For some time urban scholars in political science have been estranged from the mainstream scholarship of their discipline. In this article I offer three explanations for this phenomenon. First, in the 1960s urban scholarship became wedded to the political project of savings the cities—an ideological commitment that still colors urban research. Second, urban scholarship continues to reflect the reform traditions inherited from the Progressive Period. Third, urban scholars have been prone to excessive rhetoric when describing the urban condition. These three tendencies have combined to make the study of cities a somewhat insular enterprise.
Barnes, William R.2005. Beyond federal urban policy. Urban Affairs Review40 (5): 575-589.
2.
Boyer, Christine M.1988. The return of aesthetics to city planning. Society. 25 (4): 49-56.
3.
Davis, Mike. 2002. Dead cities and other tales. New York: New Press.
4.
Davis, Mike. 2004. “Planet of slums.”New Left Review26 (March/April). n.a.
5.
Dear, Michael J., and Steven Flusty. 2002a. The resistible rise of the L.A. school. In From Chicago to L.A.: Making sense of urban theory, edited by Michael J. Dear. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6.
Dear, Michael J., and Steven Flusty, eds. 2002b. The spaces of postmodernity: Readings in human geography. New York: Blackwell.
7.
Fainstein, Susan S.2001. The city builders: Property development in New York and London, 1980-2000. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
8.
Featherstone, Mike. 1994. City cultures and post-modern lifestyles. In Post-Fordism: A reader, edited by Ash Amin, 387-408. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
9.
Graham, Stephen, and Simon Marvin. 2001. Splintering urbanism: Networked infrastructure, technological mobilities and the urban condition. London: Routledge.
10.
Greenstein, Rosalind, and Wim Wiewel. 2000. Urban-suburban interdependencies. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
11.
Hoffman, Lily M., Susan S. Fainstein, and Dennis R. Judd, eds. 2003. Cities and visitors: Regulating people, markets, and city space. New York: Blackwell.
12.
Jacobs, Jane. 2004. Dark age ahead. New York: Vintage Books.
13.
Marando, Vincent. 1979. City-county consolidation: Reform regionalism, referenda, and requiem. Western Political Quarterly32 (4): 409-422.
14.
Merton, Robert K.1957. The latent functions of the machine. In Social theory and social structure, 71-81. New York: Free Press.
15.
Park, Robert E., Ernest Burgess, and Roderick D. McKenzie. 1925/1967. The city: Suggestions for investigation of human behavior in the urban environment. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
16.
Peterson, Paul E.1981. City limits. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
17.
President’s Commission for a National Agenda for the Eighties. 1980. A national agenda for the eighties. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
18.
Rothman, Hal K., and Mike Davis, eds. 2002. The grit beneath the glitter. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
19.
Sassen, Saskia, and Frank Roost. 1999. The city: Strategic site for the global entertainment industry. In The tourist city, edited by Dennis Judd and Susan S. Fainstein, 143-154. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
20.
Soja, Edward W.1989. Postmodern geographies: The reassertion of space in critical social theory. New York: Verso.
21.
Sorkin, Michael, ed. 1992. Variations on a theme park: The new American city and the end of public space. New York: Noonday Press.
22.
Stone, Clarence N.1989. Regime politics: Governing Atlanta 1946-1988. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
