Page 1


,....;-

ro -:

u

:r

,....;-

nc

;:a

ro -:

0....

~ ~

X

ro

> -· OJ 0'0 :::l :::l

--<

3

0

:::l

0

(")

m

OJ

(")

OCOJu (D ~ :::l 0 CJ'la-o....=: ,..-r

--

~


lt'l

1()1)1,

ltv Alt•H ii lldt•t' IC Cu tld wrl

IIIA C I• \'1111 1,1, 1'1/1\I ,IS IIIN {i

\~() 11

M1il 11 Stt't't'l, Mnlden, MA 02 148-5020, USA it00 ( ;t\I'Nillgton Hood, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK () Swi\ II NI0 11 Stree t, Ca rlton, Victoria 305 3, Australi a

Contents

'l'lw l'ight· of Alexa nder R. Cuthbert to be identified as the Author of this Work has been tNN!'t'lt·d in neco rd:1nce with the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988. Al11·igh1 s reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval NyNil'llt , 01· transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, 1'l't'lll'di 11g or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act I 11HH, without the prior perm ission of the publisher. Jlirst published 2006 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd I i. t tt/f lfi~ lll't 'S

()()(,

I.limn"\! o( Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Cu t·hhert, Alexander R. T he fo rm of cities: political economy and urban design I by Alexa nder R. Cuthbert. p. em. Includes bibli ographical references and index. ISHN - I3: 978-1-4051-1639-8 (hardback: alk. paper) ISIIN - 10: I-4051-1639-0 (hardback: alk. paper) ISliN - I3: 978-1-4051-1640-4 (pbk.: alk. paper) ISB N- I0: I A 05J -1640-4 (pbk.: alk. paper) 1. City planning. . Ci ty planning- Philosophy. 3. Cities and towns - Philosophy. I. Title. liT 166.C885 2006 307. I'2 16- dc22 2005022741 A cnrn logue record for this title is available from the British Library.

I 1 t , •I I li/1/t•s

vii )(

XI

xiv lllfiullh Hon

l'lll'ot . lllittlllm·lion: The Problem I It I11 t 11 Iks ign: Definitions I iti HIII lksign: 'Theory' 11111 htl Po lit·ical Economy and Urban Design

I 'I I.

J.IINIIII y !11111ttlm·t ion: What is History? I I h i Ill y :1nd Urban Design i lttllllltlogics

I, lu'l''l',its S<•t in 10.5/'12.5pt Sa bon hy SI)J Pub li sher Services, Pondicberry, India P1·int cd nnd bound in Singapore hy Po bulous Printers Pte Ltd 'l'lw pub li sher's policy is to 11se permanent paper from mills that opernt·c 11 sustn iMb le IOI't'Niry po licy, a nd which has been manufactured from pulp proccss~· d li Ning ndd-frec tlltd !'lenH.' III'nry chl orine-free practices . Furthermore, the publi shr 1· 1'1111 \tl t'N ilu11 tlw lt• xl pilpt• •· ond cove r bon rd used hnve met acceptable environnl('llt td lltl li•dll tlllntl lllllli!ll'dN. IIII I ltlli ht•t ll diil ll llil lttllllll 111111 1· WPIII'ttlti iNitl tiJI, 1'1 ~ 11 IIIII Wt •ltHIIi•l www.ltl,lt I wt lll '" ltll• Iii lit' 111111

II 1"ttl tt I I IJ IIIII' III'H 11111 hdiHI' T heory t 'I Vtt v lc•w

l'ltiloNophy lltiiiHhtrtion: Implications from Phi loNo ph l'lti i11N11phy nml Urbnni sm l'lll t1tllj•111 H l'lltltli'l llJlhv 11 11d llt·hntl Dl·H igtl

I ~ :1

I


r~ Iutltt,·,ll I Il l II ,,,.d ,, 'llii I! ·idlll l11qtl h tlttlll ~ lt tH II ~1 J II IIIIIi i'illli

l'nlith lt liiiHittllllt ll l l'olilit 1111 11d ld t•OJIIf'. l'owt•t': l( tJ•, ht Nnnd l.nws I.11 w tiNld t•o logy Pn lit ks tltld L)l·bnn Plan ning 'I'IH' P1thl ic.: R c~1lm

(J

H

iii

~ I It I 1(,

l'lllf\llhll H~

ltttnulmttntt : Cultuml C1tpi 11tl

Culture Introd uction: C ulture and Urban Design The Culture of Modernism l'ost·tnod ern Culture :lobn li sa tion, Culture, Economy 1\11 then ticity and Symbolic Representation 'l'hc New Ruralism/Urbanism

101 101 104 107

•..:ndcr In trod uction: Gender, the Missing Component :cncler and Society :cnd er and Patriarchy :c ncl er and Capital ;cnd er and Space :cnder and Urban Design

127 127 128 130 132 136 139

Environment In troduction: N ature and the City Origins and Development Peo ple-N ature Sust:1 in ab ility and Development Sust:1 ina ble Cities Susta ina ble Urban Design

150 150

l'tllit •N~dtHii d lnl l' I'Vl' lltiOII l'tlllt ·~Nio n s nnd Know lt:dgt• SyNI t'llt Pt~tlt•to~N iO tt H :11td Space

I It IHttt l)esign Education l'iiltllu 1 ipl

110

113 122

152 154 159 162 168

Aesthetics lnrroduction: Aesthetics- Objects and Experiences 'l'hc Aes thetics of Urban Fo rm M:lt'hcmati cs and the D ivin e O rder Colll'c xtua Iism l{ tll'iona lism Sy mbo lic Ca pita l l~ q..,ul ncio n ' J'Iwmin g

171 171 173

'I 'y polo~ics

201

lttlt'cH lttction : ' l'nxo ttotny, Typology, Morp hology, SvNit•ttl ' l'vpo lnl\it·s Ikl'ivt·d lt·om 1\ssod ntcd Di st: ip litH'

I \•t!ttl''tlc;iii" I'Pnqu•ut\'1

175

179 184 186 192 194 01 0

••K h

,,


ll•t!IIJI

't'

Figures

.1 H 11

1

Ill II

\~

II Three urban design theories. Diagram showing the spatial logic of encounters. J Willi am Robinson Leigh: utopian visionary city (1908). 4 Fr itz Lang's vision of the future: from the film Metropolis (1926). Le Corbusier: La Ville Contemporaine. Bernard Tschumi: Pare de la Villette, aerial view (1985). 7 Bernard Tschumi: Pare de la Villette, programmatic deconstruction ( 1983 ). 8 Example of Dadaist collage: Hanna Hoch's Cut with

s

' 10 II

I I. I '1·

15 16 I IH

the Dada Kitchen Knife through the Last Weimar Beer Belly Cultural Epoch of Germany (1919). Aldo Rossi: Gallaretese Quarter, loggia. Ald o Rossi: Gallaretese Quarter, elevation. Peter Dickens: huts, machines and organic analogies. Spee r a nd Hitler's Grand Plaza and Domed Hall. I litl e r's g ra nd plan for the centre of Berlin. Ludwig H il berseimer: Hochhausstadt Project (1924). Exnmp le of the symbolic use of the eagle in fascist architecture. Symboli c use of the eagle for spectacles by the Third Reich. Monument to the Holocaust victims (Mahnmal), Berlin. Sc bnsfinno Se rli o : the triumphal arch of Castel Vecchio in Ve rona. 'l'hc G::~teway Arc h, St LOLlis, M isso uri , des igned by Eero Snnrinen. l,n c; ,·nnd <; Arc hc nt Ln Ocf<.:n sc.

'1'1 /tt•tll\rt: sn dpttll'l' hy Hit: hnn l S('rrn fm f<'cdl'l'lll 1'111 !',11, N1 •w Ymk. LnlldiK'II IW proj1 •c1 hy Mnl'll111 Sd' w''' 11, In l'l' pl u,, · fl,, 'll lllplill'l' hy Hi1 hnn l Sl'l l'l ll ph111 I'IIW

u '·"'"'N '"P" l"'il'''' hv ~'"'II"' ',. ''"''"' '' I".,'Ni'('•Jf\1 '·I ~~~ w l' illt ll' di •t ll\" ul.q'lid lt'r illi ' l['" ll'liiHJ!it 1\,ili

\if

15 16 34 37 38 41

\i,

41

42

I( I II

48

49 50 57 57 62 91 92 93 95 96 96 98

I~ ld

1\t•i,·ut : Mnnyr's Sq utll'l' Ci llliditl l'tt'f''' · MII HIL'r' of \!r'lwn I h·vl· lopm cnt' nnd Ocs ig'' Pt'll)•,lll llllll''• llili vl•r·sity of New South Wnk·s. lki r'tll': M a rtyr's Square (fo ntt L'rly I .11 Pl nl.'c des Canons). lki r·ut: dynamiting of the Rivo li C iii CIIt n, opening up the Mnrtyr's Square axis to the sea. 'I'lw t·o wn of Kentlands. ( :litt to n Comm unity Masterplan. Mn Htcr plan for Topolobampo. I ln 111nn Jessor: workers' cooperative colony of 750 units 11 1 hous ing with collective services, New York (1926): (a) site plan; (h) dct·ni l. l(ll lll l': Monument to Vittorio Emmanuel II. I >11h lilt: statue of Anna Livia Plurabelle, 'the Floozie in the Jac u:ai'. I >nv id ll arvey's primary, secondary and tertiary circuits of capital. W11yli of thinking animals in the city. l ,t• ( :orbusier: use of Fibonacci series as a proportional system lo1 ' 11r·ch itccture. t Jol li's plan for Rome, sector 5, amended by Paolo Portoghese. II )(J llllp lcs of contextual urban space as promoted by i :ll ttlillo Sitte: (A) Rome; (B) London; (C) Copenhagen; (D) Kyoto. I It 111 Wngner: site plan of the projected twenty-second district ttl Vlt• nn n. I '••vt'l' f,·om Debord's Society of the Spectacle. 11111/lll'l" baths a t Coogee Beach, Sydney: conservation •d dnOI'wn y and original site. l'l11 • t•opy of the original Repulse Bay Hotel in Hong Kong. lil t' 111 igina l Murray Building in Hong Kong. l'l11 • Ml lfrny Building rebuilt and moved to Stanley Village. 1111 t :o urt o f Honour, World's Fair, Chicago (1893), ttl lllllll'd hy Daniel Burnham. ll t~II)' WOO d and H ighland Project, Los Angeles: perspective

111 I'• '•in·f. 1\.d, ylcut Co urt, Hollywood, and Highland Project, Los Angeles. 1'1 '' 1 liil'wnman: Aronoff Centre, conceptu nl grid . 11t: ltl1 1 \ i t-~c nm a n: Wexner Centre, concrplllllfl•,l'itl , li1111'lt I, Cl.'ddcs: 'Notation of Li fc' . '"'"'""tinos Doxiadis: plan of lsl.t11 11d •t1tl ( 1')1~ 0) , I. tl ll lt llllltinos Doxil'ldis: pl a n of INflllll td •.td ( l'r/ ll) ( iil ll'! l lllltit tos Ooxind is: d <ist i1 l',111 l 11111)1' typologit•H of urhon phtllllillll tl1 rfii I• ft 'll il J{ fil' l': J.li XI'IllhOIII')', l'lltil 'l f ll11 lt l• tll ' l '! It lot plto l ltj•,lt !d tll1 11h .I !! p f it! !i.lll l liriH•tl 1,.i

()

I I I I

I 'II

111

I 'f l tl H l eiS

lciH 17H IHO I H'l

IH I H!J 1!).)

1% I !1 1!1

I !IH


Tables

H

I0 II

12

IJ JIJ.

IS

Forty classic texts in urban design. A systems view of professional boundaries. Properties of industrial and cultural forms and practices. 'I'hi rty classic urban design histories. Hasic structural components of James Joyce's novel Ulysses. Bernard Tschumi: extracts from 'Questions of Space'. State control (housing authority) over the reproduction of la bour and private sector development. Functional and signifying properties of urban space. State cori.trol (town planning authority) over the reproduction of la bo ur and private sector development. Functional and signifying properties of non-urban space. Major international and European-level policies and initiatives on susta inable development. E.T. Ha ll 's matrix of culture. Sociologica l conceptualisation of urbanism. Manue l Castells' relationship between social reproduction and lan d-use function. Re lat ions hip between professional service and the capitalist sys t·em of production. O nto logy, ways of knowing and ways of teaching as exemplified by a rch itcctu raJ aca demics. Anne Verncz Mo ucl on's ep istemo logical ma p for urb:1n d(•s ign.

Preface

12 13 19

26 36 46

116

117 155 214 227 228 237 251 253

I hlit lu1ok concludes four years of research into the theoretical basis for u rbn 11 d• ''II"• 11 project conceived in two stages, namely the publication of a ren d(• r·, i~tllrrWI'd

hy a text that elaborated on the same basic structure. The first two 1rl the research process therefore resulted in Designing Cities ( C ut· hb~· l' l 'Ill I I), w hi ~; h accomplished four basic tasks: first, to assemble critical readin gs irl ilu llr•ld th nt I felt had been largely ignored by urban designers in gene 1·n l; •rr1111 l, to suggest that mainstream 'urban design theory' be redirected townrd1 rlr lr 11l 1h(•ory and spatial political economy; third, that the adopted form of lu,tll hooks would suggest a structure and organisation of material that wo11ld " llr r 1 thi s ideo logical shift and, at the same time, make it accessible to indi vid \1 rl Ill 11 vnriety of fields - professionals, postgraduate students and an edu cn t·t·d ! ~t)' rllll ill 'll i,;C; and fourth, the adopted form for the articles contained in tlw l!.'tllil t wo1 dd be the same one used in the planned text, so that anyone rea dir1 g i lr o Ill ,., vo lume would already be familiar with the principles guiding the scco r1d 1111111 \ liS we ll as its structure and organisation. lltl!i l' lll'r'C'nt vo lume, The Form of Cities, is the text that completes a no dwr· 1\\" 1 \'i!l lt'Hof research. It uses the same structure as Designing Cities to elu ddn tt• Iii ~ ijl llil l l'il nt' l y greater detail the parameters for an appropriate knowl edge in !il'li 1ttl d1 •N ig n. I~ot h volumes were conceived as part of the same project a nd 11 1'1' Hii 'tllillo lw used together. When articles in Volume 1 are referenced, I have wwd tll[l jlll•lt '< /)(; t·o indicate that the article can be sourced from Designing Cit /1'.~, 1i11 1 fi 1111 vo lu me acts as a generic information bn se for Vo lume 2. Iii w1llirrg thi s text (Vo lume 2), it was not my int vntion to propose a ny tt t'W tt l ll t'hnn des ign. As we sha ll sec, sc vn11l WI i11:t'H l11 rvt· fn lh:n into this tr:rp ru:l pllllllVt' fnikd. Whil e sorne may h:we 1\l' lll' lll lr•d tjllilt• t tdlllir·oh k~'l nd crl•dihl1• !ii-,d, tll! ol Vlll'io ll .~ ns1wns of urbnn d (~s ig11 , t'l lllt l11t "' ;1,,,11 Hlllll til1· t'os t· o f voN tl li\'l-I'Hilllfl lil yi ll f'. !!NHt' llli n l illlt' l':ll.: ti o ll S lu•I W(I)II liiuld llltilllll'! illpH n11d di•l. il', ll jtlliU'I'INl 'N, Ill ,1d d iti1111 1 ti ll Y ill tllrlll' WI illll j\ iill tlt ri]l)1 111.! 1\ li.t H to w,dk II it 1 1ll'''i11' lwtwl'l' l l t wo ""'"Ho tri NIII N, < >11 tl w Pllf' lituHI, Pt•~ "''"d' 11dNI t rit h IN''' 1

11 11

"'Y

II

t'lf!l llll}' lliil' ll'!il fllllltllllllll ' till ill fi'J\Illl ;I tlr f'lil~. !lti! 1 tlifll "til llllt1llltli11 dl y


)\

l'llLir\1 I

ht• l,d wll (•d Sll'ucturnliSI', tOI'n li si ng and lh cn•lo l t' lllllllll lplohlt' . O n the other hnnd , pos1 n1odernism, in rejecting tb e ideo of sf rll~'flll'l', cn siIy fn ll s into an inll' ll (.•t:t'unl a nnrc hy co mposed of myriads of separate a nd co mpetin g discourses, vo ices a nd neb ulous 'o thers'. Usin g t he intell ectual grid of spatial political economy, I hope to demonstrate n fn bric o.f interconnected principles that will guide the evolution of theoretical k11 ow ledge in urban design. As I discovered in researching Designing Cities, know ledge, like national economies, is subject to uneven development. In certain nrens, fo r example history, the concept of political economy is widely utilised, while in others, s uch as aesthetics, it is weakly developed. So each chapter unfo lds based upon an overall evaluation of available discourses within each s ubj ect a rea, the extent to which spatial political economy is used and useful, a nd a n assessment of h ow the uneven development of urban design knowledge mn y be rectified. Sin ce the first draft of this book was 32,000 words over the limit set by the pub li sher, I was faced with the problem of how to retain the integrity of the work whi le having to eliminate every fourth word. I decided to drastically reduce ·hn pter 1, which formed an extended and detailed critique of the central texts nnd actors in traditional urban design, with an in-depth explanation of the phi losop hical basis for spatial political economy, my chosen method of approach throughout this book. 'I'he re were three basic reasons for this choice. Designing Cities already ;onta in s a significant overview of urban design theory in the extended introductio n ro that work. I am assuming that many readers will either have purchased or wi ll have access to this companion text, and will be familiar with the important deb:Hes. N ext, chapter 1 still contains the substance of my argument. Political lC0 11 0 111y is explained in some detail in chapters 2 and 3, and is deployed in all of 1'11c remaining chapters. Finally, the 30,000-word original chapter 1 is available lu n nyone who wishes to access it on my website at http://www.fbe.unsw.edu.au/ Sl'n ff/ 1\lexa nder. C uthbert/ . This allows me to explore the nine remaining essen1in I c leme nts of urban design knowledge in significantly greater depth than wo tdd othe rwise have been possible. In g rc::tte r detail, The Form of Cities offers everyone involved in the built •n vii'O nment a framework for study. The book is structured so it will have wide 1pp licntion to tertia ry education, professional practice and for the educated loypc rso n wh o mi g ht wi sh to delve deeper into the design process. Since urban d('sig n is taught· univ ersa ll y at Master's level to g rndu ntes in n vnric ty of disciplilll's, it tlSS IIIll CS n prc-cx istin g le ve l of c riti cn l d lin ld ng. 11 iN wl'i llt 'll for g raduate illdt•lll s, pnrliculnl'l y 1'11os<· stud yi ng OIT hil <•l'llll't•, IHIIdNIII jll' 11 11 lliit 'l'IUI'C, cu l111 1'11 1 Sllldi t•N , til'hnn p ln1 11 Ji 1% 11dm11 /',i'IIJ\I'IIp ll\', 111!11111 -.IHin l"lll' 1111d other tlHH ipliiii 'N (t~ llj ',i llt 't'l'i ll j\, 11'11 1 l'~lllll , t'lt ), 1111d tdl1 I I rt l])tdlirli ·t qtllliii"Y lht•o r·etH'II I IIji pii Hit il Ill ti ll' t il ltd tl i'N ij \IIIIIJ' t Hit W l11l t• !111 llilt •ll t) 1111d 1111tll11ldiiiJ' tit r i~o , '' ;d 1 ~ 11111 J,l111d p n r,idq ~ ~~~ il1111 lllit~ l 11l tilt llt tlf• I I d 1\'!lifi ii li

''·'""II,

Plill AI I

pt 'INIH'l'liv<•. Why thi s is so lotiii R 11 IIIIJ',I' p 11 11 ol dHiptl'l' I. So nl (.' o lh t' l l'll rl '< itl tl ttllllii H nlso rl L·cd to be 111 t1dc clt'l ll ' 11 1 du• III II Ht'l. Probnb ly the most intpo tl lltll ptlllll is th nt l'hi s book is de li ber·ntt•ly ' Wt•N lt'l'll ' in focus, dea ling pl'incipn ll v w lllt l•tlllljll' 11 11d North America as pritn c silt's. l'lw r t· ntT::d re::~son for disting ui shin g bctwcc n East and West is bt•cn ii Nt' i111 wlttt lt• dt•vc lopment paradigm h as been differ ent. T he Industri a l Rcvo l11t io r1 ul flu t•ig hl cc nth a nd nineteenth centuries in the Western world spttWil t'd d11 l l tillll lll it.: bns is for capita list imperialism and the ensuing process of Ut' hn11i H11 111111 , '1'!11' expa nsionism which resulted saw vast tracts of Asia CO IIt C tlltd er 't~llllli t il n dc in o ne form or another. The planet was carved up by dw 1\l't'i ll IHt WI' I H of l'l1 c time, resulting in the first great imperialist war of 19 14- 19. 1'1·i11 10 111111111', tht·sc were the British in India, Malaysia and China, the Frend1 i11 \ It 11111111 , l.nos and Cambodia, the Dutch in Indonesia, and the J apo nesl' nl110 ht ( ;1111111 , Im peria lism and colonisation were predicated on the bas is of Wl'Hlt'lll d1 vt•lt 1pr11i.'llt st rategies, not Asian. W ltt'II'I IS t·he Western system of development was built on a vast indu s! 1'1 1d 111pi11 N~ m lo ni sation and imperialist practices, Asia was on the receivin g C111 l o l II II III p1 m't'SS ns a fundame ntally agrarian society, to be plundered by WeHil' lll 1!11111111" lm t·nw materials and markets. This is not to say that economic intpt•ri d1 1111 did 11ot occ ur in the East - the 'stealth imperialism' of the Ch inese in soul h 1 1 A!l lll is legendary, and China still exerts enormous influence throu g ho111 tl11• IIJ iilll ltll lny. Nonetheless it is difficult if not impossible to enco mpnss tlu JII IHIIII 111111 of urban form as a process common to both East and West, h1HH'd 11 di iiNi llliiM developmental histories. Having lived and worked in !\sin 11 11d li cit d ttNIII l:or t he last twenty years, I accept the limitation that both l'l'j•,io ll tllllltl IH' ('ll com passed in the same text, and I have another proj ect 0 11 !1 11 l1 l'll llj t IHIIII' d to deal with this omission.


v til i111pt I h•t lltlii Nti l till' lt'l\ 1 11 11 ~ tllltlf' illllll lld·itl lldll't'N ptHINih tlii V!111

li ll Y

t:l'ltll

llllli !IM IIliHI, l 1dlit1 wtMh to tltrlllk /\y 11 fOI' lu•1 t~ l ft•t ttoll 1 lwtltu tk tllld f',l'ilt:t•, 1111d to hn111111 1 "' )'' tit tltt'H t 11 11d old t:st frie nd , D1· .lt'll ll CIIVl'lt di sh, who tlrlvt:d my li ft• 011 IIHII'l' tli11 11 "'"' ml'llflion with hcr insight· and t:Oillpass ion. For n li fel'i nl l' of Ht· lll t• !ltl lt t t' 111HI dl•di cntion to the welfare of her fe ll ow travell ers, iri s to hl'l' tl utt i1

Acknowledgements

III I.'Oillpleting this work I must express a great debt to two institutions and to the tllllllY individuals who have made this book possible. The London School of lk w10mi cs and Political Science offered me the opportunity to transform my illinking abo ut society and space over the course of my doctoral studies, and the \ hli vcrs ity of New South Wales, Faculty of the Built Environment, supported me l'ill ll lH.: ially with two grants over the course of this project. Four friends and co llt•ng ucs in particular deserve special mention, all of whom encouraged me to pu Nh the boundaries of my own abilities and interests. In this regard I wish to honour the debt I owe to Professor Manuel Castells for the many conversations wt~ hnd in Hong Kong, and to my friends Professor Allen Scott of UCLA, Professo r Jeffrey Henderson of Manchester University and Professor Harry l)imitriou of University College London for twenty years of banter, intellectual Htimu lation and friendship. Mnny others have supported me, with camaraderie, recognition and sometinH.:s just ' being there'. Those that come immediately to mind are Keith McKinll l..' ll of rh c University of Hong Kong, and one tragic but wonderful human being, tlt t• lntc, grea t Brian McLoughlin, formerly Professor of Planning at Melbourne \ l11i versity. My friend and colleague Peter Murphy at the University of New South W:J les has always provided much-needed support and encouragement. Dr 1\nt ~:e Judd and Professor Jon Lang have also been there for me on countless m cttNion s, helping to create a sterling urban design programme. My other good ll'it•,tds Chri s Abel, Rob Samuels, and John Zerby reviewed seve rn! chapters in tl11· ro11rse of writing, and Deepak George offered his vn lu ahlt• t'Otllpttt·ing skills to IIH' when it ren ll y mattered. Andrew Covell :11·rivt·d 11 1 Jll't•t iNt• ly tlw l'ig ht· t·ime to IINNist tilt' wit·h editing the text. The srnff of 1\lut kwt•ll l'tihl l ~ llill l'o lt tiVI ' l'lll'ried tHtt 11 ll tlw diffi cult t':1 sks of prodw.·tion wit lt tl1111 11 ~ 11 d Jlf "'' ';l lot1Ldl ~ lli 1 nmll WiNlt to th nnk l'Vl'l'yo nt itlvolvt•d in tlli ·~ Jl'"' ''._.,, Jll td 11d 11l~ Ji , l\ltl ~ht ttht• ws, It HIIIII I' <:ni'IWI'il',ht nnd V:tk,·y Hww wl11 1I· 'Ill 1111 1111 '' 'll h tli d!lt'Pit'iil IIIIII 'N ovc ,· tl11 • l u ~ t two yt'II I'N. Btl l Npt•t'i id tl11ud· N11111 ~ 1 L" '" •iii !'l!ill!pu l;11 tl11 t''< t't't•d ll j\1\' dill it 1111 liiH lll /',t iiiiii NIII NI nf (l!r•)' l·ditiiiJ \ ill! I ill ill ,, t> l ,..~ ,. "'' 'lllltl ltl I'll}',

'"'!

I dn lit 'll ll' this work.


Introduction

Thinking people search for truth in matter because they nre aware that there is nowhere else for them to search Tariq Ali

t Jrhan Design Origins 111'1111 11 design is the study of how cities have achieved their physical form and t hc• p1 Ol'!!SSCS that go into renewing them. Urban design is not merely the :l rt o l tlt •Nign ing cities, but the knowledge of how cities grow and change. It is the st 11 1I 11 1 how civilisations have chosen to represent themselves in spatial form, a nd the• jiiiH't•sscs through which specific urban forms come about. Cities are not si1npl y pltysk·nl containers of social processes any more than languages arc sok ly .1 lttll \' tiona l method of transmitting information. Languages are symbolic rcprc• l' llt ll tions of the world we inhabit, evolving gradually over historical tim e. 'J'I w 1tttlHldy entire philosophies, ideologies, conceptual systems, and many w:1ys ol l'l't ll l\• '('he same is true of cities. Since all human action is infused with mennill j•,, 11 th e spn ces we inhabit are also replete with symbolic values, collecti vc Il l!' III 111 y, nHsoc intion, celebration and conflict. Ultimately, urban design is about 1ht ll tiii Nitli ss ion of urban meaning in specific urban forms. For this reason we IIIII N ( ~ J\11 lwyo nd ~ bs tract social science into the realm of human experience and ti l!' 1 11'11 t iVt' process in order to fully understand why cities are how they rHt'. 1\ \tidt•c•w Sn yer (1984: 148) comments, 'social processes do not occur on t he lw11d 1d 11 pin ', menn ing that people by definition live and breathe in and through fl i W~c ·. ' I'Itt' design of cities has been going on as long as civilised life, and to a Ct'l't :ti 11 t)J it•tlt iH n meas ure of it. Many ancient civili sn rions hnd vnrio us kits of co n1p011!'111 lti iii Nth ot were used in organising socin l H(liH'I', 'l'lu• ( ;1·c•c•ks f01· t'}<nJll () il' hnd ilu '1 1111'11 , t lw lhen tre, the polis and t·lw Ntndtllltl , 1111tl 11 1111t y 1 11 it'll, IWtl icu lnrly in /\ tmt ~ I I IIIII', II Nt•d l'lw org:-~n i s i ng fr:1ntewod· 111 tl11 l' llll ltlfll I 111 1111l y illl:lttt t•ti Ndc~flil'. lll 'tl ti11 • lt~tlld i ii Jifl nnd s pn1.:~· s, nnd i11 C11111 . 1 111 " d u1 ' 1d[t111~W O\·f: t ti11 ll ' lllllllt •~, 1111' 11' Wllll 110 t ll'! 'd fol' n llt' J W I'I IIt ~ tlllllt i •l !I I 1 !1i!ltlll tk~lg11 ', l11 llilt~ l 11 p,lllll /'4 ttl tlt t Wt11ltl , ttii HIIII w •lltl utd t•• p11y Itt !lilt '' ~ liitl 111 II !i!1it t11intl1lit il1 i1 tili\ft td" lilt Ill i d l't«Hi d Nl ll llt' 1111d Ill d n llll ~~jtlt tlltillltol!ll l lllll•ttl•i!l'fil ii! tllliiitftutol 1111 i1


II</ IIW I H JC li ON

INTRODUC TI ON

11'11 11 in 1Hll lll 'll ll nws 111 l'l'l',lll'd 1o locn I ion, cl imate, defence and other considerations. llt'yo nd 1hot poi nt , fun r l iono l, eco no mic, political and religious factors generated t' II OI'IIIOUS <.' Oillp lc xity i11 th e way c ities worked and how they developed. While ci t·ics co nl'i nu ed to g row physically, real knowledge of their social Ol'l',llllisnli o n had to wait un til the development of modern social science in the 11 ill l' lcc nth ::1 nd ea rly twentieth centuries, when the full consequences of capitalist dt•vt• lopment w as exposed in such epic writing as Marx's three volumes of ( ,'a pita/ ( 1894), George Simmel's The Philosophy of Money (1900), Freud's ,'ioiliscllion and its Discontents (1930) and Max Weber's Economy and Society ( 19oH ). Ta ken together, the penetrating analysis of society that emerged categoril'n ll y de mon strated that urban life in its full complexity could only be explained thi'OI I!J,h the invisible web of economic and social processes. With such immense tlll l' ll cc tua l activity taking place in the social sciences, it became undeniable that lil t• phys ica l world was an ephemeral product of much deeper and enduring lo1Tt:S. It was also true that none of these great thinkers were concerned with Npn cc or c ities, let alone urban form. Nonetheless, many considerations inherent Io 1hesc treatises were symbolically represented at the fin de siecle when Vienna ht 'l'l llll e the intellectual epicentre of European thought.

'J'h c co nflict between two great Viennese architects, Camillo Sitte and Otto Wng nc1; o ver the design of the city centre enclosed by Vienna's Ringstrasse, 111 ho lica ll y represented two alternative visions of the twentieth century. Almost t•x nt.: ll y one ce ntury ago, the concept of the public realm expressed in urban d!'si l\11 bccnme directly linked with emergent concepts of the modern world. The inrt' pli o n of urban design as social process therefore became condensed as pl'll xis, something different from architecture, but also something different l1'0 111 rhe pro fes sion of town planning which did not become institutionalised 11111 il 19 14 as the Royal Town Planning Institute in London. From the fin de ,ft'.l'f!', tl i'C h itectu re and urban planning progressed as independent professions, 111d Ul' h:m des ign was born as a process of major social consequence. In nd dit·ion , the se minal textbook on urban design was brought into existence hy Ca mill o Sitte in 1889, namely The Art of Building Cities: City Building l f't' lll'rlillg to its Artistic Fundamentals. Although Marcus Pollio Vitruvius l1111 l wl"irrc11 hi s ten books on architecture (De Architectura) in Rome i11 lil t• first cc nt·ury BC (fi rst published in 1471), it had taken some 2000 years lw 11 lvx l of overw heln1ing co nsequence to emerge regarding the built form of the l'i I Y• I >t·.~ rlilt• this nt·w uwnl'l' IH'Ss of urbo n for m ns sot: inl proct·ss, ilw orgnnisa tion 11 / t' llil'N WliH Still I'OII it'ivt•d liS fl w SOft• dOillllill nf tii'I 'IJ ill 'li N Wt• ll i1110 the

Al"'''"'

IWt'lllll 'lh t't'lllllt y, IJHli •t•d ()flo Wul'. tll•t''ll t iiiNNil ' ,,., tlu"d· \i 1/Jilt•f'l11r Wtlllt' ll 111 IH'IH WIIN i111 • ct 1lg il 11 d ~ 1111111111 ~ ''" 111111 l1 " ' 11, 1.,, 1\ l11 tl •lty ' I he t1dd11t I \\'tlll ld li iiVfl ftJ lilu 1 il l I111 W;1 II fltllll drt 1 11 l1 1,_!il [l lli lio l11 1111} In ill" 1 ll'i HIII illll ttl " 'dl lht_llli l'l lllll .. I Utd llll'll l! fl I ' 11 i I •• II ( i VI I ill l1 f ltlt 1•' did 1J1i1 pr.,h, v~_· l )' ~ ~~~~ilt~ i,d , , i. .. ( '( i ' •., Iii I i ' ; I L: I I • ! ~ I•. : I I •I j

j ..

I i •

•• • -

Pruitt-Igoe housing estate in St Louis, USA, on 15 July 1972 inspired Ch nrl t• Jencks to announce the symbolic death of modernism and the rise of a new eHH lf postmodemism. By that time it had become obvious that the physical dell'' 1ninism of modern architecture could not be relied upon to resolve cornph•x social issues. Many disasters had followed from this approach in other coun tr ieN, or example the entire system of 'new towns' in Britain, abandoned as gov<.' t'll tll Cnt policy after three-quarters of a century, and the failure of high-rise, high density residential development in social housing from the late 1950s (Dunl cnv y 1981 ). Other great planning disasters (which in most cases were actually an:hi ll'etural disasters) have been documented in a book by the same name by Pt'l\'1 ll nll (1982). At that point it became abundantly clear that cities, the puhli1 l'l•n lm and projects beyond the level of a few related buildings lay well bcy<)IHI I Il l' reach of an architectural education, and that a different kind of knowled gt• wns required in order to accommodate the design of cities.

Synopsis of the book Ill tr yin g to obviate the inherent physical determinism of architectural and udm tl 1 have adopted a particular approach outlined in the preface. In o rd ct• to 11111k e my aims explicit, I also need to be clear about the content of this book :111d li Npnrtic ular orientation. This can be done by locating it in relation to four l ~,; vv l nl kno wl edge that are required by urban designers. dt •s i ~ n ,

'I 'he theoretical, philosophical and contextual foundation of the di sci pi i IIi' 11 11d the meta-programmes that both inform and legitimise practice . ' l'he lc!!a l, financial and administrative context within which the di sd pli1H' opc rn tcs . ' l ~·c hn o l ogi e s of space and form. ( :nst studi es of urban design practice.

1'1d r-~ hook is categorically about the first of these levels, for a variety of rt:n SOII ,, It tHhipl s t'h e position of how to understand urban design rather th a n how lo d11 1 •,o w hil e thi s volume is a text, it is one th at dea ls with theory r:l l'fl (' t' il u111 111 111 I iL't' in the context of 'Western' urba nis:1 tion. 1t docs not, for cx::~ mp lt:, lt 'y I 11 111'.1\l''l l how we should incorporMc tH )IHWxiN I proct ~SIWS i1110 d v~o~ig 11 . ltt.~ l i ' lld , 11 lu,l·a,1 1111 the foundat ion for ge ndL'I'n l pnH'Iitt 'l• wi lhllll '11pitnliNI Hol"it•ty, lltHIItu w thi N I111 1J llfl't.•ctcd the spati::tl :nHI I•)' Itlhll lll ,, 1111111111 ' cd ttlll tllil •N, ' I'I111 N ilu• lu111l 111\1\I'"' N() II(' poss ibl e stru t: llll'l' 1111 lit filii ill f' lil t I I "II III I' Iiii i 1111 ~ 1 1 1 ' '' it mv lc •d p.t' lilt) ~t llllN II'Illt' lh :t l l'l' lnl(•s :t il t. lllt ·e~ ljii L' ttl IQftlllii! JI 11111 i'f I• lit 1 1111u 111 illlt ll tc IU il ll )' to lt t• l't'll( di sr ip lill t', 1'-~ll tl ftllll l dH'ii' tilt llilii i Wt t)'ll Ii i litLit ilqtli tt ll dli 11 ~ 1 . ' l'lu• ll' lill': tl l't' IINO II ltll till li jH!!;i i illi l llj ili •il \\o llllt • i!io 1 (t lli i'i illlf(1 it"-\t_l l lilt llllttlll d '" "'"'' oil I l l 'l l .. fll l [il!l \ 1 "wr II I 11\f I IIi 1111 11 II iii iilii·~ i liiil il lr• l i I fli"ltfttllilll Ill fllllot \\1 111\ 1hili il ol iiil "lll~, I "Ill

il"


t :nll til'(\IH'IItl y, tht- tl' Xt huH lu•t'll "'llt lld !it d i11 IH1Nk1 tll y tlu•t•t• Nl'l'llllll il. ' l'l11•n • 1

llllgltl lt 'I INtl ll olhl y ln 1111 it'l dt'I'IH' I' Sti'\I Vtlll't'N, lll 1 hq 1111 , w ill , It di'II IS with III •Hnty, 111 y tllllt 't'l'll w ill11 ot he to rcco uttl (yet ll)\11 11 1) tlu t lHlltlltl~t)l,lt'r tl Sl!q uent 1111', nl Ill hot I des ign prodtiCtS from Miletu s to 1'11(; nodd ttt HIN, htt( to show h ow Iti Nt my it ~w l I' is sm:i:tll y constructed and to demon st r:lte how various histories lt iiVI' lwt' ll nss um ed in o rd er to explain essential knowledge in the field. While a diu l t ·~· t k exis t·s to some degree between theory and practice, the latter will t nnti llll l' t't'g:1rdl ess, since it is driven in most cases by financial and administratt vt• t·x 1wdic.:ncy. In order for the discipline to move forward, a new discourse llt•t•ds to he se t· in place with ideas derived from a significantly wider compass. It is t hcrefo re in the realm of theory that advances need to be made, and this hnN lwt• n 111 y focus throughout. As I have made clear in Designing Cities, the 11' 111111 udm inistrative, financial, legal and formal foundations for the practice of 111'1H111 des ign is not my concern in undertaking this project, although the formadoll of c ultura l capital is considered in depth in chapter 10. Another reason for thi N foc us is that there are already a great many books and reports dealing with lt•vt•l J, the techn ologies of urban design practice, namely design and develop1111'11( co ntro l, historic conservation, land valuation, planning law, site analysis, ~ t1111dnrd s fo r residential development and layout, formal typologies and standI! dN for open space, facilities provision and the rapidly shifting world of geol', l'll phic information systems (GIS), and systems for computerised graphic design 1111 1 t•cpresentation. These are so well developed that the discipline is being lllldt:l'lni ned by its own dependence on applied technologies of all kinds, ignoring i11 tlw process the intellectual and theoretical considerations that might lend it vn ·dihility and integrity as an independent region of practice. Similary, at level4, rnNI.' studies abound, for example my colleague Jon Lang (1994) has written the dt•finit·iv e text on the public realm in his exhaustive Urban Design: The Amerit rill J•;xperience, with privatised public space extensively documented in Kayden ().000). The key fac tor that distinguishes a profession from other forms of pl'ilt't'ice is that its acts are based in theory. If urban design as a social process is 110t t·o be degraded into a series of displaced technologies, then it must be l't'Ot'ii.' llt·ed o nto a new trajectory where substantial theoretical engagement is p111't of the overa ll process of educating (designing) urban designers. How this p1'ol't'HS mi ght be represented is the purpose of this volume. Wit h regard to the organisation and categorisation of substantive material 11110 L'hnpters, the trade-off in any taxonomy is that one sacrifices continuity to t OIIVl' rti ence. Th e re is no linear 'story' being told . Each chapter is to some degree i ndl'pcnd<.•~tt' of the others. The underlying theme of spatia l polit'kn l t•~o·o n omy wovidvs nn int·cll ectua l and critical reference point t·hrouj•,IHllll tltt • tt ''< l. This iH•Nitio tl is new to urba n design, but it is not n new p : ~t·n di n trl NtH hj it i111111une In ll'itkn l sclf-n:flcction. In fact it h:-~ s :1 lo " f', lti Ntn ry, Prlgiii \I IIII J\ t• !111• polit·i,;ld t'l'O II OIII Y of /\dnm Sm ith duri11g tlt t• Stnlll 'l ll J1ll lt j\l•lf'lllll t' lil i11 tl11• l1ttll' l' lr ,tll of till' eig ltt v1· nth t't' nt11ry. I nl:111 Nlll 'iltl tlr11 ~ l ' • ll i 1 tl l' i;liiil.d n i'"''"'Y wi ll lw ti'H'd IIH' II Httil'n ll y, ns a ··dt' l't' tll t' !H•IIIt "' l• ltl!' li~t c, •11ilwt i!!t!ll ' I" 11 \llllttit.: pttNitlllll , ' l'ht il iN tiH • l't'llt l'l tii'I'II HIII I wit ) 11l1 '!Iii'! ilt HI! i i!il !\itll'l l l! ll tit, 111 11l1jl'~'l ttl NltH~ ~ t''' ' t'lt llttllllil ' 1u,1Hpn il \'[' i ~ liil•n•lll 111 tlu 1 •1111•~ k.

