The New Geography
from the how-the-digital-revolution-is-changing-everything dept.
| The New Geography | |
| author | Joel Kotkin |
| pages | 243 |
| publisher | Random House |
| rating | 3/10 |
| reviewer | Jon Katz |
| ISBN | 0-375-50199-1 |
| summary | The Net is creating a new geography |
Books like this one make one nostalgic for the days when publishing ignored the Net or published urgent tomes about addicted children, hackers and online predators.
This book is a mess. The only way to describe it is cyber-BS. It's not at all clear what it's even about, but Kotkin seems to be making the point that the digital economy is creating a new kind of social geography in which place has become important. (Wasn't it important before?) Individuals and businesses can scan the country to find places most desirable to them, freed from old ties to materials and cheap labor. This, says Plotkin, has triggered a vast upheaval, good news for communities that excel at creativity, education, trade and culture, bad news for everybody else.
"In geographic terms," writes Kotkin, a fellow at Pepperdine University, "the impact of the new economy has been devastating to a broad array of places. As commodity prices have dried up, rural communities that depend on ranching, lumbering, fishing and farming have continued to lose population. Similiarily, in urban areas the decline of traditional bulwarks of the economy such as ship-building, auto manufacturing, and textiles, as well as the relocation of large corporations, has afflicted once-robust urban districts with the equivalent of a wasting disease that gains strength as it weakens its victim."
The new economy promotes class as well as geographic divisions, he writes, and suggest the possibility of a growing geographic separation, with rich and poor, educated and noneducated increasingly segregated within particular areas. The growing threat of technologically-sparked "locational choice," warns Kotkin, is a Balkanization of populations. "Valhallas and nerdistans grow largely on the basis of migration of the skilled and well educated, while the cities and increasingly the midopolises absorb the flotsam and jetsam of the emerging postindustrial society."
Bring back the online-predator books! Yes, for sure, hi-tech environments are growing more rapidly than industrial ones, as the information-based new economy spreads rapidly throughout the U.S. and other parts of the world. And it's true that government and political systems seems to take little responsibility for making sure this prosperity is equitably distributed. But this isn't even remotely new, nor is it uniquely tied to the Digital Age. It's the Darwinian core of capitalism, which works beautifuly for lots of people, and badly for others. One could as easily (and foolishly) argue that the digital revolution will definitely empower poor individuals and communities to join in the booming new economy, no matter where they are located.
Kotkin's prescription for troubled or declining places: "Communities that wish to avoid this fate will be those that commit themselves to facing these problems with imagination and a sense of commitment." He adds: "Whether in the reform of education or the encouragement of enterprise or the creation of new public infrastructures, healthy twenty-first-century communities will be those that can develop a sense of common purpose."
Whew. Now that we all know what to do, it should be simple to manage the Digital Revolution more equitably. All we need is a common purpose. You have to wonder of Kotkin has ever been to a local school board meeting, let alone an online discussion group.
In his notion, communities that want to do well will band together in common purpose. But what of those that don't bother? Or whose leadership is too corrupt, short-sighted or apathetic? Economic booms have always been spread unevenly, since people ultimately are free to move and live where they want, those with more money and opportunity freer than those with neither. And people who can will always gravitate towards opportunity, leaving behind those who can't. Grapes of Wrath told this story a lot better.
Kotkin argues that as people and advanced industries hunt the globe for locations, they will not necessarily seek out those places that are the biggest, the cheapest, or the most well favored by location. Instead, they will seek out a new kind of geography, one that appeals to their sense of values and to their hearts, "and it is there that the successful communities of the digital age will be found." This is cyber-jabberwocky. People and industries would be insane to do otherwise. But this book's geography is pretty muddled. It takes you nowhere. Kotkin's new geography is not digital, but is instead made of gas and vapors.
Usually, it seems foolish to criticize a book, a waste of everybody's time. If it's no good, why bother to review it at all? But New Geography is so self-importan,t ponderous and opaque that it suggests that publishing has simply lurched from one silly extreme to another. Here's to the new geography of the middle ground.
You can purchase this book at Fatbrain.
Ah, Irony (Score:3)
Pardon me while I fail to be impressed.
