Places

About
Foundation
Partner Schools
Print Archive
Peer Review
Submissions
Donate
Contact


Departments

Critique
Essays
Gallery
Interviews
Multimedia
Partner News
Peer Reviewed
Poetry & Fiction
Projects


Topics

Architecture
Art
Books
Cities + Places
Community
Culture
Design History
Design Practice
Development
Ecology
Economy
Education
Energy
Environment
Film + Video
Food
Geography
Health + Safety
History
Housing
Ideas
Infrastructure
Landscape
Photography
Planning
Politics + Policy
Preservation
Public + Private
Reputations
Sustainability
Technology
Transportation
Urbanism
Water



Design Observer

About
Books
Job Board
Newsletters
Archive
Contact



Comments (5) Posted 03.03.14 | PERMALINK | PRINT

Essay: Richard Campanella

Hating Bourbon Street



Mardi Gras on Bourbon Street, 2012. [Photo by the author]

Hundreds of millions. That’s how many people, over the past two generations, have crammed themselves into a minor and rather middling artery in a secondary city on America’s Third Coast. They made it into one of the most famous streets in the nation, a brand that has diffused worldwide. People by the thousands beeline for this narrow space, and parade up and down it nightly, because a crusty cohort of shrewd locals figured out what pleasured them and delivered it with panache, while constantly battling police, patricians, preservationists and pontificators. The street is named Bourbon, the city is New Orleans, and the story is fundamentally American.

Bourbon Street emerged from an inward shift in the urban geography of “sin” in the late 19th century. It gained momentum with the rise of leisure tourism in the early 20th century, and catapulted into national fame during World War II. It has hummed ever since, round the clock, 365 days a year — all without the benefit of a corporate structure, a team of experts, a board of directors or a marketing branch. Formed by working-class characters toiling individually but prospering collectively through the clever use of space and the adaptive commodification of culture, Bourbon Street today is at once “the biggest disorganized street in the whole country” [1] and a well-honed economic engine that pumps millions of outside dollars into the city’s economy and generates imagery and reputation about an entire metropolis.

For some, the Bourbon Street image is a delectable mélange of historicity and hedonism; for others it’s iniquitous, crass, phony and offensive. Americans on either side of the culture wars hate Bourbon Street, but they hate it for entirely different reasons. The Right hates it for its commercialization of sin; the Left, for its commercialization of culture. The Right hates it because it is dangerous pretending to be safe; the Left, because it is safe pretending to be dangerous. The Right, because it’s funky and honkytonk; the Left, because it’s neither. Hating Bourbon Street is one of the few things traditionalists and progressives agree on, so long as they don’t compare notes.



Bourbon, Royal, and Chartres Streets a decade after they were first surveyed, as depicted by Gonichon in a detail of a map entitled Plan de la Nouvelle Orleans telle qu’elle estoit au mois de dexembre 1731. [Courtesy of the Library of Congress] Click image to enlarge.

The Authenticity Game

Intrinsic to the progressive brand of Bourbon hating is the notion of authenticity, or rather, the lack thereof. Authenticity may be viewed as the narrowness of the gap between one’s innermost nature and that which is expressed outwardly. The wider the gap, and the more planning and scheming goes on to disguise that gap, the less the authenticity. Few people lost sleep over authenticity before the 1900s. Most humans lived lives that were all too gritty and real to leave time to contemplate gritty reality. Those wealthy enough to distance themselves from daily drudgery mostly wanted to lengthen and flaunt that distance. This began to change as industrialization led to the expansion of the middle class, the spatial subjugation of the poor, and increased consumption of, among other things, modern leisure travel experiences. “Public relations” became a field; tourism became an industry; and image became everything. A gap widened between what people said about themselves — and about places and products — and what they really were. The privileged became sensitive to their own artifice and grew intrigued by the apparent genuineness of common folk and their simple ways. Affluent youth started visiting the spaces of the poor, listening to their music, appropriating their language — “slumming,” it was called. The most committed moved into their neighborhoods, like the French Quarter.

