Kwok 1

Jolin Kwok

CMCL-C334

7 August 2010

Cynthia Smith

Reading Response 5: Wright on Broadacre City

Broadacre City, more than mere building models constructed by the Taliesin Fellowship

in 1934, is representative of the revolutionary philosophy of renowned architect Frank Lloyd

Wright with regards to community planning. This “City of the Future” conceptualizes “a

decentralized, liberated society, the centerline of which would be architecture” (Wright 46, 57).

Architecture is the language whereas the message lies in the theme of organic planning, to bring

technology back to nature and reestablish human ties between urban and rural life (Wright 66).

Hence, “to take these models as literal pictures would be to miss their effect” (Wright 60).

Therefore, I refrain from elaborating on technical details for the purpose of this summary.

Wright argues that “we [Americans] live in economic, aesthetic and moral chaos, for the

reason that American life has achieved no organic form” (65). His resentment towards the

influence of plutocracy in America is evident in his reply to the Mayor of Pittsburgh (Wright 65).

His solution is “Organic Capitalism” in Broadacre City, a “genuine” capitalist system “wherein

private ownership is based upon personal use and public service” (Wright 53). This would mean

that everyone in America is “entitled to ‘own’ an acre of ground so long as they live on it or use

it” (Wright 51). It is ultimately “the unification of public means to private ends in all uses of the

ground” (Wright 57).

That being said, everyone in America “will have to go to work” (Wright 58). Too many

people are what Wright calls “speculative [commodities]”—not actual commodities—so long
 Kwok 2

they lie unused and idle, no thanks to money, the “immunity from work, a false privilege”

(Wright 54). These people have been “divorced from nature by excessive urban idealism and

parasitic living” (Wright 52). Wright argues that everyone should fully utilize and improve “his

own ground”, calling this philosophy “out of the ground into the light” (59). And so, the citizens

of Broadacre City would “have to be of a real service or starve” (Wright 64). However, it is

interesting to note that “the aged, the lame, halt and blind…are well protected [in Broadacre

City]…and not by charity” (Wright 64). Wright does not elaborate on specific methods for doing

so which makes one wonder exactly what he means by that. After all, it is common knowledge

that contemporary capitalism is not perceived to be charitable by nature and its polar opposites,

socialism and communism are often criticized for being too charitable to their people, regardless

of how deserving they are in terms of welfare status.

Public utilities in Broadacre City would be as “concentrated in the hands of the state” as

much as her government would be the only thing centralized (Wright 46). This way with “the

county government being more closely knit with federal administration…there will be less of it

needed” (Wright 51). The government would function mostly as “the business administration of

popular necessities, together with impersonal social affairs of a great nation”, for politics in

Broadacre City would be mainly “the policy of the people…concerning public utilities” (Wright

53, 64). In effect, this should make politics “a vital matter to everyone in [Broadacre City]

instead of the [then] hopeless indifference that makes ‘politics’ a grafter’s profession” (Wright

47). Moreover, with everything but the government decentralized, governmental administrative

procedures are simplified and the citizen’s individuality can be maintained. Perhaps then, the

government will be more responsible too.

All in all, Wright aims for the use of current scientific knowledge and powers to
 Kwok 3

“establish a practical way of life that will bring the Arts, Agriculture, and Industry into a

harmonious whole” (66). It is hard to disagree with the overall concept of Broadacre City. This

model of a city is the utopia for people who aspire to live in a whole and humane community that

advocates genuine meritocracy to make a living. It would be fruitful to further investigate

functional details of the community, such as its methods in approaching welfare issues “not by

charity”. A criticism of Broadacre City wave the rhetorical city off as “[just] an artist’s dream”

and claim that the social and technological problems it proposes to solve just needs more

technology. Like Wright, I see this argument as thoroughly shortsighted, for I think there really

is some “vision” going on in there (60).