Neanderthals Against Progress! (Score:3)
Thog notice weird people moving into cave next door. They have no brow. They stand up straight. Now weird people build spear using rock knife built by Thog. They kill many deer, and move up to prettier cave, with big rock walls for painting. Now they take little rock knife and attach it to stick, and shoot it with bow. Silly weird people! Don't you know bow is music maker? Silly weird people starve next winter.
Boy is Thog face red. Weird people kill even more deer! And nobody trade Thog naked woman statue or beads or meat anymore for stone knife. Me think something bad, Thog think weird people make new law of land, to make Thog starve in winter, cold and dead! Thog do big cave painting showing how bad weird people are because Thog starve. Thog stone knife good enough to kill deer, why nobody buy stone knife?
Weird people teach Thog new word, called compe- somthing. Thog not know what compe-somthing mean, but me not like it. Thog still use rock knife, rock knife good enough for me. Why weird people not use rock knife like everyone else use to? Now everyone use funny bow and stick thing, or spear, and only buy stone knife for cutting food, not as much as before, and Thog hungry!
Thog cold in winter again, Thog still not understand red hot thing weird people use to stay warm, but it scare Thog. Thog stay away from red hot thing, it make cave and Thog stink. Bad too, Thog see weird people playing with shiny clinky stone, and making it into knife. Thog scared of weird people now.
Thog think, there go neighborhood...
Cyber-Jabberwocky (Score:4)
Katz reads book
Katz genuinely feels like it's Cyber-Jabberwocky
Katz gets sinking feeling that this is how his work is perceived
Katz pans book to try to distance himself.
The observant reader may speculate that I, the writer of this, may have the same hangup. Could be!
man, this guy is lame (Score:4)
Similiarily, in urban areas the decline of traditional bulwarks of the economy such as ship-building,auto manufacturing, and textiles, as well as the relocation of large corporations, has afflicted once-robust urban districts with the equivalent of a wasting disease that gains strength as it weakens its victim."
Why didn't he write a book entitled, "Pointing out the Obvious". He could have also included cow herding and blacksmithing in the list of depleting industry.
What ever happened to being rewarded for doing well, just because you made alot or all of your fortune using electronic means does not make you a criminal, or a bad person, it makes you smart. Will it be such a tragedy if the author makes millions off this book that was written on a word processor, printed on computer controlled presses and published/sold on the internet?
Re:Myopic review (Score:3)
Actually there is nothing to "blame" for. You are upset because a business made a decision to save money. Let's put it in a different view:
Let's say you, your parents, and grandparents all work at Sears. You are going out to buy a new TV. You can get it at Sears for $300. At Best Buy, you can get it for $200. Would you pay $200 for it to get a good deal at Best Buy, or would you feel guilty and buy it at Sears for a higher price just because you have some misguided loyalty directed to Sears? I would choose Best Buy. The thing that is occuring due to the internet, and the international trade and all this is a big equalization. These corporations are going to the country where they get the best deal on service. People may complain that it takes jobs away from the U.S., and these people end up out of work. That is true, temporarily. Why don't these people get a job in another industry, or simply move to one of the locations that the company they used to work for moved to? In your example, the car company went to Sonora from Arizona. The cost of living is lower in Mexico, as is the amount of pay you would receive. I see no reason not to go there if you feel you are dedicated to that company and that line of work.
I don't blame "The Net" entirely for this, but increasingly rapid digital communication coupled with stronger "free trade" policies are increasing corporate mobility. Not just within the country, though - throughout the world.
I don't see how this is a bad thing. Even within the U.S. there are big differences in the cost of living. The decent amount of money I make as a developer in Atlanta would cause me to be homeless in Silicon Valley. I don't need to get paid as much as someone out there, because I don't need to spend as much money to survive. And as far as the internet and methods of telecommunications go, they are really good. It means I could potentially get a job working from "home." Basically, I could get a job in Silicon Valley, then live and work from somewhere in Montana, and have a ton of money by Montana standards.
I don't want to be rude, but I see your entire arguement as extremely short-sighted. Technological changes have always caused a few temporary problems in the work force, but they free people up to do other things. I very much prefer to work with computers than to work in a factory. I am happy to have the opportunity to work in the computer industry. If the work ends up getting sent to another country, I guess I would have to move there to work, just like all the people from India, China, and Mexico do now. I don't see the problem here. There is no "us" vs. "them" because we're all the same. Also, if you don't want to keep up with the changes, you will get left behind.
