Reviews – Invincible Green Suburbs

‘Although written about England, Mark Clapson’s ideas about the suburbs have universal relevance.  This book is in support of the suburbs, and helps to confront negative views of them.  Clapson cites the origin of negative views of the suburbs from television, books and music.  He feels that, at least for the British, moving to the suburbs was the continuation of a popular pre-war trend’.
The New Urbanism: www.eslarp.uiuc.edu.  (September, 2001)

‘In its general approach and subject matter, Invincible Green Suburbs offers an invigorating re-examination of urban life in the postwar period from a perspective previously largely ignored by social historians’.
Journal of Urban History, 27/3, 2001

‘The drawing together of the various strands of the postwar housing and urban development story through a detailed historical analysis provides a valuable contribution to our understanding of both urban and working-class change.  Although much of this story is familiar, Clapson, through his integration of a varied range of data has managed to produce new insights. The book will be valuable to students of both city transformation and class change’.
Urban Studies, 36/8, 1999

‘Mark Clapson’s books Invincible Green Suburbs, Brave New Towns (1998) and A Social History of Milton Keynes: Middle England/Edge City (2004) are terrific on suburbia.’ (Dominic Sandbrook in State of Emergency: The Way We Were: Britain, 1970-1974 (2010))

‘Clapson’s book is well researched and it is a positive addition to our knowledge of the suburbs and new towns.’
Socialist History, 16, 2000

‘Its clearly stated findings and comprehensive bibliography make it an excellent source of reference and a most useful addition to the literature on social change and urban dispersal in postwar England.  It helps challenge preconceptions, providing a powerful antidote to the intellectual disdain that is partly responsible for the neglect of suburbia by researchers.  Above all, Clapson’s book shows the existence of other narratives that lie outside the accepted canon on the history of British town planning and urban development’.
Journal of Urban History, 26/4 2000