With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

Mike Davis Could See the Future

Sometime in the mid-nineties, when I was an undergraduate at U.C. Berkeley, a guest lecturer visited my U.S. history class. It was one of those massive survey lectures with about five hundred students, many of us there to check a requirement rather than follow an academic passion. The guest’s name was Mike Davis, and his subject was Los Angeles. The hour began with a story about Aimee Semple McPherson, a charismatic evangelist and early-twentieth-century pioneer of media celebrity, who established a base of ardent believers in the city back when it was only sparsely populated. I can still hear the way Davis said her name, as though repeating it enough times offered some key to understanding the huckster promises that drew some people to L.A. It ended with a look at the recently completed headquarters of the Beverly Hills Police Department—a gleaming fortress, a monument to state power. Throughout the lecture, I remember being unable to move, transfixed by the torrent of ideas, all the dots being connected, this new way of seeing the world around me. After class, I skipped down to a bookstore near campus and bought “City of Quartz,” Davis’s 1990 book about Los Angeles as both “utopia and dystopia.” What he taught us that day was not history; it was a way of digging through the ruins of the past to see the future.

Davis passed away this week, from esophageal cancer, at the age of seventy-six. He was born in 1946 in Fontana, California, in San Bernardino County, to working-class parents who had hitchhiked to California from Ohio. He was raised in El Cajon, just outside of San Diego. He was a curious student but an itinerant one. His education was interrupted—or rather, augmented—by stints as a truck driver, a bookseller, and a tour-bus driver, experiences that drew him into the world of activism, organizing, and Marxist thinking. Upon finishing his undergraduate education, at U.C.L.A., in the mid-seventies, he pursued but never completed the requirements for his Ph.D. He took a path of teaching, editing, writing, and labor organizing. In the early eighties, he spent six years in the U.K. and served as an editor of the New Left Review, before returning to Southern California.

“City of Quartz” drew on his graduate work, but, as he joked in the book’s acknowledgments, there were “no research grants, sabbaticals, teaching assistants or other fancy ingredients” here. His style ran afoul of academic conventions. In retrospect, this was a failing of the system, not Davis. In the eighties, Los Angeles was an object of fascination to scholars and thinkers such as the geographer Edward Soja, the literary critic Fredric Jameson, and the sociologist Jean Baudrillard, for whom a downtown hotel or mazy highway interchange held great symbolic heft. What made “City of Quartz” so breathtaking was that Davis tried to write about Los Angeles as a totality—from the real-estate deals of the mega-rich to the waste-treatment plants, the power brokers to the unhoused and dispossessed, from the glamour of Hollywood to the cryptic graffiti of street gangs. Even those who decried his bombastic tone or his looseness with fact-checking could not deny the scale of his ambition.

Part of Davis’s achievement is that he understood Los Angeles from the periphery, not from a place of entitlement. “The world that experientially I was familiar with,” he explained, in 1993, “is that kind of blue-collar margin between the city and the desert. . . . I know a lot about the chaos of that, and I know what the city looks like from that kind of perspective. I know that the region consists of one hundred small towns or communities, that it’s a mosaic of those, and that, though L.A.’s the most visualized, endlessly represented place in the world, you generally keep seeing the same thing over and over and over again.”

Read entire article at The New Yorker