The Salvation of Podunk (Score:3)
But here's what the technology revolution has done: it has brought the entire world to every doorstep, no matter where it is. My uncle lives in a small north Georgia town with a population of 30,000. He has 120 channels via directTV and instant Internet access via 2B+D ISDN. His kids can log into AOL just the same as any kid in Chicago. And if Wal-Mart doesn't have the gas grill he wants, the right one is just a click and a UPS truck away.
If anything, the quality of life in Podunk is improving, and far more rapidly than it is in the big city. As soon as my office finishes installing its VPN, I could move out to my father-in-law's farm. For the chance to trade a daily commute for a twice-monthly drive into town, it just might be worth it.
The only concern I have about such universally available communications is the homologation of societies worldwide. Local character is being replaced with Generica, because everybody everywhere is being exposed to the same thing. But, as the French say in their rapidly disappearing language, c'est la vie.
--
billn's beatstick: Cyber BS, Katz, Geography. (Score:3)
I don't mean to get off on a Dennis Miller-esque rant here, but..
There isn't "cyber" anything, in any sense true to the context in which the term 'cyber' was coined. People calling the Internet
"cyberspace" need to be flogged. Sadly, I'd rather stick to the 'Information Superhighway' line, as it applies to an increasingly fast infrastructure for moving our era's biggest commodity: porn^Wdata.
The only thing that currently comes close to 'cyber' is those folks equipped with mechanical supplements to accomodate a disability. Skip the fruity 'chip in the arm' experiment [cnn.com], that could have been pulled off in a less dangerous manner by putting it under his tongue. The wearable computer chic that's evolving is a good start, and simple evolution and miniaturization will spur it into the true definition of 'cyber' whatever.
Don't agree with me? Screw off, I'm a 'cyber' purist, and the world needs more.
Katz. Don't like his work? Exercise your sapience endowed freedom of choice, and DON'T READ IT. You freaks are worse than the Howard Stern audience. Do you realize, half his listeners are there for the same reason the other half is, which is to hear what he says next, despite the fact that they don't agree or like it? If you ARE going to read his work, do it with an open mind, and look at what he's writing about, and not at what he's writing. There's no law or commandment that say you have to like Katz. I'm open minded enough to understand what he's writing about, whether I agree with his viewpoint or not. I'd happily applaud him for the reaction he gets from you guys, like dangling a plastic banana in front of monkeys. Looks like a banana, tastes like crap. You're just reacting to the fact that he's got a banana, whether you're going to eat it, or not.
Geography. This is my review of Katz's review of the SUBJECT that book tackles, whether it does it well or not. Most people don't realize, that the Internet, as a cultural tool, isn't a medium. It's an accelerator. The only other medium on the planet that can disseminate information faster is a pack of small town wives.
Internetworks, as a medium, dramatically change the way corporations *need* to work, and the way their employees *want* to work. High tech companies dealing in information commodities don't need to bring the miners to the mine any longer. Personally, I'm a network engineer and NMS prototype developer, myself. I work from home. In my boxers. I have a fridge under my desk. I think that covers how high tech employees *want* to work.
Here's the Wendy's 'Biggie' sized "But". Not all companies are high tech companies. We still need steel mills, farming communities, and every other craft in the class[1]. Take a trip back to the movie 'Son in Law', as a perfect example of what Katz and Cyber BS Joe are talking about. The daughter went off to college, and the son is a computer nerd[2]. The father, a generation farmer, couldn't understand his son's desire to program. The nature of humanity, or maybe just Americans, to rebel against what their parents do, is accelerated by high technology and Internet culture, and is undoubtedly increasingly sucking the marrow from our nations.. well, no, actually, our WORLD'S support infrastructure.
L.E.Modesitt, Jr, wrote in his book, _Timediver's Dawn_[3], that high tech societies tend to burn themselves out rather quickly. The Internet's accelerating effect is a good example of this, as more and more people are lured from staple support industries to the glitz and glamour of a connected 'global village' (Hey, Hillary, this village is raising more kids [slashdot.org] than you think.)
