Before beginning drafting Project 1, we read many essays from various critical regionalist authors to familiarize ourselves with the topical and scholarly discussion. Below are three reading responses that I wrote regarding some of the readings. 

Reading Response 1

Critical regionalism’s application in scholarly writing and analysis is often debated. Douglas Reichert Powell, in his essay “Connecting Politics and Culture in the American Landscape”, defends critical regionalism by arguing against the popular notion that this critical lens is isolating. Specifically, Powell believes that analysis through this lens provides “a rhetorical basis for making claims about how spaces and places are connected to (…) broader patterns of meaning” (4). Through an example regarding a murderous elephant from his hometown, Powell conveys that regions are best defined by multifaceted, interdisciplinary interactions that occur within them and extends that critical regionalism is the optimal way to describe these and direct them towards social change. Critical regionalism is valuable because it provides the verbiage for the emotions people associates with places, and grounds these emotions so that they can be used more productively without sacrificing culture and roots. Powell argues that the meaning that can arise from this realization will unify and develop places and spaces for the locals.

A term that Powell uses often in the conclusion of his essay is “social invention”. He states that this term navigates the in-between of the passivity of social construction and the directedness of social action and is thus appropriate for the reaction critical regionalism ought to arouse. By making the “social invention” aspect of critical regionalism active in a sense, Powell has created an instrument by which to find the patterns of meaning in regional spaces. A social invention may give rise to a reactionary movement, such as the creation of the American Institute of Planners (Powell 23), but at its heart it ought to have ethics that speak to all people in the area. Social invention provides the link between assumed construct the active response and reaction by giving locals a means to realize how their core values align with the places they are from and interact with on a day to day basis. Thus, Powell’s frequent use of the term “social invention” is useful to his argument because it quantifies the necessary link to support there being something meaningfully connecting people to places, beyond mere romantic feelings.

Reading Response 2

Keith Eggener’s and Douglas Reichert Powell’s opinions on critical regionalism could not appear to be any more different at face value. Eggener’s essay, “Placing Resistance: A Critique of Critical Regionalism” presents a multifaceted attack on the critical lens and claims that it is does not accomplish its goals. He notes that critical regionalism was initially created as resistance to globalization and universalization but concludes that it not only doesn’t combat this issue but also aids it by “reinforcing generality” and thus it “falls victim of the inevitable universalizing tendencies it warned against” (235). Powell, on the other hand, believes that critical regionalism is a valuable tool because it provides the verbiage for the emotions people associates with places, and grounds these emotions so that they can be used more productively without sacrificing culture and roots. By claiming that critical regionalism acts like a “social invention” (Powell 23), he supports that the lens accomplishes its goals of advancing changes without becoming too aggressive and generalizing. Powell’s paper seems to be written almost as a response to Eggener’s in that Powell addresses many of Eggener’s concerns about critical regionalism but overall the two have very different views on critical regionalism as an analytical lens.

Although Eggener’s and Powell’s views appear to be diametrically opposite, they are both surprisingly unified on one issue that relates back to the very roots of critical regionalism. Kenneth Frampton is widely regarded as the “father of critical regionalism” and in his view “the fundamental strategy of critical regionalism is to mediate the impact of universal civilization with elements derived indirectly from the peculiarities of a particular place” (Eggener 228). While this may seem like a working definition and practical use of critical regionalism, both Eggener and Powell believe that the use of this lens leads to romanticized notions about place that actually undermine the intentions of Frampton’s critical regionalism. For example, Eggener quite firmly believes that the implications of defining regions through an outside lens gives the outsider authority and thus “undermines [critical regionalism’s] constructive message” (228). Eggener’s paper is in direct response to Frampton’s definition of critical regionalism and thus has many critiques for the overly-sentimentalized view that it lends itself to. However, even Powell, a supporter of critical regionalism, finds fault with Frampton’s definition. Powell, in his paper, attempts to redefine critical regionalism in such a way that it does not encounter the same issues with sentimentality that Frampton does. He advocates that critical regionalism provides “a rhetorical basis for making claims about how spaces and places are connected to (…) broader patterns of meaning” (4) and that this grounds the practice of critical regionalism in a way that Frampton’s definition does not. Overall, although Eggener and Powell’s views regarding critical regionalism seem to be very opposite, they have surprising similarity in that both find fault with the definition and use of critical regionalism by its founder.