"''"il""v

w•"

1 ,

hi Nlm y 111 HI philosoph y tll' l' dln•t tl y 11111111 ntllll'l'lt'd nnd nn• tl1 l' 1l10 fl l l' ll l'Otl'l ll t "'l',l.'llttj.\<)l' ies. Si1nilnrly, politics, l lllilll't' 1t11d p,l'nder den l with the sodn l di11H ' II io11 . 'l'hl.! next three catego ri es, e11 v it'OIIItll' ll t, ncsl'l1 etics a od 1ypo logic H, dl•11 l w II h qtii'Stion s of form, while chapter I 0 (' p,·a xis' ) addresses some of t'he lllll'{'fl~l ll l't•lnt ions between ed ucation, research and practice. T herefore the book is hot h litll it·ed by, and benefits from, this structure. There will always be a 1 dqJ,ree of overlap between categories, for example between history and rheory 111 lwt ween culture and politics This is not a problem of the text but a prob lv111 nl k11ow led ge in general. In fact, every attempt has been made to cross·· n: lt•• t hcor ies, concepts, subject matter and references. The purpose of each chnplt' t 1111d the interconnections between them is described in greater detail below. :hapter 1 performs three tasks: first, it gives an overview of mainstrea m ud l illl k sign theory; second, it traces where political economy and critical thco,·y hnvt IK•en most active to elate in offering a different viewpoint; and third , it SII!\I WHI how we should consolidate a framework from spatial political economy th:ll \'1 111 11 He va ri ous components derived from the mainstream position, and at tb c S:t iiH ti111e, offer it a coherence that it presently lacks. The chapter addresses prohlt••• H of definition and context: what exactly is it we are trying to encapsulate i11 ti ll' con cept 'urban design'? A taxonomy of classic texts is offered, with dt•; ll t•x position of the differences between the intellectual territories claimed h ll'chitecture, urban design and urban planning. This is followed by n bt·it•l di scussion of political economy as a concept, and the more recent spnt lid poli tica l economy of the social sciences. The chapter concludes by lo t I hi.· usc of this paradigm as a framework for urban design knowledge. 2 addresses the idea of history in relation to urban design. It b egin s h INking the question 'What is history?' in order to contextualise urban tk Hif',ll pt'tlctice. Next I look at the idea of history from the ideological posit·i01 1 nl pmfcss ional intervention, a process that has significantly influenced how lll'hnn design has been configured as an intellectual product. The two n uli11 itt ll uences here, as one would expect, are from architecture and urban pbnllittl \• In hoth cases, history has frequently been used as a vehicle for legi t'i tnn 1i ll f', profess io na l solidarity, rather than for its capacity to enlighten us about h11111 1111 1 it y. I then d iscuss four ways in which urban design history has been enun cia tt•d vilt i.'hronologies, typologies, utopias and fragments/collage. An alternnt·ivt' lu ltll'kn l perspective is then given, based in m nteria li st theory. In th e prm't'HH I II Nl'II NH rhe wo rk o f many scholars whose w1·iting s upports a concept of ui'I HIII dt·~linn :1s the.: dynam ic prod uct o f soc~cty's 1H't ' tl to l',t'llt' rn t·e material rr ttd NY III

si~11ifkn111

~

argu in~

:h::~pter

ex tt'~"1'vt•l )'

IHtl k cn pi ta l from space . . ( :h11pt1'1' j (Philoso phy) overlnps wt tl• tit•• 111't•v iou s NwpH'I", to tlu t•jj lt'lll thnl it i ~ ilnpos~ibil- tO st• pnrnl\' t\11•"t olliltlll ,j \tl lil lill )' fl'll tll HOIIII' l'll llll' l' 1ln11 nf tl w llVt'l':t ll 1\ t•ft' ti ll' "''1 '1" '""" " ' t•ldhHlnpli y 1111' I'' io •' t n 11 dt•ttri ltotl 1 o tiHitlt•n t tln11 ol I•''Y ttl Ill" '" i'll ill! i ;I 11fl Iill tl 11111 i 11 till' t wt• lll il •tl t 1 1111 11 y. ' I 'ltt•tH' jll\1'11 d ij •,lll'l 1'1' 111'1 I P I11 ttl II Ii •\ 111,; li i li 11i i lit' 1 I' l1 1 11\11' nl 1111II ll t•t lthtl dt•htlll' 111 111111'1 l111111 Vltlllt ll Ill lli ''/iu ,;, /tJ, h• tlu l1 utlcl'1111 1\ lt1111l

prm·t~Hfl,

tlt1~i1

dim lli'l~t·d,

lll~

lt~ i


ul du IIJ 10N, lol :llll'lll'tll ltttd lht• 1\nuhnus itt Wl'i ll t~ ll 111 !111 l ''lil ~ 111111 11>40s, t·o l'111i N In IIH• l%01'l ii 1HI 1970s, an<.l :-~ rg unhly lo I ,II N All )',t' h'N ltHiity, with a llfl ll ifit:n nt hod y of i:Oilt t• tnpor:uy urban theo ry eml\ ll ttlilll\ it'OIII tll nt location. A dt•lni lt>d ncco un t of the central philosophical paradigms thnt h:Jve informed lll'hntt design is then suggested: semiotics (semiology), phenomenology and Mtii'Xinn politica l economy. While all of the chapters in this text are designed to int·ernct and overlap, the first three chapters on theory, history and philosophy hnvc partic ul a rly strong connections. ;hnpcc r 4 tackles the difficult subject of politics. For most urban designers, politics, like philosophy, is a topic that has no significant bearing on their t• d~t c ntion. In order to demonstrate why this should not be the case, the relatl ottship between politics and ideology is discussed, since they are inseparable pnrt·s of the same process. Mao Tse-tung once described politics as 'war without 1\II II S', ::md in the theatre of the built environment, urban politics is influential at 1II k·vels of engagement in design. Also intimately connected is the idea of power, 1nd how the built environment is the theatre where power expresses itself tltro ugh the medium of political ideologies that configure, and are embedded wi thin , spa tial configurations, architectonic space and the expression of symholic capital. Continuing from this point, the central ideological construct of r npi t:1 l, namely the legal system, is discussed in relation to the concept of right, whic h has ultimate authority over the public domain and therefore of urban d t~ sig n ::IS its custodian. The state's legitimating control over urban design in the fort tt of urban planning is then discussed. This has two aspects: theories that lwg in with an a priori concept of society, and those that somehow view urban plnnning as an independent factor in the overall process of urbanisation. The l'Ot'C co nce pt defining urban design, that of the public realm, is then contextualisL•d within this defining framework. :hn ptcr 5 investigates the interdependence of urban design and culture, il'l'e pting that urban design is also a physical expression of cultural processes 1nd nspi r::t tions. I then discuss the relationship between modernism and posttllodernism in the context of global culture and posthistory. Two central conn •pt s nnd two emergent manifestations in the built form of cities are outlined. Aut hl' Mi city and symbolic representation form key processes in the expression of 111'h11 n form within first-world countries, with the New Urbanism fast becoming tl w domin ant design paradigm. The chapter concludes by suggesting that while tl11• New Urbnni sm reflects the engrained ideologies of capitalist society, a New l{llt't di sm contni ns ::1 greater capacity for resistance and change in rhe developing WO t'kl. Chnpt cr 6 dc:1ls wi th the rel ationship betwee n gc nd cr nnd dt-Ni1•,11 . < ;,·nd t•r is th11os1 wlto ll y nhscnt· :1s n referent within allurbtllt dnd1•,11 PII'I\ I'I IIIIIIII 'N, di•s pit· lilt• l'llt'l tltnt nfH·t· cn pit·a l it· is !'he l nr~ws t si" l', li• i11llllt' tll 1' lt¥1' tlu l l l' t~ ll l '' ' "'" 11 He n litd Hitl Np.tn •. In o t·dvr I'O ohvin lt' tlli N~i ltUtli1111 , 11 i ~ llll! lllli lllll 1111 · 1111itH' nil ~t• l n tt•d rt Ht l't'pi N, liN wt• ll ns th t ''"'" '' i"ll .. '"'" "'ll"ifl, '"' 1 tl~tt! ill [, '""'' 'PI j\l' tltl t•t I1 11 Nlnt' tiH• h11ill t'tt vi t'iltllt\1'111 AI"" 111111111t 1111' I ilu l,hi iltl! i ttlllliittlllll jllt llltl 11 1 t't tllllll ll )' ip,llttll 'd l\l'ttd l'l 111111 th'4 II It tltd Wiil, ! iliiti t li ), ltl t1!11111J',t',

,,r

Ili n t 1'l1 11 11d Nt·xtlll lit y. Tlw 1 llil pli 1 du ,, Hill d P11h1 itt It \I' ll wi th ti ll' lot''' huddttq ., liltu I~.M 11 1 p,t' ild t•t' tl w()l'y, '""'"·ly 'ltllltly, )lill tt lll't'lt y, t.: q~il n l :tlld Sp ill I', lwl11t1 lit~tlllll\ 111 tlw ovt•t·nll irnp:H:l olp,t•tHit•t tlllll l'h•"' tksi~ll. llltptt•t' 7 (l1,11vironment) ann lyst'S tl11• ot·igi nH, rheoretica l deve lopiiH't\1 111111 III II III tti t•t•; disnti on of sustainabilit y itt urhr111 design, not fro m <1 tcd uti cn l ptlllll 1l vll•w IHtl fro11 ' the perspective of politica l and economic progress. ' l'lw lt i111111) l!r tl11• t' IIVii'Ontncntaln\Ovement is first discussed, beginning in the nliddk ol 1111 1Wt• lll 11:1It i:l'litury and continuing until today. Attitudes to nature :Ht' tl11 11 1.kli111II It'd ns the so urce of ongoing dilemmas of the fundamental LII1Sl1Stili tllthil II \' 11l Nil n d lc<.l 's ustainable development practices'. These ideas then scp,ttl' itlllt ,_ lh~~ tl'mion of the relationship between sustainability and developrnent', 011 t\ 11 h~uclll t~l th e inherent contradictions of the capitalist world order. Wit·hin tl w~t lil" '""t'lt'I'H , the ideology of sustainable cities is interrogated in three :tNIH't l• ilt ~l , l11 1·clntion to capital accumulation; second, in terms of social justkc; 1\tlll tlti1d , i11 relation to the material problems of urban space and susta in nbk III'I Htll dt •IUI\ '' · As in the first three chapters, chapters 4, 5, and 6, on culture, pol it kH I\ till till' t'll vi ro n mcnt have significant interactions. ( :1t11p1er 8 (Aesthetics) has probably been the dominant elemen t in till \Vt•l/t111Srhauu.ng of urban designers, since most have undergone tra in ill f', ltt 1111 hitccturc defined either as art or technic. Paradoxically, however, then· iHfi ll lit ti t.• wri tten on the subject by urban designers that their learning in thi s t'I'H)ll't I 111\IHI h:lVC been through osmosis. The chapter begins by examinin g acs tlwllt tiH'Ot'Y and the intersection between object and experience. The acsthcti t.'H til 111 h11 11 form are then discussed, reviewing the three articles selected in Desigll/11" C :llit•s as paradigmatic of particular approaches, namely aesthetic phil WHt plt ttHI <.: ognition, the production of the aesthetic object, and the mcdintiott nl ymholic form. To these I add a fourth dimension, namely the rcl::~ t iolltlltqt lwlwt•en aesthetic production and commodity production, focused on l'tlltl :l111'kc's article 'The economic currency of architectural aesthetics' (DC 2), tllll whic h was in fact included in the first section on theory. Three dot~t i t HIIil jll lt'ttdi p,ms are then outlined, namely mathematics and the divine order, COII(t•sl 1111 listn and rationalism, and three forms of aesthetic production in th e rc:tltti M11l 111holic ca pital, state regulation and theming. Chupte r 9 (Typologies) is concerned with the manner through whi ch 11tl11tt1 tb;ign und erstands itself and constructs models, appropriate or otherwi se , lu it ow n socia l formation. One way or another, the idea of typology lies at t'lw lwlltl ol the di scipline, since it allows designers to t·ncn psulate key conce pt s 11 111 p1·ocesses in a co mpressed and acccs~;ihlc for111 . AHn tlH'th od of introdw:iul', 1111 r o tH.'i.· pt, di stinctions arc made bctw~o~~ l't 1111 11'111 1t•d itlt•nH: typology, tn xo t111111 llto t·pholo)!,y :'l nd system. These co nL·t~t)h 1111 1 .-,d tlltll'd II Nit'l\ t•xn mpk•s fl 'll il t l'lllll',l' of differe nt· di sciplines such m< ,.~ :, , 111 ftlllhlltlntlttf•,y, psycholof',y 11 11 1"1111 111 tltlllil wldt It t' ltH'I'f',t ' 11111 t'llt io tk s. I tl wn t.' IIUtH:io tt.· thl'l'l' l y ptll"l~ t\ 1Hd p\l1 WH L'IOI·II' Iy t't•lnll•d til lltl ll tll tit lol lj'll • " ,tl ditt~i_ l" tit I ivt•d It IIIII Ill \t i dt•Nil',ll , li tld otiH•t'fi i'Vtl lvl ll p, 11111 11l 111111\i td I" \•,!'' !I 1\ 111111111\' Ill Mil tl tt lll )', II pti~Nihlt• It \ dt•III!III NII IIII' lltll\11 '1\ll ll lill tllll iltttlt .\ti.ll ti \\IJ III Ill , lilt\\' till• I -~~III 1

1


fiiTTf li l l

llt _lf'l

t_tll ll j llll td fl tllllt' W itd( IN l' lll'U PHlll tt l'ed, :!lid lto w II ll lij)l l' ht II 111 'i l 1II II H' d w ith 11 .1.1 ~~~ 111 11 li lt tit'' l'i t ku lj W I',~ puctive based in 11d t1111 11 1111o d il u•tll) f :hll pl i!l I() (P,·ng nltll ks ) looks nt the tw o mos1 .~igll i ltl'll lll (id1•o lollic:n l) prol'li i1 11 11 idl t•<.: i ih c production of cultural capi t::d : th e tr:linin g of urban It 'll ljl,ll t'l /1 fiiHI ilwi ,. rei n tio nship to tertiary education and to the professions. I)' IIIHtly.~ls bq~i 11 1-1 with the role of professional service within the capitalist 11111 111 o l w odut: f·ion, nnd how they interact in the reproduction of surplus value 11d i1 11 · ttl lli nl t' ll:tn ce o f c lass barriers. I then move onto the role played by '"' ' ''IIN io ns in f·he produ ction of knowledge systems, and the nature of their 11 f11 t11 il y, f11 wentc r deta il, professional intervention and influence over the (111111 ll ll 'ilo n or urba n space is discussed, concentrating on its ideological role 1 il llpl t•lil l' lll'ing pl a nning law, and how the exacting ideologies of form so ' " " 111 t•d Nc.• rve to re inforce the reproduction of capital from space. I conclude 11 1 luq tfl'l; u11d th e boo k, with an extended analysis of the relationship between '' ' 1Wit p•·oftsN io ns of architecture and planning, predicated on the absence of II) l lldt•j H'tlll~; nt professi on of urban design, with an extended assessment of the l• 'llll d tll lli l'lll' of urban design education.

haot heory

II is the theory that determines what can be observed. Albert Einstein

Introduction: The Problem W' l1111 iA1111dcrstood as urban design 'theory' is anarchistic and insubstantial. This i ~ 11Nil 11111 ion which has been ongoing for the best part of fifty years and needs to b

1:••1 1t•t'll'tl. Urba n design is a discipline where, almost without exception, its maj o r ' ilu•t tl'i fl iH' h:wc failed to engage with any substantial origins in the cognate diNt ip line!l of economics, social and political science, psychology, geography or !111' 11111 11 nni ties. We can push this idea even further and say that it has not even fl ltd llllrtd wh a t today would be recognised as significant subdisciplines, such as IIIIHi tlj\i:og ra phy, urban economics, urban sociology or cultural studies, the latte r 1111 1y l'l'l'l' nl'l y emerging as a major force in critical theory. This effectively situates llt l!i ltl des ig n as several realms removed from any substantial theory at all. At it Wl't d(t•s t il' COLlld be seen as merely an extension ofthe architectural imagination o r !ill ' phys icn l consequence of State planning policies. Both of these are heavily 'tlllll lt•ni nec.l attitudes that ignore the fact that the organisation and design of o ur 1111yHkn l wo rld cannot be so narrowly drawn. They suggest a theoretical depend 1' 111 y 011 nrc hi tecture and planning, focusing narrowly on their function as socia l lt 'i 1111o log ics. What constitutes the theoretical object of urban design remains in !III CH I io n, one upon which the foundation for any substantial theory is predicated. lt 1n t'tl l' l' 1'0 do this we must begin by defining what we mean by 'urban design ', its l't' lillio ii Hhi p within a hierarchy of practices, from architecture through urba n dt•ll il', ll into urba n and regional planning, a nd its socia l fun ctio n within a Ia nze r II HIIII OI'l' embrac in g socia l context.

Urban Design: Definitions l'l11: it' l'lll ' ill' hnn\ npnrt l'ro 111 tiH' lnl'l tlll'll ll ill p,l'i ty, l111111 tt lll rli tll 'd 1-lil', 'lil'i l'l llil lll ltl t 1l li iN il'l',l 'tld tll y pllj ll 'l ' I It llillli l:l lll 11'1 11 W 11·

111

!1 11

I,, ,, in won llldJ .~

l .c·~· l ~ Wl 1th l'i nH

w'''''''

1111 11.1 11 1 1 111i ll lll ' 11 IN11


III II !I

ltt llll n ltiH• h, t •ll~ l111 tll lt' tt l IIH• 111 os t tll t'l lllllt p, ltd lill t '' ''li·ll ltt ll l td tiii Htll stru cllll t', ii Htl nl rvl11 1111t'l O tstt• ll s' now ico ni t.: hook 1'/J, , 11,{1,/lf ( 11/t'.~ flu u , first pllhlt Nii t·d 111 ill't' IH.:Ii in I 972 . M tc r its English dch11t in I 1)7'/, it !W I itI motion a d,•IHtt t· l. ts ti1111 th e next ten yea rs over th e idea of a CO il t.:eptu nll y va lid 'urban IH iology', o nt• rh nt· still reso nates today, although much of the territory has now l ~t •t • ll Cll pt urt·d by urban geography. So I will continue to deploy the term 'urban' I1H't' it I'Cin ains n more relevant and conceptually challenging term than either 'l ivit-' or 'ci ty' wh en applied to design, one whose meaning will hopefully ht 'CII III l~ den rer over the remainder of this chapter. 1'1 '11~\'·ess toward s developing some substantial theory of urban design in the fnt'lll of n satisfactory hypothesis, a set of guiding constructs or principles, or a II 'IINII II l'd mani fes to of ideological practices has been absolutely glacial. Virtually dl dt•l'i nit·ions begin and end in dogma, and 'the crisis in urban design', like the l'lld lt•ss \ •ri sis in ur ban planning' continues, fuelled by a dearth of critical and d ll dt•l'tit:n l thinking, an emballage of anarchistic practices, an obsession with I. ill hnst· d lea rnin g and a continuing belief in physical determinism. Here two I'III H'I'N stnnd out simply because of their titles: David Gosling's 1984 paper ' I >t•lln it io ns o f urban design' and Alan Rowley's paper of the same name exactly 11'11 yt'I II'H Inte r (more recent examples are represented in Punter 1996 and St llltt'L'h 1999 ). In his paper, Gosling has adopted a wholly architectural perIH'l'livt•, as if only architects had any right to define the discipline. While it may '1'111 un fo ir to criticise this paper, now twenty years old, it remains significant pn•l'ist· ly beca use it represents the most powerful and enduring ideologies still do tllht nting the field of urban design. The paper is an articulate manifestation of 1 who ll y o ne-sided, ideologically biased and atheoretical example of the genre, dil'll:l l i11g every major theorist concerned with urban development, structure 111d lo n11 . Simil arly, potential models of urban design (e.g. as a definition of the p11hl k ren lm , as a spatial matrix, as inversion, revitalisation, iconography) are Wl'll ppt•d and made accessible only in and through the work of architects and tiH•i1· critics. Sil nilur cri ticisms can be applied to Alan Rowley's paper. On the first page (lwv•tl y yen rs a fter the hu ge debates about the term 'urban' raged within urban odo l o~y, in vo lving some of the best social theorists of the time) we are still pn ~H t' ltl l'd wid1 a de finition of 'urban' as something (we know not what) in 1 tlll lt'ns l to ' rurnl' development. Quoting Ruth Knack, we are informed that '' l't yi 11l\ to defin e urban design is like playing a frustrating version of the old ptlt'lo r· gn mc, lwenty qu esti ons' (Rowley 1994: 181). In 'Definiti ons of urban d (·~IJ•, n ', Row lt.'y co nclud es with ten definitions, by whi ch po int it sho uld be II Pi hl t'l' llt to th e intellige nt reader th at the di scipline is in Hl't'ioii N t•·o uhk. The ltt ~J I o l tl wse notes that urban design edu cation (knwtHI H litr ' l't ll y 111 tl w social 1it • 11 n~s, lnw, t•co nomi cs, publi<.: po li cy nnd hti H irii ·~N ll iltl ti lll ij ft 111 111 1, lllllll' of w lw l1 tlt't' 1itopl oyt·d in t'lw pnpvt·. '1'1 11' prn hl t•ttl wlllt nil it!' d 11 •I 1111 III(I IN 10 d1 •illll' 111h11 11 dt•Sif\11 is th 11 1 iiH'y 1111 ' dl' ptld l'ltlll tll ll l iii!Jij itlhln i"!l' 11111\' li lf', \IS fn 1Wt ll'd, t"H 1'(11 jH' t'lt ll pH itH o tllt ntl11•1 1111 111' ~fl' dl 1d h.tll li vn ltt r · lltlltllnnlil qwditit•t;, dt•tH tlpt lvt• l"''l'' ''lt l''l, I'• tl ll tll lftllii" tll"'''l l•ill'll Iii nil11 1 •PI· illl lltivl

Jllll l\ ll ll f','l th lll' Ill'(' \I HIII ill y t llllll ll ,I Ill lt l\'1 lll liVt'i'N :tl Nlp,ll i lkll ll~'(', Stll h 11 11 •P I""'" It iH ttld tt to I'Uillling 1111 1l11• ""'' '"I' ttl tt Nph t• rL'. Al so nt t• poi t\1 , '""I 011 1 1 111tltl lll hnH iH, yo u have to '"·rl vl' I H~t l· wiH•t'l' yo u sl'nt·ted. So th t• ti VI' I'fl ll l"' dtl r• ltl l't• tll ll tii H. In the abse nt.:c ol' 11 1t y Hlthll lll lll'i nl thco rcticn l frnmcwo•·k tlt11 1 ll11l 111 111 h11 11 dt·s ign activity to tbc hi swri cn l pi'Ocess, to social dcveloplll l' llt nnd to ,,ti ll 1 pmft•sH ion s, the same basic positio ns and approaches will be cndilosH I 11 '1 It l1•d,

Ul'llim Design: 'Theory' It !11 11t1l my in tention here to write a normative history of urban design hul 111 .~ I I'' lt vl' ly illustrate some of the more influential and prototypical di scout'N t' tl ltll lt•J•,i titlli se traditional theory from forty texts. All are classics in their ow•' 1IJ',Itl , nnd co nstitute significant markers in the journey towards an improvt•d lllldt•l'tl lil tldin g of urban design (see table 1). Historically, each text represe nt n l '' IIHijlll' 11 11'e1npt to correct what was considered a dominant problem at th e ti1n t: il 1\'11"1 wl'i lt t: n. Despite what I have said above, much practical criticism conrnint•d lulwt•t• tl th eir covers will remain valid for years to come, for the simple rcasott tl11t l t•vt•n basic principles remain widely ignored decades after they were pt't' t•ll lt•d, :tH in Gordon Cullen's Townscape for example. As we approached th~ I Ill I II r (he second millennium, however, three things became very clear. ' I'IH· fi rst· was that the positions represented in the collective corpus tr aditioll dl y I\NHOt.:i:1tcd with urban design had lost most of their explanatory powt' l, tvl tii iY of these marked, in a very real sense, the last significant breath of tl11• llltH it•l'lli sr position, twenty years after postmodernism had started to flouri sh i ll 111 IHIII design. Second, over the last ten years, a new era in urban design dwo• 111\ll tHII'fnt.:ed, although this remains to be articulated in any significant mntll\1'1. N11 11 1\llin's book Postmodern Urbanism (1996) and Ross King's EmancifJt!l/11~: Sflrlt't' ( 1996 ) are among the few memorable texts written in the intcrv t• ttltt p, JH'I tlld, Ihe latter being notable due to its rare dialectical relationship to t·lll'o i'Y• l'lti n l, th e upsurge in things urban in disciplines that had previously bee n wh oll di ta·otll ll'Ctcd to the design of cities began to produce a significant corp1111 nl w•• tlc llrhnn sociology, economics and geography, cultural studies, ar t hi HIOI y, htlldN~·n pc architecture and other disciplines from anthropology to philosoph Wt' l'l' ttl I involved. Urban sociology and hutnan geography have been th e two k1• plllyt• I'H si11CC the early 1980s. l'h iH pmgrcssion results in the incvir:d1k ohHt'rvnlion th at more signifir11 111 tl tl 'lll't•tk: d pnradi gms abou t th e shnpt• :11td ltt llll rtl lll'hnn Hpncc nrc origirlllli''l\ llltt ll out'sidc d1 c di scipline of L~rb:'ln dt•Hip, tl l tlti H~I' 1lti1ll 11'11111 th t· •itiHidl•. It n h~tt ttii i'I'H n pnrt·inl cx pbn nti on ns to wlt y 1111 l1w l{t')' ii1'i l"' 11 11 lll'hnn dcs igal h,1v1 l'll ll'l'f',l' tl. 'J'Iw o ld pnnuli gm hn s w,· H'll'd ttWtt)" l!!!d d1 t lt i'W I111N 1tot yt• l tll kt•ll lt11ld . Ill /)t•sl1{11ill~ Citlt•ii, I tht•t t•ft ~• 11 111tlt' 11 l hw •.11 ll 1tt Ill t il lwtwl'l' ll wl111 1 I , nnNHi t•t' 111 lw II OI'III II tivt• tlu•III Y /(r \,\ l.!_ 11 1 i_ lr~ini• llVl• d u i\ il 1I Y Yl'll l pt•tl~td 111 11 11 1'I 110 1t 1'" 11tt1td II) 110 11 11tl tl 11 11tl u 1~. ..0.,. 1r li H•.i! lilt 11 11 i di r y r-'/' 111 IHill dr • lp.11

li,


J,tl•l•• I

l11ll}

1 ' "'''' ''

luxl:; 111

ttl'lltlll

dt•!.lgll.

I Jt •W III!III ( 1<172) Defensible Space

ittd 11dt.tll l'w''" ii HII nddH'NNI'll lllhtlll fl l'.!lltd illl • c~ty, ht•j;i tll tiltj•, wit lt C.t Nit·ll ··' ttlill d ~t~ ltul y 'I'!Jt• llr/Jr/1/ {?. ttt •:. ltutt . Itt tddll 'llll 111 J•, Ill lli 11 H in.: u mth ~·o t y, wt• IIIII NIIllit•ll y look nt th e key n·l:.tio ti Hhip, IH 1' ' ' ' 11 t lnltit~·<.: turc, urb:ll1 design n11d ul'i lil ll plnnnin g. '!'ab le 2 givell n sys lt'lll It•·• ttl tlu• lht'l'e related disciplines, co uched in terms of I lerbcrt Si moti 'H 1,,., d111 Ihi t• t· lements o f systems referred to in his book The Sciences of tin• It 11/lt Ml ( I%9 ). Like all attempts to create a simple table of relationships, i!ll) lt illl 111 t'rsorr to some fairly pragmatic statements. Nonetheless, s.ignifi cnn lifl',_'' 111 t'N ht l wee n these activities soon become transparent. Architecru re is !it tll ll ,lltll'd to the design of individual buildings, which are governed by 1he lilll illlll 'tc•t'N l111posed by artificially controlled environments. The term 'artificinl' iJ~Cd i11 I Ili Ncontext does not connote false but man-made. The essential fun ctio 11 ,,f tll l tilt ·~' llll'e is defensive, predominantly from the weather and from other I" t~plt •; IH'II t.:C bui ldings generally operate as closed systems with human, elcc11' •lilt o1' physical means of surveillance used to mediate external relation s. I It Ihilt dt·sign on the other hand is represented as an open system that u sc~ ildtv tlh utl nrc hi tectural elements and ambient space as its basic vocabu lary. Will'll'll ll nrc hitccture is predominantly concerned with social closure and pro''' 111111, tlt'hrtn design is by its very nature focused on social interaction and ' '"''"11111k:11'ion in the public realm. Urban planning is then conceived as so me tl Iiiii\ ltllt <.h mentally different again, as the agent of the state in controlling the jlllldllr lion :1nd reproduction of profit from land development, in allocat in ~ 11 ii1 'N lo t' 1he collective consumption of social goods such as hospitals, schools,

ll itllil•ll 11 (I 97:3) Los Angeles: The Architecture of Four Ecologies IJt ljlfljlt 11 I ( I 977) The !-Iuman Aspects of Urban Form V111111 11 l1 S<'olt-Brown & lzenour (1977) Learning from Las Vegas

I11ltlc• :l

( 111 1''"' Yt•ll.~ 1\lt•lo.i UHit •t' (I%0) rommunily ;md Priva('y: 1

/It 11/l.tlll•.t 11

l t!W,Iftl. t M •ll 1\11 httc•ctur.

I Yttt It (1%0) ll1t • '' ""IW of the City t\ litlttlotd ( 1% 1) 11t<' City in 1-fistory lilt ttl IN ( I% I ) tit<' /)c •t~lh Dnd Life of Great America n Cities t tt ll1•11 (1%1) ! own

Wnl1l1111 (1% .1) l:xp lomtions into Urban Structure ll.dflllll (I %.1) Citi lllll lt.ttldtl (1%:1) Tram in Towns l ·'ll tl11l ~ l1y ( I %4) Archil ture without Architects: An Introduction to Non-pedigreed 111/t//(•( '/(1/'('

''I'' h•11w''1 ( I %5) Urban Design: The Architecture of Towns and Cities

It,,, 1111 ( I % 7) The Design of Cities t\ lcll,llll (1%9) Design with Nature l·' l11 lttl•1ky ( I %9) Streets for Peop le

tfllllltlt •l' ( I %9) Personal Space: The Behavioural Basis for Design II•ill 11111 ( I %9) The I?SVP Cycles: Creative Processes in the Human Environment l 'llt~lit tll'.l<y, lllclson & Rivlin (1 9 70) Environmental Psychology: Man and His Physical •,, •II IllIf I } 111 II (I 117 1) Site Planning 1'1

\,111 I1 ~~ St<•,1drna n (19 71) The Geometry of Environment

f

\lt•'lt llllilll' ( I 9 77) A Pattern Language

A systems view of professional boundaries.

lilmncnt

I·'11W11 .~ ll.o<•ttcr (1978) Collage City

11 111< 1111'1'

Statics + human activity

I11 VII111 1111('111

Three dimensional (closed system) Materials + energy + design theory

1

I hlll11 •111 St'hUIL (1 979) Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture I ilt •t ( 11!7'1) Urban Space I } Ill It (I 1111 1) A Theory of Good City Form

Architecture

1

l ltlllll•ll ( I 1H2) 1\ n Introduction to Urban Design

11111 1111 til lldnson ('1984) The Social Logic of Space 11 •1111 II<(I ')II(,) rinding Lost Space: Theories of Urban Design

\ lt •'-t llttlt •r ( 1911 7) A New Theory of Urban Design 1 1 11•ld ( 1 111 7) 1/((• !Jctween Bu ildings: Using Public Space

lilt 1111 II 111111 ( 111'10) t:rnoq;ing Concepts in Urban Space Desifln I •II ( l'!'!lf) !Itt' N ('W Urbanism 11111 ( 1'1'!•1) I Jrlidlll)c •slt:n: The Amcricnn CXIJN!t•n< 't' lllll111 ( l'!'!lt) .~fi.tt t' l11 tltc• M.1 r ltin" IIIII ( 111%) /'m lnltnll•l'll I M>,nl.wn \tllltlll ijllllll ( I I)%) /)( u,fl/11 u( (hiJ!III 1

1

111//ttl/111/\

(.I!)( )

I

All•t//,11/11// l't•ll• ·l I) flit • l\u/11/lullt•l \111

I11Vny (1 111 1) lt.t/IIIIIJ/1'/,u 1"1'

111•• II11H 8- I 11t•c ll1111

1•ftolt

Ill!III II II'('I 'S

I lhjnt t lws

Social closure/ physica l protecti on

llfii\II VIt HI I'

Design pnrnnwi<•J'ti: .111ifld,lll y <'nn troll nd •II VII'IIIl l111'111 '

Urban design

Morphology of space and form (history + human activity) Four dimensional (open system) Architecture+ ambi ent space + soc ial theory .•orl, \1 <'<H ntJHIIl i<'il· !11111 ' '"" Ini t'' '" li on 1-lytlill 1lie

l1111tl

~ I II

Ill II I t I

Ill I11111

Urban planning

Government bureaucracy

Political economy of the state Systems of legitimati on and communi ca tion


ntt I lilt l l

ttlt)\IIIII Mh~ttldttl)•,'l, lltH I in pt·ovi ding N p tw~· lo t' iltt pf~tdll t ll tlil. t: IH~ tdntion nnd t'V I' tll 111d IOII HIIIII(H io n of CO I11111 0dities. ( lt•t•n Yilindll·l's pnpcr '' ((>wards a new typo logy o l ui'I HIII pl 11 1111ing theo ries' (I '!H'!) itl vt•sl ign lcs the relationship between urban plannittg Dnd urban form, wlu:t'l' lw delineates the three debates of planning theory, variously outlined as il~t • tltt:dytkal dcbntc (What is urban planning? ), the urban form debate (What is 1 Jlnod liJ'bn n plan? ) and the procedural debate (What is a good planning pt m·usll? ). Whil e Yiftachel draws a fairly big picture of the positions that conI ip,ll t'l'd 11 rhn n planning at the end of the 1980s, more mainstream urban design,. , H Wl' t'C nIso doing the same thing within what he termed the 'urban form dt•hntt•' (sec also chapter 10). There have been a few influential articles within ild1, pnrndigm that suggest a typology, synthesis or theory of urban form, for t' \t l111ple Chris Abel's 'Analogical models in architecture and urban design' ( I'!HH), /\ nn e Vernez Moudon's epistemological map for urban design (DC 'H), Ali Mad anipour's Design of Urban Space (1996a), and the New Urbanism, t' \ pl tlillt'd nt length in a special issue of the Journal of Urban Design (Duany and lldt •tt 2.002). More importantly, we can make three fundamental distinctions in tl'll''''d t·o theo ry. 'l'lll't'(.' nrc claims to primacy. By this I mean some claim to a theory of urban tblig n by individuals. Prime among these are Kevin Lynch's A Theory of ,'ood City Form (1981 ), Rob Krier's Urban Space (1979b) and Christopher /\kxandc r's A N ew Theory of Urban Design (1987). 'I 'here ha vc been four courageous attempts to synthesise the entire field of urban dt:s ig n, the rnost notable being Rowe and Koetter's Collage City (1978), Gos1i11g nnd Maitland's Concepts of Urban Design (1984 ), Roger Trancik's Finding I ,us/ Space: Theories of Urban Design (1986) (see figure 1), and Bill Hillier and ,lt~li c nn c Hanson's The Social Logic of Space (1984) (see figure 2). 'I'ht•re is a new generation of writers approaching urban design from a variety of different academic backgrounds and critical perspectives (Aravot 2002, ltl il lll 2002 and Gospodini 2002). While many of these retain attachments to 11111 inst rca m theory, they also incorporate certain new forms of learning into t ht•i r n nnIys is. Although these do not appear to emerge from any unitary (ll't'SIX'ctivc at all , even an opaque postmodernism, they do indicate a trend townrds very different sources than their predecessors. t lvt·t·nll , however, there is little coherence among or betwee n th ese various

1111 t't ttllp,n ts nnd npproac hes. Exhibited here is postmode rn deco nstt'tll'l ion withtlltl tilt• illte nti o nnlit y o r the conce ptua l framework. 0 11 lilt· oth t•t' lllt ttd, it is also lltll't'IINOti tlhlt·givt•n d1 c limi tations of st nt Cttn·tdi snt to ll'ttllll 111 11 wl1oll y prnglllitiH nnd ill flt •x ihle fr·:nn ewor k for· tht• tl iNI'ip lint• 1\ "' w lltHI '"'""ll lilSsing tltt•nt y HltH.ltt ht• lltHlWt'l' t•ii'IH·r·. ' J'III' nttict tll tlt• 11 111\'t 1 ··I''' ' ·11 .!111 !111 ltlllttdtwtion tlf',l\l'llt ll tlu11 " '' ttppt·npl'iiltt' lot lltd ttttull ltll' 111'1 -•1111 der.i;111 riltttUitl lu • htt tll('d Wi tldll ll \Hittttl poll! it 11 1 l'i'CIIIOitty nt tl lll tit Ill tti\ ltii ['l flll td tli \f!i\tlitl 111 1 poll jtl illtll lll l\ 11 1 11 p,t'llt 'l'll it Nt'd lllll ll t lt y 11! tdo 1,tll Willti11 li!Jlitt ~ ii! lill !ii l«tHI tli 1 11 il ~ ll .

Place

nm••

I I hrce urban design theories. ''"'' ,, 11 , lt'i111Cik, Finding Lost Space: Theories of Urban Design. New York: Van 1111 li olitd l{pln hold, 1986. © 1986 by Van Nostrand Reinhold. Reprinted with

jH ' IItth~ltlll of john Wiley and Sons, Inc.

pallal Political Economy and Urban Design IHtlt otl politica l economy can be considered a meta-language or meta-narrative. It ' 111 HH It 111 cs a loose coalition of ideas with a powerful intellectual base that goc~< lr 11 I• to /\dam Smith, Hegel and Marx. Today it incorporates the spatial intere~t H 11l ~~~~ tt d st:iencc, geography, cultural studies, economics, architecture, art hi story 11 tol nl ht•l' disciplines, and existential positions such as feminism, and sustn i11 dultl y. Ill other words it offers urban design the credibility it now lacks, without tlu 1111 nr lwd dogma. Another property of spatial political economy is its w ho ittit lt'il·~·t ion of any division of knowledge based upon professional and ::~en .It 111ft houndaries. Taking the profession of urban planning as an exampk, f\lt l.lllll',h lin says, 'One of my main conclusions is that the dominance of tlw tiiWII plnnning tradition in the academy is a serious ::~nd ideologically driven lltttillltion on our abili ty to understand urbnn pmhlt·tli S niHI policies which mit;ht ltllp t'llVl' our cities and the lives of their pl.'oplt•' t ntt'li'ltilll', i11 wh::~t· he refers to 11 tl11• HIH•t•r intellectual incoherence of th v w l ~ttlt• htt~lttl'~ll' (Mcl.mioJ.!,h lin I 9WI: Ill\; Hl't' :dso I luxlcy's clnhorntion nnd 'tittqll• , 11111 ' ), I 11 11 pttsltioll is th11t tht• 'fill' twt·ip hl·ry l'l' lntionship t.:\tt't't·n tl y ('l(l tilittl'· itt tttl nttt pltttllllllf', ,,ntllo n l.tt'\',11 dt•)•,tt't' tht'OIII\houl it•t·tinry t'di tl'lltio tt Nl"'" ld lu.l tn\'D tl!t'd, !'Itt tdrt~lnt•,it ,tl,·nlt• ul jllliiPNH tiH1 '1l tll filll' lli't' " "" till' Nll li li'W h II t~ht!iW \' ll t!!llll_ Ill ll llilt •ttth I"" )J,I r.Ht"oilll'., fl huttld lw tt •lt•j •,lltt 'tlin tl11• 111 tlplto 1i)'· l\ll iit 11 hllll li Hit li tnl!ti iHII ' Itttlll


II II

11 1

IIII H< I

1il1•ly

ht' l'IIII Nl ' 11f

il ll t i lt ~ ll IIIII i111i1 y

(II

Nmll d NCit'lll't' (kt•t•pttl p, Ill

I ill[ lttii Midt·t'tlh lt• ovt·t•lttp lwlwttll dt t'lll' IHIIIH'W IIllt r11·hilt't ii'Y pt·o lt ~IIN IIItlltl !!! I'd l111ln d, ttt•tlly ol' tl w kt•y lldtlllfltMdl'ivi11g what wn s t•:tlbl tltt• Nt•w lttlll '• lltl lti'H, w ltos(' tnsk wn s to t'l'VOI\ Hit'\11.'! urbnn socinl Jh cOI'y dut•ittl', iltt• iit, • ""''''"'d thl•tnselves with urbnn pl:tnning as part· of the stun.: nppnl'll ttl 11l 11 11 l'ok in the socia l control and regu lation of urban spn c.: t•; Ht't' it ll ti ( 1'1 /'1, 11)7H), ll arvey (1973, :1.982), Mingione ( L98 1), Scott· ( 19HO) , ll llil rt'• ( I'IHit) , l'nhl ( 1970, 1975, 1983), Dear (198 6) a nd many ot hers. Ovl't' !i l it pt 1111d, tit<.' critical extension of social theory into the a rena of nr<.: hi il!t 1d 11111 lll'lm11 form, what has been called the 'powers of a rchi tec ture', •l !l '"tit vt•lop (l<nesl 1984). I ll 1lii N111tl , Ht'ntinal papers by Scott and Roweis (1977) and Harvey ( 1 9 7 ~n) illl lu_ ltlldt•n·stimated, as well as influential writing by Tafuri (1 976 ), Mn x II ( I iJ' ), 1\ 0I'i los ( 1979), Rubin (1979), Dickens (1979, 1981), Fra mpt o n II ), I tlll 'i ( 11JH2), Knesl (1984), King (1984) and King (1996). Several of "' Y 1 olb .: t ivcly provide an in-depth study of Hong Kong from thi s lt,ji[l ll \ t linHtlld the same period (Cuthbert 1984, 1987, 1989, 199 1, 1,,il1) '!'Itt• l',l..' tH.! r:J I trajectory of this writing is exemplified in extracts ft·ont !r ii ii'' IIH' l'ity nnd the grassroots' (DC 1), and in Sharon Zukin's 'Post111od ii dr lt, tll II Vt'r' 11rban form' (DC 3). Castells (1983 : 303 ) frames the fund a mc11 I IJUI:~ tlt 111 ' ott l he basis of the fundamental concepts of historical materia Iism, tt lll wt• gm sp the specificity of the forms of social space?' In concert with 1111111iltll , Itt• offers by far the most encompassing and theoretically ri go rouN 111111 11111 111 t1rhnn design to date, one which informs this entire text: ' d1 Ifill 1tl'hn11 mea ning as the structural performance assigned as a goal to CttiCS (tltHI to :1 particular city in the inter-urban division of labour) by t'lt•· t• llil lt II Vt' Jli'OCt ss between historical actors in a given society. \·1 dt litH• urh:111 funct ions as the articulated system of organisational mcn ns II lil t d 111 Jwd'o nning the goals assigned to each city by its historically defined urbnn

111 I" 111 ~t tl

"- .,_ llgurc 2 Diagram showing the spatial logic of encounters. '1'1111/'1'(1; W . llillier and J. Hanson, The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge:

Cambridge I JtiiVl't'sily 1-'rcss, "1984. Reprinted by permission of Cambridge University Press.

