This message was sent to the list by Alice Hudson.---------Johnnie
-------------------------------------------
>Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 09:50:49 -0400
>From: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Review: Saunier on European City Atlases
fyi mapsters, a followup on the previously posted review from h-urba=
n =
list. Alice Hudson.
______________________________ Forward Header ___________________________=
_______
>Subject: Re: Review: Saunier on European City Atlases
>Author: H-Urban <[log in to unmask]> at "Internet-Mail
>Date: 5/28/97 2:46 PM
For the original reviews see H-Urban's Web archives for Thurs 15 May 1997=
(Review: Saunier on European City Atlases) and Fri 27 Dec 1996 (Review:
Atlas historique des villes de France).
Alan Mayne
H-Urban Co-Editor
[log in to unmask]
=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D=
-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=
=3D-=3D-=3D
Posted by Javier Monclus <[log in to unmask]>
We all had a nice surprise when we read the Review made by P.Y. Saunier
(vol.II on H-Urban 27 Dec 1996, vol.I on H-Urban 15 May 1997). It is
important to say that, after several reviews in Spanish, French or Englis=
h,
this has been the most interesting one and the first with a joint review =
on
both Atlas volumes. It is an in-depth study of the books with a truly
comparative view.
And we are happy not just for the praises but also for the critical
remarks, which use to be the most interesting for the authors. As we know=
it is the policy of H-Urban to propose the authors to react to the review=
s,
we would like to take this opportunity to do that without boring too much=
H-Urban subscribers. Therefore, we won=A5t reply to everything that P.Y.
Saunier says. Just a few remarks:
1. Our main aim has been both simple and too ambitious. As we said in th=
e
Foreword, the Atlas tried to "collect, spread and produce a vast amount o=
f
information on Cities" and help to "explain and make understand the histo=
ry
of each city and the evolution of the urban fabric". The CCCB team starte=
d
the work in 1991 defining the common guidelines of the project, after an
International Seminar with the participation of several national
coordinators.
2. It is not difficult to imagine the difficulties in the implementation=
of such a project. First of all, we agree in that the choice of cities
raises some questions. The suggestion of choosing also some "decaying
cities (a black sheep) or promoted ones" is very interesting. Anyway, we
made some options in choosing cities like Granada in the Iberian volume,
which was not so obvious (why not Cordoba or Toledo, for instance?). And =
we
selected Montpellier instead of Nice, just because the former seems a
"promoted city". But we were also conditioned by the availability of
"experts" in each city, and we always tried to find the right team to do
the work.
3. We also agree with the reviewer in his remarks on maps and engravings.=
The aim of homogeneity has been essential even if some scales of the maps=
are different. Problems of format and size of the pages explains part of
the result, but we have redrawn maps at similar scales when it was
neccesary in order to make comparisons possible. As for engravings, it is=
also true that we could have included more collections of pictures in the=
line of Wyngaerde views for Spanish cities or Guesdon for cities in both
countries. We could have been more ambitious and systematic, but you can
imagine the problems to do all this in a short period of time. We are awa=
re
that this is one of the most promising ways of following and widenning ou=
r
project.
4. Cities or urban and metropolitan regions ? This was part of the debate=
started in 1991 and we decided to include some references to the wider
areas, but focusing the analysis on the Towns and Cities selected. Again,=
it is true that town-coordinators and authors did not seem to understand
the guidelines in the same way. But we would like to remind here that no
common definition of towns and urban regions is available yet, at least i=
n
Europe, as N.U.R.E.C. Atlas shows (which was launched at the same time of=
the 1st volume of our Atlas).
5. The most serious problems which almost always arises when you want to
coordinate and to direct a collective work, are the ones related with the=
unity or homogeneity of approaches. Some cities offer stronger "recent
times" chapters, specially the Spanish ones, but also some French:
Toulouse, Lille, Montpellier. On the contrary, the relative lack of
pre-1800 focus in other Iberian cities can be explained because of the
weakness of historical studies for them, but we think this is more a choi=
ce
of each author. Is it a coincidence that geographers and architects
dominated in the the cities with strong chapters on recent times against
historians in other French cities more focused in pre-industrial period?
"When we are coordinated, we wonder how to escape the guidelines and give=
our own solo" as P.Y.Saunier says. This is specially true with urban
studies and mainly with this kind of international and interdisciplinary
project.
6. Generally speaking, it is obvious that authors have not always respect=
ed
the themes and periods suggested by the coordinators. Actually, we were
"tolerant" because this was the only way we could do the job and we were
enough pragmatic as to follow this way. But we also knew that Iberian foc=
us
on urban fabric would contrast with the French focus on political and
social life, as those are the main traditions in recent urban historiogra=
fy
in both countries. In that way, leaving the opportunity to each author to=
express his/her view and to interpret his traditions seemed good to
everyone. Homogeneity of approaches is not easy to achieve and it is a lo=
ng
way to go. But we should be happy if the work "gives strong elements as t=
o
the state and nature of urban studies" and urban history in these
countries, as the reviewer says.
7. Finally, just a few words on publishing this kind of work. The problem=
s
with urban history are not just the result of several disciplines involve=
d
with different approaches, etc. We also have to cope with language barrie=
rs
and, as everybody knows, English is the international language in urban
studies as in everything. However, non English literature can produce
interesting works, which are not always known in the English-speaking
world. We say this because the difficulties in finding a British/American=
editor in order to publish the 3rd volume (on British Islands) are still
there. We are now in a "stand by" situation, although we hope that some
publisher will find this work attractive enough as to be involved with it=
=2E
And we must remind that the Centre de Cultura Contemporania de Barcelona
subsidizes an important part of the project (authors work, iconographic
material, technical team at the CCCB, etc.)
8. Anyway, the project aims to make a step forwards in the edition of the=
Atlas series by a "digital reconversion" of the whole work. The European
Cities Multimedia Atlas (ECMA) has got the support of the European
Commission and it is now in a "definition phase" (in the frame of the
Info2000 programme). The project now includes tje contents of the
Historical Atlas (for 43 cities of Portugal, Spain, France, United Kingdo=
m,
Ireland and Germany) and aims at widenning the work with new information
and analysis of recent urban processes and planning strategies. The
advantages ot this new way of electronic edition are important: lower cos=
t
and better diffussion (with a new Web site at the CCCB)..
Of course, we all hope that we will see how our colleagues from all over
Europe will interpret their own urban tradition... and wishes.
F.Javier Monclus
Prof. Urbanism
Polytechnic University of Catalonia (Barcelona, Spain)
Fco. Javier Monclus
Prof. Urbanismo ETSAV, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya
|