Postindustrialization furthered this process. The late-20th-century shift to an information society of white-collar professionals working in office parks and living in exurbs produced a generation insulated from risk and bound by structure. Educated young people were aware of their privilege, and a certain segment grew bored and anguished with it. As Adam Nathaniel Mayer writes, they “suffered a kind of postmodern malaise which in turn spurred a quest for meaning.” [2] Previous generations had common causes like escaping poverty or fighting wars to satisfy the top tier of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs; this generation did not. So they sought meaning through individualized quests for authentic experiences.

Because authenticity seemed to call for a certain demeanor, its seekers brooded, acted aloof and squinted when they dragged on their cigarettes. Because it needed a certain look, they grew or chopped their hair defiantly, got tattoos, and donned ragged or vintage clothing. Music, food, cinema, literature, cars, religion: just about every aspect of culture had a “groovy” (1960s), “alternative” (1980s) or “critical” (2000s) counterpart which pitted itself against the mainstream and viewed itself as authentic. And because authenticity also had a geography, its seekers packed their knapsacks and hit the road — out of suburbia and into the wilderness, to distant countries, communes, college towns and mountain villages, and to the decaying inner cities abandoned by their elders. In the past few decades, educated, mostly white youths from prosperous backgrounds have transformed urban spaces in cities like Brooklyn and Oakland and Baltimore and Boston and London from shabbiness and indigence to restoration and gentrification.

New Orleans fit the bill perfectly. It had history, culture, and the poignancy of tragedy and past grandeur. It had a European look, a Caribbean feel, an expatriated vibe, an abundance of historic housing at low rent, a pervasive booziness, and music, food and festivity to boot. It was authentic!



Wyatt and Billy make it to New Orleans in Easy Rider (1969).

There was just one problem: authentic New Orleans depended wholly on the hideously inauthentic corporate conventioneers, SUV-driving suburbanites, and crass rubes who infested the inner city as tourists. Numbering close to 10 million per year, they ruined the progressives’ quest for authenticity as absolutely as they absolutely loved Bourbon Street, which was their favored geography. Authenticity seekers responded by loving to hate Bourbon Street — ardently, almost histrionically, because outing the inauthentic enhanced their claim to its antithesis. They viewed Bourbon Street as a place where the spurious is sold to the phony to profit the sleazy at the expense of the real, and they wanted everyone to know that they were on to it.

Not everyone plays the authenticity game. Many working-class natives of metro New Orleans, particularly African Americans, have all the authenticity they need, and tend to view Bourbon Street as harmless, naughty fun. Middle-class folks throughout the region enjoy it for what it is and shrug off its faults. It’s the cultural elite and their aspirants who obsess about authenticity, going so far as to segregate nearly all aspects of city life into an authentic/inauthentic dualism. They would universally agree, for example, that the Seventh Ward, St. Claude Avenue, the bounce scene, second-line parades, Mardi Gras Indians, and anything to do with Creoles all sparkle with realness. And with equal unanimity they renounce the upper Quarter, the French Market, Indian-owned T-shirt shops, and anything related to Bourbon Street. To be sure, most are willing to concede a few spots of Good Bourbon amid ten blocks of Bad Bourbon. Even the most rabid haters revere Galatoire’s, say nice things about Irvin Mayfield’s Jazz Playhouse, maintain a polite neutrality regarding the St. Ann queer space, and enjoy Lafitte’s Blacksmith Shop, whose candlelit interior wins over just about everyone. But these exceptions only prove the rule — and progressives rule that Bourbon Street is phony, period.

