Pop-geographer Richard Florida - author of the wildly successful Rise of the Creative Class - released a new book recently, strangely titled Who's Your City? I guess some people out there still demand to know "Who's your daddy?" at, I don't know, mud volleyball tournaments or something. How, exactly, this phrase connects with geography is tenuous, at best.
The book, in a nutshell, proposes that there are three big decisions a person must make in life. 1) Choose a career. 2) Choose a spouse/partner. 3) Choose a place to live. Florida's assertion is that choosing a good fit with regards to no. 3 can not only help you lead a happier and more satisfying life, but it can help you find a good fit for nos. 1 and 2, as well. Yes, it's a little self-helpy, but whatever.
How does this idea intersect with theater? Obviously, any professional must decide at some point whether it makes sense to move to a big showbiz town, namely New York or Los Angeles. Not to discount Scott Walters' lengthy discussions about the decentralization of theater, but Florida emphasizes a significant trend toward the clustering of industries in particular metro areas. In fact, he says, the big story of the last 30 years or so has been that of cities "sorting themselves out," gaining greater distinction and specialization in various industries. Here's a smattering of Florida's urban specializations:
Missoula: forestry
Santa Fe: anthropology, archeology
Houston: petroleum engineering
Providence: jewelry
Terra Haute: machinists
Chicago: air travel, sales
Fargo: cartography
Los Angeles: entertainment
New York: fashion, entertainment, design
Florida quotes Cato Unbound editor Will Wilkinson (p. 102):
I actually think it's important to know this in order to realize how important it might be for ambitious people to move someplace they wouldn't otherwise find satisfying... You love acting but you hate LA, New York, D.C., and Chicago? Tough luck: Suck it up or resign yourself to dinner theater in Biloxi.
Later in the chapter, Florida engages in a discussion of "scenes" (p. 123):
Scenes are vehicles for producing, consuming, and improving products - and they're responsible for creating experiences, too. They represent "modes of organizing cultural production and consumption," according to Daniel Silver, Terry Clark, and Lawrence Rothfield, leading students of the subject at the University of Chicago. Scenes are many and varied. There's the music scene in Nashville, the theater scene in New York, the nightlife scene in Miami, and LA's film scene. But, the authors ask, "What makes these scenes 'scenes'?" What makes a collection of theaters on Broadway in New York City different from theaters anywhere else?A scene is defined, the authors note, by the opportunities it gives you to "look at other people and be looked at by them." It is "total entertainment culture that pushes work out of mind." The key, they argue, lies in the way "collections of amenities and people serve to foster certain shared values and tastes, certain ways of relating to one another and legitimating what one is doing or not doing." Scenes provide a key lens into why work continues to cluster today.
After reading this, it's tempting to think that all one has to do to achieve success is to simply move to where your desired scene is. Florida never comes out and says it quite that way, but he does suggest that professionals of all disciplines will have more frequent and more meaningful opportunities for success if they pursue the industrial cluster and engage the scene that suits them best.
Comments (2)
The Wilkinson quotation is, of course, pure BS on so many levels.
Posted by Scott Walters | May 6, 2008 9:37 AM
Posted on May 6, 2008 09:37
And for God's sake, Wilkerson and Cato Unbound, the blog of the Libertarian Cato Institute?
Posted by Scott Walters | May 6, 2008 9:47 AM
Posted on May 6, 2008 09:47