Robert Bruegmann gives book Sprawl a dry subtitle, “A compact history.” To his credit, it’s appropriate. In 225 pages or so, not counting the extensive endnotes and bibliography (which I skipped), the professor (for that’s what he is) does a thorough job of trying to define sprawl and then politely demolish the demonization and negative characterizations of the word. Bruegmann reiterates that the definition itself has been malleable over time, as people use the word to tar with broad strokes anything which doesn’t meet their approval. Sprawl, to Bruegmann, is mostly a class-based attempt to criticize any lifestyle that is not one’s own, especially for the upper and upper-middle class elites who live in cities or ex-urban communities. To the author, sprawl is a normal condition of cities, and not uniquely American, either. Affluence anywhere leads to similar conditions for cities and their environs. While the argument gets repeated a bit often, I got the point, which I would sum up with this one line from the book:
I would argue that worries about sprawl have become so important not because conditions are really bad, as the critics suggest, but precisely because conditions are so good. [p.164]
In the endnote for this phrase, Bruegmann says this idea is explored more deeply by Gregg Easterbrook in The Progress Paradox, which is summed up thusly: “Living standards keep rising, yet people are no happier as a result. What does this paradox tell us about ourselves and our future?” Glum stuff, perhaps. But at least Sprawl provides — and supports — a more pleasing interpretation of modern life.