Authenticity is a powerful theme in both the intellectual and popular discourse about modern New Orleans. It is used, as sociologist Kevin Gotham observes, “to influence public debate, contest policies, neutralize counterarguments and opposition, and mobilize constituents.” [3] Buzz about authenticity can make or break a restaurant. It defines social circles and where they circulate. It underlies the credibility of artists, musicians, researchers and writers. The authenticity argument helped win nationwide support for the rebuilding of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, and motivated thousands of authenticity-starved young professionals to move here unbidden to participate in the recovery. The city revels in its own realness, and sees no irony in statements such as that made by the Chief Executive Officer of the New Orleans Tourism Marketing Corporation, who extolled his company’s “global efforts to bring the story of our authentic and unique culture to leisure travelers everywhere” — even as he canned a consulting firm with deep local roots in favor of a New York ad agency. [4]



Bourbon Street. [Photo by Scott Smith]

The “Real” New Orleans
Authenticity is seductive; we embrace it because it makes us feel exclusive. Hating Bourbon Street has valuable social currency, and it’s an easy step toward assuming co-ownership of “real” New Orleans culture. But declaring something to be inauthentic positions the critic in the dubious position of arbitrating reality. What qualifies any one individual — a “progressive,” no less — to cast such bold judgment? The fact that no one person or community ever thinks of himself, herself, or itself as anything but fully real and genuine suggests that inauthenticity is at best a subjective and arbitrary construct, and at worse, an arrogant disparagement. It smacks of smugness; it is necessarily exclusionary; and it is usually elitist — yet it tumbles from the mouths of people who purport to be enlightened, inclusionary and egalitarian. Worse, inauthenticity rests on the troubling supposition that not all human beings or human endeavors contribute equally to this thing we call culture; that some are more worthy than others.

Another weakness with authenticity is that it is ahistorical. A hundred years ago, scholars of the Old Guard like Charles Gayarré, Alcée Fortier, Grace King and John Kendall took it upon themselves to scribe the “real” history and culture of New Orleans. They esteemed the French founders, the aristocracy, the grand edifices and the Confederate generals, and shunted aside the poor, blacks, women, laborers, shotgun shacks and anyone or anything else they deemed outside the fault-free, triumphant, “authentic” New Orleans narrative. Now, it’s reversed: scholars today find plenty of fault in the historic inequities of wealth and power, roll their eyes at the cobwebbed icons of old, and adulate those marginalized by the musty patricians of the past. What happened? Did the inauthentic become authentic? The fake real? Or did we change, as we came to view, with the passage of time, that what struck our predecessors as mere backdrop was in fact a legitimate and important part of New Orleans history and culture?



Bourbon street scenes from the late 1930s (left column), paired with 2013 views (right). [Photos by the WPA, courtesy of the Library of Congress and the Louisiana State Museum; and by the author] Click image to enlarge.

Scholars a hundred years hence will likely intellectualize how New Orleanians back in the 2000s shopped at a place called Walmart, listed to the music of a lady who called herself Gaga, and generated income at the famous Bourbon Street — and perhaps they might ponder why contemporary scholars never wrote about these topics. Time puts the lie to authenticity. Dismissing the Bourbon Street of today as inauthentic is precisely the same ahistorical mistake the Old Guard made a century ago. It obtusely presumes that no one in the past manipulated their image, hyped their business, contrived verisimilitude, or sold the sizzle; that everyone was on the up-and-up, and what they displayed outwardly represented their true innermost nature. It’s utter nonsense. “Inauthenticity” is entirely human. It’s real. Bourbon Street today is just as authentically part of real New Orleans culture as Storyville was a hundred years ago, and as Social Aid and Pleasure clubs, the housing projects, Creoles and Tremé are today — no more, no less.

