Front matter hereUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON
                                
                                
                                
                REVIEW OF DOWN THE ASPHALT PATH:
               THE AUTOMOBILE AND THE AMERICAN CITY
                                
                      DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
                                
                                
                                
                               BY
                           JASON CARR
                                
                                
                        ARLINGTON, TEXAS
                         SEPTEMBER 1998
blank page

First, what is the book about?CLAY MCSHANE.  Down the Asphalt

Path: the Automobile and the American City.  New York: Columbia

University Press.  Pp. xvii, 288.



     Clay McShane's Down the Asphalt Path is a cultural history

of the rise of automobility and American cities.1  McShane is

careful to point out early on that the causal relationship

between the two have been previously misunderstood, and that the

increasing importance of the automobile did not singlehandedly

drive suburbanization and the transformation of the city.

McShane offers that the emergence of automobile technology was

instead the result of a change in American urban culture (x).

     The core problem with this book is that the thesis-as-stated

is central only to the first half of the book; from that point on

the book becomes a heavily-biased social criticism only

tangentially related to automobility. The automobilization of

cities is painted as a kind of revolution of (or steam-rolling

by) the business classes, overthrowing traditional street-uses of

the proletarian city-dwellers.  Oppression of women and

minorities is thrown in as an added benefit to the

revolutionaries..

     Second, is the book reliable?

     Building on his earlier research into paving McShane relies

heavily on municipal documents and engineering journals.2  His

research into the various paving technologies is quite good, and

he ties this technology closely to the projected use of the

street.3  The struggle between commercial and urban residential

street use is poignantly drawn.

     The author's use of the engineering and technical primary

sources allows him to make interesting and warranted claims:

since cities and their suburbs were the natural target for

automobile sales,  until the cities could be forced to adopt

traffic-friendly pavements and auto-friendly legislation, the

automobile had no change of commercial and technological success.

On the other hand, reliance on civic and engineering documents

can lure him into a false sense of groundedness.  In the second

half of the book, McShane veers off into culture and

architectural/urban planning arenas that require more subtlety

and informed subjectivity.  In the latter sections McShane begins

to make unwarranted and occasionally bizarre pronouncements about

the intentions of his subjects.  For example, he alludes that

Henry Ford may have wanted to kill or injure his wife by giving

her a "dangerous" electric vehicle (140).

     This admittedly extreme case affords a jumping-off point to

dissect McShane's reasoning in the latter half of the book.

First, the electric vehicles are reported as being particularly

attractive to women because they are "quiet", easily

controllable, and generally not as frightening as internal

combustion cars (139). By contrast, Ford's Model T has "odd" and

"inconvenient" and "awkward" features (135).  It's high power-to-

weight ratio made it "powerful", a "muscle car", a favorite of

drag racing adolescents.  Having characterized the two

vehicles this way, why does McShane fault Ford for giving his

wife a Detroit Electric instead of one of his own Model Ts?

     Although McShane uses some unorthodox primary sources in the

latter half (songs, advertisements), the sources themselves are

reliable as cultural markers; it is McShane's interpretation of

the sources that is unconvincing and ham-handed.

Third, is the material presented well?  McShane's presentation of

the first part of the book is good.  In particular, his

willingness to insert the etymologies of the vernacular adds

welcome bits of engaging trivia.  His brief and integrated

explanations of "cabs" and "hacks" provides a useful example of

his willingness to assist the reader with interesting tidbits

(7).

     There is a brief transition from the explication of the

first half of Asphalt Path, and the unbalanced cultural criticism

of the second half.  This transition is the chapter titled "The

Epitome of Possessions: The Car in Popular Culture."  McShane

begins throwing in an unhealthy mix of supposition into his

engineering data:

     most American car owners probably employed chauffeurs

     not just to drive their cars, but also to provide the

     all-too-frequent repairs... Constant tire repairs

     probably represented the greatest hassle for car

     owners... flat tires probably occurred every 100 miles

     or so (126).



     A more serious detriment to the material's presentation is

the zealous, almost obsessive, insistence that a male (a puerile

or adolescent male in particular) conspiracy co-opted the myth

and reality of the automobile for the nefarious purposes of

oppressing wives, daughters, blacks, and immigrants, and city

dwellers altogether.4

     This assertion itself is not as egregious as McShane's

arbitrary use of contradictory evidence, and his frequent

misunderstanding of automobile's technical issues5.  Although

McShane's main attack was saved for male sabotage of female

driving rights, a racially-charged example makes a good starting

place.  McShane illustrates white fear of non-white advancement

by mentioning a New York Times article which "complained that

blacks and Latins were bad drivers, with no supporting evidence

(134)."  Then he refers to an Italian immigrant who is shocked to

see that American drivers actually pay attention to police

traffic direction (201).  There was obviously a difference in

automobile and traffic culture socialization between America and

Italy at that time, a difference which the paper characterized,

perhaps too simplistically, as bad driving and good driving.6

     McShane's arbitrary interpretations grow looser and more

biased as he begins talking about automobility and gender.

Again, the flaw is that McShane reads all mentions of difference

as value judgements rather than indications of different

socialization (value systems).  The author, for example, notes

that although early vehicles had constant problems that required

"considerable strength (126)", were inconvenient and "smelly ()",

and that "early women drivers often encountered hostility from

other women (167)", there was definitely a male conspiracy pumped

by "phallic (fig. 7.9)" and "geometric fantasies" which

eventually created "a nightmare (228)" and a "bloodbath (202)."



Fourth, what, if anything, did this book contribute to your

knowledge and understanding about urban history?  McShanes's

early text in this book is quite good, and could stand as a short

book on it's own.  McShane undercuts the solidity and usefulness

of his work when he consistently characterizes male automotive

(and motorsport particularly) culture as puerile, boyish,

adolescent, "atavistic and anti-modern (202)" bent on gutting

cities "create a high-speed urban environment for their machines

(203)."  He does himself, and Asphalt Path a disservice.







                              NOTES



_______________________________
1.McShane tips his pessimistic hand in the selection of the tile,
alluding to American cities being "led down the primrose path" of
automobility.

2.McShane  had  written  an article on the  relationship  of  new
paving technologies vis-a-vis street usage: "Transforming the Use
of  Urban  Space:  A Look at the Revolution in Street  Pavements,
1880-1924," Journal of Urban History, 5 (May, 1979).
3.McShane shows us how the abutter's deliberate choice  of  rough
and  inexpensive  pavements acted as a primitive traffic-limiting
device.  In this way, the author demonstrates the tension between
suburbanite and urbanite, with the auto being the major weapon.

4.McShane  is advertised by Northeastern University as an  expert
on              JFK              conspiracy             theories.
URL=http://www.nubr.neu.edu/EXPERT/expertinfo3.html

5.McShane  frequently misunderstands the underlying  reasons  for
particular engineering decisions, such as disconnecting  mufflers
for   racing   purposes   (169).   This  disconnection   relieved
backpressure  on the early exhaust systems, increasing  flow  and
therefore increasing horsepower.

There  are  other  errors.  For example, in Table  8.2  (162)  he
confounds horsepower with the size of the car.

6.Recent personal observation of traffic in Italy (and France and
Germany,    for  that  matter)  argues  that  there   are   major
differences in driving, breaking down along national lines.


http://www.mousetrap.net/~mouse/uta/