I il[li lllflll

\•'• ilit•t'l'ltu't' define urban form as the symbolic expression of urban mea nin g, nit! t~ltlll • h i s t or i ca l superimposition of urban meanings (and their forms), always IOIIIIIIIIII'd hy n confli ctive process between historical actors. \'1 ,,til lll'hnn social change the redefinition of urban meaning. We call urbn11 pl11111 l111\ tilt• negotiated adaptation of urban functions to a shared urban mea nin g. \1 , , ,i// llr/Jt/11 /)esign the symbolic attempt to express an accepted urban m eani'llp_ I 1 r•l/,t/1/ lll'l1t111 forms Imy ita lies]. (Cnstc lls 1983: 303- 4)

IH'I'H !W<.' livcs. This argument would of course encompass the built environment

di.~viplincs, including urban design. McLoughlin maintains that the discipline occupyi111•, n kt•y ro le rll" the centre of spatial political economy must be hum an geography Itt~·t• it is 1'11c co re of what has been called the 'socio-spatial di~ b :t·ic' (Soja 1989), Pill I or :l C.: O;lli tion d isco urse 'which is multi-faceted and illd!tdt·N (Il l lt•o st·) insights wltid1 n r'(' drn wn from (critiques of) positivist gcog r:1 ph y nrtd 1"'' u lrt'jN tt tt l t•c.:onomh 11, 11 11 Wl' ll ns nco-M a rx ist and neo-Weberi a n sod n I iiH'OI )'• I~ rr 11111.,1II' 'Ill\ Iilphy, th "( ;l'l't'rt " n•ovcrn cnt, an d much else. lt is n plll',l'.lirtll. t 1111fr 11lil 1 11f~ 111d lllllllt'limcs tltt dli l'flf nl st• t ofdisc.:o~rrses' (M cLOltJ•,hlifl I 1111 I III II) 'l'l11· pw:ilion of spnt·inl politk:rlt •t 111111111) l1 .11i h1 '(l i! ll11rd! Jilill (t ltll •ltl )• nr·1in1 lnlt •d lrt lht• l't'l""' nl llf'hll ll pl nn11if11; d ttll II !rrl ~ l;q 1l i11 1ii t !iit !"t itli1 '" lll'iHt•t

11111 1 lilfltt t'l'H OI'I' to definitions o f urbnn dt ~H iJ',fl Ntfllt 1 1 .~ th ose previous ly di. II rl'd , wltt•f't' tiw Vrl riOUS q Ll ::'d it·ics, prOpl't'l it•H 1111.1 .it II II II NIIIII Nor c.: iI icr-;. nI'C II S(•d I0 It 11111 ·•11•• 111'hnn dt•s igl• ns p1·nxis, Cnslt•ll ••' 1'·' ''1 11 'llllittluiltn ll WIIH Jo defittt' it tluttlllll 'l"' y riN illl l'llll wdd vd Pill'! ol olltt•l lfthlll i llllltlllillll lllld p1 0l'I'SNl'll (nol ilt ~ ltllll llfi J', Jil t' L11·t tlt ni wlt ,lit' XII< 'ti y lll ll lf lllfll !"il tlll•·llt ' t•llltillt •d tllti'I'N II Ivt ·d ). 1 1 liilj'ltli' IUIIJ! ~. ( l'•li' ll '< fi iNo ii ~N IJ', II N Jltt• lt'llll 11111 lldllj \ (11 i !f 1[ • 111111111 ) tlll tllll ' IIII Jd ll

I


II II

III LU I

1'\ (ll't l) I I ~ th t• td tt lll ll ll' lll t'llNl ll't' of d1 e p erfO I'II III II (I 1d 1 11 11 ll tli!NIHII' IIII l'S Sll <; h tlll'tlllillf', with th e o ult:o me or representation o lttt hll tl ltt ttll llt 111 l his t'l'gard, Pau l Walker Clarke's article 'The l't:O tllllttl ~ tt lll't' lt t:y of archi tl'l ltll': tl nl'Hthctics' (D C 2: 28 ) also provided a relatively t'a t·e sy nth esis of this l',t' tlt' t'; tl Weltcm schauung at the end of the 1980s: 'It is a simple asse rtion that tt•vhit t'l' ILtre costs money and occupies space. It is therefore integral to the prodttction of space and to the spatial configurations of the urbanism of our politkn l economy.' The mystification of the connectivity between urban prot t'N .~ t·s is what Clarke seeks to dispel, bringing together the work of Harvey, l{owt•, 'l'nfu ri , Knesl and others previously mentioned. At the same time, Sharon ukin 's nrticle 'The postmodern debate over urban form' (DC 3: 45) summarl ~t· d whut had ta ken place during the 1980s, where disciplines such as architecltll't', social science, philosophy, cultural studies and human geography had been ttl llt lll'illg on the basis of structural economic and social change (Harvey 1989). I h1tvt• 1ri cd to encapsulate the move to postmodernity and postindustrialism in l't•ln(ion to their various characteristics and spatial outcomes (see table 3). Zukin poiltt s ro the significance of culture in the creation of urban form when she says, ' th t• litnin al space of postmodern urban forms is socially constructed in the l' l'oNio n of a utonomy of cultural producers from cultural consumers'. Despite thiN, / ,ukin (DC 3: 47) remains convinced that certain fundamentals remained 111111ltcrcd: 'l'hc constant rebuilding of cities in core capitalist societies suggests that the major i'O ndi eion of architectural production is to create shifting material landscapes. 'l'lwsc landscapes bridge space and time; they also directly mediate economic po wc.;r by both conforming to and structuring norms of market driven investment, production and consumption. Whik it· is impossible to prioritise texts in relation to the general field of spatial pol it il.:a l economy over this period as they relate to urban space and form, some typify or otherwise encapsulate the critical issues of the time. In this regard, ltnttoms for th e most encompassing text must be shared between Postmetropo11.~: Critical Studies of Cities and Regions (Soja 2000) and Postmodern Urbanism hy Nnn Ell in (1996). The latter is a brilliant summary of the overall development of I lw period . T he same is true of Claudio Minca's edited collection Postmodern <,' t•o~rap!Jy: Th eory and Praxis (2001 ). The volume provides a beginning of 111il ll'n nium statement of the concerns of human geography, with contributions lm nt lumin nri cs such as Michael Dear, Dennis Cosgrove, Cindy Katz, Ed Soja 111<l Nei l Sm ith. Landmark texts have also been written in ma ny areas, for t"<ll lllplc Doree n Massey's Space, Place and Gender (1994), Scott Ln sh a nd loh11 lJI·t·y's gconomies o f Signs and Space (1994), Sharon Z t~ki11 's f.(fllrfscapas 11( Jlnwt·r ( 199 1), Mike Davis' The Ecology of Fear ("1 99H), ( : ~~·~ t l' ll t~' 1ri lop,y 111'1\i llllillg wieh the Rise of the N l' /lll<>rl< Society (1 9%), All ttt 1.\tnt t's Tin · :1111111'1/l l•:tollomy of Cities (200011), Mit hllt' l Dtnr's 'f'!Jt • l't~ , fiWIIIr •/11 llr/Jt l/1 :ntll litlott (2000) 11 11d Dnvid ll ni'VI'y '~ Sfrl/r '~' uf ll t> fJt' (JOIIIl)

I'IOPI 'il lt •s of lndu hlil od ''''" 11illt11 .d ltllllHI 1111<1 pt'ilt

Iii

hulu-1 rh•ll~em

I . I' IIIII Hlllliidl ~ ll ll o lt

ltll* tl.t I 11 • ''1~' II•

li lt

I Ill

111111 II I! ttl

1'! !IJII lilt HI• pttWI 'I l , i ~~

pttlltl!

!,1 -~

p1111 l111 lion

II

'I

111')1\1 pl ollllllng

)It

I

l11p1 1111 11\

II lll•tllod \Hill j 11111111 ill HI

ol

·I

IIIII '

l'ostinc.luHh'l"ll"lll

Corporate power New class politics In-time production Contextual planning Adaptation Ethni c fission Economies of scale Ind. accountability Synergy in labour Individual bargain

'Iiiii ' ~l ol ll s 1 n I II" l.lll tlt lllttll 1.111111111••1111111 illtllu•uphkill rtltributes It 11tl llt Neo-Darwinism I tlltltlidlly Functionali sm i I (ll t-lolllf 111 1\ Flexible I I llltl ~ lll specialisms Diversification l•tldl tHit

I IIIII I I

l'ltlt il l\1111

llll tiii Mi lllllt\

l ) lff~t s ion

I >iolplll'l•"

Mculcrnism rder ontrol Direction Need Product

Deregulati on Flexibility Diffus ion Diversifi cation Info rmation base Grids and networks Discretion

I' •ll••l••l'ftlt'IS:md implications \11 ~ lilt ,,l lott Dcmassifi

ll n~h.

Li on

Pustmodcrnlsm Anarchy Chance Indeterm inacy Desire Process

History

Destiny

Function

Signifi cati on

Construction

Deconstruction

Society

Ethnicity

Community

Locality

Monoculturism

Pluralism

Class culture

Commodi ty culture Transienc Diversity

Permanence Similarity

Structuralism

Poststructu raIism

Realism Romanti cism

Hyperreality Mysti cism

Formalism Narrativ on tlgully l!d ll lll

Urb'ln

'•1•11 11 -Y IIIltlll

louHIHr;11l<' ( tlljlOI'oll(1

1\11 II ·~ l yli

1\11 i1 iltl•ltlllI

[IIIII \IIIII

y ltthol ~

11/11111111'


'Tl -

I ;chic•

11-IIUI

:1

<'unt/ 1111('(/

luchtHI rl.tllfllll

( l)lllllHIIlily

b,1 SC

llllllll\ 1

tllillll'i>. \11 focu s

Postindustrialism Loca Iity based Compl ex integration Urban focus

Modvrnhnu Parad igmatic Syntactic Design

-

l 1oslmodernism ~c l ccti c

Metaphoric Codification

1\. R. Cuthbert, 'An agenda fo r planning education in the nineties (part 2), Th e \1/•. /ttl//,l/1 Planner 32, no. 1, journal of the Royal Australian Planning Institute, 1994.

1

1111/ll't ':

l{t~ pl'llllt•d

by permi ssion of Planning Institute Australia.

'!'his sndl li st is an injustice to the many other phenomenal texts in the area of p:11 i:d political economy, urban geography, feminism and culture. However, tiH•r•t• is n marked contrast when we come into the specific compass of main'll r't'illll lll'ban design. Here we are dealing with a fairly rarified field. Nonethelmm, Christine Boyer's The City of Collective Memory (1994) is an original 1 11111 r· iht rt·ion to the history of urban form, followed two years later by Ross 1\ tllf•,'s l•:mancipating Space (1996), an intellectual tour de force subtitled Geog/'ri/1/Jy, Architecture and Urban Design. Kim Dovey's Framing Places: Mediating / 1111/ll'r ill J3uilt Form (1999) explores how the built environment mediates and I'I'PI't•sc nts the social practices of power. Joseph Rykwert's The Seduction of 11/ttn •: '/'h e City in the Twenty First Century (2000) is badly titled because we IHI VI' t·o wait until chapter 8 to arrive at considerations of the new millennium, l11r1 unti l d1 ot point the book is a fascinating account of the creation of place in Iii!• 1wcnticth century. Gender Space and Architecture: An Interdisciplinary 111/ /'o tlllclicm, edited by Rendell, Penner and Borden (2000 ), demonstrates l''llll'ti y how many different disciplines, and therefore different perspectives, 111 IW I'm:us on urban and other spaces (a text that should be read in concert wl tl1 Co lornina's Sexuality and Space, 1992). l•'mrn the above discussion of theory in urban design, several things are t•v ldt• nt. First·, the relationship to architecture remains paramount and consetpll'll f'i y d1 e deve lopment of significant theory in urban design remains determintk, wL·nk ly developed and compromised in scope. The cult of the individual 11 r ilit cct nnd of the architect as master planner, which dominates architectural dt•Nip,n, hn s been ca rried over into urban design. Urban design theory is then seen 111 lw dct·err nined by whichever individual perspective one adopts. Co nsequently, !111• lll!ltrr·c of theory that emerges is altogether fracwrcd sintT thtrc are few 11111't•d th corct i c:-~ 1 constructs, ideologies o r porndigms. l<t•vi11 LyiH 'il offers his ow 1t t·~.· l ec ti c combination of aesthetic cho ices :-~s to how 1 if y rlt•Nip, tl Nhould take pl.tt't'. ( :hri stop her Alexa nder's ideCl s nr(· tllophtll , ttfft•1l y ttiiJII III th rtlllttd t'('q llire tH it• ty to lw reinvented. Roger Tn1ncik pt! ·~ t ' lli ~ 11 11 witlt• .lt llltl lu 1\\'t't' tt vnrio11s l'lt'f\l llil pil ll't'I'IIS, illld llilliN'S lll lldt• l ~t II q1ti11 .!111 llll fd !11\'!1\ illllltl'llli!fkS IO lllHit•I'N fll tHI th c111. As u l'l'flltlt , tl11• nttjtll du111 1 1 111 !I H1 (ii l!t ipllttl I"''N t'lll 111 Willi i'llllll'jiiN of ltt'hll rl ftl! '!ll tlti!l' 1111 llllltl II• d, iillj\til\1 tiJ:\r!lld (! f fi ll Y NCH In\

I! III CIII II IHi tdit•tHII I'd ft'OIIl tllt y tH 111111 1111 '" 11 '"'''""v ;nHI politkul htHil'. ' l'ht'll' lllilll 11'1 tlfllliliO II , cxce pl i11 1101111 lllll ill"llllli 'M , i\1111 th e production of til l• built ll l'itll ttlllt' lll , it s fo rrn an d sy111hol1t tllllit' lll li t I' pnrt ttnd pnrccl of the mntl'rinl jllltt liu 111111 of so<.:icty. 111 !111• followin g pages I hope to dl.'lliOil HII':IIC that urban design can indeed lw ltl\•'1 d tHi lhc social production of space in its material and symbolic dim ensions. li l~H111d ol ndding yet another theory to the one's presented above, I wi ll c011 · lllt llft• 011 t•e vcaling the necessary features of such a theory rather th an its (l lltillp,t•lll qu ::d ities- the fundamentals we can share rather than the differen ces 1!1 tl 1-t't' P li S llpa rt, commonality rather than ownership. In so doing, my mni 11 II 1111 I~ tll'kntcd towards more integrated explanations of urban form as a bnsi s 1 l11t 1 -.111 hlishing the credibility of urban design as an independent disciplin c jlf'ill)~t·di "l', in each chapter from an evolutionary assessment and critiq ue of ''It llllt•lkctunl region to the place of urban design within a political econon'ly If

11 11111 ! 1 ,


ill 1111

l1apter wo istory

ll histo ire, ce melange indecent de banalite et d'apocalypse. Jean Amery

Introduction: What is History? 'I'lt t'l'l' is no more encompassing field of study than history, since it involves the of human evolution in its entirety. It is also difficult, if not impossible, to l'flHI'Il iC history from the preceding section on theory, or indeed the subsequent I IIII ' 011 phi losophy. Many writers such as Amery and Joyce view history as 11111do111 Cntn ll y tragic, an ongoing catastrophe or nightmare respectively. This is 1 posi t ion we will find echoed in several histories of urban form. Not only is lt iN iory nightmarish in many respects, it is also constituted in a vast maze of phi loso phica l perspectives and paradigms. There is no such thing as an unassaillhlt• phi loso phy of history, and a brief glance through some of the captivating llil' l'lli'LII"C surro unding the topic is sufficient to ensure absolute confusion about Nllch lcnns as ' facts', 'truth' and 'progress' as a precursor to debates on the l't•lnlionship between history and philosophy (Cohen 1978, White 1980, Carr 1 I JH7, I fel ler 1993, Thompson 1995, Hobsbawm 1997, Evans 1997, Burns and Huy mcnt-Picka rd 2000, Fulbrook 2002). Some basic questions that guide hisltll'icn l enquiry have been given as follows (Jenkins 1991: 27). p rot 'I'NS

Wl1 o1 is 1·he status of truth in the discourses of history? 1.~ th ere nny such thing as an objective history (are there objective 'facts' etc.) w· is his tory just an interpretation? Whnl is bi ns nnd w hat are the problems involved in trying I'O get 1·id of it? Whn1 is cn•pnthy? Can it be done? How? Why? If i1· <.:n nn ol lw nl.' hi t·vcd, why dot\~ il seem so important to try? Whn1 III'C rh c di ffe rences between prin• nry n11d Nl'i'OIIl lll l I' lit till (I'M (ll·i ll't•s ) nnd lwlwt't' ll 'cv idcnc<.:' ond 'so urcc.-s'? Wl1 11 1 111 111 Nlid· 1 h1 ' ' • Wlt ni do yo u do wid1 1·hosc co11plc· IN(• ll llt~c 111d 1 f((, 1, ,_ 111111111111 ~ lltdl11i't ly 11 11d dif'ft' l'i'll <.'l' ) nnd iN II jti tlill dtl t 111 •IIi Wlt JII \·tillllli 111d 1 hnnl\v, 1-. l. t•d 1o do illl tt ll)',ll 11 .~i 111\ rh t•in ? lll rj lttl V 1111 11 1'1 Ill ' II Nl il'llt 't•

Ill ~lltly flt dhl'ook 'N hool ll ililt!//trll II!UUI \', NIH' IIOit~N tlw illlf1W!Ni hilil y ol lvilt idliiiJ', lt istol' ka l illvt'H II J\•IIIIIIIIt llllt dtl 'll t\' '"'d '":d111 ni ns thnt nil Wl'iliii J\ o 11 ld ~ I"' Y• I'V t' ll hy default, is ll lllltllu l , ·•~ illl llll;li t't tl since it has ndopl'ed n Slwd lk j, • jllllltl, t'vt.• n if this is so ll·ly 11 t lll ollll logll'tl lt'C tt dition of 'the f::tas'. /\notlwr lt~tplt • h111 difficu lt poin t lO :H.'<.:t' Pt iN II til l his1o1·y can be re invented post (r~ c t o, ill du III' II'H' th:11 new theories ca 11 ht• nppli cd ton reading of historical events thnt ,,,,,1 plun· ce nturies or even mil lenni a before the theory itself existed. So llt t• i!i t:111i•JIIi l ll'l' more comfortable in following an explicit body of knowledge, such '" l:l rtfill kll l hi sto ricism, hermeneutics, narrativism, structuralism, disco urse th e ;, )' 111 lt• tnini sm. Then there is the problem of method: would you rather fo ll ow ll t'J\1' 1, Wt.•hcr, Marx, Popper, Foucault or Dray, or what has been referred to ns l'''li l ltt Ntor y', which includes the work of Michel Foucault, Jean Baudrilla rd and ' ' 1111 1•, l•'td<Uy ama? Each of these histories is decomposable into several layers Ol' 1, 11 l11 ol interest. Within narrativism for example, Rayment-Pickard notes thnl tlo lti NIIII'iographical style may be represented in three specific modes of o pcr 11lt111 il111l ca nnot be combined arbitrarily in a given work: lmh• uf cmplotment

R0 111 :1 ntic 'l'l':lgic C:om ic S:lt irica I

Mode of argument

Formist Mechanist Organicist Contextualist

Mode of ideological implication

Anarchist Radical Conservative Liberal

II11111N1111d Rayment-Pickard (2000: 295) note that these relationships mu st nol lu ltii iStrued as necessary relations l111 t'X II IIlpl e, a comic emplotment is not compatible with a mechanistic argument , IIIli liS l'rt di ca l ideology is not compatible with a satirical emplotment. There a rc, as II Wl' l'l', elective affinities among the various modes that might be used to gai n nn ' '~ fllll tl nlO ry effect on the different levels of composition. And these elective affin ih•lil ll't' b::~sed upon the structural homologies which can be discerned among l'lw pttN~ i hk modes of emplotment, argument and ideological implication.

1111' 111 odc of ideological implication is particularly germane in society ns n wh11 ll• 1 porticularly in how courses are taught in universities. For exa rnpl l' 1 It ttl· III H ( 199 l) raises the idea that it would be quite possible and prOp(; l'i y lil lf llll'it'n l for a syllabus to be presented from a black, Marxist, feminist pcrS JWl' 111'1 ' htll 1h:1t th is would be an exceedingly Lln li ke ly occ urrence beca use oF llw lilt I ol' nn nppropriate power base. Hence then· is rhc tend ency to write hi stol'it1 i11 lt'I' IIIS of domin ant di sco urses, meaning il wy ltr'c• idl'nlogicn l co nstru crs, 111:111 y 111 wldd1 focltS on societal sclf-regul at io11 , ' I(, !111 ~ ,., Itt II , lt' lt ki ns Hll (..\gcsts tlu\1 i1 lu• ll <' l' 1101' m nsk ' Wh nr is hi story ?' h111 i ll il l l'(td In (1'-1 1· ' WI111 is li i.~ tot· y f<ll' ?' !'Itt 111 Ot'dt'l' In aeq11i1't· n ltl t' l'l' fontl1nld 111 llll tktll l ut.IIII J\ It I'll Ill y1 wt• IIIII NI ,11 l11 pl NO illl ' 1 tl il<t'p lllli l lt ' II N iiii'OII )', h wlw It .n tll [' Itt') l1 I IIIII '' td il~t • lti Ntol'in d f'I IHI'NII ~tm .. lllillllltll ll (/H :~I . 1). Hv t•t y di , i(dill fl l l!illt ldtil"·•"l'll>' Ill Nt lttlll lll,j ittt't 'i ll lll l ~ it tlli il K ltWIII'I II i111111 iil l11ll11 lil t llilit (l, tli!!itl•lll• 111••1111 ~ 1 111\', lit !Ill


I II H11111 l II ' 111 11 ht• Vlt'wt•d :1 ,~ lh t• dt:v<.: lop mefll of ll~t• ll''"'"' til• '"' '' '" (~ 1 11 1'1\), ns the t•vn l11 1io11 o l lil t SJW<.:it:s (D~Hwin ), of th e hulil tlll I''~ }' lu .111d 1l11• l'O ikctive lllll'()l l,~l'i tHIS (Freud), o r even though the history or id~·ns, II H Wn tso n (2000) d!it·.~ in II 'l'errible Beauty: A History of the People and lclet/S t/;at Shaped th M()t/1'1'11 Mind. Fouca ult (1977) has called his study of the history of the last 400 t'ti i'H '/'/;(! Archaeology of Knowledge, likening history to an excavation of l11 111ln n co nsciousness over that period. History may then be better termed ' llislories' since any one history does not necessarily devalue other discourses. Fourn ul r's writings, for example, are an appropriate counterpoint to Marx. fo'o ut:n ult den ies most of the central tenets of classical Marxism, for example of I ht• <.:o ncept of domination being rooted solely to social class, of a teleological (11s opposed to a genealogical) approach to history, of domination existing purely in lhc lnbo ur process, of a base- superstructure model of society, etc. Foucault lrin1s<:l( was forced to address Marx early in his career, as most great theorists int•vitnb ly do, and although he ended up in a diametrically opposite camp, 1 1 ot lt:n ult's work is a direct intellectual extension of Marxist theorising. They do 1101 have to be read in opposition to each other, despite the fact that for Fo 11<:a ult, classical Marxism

In tlu 11 f11111111 hlp Of Ji11 1 1111~ 1 Ill il w p1'!1NI'ill ,, , l 1111 1kll!dt IIIIIIII ~ I· N lht• t • pi.~ l l' lli O f ogi u d lililllllllt 1 11! Ji1 1 hi - 1111 111 11 , fi t• l'(liHt'Nlh(• diH\'O IIfilllf 1111 qt1 n~ tto11 : Whn t docs il 11· lll lilt ll l llt ,j,, 111 ilu • p11 s t when she or hl· [1'1\\'l'N itN 'llllll lllltl y nnd nssigns its cn tr HI'I• ? (Poster 1984: 74 ·5 ) II

p,.,,.,

l 'll ll not

be the bas is for a critical theory of history, because the modes of domination

i11 I he twenti eth century cannot be perceived from the limited vantage point of the sr•hj cct. Instead, domination today takes the form of a combination or structure of

"-'•'" l\1111d ri ll :.Hd holds yet anot het· posi1ion with respect to history, rcferrvd I o

' pnNtlii story', based on the hyperrcali ty of contemporary life, wh ere he il l'f,\ll l'H dt 111 ~ l ' llliotk:s is a more appropriate lens through which history can be obsc rv l'd il11111 Mll l'xis m. Due to the impact of mass media on social life, Ba ud1·ill nrd irll(luh~ 1hnt we are now in a period where reality has been transformed int o !t ~' l iU' I e u l ity, where individuals become the products of the mass medi a nH lt t• r iiui11 ltll 'l't' <:o nsumers, as for example in Debord's Society of the Spectacle. Iii !111 · lnst· instance, all historical perspectives are flawed as ideologica l <:o n li 111 111 1 Nim·c subj ectivity, rationality and time cannot be suspended. WIH' rl it•d iiH· Iost cities ofthelncas in 1975, Ilearned that they had officia l sc r· ilw l!lt!ll' jnh it was to rewrite their history as they would have liked it to ap pt'lll , 1111111 th nn being unusual, it seemed to me that this was the normal process ir1 Ot )' IHII'k ty, that history is largely an invention, and the most convinci11 g 11ilo11 is t·he one that has the largest audience. 1

know ledge a nd power which is not external to the subject, but still intelligible from

lory and Urban Design

his o r her perspective. Critical theory cannot present history as the transition from nhu sive a ri stocrats to exploiting capitalists, because domination is no longer

ct• nt·r·cd in o r ca used by subjects.

11flll11111 dl y l'lljo yt• d

ltHtldrtg :lt history from the point of view of urban design, as distin ct· ti' OIII ltlit'L1III' C ::~ nd urban planning, I maintain my adopted definition of the suhj erl, tit 1i 111 hnn design is fundamentally about the purposive production of urhnn in ce rtain ur ban forms. Overall I prefer the phrase 'production o l til l11111 IOt'll1' to 'production of urban design', and conflate one to the 01ht•r·. I i,l hlll dt•s ign ca n easily be taken to mean only professional design pmj tT I 1111d1 IJII IH' rl by architects over the last forty years that the term has bce rl i11 di!Hpt't'lld usc, as in for example Battery Park City in New York, Canary W III III 11 I tl lldtt ll or Potsdamer Platz in Berlin. The term 'urban form' appli es 11101'1' if'l" tlfll'intcly to the whole of history. What this suggests is that all urban sp:ll't' tli •N II', IIt•d, nnd that our concept of design should not be limited to co mmodil'lt•d 1.11vIt ~~~~. 'l'he idea that any urban design should be either defined by, or co n fi rwd 111 111 " '' 'HNiolln ll cgitimat ion is unacceptable. So I will continue to use the term s ' ul'i >ll ll "' '11 1)1.11 1 11 11d ' production of urban form' synonym o usly, a pplying to the tot: d ily o l tlu lt11 il1 t• r• viron mcnt. By minimising profcss ion nl int'C'rvc ~Hi o n in thi s mnrir H't1 i•·\' 11 ildtii\H heco me possibl e: first, to see ti H' pr·ndllt'linn of the physicnl wo l'id ,•·II"""' il w Iitlli tn rions illlJ') OSC d by pro(vHsio rud l'l lli 'p, llrll:t~; ri lld .~t·c o rrd , I() oil ow II IIIJ II' I l'll llj•,t• of mnrcrin l lo lw co nsid t· r•t·d th tlrl " ''"'"' " "" '' Wlllt' lw potm ih lt•, Hilltl I IIIII' i11 11 11 II' XI J'llh lir-dH·d lo dnit' t•nililt•d ' A 111 ~ 1111 ) ~tl'l_h lu111 I ll!tltp,ll ', l'ul· lll f', d 11 ,tilOYI' \' OIII II I(:III Il i111 11 Ill I 111 1111 , f1 11J lttd l ttl dtflltlti l't wlt l1 l1 11:.'1' 1 llfi i.. IH~ '"- II ti lp,t ldH tllll lll ll liiiY Il l 111'111 111 (rillll lietiiljll_ 1_ \' 1_11 1111111 ' diiiiCIIIt , ... 111111\W IIIIIIII II II IIII NI Vll' Wpllltll I" '' VIIil ft [I! li! -11 11111111 !!1 Ill illl ~ ill 'l llll tttl ll lll 111

(Poster 1984: 80)

llis1·o ri es also have differing destinies. In Christianity, history is considered filli l't, supposedly ending with Parousia, associated with the second coming of ( :hris t·, afte r which divine rule will prevail. The Renaissance introduced the idea of deve lop ment, that progress was in fact inherent to the historical process, an idt•n thnt still continues to inform the developed economies of the world. The idt•n 1·hat histo ry will end, expressed most recently in Fukuyama (1992), is not n ~·w. Fukuyama believes that history has come to an end because liberal demonncy co nta in s the ultim ate promise of a free and democratic society, retaining lit (' dt•lusio n that so mehow this principle will ultimately be shared by everyone. llowt.•ve1; r1 recent text called Straw Dogs (Gray 2002) challenges tbe idea that hllrll tlllil y h:1s so me place to progress to, and that the Enlightenment idea of fli 'OJ',I'l'SS is self-destructi ve to our species. No prior age hns in fn ,·l vil'wcd history 11111 .~(· r·ies of deve lop mental stages as in Marx ian ideology lo r t' \ 11111plt•, Fo 11ca. ult 011 lht• oii1CI' hnnd d ismisses the principl e of t'OII Iillllll)' 1111d Wllh i1 11 fac il l'( •lnt iollNhip l'o din chronic co nr" pts of 1in II':

Ill"'

Fllll l'll llll is II () ( n hist'o r·inn of (.'Oill illll li)l, llllf olllllllll!lll lu 1w how iiH• Pil li l wns dil'f<'l'l' lll , NII II IIJ \1, !111 1 ''' rrlrrg . fi r I I t!liUl!fl! l! llilllpi NIn liHill fl i•1 t/1 ~ 1 1 11111' i l l(• JliiiH 111!111 ill!• Jll'l'N I' III , IO d iNI'IIJII ll11 1.' 1 1 ~ )', Ill illlfi lfi ldlll/tiiN lt iiYI'

i11

"" '"11"11


dt '~il\11

I11,~ IOI'y,

iltt 'O')' .tnd pt'Oittotillg lit e idt•ll il1.11 tllll ttii dt i ,,, i!i rt llt'Xt' t'<.: ist· in 1 Pllll' lotlll illlllnotntuch clst:. Furthcr111 orc, dt: l'itlllloll~, ll111tJ ft 1111 11d histori es arc llh~it'l'i ht•d lo 1lw formn l prope rties of space, with lilll t• kllowlt•dgt• oF its prodll cl ion, 1111d 1hot the relationship between urban form and glohn Iis a tion, nalio1111 l t'<.:ono m ic and poli tical systems, cultural forms , class conflict, ideological ,~ (l'llt'turt:s nnd tec hnical change is marginal to an understanding of history in 1trh:t11 des ign. Ove r the last fifty years, some of the more important texts that lwnr 0 11 the question of urban design may be situated chronologically as shown in lnhlc 4. N<>l':lbly, only five of these histories mention the word 'design' and most are wrillcn by a rchitects. On this basis it is fair to assume that the first comprehenNivc histo ry of urban design remains to be written. This begs two major considt'l'll t ions. First, any comprehensive text would probably have to rely on some lotn lisinl! discourse in order to capture the territory, which in today's intellectual

J'nhle 4 Thirty class ic urban design histories. Ct•ddcs ('1915) Cities in Evolution { hi/de (1935) Man Makes Himself

( il hl wrd (1953) Town Design l<ol'll ( I 953) H istory Builds the Town lt111nard 0953) The City of Man I llll><•rsc imer (1 955) The Nature of Cities Mumford 0 961) The City in History Ct ll kind 0964) The International History of City Development Sprit•rcgcn 0 965) Urban Design l~(lj>S 0 965) The M aking of Urban America ll.tcon (1 967) Design of Cities llt•twvolo 0967) The O rigins of M odern Town Planning Moholy-Nagy (1968) The M atrix of Man I.t(uri ( 1976) Architecture and Utopia I~OW(' i'l nd Koetter (1 978) Collage City Morris ( 1979) The H istory of Urban Form lloyt•r ('1983) D reaming the Rational City

~~ Robbins (.2002) Shnpinf1 1/u • 1 l/1

lid IIIII Ut ·~Inn

< "'11ll1111

,'{. < tllil l/1111

(J()()

'•lllt/t, .. , /11

I) lilt• I vu/111 /111/ttl 11111 tit ,i/, I

i/,, ,,,,!

'1!11 t11 ologics: Mumford, Sprieregen, Gutkind, etc. I \'IHtlog ics: Kostoff, Moholy-Nagy, Hall, Krier ll111pinH: Eaton, Tafuri, Doxiadis, Roseneau lr tlj•,lllt'I11'S: Boyer, Hall, Koetter and Rowe, Kostoff ~ lttlt•t•in list theory: Korn, Tafuri, Frampton, Boyer, Knesl, Dickens

f

lwunologies lilt~

I{OS(' I1 Wlu (1 983 ) The Idea l City I Ol\('lson (I 986) Planning the Capitalist City I t1f1 11'i ( 19tl7) The Sphere and the Labyrinth I Iti ll ( I 1)1113) Cities of Tomorrow 1\oslo(( ( 199 I ) The City Shaped l\1 )lifo(( ( I 992) The City Assembled ll(ltll•volo ( 1993) The European City 11 111 'Y' •r ( I 1 14) The City of Collective M emory 11 1/.tll (I ) !/l) Citi<'s in Civilization l ,lfiHI (;WOI ) ld<'d l Cit i<'S

lll\lto11ry

litl lfl ll WlltJ!d ht• llllll l'l'L'fll lrltl t;, t\ lt tli ll !l il \'c/)'1 jj WI~ 11dopl II flONIIII OdJ'III llfl tii.llttlt, wr• ""'Y nN W(' ll 1-1 1irk with w h t~t w1 It 1\'1' 11 111i11 i11HIIIl ol \() dillt•t'r'll l d1,,,,,,, .,H~N' 11 ll of which nddt't'NM 1111 ltrdlt '"''''"/till' 1.: ity inn varie ty of difft• l't'lil 'Y " '1t•l'Otld , d1 c problem of pl'o lt•IIH illli trl ldt•olop,y addressed above hi ghl ig ht rlu llli~IH'IIN 10 1'11c co herence of udm11 dt'N ip,ll iiN11 di sci pline, one for cxnm pk thnl •ttdtl lw lnught at undergradu ate leve l with its own 'history' and 'thco t·y', ,, ,, lltilhth ly sc p~rate from architecture at1d urban planning (DC 6). O vct·ull , j/u 11 \ I N li sl'f.XI in table 4 are all classics, but remain dominated by architcctum l illltl l"''lnlions and the architectural imagination. Nonetheless, there a rc 111 a11 y 11111 11'111 pt: t'S pcctives involved. This makes classification difficult, but it i1 f·ll lll dtll• to ot·ga nise most of these into five basic categories with all th e litn itn rl•tll ll il1111 1h is involves.