When viewed in this light, Bourbon Street emerges as a fascinating and refreshing phenomenon. The dizzying, deafening artifact we see today originated organically, without an inventor or a vision or a legislative act. There is no Bourbon Street logo, no headquarters, no board of directors, no visitors’ center, no brochure, not even a website. The nightlife that made the street famous — after two hundred years of utter normalcy — was created spontaneously by a cast of local characters, who, in an uncoordinated attempt to make a living individually, succeeded collectively. Localism has always predominated on Bourbon Street; even today, in an era defined by corporate globalization, New Orleans–based proprietors own fully 74 percent of the units on Bourbon Street, and Louisianians own 90 percent. [5] Bourbon Street is a self-organizing local network sans a central nervous system, a self-correcting system that recognizes its own imbalances, and a brutally efficient marketplace operating with a minimum of sentimentality. As such, Bourbon Street has proven to be pugnacious, adaptable and resilient. It represents a triumph of localism, an argument for emergent over ordained order, and a case study of civic (if often uncivil) compromise. It has been famous for nearly one-third of the city’s entire existence — longer than the French and Spanish colonial eras combined, and the entire antebellum era. Bourbon Street is New Orleans’s most lucrative sustained homegrown commercial success.



Bourbon Street. [Photo by Patrick Haney]

Contrast this with the New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival, the annual springtime fete that attracts hundreds of thousands of people to the Fairgrounds in Gentilly. Jazz Fest takes great pride in its musical acts and regional foods, arts and exhibits; cultural cognoscenti love it devoutly, and criticize it only when it fails to live up to its own authenticity-reverent ideals. Among the unwritten rules of self-respecting festgoers are no beads, no Bourbon T-shirts and no Bourbon antics; Jazz Fest sees itself as a cultural refuge from all that phoniness. Yet Jazz Fest was invented by a man from Massachusetts as part of a worldwide megafestival circuit — essentially a local franchise of a global chain. Meticulously choreographed and carefully policed, it is managed out of New York, coordinated by crack professionals, “presented by Shell” (a phrase now officially appended to the event’s name), increasingly dependent on global superstar acts, subsidized by an on-site Acura showroom, and funded by Big Oil — not to mention an entrance fee that has risen 400 percent in 10 years, to 50 dollars per person, more than the median daily take-home pay in New Orleans. Trained staffers screen the acts, taste-test the foods of every concessionaire, and inspect the merchandise of all vendors before passing authentic/inauthentic judgment. The motifs of the event are all professionally designed to affect a funky juke-joint atmosphere — bottle caps nailed to rough-hewn clapboards, folk-style naïve art, helter-skelter multicolored lettering, that sort of thing. Jazz Fest is the epitome of invented, planned, centralized cultural control that leaves nothing to chance and covers its tracks with the trappings and aesthetics of authenticity. An existential philosopher would have to be particularly generous to describe Jazz Fest as authentic, and equally parsimonious to dismiss Bourbon Street as phony. Yet that is precisely what most Bourbon-hating culture lovers do.

The Least Pretentious Place in Town
A final rationale for Bourbon-hating transcends conservative and progressive worldviews. It’s taste. Many people spurn Bourbon Street not necessarily because they see it as sinful or phony, but because it’s crass and tasteless. In her essay “Notes on Camp,” Susan Sontag viewed poor taste in art — kitsch — as aesthetically misguided to a comical extreme. But when set forth earnestly, devoid of all pretense and affectation, Sontag found kitsch to bear a certain honest and genuine appeal. Kitsch that is meant earnestly is campy; kitsch delivered lazily or cheaply is tasteless.

Bourbon Street from late 1930s to the mid-1960s was campy. The Oyster Girl and the Tassel Spinner were proudly proffered by impresarios as exemplars of stylish eroticism. People dressed to the nines and patronized Bourbon clubs craving the velvety cultural cachet that such clubs convincingly delivered. We laugh at them in retrospect, but they were not produced to be ridiculed; they were produced to dazzle. Midcentury Bourbon Street nightclubs presented themselves with enough decorum and pizzazz to make the kitsch campy.

