Elizabeth Gaskell and Manchester:
Identity, Culture and the Modern City
Conference, 19/20/21 July 2005

This paper will look at how local tradition and civic pride continued to be major factors in the decision-making process across the twentieth century. Focusing on Manchester's housing policies, it will look at how civic culture and tradition provided an important framework within which decisions were made. Whilst fully acknowledging the role of central government in providing legislation, finance and policy preferences, as well as planners and designers, in providing direction for housing policy, ultimate decisions were still left with the local council. Councillors had a great deal of scope in which to operate. They did-not work in a social-cultural vacuum. Key figures such as Horsfall and Simon successfully promoted the building of cottage style homes set in a idealized semi-rural idyll. A the same time, Manchester wanted to do things 'big.' There were continued boasts about how Manchester liked to do things on a big scale and, preferably, get there first. The impact of all this could be seen with the development of Wythenshawe.

However, it was forcibly underlined with their ambitious slum clearance and overspill projects unveiled after the war. No other city clung to the idea of overspill like Manchester. Yet it was also apparent with inner city developments such as the Hulme Crescents. True, the council was pushed into adopting system-built designs, but it continually resisted large tower blocks and, with Hulme, it opted for a design which seemed to suit its belief in cottage-style homes. These were to be 'streets in the sky,' providing a highly prestigious development, a new 'Bath' and 'Bloomsbury.' Of course, other cities had similar boasts, but they were not a product of national policy. These came from within the urban arena and, although there were similarities between cities, they were a product of individual city pride, culture and identity.