Just began reading David McCullough's Great Bridge about the building of the Brooklyn Bridge, good first 50 pages! I'm struck by two things already:

1) New York was already considered overcrowded before 1870 (though, as the book admits, no one had really dreamt of building upwards yet) and crime was an issue: "The Times, for example, described the bridge as a sort of grand long-needed pressure valve that would do much to alleviate New York's two most serious problems, crime and overcrowding." (25)

2) I don't know if McCullough means to show the gravity of the oppositon to the bridge, but I am amazed at the outcry to its building from various angles:

"The editors of Scientific American said a tunnel would serve the purpose as well and cost less...Warehouse owners along the rivers and others in the shipping business were calling it an obstruction to navigation and a public nuissance...Even in Brooklyn the Union said another bridge and a tunnel besides would probably be built by the time everyone finished wrangling over the details..." (28)

And yet, as I preview maps for our upcoming trip to New York, I see the Brooklyn Bridge still standing and I look forward to travelling over it.

It seems that as much as things change, things stay the same.