The Los Angeles Times - Current - September 4, 2005
A NEW
New Orleans
Forget
crawfish étouffée -- look to Houston for a vibrant economic model.
ecause
the old New Orleans is no more, it could resurrect itself as the great new
American city of the 21st century. Or as an impoverished tourist trap.
Founded by the French in 1718, site
of the first U.S. mint in the Western United States, this one-time pride of
the South, this one-time queen of the Gulf Coast, had been declining for
decades, slowly becoming an antiquated museum.
Now New Orleans must decide how to be
reborn. Its choices could foretell the future of urbanism.
The sheer human tragedy ―
and the fact that the Gulf Coast
is critical to the nation' s economy as well as the Republican Party's base ―
guarantee that there will be
money to start the project. Private corporations, churches and nonprofits will
pitch in with the government.
But what kind of city will the
builders create on the sodden ruins?
The wrong approach would be to
preserve a chimera of the past, producing a touristic faux New Orleans, a
Cajun Disneyland.
Sadly, even before Hurricane
Katrina's devastation, local leaders seemed convinced that being a "port
of cool" should be the city's policy. Adopting a page from Richard
Florida's "creative class" theory, city leaders held a conference
just a month before the disaster promoting a cultural strategy as the primary
way to bring in high-end industry.
This would be the easy, bankable way
to go now: Reconstruct the French Quarter, Garden District and other historic
areas while sprucing up the convention center and other tourist facilities.
This, however, would squander a greater opportunity. A tourism-based economy
is no way to generate a broadly successful economy.
For decades before this latest
hurricane, public life, including the police force, were battered by
corruption and eroded by inefficiency. Now Katrina has brought into public
view the once-invisible masses of desperately poor people whom New Orleans'
tourist economy and political system have so clearly failed.
Although the number of hotel rooms in
the city has grown by about 50% over the last few years, tourism produces
relatively few high-wage jobs. It encourages people to learn extraordinary
slide trombone technique, develop 100 exquisite recipes for crawfish and keep
swarms of conventioneers happy ― none of which are
easy or unimportant tasks. But this economy does little to nurture the array
of skills that sustain a large and diverse workforce. Contrary to Florida's
precepts, having a strong gay community, lively street culture, great food,
tremendous music and lively arts have not been enough to lure the
"creative class" to New Orleans. The city has been at best a
marginal player in the evolving tech and information economy.
Meanwhile, the tourism/entertainment
industry is constantly under pressure from competitors. Once, being the Big
Easy in the Bible Belt gave New Orleans a trademark advantage. But the spread
of gambling along the Gulf has eroded that semi-sinful allure. Mississippi's
flattened casinos, with their massive private investment, will almost
certainly rise years ahead of New Orleans' touristic icons.
For all these reasons, New Orleans
should take its destruction as an opportunity to change course. There is no
law that says a Southern city must be forever undereducated, impoverished,
corrupt and regressive. Instead of trying to refashion what wasn't working,
New Orleans should craft a future for itself as a better, more progressive
metropolis.
Look a few hundred miles to the west,
at Houston ― a well-run city with a widely
diversified economy. Without much in the way of old culture, charm or
tradition, it has far outshone New Orleans as a beacon for enterprising
migrants from other countries as well as other parts of the United States ―
including New Orleans.
Houston has succeeded by sticking to
the basics, by focusing on the practical aspects of urbanism rather than the
glamorous. Under the inspired leadership of former Mayor Bob Lanier and the
current chief executive, Bill White, the city has invested heavily in port
facilities, drainage, sanitation, freeways and other infrastructure.
At least in part as a result of this
investment, this superficially less-than-lovely city has managed to siphon
industries ― including energy and international
trade ― from New Orleans. With its massive Texas
Medical Center, it has emerged as the primary healthcare center in the
Caribbean basin ― something New Orleans, with
Tulane University's well-regarded medical school, should have been able to
pull off.
Attention to fundamentals has always
been important to cities. Hellenistic Alexandria was built in brick to reduce
fire dangers that terrified ancient urbanites, and it lived off its huge new
man-made harbor. Rome built stupendous, elaborate water systems and port
facilities to support its huge population.
Amsterdam and the Netherlands provide
particularly relevant examples, as they offer great urban culture at or below
sea level. For centuries the Dutch have coped with rising water levels with
ingenious engineering. In this century, the most notable example was the
determined response to the devastating 1953 North Sea storm, which killed more
than 1,800 people. Responding with traditional efficiency, the Dutch built a
massive system of dikes, completed in 1998, which has helped them to remain
among the most economically and culturally vibrant regions in Europe.
Giving priority to basic
infrastructure may not appeal to those who would prefer to patch the
structural problems and spend money on rebuilding New Orleans as a museum, or
by adding splashy concert halls, art museums and other iconic cultural
structures. Ultimately, the people of the New Orleans region will have to
decide whether to focus on resuscitating the Big Easy zeitgeist ―
which includes a wink-and-nod attitude toward corruption ―
or to begin drawing upon inner resources of discipline, rigor and ingenuity.
Some may argue that such a shift
would diminish New Orleans' status in cultural folklore as a corrupt but
charming waif. Yet that old ghost is probably already gone. Even a rebuilt,
reconfigured French Quarter would no doubt seem more Anaheim than anti-bellum.
In contrast, a new New Orleans ― a city with a
thriving economy, a city of aspiration as well as memory ―
would in time create its own cultural efflorescence, this time linked as much
to the future as the past. This should be the goal of the great rebuilding
process about to begin.
***