1. The main purpose of each of Whyte and Gibbs's writing is fairly fundamentally different, owing for the fundamental differences in their writing and approaches. Gibbs focuses on main streets, and their ability to act like places of commerce and shopping. Whyte, on the other hand, analyzes cities as a whole - so while he mentions commerce and shopping heavily, he focuses more on the aspects that cities have that you would not find on a main street in a small town. Gibbs tends to mention a lot of what is pleasing or detrimental about a main street - mostly in visuals and expenses - and while Whyte mentions these, he also explores a lot further into the other senses and sensory cues as well as space, time, and the accomodation and manipulation of masses of people in city streets. Gibbs writes with an enthusiasm that Whyte lacks in his technicality; but because of the depth of exploration Whyte uses in his writing, I find his writings a lot more useful to the topic.

2. Probably what I love the most about an urban area is the architecture and the lights. (Whyte is perfectly correct when he states that lights attract.) The atmosphere of a city, especially a large one like New York, is one that you can't find elsewhere due to the nature of a place that needs to accommodate so many people. Plus, seeing how theory behind retail works in action in big cities is fascinating. However, at times, other sensory cues - especially sound and smell - can be revolting and repelling out on the streets. And, cities are dirty and crowded. However, something about the life and vibrance of cities - which both authors take care to examine properly - is fascinating to this small-town girl.