What happened on Bourbon Street in the 1960s and 1970s was that the earnestness went out of the camp and left in its place only bad taste. It sold well, nonetheless, because the eternal parade of tourists forever replenished itself and had no collective memory. So the service got lazy, the merchandise cheapened, the bands lost their edge, the strippers let their bodies go, and Bourbon Street became, in the view of many, a tasteless and vapid commercial conjunction with a bad case of cultural sclerosis.



Bourbon Street. [Photo by Jimmy Thomas]

Bourbon Street doesn’t necessarily disagree. Or agree. One of the benefits of having no spokesperson is that Bourbon Street cannot take offense. Criticism of Bourbon Street is diffused and abstracted to all its constituent parts, and that which belongs to everybody belongs to nobody. No Bourbon musician or chef retorts when detractors excoriate The Street’s music or food, just as no Bourbonite protested when the writers of an “underground” (read: authentic) guidebook pointedly expunged Bourbon Street. [6] Bourbonites really don’t give a damn; they cry crocodile tears all the way to the bank. They’ll address that tastelessness thing if and only if those trips start bearing shrinking sacks of cash. And sclerotic? Hardly. Bourbon Street operates on the principles of free-market capitalism. Those who don’t flexibly adapt to demand go bankrupt; those who survive must effectively and efficiently give the people exactly what they want — and, yes, that may well be tasteless.

Las Vegas has been called America’s most honest city for its undisguised pursuit of profit. Perhaps Bourbon rates as our most candid street, for the clarity of its deal: accessible pleasures offered for a price to the passing parade. For all its flamboyance and swagger, Bourbon Street is one of the least pretentious places in town. It’s as utterly uncool as it is wildly successful, and in an era when “cool capital” is increasingly craved and fiscal capital increasingly scarce, there’s something refreshing about a place that flips off coolness and measures success the old-fashioned way: by the millions. And authenticity? Not only does Bourbon Street not try to be authentic, it doesn’t even think about it. If, as Sartre once said, “you seek authenticity for authenticity’s sake, you are no longer authentic,” then perhaps the opposite is true as well. For all its ruses and illusions, Bourbon Street puts on no airs, requires no subsidies or handouts, has no need for the kindness of strangers, and lets the loquacious literati and the fuming fundamentalists fulminate alone. What you see when you peer past the neon is exactly what you get.



Editors’ Note

“Hating Bourbon Street” is adapted from Bourbon Street: A History, by Richard Campanella, published this month by Louisiana State University Press.

For related work on Places, see our features on the Gulf Coast.

Notes

1. Business owner Earl Bernhardt, interviewed by the author, October 11, 2012.

2. Adam Nathaniel Mayer, “Pondering Urban Authenticity: A Look at the New Book ‘Naked City,’” New Geography, April 2010.

3. Kevin Fox Gotham, Authentic New Orleans: Tourism, Culture, and Race in the Big Easy (New York: New York University Press, 2007), 12.

4. Mark C. Romig, “Thorough Review Led to New Ad Agency,” Times-Picayune, July 25, 2012, B4.

5. These percentages are based on units. When we look at value, New Orleans-based proprietors in 2012 owned 56 percent of the appraised land and building value of Bourbon Street; those based in Jefferson Parish owned an additional 13 percent; and Louisianians in general held 72 percent of the value. (Analysis by the author based on property values and ownership information from the Orleans Parish Assessor’s Office, queried October 2012.)

6. Michael Patrick Welch with Alison Fensterstock, New Orleans: The Underground Guide (New Orleans: UNO Press, 2010).
Share This Story

RELATED POSTS


An Excerpt from S P R A W L


A Method of Living


Founding Mother: Mariana Van Rensselaer and the Rise of Criticism


New Deal Utopias


Unforgetting Women Architects: From the Pritzker to Wikipedia



RSSSubscribe to Comment Feed

Comments (5)   |   JUMP TO MOST RECENT >>

I wrote the "underground guide" you mention and just felt the need to clarify that I love Bourbon Street and would never judge its authenticity (in New Orleans, more harm has been done in the name of authenticity as anything else).