I li•i;•!l 1111/

Hlllip lt:st way to present any history is through a diachronic commentary o l l111 hilppcnccl over time, sticking to 'the facts' as closely as possibl e. 'l'h i1 1111 ti11HI hns been followed by many scholars in some manner or a noth t•t• ( ~ ltiiiiiOI'd 1961, Gutkind 1964, Benevolo 1967, Morris 1979, Rosc nl.':t ll /'IH I), In l'his sense Urban Design: The Architecture of Towns and Cities by I'·lid Spl'incgcn was the first book to claim the territory of urban design on bch:dl 11l till• :ll'l'hitectural profession since it was commissioned by the Amcrkn '' 1111111111111.' of Architects. Sprieregen opens his introduction by describing ti ll' lut11l liN n cha llenge and a guide 'to those who would save the city a11d th t• 11111111po lis from itself during the fateful decades of explosive urbani z.:lli o tt lth l1 lit• just ahead' (1965: v), a view of history which seemed to prevail nl 11 11• 111111 , thnl so mehow the present needed to be saved from the future. Important ly, I'' /i•n•gt•n's book only deals with urban design history directly in the first· 1wo 1I1 1pii "I'N , nit hougb case studies of contemporary projects of the time arc incllldt•d !111 ""l',houl th e book. Here we find an interprctntion of hi story that is cli ac h,·o" k , rillt 'llll'lk: d a nd focLJsed on the architccl'urnl (and lnndscn pc architcctu rnl) oh Itt I l liHIO I'Y bCI.;in s with anc ient (i .e. clnsNiv,d) ( ;ll'l 'll' .111d th e /\thcninn 1\ <.: I'Ojl 11 ll ll l11 '100 1\(:. We then proceed thro ugh 11 11111111 Htt ll ll ', tl11• rnl'dit.wn l pt.•,·iod i11 1•11111/H\ tht• l ~l.' ll nissn n cc :1nd n 1-IJIIliii ii ii Y o l ',., 111 11 lutwt 't' ll / (,()() n11d I H~O 1111 li11 p. wit h tlw Pnri sinn hou l('vnnlN ol N1'1'" '' "'' Ill "'" tl11 tllllillll'll l't' IIH'Ill o l ilu• H111gto!i.,~.,,: 111 Vit'"''" i11 I H'IO. ' ll 11 '""'lt-'n I"'"" ' 1,. lll •tll 'tl ld"•wi~u lllllltjlt'r' IIIP, IIIIIIIIHI I H()() II IHi liiiH IIIII IIIJ'. IJI•!!I!I j l)~il 1111 ll llfl lrljllllitlllll ·~til tlri11, til l' tl1111111 11 11il fllll lll ii HIII , 1'-1 Ill• lj• ll!ill!!id li\' i!u •/111111111111 ilhtf 'i111


Ill

l'l tllllt It 11 pltysko l ohjt•t'l i11 thrl'l' dillllll 'l illtl 1iH il 1 1111 dtlitp, t•INt'. 1\s n ph yNII td ohjt•t•t i1 1..'1 111 he designed - perhaps n N 11111111 h' ''" till 11111 dt•ltS of Verdll t•N, .t HIWn ctic.:n ll y os the tow n of Ferrara, and as htiii Htllt'l)' 1INtlw towns of the tlll'it•tll (;rl'l'ks' (Spri cregen 1965 : 48). On the surface thi s stlltt•tll l'lll is perfectly t'II Hih lv, but· it embodies the whole philosophy of physical determinism. It lllNIItllt'S d1ut designing today's cities can be carried out in the same fashion as Frt'lll' h l:.ndscnpe gardens, Italian hill towns or ancient Greek settlements (apart 1'1 •om the impossibility of comparing these three typologies). l,l•wi s Mumford is another great commentator on the form of the city, writing tlti1•ty books over fifty-five years from 1922, beginning with The Story of 1/luflias nnd ending with My Works and Days in 1979. The majority of this pi'Odigious output dealt with the form and culture of cities, the most famous lwing 'J'!J e Culture of Cities (1938), The City in History (1961) and The Urban l'mspecl ( 1968 ). Peter Hall, in a massive tome Cities and Civilisation, says ' Mumford was fundamentally a brilliant polemical journalist, not a scholar' (lln ll 199 8: 6). Despite this comment, Mumford had iconic status in his time tttd wn s widel y recognised as one of the most significant commentators on urban lnt'lll , in flucncing several generations of architects, planners and others environIIII'IH!IIists. Like Sprieregen, Mumford's classic text The City in History is also a dti'OIIo logical rendition of sequential historical stages, and he held similar views thottl the future: that metropolitan civilisation was inevitably drawn to what he cn ll cd ' Necropolis', the city of the dead, a position he predicted in his earlier wod< '/'/;e Culture of Cities, which he called 'A Brief Outline of Hell' (1961: ~% ) . Given that The Culture of Cities was written in 1938, Mumford's claims in '1'/n • City in History that his predictions were correct are difficult to dispute, ill <.: t' t·he nuclear and human holocausts of the Second World War occupied IIIIlCh of the intervening space. Without doubt, Peter Hall's description of MUlll ford's work as polemical is valid, and one could even go further and dt'IH.:I'ihe the prose as Gothic: 'The monstrous gods of the ancient world have til l'l'llppen rcd, hugely magnified, demanding total human sacrifice. To appease 1h1•iI' Sllper-Moloch in the nuclear temples, whole nations stand ready, supinely, to tlli'Ow their children into his fiery furnace' (Mumford 1961: 572). The only tltt'l'llnt'ive to thi s situation of economies driven by military production would t't•quirc d1 e replenishment of the human personality: 'once the sterile dreams and Nndi sl ic.: nightmares that obsess the ruling elites are banished, there will be such a r't • l t• n s~· of hum :1 n vita lity as will make the Renascence < sic> seem almost a flli llhit·th' (Mumford 1961: 574). 'l'hroug hout The City in Histo ry, Mumford pays hom ngl' to nt nny scholars, httl none mo1·e so than the Scottish philosopher Pnt•·irk ( ;t•ddt•H who was his ti1C'Ittol', Ccddes, himself a biologist, hnd :1 twofotttHI ii tlltll 'lllt 1111 till' develop1111'11t ol plnnning thought, nnd bet·wl'l'll 11) 1·1 li tH I 111 1 I " 111 111 Vnlvt•d in th~.: lt•ll lp.ll o1' n•visio n of plnns for fifty ri t ii ~N i11 l111l i,, tlld 1\ tl (tU tllllj (•"·' 1lwptn 9). l'lti Nrrtllt ll' tl l'l' l'('ll llli iiS 10dny, sittl'l' tiH • itllt.illtll Ill tllttiiLITII ul tli1 ~-11 W lll'hll11 • 11'1 111 1 tl11• ti'IIII NI'l't 1 is il dit'l't't t1'1 t11 NI11 1Nlllltllld lt11tlt il tr• l••j l, ll i\il illllllt l! tltt11pli l'li tinii N ol < : c •dtlt~~~· v11 llc •v IH'I' ticllt , wlt11lt lt1 t1 tljltlr ti l'll iii l1 l~ l11 111 l ( ~flit •,, 111

1 1 I !I

i/!!f h ttl i11 11) 15. In comH..' llll\'1111, f\lllt•tlt~td'H nppron ch 1'0 dw fontt of tht• l it.y 1111111tllli fl l ot·gnnic, syrnbolhwd 111 lti N l'n·qu ent usc of such n:Hllt'ltl t·t•t't11 N n prt.! tllllll (o1· pnrnsitism), symbiosis nnd commensalism, three words dl'riv1•d i 1illlt l•111lOI',Y to describe specific relationships within the natural world , nHwl•ll i. ~ !I !t 111 ttltt·opomorphic use of psychological terminology (pathology, Sll bli nt i i l11il , tl'l',l't•Hsion , trauma, etc.) applied to cities. lltil ll l'l y, pnra llcls with the human body abound in terms of both fun ction :utd lil t iii · t'lt\Hemerges in the frequent use of similes, metaphors and analogi es to llitill1111 h1olop,y. Rome, for example, 'contained a greater number of pathologi<:nl ll tJ ll u11t111ty healthy body should tolerate' (1961: 237), and he sums up Ro•nl· 's qdl tl 11\ ltil•vements by analogy 'with words used by a great scientist abo11t n 1l111il• 111 itn:hitectural interpretation of his highly revolutionary concepts ol I'd'- ' tliHI time, as "poorly digested but splendidly evacuated".' N oncthelesll, IUt11h11d's conception of urban form is properly focused on the econOtll k\ 111_ i tl tllid poli tical development of cultures, and the manifestation of tlw~w tliiH I'IVH'H i11 institutions, spaces and places that together compose the urbttlt IPI t While Th e City in History in its entirety is about the form of the ci ty, lt11ttllll'd iH t·otally aware of the complexity of forces which produce it. Thi s llll tlt nHII tHiing can probably best be summarised in his own words abo ut' dw ll 1lll'l tir poli s, that in order to understand the form of the city, 'one must t'tlkt• 11 11 1 '11 t•yeH off the buildings and look more closely at the citizen' (1961 : L65 ). l' l11111ford and Sprieregen apart, many other historians have similarly adop tt•d 1 t lll llltOiogical approach to an understanding of urban form (Gutkind I %4 , 1\, 111111 I % 7, Morris 1979, Benevolo 1980). Overall, no theoretical position iN lt• ll ••wc•d in any of these, although clearly the concept of teleology, of si!!,nifi IIII I' ,l( tributed to successive phases of development over time, is dominnnt. \ ill tllll'r ndopted method in urban design has been to look at the hist·o•·kn l 111111 c•NH ll H:t series of typologies, in terms of both the form of the city nnd tl w 1.1 lll'l'l ttion of subtypes, building groups, urban spaces and nature.

l'vpnlogies 1,11t y ltiHt·orians have chosen to look at the city not as a time-se ri es but' nH 11 IH' I'it•s. Thi s goes back to a concept common to the contextualist s, fc11 1 1lllll'k l~ob Kri er mentions in chapter 1 of Urban Space tbat the vocnhulnt·y 1d pntt'lll in I urban forms is for all practical purposes complete. The hi smry ol t\H• 1 II y t't llt t hcrdor<.: be investigated in terms of how and when various ty pologkHol lltiH•" lorm cnme into existence, whether spccifk typologies : ~ lw:1ys shttr~·d tit~• tHf,. iltuct'ion or wh ether the form wn s dw sn nw httt tl11· function d~:lltgt•tl ovt•t 1 I ~ 1111'kil l titne1 (Moholy -Nngy 196H, KoNI(II'I 111111 , I 111U,, li nII I IJ >H) . llt tlti tll'll't'l'tlltion , t'lw d li'OIHll op,il'n l S('{[tt~·•H'I' IH'IIlllll'li ~<~ lllmtdllllllt•d tn hntlt lutlll 111d ftlllltioll . \lrh1111 lt iHtnry iH t\ H' II I'C'dll tl'd Ill ll11 I \' ldlltl11l1 Ill 11 !1 HlljH' tlll 11d l'lt yH kH I tllj \llltitmticlll , wlllt tlll'llllillllN ll!llll 11ti11 . 11111l 11•••ultt1 d wtth , NIH'' illl

!11 1111

111ht111 111111114,


! •ttl

llltdll~fll l llll 11dlli11 di'N fg ll t•r·s , flit' hy 11 '\ l ' "' '" '·" rl.!1 1/J!I t\f,,ftll' uf MttJI: llt~IIIIY uft/Jt' (Jrfulll l\llllimllltlt'lllll )' l•l' lttl ~ liollltl)' ~~11/\Y ( 1968 ),

\11 l/ltl\lt 1/lr•d tJIII ' 11/

fl~t• lt•w hooks I kr1o w chnt is dedica ted ton d i y (~ l o~tillllfl ttn),

1!1 lht• "IW, likt• Mulllford, her vision of urban growth prtlltol ph k 11 11d ol'ic ntcd to death and dissolution:

L~

111 th e s pirit IIJ•,nlll Ol'j',llllk, a nthrn-

( :11it•N, likt· II It' ll , nrc embodiments of the past, and mirages of unfulfilled dreams. 'l'lwy Iht"ivt• 0 11 eco nomy and waste, on exploitation and charity, on the initiative of flw 1'1\0 n11d th e so lida ri ty of the group. They stagnate and ultimately die under lllljlOHt'd stn11dnrdisa tion, homogenised equality, and a minimum denominator of 1111111 llt lldc envi ronment. Most decisive of all, cities like mankind, renew theml'l vt~N un i1 by unit in a slow, time bound metabolic process. (Moholy-Nagy 1968: 11)

Mnho ly· Nngy rails against what she calls 'the scientific approach' of people such 110 lll't'lti~t:ct· s Buckminster Fuller, Christopher Alexander and Constantinos Doxllldi N, Ihe icon ic planner of the 1960s, and the British Archigram Group's plug-in llfit•N ol' rhe sa me period. Against this position she argues for the idea that 11dlvidt111 1 respo nses to the environment are largely irrational, based on emollollnl ttll'nc hm ents to family, religion, art, etc. Her argument borders on a 11•jtoc •fion of any kind of rationality in design or human organisation, or even ~ PIIIt lll l ions driven by reason. She argues that organisation of the built envir11111111' 111 is n representation of our need for tradition. Since these traditions share l!i tll lt princip les, or what she terms 'eternally recurrent constellations of matrix 111d 1 lllllt'nt' ( 1968 : 17), the outcomes are archetypal and conform to certain ltu~h· 11 11d di sr·inctive patterns that can be described in five basic types. I

( ;t'OIIIO i'phic: interrelated growth between landscape and building. < :ntlt'l'll Iri c: ideological, deriving from a commitment to a supramundane

111h,i11 lttllll "'lltdd IIIIVI' l' llll' l'f'11'11. floWt ' VI ' I, fl11 Iii tit 1 ttl looki itl\ 1'01' who I Nlu '' 1ill lt • qqdll tthlt • lllt'l trting' sok ly 0 11 tlw ho,YiN ol tlir ~t lt vt typt·s wn s doonwd lt11111 tlu lu p,l lllllllf•,, sin ce it wou ld S<.Jl:lll n l'ruilil' s~ l!llt lt ''' jjc:llr'l' li for nny genern liN; dtlt • ( lllll lii NIIIIIS pure ly on the bas is of simil :ll'ily lit tlll ll tll l'on11, p:1rticu la rl y ove1· dindll'olli t: tim e. O verall it is a lm ost i mpos('lihl~· 111 tlllllc·r~liilld the differences betwee n th ese types from the examples giv c11 , l' "lltllhll'ly so for categories 3 and 5. Some of the causes given for urhnn il' 1ltljlllll'lll arc quite astounding, for example that the emergence of the or· ! li"H""" I Iinco r environment in the merchant cities of the Middle Ages 's haped Jil, l'lt y•licn l image of the city in the likeness of the middle stratum of society ltit It l ilt.~, ever since been the determining factor in urbanization' (1 968: 198 ). 1101 lt11vi11g co ndemned 'the scientific' high-tech approach, Moholy-Nagy in!l qulllll t'H 111 : .1 ny such examples as potential solutions to future developm en t·, 111tl II II ' hook's focus on typologies is abandoned without further mention. 1 1111111 Kostoff's two-volume study of the history of urban form also adop ts 11 p11ltlf•,il'n I approach, and includes an astounding array of illustrative mate· till 1I~ttl ndds significant depth to our understanding. In the first volume, The: i 'if I' ShtlfiNI, urban form is studied as a totality. In the second volume, The City \ ~ ''lttfJ/t•t!: '/'he Elements of Urban Form Throughout History, the city is stud icd Ill ltl llll l. of its composite elements: l!l!!i\ tl ili Hfy illf', l'X pl tlllllfillll 11f

1111' l'ity edge; 111 hn11 divisions; pt1hlic places; 1lu• ~ trce t; II II' t11·ba n process.

tdt•nl.

( )t'l hogo nal: connective (linear cities). Pragmatic, adjusting the city to conl1111 tl y changing requirements of communication and expansion. < )l'lltogonnl: modular (linear cities). : ltt .~ ( t' I'C d .

'l'l11• pttr·post• of 'J'he Matrix of Man was to use this typology to classify human I'll lt'II H'JII's. C uriou sly, Moholy-Nagy uses a famous quotation from Marx to lltldt•i'Nt'OI't' r·he iden that imagination must triumph over science:

A IH•t• flllf S f o shnmc many an architect, in the construction of ht• t· <'t•lls. Hu t· what di Nillll',tdsht•s l'lw worst archi tect from the best of the het•s is 1his, il iitl IIH• 111\' hit·cct 111IN1'N It i,~ Nlt'll (.; ltii'C in th e im agin ation before lw l'l't•crH It ;,, ll 'ld II l' A1 1lit• t•nd of il11• lnllow· p i'Ot.'t•ss we ge t· n resul t t·hnr nlt•t•n dy t•x iNII •d 111 "'' ''''''11111,1111111 nf rhc li dHII11'111' Ill its fwgin ll illg. ll ud Mo l1 oly Nngy Sftt l'k lo M111 ''li t~tll\lil (d '-''" l11p lli ' I WI'I ' II iht• illl il)',tll ltfiOII 11111 1 11 111 lidh~tlll J'llii ill I il i ftH I[ ii !J I II 11 .1 I t•lolf io11 ii i11 !11 ·,11\' tlt tlf II llltli 'h

liJillkt• l<ric r's Urban Space, or even Paul Zucker's treatise of 1959 Toum r111tl •flill l't•, I here is no 'system' presented, other than what is inferred from these fivt • lllt'llll lll't.: li o ns that make up the volume, two of which (2 and 5) do not fit wt•ll 1111 Iht• Ol'hers. Streets, public places and the city edge all contain immCIISl' f,nt ll id vnrintion, but 'urban divisions' and 'the urban process' by definition arc 11111 't•lt'lll <.: nts of urban form'. Each of these is further divided into subsections. I"' l'll ll lllpl e, some street types are given as waterways, the bridge street, rht• lu111lt•vlll'd nnd covered streets. Michael Webb's The City Square (1 990 ) is n II J11fl11rly more coherent rendition of the development of public places t hn11 I ll'i ( cti'l''s . Both volumes nonetheless constitute a tour de force in terms of l'lw 1ttllll' lll nnd illustrative material, and whil e cnc h deta il ed study is info rmati vl' 111d lllj·li ll nt in g, wholesale confusion rcignN in Kostoff's Weltanschauung ns to 111 y u ftn prehcnsible urban process, link vd ic1 Hllllll' 111111111!'1' ton co herlint tlwo1 1 tity l,•xp lnll a tion. ''•lt't' ll n ll ndopls :1 11 entirely dilft:n:rlf l)' lll tliiJ\i.Jd ll'fl" Hidl i11 Cltit•.~ in tt•dtt.ttllull , h i.~ II (,() pnJ•,t' ,,,n .~ H · t ' Wtll l t 111' I ~JiJil , U11 l11 ~ ttWII ll dltti •min rt, ll11• W•lll• IH 'N il llllli'lt•HN iy pi ll llf',l'd ll lld ht11111 Wi ~ d ' iill lltl! il dtt!'!l IIIII I tlill lllil fllllll lll (I 'IH'illl)ll (l l1tll I 111)H H) IIII WI:VI' I, !111 lu•1• h'll j\!lii Hii:P Wt ll IIIII 111 1111 1'11 1111 Ill W


1,11 l~l l1111 Ill f',t' llt'l'l ll t• rlt'W irlt l' I'PI'l' tt\liolls o l wl1111 ,., ' dkd !111 /., 1/, ,·/"'•flit' or· th t• 1\''ldt•ll llf',t' of ri tks: why these nrise at a ll , whut· l'o r'U'N d' "'' i111111 1111d why cities t• ld nlll n · p~· : 1t th ci1· success. 'I'he single volume is suhd ividt·d i1111r lt vt• hooks: th t tt y 1 1,~ r tdturol crucib le, as inno vative milieu, as the n ~tll'l'ingt• o l 111·t t~ nd techrl o lllgy, ns th l' establi shm ent of urban order and as the union of art, tec hnology 111d Ol'!\ll llisation. Eac h book is organised chronologically, book 5 being a lf\rlil'i l'nlltl y shorter concluding chapter. Despite the virtual absence of illustratltiii N, tlwre is infinitely greater clarity in Hall's book than in the two volumes of l"tlfllol'l' di sc ussed above. Unlike Kostoff, on the surface, the work has nothing to 1y nho ut urban design. On the other hand, there is infinitely more to learn 1hntll th e production of urban form in Cities in Civilisation than in most urban dt•sil\11 textbooks that purport to deal with the subject directly. For example, 111 l ho~pt c r 18 of Cities in Civilisation, 'The dream factory', Hall describes the i111pnt·t of ll o ll ywood on the development of urban form in Los Angeles, and in d111p1t'1' 24, 'The city of perpetual public works', Hall enunciates how the dt•vt• lop rn cnt of public works in Paris from 1850 to 1870 stimulated a tradition tl1111 l't• mnins to this day, and how the built form of one of the world's most 111'11 111 iFu l cities evolved into the twenty-first century. ( >t lwr histories can also be viewed as typological, for example Christine 1\nyt• r·'s 'J'/;e City of Collective Memory (1994 ), which describes a series of visual 1111 1 lll t' nt·al models and three major 'maps' or typologies of the traditional city (ww·ks of art) , the modern city (as panorama) and the contemporary city (the 1 it y 11s spectacle). Similary Eaton (2001) uses the concept of utopia as a typolop,kn l hn se for exploring the ideal city, and covers the influence of utopian Iypo logies over two millennia, demonstrating the significant influence of utopian id1•1ds nnd concepts on the design of cities. While typologies qua history provide ij•, llil'i ~·tlll t and interesting insights into the creation of urban form specifically in IIll' l't•n llll of culture, they also mask the dominant role of political and economic lmrt•s ir1 rhe gene ration, signification and expression of urban form. Christine lltt yt' l' ht•a utifully sums up the limitations of the typological approach in DreamIll!: t!Jt• l<ational City when she says 'to begin to unravel the process where l!i dlding typo logy and spatial morphology confront one another and transform tllllllll dt·ve lopment, we must return to the economic and political, cultural and 111 in l t'OII tCxt that are important to both the spatial morphology and building tvpo logy of t·he city' (Boyer 1983: 288).

l Jh•pias I lto pi ns, lwir1g th e ea rthl y manifesta tion o( p n t·n d i~t\ l11 rvr lwt 11 p111 t ot our ttlllit' pliorl o( sm:iety, :1 nd hence o ur cori VI' ptinrtllllltll;tll l111111 , PI' 11'11111 Nine tilt• tilllt' of JlllltO, /\ r•istodt• nnd /:~· 110 ilt!I H• IIIIIIiltlllllllf)r Ill I It t \\'Old WIIN first rlllllt•d hy Sir ' l'ho ll lii H Mo r·v i11 hi Nho11l· 1/f"/'ltl i11 I '; I i1 l ltii tlif! II! tltli h•ed 11'0111 IWII ( ;11:e k li ' IIII N~ till lllt'll llill)\ IIIII Ill 111 1, 1111_1/tlfJ/,; liti'.!iiliij\ jillil (:_ I !11111 II topi ,l ll tendh• ''II'III IN11u •pi1H'o. 'l'l1 e 111i11 i11.d "''n Ll tli w11 Hili 111111 -htt!·i\' 1il• 11111trtt ltti11 11

11f 11111111' pl ult' IH•tlt 'r' 111 1111111 lu .11 11iltd 11! 111 wlwt '""'" dy t'X ININ, l'l.1t11

hkl: n~l u:d

!1111 111 '1 ho1 ~ 11 ult'IIS 0 11 tlw lu 1111 r111d lll "lillllltllli d tll'l'll ll !',t'lt lt' lll tl o l h1 Nidt•t d l ity l11 '1/•r• I !Ill'~, .111d full y tkovl' lopt•d lr1 ~ ldt'll ll ill '/'Ill• Ht• fm/Ji ic, wlll't't' lw t·,tll t•d lnt ' 1111 tdl d l>lt y ol :II'OIIIId 50'1·0 t: iti:t.t'II N. Sillll' I'I II IO'H iden or utopia W:I Hh:INt·d () II ti H· "'l\r llli ~.1tio11 of th e Gree k st: 1t t.' ol tl w timt.:, with a st rut: IUI't.: of ~W~'OIId ,c l11 1 llii'II N, o l women slaves and metics (fore igners not entitl ed t·o vote ), th is liJ•,111 t' IIIJI I!t•d .1 tota l popu lation of around 30,000, a nlllnber also favo llrt•d by ll.lw 1111 1'1 llow :ll'd for his Garden Cities. Hippodamus, a Greek city pi:lt11ll'1' who '- " ''''~~~ till· archetypal urban design plan for Miletus in Asia Minor, t:O II t:l' ivt•d ~.t lltiN idt•a l ciLy on t he basis of triads. Quoting from Aristotle, Mumford still!' diill tiH• d ly wr1NliH III)OSCd of 10,000 citizens divided into three parts - one of artisa ns, ont· ol llll~h>ttHIIllcn, and a third of armed defenders of the state. He also divid ed th e l:llld hr tu thl'l'l' parts, one sacred, one public, the third private: the first was set up:ll't 10 ltlllllltni n the customary worship of the Gods, the second to support th e warrior·s, !111' lldr·tl was the property of the husbandmen. 1\ lllltllmd notes ca ustically that on this basis, the working classes, as in Mar x\ tll lttt•pt o( labo ur power, would have to remain forever in grinding poverty il 1111•y hod to support the idleness of the upper class by handing ove r two-third Nol tIll' W\'n lt h (Mumford 1961: 173), and his The Story of Utopias (1 922) rem:1ins 11 d ttNNk for nil urban designers. Slr ll't' the time of classical Greece, the concept of utopia has been part of l'vt•r 1\l lll'l'll tion , and possibly of every society, and there are countless exn mpk H o l 11111pi11 11 ideas and places, for example in systems of belief, literatu re and ti li' r llll'lll il, os we ll as in urban planning and design (figure 3). Sir T h01nas Mort• Wll IIII' ol'if!,i nntor of the utopian novel in 1516, later emulated by thou sn nds, tl w 1 1 11~~kH nmon g these being J.V. Andrea's Christianopolis, Fra ncis Bac011 'N 'l 'l~t• Nr' ll' 1\1 /alltis ( 1626 ), Etienne Cabet's Voyage en Icarie (1848), Williarn Mol'll ' Nr' IIIS t lro 111 N owhere (18 91 ), B.F. Skinner's Walden Two (1 948 ), /\ldotl ll11 xlt•y's Brave N ew World (1 960) and Island (1 962), and George 0 1'Wt•ll ' Nlll t'lt'l'l l l•: ighty /1our (1 948 ). Brave N ew World and Nineteen Eighty Jlul/1' 111 1' ht•t tt• r' ll' l'll1ed dy stopias rather than utopias since they contain bittcl' w:u·n i" I'• d1111tl tht• future, Orwell 's future now being twenty years old . Since l'iwi r· p11h lln1 tio r1 th ere ha s been an explosion of novels and film s all tryin g w co m·t•pllr ii HH' lll'h:l n li fe :'II' some future point, both good and bad, and Ri chard l.t•lllt ll ' 1/.Jt• C:ily ill Ut cralure ('1 998 ) is central to thi s understandin g of l'i1e intt•llt•t 'lt ll rl 1111 l'lllilll'td hi smry of cities, utopian, dy stopi an and : ~ 11 d1 e v::~ ri ~1tlOIIH \11 lw tWI'l' ll , /\dop1i11p, the postmodern genre, l.ehnn inrrod uces th e ci ty :l H tt•'l t, lll ltY IIII', tiii'Oi tfjh th e l•:nli ght't' nnl t: lll , III Odc mi st· lll'h:uli Srll , nnd /\rllt'l~l'llll l't•ptt' t•lll ll li o ii Hof tlw t:i ly. It iHl'f t·!lr' th nt ill tiH' tf l•Hij',ll ol vttit·N~ tJH• YIINIII't'; INIII't• (III YI ' lll lilt•I'OIIII't• iHlnrl',t' ly iJ•,IIOt't' d 11-Y ,1 HIH II'I't' of i11Hpi1 ,rll rtlllt11 ltii HIIt dl ·t·li J•,rH' I'l, IIIHI 11'4 r111t t•vt' rl l'ttii Hidl'l't•d 111 ~~~ t~dt•tllil' pmgi'I IIIIIII I'M T lwi I11NN t ~ illllllt 'll "it', hllrqtl IH•tllll'lt' lltt'l'll lltl'l' luu1 ll w ~thl lll y 111 ' ~'Pill lilt• tltt 1 · I" 1111111 , "'l\l llli lit lti"'' tiiHI rl mliJ•, IIrd 1 it it·~ 111 11 1111111111!t' l1 1lt: ll tu IIIIHl lrd tl11 Itt• 1 111111 "" 111lt111 ri1 •M ip,11 l\ l1n l1


llnm·c ,1 :1 Wi ll L1111 1\ ohlllhOII I 1•Init 111"1 t1 ''' vhd o''' ''' ~· 1 11 111/11

. (

IIIIII P~Y ,, M .ll y I Vt ill '• l'lttltli ,,,,,II

i 11

v ( It11 illi

lidt l'l' ,, l!'lld I )il kt• tt ~l· ( ,,,,,./ '/it !h f [ il i lllih• Z.tthi 'M ( •111/111/1/t!l d WI ' Wfl lll !ill) tilttti l ltlii''' N'' pottt•oyo l o l tltdii Nil itt ll ttlld litl tji('ll tl llttt to gn l'.t' 111 Hll't·ilt• pl ow; 1111tl l11111 11, IH'ttt•r to t't•nd Jnllll'N .l or,~ u'li tl/.1•.• ,,,, •u ' yntt t.' n'' :H.: tu nll y ft•cl nnd fl t•H·II I itdtlill ttl ti ll' turn of the l'l'lltlll y !111111 111 pill I' ove r a l ~111cl · Lt SC 111::11) of l)uhlilt (1 ddt ~ ) . 'l'lt is no doubt OVI.'I'N III II'I; tiH• ptohlt·nt , but the case in po in t is tlwt lil t t.tfllt'l', pnrticularly fictio n, rcpl't'SI'III S 11 mn ssively und errated resou rcl.' to tiH !Itl!" lltvolv ud in the design of citi us. It· all ows us to recreate in a nHli11WI' i 11 'I" 1 ~1H hk 1o the designer, the actual lived experience of cities, and to n •on• If,, ft vt•ly project into the future the costs and benefits of our decisions. l'l11• ~H IIIIC is true of the cinema. The archetypal film about the future form o !111 1il y nnd urban life is undoubtedly Fritz Lang's expressionist mastc rpi uct• Af, 1111{)()/is ( 1926; see figure 4), a movie that was not emulated for many yunrs, lll' "~'~ 'h l y not· until Ridley Scott's Blade Runner of 1982. The best history of t·ht• ii y 111 ri ll l.! ll1 a is given in David Clarke's The Cinematic City (1997), while Sh iel 11111 llit ~ lll :lUr i ce (2001) provide a brilliant collection of essays in Cinema all(/ /Itt• <:11v. Notable among these are the authors' own introductions, 'Cinema nnd !111• c lf y in history and theory' (Shiel) and 'Film and urban societies in a globnl l llllll'X I' . Shiel and Fitzmaurice's text contains not only a complex selection of 11 I! lt!S about the city and cinema in terms of direct visual content, but also n 11111ilicnnr amount of commentary and critique on global cities, the urbnn liiiii Nci tpc, capital flows, urban redevelopment, capital infrastructuring, airpoc·ts, pttl tilt ' spncc and other issues. Germane to the idea of utopias, Geoffrey N owe ll 1 111111 It 's essay 'Cities: real and imagined' (2001) explores the important poin t t'l1 n1 !111 'i ll t' l11:l, via the medium of film, has generated a powerful tool through whi<:h tlo• 11 nturc, design and consequences of urban life can be examined. I'll!' ncttta l design and building of our utopias (and dystopias) has also t·nk('ll 1111t11 y form s, .from the great Pyramid cities of Egypt, to Filarete's Sforz.ind n, tl w II 11U idt•;d city of the Italian Renaissance, to Walter Burley Griffin's plan l'ot I .c ll dwc·ra, the new capital city of Australia. Ideal cities have been conceived f1'0111 1 llllillip licity of perspectives, religious, ideological, political, defence, art :t1td tc;tlnto logy (Rosenau 1983, Eaton 2001). Many great (and some not so g t't'n t) ttrdtltt'l'I'S have felt compelled to present their own egomaniacal visions lot· l" '"''''''ity. Some classics in this regard are Soria y Mata's Ciudad Lincn l lot fin n 1•lonn ( 1894 ), Tony Garnier's Cite Industrielle (1901), Antonio Sant'l•:li n'l 'l lu • N~· w City (1 914 ), Ludwig Hilberseimer's Hochhaustadt, Berlin ( 192H) , I t• ( :mhusicr's Plan Voisin for Paris (1925), La Ville Contemporaine ( 193 0) (M~ c · liguru 5) and Fort L'Empereur for Algiers (1 931 ), Frank Lloyd Wright ' ! H tc ll tdn ~· r~: City (1934 ), and Peter Coo k and !\ rchi p;rn m's PI ug-in City (1964, ~H'( ' 'iNIIIII illl 1987). T he quality that distinguishi'N nil of tlwsu, nne! virtually CVI'I'Y '"11'1 idt•nl city or utopian city concept, is gt•onll't l y. <:in lt!S, Ol't·ngo ns,.lw xngniiN, ljlltii!'H, lri:Jngks, gr ids, mnnd nll:. s, ('Vl' I'Y jHlN'II Itlt• 1\l'llllll'fl'k ll ll ('l'tl ntivv lo il11• ltiiiiiH lll' l111dly ndop tl'd hy lll OSl' ri ti i'H Hidtjl'l f Ill tlu tttlt •M 111 !'llpifll liNt Ill' pt'l~ i.. qtltnii Ht dt•vt•lop llH'Ilf. ( :loS(' I' t·n t't•t tl ity, llflljlllllc 111\11 1'1 .. ,!,, lllcf lutvc• llll't'lllidll ilillu• l'l't tllll ol fllliiii Hy, Hilll'l' l'lldl 11 11111II VI1!i I l l ~ ciilit' dt f\ 111 11111111 !I WIII H'I MII II Id llllljll ll, ll'll lt fll' d 111 lltiii' IWIIII', M11 1tl11 tl11 'lttl'ltli 11j J\ li i!l ild htc 'i d lllf ~ W11tl Wll


:>

ElOpe

.... oolus

- ades

otus-eaters

Medicine

Womb Locomotor apparatus Nerves Skeleton

10 p.m. Midnight 1 a.m . 2 a.m .

The Hospital The Brothel :he She lter The House Flesh

Politics Painting

Muscle Eye, nose

5 p.m. 8 p.m.

The Bed

Music

Ear

4 p.m .

The Concert Room The Tavern The Rocks

Navigation Science

Magic

Mechanics

Blood

3 p.m .

The Streets

Phil ology Economics Botany, chemistry Religion Rhetoric Architecture Literature

Kidney Genitals Heart Lungs Oesophagus Brain

11 a.m . 8 a. m. 10 a. m. 11 a.m. Noon 1 p.m. 2 p.m .

The Strand The House The Bath The Graveya rd The Newspaper The Lunch The Library

Theology H istory

:::::

...,;

-

= ~

=

=

-

- -

-

'<

-- ---

= =-

=

-

::=~~-

-

----

-

= - -

:::::..

~::.-

- =--= .

-:-:

-:

-

--

~

- --- -~- ~ ~ ~-

~

-

c:!.

c

_, ...,

3

(t>

::::;-

3,...,.

0

;;o 0 ::':

:::l

0

Q..

:::l

r 0

::.--

--

Sau-ce: S. Gilbert, }ames Joyce's Ulysses. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1963, p. 23.

-

~

.:J.

eus

Capso

8 a.m. 10 a.m .

White

Grey, blue

Earth

Sailors Comets

Whore

(impersona. M onologue (female)

Gigantism Tum escence. detum Em bry de e Halluci

Feni an Virgin Mothers

Fuga per canon~::r

Citizens Barmaids

La byrinth

Tide Nymph Euch ari st Caretaker Editor Constables Stratford, London

Green Orange White, black Red

arrati e arcissism lncubism Enthymemic Peristaltic D ialectic

Heir Horse

Wh ite, gold Brown

Colour


1\ lhl ttl illpit'ht•II Hilllt• Hllllllllll d1tl I,! " liH'II •k~ll\ llt' d !Jy 1111 y ki 11d of l.illlllllll pi•H_t'"'N, So SIIIH'I'illlfHIHilll', 11111 l'll tli ll tt I ' ''"" '~ llflllll it wi ll get II H 11owiH' Il'. l11 ti l1 ~ 11 d , it 1.: :111 o nl y be lllld t' l ~ lilt Ill il it i11 \'II Wl'd oiH :1 CO I11!)0Si tc of tlliliioll l! ol I lli ll 'l lll' rl':lgrn ents, the lHlSI'Illl lll•d dt :lllillli Ill Wi ll'S, pes tilen ce, fire, e:Hthq \Ill kc·, n·development a nd 1ht· l11 1'l',' 'l y 11111 n11t I'O ii ed expansion of ciri es sin <.:l' 1 ht• i111lt1 Ntl'inl Revolution. Despite d1 c n1.: tio•1 s of co ntemporary planning to 'control ' ,I, Vl' lopment, cities largely mirror the inchoate, chaotic and random processes o l 111 Ittl cvoluti on. However, this randomness does not imply that the proct~ss 1 tllllnl in so me way be represented or theorised in reverse. In other word s, tiH• ' II y l'i111 j usr as well be explained through processes of deconstruction as th ey ~ :111 l11 '"' 1'01/Struction. 'l'hi Nco nce pt is even embedded in the philosophy of history, with Kierkegn :t••d " 11111111 n treatise entitled Philosophical Fragments as early as 1844. /\gnt•s ll1ll t• t• in her work A Philosophy of History in Fragments, points out that il

II"""''•

~·~

L ~· -' ~ -

, , , i.~ not· a book on history. It is a philosophy of history after the demise of gr::md IHitt'lll ivcs ... Postmoderns inherited historical consciousness, but not the compln 1 t ' II ~' Y

of the grand narratives. The confidence in an increasing transparency of 1hi.'

wn rld is gone. This is not a good time for writing systems. On the other hand i1· iH ljllil!'

n good time for writing fragments. (Heller 1993: H)

llnurt• !i 1

Lc Corbu sier: La Ville Contemporaine.

1111 //1 't•: l<,•pri nl('(l <

by permi ss ion of Le Corbusier Foundation ancltlw l)c•sign and Artists opyl'll\hl Socil•ty. Copyright © 2005 by FLC/ADAGP, Pari s nnd I>t\CS, I ondon.

thtrt• is rn•oth er srrcnm of thinki111: l'llllldJIIl tlilliii HII lllilljlll 'lllliolls of llll ll tll lor111 thnt tl'ies to dl·n l witl1 i111• '"'"'.111ld 1 111 11 111\llll'I II S ll' jlii'Nt' llfl'd itt V<l llfl'llliJOI'ri i'Ycilic•N, '1'111' 111111' j,, iJt11d fidt~t!jljltii lllit •llll tt• Nllli(•d ittpl y:t iNlll',t'flt'l'll lndc', Olll' 1'11111 1' ltllllt '"' !t•illlit~•lli 111 iHll 11 '"'"""'· 1111\it•nl llltfi'IIMI,

'''''"'li

ill'''"

I wlwig Wittgenstein adopted this style, for example in Philosophical tJranl/llr/1' Htd i11 %euel (Anscombe and Wright 1970), a genre continued by Jean Baudrillnnl II III\' fifty years later. Baudrillard became a cult figure for architecture stuclt: III N, lit H! i11 1\merica and then through his three popular volumes on philosoph ,·,dl t•d Cool M emories I, Cool Memories II and Cool Memories III: Praglllt'll/ ll1t lldrillnrd 1986, 1990, 1996, 1997). <)ltV of the central tenets/analytical tools of postmodernism embodies thi s vt•r .It'll of fragmentation and deconstruction, a concept derived from th e Fl'l'lt l" h phil oso pher Jacques Derrida (1976, 1978, see also Soltan 1996). Inscpn•·nh lt• 1111111 thi s is hi s concept of 'difference' which derived from his work on se mi o t i~: 11ttl lntl gun gc (see also chapter 3). Derrida's position was that the Sauss ul'in1t l1 '11111 y (nnmed after the French philosopher of linguistics, Ferdinand de Sntt lilt') lind been largely ignored, despite the fact that Saussure had demons! l':ltl'd 1h111 l.tn g11n ge, instead of being constructed as a system of meanings bn st•d i11 IIIII I Il N ( 1hn t is positively in phenomena), could best be understood as a systt' lll ol ·, !1\ll c• l't'll (.:tS without positive terms. Derrida recogni sed the revo luti o na ry polt' ll la d l11 thi s idea, which had not been dcvt·lo1wd in n11 y mea nin gful se nst• I II NN III't' himself or indeed by hi s Amcrir:1111 OIIIIII' I'Pll •'l, C hnrks Sanders Pi''''t'c• ; 1111 lkrrid n, differen ce beco mes l'iw p111l11l )' l" ' 111' wlll tl ,.,.,n nins "otlt sidt• !11P ''I~~' oi' W <.·tlll·rn mctn physicn ll'lwu ght , lu •t tlll llt It 1"1 tlt e llltli• t 'N vt' t'y co•1diti o11o l 1 ~ ihility ' (L<.•l' ht t• 19911: 107), l111pott 11111 Jl ~n II! i111 • 11 •.1 1d tlu• 1<'1 '1'111 h Nfll' lillll tlu· wlll'd tli/{l'l't ' l ~ w lt iv h hn11 two llll 'l lllilll \~ 1 11ii rlilkt·' Htd ' 111 dt•lt• ', 111111hllt o l dt •lt' lllll' lll (litlll' 11 111l ld!ii;HI'! ilil!l !llijJIIIi lltlll (il hllitl , tdt 'll"', 1

!:.. .


11

l'llNttiiiHit •llli st th i11ki1tg Lit t'l'dw·l· : t SH UIII ~~N il li ll lu_·,_l111 4(1 li'lllii tt ittp, ,liN~ot ii'N I'r ~~l tltltnt lll'l'OI IIIl lOdn tc thi s co nce pt of Jil'l'cn•tlll', tl1q 11111" lu lt ' it ·~ · t ~·d, not lll t' ll' iy 011 th l' hn sis of funct ion bu t a lso on tht: hn NIHnl pnl11 i1 N, 11 i11n' ' th ere is 11 II ITl'SS:li'Y n: I:Hions hip between conceptual appa 1'alUSt'll 1111tl po litica l institu t io11s' (l~ y:111 1982: 8). Also, in relation to historical st ud ies in ge nera l, and fo1· II III' p11rposes in pa rticu lar, Derrida notes that 'We shall designate by the ten11 li(fl•relltiation, the movement by which language, or any code, any system of l'l' ft' l't• nce in ge neral, becomes historically constituted as a fabric of differences' (tptoted in Ryan 1982: 15); and again, 'If one accepts that the historical world is produced as a process of differentiation, in which specific events are subsumed hy In rger chains, series, structures, and sequences, then one must also acknow lt•dgc thn t a II knowledge of it which isolates self identical entities or events from t h il l differential seriality is necessarily institutional, that is conventional and l'O IIStru cted' (Ryan 1982: 25). O ut o f these concepts comes a series of metaphors, prime among which is the idt•n of the city as text that can be read as a system of differences or fragments t h11 t hen r a Ioose or indeterminate relation to each other. Since these texts are a II ~' O II H t ' l' u c ti o n s following certain laws, it follows that they can also be decon HIt'll \..' t·ed unci therefore understood. While this idea is now well established in ll'(;hitccture, where the principle of deconstruction has been explored in buildin d{•Hign fo r some twenty-five years, it has had a small but significant effect· 11 11 urban history. Bernard Tschumi in his book Architecture and Disjunction ( 1996: 4) co mments that the essays which it contains describe the condition of ll'l'hit·ecture at the end of the twentieth century, and 'While their common starting point is today's disjunction between use, form and social values, they 11'gue t·hnt this condition, instead of being a pejorative one, is highly "architect tll'nl" ... architecture being defined as the pleasurable and sometimes violent· t•onfro nt<'ltion between spaces and activities'. Later he argues in an essay on his IIIOst· f::~mous work, the Pare de la Villette in Paris, that 'If the new mediated wor ld ec hoed and reinforced our dismantled reality, maybe, just maybe, on" hould ta ke advantage of such dismantling, celebrate fragmentation, by celehnll ing the culture of differences, by accelerating and intensifying the loss of t't'l'tni nt y, of cente r, of history' (Tschumi 1996: 237; see figures 6 and 7). 'l'hi s idcn, of urban design history as a process of assembling and integrating 11'111\lll l' llts, nncl of the ass umption of discontinuity rather than order, had been i1titiut l'd l\t lc::tst twenty years previously in early work by Colin Rowe and Fred Km·lt'n's Collage City (1 978 ). The authors refer to the process of urban design IN \·o ll ngt•', :1 11 image der ived from expressionist painting, but :1 pplied in thi~ iii N t ll lt ~· t.• to ur b:1n morphol ogy (see fi gure 8). llcre, fl':lf', IIH'III fl of mnterial s, II'Hin ll y co nt·ni11ing pre-existing im:1gc~ were nSHl'lnhlt·d i11to il Nill l', lt· pns tidv · wlt it.: h llOIH' th eless l't"n d as n 11ni fit d wOI'k , ' I'IH• l't·lnt'llt'l' to tilt• 1d1'1 t of ro ll nAC', lt nwt'Vt' l', is not nwn: ly n l'tfl'l't· lll'(' to tl11• nl111 t1'111 t 1111llt 111111111 d tlu t•v nllltiolllll')' ll lil t oll ll'. It 11iso ••t'ft•I'Nto ti H' sodn l 11 11d (IN)'I illli llHII •Ii 111t H11 IIIi('ll !Itt! ltd tll llll'd it , qiii 'N itlliiiiiJ', tilt· poss ihil ity tllllt 111 h1111 1'11 1111 11111 111 1 11 1 lu • 11111;1:iw• d ' 111 tl111 thNtntt 1' li M ll ll tii Y tii 'IHIII dt•ldJ\III'ni "'"" '" l~rlk· \'fl l't IH•i11r 1 , l ~rtw• l r11HI

'"'"ti•

llnmc• (, Bern ard Tschumi: Pare de Ia Villette, aerial view

(1 985).

