Blog 7: Waiting for the Zine and more history

Waiting for the zine

Most of the work in the zine this week has been with Kaila (final editing) and Calvin/Markele (production and photos).   I am eager to see the final product.   In the meantime, I have continued to research the history of markets.   

More history of public markets

When we talked to Eli Pousson, he said, among other things, that the history of Lexington Market needs to be understood in the context of other changes, one of those being the change from an agrarian to an industrial food system.[1]   In the first, farmers sell fresh food – produce, meat and/or dairy products – directly to consumers.  In the latter, food is distributed and sold by third parties, increasingly corporations.  

In colonial America, most towns had markets much like those in England.  They were held in the center of town and allowed local farmers to sell their produce or other products to people who lived in nearby towns.  As cities, like Baltimore, grew, the city set aside land for and eventually built public markets.  An architectural historian distinguished two main kinds of market houses – street market houses and block market houses.[2]  Street market houses were built primarily in the center of wider streets, often with multiple sheds in a long row.  In Baltimore, this would be the Broadway Market or the Hollins Market.  Lexington Market is an example of a block market house, usually bigger, often with multiple floors providing space for community activities. 

In addition to markets, there were small stores which sold non-perishable food such as flour, sugar, spices, tea or coffee.  In America, these were often general stores which also sold other manufactured household goods such as cloth, sewing supplies, or tools.  

Nineteenth century markets reflected the interest of cities in ensuring that sufficient fresh food was available for citizens.  The city market regulations were largely devoted to consumer protections – good quality, fair weights, no manipulation of prices such as creating false shortages.  Most of them required that producers sell directly to customers.  The practice of forestalling – buying produce from farmer before it got to the market with the intention of resale – was forbidden.  Some cities, such as New York, had rules which required that butchered meat be sold only in the public market, where the quality of meat could be monitored.  Cities also made money from the markets making profits from renting stalls to vendors.  

Over the nineteenth century, as we have seen in Baltimore, the status of public markets waxed and waned for a variety of reasons.   Municipal oversight could be erratic and some market managers were better than others.   Older buildings were not always well-maintained.   Markets in the city center, especially those in the middle of streets, created traffic congestion.  In addition, rapid geographic as well as population growth in cities encouraged the development of alternate food retail options.   Grocery stores expanded to include meat and dairy goods.   In New York City, where butchers were required to sell in the public markets, new butchers who could not get space opened butcher shops throughout the city.  After 6 years of public wrangling, the old laws were repealed, recognizing the new butcher shops. In other cities, most notably Philadelphia, businessmen saw the profits from the markets and wanted to privatize them.   They were allied with the men who wanted to build city rail systems, using the center of the wider streets, replacing street market houses with rail stops.   In Philadelphia, most of the public markets were closed, replaced by more private ones than the public could support.  Many of them closed.

In the late nineteenth century, city interest in public markets revived and many cities, including Baltimore, built new ones.  One of the largest markets ever in the US  – the Central Market – was built in Washington, D.C. on the site now occupied by the National Archives.  Some were a new type of market, a terminal market, located near rail or shipping hubs which sold to third parties for distribution.  Many of these survive today as either intake markets, where farmers can sell produce for shipping to more remote areas, or distribution centers for bulk shipments from elsewhere.  

The heyday of public markets, including the Lexington Market, was in the first decades of the twentieth century.  However, the confluence of the Depression and changing patterns of distribution left the markets behind.  Small grocery stores located in new areas as cities did not build new markets in new neighborhoods.   Beginning in the mid-nineteenth century, improved food processing such as canning and pasteurization made it possible to ship food safely.  Improved transportation, including refrigerated trains and trucks, meant that local farmers were no longer the primary providers of food.  But the most serious competition came from supermarkets, beginning in the 1930s.  Supermarkets reflected two innovations: lower cost from larger scale purchasing and other efficiencies and self-service, which substantially reduced overhead costs by eliminating clerks.   Supermarkets were located on urban fringes, in new suburban neighborhoods, where land was cheaper and parking lots affordable.  During World War II, supermarkets spread as working women preferred the ease of shopping in one place and the lower prices.   By 1946, supermarkets were 2.6% of retail food outlets, but handled 30% of food volume.[3]

Much of this story reflects the change to an industrial food system.  Food production is dominated by industrial commercial enterprises which use large scale agriculture in lower-cost areas of the country.   Food distribution is primarily through chain stores, both supermarkets and Walmart.   Small-scale vendors in public markets have difficulty competing on cost, even with lower transportation costs. 

In parts of Europe, governments have resisted the industrialization of food distribution.  France and Spain, for example, have laws and regulations which limit the ability of supermarkets to compete directly with local vendors or fresh food.   Public markets can play an important part in connecting people in cities to locally grown food.[4]

---

[1] Unless otherwise noted, this discussion is based on: Helen Tangires, Public Markets and Civic Culture in Nineteenth-Century America, Creating the North American Landscape (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003).

[2] James M. Mayo, “The American Public Market,” Journal of Architectural Education 45, no. 1 (November 1991): 41–57.

[3] M.M. Zimmerman, “Tomorrow’s Supermarket,” Journal of Marketing 10, no. 4 (April 1946): 384.

[4] Carolyn Steel, Hungry City: How Food Shapes Our Lives (London: Vintage Books, 2009).