Reviewed by:

• Straßenverkehr und soziale Sichtbarkeit: Das Massenmedium Straße in Chicago 1900–1930 by David Sittler
• Tiina Männistö-Funk (bio)

An individual’s ability to use public spaces, based on aspects like race, class, gender, and age, is as topical an issue today as it was in early twentieth century Chicago. David Sittler argues that urban streets are a form of media— being on the street means constantly participating in media-technologies of social visibility that resonate through that street’s material elements; these are read by others on the street and amplified in the printed media. Sittler defines “Bilder-Verkehr” (“picture traffic”), the subject of his study, as all the “pictures” that can be visually perceived by any traffic participant on the street (p. 37). From different viewpoints, Sittler studies the physical practices on Michigan Avenue, then the specific activities that achieved mass-media visibility, such as demonstrations. He also consults contemporary experts’ writings about Chicago’s streets. Having examined the race riots of 1919 as an extreme case of “Bilder-Verkehr,” he argues that the violence of the riots can be perceived as media practice.

Studying the entire visibilities, even on one street in one city for a defined period, is a gigantic task. Sittler marches, or maybe rather saunters, through a great variety of interesting phenomena, from street cleaners and statues to street facades and political groups. This abundance of subjects prevents the author from looking deeply into any of them, and the number of perspectives, concepts, and thinkers make the book a challenging, sometimes bewildering read. However, the amount of detail is also a fitting reflection of the multifaceted topic of simultaneous occurrences. Understandably the focus on social visibility as well as the tradition of media history steer the use of literature. In a study about streets, however, we expect at least some recognition of the large field of recent studies on the history of space and mobility in cities. A prime example is Peter Norton’s article on changes in U.S. city streets during this period, predominantly in Chicago, resulting in the hegemony of car-traffic at the cost of all other street uses and users: “Street Rivals: Jaywalking and the Invention of the Motor Age Street” (2007). Without this context, the book’s recurring analysis of social visibility and media representations of different traffic modes lacks a crucial historical dimension. [End Page 962]

In the final chapter, Sittler turns to the work of the Chicago School of Sociology in order to link its classic studies with his attempts to grasp essential phenomena from the visual mass of a street. He suggests that the city is not only the topic, but also the outcome of the study, because it produces new presentations and definitions of its phenomena (p. 339). This is a refreshing insight. It could have been presented at the beginning to serve as a fruitful framing of the entire book. Some maps would have been beneficial to illustrate the subject (following the example of the Chicago sociologists Sittler analyses). Even so, his analysis has a strong visual rooting in the photographs he uses as sources and points of reference. A mainly micro-historical approach to using pictures allows him to concentrate on just thirty individual pictures to anchor his analysis. It would be helpful to have a more thorough explanation of how and why he chose these pictures and analyzed them. Sittler could also have told us more about the fleeting everyday practices that he refers to only in passing (p. 178). Other authors have used historical photographs also to analyze such practices, for example, Franck Cochoy, Johan Hagberg, and Roland Canu in “The Forgotten Role of Pedestrian Transportation in Urban Life: Insights from a Visual Comparative Archaeology (Gothenburg and Toulouse, 1875–2011)” (2015). Nevertheless, Sittler’s book is a very welcome addition to the visual scholarship of urban street life and a rich, thought-provoking walk through the everyday history of Chicago.

Tiina Männistö-Funk is a visiting researcher at the...

审核人：

• 大街和购物街：大卫·西特勒（David Sittler）1900–1930年在芝加哥的Das Massenmedium大街
• TiinaMännistö-Funk（生物）

个人的种族，阶级，性别和年龄等方面的公共空间使用能力如今已成为二十世纪初芝加哥的热门话题。戴维·西特勒（David Sittler）认为，城市街道是一种媒体形式–出现在街道上意味着不断参与通过街道的物质元素产生共鸣的社会知名度的媒体技术；这些在街上被其他人阅读，并在印刷媒体中得到放大。Sittler定义“ Bilder-Verkehr”（“图片流量”）作为他研究的主题，因为街道上的任何交通参与者都可以在视觉上感知到所有“图片”（第37页）。Sittler从不同的角度研究了密歇根大道上的体育活动，然后研究了实现大众媒体知名度的具体活动，例如游行示威。他还查阅有关芝加哥街道的当代专家著作。他将1919年的种族暴动视作“比尔德-维克（Bilder-Verkehr）”的极端案例，他认为暴动的暴力行为可以被视为媒体的行为。

研究整个可见性，即使是在一个城市的某个街道上一段限定的时间，也是一项艰巨的任务。从街道清洁工和雕像到街道外墙和政治团体，Sittler可能通过各种各样有趣的现象进军甚至是漫步。如此众多的主题使作者无法深入研究其中的任何一个主题，而且观点，概念和思想家的数量使这本书成为具有挑战性的内容，有时甚至令人困惑。但是，细节的数量也是同时发生的多方面主题的恰当反映。可以理解，对社会知名度的关注以及媒体历史的传统引导了文学的使用。但是，在有关街道的研究中，我们希望至少对最近有关城市空间和交通历史的研究领域有一定的认识。一个典型的例子是彼得·诺顿（Peter Norton）关于这段时期美国城市街道变化的文章，主要是在芝加哥，这导致了汽车交通的霸权，而这却牺牲了所有其他街道用途和使用者的利益：“街头竞争对手：横穿马路和发明发明汽车时代街”（2007年）。没有这种背景，该书对不同交通模式的社会知名度和媒体表现的重复分析就缺乏关键的历史意义。[结束页962]

在最后一章中，Sittler转向芝加哥社会学学院的工作，以将其经典研究与他从街道视觉质量中把握基本现象的尝试联系起来。他建议，这座城市不仅是主题，而且是研究的结果，因为它产生了有关现象的新描述和定义（第339页）。这是一个令人耳目一新的见解。它可能在一开始就被提出来作为整本书的富有成果的框架。一些地图本来可以很好地说明这一主题（以芝加哥社会学家Sittler分析的例子为例）。即便如此，他的分析仍深深植根于他用作来源和参考点的照片中。一种主要的微观历史方法来使用图片，使他可以专注于仅三十张单独的图片来锚定他的分析。对他如何以及为什么选择这些图片并进行分析有一个更彻底的解释将很有帮助。Sittler可能还告诉我们更多有关他只是在传球中提到的短暂的日常实践（第178页）。其他作者也使用历史照片来分析这种做法，例如Franck Cochoy，Johan Hagberg和Roland Canu在“行人交通在城市生活中被遗忘的作用：视觉比较考古学的见解（哥德堡和图卢兹，1875–2011年”）中）”（2015年）。尽管如此，Sittler的书还是对城市街头生活的视觉奖学金和对芝加哥日常生活史的丰富而发人深省的探索之外的非常受欢迎的书。

TiinaMännistö-Funk是...的访问学者