111111 1': Courtesy of Bernard Tschum i Architects.

r:>

THE l ARGESl COMMON Ot.NOM INA IOII tEPlUSGRANDCOMMUNOOIOMIN ATtiUII

~d

b

~~

~....

~

c ~

\

...

I)

I

l11 1lfl.illl 'ht 1

b

()

"e>

ill

If;]

c,rl

~

t>

I.

~

i.

~

• ~

. ,. ·' \. .111.11 1.".

b

IMI'II!.UIH

;

4t

"'cJ

tt1

\ ~

lit

'•

1

I

~1 \ll~~o•IHiili

HUH! lllo\MI .

11

lttttl\ 1 ~ 1111 11 ~~~ ~ !:1 Vl ll •l l!i , i!li ii\lliliH II.tllt tll't 111\ 1oltll t ll1111

11111 111-V •rl llltll•tld l•u 1!111111 '\1• 1111 •'•1


t i ~tiill_: il tlloll ~ wo tdd Ill

11d,lllol l!il! 1 ll ll'(lljlii OI' IN 1111 II l111o I iii_'td len II l'Oil tt'l lli)OI'I II Y 1111i11111l ii i illlr 1il11tio11 S of l'i1c COlll t' II'I HIIIII)' t ilro

( 11 111 )\l' li N II

II Llllil!lhl llll 'li '1'111' p1i111 ipl1• o l', li N!II ) f111 1 1 ~ if )',1WN1 lll ll ilu•r't• l'l'lll lliii Ntl11• IIH• II('L'l'flSlii'Y f\l'O illt'll'il•li 11 11tl

I"

h!rialist Theory i11 111 11111 1design, discernible approaches to history appear as eclectic as tht.:y wt' l'e• 11 !Itt' jll'evious chapter on theory, resulting in a wholesale anarchy of com pl·tltl p, .lt u nlll'IK'S. None of the positions presented to this point either share, o r l'IIH'I'I',e' '"'"' • 1111y substantial theoretical position. Somehow the vast powcrhoww ol tlll llllltti c production that underpins social life has become mysteriouHiy de• 1 1t l11 •d fmm the production of urban form. The physicality of urban spac<: n111l II 111 on l'igu rations are not seen as products of social processes, politica l st l'rll e·g 111d t•ro nomic policy, but instead come about as a result of utopi a n wi Nit flll lilttl t'lll', normative spatial concepts, professional influence or a se ri es o l lllllt'whnt random and arbitrary aesthetic choices. We are forced to concltHit• tlt tll e•ll her the majority of interpretations informing urban design bctlf' 11 11 I( l~ttiOII S hip to social production like most mainstream interpretations would 11)\J',t'N t, o r something substantial is missing. Fortunately, a small but sign ifk11111 tiiiiiiiWI' of sc holars have recognised this omission, adopting the standpo int· tliiil w!l•1•d 1he symbolic and material production of urban space and form wltidt lt 'Ntill ll i11 the totality of our 'designed' environment must relate in some suhs111 11 II tl lll liltner to social life as a whole. Most of these scholars are, in one wny 01 11111tl11•1', influenced by the Marxian dialectic. I liNIorica I materialism is based on the fundamental assumption that Ii fc :l fl wt• I IIIIW iI is predicated on human beings coming together to manufactt ll't' 1lt1 Ill til t' l'tn l necessities of life that cannot be created solely by individuals. H t;ll l'l' tlu p1111 l11 l'li ve process becomes transformed into a social event: xa mpl e of Dadaist collage: Hanna Hoch's Cut with the Dada Kitchen ugh the Last Weimar Beer Belly Cultural Epoch of Germany (1919). Suurc<': ' ourl csy of the Staatli che Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Nationalgaleri e, lit •rlln .

Km•t tc1· presc ribe their work as 'A proposal for constructive di s-illusion, it is ir ltlll tn nco usly an appeal for order and disorder, for th e simpk• nn d th e complex, lm dw joi nt existe nce of permanent reference nnd r':t 1Hior11 lt oip jWit ilt g, of the pl'ivn tt• nnd the public, of inn ovntion 1111d tntdilio11 ' ( l 1l7H H) 111 IIIIIIIY ways n inlil n1· t'O IH.:cpru nl bc-1se is prese nt i11 Hob'' 1il' l '~o~ lli/l,t/1 8/llitl'• .. 11111 lri~t proposed typo logy of 11rhn11 spn <:c rcviv t N11 j,,,,., ll "'" rl11d II ) ' ,,1' hi1 1i 1 ll111 • 111 lu• ll .~t·d to iii'P,.t lli Nt' i1 11 y Sll l' h ro ll ngt• t ity. Wlrd r I· 111 1 ''"11 ld l r iJ! i ~ i i'll !l hilll_l t1 \'•u ;rl ll il nry ol jll't' e•x i"'liiiJ', loi'III N, tlu•lr· ww wt~t dd lu 111 tl i l!ili 11l , t:i iH ' ' ilir' nlil 1111 tlllllgN u11 d

In iiH' social production of their life men enter into definite relations thut

t1 1t'

IIIII NjWIISnblc and independent of their will, relations of production which COI'I't' pnnd lo n definite state of development of their material productive forces ... 111 11 1 I'l lni 11 srn gc of their development the material productive forces of society CO li II' i 11 11111ll k t with the existing relations of production, or, what is but a legal cxprCNRill tl 111 lhl' sn mc thing- with the property relations within which they have lwl'll 111 Wtl l'i t hidl Crl'(), (preface to Marx's Critique of Politica l gc<n /011111) llu• l11tiil environment may therefore be St't'll ns n mirror of pmd11 vilotl luul'owi " g n phrn sc from Baudrill:1rd) , si1H't' iiH H l'OIIe•t•ti vt· pi'Ocess c;11t11o f IH drNII 'IH'It'd nwny f1·o nt tht :1Ct'11nl producti n11 11 l HIH'l iiH urhu11 fOI'Ill S. AMHOI it•t "I'IIH IH n~s il sr lf, n Ht' l of sot'i: rl nnd jli'CI III' tl y lll trltiiii Nll tl' si11tiln1'ly l'N I.Ihii Niu•d ull lr·e•pi'Oti ll t't·tl nvt'l' liiiH' h111wd lljHIII tlu 111 11 11 1 11\\'l ll lll ldp o l Ill' l'O tllr'o i iiVt 'l 11d , p111pt•11 y 111111 1he• llll'll ll N111 pt'lltilllilllll ll li ij l111 • II IIVI'M Hnvlr•l y 111111 1wn lliVi MIIIII It: tltiiiH w lll r l" ' "~ t !ll~ lllpilld 11111 11 \ l1hqt ij l!illil ~1 111d Wlll l llll' tlull•l'lllll l11


I ll !o I Uln

I lliiNtilnll [() JHtl'dHISt' l:thOtlf' J)OWCt', !llld iltON11 wlt11 tlltJ ltliu: d Itt llt' ll tht•ir luhn ttl' itt onk•r· to sur·vivc. ( >wi11g n grcn t· debt to the Scottish Enlighten me nt , Ct' l'lll tllt philosop hy and Ft•t•nc h soc ia li sm, Marx's philosophy of history is fundarnentn ll y te leo logica l. 111 ot ht•t· words, it is based on a necessary diachronic sequence of modes of wod ll ct ion t·ied to specific forms of class domination. Both before and afte r ill is period, wt: il·ty existed in a form of undifferentiated unity, and that after the demise of class socicry, the re will again be unity, but now in a differentiated form that allows full Hl'opc for the development of the individual. True, this view need not be based on n J11'iot·i ass umptions. One might well argue on empirical grounds that the advent of t communist society is highly probable, given certain trends in capitalism. (Elster 1985: 107) trl Popper (1986) offers the opposite point of view in The Poverty of Histori-

r·islll , where he argues against the idea of historical laws or trends. Popper refers 1o t·hese somewhat scathingly as 'prophecies', implying that it is quite impossible to predict the future and that there is no necessary relation between future states 111d past history. This denies Marx's prediction for example that communism is tlw logical outcome of the stored wealth of capitalist development, which provides the surplus required for true socialism to occur. As Marx states in 'lht• German Ideology, 'Communism is not a state of affairs to be established, 111 idea l to which reality will have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement, which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this mov ement result from the premises now in existence' (Marx 1981: 57). It is clear 1'1'0111 this that no socialist state has ever existed in the form he anticipated. Inh e rent to the idea of modes of production (Asiatic, ancient, feudal, modern, ho11rgeois, etc.), as definitive of the forms of material life, is the principle that 1hey a lso condition the social, political and intellectual life-process. In other words, consciousness itself emerges from the social relations of production. 'I'lwsc relations are dependent on the amount of his/her own labour power ' owned' by the individual, as Cohen says: Unlike the slaveholder, the lord of the manor has only some ownership of the Inhour power of the producer subordinate to him. He is entitled to tell the serf what to do with his labour power only some of the time. Unlike the proletarian, the serf h11 H on ly some of the rights over his labour power, not all; but whereas the pt· o l cto ri ~ n has no rights over the means of production he uses, the serf does hnve some. (El ster 1985: 65 ) l·lt• l',ot~s on to note that these relation~ c:1n h'· rl'pn·st' lll i'd ... is tlw slnvc o . .. . ... iN tlw mn ll t tl' of .. . ••• i11 tiH• sl'l'l' of , •. , , , i11 tiH • Imd ttl . , ,

11

,,, iN ld11•d h

n

... l1i ~~ttH • •• , " UWtlS ...

II ') I f)

, .. docs not· OW il ••• , .. k•ascs hi s labou t· puwc•t lu ... , •• is obli ged to work l'o•·...

'llu tttilll'l"i:l l relation between capita l and labour can then be stated in te t' ti\ Hol [111 dc•wt•c to which one owns one's own labour, and the means of producti011 1It II 11 t't' used in the generation of surplus value. For example, a sin vc OW II ii lll tlll ~ l' his o r her own labour nor does he or she own any means of produc Lio11 , ~ itt ~i; tll theory therefore maintains that history progresses on the bo sis o l [illllltdnr modes of production, which are defined by these specifi c sori11 l ; • ltllllll H. Land and property ownership, institutional forms and their sy mho li1 '' p11'1W tltntion a ll emerge from this process, and are inherently interlinked ill tilt' t n l,tl pi'Odllction of urban form, towns, cities, conurbations, as well l'\H tiH• Ittl ttl lo ll n nd expression of places, spaces, monuments and buildin gs. Si llt' l ' t't ll lt 1110dc of production also develops its own forms of consciousness, I'IW HI' tlll ltn' in li terature , art and architecture, the latter inscribing the asp ir:Hio ll ll, dti 'I IIII H, systems of repression, nightmares, fears and accomplishments of civil ttlotl in both mental and material space. l'oHI Mnrxist theory has developed not only from inconsistencies and f:wlt dt •tlll l' l ion in the original exposition but also from the inability of orthodo >< ttlt'l Jll't'tnt'ions to explain the dynamic complexity of contemporary capi tnlitH dt!Vt• loptn cnt. This reformulation is due in part to the empirical evidence, whi l' lt \\liM nvni lnble to Marx during his lifetime, and to the actual historica l evo luti o11 til 11111 it•ty ove r the last 150 years, which has contradicted many of hi s ol'igirud tlltN itlltptions. Marx's concentration on productive forces derived from indu st1 ttd •. lljlil ttli sm does not for example reflect the dominance of service ecoHo ll tlt• \\ 1tlti11 ndvn need capitalist societies and the functions of management and it tic 11 tllllllotl ns major economic activities. As labour productivity incrcn!lts, I It t• itprodll ction of the social relations of production has become inc rc:,sitq•,l 1 ltillp lt•x , and hence a change of emphasis is required from produc t'io11 In tltll ll ltlllption and to social conflict related to the reproductio n of lnhut tl p11Wt'l', This change of emphasis demands not merely a reorientation t ow:11'd tl II' Ho t' in I woge, but the actual material circumstances of labour in rcgo rd t o tlH• 11111 11 d forms w ithin which consumption processes come about, and thcrdol't' 111 1 d11 HIHi ti :tl construction of urban life - t·o rlw tk•p loymcnt of the conS IIIltpttt tll 11 td l i o 1he in c rca si ng complexity of socin l Hll'lltltll'l' rtnd 1he compet·i ng i til t•rt•N I 1111 t•x ist lwt ween c la sses and cl::~ss fnc tiw P<; n l pt'llltlc•rn Nt•t• ln ((•d t·o 1'hv ftttt c t Iott 11)' td tht• Hint'(•; of lll'l1fl l\ plnnning :ntd tti! HIII lUll I rlltiii Vt;IIH' tlt S; 1\t ld tO l ottl lll I 1 tllll'd ;II'OI II HI tlw politicnl nll m•nti OIIltlttd il lll l j l II I Wldlt• lt•w tw ltolnt'fl l'O II~'t' l't wd witlt lrl '"' ·' lt111't tlll~tplt•d ltt NitiiiiJt d ~> tl t' '' ' "' H"' i11 tl H ,.,,,,,.t•ty, lltotll lt 11vt lt nil '" ttllt. l,rit~t lit e '""'' 'l'twli ">'N ''"' It ~ttlull i ii•H, jf fnt 1111 ntl11•1 ll 'l tllllll tlt illt il tdl!i i!'! l il1 t:ili !l11 lu •11 1 ''I'IIIIHtlltttl l11

lid···"'


"' Wtttk lrt p, lh1'1111111t llt t'il' own idt•os. Some IHIVI ' ltlllolt, ol i]ll t\·l11 1 i.111 illi1ddltl', IIIOIIH'Illlll'lly, IW ••I l' usc il ns a whi pping post·, wl1il1• ~tlllltll ll tl\'1 udupl l•d it ns n lilr·tinH• projr·ct·. Bcrn:ud 'l'schumi for examp.lc bcgi tlll lli Nhuul, ,\rt /;/lecture a/ld 1)/sjlllll'lioll hy begging the question 'Is space a mntl'l'illl ll rl11g in wh ich nil 111nt crinl rhings nrc located? .. . Does the Hegelian end of bisLory mean the end or spn cc :1S n material product? ... On the other hand, if history does not end, 111d histori ca l time is the Marxist time of revolution, does space lose its primary •·o le? ' ('l'sc h~1111i 1996: 53-62; see table 6). Most scholars of the left would agree to l'l1 c principle of a dialectical relationship between theory and practice, allowing spa ce for new concepts and ideas to be accommodated. Foremost among lhl~SC arc T'afuri (1 976), Dickens (1979, 1980, 1981), Boyer (1983), Cosgrove ( 1984), Knesl (1 984), King (1984, 1988, 1996), Harvey (1989), Davis (1 990, 002 ) Z ukin (1 991 ), Ward (1996), Tschumi (1996), and Frampton (2002). ln rddition, most would also be sympathetic to the type of critical thinking exhibited by the intellectual nexus represented in the new urban studies of the lat 1970s and early 1980s; Harvey (1973, 1982), Castells (1977, 1978), Saunders ( 1979), Scott (1980) and Mingione (1981 ), as well as in related areas of intel lcc t·uol development such as human geography, cultural studies and urban socio logy since that time. Probably the best overall interpretation is G.A. Cohen's out·standing work of 1978 Karl Marx's Theory of History, although many other :o111me nta ries are available, from Boudin's The Theoretical System of Karl Marx ( 1907) to Bober's Karl Marx Interpretation of History (1950) or John Elster's Mal<.ing Sense of Marx (1985). While Marxian thought will be one of th"

Table 6

Bernard Tschumi: extracts from 'Questions of Space'.

1.0 1. 1 I.

Is space a material thing in which all material things are located? If space is a material thing, does it have boundaries? If space is not matter, is it merely the sum of all spatial relations between material things? If space is neither matter nor a set of objective relations between things, is it someth ing subjective with which the mind categorises things? If, etymologica lly, 'defin ing' space is both making space distinct and statinn Ihe precise nature of space, is this an essential paradox of space? Archit ecturall y, if defining space is making space distinct, does mak ing spart• lislinct define space? Is <lrchitecture the concept of space, the space, and the definition of spa H Euclidean space is restri cted to a three-d imen s ion <~ I lump of matter, is non-Eucl idean space to be restri cted t·o a scri(•s of C 1 V(IIIt ~ 111 fourdimensiona l space-time? Is ilw percepti on of space com moll In 1·v~ •1yn1111( Is llwre c1 ll1nguL1gc of sp.w<• (,1 '•P•II ~ · loilllllhlflt •)( Is spo~n• n product of hl ~ lnill llllliill •(

1.:! 1.4

1.!1 1.()

I.

,() 1, ()

1.0 1

1111111

n: H. 1•11'11111111, 1\tr h/tc •r'/1111' .t/ltl/11\ fllll• //1011 1 ~ Ill l't•

1'1'· 1ol (, ), l{ l' jlllll llld IJy j H ' IIIII ~•I IIIIIIII IIIII

Ill• ~ Ill I'1 "'•'•, \ 11ltllt •t I

I ~ ; Ill til II

h;lllill tllll pitl'lldigtii Ntl'P" '"' 1t1nl in ti11 "' 1 , lltplt'l' o11 plti lwmplty, I wtll litttil til \' UIIIIIIII' III S lwrt to t•x pllliiiiii H 1 I•'" tlltlltlli ii i Y point s I'Cg:Hding nny Mn1 )i i1111 illl t.l llllt' llltioll ol: history :111d '''"''"'''11 11 1111 ll w itnpli ca tion s for urh;w fol'lll r111d lrt.ill" · l'ltl· "'1', hut a few examples ln)lll th e lilcrature, the first serious lllti: 111pl !11 •11111'11 II Httcri alist theory to the deve lopment of urban form was Mnnfn•d11 !til lll i'N 1\rrhitecture and Utopia: Design and Capitalist Developmeul ( I<.J 7(i) ! l11 !11 111k wa s a reworked and much expanded version of a paper he publi slwd l11 1"' •'1, 11 11d was criticised on at least three levels unrelated to its con ll'lll : !111• 111 d i1y o ll he translation, Tafuri's adopted use of language and the opacity ol IIH~ 11 1 11111!'111 s presented. Tafuri's argument is ideological, particularly in r<.:g:ll'd 111 l111 ltr• lt• rm s the bourgeois intellectual's obligation in relation to a rchitt'l.'ltll ll l hIt 11 logy. l1il111i hegin s by stating his focus thus Wl11 11 iNof interest here is the precise identification of those tasks which c::tpit~t l i H I dt V1•lnpmcnt has taken away from architecture, that is to say what it has t:lkl'll 1\V IIY in ge neral from ideological pre-figuration. With this, one is led :tlltH IHI llltllllllllic:1 ll y to the discovery of what may well be the 'drama' of arc hi tccttll't' 111d11Y; 1h:H is to see architecture obliged to return to pure architecture, to fot'lll 11 11/lirltll uto pia; in the best cases to sublime uselessness. (Tafuri 1976: ix; my irnlks)

! It'll Ill' is referring to the idea of architecture as a pure sign in semioti<.: ti.: l'lll"• i.l1111 IN, n sign that is purely self-referential, or a building that contnin s 1111 1•.:1'• II ' III S whatever. In postmodern terminology, this would imply that th e httild IIIJI!tl do not· contain any 'text' and therefore no symbolic references to ud HIII l"1 lli k N. 'l'hc supra-material function of architecture would therefor<.: lw I' X lllll tp,t•d, vlimin ating all reference for example to class domination or t·o l't~N I N I III I I ', lo dominant ideologies or forms of power. The archetypal exampk olll11 l 1111 l nl urban form is that of Aldo Rossi, whose struggle to produce :111 idt'll l t~H it ull y pure a rchitecture (one that represents nothing at all) lasted mw.: h ol l11 lilt 111 ~·~· lntion to Rossi's famous design for the Gallaretese Quarter in Md1111 (iiJI IIIt ~M 9 nnd 10), Tafuri says 'Rossi sets the hieratic purism of hi s ~<.; () 11 11 ' 11 ' 11 ld tll I , wltk:h is kept aloof from every ideology, from every utopian pror>osnll111 1 111 w lifl'tim c' ('L'a furi 1974: 157). Tafuri was a leading theorist in the ltnli 1t11 ' lt nn l of Architecture and Urbanism called La Tendenza whose work hns ht•t'll llllllll t•d up in t·he context of a materialist interpretation of history by Bt•l'lllll rl 111111 (,WOO: 5 12 ) as 'an ideological deconstru ction and rc-cvo lu ~11'ion of !111 '11 11111 y ol tll't: hirecture as an integral part of l'lw hi stOI'Y of Inhour. Tit(' typo •1\lll tl l'l'il ic is1n dcv<.:loped by Carlos Aymo11 i11 o ri lt d 1\ldo Ross i•nllt'lllptt•d 111 1111 11 1r • ll l'thilt•c illl'~' ns :1 lyp ica l production ill tl11• ld NitHil ,tl prrH:t~Ns ol 1111' L\l'l ll tl(lllll or dti<.~ s·. '·X' ltilt• 'l'~tftll'i , 1\yn iOIIillo 1111d RosNi lotlt"l 1111 !111 tlllll 'ld il)' nl idt•Jtlllt \11 '11 1 P\( " ltt t llllll 111 iltt• histm y ol tttl ll ttl dr·'l il\11 , i '" '~l', llnt '""'I 1111 ill 'll tlll ilu• ltl lj\lld I ld• 1 . nl lllllrll'll lll ptodiit lillll IIII WI'\11'1, lll'l" li•i 1\"i "1111 " ilt l I {IIIII Il l whit iJ 1


"'"'' W AIdo Rossi: Ga ll aretese Quarter, e levation. ;,II, 1• I tlllll t•sy of the Courtaul d Institute of Art. Copyright © Courtau ld lnslitul t' ol /\11. Figure 9

Aldo Rossi: Ga ll aretese Quarter, loggia.

So urce: Aldo Ross i, Architect. London: Architectural Press, 1987, p. 85 .

M ~1 rx i a n concepts are interlinked when he says, 'Landscape, I shall argue, is an irlcological concept. It represents a way in which certain classes of people have sign ificd th emselves and their world through their imagined relationship with n ~Hurc, and through which they have underlined and communicated their ow n soc ia l ro le and that of others with respect to external nature' (Cosgrove 1997: 15; my ita lics ). He concentrates in particular on the transition between feuda lism nnd ca pita lism, and on the connections between social formation and symboli" l:n1d scn pc in a book of the same name (1984). In materi8li st term s, each specific lnodc of produ ction outlines the manner in wh ich co ll (•c tiv~· socia l li fe is l't' jWoduccd (Althusser and Bali bar 1970, r3nnnji 11>77, 1\o ll o mo re ·t983). Whi1<: Cosg rove is sensitive to cri ri<:isms of iIIII'I'PI'I' IIII it II IN 1h11 1 re iy upo n n domi1l :1 11t n :1 rr~1tive, he vi ews rill' di'l'OII NIIIH:Iiv ltH phd w~ 11 plt ) 111' lt 'V t' lll tin1 es ns 1 posi 1iv c force, wh ere th e indti Hintl 'l 11l '"' ' 111111il'l 11 d111 1·~ Nlll' II J\ il ll' n nll hv1· i1 11 111 w1·n kV11 hislo ri cn l inii'I'PI't'l•llltlll IIi diltl llt'l<itiiWkdgCI 11 1•11 il11• 11'1'111 'tH ill llo r11 1i tli o11 ' in th r liilt• ollw1 luu " d1 1 l11 1 ~ lt ll lilll ~ ~ M~I~I ltll llllil nlin ll ,

I'L~ II ' I l) k kcns also recognises the weakness in traditional architec turnl 11 11d !11l1111 1 th t•ory in a seminal article called 'Marxism and architecturnl tiH•o l ' II\!}')), 11 th l· me pursued in 'The hut and the machine: towards a social tiH'Il l )' d 111 h i t t•~; tu rc' (Dickens 1981). Dickens adopts, on the one hand, :1 M lt i'X INI li! t t~ JH 'l l ivl' on r~ rchitecture as social closure and ideological produ cti011 , wlttl t itlllll ll'. 111\lli nst simple-mind ed misinterpretations of Marxian theo ry, Oll l' o l Ill lltil\l IH!win g '1':-l furi: 'Thus Tafuri's histo ri cal account involving the usc of lllll t lt ~ \ll l li i NI j:u·go n ("the wo rkin g class", "the bo urgeoisie", "the alw::t ys Otltd ll li'd lt ·\'cl tt l idvo logy", " l'l1e ca pitali st use of land ", and so forth) beco mes, wiH'II lll lll ll'd i11 nn y hi sto ri cal deta il , almost entirely lackin g in ana lyti c:d 111111 •tlll1111 l vn lt w' (D i<.: kcns 1979: ·111 ). li e criti cises nrchit·cc tural and urhnn tiH'O I jlllt'tll lo· Nrit' tl rl' hccn1 1St' of its hnhit o f plundt rin !J, socinl ilwo ry ir~o o rdt' l' 10 l\11 111 d1h il11 y 11 1 11 0 mN I lo i11wlf. Dic kens !lnys 1hn1 tlw o ppoNi ll' nvt·ds 10 l111ppt•ll , II WI' hiiVI' I ll III OV I' iii WII I'(I H f1'011l soc inJ tJ H'O I y I ll il l'l Jti lt•t' llll't', vit•Wi ll j', i111 1\f' " ll ll ll tl lt o l il lt llit t•t littll l ltlld lll'l lilll ltll'ltl .11~.' 111 tlllt •p, l,d pttt .l o l , tll o~ lll·l ~mlid I'~P• l tll ll t lll , ll u tlll tld tN ti ll' l'ltll tll li tli NIN 111111 Ill jllltl lt tl h\1 C 11 /ltl,l.!t' (./II' ltl l II


'ol

II!WIIIi i:dity. 'l'hl• ll~t·o ,·y tl wl Row t nnd 1\W' IItl' i''i"f l"" hn ~~ · tl nn l'l•ilyi11g 1dditi Vl' sll'll t' lllrc and n perpetua ll y inco mpie lt• 111 lli lll 1111111 ,1 ltih11 11 1ow lt.:VL' II, ol n• l11tnbilit y in the cla ssic Popperian sense, ' It iN 11 1'11'111 11411 1 lm n libe1·:d dt' IIIO<.: r~ti c society, but, since we are not told w hat tlw sm•t:d l' ll vi ro nment is within which Collage City is being tested, we can never know in Pop per's term s whnhcr it is a "s uccess" or a "failure"' (Dickens 1981: 1). Dickens is also critical of the Marxian thinking in Krier's Urban Space, nol beca use it is misplaced but simply because it is a distortion of Marxist thinking on the relationship between culture and society. He argues that the critica l req uired reversal from the continuing architectural rip-off of social science, to n place ment of architecture within social science, hinges around the concept of ideo logy. Clearly the left is its own worst critic, and one wonders wha t 'f'n fur i wou ld have to say about the capital-logic nature of Dickens' own analysis (figure 11) . Dickens' argument is significantly refined by John Knesl in an articlt ;a il ed 'The powers of architecture' (1984), and others have demonstrated the effectiveness of materialist theory in relation to the history of buildin!!,

~-\,. '

Cl

\

MECHANISATION/MOD ERNITY/ HIGH TECHNOLO GY / CLASS·COLLASOR ATI ON FOR PROGRESS

MP

/

/ ' ...... p .....

"007"',;;

FINANCE CAPITA L 1: A UTOMATI ON/HIGH TECHNOLOGY,

STATUS/DOM I NANCE

fl N...... CIHOUiU

i

BUT 'WH ITE COLLAR WOES

~

F INANCE CAPITA L 0!: NUC LEAR PATRIARCHAL FAM ILY,

...

SE LF·OETERMIN AT ION/SECURITY

l·® I"

UROAN/RURA L DICHOTOMY 'URBAN WAY OF LIFE','URBANPROBLEMS' 'RURA L DEPRIVATION' 'RURAL EX ISTENCE'

~~::::::.:,--:::.::.~·~:.~~~'=·=

2 ................. ...... ~, -lri' .....ll•·~~·· ~~.

~ ' ""~~"'••poocto < lo~o rr,.,u..,..,'""'lon~ceo

) Atool<l"'"'"'-'"o-.hii>I>Uton-rolt-l>toolo, lGtlt fll• t.,.._,.,,.,...,lol_l.....,.nt. 4 'WhlttUotdo-MI~Ir(prlvo,.· ll,..nct..l~ult~tlotoo•tcin ""' lc""'t ""'OI(<Mttl• ' "ltHnt~ l o.,.,.tlon

....

~ ::o::: :~~":"d tOpl

..l. ,.......................... ...00.1>'"' "'• ..........

STATE WOR K I NG I N NATIONAL INTEREST 'WHITE HEAT OF TECHNO LOGY' 'COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION'

~

~

INCfl iA&IlD CO LLECTIVE CONIUMP li ON INCU fii\ I NO 110 L ITI CI8AT ION Or-

dCONOM IO f! I LATIONO

llgurc• II

l'l'l<'r l)irkm s: IHtl s, llhtl hlllt ' llllltiiJI"nii tttt" l"llli' !lUII/ II': 1'. 1)11 ki 1l o, ' I)I P fliii ,IIHIIIll • lildl liltll '" lid I IIIIi I d llti 'lll\ til \11 lilt1•1 llllt~l/11 "./!fll, I: ', 1'1 11 1 1

1

i lllldll'i

IIII IJ 1 ,

iiJI" I")',il''4, l'ot t'X'III IIpl t• '' l'l11 "" ir.J Jlll•dt!•"llllll 1d lttnld11lg fol'ltl : tlt~•o 1 y 11 11d 1 lltlt ' iNn dn ss ic ol' it N J, lltd (1\ !il)\ f'}U •I) Wldl,• lw lllnkt•s n piton 101' !111• 1, tlh li Nt' of th eo ry, hi s [l lt itl yNI'III I t tdlltlt tllid tl~t• pln ce of bui ldin1-1 fol'lll lt'll ll It t' tvily 1!11 th e co nce pt of lt todt•N 111' J111 HIIHI1 111t , IIH· global relations of pro<hlt iloilt , IIH• l'l' PI'Od uction of laboul', l'lll't' lll'l'i pht•I'Y re lationships, etc.; in sho1·t, llu• wul!l d,11·y of h istoricalmaterin Iism n nd sp:Hia I political economy.

Ii 1 11n IIVI'I'Vicw of the history of urban form and design, there are a hu ge vill'it•t )' I p11NII io:1s adopted by a significant number of theorists. I have chost' ll 111 Ipi ,14 11 y lil l~Se for the purpose of discussion as chronologies, typologi es, 111 op ll l ~t~, li.tll\1111'111 s n nd materialist theory, and I acknowledge that other method s illl ' 1d illlliH' possible. During this review, two key strategies were follow ed. 'I'IH• litl41 It 'll IH•t• n 1o place these various positions into some basic perspective as Io llu:i1 !i''' I tiltii'NN in explaining the historical evolution of urban form and th e <.k sij',l\ 1tl [I !I '"11 Npllce, and to demonstrate the range of available perspectives. Th e Sl'l'OIHI 1 ~ 111 JlllllllOI'e Peter Dickens' proposition that architecture and urban desig n lllti NI 11 ~~ t'IH' th eir historical relationship with the social sciences, which they h:1v1 plttlldt•rt"d superficially, for too long, and at too great a cost to thei r· ow 11 IIIII'JIIII y. llowever, this is not a mandate to rush blindly back to Marx's Ca{Jillll I 111 ndopt wholesale more recent Marxian theory (e.g. Hardt and Nvg r·i' lti(I NII' IWOI' k Empire, 2000) as the theoretical nexus for studies of urbnn fo: 'lll !iiil dt •H ip, ll . While I believe spatial political economy remains the most int ell t•t llllil ly l'll herent and encompassing episteme available to us, philosophy ha s niNn i dft 11•d r<t• vera l other significant pathways into the design of cities a ncl !'h ifl i dl u II Nilt'd next in chapter 3.


,, I

.

hre'\

hilosophy

Design is the prefiguration of the encounter between ideology a nd the production process. Peter Dickens

Introduction: Implications from Philosophy 'I'ht• shape a nd form of cities has always been the subject of philosophical discourse, hr·t•cd ing theoretical interventions, utopian visions, symbolic constructs or speculnl'io n abo ut the future. Two and a half millennia have now past since Hippodamus, Al'ist·oclc, Zeno and Plato raised questions about the ideal size and form of cities as wd l as their social organisation. After Hellenistic Greece, the practice of philosophy lw<.: nme embedded as an ongoing responsibility of civilised life, more often than not dtn llcnging the societies within which it took root. As a discipline, social science hns been dominated by the philosophies of Kant, Hegel, Marx, Simmel, Weber, I )w·kheim and others. Outhwaite (1994) points out that philosophy in the context of Noc inl science comes under scrutiny in two respects: first, the idea that social N<.'ivnce sho uld be capable of organising its own methodologies without the help of phi losop hy; the second view takes issue with the proposition that science can be fmgmentcd and so the very idea of a 'social' science should be resisted. This idea wn s in fact at the centre of the great debate in urban studies from 1970 to 1980, w h<.'n M n n ucl Cas tells raised the problematic that in order to claim status as part of Nl'i(• n<.:c, urban sociology would have to possess either a real or a theoretical object. If it hnd neither then it could not claim true status as a science, and would remain as t•ither· nn ideo logical construct or an empty empiricism. Outhwaite then goes on Io SIII\1\CSt t·hat twentieth-century philosophy of science and socia l science has Ihr('l' di st·irt ct· pe riods. In the first period, seven significa nt l'l ppro:-~c.:hts :1 re suggested, II II'('(' of which have d irect relevance for urban stud ies: lh(• ph t• nom eno logy of Edmund T-lu SSl' rl llr td M11tli11 llt•itltl\1\t ' t'; o t·llt odo x Mnrxist ap proac hes nnd w lt tlf l11 • ltlltt jj ' l!tlitttlt,,d" '' Mnrx ism, tt l1 nH•Iy th (•o r·ists s uc h ns Geo rg(' l.ukn r ~ II tid ilu 1 1 iti1J d !111 '11 1 ttl ti lt' Fntttk · ltlll .Sd too l in 1\t' tWt·nl; Wt •IH•I'illtl NtH io lo11y,

1111 1WIIIIId lll'l'iod Woi N Jilllllli llli[d lJ )' Wit ti 1\' tl'l lt'IIIWd {UI{ittl f t'/1/ fl// '{t /.\1/1 Ill /itJ)tod /IUS/t/ui.WI, w ltidt tllltlu_l ht \ 'it tlll ,t illllllltd 1\.120 nnd dwn i11 tlt t• liSt\ i•\1 lil Y YI 'I II'S lntc t·: l' l'lw Hlll tld 111d \' It W Ill tiH' phi losophy of SC ient..:t' WIIS .1 11111dll tt•d logica l crnpiri cis"' • fliii 'Nil lllf', till' tlltily of natura l a nd soci:-~ 1 scit' ll l'l' in "1'111111!\ion to more spec ulntivt• lmiiHI o l sodn l theory, the importance of L' lltpil 1 tl lt~lilllbi l icy and the va lu c-frc cdo tn of social science. This co nce pl'ion l ' Oll tlllll illt to set the agenda for much contemporary philosophy of sc icnlT ' (I lllillwnirc 1994: 84). The period since that time has been represented in tilt• d1 v t • lopllt~· nt of philosophies emerging from stage one, for exa mpl e II L'O l11 s iNtti, neo-Kantianism, neo-Nietzscheanism. In addition, three other ind i ~ 1tll11ti M stnnd o ut as having had a major impact on urban design: first·, Mn x '\ ~ 1 lu•t' whose book The City is a classic text, neo-Weberian social theo ry still lt .t v lllp. 11 significant grip in urban studies; second, Ferdinand de Saussure w ho ill l' l' ltit•d sem iotics, sometimes referred to as the science of meaning, and whost• !l ttdt•ttt s <.: o ll ated his work after his death in 1913 into a text called Co11 rs r!t• llllfl llislic Generate'; and third, Walter Benjamin, probably the only fi g ure fi'Oilt tltt llt'illlkfurt School to have a lasting and direct impact on ur ban st udi es. If wt• 111 t•pl ( :hn rles Jencks' date for the birth of postmodernism as July 1972, HOt li t' tddltionn l refinement is needed. Over that period, the environmental d i sc iplit l(~l ltt Vt' lwcn more directly influenced by contemporary philosophy tha n at ;111 y 11tltt' l tinw, a lmost a ll of it originating in France. Dozens of influ enti a l philo •qt ll t' t'S hove impacted on architectural, urban and landscape theory, incl udin g, lull 11ot lirnitcd to, Michel Foucault, Emmanuel Levinas, Jacques Laca n, Roln11d IItil tlu•s, .Jen n-Francois Lyotard, Jean Baudrillard, Gilles Deleuze, Felix G u :-~ tl : ll' i , Pit t il ' 1\o lll'di e u, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Paul Ricoeur, Jacqu es De rridn , i Ill tNt in n Metz, Ernesto Laclau, Chantal Mouffe and Alain Touraine. Of CO tii'Ht' IIIII II' of t·hese ca me stillborn to the world of philosophy, and represented in ti H•it 1\' tll k ll t'c 'dominant others', for example Foucault (Marx and Ni etzst:IH·), I l'llllll'd (Ma rx a nd Kant ), Barthes (de Saussure), Lacan (Hegel a nd Jlt·t·trd ), lt tllll t• nside, other philosophers have influenced urban studies, such as Mnt·tin lit ldt ')',l',l'r, Umberto Eco, Julia Kristeva and Frederic Jameson. h 11 111 l'lt ese ::t uth ors poured an astounding array of concepts and pro pos it io11 tl1111 tll't' sti ll be in g de bated today. The subject matter of their interests is t n t! lit 11 ttlt•nn, mnging from the outer fringes of human psychology to the sy ntholi t ltllllllri ll g of la ng uage and thought. However, the overall brilliance of this W()l'k jllltjli)Nt'S n prec ise prob lematic, th e reason for Peter Dickens' admon it·ion t hnt 1 \ \• ti111 NI mov e it~ward ~rom social theory to ar~hitec~ure and urb::tt1 des ig" : It i HW• t'II NY for dcs tg ners 111 ge nera l to plunder tht s cnttre body of work fo 1· ld ('il lll't' tlwn loc:1 ted e lse wh e re, lac kin g th c ir Ol'if',i nn I lq;itimn<.:y n nd co tt lt• JI I. llltliiJ', Htlt·h o h11 gc nrrny of publi shed work it i11 dili'i c tdt In i .~o l n t(· nit y s pt•dfit lilt'},.. ,. 111 thl• cos t of th e ot hc •·s, nlrho ug h S('VI'I'II I d11 Nltllllltllll n•1 lt11vi n)•, •ii lt p.t dll t 1)'.11\ tl'll tH't' in tlw .l l't•n s of nn.: hitl'l'f\11'1' tttld 11rl t~tll d· ·~ ll\11 l'l'tlll ' · ~1 ~1Ci tl f 11 lh WW WI I~ .~~~~ jii'Ol'll'tltl y lw l•'llt 1l "l ll.l_lt·'··'. //11.! J \t,/1,/. r'fi/IIJ;I' ;t/ /\/III/I' 1 ln/.1{'' (I'l l/ ), lllltlll' lln htt 'H 1\ llu•ul\111/ 81lll/1!lli ll (1 ~ 1 rt) , I \' Ill titl l! il h lti Ht l'f,,• I \!fll/lltlr •/11 ( 111/1/ilirl/1 ( 1~11(\), Ptt d tlll lt illt 'iii 1fi 1H / 1i

11\,

1

r,,


·,,,,,,,,,iS/11

"t tlltll 'il l ' ''·':'' II/ I.,,, , I (I'll) I ) 111.1 I .~r,rlr! l\ 1 uftltr• Sftt 'l ltlllt • ( I 'J(,'/ ) .tlld .l l'll ll 1\ilildttlhtld 'll J, ,, ' I llllrfllt' u/ 1/Jr• l'rdtllt 'rtl 1•: , n/111//IY of t!Jt• Si~/1 ( 198 I) . From nil ol tld 111! l\\' 1111l u,, 1\'l iii!III S Cnl CI'!-\(' I

whi l il wi ll stru cttll'l' th e rctnaindcr of this chaptl'l'. 111rNt1 th,tt Nn L1 1' we hnvt· lnl'IIIWd l:ll'gcly o n individual s and their philosophical co nt l'iiHit Ion to ou r arc:1 ol l'Otl l'l'l"ll , 11t11ncly n socia l theory of urban form and design. llowcver it is also li Hl' llll t·o look at collectivities, schools of thought that have locked into particu lnt· pnmdi gms hnving sign ificance for the generation of urban form. Second, that 'dolllinnnt pnradigms' also emerge from even a brief consideration of the above. Prime nmong these in assisting us in our understanding of how cities arc 't k sign cd' a rc the long-established developmental traditions of semiotics (de Su uss urc), phenomenology (H usserl), deconstruction (Foucault) and politica l l'l'O nom y (Marx), and their influence needs to be systematically located.

