Fighting Traffic: The Dawn of the Motor Age in the American City (Inside Technology)

Peter Norton describes a long-forgotten aspect of the appearance of mass motoring in America, the war between motorists and pedestrians. When neither motorists nor pedestrians had significant rules, the appearance of a road vehicle that went faster than ever before resulted in pedestrian deaths. These produced strong anti-motoring emotions, furthered by cartoons of young mothers and innocent children murdered by speeding cars. When this produced proposed legislation for car governors to limit possible speed to 25 mph or so, everywhere, Motordom found itself united. It united against pedestrians on streets, and for highways without pedestrians. By 1940 it had won these battles, with pedestrians limited to sidewalks and crosswalks of normal streets, and freeways accepted for high-speed travel. We achieved this result by producing the rules of the road, that combine rules for drivers of wheeled vehicles on roadways and rules for pedestrians on sidewalks and crosswalks into one set of reasonably equitable conforming rules. As a child cyclist in London, UK, of the 1930s, arriving in California in 1940, I never questioned the principle of roadways for wheels and sidewalks for feet, the battle had been forgotten.American cyclists should benefit from that principle, but American Motordom managed to get cyclists classified with pedestrians instead of drivers, which created the nasty legal situation of bicyclists under American traffic law. And now anti-motoring bicycle advocates are breaking that principle by advocating non-traveling uses for roadways. The reasons for the war between motorists and pedestrians should again be remembered, with the proper division of street users into those on wheels and those on feet. Norton's book revives that history.My short criticism is that Norton has not properly discussed the creation and role of traffic rules in achieving our standard of reasonably safe operation.

For those of us that recognize the American automobile as a vicious and murderous machine in the hands of a people incapable of responsibility to one another, this book is an excellent Playbill for the unaccountable slaughter that would take place between 1900 and today. The description of the removal of pedestrians/cyclists from protected status to hunted roadkill reminds one of nothing less than the American native genocide, and as Mr. Norton demonstrates, this turnabout takes only thirty years of propaganda and industry low-lifes and money to turn the tables. But for those who realize that the person at the wheel deserves total responsibility for death and injury, one easily finds corroboration that the original response to the pleasure car reacted in the same manner of indignation to the killers behind the wheel that still run rampant and unpunished by American 'justice.' Eye-opening.

In 18th and 19th century Britain, Parliament passed a series of Enclosure Acts removing previously existing rights of local people to their use of the commons. In a dispassionate, straight forward manner, Dr. Norton reveals the story of how traditional rights to an individual's use of American streets(which comprise the largest portion of the public realm in any given city)were appropriated by "organized motordom" to benefit the growing ranks of automobile users. A masterful work of scholarship.Though the author doesn't specifically state the connection (probably because he is so fair-minded and objective), the period covered (roughly 1910-39) corresponded with the rise of public relations. Norton's story provides a vivid example of how the new techniques of this field were used to manipulate public opinion and advance a political agenda. Fascinating! Highly recommend, especially for those working on pedestrian/bicycle accessibility, transit issues, architects, engineers, and urban designers, or anyone who simply loves cities.

Seldom have I read a book that so profoundly changed my understanding of history. The author maintains a neutral tone, not showing bias towards or against any industry or interest group. It discusses at length how various advocates advanced their position, what approaches worked and what failed and why. Even so, I am left overwhelmed by the feeling that the auto industry has controlled the dialog. A bias that continues more by momentum today in popular media. I was also surprised to find the same arguments that are gaining traction today were tried and failed 100 years ago.If you want to be an activist, on any topic, you need to read this book. How is it that something so overwhelmingly unwanted in the urban environment came to dominate the scene?

A little dense, a little academic, a little repetitive, but thus far a terrific look at the evolution of our Motor Age. Fascinating parallels with the discussion taking place today.

This book is a well researched and documented history of how our public streets became the domain of motorized vehicles over significant and violent opposition. It also a very readable and engaging book. It would surprise most Americans to learn how pedestrians,cyclists, and other non-motorized roadway users were criminalized for the benefit of the wealthy minority that could afford cars.

Peter provides as comprehensive a history on public rights-of-way as any I've ever seen. His work is thoroughly-researched and very well-organized. My only concern was that at times it was so dense that it was hard to follow; however, that was merely my experience of the book. It was absolutely worth the purchase and the read.

This is a very thoroughly researched book. Almost a third of the last part of the book consists entirely of the author's footnotes. I found it to be a little too academic for my taste but others may appreciate that facet of the book. It might make a good reading assignment in an urban planning course at a university.

Fighting traffic is an instructive account of the social reconstruction of American cities that led to their domination by motordom – the powerful collective of interests dedicated clearing a path for the car. The most important period in the rise of motordom was the 1920s. Norton charts this transformation in terms of the insults that the competitors for road space traded with each other: motorists became “joy riders”, “road hogs” and “speed demons”, and their machines “juggernauts” and “death cars”, while pedestrians became “jaywalkers” and street cars became “traffic obstructions”. Norton explains how the road hogs won, how roads that were previously shared spaces were taken over by the car.He attributes this victory to motordom’s awareness of the importance of shaping attitudes, the impressive resources that they had available to apply to this task, and their ultimate success in establishing that urban roads were, almost exclusively, for cars. By 1930 the battle had been won: “most street users agreed that most streets were chiefly motor thoroughfares.”“Motordom”, Norton notes, “had effective rhetorical weapons, growing national organization, a favourable political climate, substantial wealth, and the sympathy of a growing minority of city motorists. By 1930, with these assets, motordom had redefined city streets.”This is how he accounts for the dramatic change in attitudes, over a short space of time, about who should have the right of way on American streets: “From American ideals of political and economic freedom, motordom fashioned the rhetorical lever it needed. In these terms, motorists, though a minority, had rights that protected their choice of mode from intrusive restrictions. Their driving also constituted a demand for street space, which, like other demands in a free market, was not a matter for expert scrutiny.”Norton’s account is not of mere historical interest. Today the five most valuable companies in the world – Apple, Alphabet (Google), Microsoft, Amazon and Facebook – plus Tesla and Uber and all the major traditional car manufacturers, are promoting driverless cars. And they promise to reopen the argument over who should have the right of way on city streets.They boast that their cars will able to respond with extreme deference to all pedestrians, cyclists and children encountered in the street, thereby liberating them to enjoy their pre-motordom freedom to venture safely into the road. But they concede that if this freedom were widely exercised in dense urban areas motor traffic would grind to a halt. So, who will command the streets in dense urban areas? The promoters of driverless cars are also the world’s preeminent shapers of public opinion.PS A sixth star for clear and persuasive writing.

Very Interesting book. Gives you insights about the strong interdependences between city development and automobiles and the history of this development.Very recommendable!

It is short (the last third of it is pretty much all just references), but it is very informative. I learned a lot about the history of jaywalking (how it was constructed by the car lobby) and also a lot about the lobbying practices of the car companies.Very insightful if you like to know more about how our cities became what they are today.

This seemed to me to be a topic that could be very interesting, and yet the book managed to say very little (what little it did say it repeated over and over again). I couldn't get through it.