But since, as you mentioned, Bourbon Street is "world famous" then why would I waste pages telling people about something they already know about? The problem with other guidebooks about "out of the way places" is that they end up just going over the same stuff that advertised to tourists from the moment they step off the plane.

So again, I love Bourbon Street, I just didn't feel the need to write ANOTHER book about it. Don't project your authenticity fetishism onto me!

MPW
03.05.14 at 09:45

The best treatment of the puzzle of authenticity I've read is also my favorite fictional treatment of New Orleans: Walker Percy's "The Moviegoer." ("I am attracted to movie stars but not for the usual reasons . . . . It is their peculiar reality which astounds me.")
Tim Culvahouse
03.12.14 at 01:57

What a great piece! That is all.
Rob Walker
04.07.14 at 05:33

When I was a student at Tulane in the 1980's, I shacked up for a while with a guy who lived in the French Quarter. The Lower Quarter, at that time, was one of a dozen or so gay ghettos in the US, and possibly the only one in the South. It was a "community" in a serious sense of the word, a vertically-integrated subculture of remarkable socio-economic variety. In our view, there were 2 Bourbon Streets: Straight Bourbon ran from Canal to Orleans Avenue; Gay Bourbon started at St. Ann and ran downriver. The block between, which at the time had few businesses, was known as the "DMZ."

That could inspire its own article vis-à-vis "authenticity," but relative to Bourbon Street, I would note the following: I always walked on Bourbon Street going to & from the streetcar stop at Canal Street. Why? Simple, because it was by far the SAFEST choice. There was a lot more crime then, and we gays, in particular, were targets. (One of the risks of a socioeconomically mixed neighborhood, I suppose. On other French Quarter streets, we always walked on the side opposite the parked cars, also for safety reasons.) Bourbon had the most "eyes on the street," and although its entrepreneurs and patrons promoted certain types of vice, they pointedly kept other types of vice at a distance.

Perhaps as a result, although I never liked Straight Bourbon Street and wouldn't dream of patronizing its establishments, I never thought of it as inauthentic. Personal safety is a basic need in the Maslow pyramid, and basic = authentic.
Skidrowe
04.10.14 at 04:42

> "Hundreds of Millions". Ok.
Let's say 10M/yr x 20years = 200 million.

Then, if one person out of every 10,000 decided to stay in live in New Orleans over the last 20 years, that would be about a 20,000 population growth. If it was 1 out of every 100,000, that would be 2,000 population growth.

But of course, you know NOLA has lost population for the last 50 years, likewise, very very few, perhaps not even 1 in 10,000 of these "Hundreds of Millions" decided not to stay in NOLA. If it is was somewhere around 1 in 10,000, you would at least see some maintaining of population numbers. But is has been constant decline for the last 50 years.


> "Bourbon Street is New Orleans’s most lucrative sustained
> homegrown commercial success."

Is it really a success? I bet Magazine St brings in way more tax revenue than not only Bourbon St, but the entire French Quarter. First, Bourbon St is still a very narrow street, e.g. 28 ft wide or so; hence it is no way near as crowded as it appears to be.

And when you see packed crowds OUTSIDE, that means they are not inside the bars/clubs buying drinks, food or tipping. Moreover, visitors and tourists can buy one hurricane or a beer at a cheap to-go bar and walk up and down Bourbon St and people watch and sight see without entering a single bar and pay a cover charge.

Below are some numbers of "boring Jefferson Parish when compared to festival and party happy Orleans Parish.

Advocate: Last year, for example, Jefferson generated $310.7 million in sales taxes, excluding taxes generated from the sale of food and drugs, automobiles and hotel and motel rooms in the parish. Orleans Parish brought in just $162.9 million, but that includes every category, meaning the gap between the two parishes is even greater.
http://bit.ly/1eCPYPg
AhContraire
04.12.14 at 12:31



LOG IN TO POST A COMMENT
Don't have an account? Create an account. Forgot your password? Click here.