II! I I littl 1111 IIIII thi\il\· IH IUII\11··1.111.\ \ill 1111 lllillj \111 111;1 1111'~~ Ill till h11i\i ll\'ltllllllltlll 1i lltl 111 \'It w il •l ilii Hittl illill llil ('tlll 111d jhllll'ltd "111111d jllllllill ttn11 1 \ · l111lt I•', JI( It nl tiH ''ll iiiUiiloitoll- liilll 1111 1111 th 'V I' Ioplll!'lll h.IH lwl'll lllllljllt:, liilo till y Wl'l'l' hy Ill! 1111 111111 tllo_l IIIII\ I' 11 ultp,11 1'1, tiH'Y l'i.: lll :d ll j,!lh ll'llt ill l I'V I' II llltl•t)· Ill ll lllll'IIIJ)OI'l\I'Y t\dtdd tq~ 11 l111lll till 11t y, I1':)11SI1HII Cd fi'O lll l'SI:lhl \i-llil•d j'hlltl""Pitll"lll ll'lldi t·ions of tlw l'tf•,hlll' lltll , llllll' ICC I1th and twenticd1 l:l'llllll'il'll, i11 ' 1111illllll\ L·nch school o l tli iHif',hl , I wi ll have as a prim e couce r11 tl w11 lttllllll idlip to ptHticular phil osophi t.:s, before discussing three specific out t.:Oilll' Iii i l11 l,t/'4 1 Nl'l' t'ion .

ciiJ~ms

I( Ill'" i IIH• /111

Philosophy and Urbanism While the masters of sociological thought during the nineteenth century wer conce rn ed with neither space nor form, the twentieth century generated severa l significa nt incursions into the relationship between socio-economic practices, sputinl patterns and the built form of cities. There was a similar movement in met hods of explanation, from the structuralist functionalism of Marx and Freud to thci r nemesis within the feminist critique of postmodernism. While the t hco rcti ca l bridge has been made from social process to spatial patterns, conll t'ctions to built form, usually seen as arbitrary, have only been given passing 'OIISidc ration . Understanding the environment we live in has preoccupied some of society's greatest minds for centuries. But when we think of philosophy we tend to think of individuals who have somehow turned the course of human 11ndcrsta nding. Yet from the beginning of the twentieth century, several schools of thou ght or pioneering movements investigating urban life arose in several of th e wo rld s' great cities, namely Vienna, Frankfurt, Chicago, Paris and arguably Los Angeles today. Another influential movement, that of the Bauhaus, was not locuted in a significant urban centre (Weimar and Dessau), yet it effectively set t hl' fo 11ndation fo r the entire modern movement in architecture and other design fie lds. L usc the term 'school' loosely to denote a powerful concentration of int cllect11 :J I activity where a dominant paradigm, theoretica l object or particular cult·um l world view was set in motion. The 'Paris School' is per h:~ps an overNt!lt't'llt t nl', but not so in the significance of its imp:1c t· 0 11 11dW11 studi es, ce ntrin on til t• work of llcnri Lefe bvre, Manuel Casn·II NOtHI Al >lill '1\ll ll'lii ll l'. Simil arly, I 1dso odd t·he term ' Los Angeles School' ns n nll' t hod o l '· 1) jj llllli Ni" F. t lw in1m ens hody o( im1ovntivc work on urban dcvtlopnll'llt tl1111 l11111 11111 qwd l u t•p,~· l y from chol n,·s, pnrl'ic11l nrl y gcog rnp hcrs, i11 th1• 111111 1 \11 1','~ k ~ tfr h'" 11 \'111 tlu• b st" H' n I'I II'N, W h i l ~· 011l y two of th rst• hnd tli11o.' l illili_thnld 111il1uJ h t' 011 urhnn dt•N ij', ll tli l101'Y (Vit'llll(l 1111d t'h l' 1\pullnliN), tl 11 ll liii (ii !ldt•l ii [l\'(1 li11il II t~ lj'. tdli l' il llt ' l

'"'>

rlt• siecle, on the cusp between the eighteenth and nineteenth centuri1• .,

11 111 111 l11y nl the epicentre of European culture and civilisation. Vicnnn IHHI lie' tlltll' 11 vortex of creativity, breaking new ground in the world of art, sci~·m'l nul l'lltlltsophy, with figures such as Arnold Schoenberg, Gustave Kli mt:, Jo~wl I j.dllll illlll , Richard Strauss, Hugo von Hofmannsthal, Gustave M:dd i'l', li\111111111 Freud and a host of other great artists and intellectuals. Conp,i'll l' ''' tl1 tl11· hu ge transformations that were taking place in society, the physk: d I d11 h 111' th e city was also being torn apart and reconstructed, a sy mholi1 '' I'II 'H t' llllll'ion of what was happening in music, painting, sculpture, philoso ph tilt! tt tht•l' regions of human creativity. The Ringstrasse (the major boukvnnl lllllll llllf\ the city centre) and everything contained within it was to be rebui lt . 1111 l11 11 qt~estion was how to do it or, more accurately, in what rnann c1·. 'l'l11• lt•lttll'fi''IHi nd was that of physical determinism, which saw no con 11 t t.: l it til lu t Wl't' ll th e design of cities and their social organisation. Designing cit:i cH Wtl t'(lll tnl w n t·echnical project inspired by individual genius, focusing on the w111 l• 11f two Vil'nncse architects, Otto Wagner and Camillo Sitte, the latte r beinp, till' 1111 h111 of arguab ly the seminal work on urban design, The Art of BuildittF, Cillt·~: I 1/V ll11ilding According to its Artistic Fundamentals (Sitte 1889). II WIIH in Vien na that the actual form of the city and its symbolic conten t·, OVI'I 111d ll llllvC it·s co mponent architectural elements, had risen to prominence 11M 11 111 11111 ~·onsideration in the modern world. Sitte advocated a contextu al :-~ppro.tl ll ''' 111 h1111 form, which was vi ewed by many as a reification of medievalurhntliHtll .. 11111 1'\' tl't'n t· into hi sto ri cism. On the other hand , Wagner's uti li tar ian fu nr.: tio11 'lll tll , n position wh ich ultim ately triumphed, proposed not merely a new vi~i1111 t\1 111 h:t1t lift• but· nlso :l new vi sion of man, n dl•htll l' whi ch srill co ntimws tod:1y. 1(, ltH i'd 10 it s es~t·nt·ials, the dchntc wa s Oil \' of t'tltotinll ovl'l' intclkct, or fl'l'lillf', nV t mt\on nlit y. At thnt poi11t n stntvnw11t wmt 11 1111 h• wh1 vh IINSl' t'll'd th ill till' 1',1~1 d phfN \vn lit,y ol tl~t· htdlt l'lt~i i'OIII\H'lll ll llltt t;~ td , IIIII1 lllill'ly IIHH,lwltl'l ~HII II I ") 11 h111i\ lll ll lliii'H II\IIIIlllll Hili ll'ly1S \ 111d ll1tll, ltt i lllil1 11 11111\ ,1/~l'llllltctiiN, (.It'll II 1 tlti 14 l'! IHtdll'lll lVlllllll' lft lilllll , i111 1''\11111plt• IJy t\11 111111 1 If ill . I! ilfol i ~~IJHllt 1111 111 , Will i


rTI

"'' ' ~ '' ''I PIIII'I ihl t• Itil I LIII NH III:IIIIl 'H

ji!'.Jjl: l I IHIIW.ltl Il l till' 1 dtfll i111• lorm of tlw d t)' WI IN11 suhjl't·t for tkb:Hc in ::t free a nd ega lil·nri 1111 Ntttltl)·

GII NI' ul dt ·~ tro y llt l\

I' lj lh,

[i

tl w tll l'dicvn l c.:i ly. The difl't.! n'lllt ''''"'

w

f\ l't'll l

pi li II

'"'

' II IWil t 'd .~ 1ht• ~.· l ose of 1'11 e nin eteenth century, when the in tel k•t'ltt ii iNo l i\ II Htri a began In dt •vv lop doubt·s :1 bo ut the culture of liberalism in which they hod bee n rn ised, the l(i ngs tt'nssc bcc~1me a symbolic focus of their critique ... in their contras ting views, Si ll l' ,1nd Wn g ne r brought to thought about the city, the archaistic and modernistic ohjl'L'Ii o ns to n ineteenth century civilization that appeared in other areas of Austri nn life. '!'hey ma nifested in their urban theory and spatial design, two salient li'nll !l'l'S of e merge nt twentieth-century Austrian higher culture - a sensitivity to psyd1ic stnres, a nd a concern with the penalties as well as the possibilities of l'ltlionnlity as t he g uide of life. (Schorske 1981: 25)

'I'IH• discussion crystallised around two opposing architectural philosophies that

dominntcd architectural and urban design debates in the twentieth century, ll iltl\Ciy rationalism and contextualism respectively. Rationalism promotes a lttn r t ion::t list philosophy whereby new urban forms can be invented to suit new ocinl ~,ge ndas, one where the legacy of history has little bearing. Contextualism II'P,l ll'S t·hnt no new urban forms can be created, since all of these are already in t•xis tt• nce. Instead, we should study historically defined typologies and use these lo plnn citi es, rather than adopting the sterile zoning practices of state-sponsored t'i'giii :Hion. Rationalist architecture and urbanism reached its zenith in its coincide nce with functionalist social science and the eugenic strategies of fascism, Jl lll'ticularly with Hitler and his architect Albert Speer (see figures 12 and 13) and wi th Mussolini (Marcello Piacentini, Giuseppe Terragni). Thirty years later, ltHllhcr great influential school of thought came into existence in Germany, bridgi ng the second great war of capitalist accumulation.

IIKIII't' 12 Spee r and Hitler's Grand Plaza and Domed Ha ll. '·ttl/It t•: l.nndesa rc hiv Berlin.

Frn nkfu rt 'l'hc In stitute for Social Research (lnstitut fur Sozialforschung) more commonly lwown :1s the Fra nkfurt School, the birthplace of critical theory, was founded in 1 1J2..1 nnd lnsred until its demise shortly before 1944 (Slater 1977, Held 1980, Ar:tto n11d Ccb hardt 1982, McCarthy 1982, Kellner 1984). Some of its greatest lig tll'l'N included Theodore Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Wilhelm Reich, Erich Jt't 'OIIlttl , ll crb<:rt Marcuse, Walter Benjamin and Leo Lowenthal. Critical theory wn s 11 hw n key progenitor in the formation of the new left in l'i1c '1960s (H eld 11>}W) . 'l'hc diasporn of some of its central figures to the LJSA pri or ro the Second World Wnt' res ulted in a co ntinuation of that tradition Oltll-lidt• Ct•t•tn nny, by such IIHiividulll s ns lll'rb<:rl Marcuse ('1964, 1968, 19H 1), Not II III II <>. Hmwn ( 1959 ) tttd Jut'l',i' ll ll nbc nn ns (1976 ). ll owcvc r, tlw tll ttti'PI 1d ,, ljt llltll l ollh ott ght is ,lltiii'Whitl llti slt• ttdi"g sin <.·e th e Frnnld't ttl s~ III Hd '"1tld l11 tlt1'td1 •d itll o tlw ltt 'lllltilt•o l Soci. tll ~t~Si ' il t'l' h itt Frnnld'tll 1 11 11d ,, "' ,,.~, 111 11~"'- '''P ,_d. u ht~l t ii N l't' tilt't'd till ilw Wil t k ol ,ltt l')•,t' ll ll ttl ll't'III IIN. I l.tv t~lll t It! dt Q r~lloii tl lt ~t'll ilt [ 11 1111 ' l•'n ttildll t'l 1lt lln l' ltl !Itt• ttHtlt.''i l ol' on ly li vt• l4tlttd ltt lil ll iit !-.I Hitlti tt, Adlltlitt, 1\I ,IIIJtt t<e,

l 'l)~lu•c•

I:' llitl <•r's grn nd pl :-t n for the r <•ntn • nl llt•illll 11 111J• ,•1\lht •tl Spt•t•r, 1\ li>l'tl .'if>l'<'l': 1\rC'hltt •ldw : \r/ u•/11'11 /•1 I I •/'1 •/;/. lt o llll~ ltttl : l ' ittp~ l.11 1 1l 1 11 )71\, pp . l)') 7, 1\IIIH'Iill!ld hy pt•lllil '•'•lt tllllll 'lllli\ lott:' ll Vtttlil f'1 1


ltt\\tttdtd .utd J•,.!lt~tl· (I !rid l'.I IW~ I il) N''''! th tll•t•• 11 t; tlliiiiiJ H I ~N IIIJ', ltll dlilltll tlt11t lwld it H tK hlll~tr ~ 1"1'' tli t !. ' li n 11!1" ··~ 111-1 it ~ Hlilf'till )', poittl wh:tl it SL'CS ns th l•u lnittll ' tl1'"'' ,· lui""'" wn xiNitlld tiHHI J•,Itt , lwtwt't' ll politicn l action and philosoplt y , !111 1 d11 11111 t~ •r ogtti:t.v tlu t'X IHit'll l.'l' of II '' Y prior hi sto ri ca l actors - not cvc11 tl11• pt nlt•tnl'in t or Luk1n VI' I'S iotl of th e pnrty - and therefore inaugurate a tota l cl'i tiqu t• of tll odc rn soc i1'll 111d l'S pe<.: ially of its culture' (Touraine 1995: 151). They recognised the dangt·t i11 what 'l(>uraine describes as 'the factory floor' of mass popular culture, viewi111\ it not as a liberating force but one of oppression, a position which Tourai111 him se lf refute s. In marrying the philosophical principles of Marxism with Fn: ud inn social psychology, the Frankfurt School was centrally concerned with tiu 'tkcp stru ctures' driving society and, with the single exception of Waltt•t lk njnmin , was wholly unconcerned with either space or form. While using Marxian political economy as its intellectual base, it also rept'l' sc nt·ed the first major attempt to recast Marx's project. For example, it remov('ll ;ulture from the Marxist superstructure and placed it at the centre of tltr di :dectic. In so doing, it stimulated investigation into the psychic developm <.: nt of society; of art, aesthetics and the pursuit of pleasure (Pile 1996). These apart, two major influences on how we investigate urban life and till' form of the city are significant. First, the concept of the 'culture industry' ca nw from Theodore Adorno in an essay entitled 'The culture industry: enlightenmCtll ns mass deception' in a book by Horkheimer and Adorno called The Dialectic n/ r•;n/ightenment (1947) and, secondly, in the work of Walter Benjamin, now a folk hero in postmodernist thinking about the city (Benjamin 1968, 1978). So tht• Jo'rankfurt School has a continuing presence today, reconstructing new interpr<.:t ntions of urban development in economy and culture. Overall, a key contributi011 to our und erstanding of urban form emanating from the Frankfurt School wm. th e principle that art and architecture were to be interpreted as 'a code langungt• for processes taking place in society' (Held 1980: 80). This concept was to lw l'c hoed half a ce ntury later in Paris, giving birth to the discipline of semiotics 011 1he way (Eco 1976 ). It is also significant that the Frankfurt School contributed Ill our und ersta nding of urban life in substantially greater depth than anything t·hnt 'IIH.:rged from the Bauhaus in Weimar and Dessau over approximately the snnH• 1wr iod . Non et heless, while the gulf between physical determinism and sociol process in Europe rem a ined immense, across the Atlantic seminal stud ies of l'lw tTint·ionship hel'wee n society and space had begun in Chicago as early as 19 16.

Chi ci'lgo 'l'lH.' third s<.: hool of t·hou ght, often referred to as th e Chi c:1140 School of llunlilll l•:t·ology, pcnkcd helwcc n the great wars, beginning with tlw work of l~oht • lt l'tll'k (ht•nv il y it1fluenced by Emil e Durkheim ), Lt•wi N Wil'th 11 11d M~·t'l'ditl t llt ll'l',l'SH. Lew is Wi1·t·h's pnper ' Urbnni snt ns n wny of lil t•' (I ii\K) i'l tll it' of tlw IIIOSI fniiiOII S nr tk lcs t'vt• r puhli shl'd nhout tht • city. Wit tit '~ lllp. tl ill n llil nlt t' l' t•go Wl' l't' tl w pldlosopht•I'S Mnx Wt·h~· ~· 1111d Ct•ot'j',(' Si llllill'l (•1 11111 I· tllililllt) , 'l'l11•

•! ' ' "1"1~'"'"• Wt tt! ,_ ld VPil h)• 11 ll 111 ~!itl 1 tll tlliH ''Ill w1tl1 lllnllt II''"' "tHt I IU ltlllllllll llll lllt!llllllit ·, l'iltljililliont, 1t~lotd~:tli()lt 1 lt•t•titot'iidity, ~dH '' • li~' ltthit~IWl, t' ll.'. tlu• Jlllllll ) tlifl, 11 w ,. 11 l hu11Hlll colllll\ltllitit•s IH'itiJ) iVtt.l 1114 tllll ' of mobility, ,dl ttWitiJ \ lt11 t lt olct.: and modificn tio11 ol' h11hit111 I !hett!t'tlll' t• ttloyii\Cnt of a shtll't•d tll lllltT: 'Once distributed fun ctio11nll y iltlll llillirtll), ltowt•vcr, members of u humnn population were then in a positio11to J;,p llt'W 1111d qua litatively different bonds of cohesion based not on till' f1h - ol th e division of labour, but on common goals, sentiments 1111d lt~t •l ( ~ti111Hkni 1986: 59). Although the analogy between human and hiotil lllltlltllllt'll wns misplaced, the Chicago School did advance many of tht• It· tJII II IIJHIII whi ch the organisation and design of 'human commu11iti1• • .J,IIu I'N tnhlishccl, with studies of population density, movement and dlllt•i 1111 i•.~ull'' H we ll ns some speculation over the generic forms of cities and t'I'J',IIIII ilttq•.t!ll~· l'n nce ntric zone theory and its derivatives. lill1 It lt ns been argued that the movement collapsed in the 19,) ()1-l, tlu tdlllttll WIIN still alive and well through the 1960s (Gans 1962, Dunl'tlll 1111, 1 IIi ttl It' I %7, !lawley 1950, 1956), even into the early work of l~ny J',dtl il l'l'/) ). It· also formed an intellectual foundation for Constantillo'l I l m li11 1 1t II Hik theory of the 1970s and 1980s. Ekistics was one of thl' 1111111' lt~itlil, lilll .ttt empts at that time to establish a science of human settlet•WIII H, 111 11 Iii It IIIJll 10 gi ve urban planning the credibility it has always lacked (Do xl.1di PHt ,i, I %H). l)oxiadis and his institute spent nearly twenty years involvl'd with \1111 tlw y ll'rmed the 'human community', named community class foL1r, i11 11 llhli,llllty of ten component classes of human organisation that added up Ill i tltilll~llllpOiis, the urban regions of today. This concept of community br~st·d 011 qi!t: d vt~ lues and spatial propinquity lost its currency some thirty yea rs ago II H 11 \1;\ijl 1'111 physica l design. As early as 1970, Constance Perrin was proposing ti\ilt llili t l lllt tiiHl lysis should be focused on what she called 'behaviour circuits' r11tltt•1 IIHIII lil Y tll'bitrary spatial unit called 'community'. In the digital inform:1tit111 [1 itlt 'IIN of plnce and locale are now the preferred orientation in urban studit·s. Ill1 111tllt':ISI' to the great intellectual tradition established in Frankfllt'l, till' pldltt~llph y of 1'11e Chicago School in aligning itself with human ecolov,y ltlld \ hlt'\\'I III NIII resu lted in serious debates as to whether it represented a subSI'tllltl VI' I( ; · l"" "digm or solely a body of knowledge and a method of urban analy sis 11 1i1l !111 11 I 111 Nl'nr<.:h of a theory. In attempting to create a (social) theory of hu11 1.111 lit It ty tlt :11 W['IS homologous with a specific (spatial) theory of th e cit y, t\11: lilt •Ill" SdH1ol coll apsed du e to the sheer impossibility of the proj ect', with tl11• 1 1il1 !1 1111 ' the relation between ecological th eo ry and urban theory lwt.'tlllll' 111 oly 111111 i11gent·. Now thnt ecology bad fonnd its ni che within th e fun cti0111ti1 HI 1 11 1i p.t 11 ... it is <.: knr l'hnt human ecology iH 1111 lollfWr essenrinl ly :111 uri HIII 11" 111 y ttlld t lint it cn nnot pi'<)Vide a conct•pt 11 td It ii iiH'wOrk within whkl1 11 , ... tlk11 ll y Htwi.ll tiwOI' y 1.' 11 '' lw dl·velorwd' (StiiiiHit ' ,. I 'IHC• : Hl.· .\). lks pill• tlu q'~'" l'' tn p,t' lll'l't llt' ph yHkt tl 1110dl·IH ol tld ntll 1111111 11111 , 1ht• ( :hi t ;q•,o Sdtonl li -t1 .11dt11'd llVl' l till• \ llllii'Jll ttlllt'hilll pol1111 1d ti ll lli'li i~, 111111 t tl wn• Wll"l htiHltll il itil ~lfll~l! wttl t\ 11 NIH Htll )Ill WIIII HIII Ill di NI II NN I ldll't I Ldilllilllt 111d p11lit1t:1d tiH'III

1 1


Ill

llldt•t•d iiiii Ni illlli,lll'llli 1 111'1\llllhly iltt• ltllldoi tll llll td diif (l t()!U. I lHIWI 1l' ll hioti

111d lttttt llt tt t Olltlllllltities. NorJ ct·hclcss, Motlllt·l 1:''"'I ll 1 ( 11i /l' ') 1o11sidcrs l'l1 n1 ' il~t• t•vo logkn l 11ppronch wa s the most serio us ltll t'l ttpl 1 vt •l lll t!llt• wi t'hin soci o logy to cstnblish o t'heoretical object (and conseq uc11tl y 11 dolltnin of research), li iWl'ifi t: lO urban sociology'. While some of the more elclll cntnry connections hct wcc11 society and space had been made in Chicago in the 1930s, another major :ctll're, this time in Germany, was simultaneously exploring another facet o Sfr~tcturnl - functionalism in regard to the material production of the built environment, namely the Bauhaus at Weimar and Dessau.

We imar a nd Dessau Hut if des ign is immersed in fashion, one must not complain, for this is the mark of it·s triump h. It is the mark of the territorial scope established by the political ono my of the sign, whose first rational theorisation was design and the Bauhaus. ~vcrything tha t today wishes to be marginal, irrational, insurrectionary, 'anti-art', 'a nti -design' etc., from pop to psychedelic or to street art - everything obeys the s:~ m c economy of the sign, whether it wants to or not. All of it is design. Nothing ·sea pes design: that is its fate. (Baudrillard 1981: 198)

But the Bauhaus had significant roots in England. The author John Ruskin, a socia list, was one of the first to rebel against the conditions of labour established in England during the Industrial Revolution. He viewed technology as anathema o the working class and sought to re-establish medieval methods. One of his Sl'udents, William Morris, continued this overall philosophy and started a tradition w hich he hoped would rehumanise alienated labour, increasingly isolated from its own products. By 1880, the movement had become so powerful that it wns named the 'Arts and Crafts movement'. The Germans copied the method as a mea ns of re-ed ucating labour in order to compete with Britain as the world's len der in industrial production. By the turn of the century, Germany had not only :mula ted British methods but had overtaken Britain as the world's leading industrial nation. In the spring of 1919, a German architect by the name of Walter :ropius was named the director of the State Bauhaus in Weimar, Germany. The governing principle was that all forms of art must be craft-based, and therefore the workshop was the appropriate place to learn. In contrast to the British, Germany l'lllbroced the idea of mass production and the integration of art and technology. Whi le the era ft-based, master-apprentice, workshop philosop hy remained, it non etheless represented an outright rejection of both Willi:-tm Mol'l·is' fundamenlnl philoso phy a nd thefugendstil (German art nouv('fl ll mo vt' IIH'III), which wer vt•ry 111Ut: h i11 vogue when the Bauhaus wn s foul!d('d , Wltd t' 1\lnt'l'is snw that lnho ur <.:ould be rehum ::t nised by revers ing till• nli1' 1111li1111 11d1t 11 '111 In llln SS prod11 r tio" (t·s pccirdl y in t·he bttilding indu ,~ lt y), 1111 1\,udtoill~t, dl111;t1 1111 it wns by Nol'in list pt·indp lvs For tn11 ch of its cxiN II' IH 1'. did 11111 '''II'IHt lf \i:t illltl I tl111111' wit hin t't tpitllliH ilt WIIHnhout lo ht •t.'OIIH' n slnvl' It• i111 111tdt111 r l[tl' \'ll tt; d, \p,til l't 'OIIl it s htiNit pnllfi,•r tl nl'it•tlfntinll In n No!in i1 Niidttltt ,11fllt )' {i!tltil l' !lliiilf' d It\' tl1 u ll'tll lt•

llllltllll'l ), tltt• Hilltlllllt N 1'''"'''''-d ll i!Hlit!l tt.li NI 111111 lltlltllli stll 11 11 it !l pltilw~o ph y 1) 1 .lo IIJ',Il , ltlthi Nit Wfi S fiN NiNitd II\' l{ll ii" i!iii i_U illllillllivl tHtt , it f)lll'll ll t• l nnd II NNCII inlt ~ d lltlliti ' lll 'l' thut nlignt:d itNtll ;vi tlt l1 It pttllth 11 1111d the in teg rotio n of t1 1'1 11 11d ''' 111111 lol\y. Bod1 emh nltt•d 11111 11111 p11ultllli1111 ll tld st·andard isatio ll as dt l' o11l 1111 tl11 HINwhic h would :.t II ow Wll t'kt•t N llt 'II!NII 1o n materially hi gher qual iI y of Ii It· l'lw l ~n uh o us was probnhly tltt• ttt ost inllu ential school of applied n•·t in tltt• [\"t llfh•tlt ce ntury, whose impnct on design remains with us today. Des pit(' ti ll' inqu111 of postmodernist thought over the last thirty years, modern arehitt•t'llll't' uul dt•Nign remains rooted to the philosophy of the Bauhaus, beginning sonH' •11\llly yt:ars ago. From its inception the Bauhaus had a left-wing revo luti OII III I'' dill l'n l philosophy, Gropius having been quoted as saying, 'Since we hnVI' 11 11 • lditll'l' whatever, merely a civilization, I am convinced that for a ll it H t•v d • lllllll tll ita nts, Bolshevism is probably the only way of creating the precondit it ttl lo 11 11 IH'W culture in the foreseeable future' (Willett 1978: 48). Unfortun:1l vl y l111 ( ;tttpllt N, n right-wing government was elected in1923 and the Bauhaus wa s I~t id j11 1 loNe or move. Gropius re-established the Bauhaus in Dessau at the t' tHI 111 I 'IJ ~s , ,111d resigned early in 1928. The architect Hannes Meyer then took ov1 1 It IIIII Cropius and a collectivist philosophy dominated, Meyer being a <k-c lnt't•d ltll'x ist: 'cooperative ideals were given first priority: cooperation, standnrd iNII lit Ill , Ihe harmonious balance of individual and society. 1\ l111t y of these ideas were taken up and politicized by communi st SI'Udt•nl ' (I llltHit' 1998 : 196). This influence was so great that the Bauhaus beca me n lont ltll hod1 communist and Marxist propaganda. Meyers' tacit support as o t.:Otll 1111111i NI sy mpathiser resulted in his dismissal, with the appointment of l.11d wln ~> I It'll vnn der Rohe to the directorship. Although Mies tried to mainta in a ncult'll l pulll k·nl sta nce, the Nazis nonetheless closed the Dessau Bauhaus on 22 Allf',II IH 1'1 I J.. M ies was then sent a set of conditions by the Gestapo on which hnsiH tltt• l\11 itltnt tS 111ight be reopened, one of which was that Hilberseimer and Ka nd i11 rli<y, lwh tl\ Jt.:ws, should no longer be permitted to teach. The staff rejected 1'11 !.' t.'o ttd 1111 1111 11 11d the Bauhaus finally closed. From its inception, the Bauhaus t':Jdi cn ll tllt•i l(•d design across all of the arts, from theatre design to painting, sc.:ulptlln), It ' 1tlt·s, n rc hitecture and urbanism, and it is also meaningful that all th rce dit't•( I '' ' " of th e Bauhaus, Gropius, Meyer and Mies van der Rohe, were art.: hilt•l I Wlttlt• Meyer went to work in Russia after his demise as director, both Mil'N .tttd t olll pitt s went to the USA. While each produced some remarkable buildings tlutl W111dd hnve a major impact on architecture in the twentieth century, dw y Wt' IU I'' illtltl'ily co ncerned with building design, not urbanism. In this reH IWl' l till' llllt dtnu s' most signi fica nt figure was Ludwig 1-lilbcrseimer, for whom: 1'111' tlll'lt'opolis ... is a molar machin e, involvi 111', l11 t'l'.l' Ncnk soci:1l, t·t·c h~t ica l nlld l'lll tlllllli t.• syste ms int·crcommunic:ll'ing with ttnlill l'lllintlt•l,••tll'tli H. 'r'lw l'i' IH'IH III •l hl,•:ll'l' hilt'C itll'fl l ckm cnt s nl 1'11c IIIOfvt.•ttl :t• lt•vt l - t '' l1 loli'lllit•nl itt Nizt• 1111d Nlll lf H' wlilto ttl 11 priOI'i dt ll't'ttl inNI poi11I'N ol' ltHIIN111 lt lflllilllli••tl li tlltNIII II' 1111!1 l't•llly I nllll'llt ltl lt 111t'l'l'l•ivt•d l't 'llll l II II ' glohli I HII 111 1111 1 •d i111_1 1_ i 1' 1 ,,1 11 1 ~ tl11•-r Nt lllll' '''''1111'111 ll', j II fill 'II 1 !It t• fll 'lllll' l IIIIH tiillli VI ' l'fl'llll II INI d :i I li ~ II II·, l lil t (llill'li IWI:l.1 17 1)


tlt,tl itt lldl ur~· illli't 'll 111i':lllhtlll 11ill lio dt~ tt•t ' tl•d ,1 11111\l llll:llt f111111 ltt1111 tii11 NIIl to pwllltllilliiii HI Ill \\ 'ltil t lllilll tiiti !; iil ~ ~ n llt•ll ~· 0 11 fldtl•d to hnlll'f',I'Ois itk•ology, lllllSki ng the I'CIIIit y Il l ••II'" tli HI o} I [I ~N ll'ltlli ons, lw d1•1'1 11 1'N postltum nni :;m as 'the conscious respo nse, w l t~• tlll ! l wi tlt 11 ppl ausc or l'l'l\"t'l, to th e dissolu tion of psychological autonomy n11d i11dividualisa tion lwought by tec hn ologica l modernization; it is a mobilization of aesthetic pract k:cs to effect a shift away from the humanist concepts of subjectivity and its pt·cs umptions about originality, universality and authority' (Hays 1992: 6). I IiI berseimer's ideas on urbanism are distilled in his great utopian concept called Vorsch lag zur Citybeauung (Project for the Construction of a City; see figure 14 ). ll cre he explores how his molar machine would materialise as a metaphor for th e city's productive capacity, the urban realm becoming a totalitarian response to the triumph of representation over experience. While Le Corbusier had nlrendy presented his Design for a City of Three Million People in 1922 and hi s Plan Voisin for Paris in 1925, projects that shocked the Garden City moventent into the modern world, Hilberseimer's Vorschlag took even Corbusier's work to new levels of abstraction and standardisation. The gateways of hope th tlt had been opened up in the Bauhaus of 1919, based on collective labour nrpli ed to new technologies within the medium of Bolshevism, socialism and ·ommunism, concluded in the despair of totalitarian production and the dissol111 ion of the public realm into the space of circulation. Mass production tec hniqu es resisted by the Bauhaus ultimately triumphed, with the concomitant ll.t1 ·• t\•u!>o

1111

'''

111)\111

1Qt tlltllllll !111 tlldll·.tti tiltll\'1•-ltiii 1tl illllltlli ilu dtllltlll ttll i 1 dt\111 ..11111111 td l i tili 1 oliil l tdl !l lllilllll lllip•H II d p•P lU•I!, tlu ilt i i •llj•.lt ilu y'lll'lll.llil dt •~t l l l\itH I 11!

ll (till Ill

!Ill) \\ 11 _111

I N II WLI\'

Il l lift

P,u'ln

ldlt i\11• 11'1'111 ' P:'Iris School ' ol ilw lnte I %0s and ea rly I 970s ti \IIY ovt•nH itl t i lu l.lt•ll ol 11 cohere nt school of thought, the revoluti onary conrl'ib11t ioiiH11 11ttl1' \ 1tl1111 i\11• philosophica l context of a Marxist retheorisation by 1\l:tin 'l'ollt't lllll , i It 11tl Lt•khvrc, Manuel Castells and others to th e gene ral fi eld o t 111 hil tI "'"'lni',Y l'l' l\\ :'li ns profound even today. Originating during a period of ~·XIIl'llll 111 1 tl 1\ lll'l'l't - rhc explosion of the free speech movement in Berk1:ky dlltilll I'J(i•l 11 11d 1he protest movements of French students in 1968 - the st tll',l' Wll 1'1 f,tt both n return to Marxist fundamentalism and later M ao ism, nH w1 ll IIi 11 mdit.:n l critiqu e of the principles upon which social and dt'llllll 1'11 111 ,,\tlll\ 1 should be based. Central to both protest movements was th e ittlltll'lllt 1 .d 11 lonncr member of the Frankfurt School, Herbert Marcusc. I lis 1 11! I 1'"\tll vn tio n, One Dimensional Man, launched a withering but mi splaced t·l'ltll \1 11 'tl llttHkrnisl' industrial society and technological development ( M::II'CliSl' IIJhH, I'IH ~ ). WiLh this context as a backdrop, two ground-breaking texts l' llll'l'l',l'd, I 11 l{t•tJo /uti cm Urbaine by Henri Lefebvre (1970) and La Questiou Url>aillt' h)' r \1111111'1 Cnstell s (1972), and the debate on the theory of space finally h1't't lllll 1 1 111 t't d to the development of social science. Lefebvre's critique cx postH ti ll' lt1111H'OHt:11'ic qua lities of capitalist ideology, a system that reprodw.·t s it ~t·ll witltolll nny apparent effort. Within this system, Lefebvre viewed spnl'l' 111'1 ,, 1111ilt'l'in l (scientific) object, which therefore gives rise to the possi bilit y ttl tllll tl space being analysed and acted upon according to scientific pdllvtp lt• Ill I ,rt ReiJolution Urbaine, Lefebvre asks, 'What is it that a buyer acquit'CHwl~t•ll l11• p11 1'chnse!> a space? The answer is time ... Is a system of knowledge - :1 Hl ll'lll l 11 l 1ht usc of space, likely to evolve? ... Perhaps, but it would have to t•vn lvt• 11 111 11 11 11 I ysis of rhythms, and an effective critique of representative and 1\llt'll llll lvt 1 pttl'l'H' (Lefebvre 1970: 356). Into his critique of ideology Lefebvre ( 19 ) I : I'\ I) d~a 1 r :ll'rics currents of semiotic theory in considering language as sp:1 ~'l', ljll l' lltlii Nwhit:h itTlpnct directly on tb e design of cities, for example: l)o the spn ces fo rn1ed by practico-social activity, whether landsco pcs,

111111111

1111'1\I S or b11ildin gs, have mea nin g? ( :n11 th e spnce occupied by a social group or several such groups lw tt'l'llit•d

11

I 11 \t'HH:Igc? Ought we lO look upon nrchit·ec tu n11 nnd urhnnistil' works ns.a typl' ol11111

Hgur•·14 Ludwi g Hilberseimer: Hochh.ill'•'•!.tdt l'll•l••t t

tl'i ~l l l,

Soltl< 't•: ColiiWsy of The /\1'1 Institute of Chit "II" l'ltlllll)ll•'l'i' l " ·, llt•ll\ti ltt:lll llll t• of ( li lt 'tlf\0 .

llll'di11111 , :~ 1\wit :1 1\ liiHI HU:tl Olll'? Moy :1 soci11 l Hpllt'l' vi: thl y lw l'Olll't'iVI'd ol tl14 11 111 111', 1111!',1' dt•lll' llllt•lll 11(11111 II dl'll't'lltit lll ll' (ll'ill'tlll' (t'l'il t\111 1\/W illlll[',)

Ill'

di Ntn lt nu l


\\!tilt l l!o lt II ;' 11 111llt (, l l\' 11~ 1' Nt)llllllill \\ ~~~~~1.! \\11 I 11 II ttdll•t, ht~tll ~t l ll lllllf ', II l IiIiqtll' Ill' I 'II pti ,d Uo lll I· I ll[ d H!t ti.!! \ :, t l'j tl • ll ~' wt'illltfl, IH•nv dy i ~tl'lu v n rr d hy Loll INAli1111 "'' 1 '"" Ni• 11•1 l'ntdllti( 'I.IIN, " iliild liiiH'Ili :tll y ~· pi s t t• m o l ogk: n l , rejec tin g ex isti1111 d11 11 111 1 1111 tl u• p, t·o ullds th nt illl' y WOI'kt•d withi n, rather thnn broke with, ex istill)•, idt•11l11p,k11 1 IIOI'IIIS. 'I(> hi r~ l' l't•dit , Cns tcl ls, a C::~ta l nn who spent his formative yctii'S l11 Pn1·is, shatte red tlw cm·oon surroundin g traditional aspatial social theory and created a new p::1r:1 diglll en li ed spatial urban theory. For the first time, and within this new motit-1 , he inl egra t·ed fund amental relationships between society, space and form and his infl uencc over the entire field has been immense. In The Urban Questio11, Cas te ll s a lso underta kes an original analysis of urban spatial forms as products or h ::~s i c econo mic processes - production, consumption, exchange and ad min i s t· r ~Hion. He also demonstrates as part of this process how ideological structures nre co ntained in symbolic configurations, elements and places. At the same time he breaks with customary Marxian tradition that concentrates on production by focusing on consumption processes as defining the urban. He argues that whilt• ind ustri a l production takes place over space, social reproduction in the form o l' ·o ll cctive consumption must take place within space, constituting the space of tve ryday life. This stands out as a singularly insightful attempt to connect the process of designing cities to the overall process of the production of spact wi t·hin ca pitalism. In another classic The City and the Grassroots, from which I have taken my guiding definition of urban design, Castells refines this defin ition even further by stating that: 1

Spatial forms, at least on our planet, will be produced by human action, as are all Ol'her objects, and will express and perform the interests of the dominant class nccording to a given mode of production and to a specific mode of development. They will express and implement the power relationships of the state in a historica lly defined society. They will be realized and shaped by gender domination and by sta te-enforced family life. At the same time, spatial forms will also be marked by resistance from exploited classes, oppressed subjects and abused women. (Castells 1983: 311-12) :::~ste ll s' later work advances from this capital-logic position with respect to how such domination will take place in the information age, but many fundamental ~< rem::~ in (CasteUs 1996, 1997, 1998).

