This book tells the story of Los Angeles's relationship with the natural forces that surround it. To tell this story, Davis recounts historical events where natural disasters or phenomena shaped the development of the city and times where the built environment exacerbated or mitigated the consequences of natural disaster for some citizens (and distinctly, not for others). Then, he summarizes various fictional accounts of the destruction of Los Angeles (and speculation around its future) to solidify his argument that LA is a city defined by its fear (and ignorance, and romanticizing) of disaster.

I found this book interesting and well-researched, but the sheer density of the book also made it tedious to get through. This was especially true in the later chapters, where it felt more as though Davis was cataloging a huge set of stories instead of focusing on synthesizing what their implications are. Also, this is not Davis's fault, but this book was published over twenty years ago, so what may have felt like bolder claims about the volatility of California's weather feel truer than ever, and I would love to read this book from a 2022 perspective. That being said, I did enjoy this book, and I would certainly recommend at least the first couple of chapters to anyone interested in the relationship between the environments we build and the environments we build them in.

#7

Davis has amazing insight into the many poor long-term planning decisions that are regularly presented and represented to Angelenos (and the wider world) as disasters -- from fires to floods, tornadoes to suburb-prowling coyotes and mountain lions. Completely out of place is his several chapter assessments of LA dissaster and sci fi fiction, which seems to be ripped straight from an undergrad English comp thesis. boo on that.

“Ecology of Fear” is essential reading for all angelinos and those living in LA. No book captures my feelings of the city more than Mike Davis, marxist historian and ecological sociologist, and we’re damn lucky to have had his extraordinary attention placed there. His framework and analysis turns hyperbole into existential materialism, its tagline: “In effect, we think ourselves gods upon the land but are still really just tourists.” This book just so happens to have a date of publication, but its contents will never be irrelevant, especially one of the great essays of all time, “The Case for Letting Malibu Burn.”

A wild-eyed book about the apocalypse that is Los Angeles. From fires to earthquakes to tornadoes (strange but true!) to mountain lions to terminators, Davis covers every real and imagined way LA is doomed to die, and the ways in which Angelenos have invited this destruction through greedy and ignorant city planning. Chapters on why Malibu should be allowed to burn and the endless battle against wildlife are the most fascinating.

He gets overly polemical at times. His arguments don't always hold water. And whenever anyone starts concocting elaborate social arguments about why Hollywood has made certain movies, I always find myself thinking, "Are you sure the studios weren't just trying to make a buck?"

The book is about ten years out of date, and suffers a little bit for that, but it was still an interesting and unusual read. Anyone living in LA should check it out.

I've read this book twice now. It is immensely fun (and frightening). If I were to be critical, I'd say that Mike Davis comes from a hardcore Marxist style and point of view. His writing is extreme and intense, but that's precisely what I dig. He's got an entirely original voice, style and approach. I'd say this is true with his scholarly work and approach to this novel too. It's a must-read if you live in Los Angeles or are a fan of the city. Mike Davis is one of its important voices.

In effect, we think ourselves gods upon the land but are still really just tourists.

Ecology of Fear is loose, if not disparate--an apt analogy of Los Angeles, if you will. It is wild-eyed, it is grim and it does boast a wicked sense of humor. How could it not? Davis embraces the myriad risks and curses which plague this fabled city. Surmising such collectively as fear, Davis concludes that it is only safety (of the Elites only, obviously), a corporate security, which remains a priority, hence surveillance capitalism thrives amongst a low-intensity race war. But the race war is only running cover for the dehumanization of the underclass.

My interest soared with the opening ecological sections and then waned in light of the threat analysis of tornados and killer bees. This is a stirring work, one which has aged rather well.

So relevant with climate change and these big dumb boats ruining everything.

See I would have given this book four-stars in 2002 when I read it, a great social/environmental history of the southland, how human manipulation and attempts to control the environment, have netted some of the unintended climate consequences and urban ills that were already starting to be a nuisance for city planners at the time the book was written.

Fast forward fifteen years, and this book is prescient about every climate concern regarding fires in Malibu and the regions which have burned in cycles to regrow the land, humans are now littered all over the free land and now we are trying to control the genie of fire danger from doing what it naturally does. Los Angeles is re-wilding the formerly paved rivers, bolstering the seafronts from erosion...it is really happening, and this book gives a great clarion call at a time when city planners still thought they had cities designed to perfection, while treating climate as an externality.

Considering CA just turned off power to a percentage of the state to avoid catastrophe in the wooded forests, this book's considerations which were focused on Los Angeles city planning should be generalized to the whole state.

Mike Davis is a very enjoyable writer, I'm pretty sure I have tried to read about everything else he's written since.

Many parts of the book were interesting - particularly the documentation of disasters that had occurred within the Los Angeles Basin and the direct response local policy makers had to them. Some sections of the book we less interesting in my personal opinion such as the representation of Los Angeles in media, but again remembering the book was written nearly 20 years ago is something to consider when thinking about this. I appreciated the diversity in topics and thought the section on wildfire was incredibly relevant to understanding our current dilemmas with organizing local government against these types of man-made natural disasters.

The documentation Davis provides is exceedingly helpful for contextualizing many of the ongoing disasters and challenges Los Angeles faces today, effectively providing a detailed roadmap for how we ended up where we are. The book also prompts discussions on what the next steps are once we have a better understanding of this unique history, which I think is particularly useful for classrooms or other learning environments.

Overall I would at least recommend a quick once over for those interested in the history of disasters within Los Angeles, as well as those thinking about how the present state of climate change might exacerbate existing issues.

Davis has a strong writerly voice (sometimes quite funny) and is often incisive throughout this book. I thought that the book’s central dialectic, unstoppable LA sprawl and development versus ungovernable forces of nature, was mostly well explored. Bonus points for the creative chapter on literary, imaginary forms of Los Angeles destruction, although it went on a little too long.

But if we spent the whole book exploring that dialectic, I was disappointed that Davis made little effort to draw some kind of synthesis or vision for a better LA. Compare this to two other left urbanist writers, Marshall Berman and James C. Scott. Both have a lot to say about the unique dynamism and potential created by dense groupings of people — they are fundamentally very humanist. While I do believe that Davis cares a lot about injustice and exploitation of people, I didn’t really believe that he was a humanist after reading this book. In my opinion, a book like this could use a little bit of that.

I did enjoy the chapter on Los Angeles being destroyed in literature and film. I didn't realize that this would only be one chapter. I think I'd appreciate the rest of the book more if I still lived there. It was eye opening and horrifying to be acquainted with the high levels of anti-asian hate in Los Angeles disaster books and early films. It was also depressing to read about culture war talk in the 1930s that sounds like the 2020s. But I guess it's important to have a broad historical perspective.