Eggener and Powell disagree completely on the value of the use of critical regionalism, but they both agree that Frampton’s definition of critical regionalism is inaccurate and overly romanticized.

Reading Response 3

Douglas Reichert Powell, in his essay “Connecting Politics and Culture in the American Landscape”, uses the key term “social invention” to describe the purpose of critical regionalism. More specifically, Powell believes that a critical regionalist piece should elevate people’s consciousness regarding what they may have previously thought of as just a place or space.  He defines a “social invention” as a middle ground: “more deliberate than a passive social construction, but less instrumental than direct forms of social action” (Powell 8). Essentially, a social invention, that should arise from a critical regionalist piece, is between something that just happens to a person and something that an individual deliberately plans. Powell provides multiple and varied examples of linking a place with cultural leading to notable social change. There is reactionary social change due to critical regionalism, such as with the creation of the American Institute of Planners in 1917 in response to the changing social structure affecting regions. Social invention can also awaken a region to its connectedness by bringing the people’s attention to a shared cultural practice or background. By bringing the term “social invention” into the discussion of regions, it allows for what was before a mere common space to become a web of multifaceted, interdisciplinary connections just by having one, conscious-raising, mutual circumstance or custom. Thus, despite inevitable disparities between people and experiences, civilians realizing a “social invention” in an area provides rhetoric for grounding discussion of regional culture and promoting positive change.

Wiz Khalifa’s music video for his song, “Black and Yellow”, features numerous shots of iconic sites in Pittsburgh and a chorus that undoubtedly references the Steel City. It also highlights a native “artifact” of sorts: The Terrible Towel, a rally towel for the hometown football team, the Pittsburgh Steelers. The music video also features Khalifa’s personal connection to the city with the majority of it being filmed on his childhood street with locals who just flocked to the video shoot. This music video represents critical regionalism through social invention because it recognizes the different experiences natives of the city and region have but still unifies everyone with one symbol, The Terrible Towel. The video begins with multiple shots spanning the Pittsburgh skyline and features many upscale commercial complexes and skyscrapers including the BNY Mellon Center and One PNC Plaza. The notable aspect of these shots is that they are taken from the ground, looking up at the tall buildings while also moving forward on the streets below; essentially, the exact same view a native of the region would have of the city’s impressive skyline while he or she is going about their daily business. The video then cuts to a street sign, the intersection of Chatsworth Avenue and Berwick Street, and begins to delve into Wiz Khalifa’s personal experience in the region. This was the area of Pittsburgh in which he grew up and the video depicts what natives of the region already know, this section of the city is fairly low income. However, throughout the video Khalifa flashes his impressive jewelry, all Pittsburgh related with replica Super Bowl rings representing the city’s six titles and chains featuring the Pittsburgh Pirates insignia, and drives off in a striking, customized black and yellow Dodge Challenger. Thus Khalifa connects to the diverse experiences of people in the region who vary greatly in socioeconomic status through his powerful, identifiable visuals.

The primary aspect of social invention in the music video for “Black and Yellow” is conveyed through highlighting The Terrible Towel. Although Pittsburgh is known for its fervent sports fans and culture, the region really united over sports, specifically football after this video. The Steelers had won their sixth Super Bowl ring in 2008 and subsequently suffered two disappointing seasons. “Black and Yellow” came out in the summer of 2010 and the music video was released during the football season and suddenly became an unofficial Steelers anthems. The last two minutes or so of the video primarily feature Wiz Khalifa singing and rapping the song to a crowd in the street with many of the audience members holding and waving Terrible Towels.  Khalifa himself has a Terrible Towel on his person for the majority of the video and the visuals basically make The Terrible Towel look like a hip thing to have. Because it is so synonymous with support for the team and pride in the region, the music video becomes an impressive, visual love letter to the city and unifies the region by highlighting the people’s faith and love for their football team. This promotes the Terrible Towel beyond the potential for insignificance like with social construct without actively making it a movement, thus qualifying it as a social invention. The Steelers once again made it to the Super Bowl the season that the song and music video were released and although they did not triumph, the song has been played at every game since then and Khalifa has even performed it on multiple occasions at Heinz Field, the Steelers’ Stadium. Overall, the music video for “Black and Yellow” is critical regionalist because it turns a symbol of the city into a social invention and uniting form for the region.