Los An geles 1\y rhc end of the twentieth century, no new sc hool s of thotl f•, lll d~·n lin g with th e u1·hnn rc:1lm had co me into existence. This is p:trtl y thw 111 tl11• I1H'I thnt 111 0st h:1d lwlonAed to some ce ntral philosophy, domin ntll (HII'I Idill''' 111 ttH it• nf condu ct, HOI IWii111cs, ns in t·hc BF~uhaus , ro nlltht'i'l', Si111 t' ilu 1d1"t 1d dttl ll lt tll lll d isl'OIIt'HCN iNt'l'it'<.:IL•d within post·mod ern philoso plt ), tl w, 111 II •·• lit • "" ' 111 tll iliflll lt• 111\ili tiSt till Y idt• ntifi nhk co ll t•~..: t· iv e posit io ,, 1111 tl11 d 1y, N" " t' dt~l t , l 1111 ,\llp.t•lt•s lt ttll 11 powt'l'i'td )',t'OIIP of sc ho lnrs dt • dl tlllt~ d 11 1 t!llitl l'~ llll\ i liltI '- !I 1 ·' ' .I lt 'N I lwd lo t•

""·'" .1. '' '"'u'""' 1111d ,, nt lilli 1 tttt ui\.utl•hlll••" 111111 tlt ll 1h''" 111tll'""it""

i 111l1i~ j\l iitlj! ttil l!tii lll lllii!llit\1 ) 'lil', lltli t'll llt fif',IIH'H, jll i'tltllll 111 tl11• It'" '"' tt l ''' ' 1111 r•t•t !"ti!lt )'t ' "'It "'' t\ lh-11 Sl·ott , gd So jn, M1t l1 11t l ttllllt•t' Wok h, ~I tl. t' 11 1\ i11 1111d 111 1111 t~tl11• 1 s. Some of th e III OHt sij',' II I iu 1111 1 ~ t'lllt' q•,l ll p. 1'1·o mthis HOIIIll ,111 \ lit tl 1,ttllt 'H 't'ln: Urba 11 Laud Nex11s tllltlillt'1 l'l Htl) , Ml'in> fJolis ( I 1JHK) 111111 t'/11• ( :11//lmd Economy of Cities (2000n); t d •I ll 1 l'll , f/IIUdcrn Geogre~/)/Jit•s ( I 1JHlJ) nnd f>ostmetropo lis (2000); and Mtl,1• I h1' 111' ( :ilv u( Quartz (1990) and /) ead Cities (2002). Had Manuel Cns tt•ll ' tii''(.lltl iiiiiH'Ill bcen at UCLA rather than Berkeley, it is arguable that Los All l',l' lt• ,,,tid h11vl' joined prior influential schools as 'the dominant di scourse' 11 1 tilt lllqtlll tiH· lll'W millennium. The significance of the Los Angeles School hns ht'l'll i• ll~< i vt•l y documented by one of its central figures (Dear 2001). 1\illlll'• till 14t ltttl !i1'1

l•t llil ) 11, ' ' h ,I•

Philosophy and Urban Design \IIIII lt·om d1 e philosophies informing dominant schools of tho ught ::1 bout t IH• nrosc from a variety of historical conditions and opportuni ties, srwc tll t '"""''~! of intellectual activity have also been instrumental in decpeni11~•, 11111 llli dt · l ~ l ll lldin g of the development and growth of cities. Dominant l\ III UII f', tilt "'' lt nve been the philosophical and practical application of semiotics, plw tllllllt' IIOiogy and Marxian political economy, and a brief overview of cnl' h 11-1 11 •I' dl't·d to demonstrate their collective importance for urban designers nlld 11 111•1 indi viduals involved in giving form to the city. As we shall sec, therL' is 11 1111l lkn nt· interweaving between them and knowledge of any one suffl' I'N \11 111 tl 11 11

11lt1t in11 . 'Pi liiOI ics 'ollll!f', hn ck to Manuel Castells' definition that we call urban design th e sy tnh1 1l1 l lllt'lllpl ro express an accepted urban meaning in certain urban forms, Wl' tlll'll I11Vt' to t~sk what is constituted in the term 'meaning'. We might then wi sh 111 I1111 W!tow mea nin gs are produced, consumed, circulated and exchanged, ns wt•ll 1' I111W th ey nrc distorted, disguised, transformed or suppressed, first as a f!,l' IH ' " " •jilt ~~~ \o 11 and th en in relation to the built environment. Although phi loso pht•t It ttl 11 1'!\IICd for millennia over the meaning of life in all its form s, it was n Sw iNt~ oltllmHlp hcr ca ll ed Ferdinand de Saussurc wh o was the first to syst·enlilt kn ll 11·' t•N t ign lt' 1he chaos of the modern world through n metn -thcory ca li ed Sl' " dot it d11· sc h.' II Ce of signs. I usc the tern• 111 1' /tl lwcn 11st• of its pan-di sci plitl lll lt~tllt'l', hnvi tl f!, ge ner:'ll'cd new t·heorL·I'it·nl itt Hij•,ltt 'l \111 11 11 hos t· <)f di sd plilll"l 11l illlling, httl' not li11tit l·d t·o, hi st<Hy, nnthll tt"d''ll>'• (li'l)'l ll nl ogy~ psyd tot ht•t'l tp y, '"' nlnp,y, l'Oilllllllll klltio ll tl wo t•y, lil l' l'lllllll', l' tilltillj',, I ltiiiiiiiiiiP,I'IIPhy, ,ll't hllt•t 1111)\.,tHIIIrhtlll d1•e;ip,11 . <:lvt''' tl 1111 S11 11~NIIIf~ Wlt•lil i11 dy 11111 (II I(H' I dllt illl'• ltl •l lli t• fi ll ~~~t •iViil l' lll lll YIIWI' IIl i11 l11d n 1•', 111111'1'11 11 \(111Jlillli 1ilti till• I !1111 lwt dtH ltll ttl fl11~!1it


\\ 1, " '' tl u " "' ttl !111 l',t!tlll ivr· l oi Nt' 111 ~.t tl ll l · 1i1 , ii illt!'·il!!ilitiiHJ\ [!1111 ltl 'l lt•l\•ll y hilt t' ltdlllt'd illltt tlu· lwt• tll y· lit·sl t't'III\II'Y· Allt' l lti ~o~ d, ttlt 11 WH !l 1.111 111 S I III .~N tln''fl lltd t• III N lo IINNl' lllhk' his tl o iL'N into La Colli '~> ,t,. I 11/l)ltl~ ll·fll• ' 1 ,',illt'l'tde (' l'lw ( :ot lt'St' on ( ;l'tH:rn l Li 11gui sti cs), n work that w:t,4 lo lt1lt1 p, It II II t•xis tcncc l'lw sril' ni:c of tn ea ning. Sn uss uri an se mi o logy contends that our cultural environ ment co nstitutes atl im nt cnsc system of meanings that is structured around a complex amalgam o l codes (Ba rth es 1964, Eco 1976). These sign systems are composed of messages th tH beco me encoded in music, food, gestures, ritual, advertising, buildings, spnccs and all other areas of human activity, of which language is arguably the most important. The ideological complex through which society maintains orde r, socialises its consumers, reproduces its own economic and political power elite, and builds its cities can therefore be considered one vast system of signs. Conversely, sign systems may be decoded, permitting the comprehension , manipulation or modification of human behaviour by such understanding. The method of semiology is first to separate an act (or an object) called the 'signifier' from its meaning, called the 'signified'. The sign may therefore be defined as the uni on of a form with an idea. The major characteristic of the sign is that it is nrbitrary. Words, for example, are simply collective social conventions that can n ncl do change radically over time and which vary from one linguistic group to another. At the same time, intellectual concepts are not universal. Language therefore articulates its own reality as well as its own particular signifying system, so the study of language and the study of semiotics bear a close relation to each other. This is best expressed in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis that language is not neutral; it is a profound means of shaping a particular culturally defined rca Iity: 'The worlds in which different societies lie are distinct worlds, not merely the same world with different labels attached' (Sapir 1921: 76). Signs therefore constitute units of relations and hence hold the key to the concept of meaning in society, by exposing the existing connections between language, thought and rea li ty. Semiotics studies all cultural processes as means of communication, and ana lyses social codes as systems of signification. This has important implications for studies of urban form, since each built environment discipline employs methods of signification that engage particular semiotic opportunities and limitations. Eco creates a general theory of culture from semiotics that in his opinion replaces th e discipline of cultural anthropology: 'objects, behaviour and rela tionsh ips of production and value, function as such socially, precisely because th ey obey semiotic laws' (Eco 1976: 27). At the same time he is careful to indicate that th e radical hypotheses 'culture is only co mmun ication' or 'c ulture is no more than a system of structured signi fi c:n!'ions' n ,.,. t ht ll l',t't'tliiS iy idea Iistic. A semiotic analysi s is essentia lly n wny of .4t't'i" l'" 1111d ll •j t'lllpl oy mcnt ca n ~· nli g h1·e t1 not on ly o ur cultural p(· t'SIWl'liVI' h111 ,dNII 11111 ttlli )'!i( lj ttl otl wr th co rt• lic: tl posit'ions that empl oy signil'r.i 1111 '~l' ~ l t nl ll .1111 tlt ~1 1111i!l t' 1 II'" '4 11f',)',t'Sis thnt th l' 1h1·t·t· elt·nt l' nlnry con stiltl l'tll plult••lll tlll\ ,; 1 !ill )' u tltitl il !Ill\ !11 • dt•ttit•d til l' VO IIIIllltll kO ii Vl' ft ii K'tion ; lht'IH' il l I' (11) till_ I'' !id tll. iliilt !lilil ('iltji litl II IIIII nl ohjt'l'(S

! kol' II 1111.f11111tillj\ tlu lll tiilH!I••.IiltHI l•t!\\'ll ·l! II IL iil olllll 1111111 11, (b) 1\i tl liltlj"l 11111 11 >11 ) 1111• 1,_. ,,~ ui l!lill!lt!l!lll tdltiCd ti ttt_hdll lttll t11 111111i1d (i;) !111

l·lihllt ~ 1 ~ tl11

1 · 1 lulll l',t' nl j•,tHII III, (l lllilllttf',il ,tl 11 111tl ys iNof 111l hlll 1111l 11, ldlt • llll ,tllnt 'lll iN II OW 11 11 m•ct•plt•d ttlndt 11!1 1' ljllt' lll lt ot t lllld 1111 itllputlllllt, ""'' tl•llt• tt 111 dt~Hign phil oso ph y (/ )( ; '>) . <)til' tihi l •Ill Ht~lllilln l wo rk i'l itt til t• lit ld It) It 111l·.l'l .tttd l~n ird ( 1969 ), Wntllri 1'1 11 !. IIJ ), lit nn dl ll' tll ( 1977, 1990) , 1\n lllll ll' ll ( I'Y/ 1) ) ;'l ncl Preziosi ( 1979 ), tlw p:lpt' l llltllll ll ll' lll ( 1977) being an ext:l.'ll t•lil inlt·odu ction to the subj ect. 'l'hl~ llt'l' lt 11111lt tllliVl't'SC may be defined as a fo ur-dim ensional hierarchically orgt~ nifwd , .dt lit•d, u tllll l'tl l and physical system th at is articulated by the distrih~ttioll nl !LI '''• i~ ptli t' 11 11d 1'11e p.roperties of materials. Architecture and language arc lm·kt•d li •i ·' tiH•t Ill Ihe hum an consciousness to the degree that our physical environtt\1'111 l!1t jll tlf•,nlil lic, syntactic and semantic features that are represented in hutl1 j1l11 1it •tl 11 ml sy mbolic relationships. Many contemporary architects usc a hi slo t tll y dt•l ivt•d vocabulary of images and details to generate their own uniqu e Iotti I I 1111 hlit'l.' lllt'nl expression, much of which is ideologically compromised hy tl w tqttllll nl lheir cl ients, i.e. corporate monopolies, state institutions, priv ate L'II P it'd , I ll . (sec fo r example the work of Michael Graves, Robert Stern, At'llll\ 1 l ~, , ,,dd, .l11111es Stirling, Charles Moore, Yasafumi Kijima, Mario Botta , Ph ilip jpltl llhll l II IH.l Ri cardo Bofill). In Jencks' own words, 'those who dam n Pwll liu llll ll Clnss icism as kitsch and consumer pabulum are pointing to an 1111 illl• •ttl 11

l•ittlllt•d hnlf-truth' (Jencks 1977: 75). I lUll II itl :1lso countered by substantial philosophical questions abou t Hl' tlli nlll 1 tl111 1 1111 dominate design, as it has in the case of Italian architects after ti ll' 1 111•1 •H id Wn 1· who inherited a contemporary history offascist architecture. Si tu t' tl u 11 pii'N t'lll nt ion also borrowed heavily from ancient Rome, the association ro 11 hllll llilli'd thdr entire urban history. Italian architects therefore had to face OIH' nl tl u iltit~tl pmfo un cl philosophical questions of our time: because of their bislo t Y~ tlu 11 111 !11111 Hymhols could not be reused because of their fascist attachments, of Intlllll , .It 11 l1 1\ tHI Ihe annihilation of peoples. How therefore could they re-semantil.' ilit' tlti lll '- lillkll l inheritance? How could past symbols be redeployed at anoth er ll·vt•l td lt•ltl lh-11 1ion, as memory from the past, a catharsis in the present and an in~pit'lilllllt 1111 tiH• l'ulurc? For this reason one could argue that they had only one way oul , 11 I" tnt N~ dt•scri bed by Charles Jencks as a 'reduction to archetypes', facilitated hy 11 11• , 11\tlllop,icn l possibilities of a syntax of empty signs, symbolised by Aldo Rossi inlti 1''"111111111 for Modena Cemetery and the Gallaretese Quarter of Milan. 1t 11dot ks, like all other disciplines, is not above criticism. For cx:~tnplt , 1 l'11 · lt~rd hns suggested that the attempt to gc ncrn I'C a e:eneral semiotics of ll l'l'lll 1•'1.11111' l'Oiltnin s a ' nca r fatal flaw' in thnl '"' ldtt'l'lllt'l', ns :111 autonomo us syst'ctn ol Hti',II N, dtu•s nol n·n ll y ex ist exce pt ti N 11 It ~ 11 11 l lnhl·l for cc rtnin :HhitnHily n'HII'IIIi'd tliltlm 1111tl pot•ti on~ of dw IHillt t lt Vliiii iiiH'Ilt , n pil.: \llt'l' nrtificill ll y iW"'Witlltll d It\' ""~"l t•tt• tii 'IHit••ll it: dcp:ll'ttll l'll t ti1 M II tillll , 1\y himiNil\111 , till' 1\ lll'lltpl (II dt VI ""' H ~llltilllh '• lll \1111ldit ll\ iN1'11 tlll' t' l i lo~• i 1t \' 111 ~, (It llltdt•tHllllllltht•ll t'j\illli HIIt lt lll lt ll otiiJ\i!lll\fl tl111111)oll I ~111d y 111 \11'11111'1' 11111111~. 1 (l'~t • t, lmd IIJ'/ 11 I)


I ,I\

l' llllit '• l tl'lll

A ~H' IIIiolog ira l npproor h I'() lll'bllll 1:01'111 llit fl lll'l' ll t I I lit i ot'ill t)' llltill ' lldtll'i (I 'JHO) il ttd Sr t'ltlo n ( 1979 ). 'li1 fttri nttnckcd se mio logy 011 tlu ltt tl!ill dt,lf il iH ' hchnvio tll' iN ti! in di Ng ui sc'. li e remarks th at to adopt the s<.: tn lo lop,iu d lltll t llo tl ns the rn a in pll t'posc of a rchitecture is to remove it from the wo rl d o l pl'lttilll y l'orms, and tha t· Htu: h n sta nce tacitly accepts the peripheral role assigned to it by the presen t· :npit·:-tl ist usc of land. Roger Scruton's criticism is based primarily on the limita 1ions of lingu istic analogy to explain urban forms, arguing that there seems to b no co nsensus on the most important features of language to be adopted as a basis for a nalogue models. Non etheless, Henri Lefebvre's proposition that a theory of meta-language Hhould be based upon logical, philosophical and linguistic research reflects the und cn.iable importance of linguistics as a model for science and scholarship in ge ucral. This has been clearly enunciated in Lefebvre (1968), Habermas (1976) 1nd Eco (1984). In The German Ideology, Marx and Engels note the important relationship between language and political consciousness. Language codes and sociali sation patterns can either extend or hinder the linguistic, social and po litical competence of the individual, and language may be perceived as an impo rtant device in maintaining social equilibrium. Marx himself maintained 1h:1t all ideologies distort because of their source within the class system. In this respect it wo uld appear that linguistic studies play a significant role in contributing to a Marxist analysis of social class by allowing a more sophisticated interpretation to emerge (Baudrillard 1981). To effectively analyse the overall logic of consumption, Baudrillard suggests the need for four logics, a system that ·o uld well be applied to the consumption of urban form:

J 4

a functional logic of use value; a n economic logic of exchange value; a logic of symbolic exchange; l'l logic of sign value.

The first is a logic of practical operations, the second one of equivalence, the third, :1mbiva lence, the fourth, difference. Or again, a logic of utility, a logic of the 111:1 rkct, a logic of the gift, and a logic of status. Organised in accordance with one of the above groupings, the object assumes respectively the status of an i11strument, a commodity, a symbol, or a sign. (Baudrillard 1981: 66) 1\nudr ill a rd's desire to reject M arxist theory only results in a more sophisticated rl• ndcrin g of Marx's basic project by deepening the signification of culture and idt.:ology thro ugh semiotic theory. Umbe rto Eco h:1s nlso H llj\1\(~N I'Ccl that the ·xc hnngc of commodities may be see n :"IS :1 s1·n1io1 k <·v< 'tll. 'l'hiH observation t'dt•rs t·o t·he process of signification Ol' sy1nholi Nn linn npp lil •d Itt llu• lrnns formtlioll of ww vn lu(.' int'o cxc h:"t ngt vn l1 w v111 il~t • lt lli ll 111 ··w•, 1 jlltllt 'Nil whit: h nlso "'lnnd H fOI'' so tnc th in g d st' (1-:cl• I 11'/t• 1~) 1111 •1 1111 ••'1 ''"" '1111 tilt itll'ltl t'l'nble plHWOj',l' l'r·o ll t l ln r'vt·y nho111 il H·tH'Itilt tlli 11 !IHII' it l il 11· lttrl ll '''' ltlllfllll'lll und l'lw IIJinlittii Nitip lli' IWt'l'll lnho11 1l vtq tl ltil 111tl il w !i tl l,Hi I"Jll lijtJqlt'. l1111 lu• 1111

l oli)lll td II'PII'NI III II It hill Ill tlt•.· llt l !II 111 ti jilt·, II d l t lllll ~li 'l ll lll'ill l'd l 11 II~ IIWII llltll\111 l'l't'll il'd IIHII HI' Vll lil l 1 Ill f ltl l!lill t' ~~~-, jllllj\II'~HIVI' n\'l llllillltt!IPII 111 li lpli td, I lit• 1\tiOP,I'IIPhicn l lllltdNII II " tl tlll '' '~ "" - '' !111 t iii WII illl'o glw·y of ptiNI l't tpi! tdltH tl••v t·lnllllH'Il l'. But nl tl 11• Mil lilt lilt it 111 liliiNWN !111' powt•l' of dcn d lnhot ll' ovt••· llvlttp, ltd II ti ll\ nnd ns such it intpd tu• IIHtllll l ltdtlltltNtiH• I I ~'CI Il i1U i ation proce~s wi thin 11 ~1· 1 'd physkol constraints ... li ll dt••' t'IIPliii ii Ntit tl wrc is, then, a pcrpel'ual stt'llf',J',il', i11 wlt ll'h cn piral builds up o phyNku l lnnd scn pc npp ropriate to its own condi t·ioll 111 11 ptlll k ulor moment in time, onl y t·o hav e to destroy it, usually in the course of 11 11wiN ttl n subsequent point in time. (Harvey 19H5: J.S )

I"' II' ~ norn e nology l'lfl•ti Ot liCnology also features large as a philosophy informing the d~.:s ign ill 'l lh•N nnd at its most essential simply means the study of phenomena.. Pt·o iHth l 1 t• III OS t' direct link with sociology is to the Chicago School and its Citlt' t')';l' tl l jll'i ll'ti ccs (Lewis 2002: 59). Phenomenology is one of the central bra nclwfl ttl ttli ii1'111)'> 0rary philosophy in the twentieth century, while remaining so nll'w lutl lllllt'l',inn l to social science as a whole. The two great sources of this tra dilln11 Wl' l'l' th e German philosopher Edmund Husserl (who was trained in mnt'hcttllll til) 11 11d his student Martin Heidegger (a rheologist). The tradition also <.: tK'Ollt ptt ~Nt:N t·he work of Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Peter Berger, Jean Paul Sa rtn: lli td All1'1'd Schutz. The key reference points here are Merleau-Ponty's Pheno ll tr'/1 11ft1J.lY of Perception (1962), Martin Heidegger's Being and Time (1962 ) n111l 1ull l t't•'s Being and Nothingness: A Phenomenological Essay on 0 1110iug V ( I ~~% ) . H usserl (193 1) argued that in everyday life, the individual's 'nn t 111'11 1 tllitu dc' merely accepted the world as self-evident. Their reality was t~Ct:l'Jllt•d !1111 1101' interrogated. The process of breaking free from this naive unders t·tw dill )', nl llw world required what he called epoche, the method of suspending lwli1•l. All t• llipirical information has to be discarded so that a transcendenta l stntt· ttl tii iiiiiHtnication could be achieved. This was almost the complete revers;d nf tit• I :11 tt csinn cogito ergo sum (I think therefore I am), where one's existence li nd 111 1 'I 'Pil l't• nt bearing on one's environment. Husserl's concern w as to und r t'H II\ !111 wl111 1 we do when we try to order or make sense of the world, in other wol'l iNItt tlll liJ)t'l' hcnd acts of consciousness. The central problem here is that CO II Hl' ioll tlt!IIH iN nlw nys mediated, a process that Husserl wished to bypass so th::~t tl w l'l'td 1 t.MHl' IH.'l' of the object could be experienced directly (Fuery and Mansfield 1') )'/ ) , 'ut llu sst• rl was concerned with the nature of individual consciousness. As Jolllt I.,,., lttt· ( 1994: 30) comments, 'for the pheno menologist, there a rc no idt•td, ltii Vl' I'H nl cc •·ta in ties at the level of i de~ s' . lndividun l consciousn ess was tht•i't•ln t'l • <HH iil'i o n l'hnt req uired both a knowi ng Ntlhit•rl nN well ns so ~11 cthing llutl i 11itWI1 : ' the t·ruc 11 :'\ Cli rC of our knowi •111 11 11'1•<·, l111 I'Xt 1111plt', cnnnot' be nddtlll'tl l''lil lt liililll', tl lt: IT~'e ()I' hy Hi tll f'l ly [11!N IIItilll)\ dull til t' 11'1'1' I'X iHI'S, 'I'IH· piH' lllllt! 1\\llllllii\Y of dw li'lll' iH l'llilll'dd cd i11 il11 • I t) ll!'it:ltHIIIIIHI!I ttl tl11 • kll OWt'l'' (l.t•W I 1 OJ,, c.O) . II WI' t't•pliH'I' tlw l'<l •H t•pt '111 .-.• wHit !lu tllllltl'l ' h1tlldilll'.' '"' tll lll tll 111 11 WI' I 1111 tll ' l' 111111'1' I II'I II I V lllt \'11 (I h l llol~ 11! jdlltllllllt'IIIIIII)',V 111111 l111 d


-" '~ " '

~

'

I I !I

11\tlll h 11111 illlj Hh I u 11 lll tll llt!N o l p t•n t• pll tt ll 11 11tl '-".- IH i i1 tu 1 111 d 11 Itt II II t•nvinlll lll t' tli , Jln ll owl ti l'• lt'Wil li ds is ih~· idt•n 1hu1 llt VI I' IN llll•td lttlht lli 'l'l't'plio n, a ll IH' It't•pil ol l lwi 11g n l'tllt~l'ion of the li ved ex pe;·it•ti Vt' o l i1 11 llldl vfd lud . As Sar tr I111 N .~ o fn lll o us ly <.: Oillnt e nl·ed, 'Man is cond em ned lo lw lt•t•t•', lll t'll ll it•g tha t hi s lil't• is lt' td y cxi~tcntia l, the moral essence of this co nd itio n be ing the a bsolute l't•s po nsih ilil y of eve ry indi vi du a l for every action they take from the tim e of their hil'l'h, ll e idegge r m oved H usserl's work forward: 'the central idea in Heidegger's Wtil"k is that understanding is a mode of being, rather than a mode of knowledge, 11 11 o nto log ical pro blem rather than an epistemological problem. It is not about how we es ta blish kn o wledge; it is about how human beings exist in the world. l Jn dersta nding is the basis of being human' (Blaikie 1993: 34). Th ese ideas, of the knowing subject and of the embedding of consciousness Ihro ug h lived experience, is symbolised effectively by one of the Frankfurt Sc hoo l phil osophers, Walter Benjamin, in the concept of the flaneur. Benjamin's fl/l!tCJ14r is a p erson who relates to the city solely through the world of the senses, by direc t kinaesthetic and Levantine experience of its places and spaces, wande rin g fro m on e event to another, spending the time of day soaking up whatever t'Vt' nts occ ur. H owever, Griselda Pollock notes that the experience of the fltlnaur is wholly masculine and reflects the phenomenology of the male gaze ,· o ns uming, detached, and impassive 'but the flaneur is an exclusively masculine lype which functions within the matrix of bourgeois ideology through which the soci:1 l s paces of the city were reconstructed by the overlaying doctrine of separrll e sp heres on to the division of public and private, which became as a result of a gc nd ered division' (Pollock 2000: 162). Whether feminism will ultimately gent•rn rc a flaneuse with her own specified gaze is something yet to be worked Ihro ug h. T he id ea of the flaneur is also embedded in De Certeau's classic essay \XIall<ing in the City (1993), where he reverses the rational comprehensive method of tr a ditional planning ideology by a process of designing via direct ex peri ence of urba n life (a process which Lawrence Halprin had tried to system11 ise by a na logy with labanotation, the language of dance choreography, over lhitty years ago in 1969). 'l'h e most nota ble phenomenologist in architectural and urban design theory is :l11·is ti a n N o rberg-Schulz and his great trilogy inspired several generations of li'c hil·cc ts a nd urban designers: Intentions in Architecture (1964), Existence, Sjlt /Ce fl lld Architecture (1971) and Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of ll rd;itecture ( 1979). His important 1976 article, which condensed the essence of h is phil oso ph y, w as called 'The phenomenon of place' (D C 8). Thro ughout his wo rk No rbe rg-Sc hutz makes frequent reference not o nl y to liiiSS~'rl , 1-Teidegger 11 11d Cns1·o n Bac he la rd (The Poetics of Space, 1969 ) h11r n L~o fo ll 11• fr11110 us child psyc ho logisf· .J cn n Pia ge t. Pia get's cl en r CO I11 H't' l io11 1o pill ' ! It III H•II o logy was no t 1It t'Otl g h hi s f:1 mous treatise o n Stmt lll !'t lflsm ( I I) l11 11 ll11 11111\l1 11 Jll'ior nnd llll lt' h rn o t't' t•n•pi r icnl wo rk co n<.:t' llll'll fill n 1111 1,'.-ll t>u ltil l~ ilr'li!! ' ' ' "' d '111tl C'/;i/d 's ( ,'c JIISI/'11 1'1h 111 o/ /~ l'tllit')l ( Pi ngt'l I 1) ' ~ )

'I''

1

l>t'll p ilt• No rl w t·p, Sc hul z'" l'tH'Itll 1111 ' "' lilit t ltti'f' 11 1 fl H• ili l1 n .~ lt 11 VI1111 n 1 ' " " ·Vlt11 1

d t•N ig ll ii ii'N ' n t•vlli lt\'lti l't•'

Itl 1 1 lto11 kN, IH: 111111' 1111 , ll iN

II

(,l lll,: l tltll '' l ht• t• k• ll ll' lt lil oit ~)( ! !i ii_ IIII JI I foj itlL•' I• H I lllll pl t\i llld illd t•t•d llllli'i lll llti

IIIII VI't;. h 111-1 li N llllt l' lt IO do Wil li ! t!J ( Il! )' 1d II JI II l'l tlld ll l' hll tl dl'Sig ll UN il d ot'/-1 wi ilt 1 ilH •ti i'Y of :11·c h il'l'CIUt't', llld t•t d, i11 tl wp11 1 .1 11/ J •;,~,;ls l t:1 t Cl', Spc"'tl a/1(1 1\rc'IJ/Ii't III II ', Npnt'l' is redu ced to c lt'II H'Ill tll y p11 11 it lt•H in n se ries of vecto rs nnd di ng t'il ''' • ,.1, l11g 1o exp lain the net.:l'HSII I'Y l't•htlillll HJWl't•- ex istence. N o rbe rg-Sc hul l'., il1 d1 l111 ing d1 e basic schemata of t•x istelll'iu l spa ce in terms of a child's pe rcc pl io tt N, lllt' lllpl's to construct a spa tia l voca bul a ry that is essential a nd undi storlt•d , ttd lt•t' l ing 11 usserl's concept of epoch e. N orberg-Schulz's typologica l sc ht'lll :t 111 Ill ' lhl'rcfo rc m uch closer to Jungian archetypes than they are to e vt· t·yd ll d t'N l'l'i pl'ions of place. He talks about levels of existential space (geown pl lil , lti tlll scn pe a nd urban) within which particular typologies exist, f ro m h:t HII lll tllt' t'in l objects to specific landscape and urban forms. This pbil oso plt y i 1 1y•ll nll ised in his quote from Heidegger when he says, 'Heidegger furt ht•t' III OII ' JHiiiii Ho ut "when I go towards the exit of a room, I am already there, a nd wo td d 11 111 lw ab le to go there unless I was already there". In other words, m o/JIItll' pii'N itpposes a structured image of the environment, an existential sp ace w hit It 1 fl lll:li iiS generalized as well as particular orientations' (Norberg-Schul :t. I '17 11 I I). Norberg-Schulz also recognises the relation between some of his w or k 11 111 1 il ull or Kevin Lynch's attempts to concretise the specificity of urban e le nWIII N, wlti lv c ri ticising his approach for according 'character' and 'meaning' to chest•. It t ll ddi f·ion ' he limits himself, however, to discuss the spatial functio n of l'lwNt' l' li' lllt' nts, and thus leaves us with a fragmentary understanding of dw c ll ill l',' (r' ~OI'bcrg- Schulz 1979: 124). Curiously, there is no reference to any ph e nOIIH 'II 111111\ iSI'S in Lynch's books (nor even any reference to Norberg-Schulz in Lynd t' u fii! S m agnum of 1981, A Theory of Good City Form ). 'l'lw bas ic tenets of phenomenology feed into urban design in a va ri c ly nl w11ys, the closest direct link being through environmental psychology a 11d , h I')( II' II Sion , into behaviourism. These disciplines deal with the mediatio n or lit~ • p11li1k:n ll y in correct man- environment relations (Proshansky et al. 1970, Dow 11 111d Sf·ca l978, H ollahan 1982). One of the most debatable outcom es ol' il ti ttvt•r·nll process resulted in Oscar Newman's ideas on defensible sp ace ( l lJ 7 1, I'J'/.1, 1976, 1980), much criticised in a withering analysis by Bill H illi e t• (1 111 tlt•lt'II St' of space', 1973), on the dominance of the symbolic over th e mnll'l'ill l IN!H't'IHof urban space. In recent years environmental psychology h as run 0 111 o l lt't ll ll , pro ba bl y due to an inadequate articulation with any substan t ia I I'IH'OI'y, ,,lll •ll o nl eno logy in p articular. Phenomenology ha s h a d a diffuse a ppli cn1io11 \ '' I'ONH n va ri ety of concerns, primarily in a rc hi tecture and urban des ig11 , l'n t ·~ -.11 111p lt• in inte rpretatio ns of histo ry and l'l wmy (N or bc rg-Sc hul z 1964, I1>71, 'l 1 in f·hc wor kin gs o f po wer (Do v<•y I '1'1'1), i11 pt·n ·t•pl io ns of space (l<rdlll Ol), in t·cgn rd to pl accmakin ga nd nltil ll'llll ti l y (S11 111 11 ( )t d' J.OOI ,"i\rnvo l 2.00 '., II }il t ll nd Ltll'k hnm 2003), in 1·he ITHinlt 'llt t'lll t•l d11 itlt tl 111 '<'ll lllilltlll ily' (Sdtllll 11 • ltH ttt l lJ')tJ, ll ill it- 1' nnd l lt•II HOtl I ~IH I) 111(/ 111 li t• It Ill II plt y•iit'nl d i•h il\ 11 td til' ,,, , NptH't' (l{t•lplt 1') 7(i) . M o 1~ 1 n l !1 11; 1!11j'i!! l'li1111 q tpl h ll lt tll ll nl pltt•ll tll ll t' ll 1 " '' \~ lt t~ v t · I H•t • ll i11 ti ll'' " "' ' '!< lll l tll "tiliiJ' !l ltH r' ti!ii l lt 1 llll ill lt •tlttlllll' l'' " 'd pl .t ,• ttlltl· ttl jl, pl.u!'it •N!Ij lli'~W, td Uitl ily, lltt l <~ <!i ii !i ll ill!'i ii \\' •itll 1 i\i 'l l\111 ( 11l!l 1 )

·'?'>),


IIJ ', III'N lo t goi 11g IHH.: k to piH.:II OIIIt'llOioglcll l plollt lt i!tl d tlJ!t dllli J,j lf 111111It 1'\'U' III 11itiriHtll ol' tlw position b:1sed upo n its esSL' III inli '- ''' • , ltltll r. ''' llliiVl'I'IW is, it ltttllln 11 is Iit.: ll'n nings, l'l1 e deco nstruction of its bn sk 1\' llt•lH h)' I h•l'ri dn and Lyo 1:11·d, n11d th e assoc iation of one of phenomeno logy 's k•ndi11g l'igt~t·es, M a rt in llt'idcgge r, wit h the Naz is. Despite these criticisms, Aravot defend s phenome no logi cnl p l ::~ce m a k i ng as central to urban design: 'l'hc,·c is li ttl e disp ute about the multidimensionality of sense of place; it is cultural, physica l, spiri tual and social. Therefore phenomenological placemaking is more a guid ing principle th an a model. It may be compared to Harvey's account of the ;onccpts of justice and rationality, which are expressed in very different forms, in different forms in different places, times and cultures, but nevertheless retain their n bstract functions as ideals. (Aravot 2002: 209) Phenomeno logical criticism extends beyond the actual experience and design of urba n space into architectural form, a movement spearheaded by Alberto PerezComez, Dalibor Vesely and others at the University of Essex in the UK. PerezComez's main text, A rchitecture and the Crisis of Modern Science (1983) , n rgued against the abstract mechanistic rationalism of modernist architecture in favom of an architecture whose foundation was based in direct experience of the world. He argues that architects have been sorely limited on the basis that: A simpli stic view of human experience derived from the projection of human

scienti fi e models on to human reality, exemplified by certain aspects of behaviourism and positivistic psychology, has hampered our understanding of the essential continuity between thought and action, between mind and body. Because architectu ral theory is assumed to imply absolute rationality, it has been considered capable of stand ing on its own, free of all relations to fundamental philosophical questions. (Perez-Gomez 2000: 469)

M arxian politi ca l economy Marx is the first great post-modern intellectual because he is an antihumanist and beca use he defines progress as the liberation of nature, and not as the realization of n conce ption of man. The important thing about Marxist thought is that it replaces a rebelli on waged in the name of the human subject with an analysis of the ·ontracl ictions of capitalism. (Touraine 1995: 104) ' l(>tn Hottomo rc notes that Marx began his life as a philosopher, n discipline that lw wns Inte r to reject as potentially harmful to und crst'ntH iitlf', ,~ i t w~· ir was so far tTt•t oved from the mate rial reality of cvcry d:~ y li fv : ' ol ,til lypt'll of th ~·ory, it is sl'it• n c~· th nt is closes t to rea li ty nnd III OHI • npuhlt• 11l dt •ph 1111p, it , whereas philosophy is n for111 of theo ry th nt Hllhlt 'll ll t' Vt ll i111 11111 .1 jll lttll tlllllf', insight·s Ill NyH il'lll ll lk di sl'()l'l'ion' (1\oll o tll lllt ' I'IH I l }i_ ·Jdlt_ [l!'.l~l ·~ llllp. ti H· l'll d of pltiloNoplt y 11 11d it NfHij)I'ITl'll,lii OII h)' ~~ II 1111 r-- 111 · itt lil lt •ii l[ itil l.! tlllhltt iii iiOII Nhip with dw ll qw lin ll lt'll d itio ll , Jlit lldt l lll lilt Ill llt tl il!iil ll!l j!l tlilli nlt: lll ll tllll y, 11 01

nn.