Email


Password




Donate to Places: Your Support Makes Our Work Possible



ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Geographer Richard Campanella is Senior Professor of Practice at Tulane University and author of several books, including Bienville's Dilemma: A Historical Geography of New Orleans, Delta Urbanism: New Orleans and Lincoln in New Orleans.
More Bio >>

DESIGN OBSERVER JOBS









MORE ON Gulf Coast


The Lost Graves of the Morganza Floodway
On Places, Kristi Dykema Cheramie and Michael Pasquier tell the story of a small Louisiana church relocated by Mississippi River engineers so the area could be designated as floodable territory.

Beneficial Use: Toward Balancing America's (Sediment) Budget
On Places, Richard Campanella argues that the promethean geo-engineering of our river systems has resulted in the catastrophic erosion of our coasts — and proposes one potential solution.

What the Nation’s Best-Educated Amateur Planners Learned from Hurricane Isaac. And Gustav. And Rita and Katrina. And Cindy, Ivan, Lili, Isidore, and Georges.
On Places, geographer Richard Campanella analyzes the many lessons that New Orleanians have learned from weathering powerful hurricanes — and he argues that the toughest test is yet to come.

Storm Season
On Places, a portfolio by photographer Daniel Kariko records the fragile and changing landscapes of the barrier islands of southern Louisiana.

Below the Sill Plate: New Orleans East Struggles to Recover
On Places, architect Deborah Gans describes a multi-year effort to rebuild neighborhoods in post-Katrina New Orleans — and the limited results to date.

The Scale of Nature: Modeling the Mississippi River
On Places, Kristi Dykema Cheramie explores the ruins of the abandoned Mississippi River Basin Model and ponders the decades-long battle to control the great river.

Black in Back: Mardi Gras and the Racial Geography of New Orleans
On Places, Tim Culvahouse charts the complex racial geography of New Orleans (and looks in on the Rex and Zulu Mardi Gras parades).

The New Orleans Corner Store
On Places, architect Tim Culvahouse continues his series on the built character of New Orleans, with a look at the humble but sociable corner store and its role in the restoration of the city.

Stoop, Balcony, Pilot House: Making It Right in the Lower Ninth Ward
On Places, architect Tim Culvahouse assesses the post-Katrina architecture in the Lower Ninth Ward of New Orleans sponsored by Brad Pitt's Make It Right Foundation.

In the Mississippi Delta: Building with Water
On Places, Elizabeth Mossop and Jeffrey Carney report on the work of the Coastal Sustainability Studio at Louisiana State University, which is proposing long-range solutions to the environmental and social challenges of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast.

New Fuel for an Old Narrative: Notes on the BP Oil Disaster
On Places, geographer Richard Campanella recalls a long hot summer, and sets the BP oil spill into the complex environmental and cultural contexts of America's third coast.

The View to America Street from Mrs. Fair’s Front Door, July 21, 2009
On Places, landscape architect Denise Hoffman Brandt offers a vivid portrait of the ongoing post-Katrina struggles of one neighborhood, and one household, in New Orleans.

Delta Urbanism and New Orleans: After
On Places, the second of a two-part essay by Richard Campanella, on the ongoing struggles of New Orleans to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina.

Delta Urbanism and New Orleans: Before
On Places, an excerpt from Delta Urbanism: New Orleans, geographer Richard Campanella's account of the ongoing environmental and political struggles of post-Katrina New Orleans — and why a great American city remains pathetically vulnerable to further catastrophe.

Bienville's Dilemma
New Orleans-based writer Dorothy Ball reviews Richard Campanella's Bienville's Dilemma, a panoramic study of the history and geography of New Orleans that spans from the early 16th century to Hurricane Katrina and its troubled aftermath.