.jpg)
The
article itself is rather short and details the impending, highly anticipated
opening of Marimekko,
“a Finnish textile and lifestyle” store, in Beverly Hills just last Friday,
November 16th. The store is the just the third one to open in America, despite
its cult-like following in certain parts of the US. While the article itself
has little to do with social difference, it does relate to class material in
numerous ways. The most prominent way this article can be incorporated into
class concepts is through the ideas of consumerism
and cosmopolitanism discussed in Kling, Olin and Spencer’s Postsuburban
California: The Transformation of Orange County Since World War II.
The
sheer fact that the opening of a new store in Beverly Hills warrants an article
in the LA Times is evidence in itself that radical consumerism and
cosmopolitanism is very present in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area. Before I
get to my visit/investigation of Beverly Hills, let me first start off by
discussing these concepts from the viewpoint of Kling, Olin and Spencer.
According
to Kling, Olin and Spencer, Orange County perfectly embodies a major shift in
the spatial layout and culture of modern cities. The authors make the argument
that not only does Orange County reflect the differences between itself and
several other recently established major cities from older major cities, but,
rather, that it reflects an emerging trend of developing cities around the
world. This trend, according to the authors, is marked by fundamental changes
in city structure and culture, the most profound of which include a
decentralized spatial layout, the emergence of information capitalism, the
shift to consumerism and the adoption of a cosmopolitan lifestyle. While all
four of these hallmarks are present in the article and, as I will get to, in
Beverly Hills itself. It is consumerism and cosmopolitanism that are most
visible. As far as decentralization, the authors argue that Orange County and
other rapidly developing cities around the world have strayed away from the
traditional Chicago School Model and have instead shifted toward a
multi-centered spatial layout. That is, rather than a city revolving around an
economic and cultural center, there are instead multiple specialized centers
located throughout the region. Kling, Olin and Poster also argue that modern
cities are characterized by a shift from a manufacturing based economy to an
economy centered around the information sector. Most importantly, in this
context at least, the authors argue that recently developed municipalities,
such as the Los Angeles area, are characterized by blatant consumerism. This
consumerism is characterized by media based manipulation of consumers by
producers, where in which consumers buy non-essential goods in order to
maintain their producer-dictated lifestyles. Finally, according to the authors,
modern cities are characterized by cosmopolitanism, that is an appreciation of
more sophisticated and foreign products and services.
.jpg)
I
would, however, like to discuss the ways in which Beverly Hills relates to the
four hallmarks of “Postsuburban” cities. Let’s start off with decentralization.
Decentralization is embodied in Beverly Hills in the way the city bases its
economy on a very specialized area, the selling and distribution of high-end
goods. Had the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area not been decentralized, Beverly
Hills would either be strictly residential, as a periphery to the center, or
would be characterized by the manufacturing and distribution of all products as
the center itself. It is this differentiated multi-centrality that provides
evidence to Kling, Olin and Poster’s claim that the modern city is
decentralized. The economic reliance on information capitalism can not be
tangibly seen, but can be abstractly discerned by the structure of Beverly
Hills. This is seen in the similarity of stores in the area. That is to say,
the information sector is present in the way the stores in the area match the
taste, preference and economic level of its residents. On to the most important
aspects of “postsuburbia” as it relates to Beverly Hills, consumerism and
cosmopolitanism. As discussed above, the city’s economic reliance on
distribution clearly indicates a consumer-dominated economy. More importantly,
however, is the international aspect of these stores. Nearly everything in
Beverly Hills is a more expensive, foreign, exotic and sophisticated version of
things found in Westwood and other neighboring areas. Instead of Starbucks
there are international teashops, instead of Macy’s and Nordstrom’s there are
Gucci and Fendi stores, even already foreign, sophisticated, exotic and expensive
products, such as BMWs and Mercedes, are replaced by even more exotic,
sophisticated, and expensive products, such as Lamborghinis and Ferraris.
While
nearly every city in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area represent the postsuburbian
idea in some way, Beverly Hills, as made evident by the LA Times article
represents all four hallmarks in a very blatant and highly visible way.
Good post, Brandon! Your post was quite interesting to read and touched on essential class concepts.
ReplyDeleteI’ve visited Beverly Hills quite a few times since moving to L.A., but I don’t think that I’ve ever bought anything there; as you mention, the stores in that neighborhood are incredibly expensive – Beverly Hills’s commercial area is probably the most posh and valuable in all of California. Your overview of Kling, Olin and Spencer’s ideas is correct and it displays Beverly Hills as such a decentralized, closed-off, consumer-centric neighborhood very well. More comment coming soon!