Environment, Space, Place

Abstract:

In 1965 the “beautification” movement, spearheaded by “Lady Bird” Johnson, ushered in a new phase for American utility companies, under increasing pressure from environmentalists, regulatory bodies and the public, who protested against the continued expansion of energy facilities. In response, utilities such as Southern California Edison, incorporated aesthetics into their corporate strategies to manage an increasingly strained relationship with their consumer base. This ranged from painting infrastructure to launching new design models for transmission lines and converting overhead lines underground. Far from universally welcomed, Southern California Edison's beautification programmes were often met with resistance in communities, due to economic costs being passed on to the consumer. This led to an extensive debate about who benefited from the aesthetics of the energy landscape: was it the utility company, the developer, the homeowner, or the communities in which they were set? Considering three distinct groups with an interest in the aesthetics of the energy landscape, Southern California Edison, federal and state regulatory bodies, and homeowner groups, this article examines how the battle over the visibility of energy infrastructure was set within the social and urban politics of Los Angeles in the late 1960s. By throwing into relief this set of competing interests, it explores how the aesthetics of the energy landscape was not unitary, but fractured along conflicting political, social, and class-based lines. It argues that energy aesthetics was less the experience of the eye alone than a reflection of broader powers struggles within community, state and nation.