John F. Kasson makes a very bold claim on page 3 of Amusing the Million, “Nowhere were these symbols and their relationship to the new mass audience more clearly revealed than at the turn of the century Coney Island”. How well do the evens and structure of the amusement parks at Coney Island truly reflect the changing values of the urban Americans?
Going through these first few chapters it seems that Coney Island is a microcosm for the whole of city existence. As opposed to Olmsted’s Central park which was purely for the purpose of “contemplation of natural scenery” exists only to further the materialist idealism that overtook American thought which started by around the turn of the century (13). It was “seized upon the new opportunities for profit in amusement” (31). Coney island became another source of wealth for enterprising individuals and another place for people to lose their hard earned dollars, even after the gambling huts and prostitutes were carted away. The owners were clearly “[oriented] toward quantity” of guests to make the maximum possible profit (33).
Also like the city, Coney Island’s amusement parks cater to a number of different ethnic groups. “Coney Island provided attractions and generated a sense of festivity in many respects familiar to frequents of, say, New York’s Italian street festivals, band concerts, and theatre, or to celebrants of Purim and patrons of Yiddish theatre” (39). The island both attracted and embraced all of the different ethnic groups that New York similarly welcomed.
So can we consider Coney island a reflection of the city, or as an escape from the city that so many claimed it was? Or is it some combination of both?