So yes, absolutely, I agree that there's a distinct shift in where our population is moving, both geographically, and morally. There's an interesting counterpoint to this, though. Just as the Internet is changing where and how people live, it's bringing more people to the surface, and leveling the playing field. People have more *options*. The savagely intelligent illuminati who, in years past, were concealed beneath basic struggles for survival are clawing their way to the surface and making a difference. The distances between life changing opportunities has narrowed dramatically for many people.
Don't believe me? Read Katz's book, _Geeks_. Some of my friends did, and threw it at me to read. Why? It was an interesting parallel to my own life, as a small town native struggling to make ends meet. I won't trash that book, because it's absolutely true for a lot of us.
What does it all come down to? Choices. The Internet, as a culture, gives us more. Can we always make them? Certainly not. I never went to college. Dropped out of high school. Because I'm one of those 'bright' people who can do whatever they set their minds to[4], I managed to land a tech job with skills I picked up while ditching school and BBS'ing. Three years later, a startup ISP brought the Internet within my reach. Six months later, I was gone, following the American Dream.
[dramatic pause, ala Shatner.]
The Dream. To do crap no one has considered before. To boldly piss off investors and accountants alike. To draw six figure salaries and vacation in Fiji.
The Dream, which has been slowly sucking the marrow from our societies, luring bright young minds to build the next big thing.
Accelerated by the Internet.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be.. no, I'm mostly right.
[1] Except novelty toy factories. You bastards are a waste of plastic, and need to go to hell.
[2] Don't for an instant think I'm slighting him. 'Computer nerd' is a distinct badge of honor, in my book.
[3] Science fiction, a good read.
[4] It's not ego inflation when dozens of people tell you so, so piss off if you think I'm on a high horse.
Ignore the Luddites at your peril. (Score:3)
Make no mistake -- there is a rising anti-technological sentiment out there, and you'd be ignoring it at your own peril. Traditional culture is sessile but still powerful, and if a backlash against high-tech occurs, it will at the least be inconvenient for you.
What does confuse me, though, is why Katz hates this book but applauded the WTO protests, which were another symptom of the same anti-high-tech phenomenon.
For a minute I thought JK was reviewing himself... (Score:5)
Jon Katz's new book(The new Media: How the Digital Revolution is Reshaping the American Landscape) is so bad it will make you pine for all those volumes on trolls and hackers.
--
Re:But the net IS creating a new geography (Score:3)
Whether or not the third-world will remain that way is anyone's guess. They're certainly not in good shape at the moment, of course. But there's a school of thought which suggests that they have a certain advantage over the first world when it comes to technological advance. They may not have the money or the education just yet, but if they were to acquire it, their advance would not be a matter of "catching up" with current first world technologies--it would be a matter of leap-frogging them. The third world is not burdened by our aging technological infrastructure, and consequently could much more easily impliment the Next Big Thing, whatever it happens to be. There's also a cultural advantage--the first world builds huge megalithic corporate entities around its technologies, which amass tremendous cultural power and hugely vested interests in maintaining the status quo. We're seeing some of the effects of this now with the whole messy RIAA vs. Napster debate. Pretty much anyone who knows anything about the technology involved can agree that on-line, digital distribution is the coming thing. But it won't come here as quickly as it might, because too many people mired in the old machinery will fight the change. If someone fed Somalia and then gave them a few mil in spending money to engage in leisure time activities and set up commerce, who would object to something like Napster? Any incoming system or technology will be new--might as well pick the best. And whatever it is, it won't have to fight the old for possession.
I'm not going to suggest that the third world is going to stomp all over the first any time soon. But I would suggest that it could, given the resources; and that talking about it 'catching up' to the first world misses the point--why not go past, instead?
New geography? Nah... (Score:4)
People don't need to move around the world seeking out new physical locations. One of the good things about the net is the way that cultures are blended together, and people share new ideas (when they're not buying crap from Amazon.com, of course. :) ). If I had a net connection in Namibia, I would be able to communicate with the same people that I would have access to in the US.
The net is helping to blur some of the national boundaries that exist. It empowers those who know how to use it. If anything, the culture and geography shift is going to be based on whether someone is a luser or whether they're net-savvy.
Hmmmmm. (Score:5)