1

illl' """" A1l •.ttttl' '""I P ttt Wl 11 . ! HtiH !hrllr i'''ri" , tvhu:·· hYIItlH•tii!iCt lll itl ow 1t ttiiilllll j•lttl ttNttp lt y, wlttt It lt il ~ iiHP II lt!tllt il\''"l' ' tth tllll lllll:ttiiJ', ,IIIItll ll ollllllt.ill ' ifitllllllltttl l l hy oiiH•t' 1'/1'11 1 tltitd 111 ll !ILII 11 ~ l,ttii'J',l' l.td~t l l''l, l.olti N A ltlll ll'l~H' t , litlltl'' <:n1111Nl'i, ,1111'1-\1' " ll nlu tti HI H, Fh111 M <lll1•, Alni 11 'l'ou ndtH', Mtllll lt' l · ~ I ti ll ~. Ultvi d li :Hv cy, Alll Otll ll r~I 'JI,I i Ill HI lil il ll Y ot hers. or tltl'Hl', pt•oh.tb l !il•ll ~~t.! l WtiNti ll.' most signifi ca ttl l.'til lt o l Mnnc's origin al phi losop hy. Altlnl i'lNt't ~~·~ i ~ ~~::tl till' I kgdian influence in Ma1·x with its humanist te nd encies, 111:ti tll ni 11 !"t\ d11tl Mtll'xist· philosophy was in fact a philosophy of science, de spil l' it jl! tllti t:t d ,111d ideological focus . The power of the M arxian tradi tio n rc lll ili ll 11l1 11 11 11 11d hn s affected many theorists across a whole range of di sciplin t·s. II ll '"' 11tlt1t't'S ns :1 significantly contested region of intellectual investi ga t·ion , t'VI' II ttlttiiJ \ those who remain its most ardent supporters, for several main rcnso11 Y. I !1 •I, tl t11 o11l y is it a philosophy, it is simultaneously a theory of hi :<to ty, i" '"1"1\Y• :l scie nce, a theory of economics, an ideology and an epi stcmoloi',Y• ', t111tl , whil e one could argue for redundancy in every avenue of Mar xi11 11 tl1111 l· 1111',, thi s would be a serious mistake as well as a major misundcrstnlldi iiJ', nl lti ~ work by ignoring the transformative nature of his ideas. Indeed, the lll OII' 1" 11pk l'tli l aga inst Marxism (in any of its reincarnations), the longe r its n• lt• 1111 I'IHirvivcs and the more enduring it becomes. Third, there are few disciplilH' !11111 thr social sciences that remain untouched by his method . Fourth , it ll' lttoti ti NIhe best critique of capitalism ever written. i'ttndn llicntal to Marxian philosophy is the principle of dialectical matcri nl 111 , which maintains that our reality is composed of contradictions that dl'iv1' ld ~lllt'kn l development. 'Matter' and 'mind' are conceived of as opposin g dl tllt WlltlllS of a reality where the material element is primary. Marxian tht'OI y lll',l',l'H IS th at some rather fundamental laws govern the processes of hlltl t:lll • 11 11 1111 ion, and that such laws relate directly to the historical thresholds of l ht· c It low: fo rms of capital development. All human requirements in thi s 1:011 tltll llllll :He seen to be contingent upon both social and economic stru cl'llt't• hl1 It ~o· hange dynamically over historical time. As human beings come togl•th t•i ''' 1111\lt ll fncture the material necessities of life, the productive process beco11 H' 11 llt Hionnecl into a social event. AN Nociety reproduces itself, a set of social and property relations a rc niNn t''llilh li l·dted a nd reproduced over time, based upon the private ownership ol', Il l '111111'1>1 over, land, property and the means of production . This cleaves soci1•1 111111 two divi sions: those who possess capital in its various forms , and who 1111' tlll' l't•l'orc in a position to purchase labour power, and those who are forced to st•ll 1 \ "It 'll lnho ur in order to survive (Marx sometimes referred to three cln HfH'N 1 · d ttll ll', lnndownc rs and capitalists). 'J'he 1'1'11 1 fOitt td :Jt ion of society is thcl'vi'lllt ' t•t tllto mi c st ructure (base ), upo n wlli1 It "'tl!ll't'~II'IH 'III t'il l form s a rc th en 1>11 il1 •,Il l, politicn l, insri t·uti onal, ickoloJ•,in tl , tit ) llnttiiiHl or lh <.' rnnta slit: di vt• t 1 tH't' i11 1wivikgt', power nnd tlw lll .tlt•t ii tl tH't~ t;'"l. lllt '._ 111' lift· wlt irh ex ist lwtwt't' ll tlii ''II' IWO ~· l nNHl'N, liS Wl' II 11S ti H'i l' llVt 'l wl11 Ill till)~ .Iiiii IIIII I IIIIIH'tlt!Wndlip, Nllpt•t p H'Iill'll ll mlti H lw illlt't'(lll'tt•d t•ttllll 1 ll t'lPH4: t• ; '"'' Ullt ll't> INol' 1\fl l'ot'lll 11 ~ dtl llllll lltill ll tl 11 11 11 1'1' ll~qttll'l•d [II 111tllltdlf' ilti' ~ i!l i ~ll ldt:li 'IIH lt y, ' l'IH' t>lllllt ' i

"'''Y

~

d


I

tdli ·d II !Ill t'\il,(t' IH I'

(O

1111111 111\l' lil t' il ll ni i'H li l t •ljlil d .,. iJ l,lll pI 1111 With doi11g

w l t~tlll dot·.~ ht ·s t, l\l' ll ('l'nli 11g illl l'rcs l, l'l:tlf, pl'olll 1111d 11 111pl11,_ , ,Jilll ' ll'ollllnbour. A l li.~ l ol'ico l 1110 t L:l'in list co ncept ion of ideo logy tl lt' tt•ltlt ,. Ii11k.~ itko logicn I lot'lltS (orgnni.~L:d religion, the law, educa tion) to thei r· hiNIOI'k·nl degrees of Hn Iit'lll'L', l'O the ir a rti cu lation with other ideologies, and in their relation to di fft•rtnt soc i::1 l classes and cl ass relations where the controlling ideology remains f hn1 of the dominant class. As David Harvey observes, 'What Marx depicts Iherdorc, arc soc ia l processes at work under capitalism conducive to individu :d ism, a I icnation, fragmentation, ephemerality, innovation, creative destruction, Spl:c.: ulativc development, unpredictable shifts in methods of production and ·ons tllnpti on (wants and needs), a shifting experience of space and time, as we ll as a crisis-ridden dynamic of social change' (Harvey 1989: 111). In Frank Sti llwe ll 's recent book Political Economy, he denotes nine important themes :merging from Marxian philosophy that remain important today, from concepts of the nature of social change and social class, the expansionary nature of :apita li sm, uneven development, monopoly power and the role of the state, to its effects in the realm of commodification, exploitation and alienation (Stillwell 002: 98 ). Post-Marxist theory has developed not only from inconsistencies and faulty LIL:duction in the original exposition but also from the inability of orthodox intl:rprctations to explain the dynamic complexity of contemporary capitalist deve lopment. This reformulation is due in part to the empirical evidence that wns ava i.la ble to Marx during his lifetime and to the actual historical evolution of soc iety over the last 150 years that has contradicted many of his original nssumptio ns. Marx's concentration on productive forces does not for example reflect the dominant importance of service economies within advanced capitalist societies a nd the functions of management and information as major economic nc.:tiviti es, nor indeed the changes involved in the move from mode of production I'O mode of information (Castells 1989, 1996, Poster 1990, Sassen 1991, Smith, N. 200 1). Nor did he ever anticipate the extent to which the exploited mass of hbolll; a nd its reserve army that acted as a safety valve for the exigencies of :npitn li st production, would be transformed. The conditions of organised labour n ccessC~ rily improved in line with the ever-improving means of capital reproduc1ion, in the provision of housing, education, health, welfare and other facilities. In nddition, the political power of labour to generate change had a revolutionary l'ffL:c.:t on its ow n material life conditions via trade unions, urban social rn ovc n1 cnts and other forms of resistance (see Smart 1983, chapter 1, 'The limits nnd limi ti1tio ns of Marxism' ). Others, however, would argue that the overall lr·n/t'ct"ory of cap ita lism is lumbering forwa rd o n ro ug hl y tht• sn mc principles, dth o ug h with a vastly different dyn:1mic illtd Sll':ll<'l',it IIH 'IIil (I IIII"Vt'y 2003). ( :lohn li s:lf' ion c:1 n be see n as a not/l('r 1l'i11111pl1 lu1 l'll flll ll l, 1 11 11tl 1111', its hound.tl'ii•s h<:yo nd rhose of the n:"l lion Nltli l', ll flr' lllllfllll• 111 11 lll ilil·lr; l li lltd t'l( ploi livc nf· a g lohn l sen /to . frtq w r ltrli NIII lrt ""'' 111d 11' iltll l11 II''" Jlolit kn l

~

pns~o~ihi l i 1 il~s

II,"'

li'triiJ\it 'IIIHil ilwJ tlt t' l't'U III 'II' 11 .' i11 l; 1111dl \1 d1i ,1, All', l li llll ~ l ll rl 111111 ll'lllj . 'l'llr : !tllr llilllll o ll nho tll' is 11ow ll llllllli 111h illljllll\'1 ri No 1hn1 1hv sttlft' l't lll t't'd ll ll' 111 i1u 11111llnl'li Hits nftcnlio11 .twuy ''""' .. 1" 1.d H' plltdlll.: lio ll , 10 assis l intll'W lo r'lll ul iJ tpltn l ill'C IIIHUln tion throu j',ll p11hll1 pdv111l' p:ll'lncrships. Prohl L: ms of idt•o ,,,,,,, '" dorlti nnncc, a li enat io n ll lld l'(ll llll l(l(/ity l'er ishism a lso re ma in , lkspi((• rill iiiiii 'I IIU IIf',ly nrtic ul ate manipu l:tl'iOrl of' difl:l: l"l: llCC - gen der, ethni c ity t1 11d 1'(' /i gio ll '"' 1 \ll ltlple, in the culture/cap ita l rcl:ltion ship . I lu• din.:c.:l' consequence of all this to the study of urban form or to 11 11 • IIIIIJ•,t' lll 1hcory of urban design is that the forms of the built environrlH'IIt 11111111 lw disconnected from the totality of the mode of production , to ho w I"" I ' IN nll ocated, owned, exchanged, transformed and institutiona li st•d, 11r lt!IW 11 lly lnbo li ses the relations of the society from which it emerges. This fm.' II HI' 1111 11lin11 on the actual reproduction of space, on the spatial forms of constlltlp 111111 JH'm'l!Sses and on the design and reproduction of the physical enviro rllt l\'111 ' " lllh<H il' productivity increases, the reproduction of the social relat io11 s o l Jilllllllt't io n become increasingly important, and hence a change of emphn sis i 11 ljllll't•d w ithin the economy from production to consumption and hc nc:t• to 111 lu i ro nfli ct related to the reproduction of labour power. Relevant hc r·t nr'l' l"""'''lll H related to urban development, the deployment of the consumplio11 l1111rl , lo the increasing complexity of social structure and the competing illl'l' l'{'li l ,. 1111 ht•x ist between classes and 'fractions' of classes, of problems rel ated I O fht • 111111 tinning of the state and its ability to subvert market laws, of urban p ln111tirt), lillllll'hnn social movements, and to conflict related to the political all ocation o l 111l u111 sp:1 cc. l 'l~t• ~:c ntral agency in this process is the state and the overall role of ul'i 11 111 l)illltling is c ritical, since it sets the environment for urban design. Here Wl' get lllll llOill CWhat deep water in the sense that the role of the state within ca pil nli HIII 1ld d kd w ith controversy. Serious questions exist about its structure, it·s n ·ln 111111 lll t'np ita l and the relative autonomy or otherwise of its various compo rH'tlt lj , 1111' 11' nrc vnrious ideological positions (conservative/liberal, classical M nnd NI, 11111 M ill' xist, state derivationist, corporatist/managerialist, neocorporatis l, I'll ,) 111 wt· ll ns t1 t least six possible classifications within a historical m a t·c rini iNI llltll ltion olo ne (Jessop 1977: 354- 7). Added to this, Boris Frankel in hi s <.' lnHHil /1, 11'111/rl tiJe State published over twenty years ago rejected the idea o f \ ·i vi i 111 lt•ly' an d the division of all social relations neatly between the sto tr, l'iv d •" lt •ty 1111d the economy (Franke11983) . Frankel also maintains that th e re nt'l' 11 1 1, 1 ~ 1 lo1 11' dominant misconceptions of th e st:1 tc: as a thing, an id e:1 l typt\ 11 \ ' Hiti''t't o r· a derivative part of capita l. W t cn n ro mpo und these diffi cultks ('VI 'rt . 1illl'r' hy co nsid e ring th e vastly diffe rin g vit•wN of Mnrx :1 nd Jioucau lt on powt•t 1111I N Alt.h11sse 1· bei_ng o ne of ~ot:r c:lliii 'N f111 rr11 •1 '''"' lu •I'H ). ~e ClYI1 rwr·~1d y .1111 il·.llln rt NhlfJ by sny 1ng th:lt wrthrn M tll tii!Pi rtl , cltlllllrl tllloJI IN nlwnys llllfllllll , 1J·" rt 'l lN I'm Fo ucn ult·, Hi nt:l' pow l'l' iN II Il i It II, 111.! 111 ~ ~~ltl''l t1j, l't:H iH tll lll't' iN lll tl U~!lftorll olio,l n l sirt' '''

It


I

I

1" 1111 "1"! ' 11__11 ' 11

Jlt IWI

1

l'jllliidb•,t•d li N II jlONNI'NN iO II 0 1 II jill \ tlo IIIIIHidt•l'l'd (() 'dispositions, lll nnoc uvrt•s, 1111111 , llltlllloni ngs'. I'IIWI'I' 1't'l111ions nt•t• nor lo<.: nli zcd in confron tolio li N IH•Iwt ·tll ~"''' " l' lnsscs 01· lwiwt'l'll d ti zcns nnd the sr:~tc; rather th ey arc co nccplii lt llt,t•d li N t'X IN(ing at th IliON( l' it'rtl CII( t1 ilcvcl of the social domain and might be snid 10 t:w • s tilut~.: it. I

IN II II I 1 II III

Itt• ''" ''' IIH'd

illm11 g h

(Smart 1983: 87) l.~ o l llt'i llg o ut the M a rxian perspective, the relationship between urban plannine., 1ill· Sl"tltc and space has been widely discussed in Preteceille (1982), Scott and l~owe is ( 1977), Kiernan (1983), Harvey (1985), Dear (1986, updated in Dear 000) nnd Merrifield (2000) . lJ11dcni nb le, however, is that urban planning, unlike its associated 'environlll l' lll'nl' di sciplines (architecture, landscape architecture, urban design, environ111Cnt:1 1 design ) is the only discipline wholly dependent on its embeddedness w iI hi n the sta te apparatus. In other words, it comes into existence solely on Ihe basis of its juridical (ideological) function, and is defined by it: 'l'hc plann er req uires something else as well as a basic understanding of how the syste m works from a purely technical standpoint. In resorting to tools of repression, coo ptation, and integration, the planner requires justification and legitimill"ion, a set of powerful arguments with which to confront warring factional illl"crcsts and class antagonisms. In striving to affect reconciliation, the planner must perforce resort to the idea of the potentiality for harmonious balance in so<.: icty. And it is on this fundamental notion of social harmony that the ideology of planning is built. (Harvey 1985: 176) All of these considerations impact heavily on urban design. Just as the practices thnt co nstitute urban planning discourse are a subset of the legal code, the pt·ncti ce of urban design is multivalent in that its power does not originate ft'OIIl n single so urce. Urban design practice is located across all state planning dt•pnrrments, dependent agencies, private sector firms in all environmental disd pli11cs, and across many academic programmes within tertiary education. {),·bn11 des ign in this context has at least four levels of functioning, where the interpenetration of one level with another is complex and not reducible to a .~ i n g l c fo rmul a without extensive qualification. lJrbo11 des ign reinforces those processes of production that underwrite th J't production of the financial/informational mode of capitalism, specifically ''t• lnt·cd to land development, for example in concept·un Iising the most effi:ic nt· usc of space for the maintenance o f pro pc1'l y vn iJt t•s, nnd in perpetu nli ng nnd extending the incessant rcp,·odu r t'io,, of l'i tpil :d f,·o111 land vin tk•vdop mcnt nnd redevelopmcn1·. At lilt• r t·•tln • n ltltl ~ I" 'H I'NN is lh ~: ex ploitIlion of ln11d as n co mmodity tlltd it.~ nppnll''' ''l' I'''' J. IJI.I II J\ ' '" IH ti t·, fllrl' hct·· i111'. the inl t' l'l'SI'S of propc1·ty t'II J!II ul ,ttld 11 11 tlltlllltl l111 ' 111 i111 t 'N i t thlit-ollltl~·nl o ll nnd polkies il lrl t l' llh ll tl n ' il 11• t · It' '"" " " ' j\l(lllilill!llll , 1''"111 ltolll fl oOI' HJllll't' 11 11d Stii'Jllll.~ vn lt w illllll ltlllll ltlil 111111 l lrJ, IJJI tlo lli i' ' " ' ' ij~ ili t ll l ,, t lll'l'l'lnl

,., Ill"

...

IIII I,.

jy

pollt' III Hnl i11 11tl IIWJII; I'~ I !ij• 1illd ''- 111111 , 11 i llft! l'~' i ll j •, NI UW pnl ici~·~~ tt•l;llt•tl 111 lu1HI tkvcloplltl' Jl( , •t• HI itt l11ht it llu• wmki ngs of th l· jlJI"id kn l NYHit' lll 111 lt'l',i t inli sing the who lt• lt ll ll Ill Jtddtli on, UJ'hnn J csig•1 :1Iso h:ts :1 ,·o lt• ill l!)lt fl ict reso lu tio n lwtwl'l'll tl11• VII J'inll s t:npi ta ls in te rested in l ~111d dt-vl' l llpllll' lll - property, industrinlmtd liiiiiiiCl' copita l in particul.ar. O vera ll , sin t't• li ~< t • d cnp ita l in the buil t envi ro nm ent· is constantly degrad ing, co ntilltlt'd " I'I HII'It111i ties for recycling profits m ust be maintained: 'Havin g dcvolin·d iltl' J'CS<> urces of urbanization, capital complains of diseconomi es. lll'h nn lllllJ't: hy and pathology' (Preteceille 1977: 23). Udlilll design is the central process for implementing state planning poli t: it• wit h 1·ega rd to spatial requirements for individual, collective and lu xut 'nnsl!tnption, and to the overall spatial needs of urban administ rr\1 io11 , 'l'lti s involves impacting institutional and class locations and bound nrit ~ illl'tH IJ.!,h socially appropriate technologies and bureaucratic proccdut'l!, (1tid es, statutes, policies, plans) through to administering 'planning' pol k (dt•w lopment and design controls in particular). The central focus here is llw p11h lic realm, the space where social reproduction connects with th e rn :1 1'k('1 lltd whe re civil society spends its leisure time. The role of urban desiwt iN ttdi spcnsable since policy planning is incapable of conceptualising approp,·i· lit' spatial forms and relationships. Urban design also has a key role i11 111itignting outcomes- social conflict which may arise from the inadequ nlt' lll'ovisio ns of the consumption fund, resulting in demands (qualitativc :111d IJII itlltitative ) at individual and collective levels. I lt·hnn design is also involved in facilitating commodity circulation , in tlw pllyskn l design and organisation of infrastructure at all levels, and i11 tiH• provision of facilities for transport functions. Of significance here is lil t• lll ~' l'l'ns in g role of urban design in the production of spectacles as intr:1 -urhn11 to m petition grows and cities become locked into a Darwinian strugg lv l'o1 III'Viv al. Spectacular production in the form of Olympic Games, trade 111111 wo•·ltl fa irs, grand prix, international conventions, political summits, 011 lt•t-Hiv:11s and other events may represent the difference betwee n finnll dll l lll't'l'SS and failure. Or, as in Bilbao, the right building at the right 1110 111!'111 ' ''" reju venate an entire city. JliJtn ll y, urban design assists the ideological, symbolic and semiotic rccptiJ't: llll'lll s of the various capitals and the state in relation to an appropri ttll' t•odil'icntio n of their ideological needs. Symbolic representation is J11'l' ~H' Ill Vt''' in neg:1tion, and ownership of th e image, branding and co rpo t':t ll' 1, ·.)'t llholi s"' i11 creasingly configure urbl'l n des ign with a co ntinu a ll y chnll j',i ng '(,,,, hnn sl• mi otic of space and form. IIIJ \

"I"''"

'''''II

Itt _ wo rd s 1"1~<.' des ign P'~occss iH l'Jtd wddJ •1I 111 l~V''' y lt•vt· l i11 til!' ~milt I l t1 1 n~.~·, lt y. 11 :dso llltpnt'l's vt• J'II t:nll y tlt~'tlllj',l' tlu ' .' '''' tll ~t v ~ l t ' lll o l .' '''lHlll pn'.' lit t'N 1 11 1d thtiS l't• Ji t•I' IH ti ll' 1'01111111',1'111 td t·ll llljl,ll"ij ld i111 ' 111111114 l~i lpil l ti N li N 1111 ')' Jlllll ldtt' dt iW II!illtllip,Jt li11• II JH'I"i ll ill ll il illl tl llt ld hlll 11! tin 111 1} [II 11;111'111 '1 11 Ull i111 ~~ ~~ ~~I Nid t• oJ 1111' JIICH I'IW JIN 111'! 11 111 J'1lllil · .II Ji 11 ~1 111 ( \j j i i ll [l iu"t \"[l ,til 11[ 111 1 1

1\hl'l"


tppt 'l ll N lo dt'II Y iiH• poss i!Ji lily of :llt y ~ t1 l11 II Ill fil '""i)1 ;;f Ill b111 1 dt•Nif',ll I!Vt:l 1'1111'1'1\f ll /', 1 I'Xrt• pf ON iI di I'C<.:tl y I'Ciul'eS 1'0 f'l1tllt' i'lli Ill lip lllilf lll\ ptlll I'IHH'H. 'l'ht'N(' fot ll' k·vt:ls o( ana lys is address both ud Htlt (plllilllt 111111) 1111d ltOII-ud ltl ll (l'Oti Stlll tpl'ion) fun ctiO t1S, as well as those of circt~l a t iot t ll tHI t•xt.:lw nge. A Sfritl dd'init ion of ' urb:m ' design in Castells' terms would therefore li mit itself to dtt• ttt 01111er in w hi ch the spatial aspect of consumption processes was physicn ll " mgn n ised and appears in building form. It would correspond to the configtll n1i011 a nd locational pattern of everyday life, dissociated from the processes ol production, storage, individual consumption, etc. There would appear, from 1'111' 1 hove ::t na lysis, to be sufficient evidence to propose at least one axiom which ol itself co ntradicts most urban design theory, that all urban space is designed. T lw nssu mpti on that chance and probability operate in some areas and not in othe1·s is t·o be avoided. Urban design is a process which applies to the totality of tlw btdl t en vironment, not simply to those examples of professionalised urban spa<..'t· th:'ll' accommodate the most concrete if transient and expedient manifestations ol ·n pi ta I development.

h olitics

Politics is war without the guns. Mao Tse-tung

h'ncluction: Politics and Ideology Disco urses are loci of power, they must be read from the vn ntage point not of the author or the intended audience, buc fro m the perspective of how they constitute a power l'(;lation. Poster (1984: 131) Sp::tce has been shaped and moulded from historical nnd natural elements, but this has been a political process. Space is political and ideological. It is a product literally filled with ideology. Henri Lefebvre

ll11 dum· quotation by Henri Lefebvre suggests how crucial it is for urban dtsij•,ll 1 111 HIttdy the political dimension of urban life and to comprehend the sigt tificnttt t• .I' itlt•t dogy to th is process. Politics is represented at the intersection of the eCOII OII tit "'!Itt· Hocinl, mediated through ideology. Urban design is an instru ment or d ttl 1"111 it •• ,,s we ll as an important method of social control and liberation. It· COllSI 1 lltl1 !j ilw spnce where political ideologies are played out in concrete form. Whilt• tl11• '' d1 1 tl t ·~·o n om i c systems in creating spatial structures is well understood, <.'XIH II t. '"' ldt•o logica l syste ms do the same thing remains open terrain. Not only dt w l1tti iJ p:tn• provide the theatre fo r social struggle, as many great urb::t n spnct•s wdl . 0~ 1 , II iN nlso the ultim ate sy mbolic representation of the conflicts, as pirt~t· ion s tt lld ' 'i 1u~ o l pnst ge ner::tl·io ns. The compl ex mat ri x of buildings nnd s pn ~cs in nil 1'/t't il t•ittlwnn·s us with f'he sro ri es, phi losop hi es, VOit Nd nli NlttSs, religio,,s, w11n1, lu! "' ~ li tH I lwroi nes, of tlw fni ltt n•s, vktorit·s :11td dll 'illllll of Oil I' illtl'l'StmH, ull " ~'"''tl : tl ist•d wi tltiJt tltt• puhl k n·n lttl (Mndilttiptlllt 1'11111) ~ h1tti tlt'H if•, lt l'l'• tl i't• t iii ii !'Jt'tl Willi ti lt' lll Nilttli llli ll ltilllll ll!flllljdt •\ l!ll:llllt'lllllj',)' lillt~ l o ~ Cilt l ll llt N 1l11 • llll' IIIIIIII'H, Jt•ll t•tfltll lll tt lltl tl11 1111 ili 1ol till II Utillltl 1 llllill~ ll llll ll lllf\ 1

'I


Ill

l ~j till' ill\ ldtt •t IIIII' o l p11h l 1 ~· l'l'll illl . 'l'itl'ir' lll olllllotl t_l ill it!\ ttiiitihll lt' llll 'l lrt ill l', lidl y 11111 1Oll l'll'i nlll·dy to th is pr·ocl'SS. O nlh e sul'fn ct\ llll li rlltl t•hll\"' ' " "'''Y lw i11 vo lv1·d 11th ~· SOIII t'w hnltllillld nne process of fu lfi ll ing :J di1'11ll 11 it f,lllt pi i' IIH'IIIillg n lo<:ll l 11'1'1 1 I' IIVii'OrlllH:ntn l plan , o r assembling developme111 l'OIItl'oi Nlot No me nebu lou pl 11 nnin g :nrth o rity. These processes are however co ntin gt: lll 1rpon mu ch dec rwr r1 11d t• rrdu ri ng und erc urrents. At a fundamental level, and as a matte r of their ow rr lq.1i 1im :1 t ion, urba n designers should remain conscious of their involvement in th1• It is tori<.:::d Iy ge nerated ideological process of reproducing urban space. Th i nwnrcness wi ll a llow them to realise how they fit into the overall trajectory ol sol'inl development, how the culture and civilisation they have been privileged to 1w rvc sho uld be recorded in stone and mortar for future generations, for their ~· hil dren, a nd for their children's children. This is one of the most important tasb, in society, fo r philosophies and ideologies do not represent themselves abstractl y in our environment but in and through its architecture and urban spaces. Mode rn political ideologies come in many forms (Dunleavy 1980, Vincent 11)92, Leac h 1993 ). Within contemporary western democracies, where there is :1 st• p:Hation of powers between the political process, the judiciary and organised re ligion, traditional political forms begin with the left (anarchism, communis11r :1 11 d democratic socialism) , through liberalism in the centre, extending to con Sl'l'vn tisrn and fascism on the right. In addition, contemporary politics ha vt· ge nerated other important ideologies that Leach (1993) refers to as 'cro~~ spectrum ideologies' such as imperialism and racism, arguably pan-politic:rl st·r:Heg ies, and others such as feminism, the Green movement and the Rainbow Con I itio n that are centred round issues of equality between the sexes, tlw ~ rr v iro nm e nt, gender issues, etc. This picture is made even more complex by 1 he idea of supra-national ideologies such as neocorporatism, the ideologi cn l SIT:ltegy o f business in a world where national boundaries (and hence nationn I ideo logies ) become eroded in the interests of the global marketplace. There an· of <.:o urse at least another two worlds where these ideologies do not who ll y .· omp ly: firstly, within totalitarian state socialism in China and, secondly, i11 Islam ic sta tes where feudal social relations maintain a homology between polit k's, reli gion, the judiciary and the military, yet operate within the capitalist wor ld t"t"o nomy. Political ideologies are fundamentally unstable. They have shiftirr1•, r·tl nt ionships with other ideological systems as well as being subject to intern :d ;onflict a nd co mpetition between subgroups. Great wars have been fou ght lwtw ce n ca pita list states, which have the same ideology, and between group1o with the sa me reli gion, for example between Iran and lraq. It· sho uld be q ui te clear to urban designers, even ::It n vv t·y si rnpli st·ic level, how ,~ pv~ifi<.: ideo logies have had huge impac t·s orr urhn11 Hjllil 'l' nr11l forrn. Socia list vitivs in Chin n hAd, until recently, nn nlrn ost llrlil!ltlll dt 'll 'l il y .1r11 l height fr0111 Olll' skk of th e city to the other, n•s tdtill l', lr!llll tl11 I''' 1 tltri C t ~ n ltt Nt· vn lues nnd tlw nho lition of priv:ll'c propt•rt y 11 11d prl vr tll l11t ~ lt11 . '' iiH •te Wt iM110 'l.'vrrt nd hii Hi ll t'HH ' to ~·on du l' l' nr1d tlwl'(•lol'l' Ill ttl 1111 d lm ~i t!l'l!ll di ll! 1 h l r t l1111 1 l u tt'm' tt• rL~I ·d tiH'I'.ipi tnliNt l'i ti1·s oi' tiH' Wl'lll. < 'illr '• · 111 tlri• lqltllitl•, W!i rld (dli 11 III U 1111 ' INIII rll it t ltll·~' ) lt .tvt· l'v o lw d tllli tpw llt ttrt l l "' t!Lidin [!li! : t!illl il!l• ·llr 1'11('1} ltiiHI~d uptrrt

01

lt nl111111 lu•lt t•l•j lltHI , i11 1'\ llltllt • 1·I

tlrr it!~l tutu l ~ ' 'l ', il'l',ll tioll ol tiH· ,YI''it'~ 11 1111

s pn ~~· is Nilllilnl'i y nllt:t il'd: It II iM t'X PI'l'SNed, whn t iN lildtl , 11 11t1 tl w l t~tl IN HIOrl'd in rn errr ory hns ini'ill ilt• 11i t1li1111, t'l'fl t.•(.;t·ing hi sto r·kn ll y lllllfl ri l',l' lli , donlin nting and depend ent idl.'olo 1 '' '"' It 1 ~ l' h•nr that urba n dcs ig tH'r'N tll't' IH> IId lll r'ded, co vertly or otherwi se, wit h 11 ltlllt• t-wl'it.•s of ideologica l co nstru <.:ts, from the overall progress of globn l ~~~ p· llili ll lll to th eir own education and beliefs . Yet while ideological interventio11 :rt iltl' lttlllttl level is a complex intangible process, it materialises and is a rticul nrvd itlilt l Hi lite institutions, dominated by the legal system, and in the exp ress ion o l ill II 11t1' Nl'l' lO r influence across the entire economic spectrum. The specific id t.•o l '1\1 IIIIISI directly affecting urban designers is therefore that of urban p la nnirl l', ri1d lt MHlntutes which legitimise state ideology in regard to the reprodu ction ol ltiid l111' development. However, before we look at the actual material effects ol i.lrll llll',it'n l prod uction on urban form, we must briefly look at how ideo logit• 1rr 111 lw und erstood, how they are constructed and configured, and how tl w llliltl\ 11' nnd support various forms of power. 1\1 l'onsider ideology in any depth is a lifetime's work, and large tra cts o l liltl tti Y stnd<s are devoted to its study (Gramsci 1971, Althusser 1984, Lad11 11 11111 Mo uffe 1985, Habermas 1987, Castoriadis 1987, Balaben 1995 ). 'l'lw jlllrlrlt• llt <.:n n be made simple if we say that ideology can be defined as nn y 11'111 of belief along with the institutions that support it. Whenever we movv l11 1111 1his position, the world becomes infinitely more complex:

!111 ltll lll ll' l'll litlll o l WO IIII'II. llu " llll 1111t ,, dtttlur tt

ltl1•ologies arc bodies of concepts, values, and symbols which incorporate concc pof hum an nature and thus indicate what is possible or impossible for hum :1 ns Ill til hkvc; critica l reflections on the nature of human interaction; the values which lt1111111tiS ought either to reject or to aspire to; and the correct technical arrangeIIII'III Nfor social, economic and political life which will meet the needs and interes ts rtl liii11 H1n bein gs. (Vincent 1992 : I()) tlll r l ,~

l'tllhii'IIIS of ideology therefore begin to access almost every dimension of in tel l11 l111tl invest iga tion, in its relationship to history, science, politics, ethics, cult ur·t•, 1dil loNo ph y ::1 nd religion. In this context, any coherent picture of what ideology is lwllllllt'H nlm ost impossible, and a retreat to Marx's simple definition that itkol t'lll' 1 ~ lll l' rely false consciousness is enticing in its elegance. Marx also sugges tvd lit il l 1d1•ology was a n inverted version of the truth, comparing it in The C er/111/11 /,h•" lu.~y to n came ra obscura where th e rea l im age (truth) becomes in v<.: rn•d. VII~' •- lii JIOt~ on to s u ~gest that the fund ~rnt' rHn l dif~<·r~· rt ce b~tween ideology nnd jtl ill.,~o ph y IS t'he nctrve ro le pl ayed by rdt •olol'. y Wltlt111 N!ll'lt' ty. In other word A, dt •t\)•tl', it•s nr'l' th <.: nrili ta nt as pect of phi losoplt y ' llr lt vl' tiH·y ll l't'd to ht• pr:lcti sl·d. 1tl1o\ •1Hiest:n nn ot sit· on thes hel fwa itinl'.lot tll iriJ \N 1111! 11'1 11'11 , hrrt !'x ist nssys lt' rrl td 111 ~.~~ tict·~ o r· di.w:rli f/'S I'S nrr d :~n· o p<· rtl nlll i.lljJi iV!.' ;Jitil'tl; ·l·rl tl11•i1 llW IIIIII t'r'rl rd lt,ll ',il.: 111tl '.\!,l''''ll vt•H: WIII H'Im Mnr '< tHIII ovt•t• tli1 • 1 , 1 ~ 1 I '.tl \'l li ll l. I'""''' ' l1>1 ilu• ll ll'dll llll dlllltl ~ll wllil'i1 id1•o lngit·N llllll 'llll tl, 1111d lil t\\' I'I'WI't i~ l'111111i'rl ,' lj lftlll 'd, tiW IH~d . lilldl ~ dt lll lll di 11!11tl1'd I~<~ tl' llt l'lil ''' 1111 1111tlt 1 .rtlllti!!l t\ tilldtiillill\' (I rd., !j l '.lfU,) ,


Ill

t•uwt-1': IUghiR and l..tws 'l'lw l o tt n·p l of L'O tllro l lies ~H the heart of any sod td N)"dt ''' lttth·d the re rn11. 'Nol' it•ty ', \ ·o 11 1ro l' :1 nc.l 'repress io n ' are to a large ex te llt ~o~y tt w t y tn ous. Socieri~·~ dilln i11 t'l'g:lt'd I'O the natu re and form of control exercised over the physical a nd tttt•ntn l bodies of individuals via childhood socialisation processes, educatio n , t'l' li gio n, ln tt guage, urban politics and o ther important elements. So the argum etll is ttot· o ne of more or less control, but of the historical relation between socia l :olll'ro l nnd individual rights . As history progresses, it appears that the nature o l stt <: h co ntrol diversifies as the technological, bureaucratic and customary ru k sys tems throug h which social life is conducted rapidly multiply. At the same tinw tlw und er lying quality of these controls has shifted in both form and content ove r th e last century, from the physical to the psychological, from the body to the tnind, from coercion to persuasion, from domination to negotiation, from active l'O tt sumption to passive compliance, from social space to what Foucault term ~ the ' heterotopic' spaces that exist outside the communion of the social body, nnd from the lumbering progress of industrial capitalism to a new world orde r

(DC 26).

Whi le Marx's concept of power is inseparable from capital, diametricall y opposing views also exist. For example, Foucault's concept of power cann ot he detached from its foundation in knowledge (Gordon 1980, Smart 1983). Fo uca ult rejects the idea that power can only be deduced from the economy, where it is defined purely in terms of control over the means of production. He tn ninta in s that power cannot be held in the manner of property. It cannot be owned like capital, it is not located in subjects and it cannot be traded like a ·on1mod ity. T h erefore domination in the Marxist sense cannot exist. Rather power reflects how society is structured within historically constituted and evo lving g rid s of practices (discourses ), which necessarily hold all classes captive. liou cnu lt maintains that power is not a monopoly to be wielded by any singl indiv idu a l, organisa tion or state institution. In order to make this distinctio n :len r, he used the terms 'power/knowledge' together in order to remove powe r ft·om nny concept of sovereignty, and the term 'disciplinary power' to distinguish his 111 0dern ist concept of power from the old prohibitive and repressive forms of the Enli ghte nm ent. In the Marxist model where the concept of repression is aliv tnd we ll , domination is implicit but so is resistance. To Foucault, however, th CO ti C.:C pt of resista nce is irrelevant. There can be no counter-domination sine'· power is not· located in subj ects. If resistance exists, it docs not function politkn ll y in th<.: Foucauldian model. Rather it is seen to ne t tht'OIIp,h d1 c individua l's opposil'io n t·o the d isc iplinary powe r exe rted ttpon , :t tHi nt IIH • It•vt• l of, t'hc hum a n hody. In rhis sense the exe rc ise of power is tltll ttl! lll tdil ltll htil tltllltiv:-t lent. It dlt•c ts tl w it1di vi du :1 l's power to movt· :111d to lltittl ~1111ll11 l11 I, llllltlilgi tw and ro tln •t lftl, i11 short to ht..• hum ntt. 1 Fnttl'nt tll 's dinloglll' wi th M :11 \ INitt (Ill '"' tjlllllt d 11 t ~'i tlj\ 1 !111 Ill!', Mnrxis nt tltwll 11111 t' \i NI' ) is :tl so t'X t'll tpltli nl 111 Ill '' t 1111 Itt dPiitllllttll h of powt•t

Ill

•tlf\illltlll)', lm tll t•itlu •t 11 ittll.li, .I Iii•• 1 .I ;;;• 1 t\.l lll 'xh l" llt.tlt• t·htli NIII , W ldl l' 11\ill)\ Ill lllt•lt• l>n Hk i l ~N IIIIIpll llll, lutllt ill tttllllih lt• 10 tiH' d c t ~' l' ll lilli ~ll lllli • "'"''"k lo t'l'L'S. In 1h e l'o t'll ll' l, 1"'"'1 1 ''''""'IIIH iilkd a nd possesse d as n l'ig hl. ! lttl HI, it h<.·co111eS n 11)0tl't'illl 11lij1tt w tiltttt vnpit:di sm, a nd fits w ith in lilt• I''' ,,1 tllng syste m of va lu es. ltl ll w hlllt' t, powt• r· is co nceived as mnillt'ni tlill g 11111 I'X It•nding the forces a nd rclut io ns ol' prod uction. In both, power sc rvt• tl11 t't OIIO tn y as a whole. Rather lh:ln crentin g an inseparable link be twl't' tt l'' .lli lts nnd eco nomics, Foucault maintains that in removing that rel atio n Ot ll tl u t t't•ttlov es bias from the process of analysis (Smart 1983: 81). This docs 1101 1i t•J tll 1li nt Foucault refuses to accept the concept that economic expl o it n 1io 11 iltt tlllion s power relations, but he rejects outright the idea of homogenei ty ol (iiiWI' t' t•c lat ions based upon this principle. Similarly, he rejects the ass umpt i011 ilttl tdt•o logy or the Marxist 'false consciousness' are vehicles for pow e r rl· l,t 111 11t N(C:ordo n 1980: 118-19). His position is that power does not emanate ft'tllll 1 11111 I ku lar institution, organisation or social class, but is dispersed a nd inl t• t lltllljl. lt·d w ithin the social fabric. In order to understand power from a Fouc.:nu l di tlll pt•t·s pective, we must begin with the assumption that it is not part of :1 11 11h1t'r1. The most important tasks in analysing power relations are the1·efo rc 10 11 V1 111 1 how discourses act as 'a system of formal statements about the world ' nnd 111 1111ttl ysc their articulation with, and regulation by, non-discursive prn c1it.'l! '''" t,d nnd in stitutional practices)' (Smart 1983: 96). As with all ideologies, it i llltil1• to try to establish the primacy of one form of interpretation over a nollwt , I 11 h 111n y have benefits depending on social context, history, mode of inv es t i t-~n llllti littd other factors . I have found it useful to temper Marxian interpretntiO tl r \·li lt Ihose from other sources, for example Foucault, Habermas, Bha bha a 11tl '·,tid. Overa ll , the most important ideological concept of urban designe rs, fro111 '' lt lllt ' Vl'l' o ri enta tion, is the concept of right, and of the law in relation to w·h1111 1dtt lllling ns a set of discursive ideological practices (Cas tells 1983, C la rk 1111d lit ill ' l lJH4, Sandercock 1990, Yiftachel and Alexander 1995). I :t•tl l nd to ur ban design knowledge is the concept of the right to the ci ty, 1111 ·~ I tit l1 hn sis the concept of the public realm is established, and how th e c usto dittii Nhip of this realm is legitimated. At its root, the principle of ri g ht is 1111 111ttly 1it:n ll y treacherous concept. Rights are not universal and uncha ngin g h111 111 dt•l'i ncd within social systems and are dependent on society and environmt•lll l111 tlt('it· meaning (Hobsbawm 1986). The concept of right is also ti ed into rt •~ "~"plt•x va lu e system that necessarily addresses concepts of democracy, ju Htkt•, •ci\ II Ho<: it>ty, eq ua lity and social control ; th e li/Je·r tf, egalite, fraternite so ~t g l1t h tl u Ft't' ll~·h Revo lu tion . In order to h:wc di sn<'l't• pt'OIWrt·ics these mu st b<.• ~·o11 11t tt•d to a syste m of government witlli11 w li il ll ,, p.tl'l ic lll nr pntl·e rn of ~wei r d tll.,dn t l.~ hn s bee n cstn bli shcd . Even 11 1 ti lt' tllll 'll l'.l' lll ' l'l tl lt•v<· l, tlw "prin t.'i plt• ol lllt\, t,lll l'ir, ht H n11d th c rdo re o f n Bill ol' l{t)\111 11 111 dl111 111 11111~1 lll o dt•t'll sm it'lit ·~ (l{ ti~· l•• I 1) 1)t), ll lll'vl'Y 2.000 <: hnptt' t' ~) , ~111 l1 tiHIII ~ ""'"" 1111 lttdt• lo t t''<ll 111pl1 illll\~ril\1 11 I ll lift •, Ill wn t·k, Ill h.t vt• tlii ld lt 11 , 111 ~ I tt!'! _I jlltld it; IPi tlllt wi i11 o tlit •t t'1'1, 'l'ht•lw 1iJ\ Iii N Nl11utld Ill' 111 •tl l1 11 tid, '"'I Iii \1fii l[l l!!i.J llHitllptl lllllllll 1d ill lt• 111 !1 11• pt IVIIIt• Nl'l lot , lit pt 'ill_lll' tltl!ii i,IJ tilfl tiilfCtTIII , I'III 'IH lltUdl


l111111 olll tigltt•, i ttl t'l11t'~l wit lt vtvi l n11d polttlt td tlp,lti ··, ill! lii ii l 111\odvi ll!', tiH· •·ip, l1t l•.t ll p 11 1titt dilt WilY of lifl·, lll l' StC0 11d 1'11e right· to lu ill lu ll't:d 111tl11• ot'p,n td sn tio tt llllllldtnini Ntt·nt io ll of th e st:'\1'~;. In practice, hutll il tl llvil ,111d llltlit ll'n l rig hts :11 '1' t'llttlt•t't'e d through 1he state, which administers th e :dl ocut iUII ol spoce a nd iN t't' Npo11 si bl<: for its s urve ill ance (Dandeneker 1990, Boga rd 19%, Pnrker 2 000) . Stnt<.' power in thi s sense means the ability to control s ubj ect population t. throttgh n multiplicity of means, first as an ideological mechanism implementing I he domin a nt prevailing ideologies, second in its command over repressive statt· ill stitution s, and finally over the production of information and disinformation . As vehicles for state policy, the environmental professions assist this process, ttsua ll y unwittingly, by creating, packaging, manipulating and designing spaces to s11it. ln thi s regard the question of the right to the city has become increasingly itnportant to the conscience of urban planning, which actively negotiates th l' hounda ry between social relations and spatial structures on behalf of, or as pi'Oxy for, the state. As I have already suggested, state neocorporatism th e11 pl aces in serio us doubt the idea that the state can retain any impartiality in n process thoro ughly permeated by the ideology of private capital. I lcre the central concern of urban designers is with the concept of the public l'l'lll/11 and h ow this is constituted in practice. It is the space where use-valu es pt·cdo minate and people lead their daily lives. Capital views the so-called publi c l't'n lm as a barrier to capital accumulation, a space for social purposes that mighl lw11·e r be used for development. We have all seen manifestations of this as urban ope n space is constantly under siege. In cities where the most rapacious form o :a pitnli sm exists, such as Hong Kong, open space has been wholly expunged from urban areas. Offer the most beautiful and revered public space in any city to priv ate developers to tum into any form of commercial development and th " offe r is unlikely to be refused. So at a fundamental level the concept of the publi l'l':11m ca n be viewed as a space of conflict, one where civil society struggles to t'l't::l in a significant urban presence and in the process erects barriers to further ncc umulation from land development. This is due to the fact that, in theory, th e pttbli c rea lm is not commodified and therefore is not circulated as part of th" ttt·bnn land market. In practice·, commodity circulation as part of the expansion of en pi tal frequently needs more space for this activity. One of the first land uses to <.:o rn e under pressure is therefore the public realm, and there are countless •x nn1ples of the erosion of public space for transport and other functions. The ro llC:ept of the public realm and the right to the city is also being eroded by two o th <.•t· processes that I have documented elsewhere in two nrt·icl es, 'The right to tl w t.: ity ' (C uth be rt 1995b) and 'Ambiguous space, nmhigltOII Nl'ight·s?' (C uthberl :1 11d M (;K inn e l 1997). Here, two central qucstiottS nt'l' di-HII SIH' d in re lat io n ro I lo ng Kong that a lso hold general re lev:'lllCt' fm o tlwr w~ttld 1 IIH'N, ll llllle ly tlw llll·r·r•nsi ng tt eoco rporate enc roachnH·111 i111n tl w p11ldlt 11 d111 111d , itt t'Oil t:t.' rt with thi s 1 dvqwning socin l co ntrol tiH n tt t•,lt ll ll11rdl11tor 1\0:IIIIIir'll ANn f',V II t.'rn l pl'indp lt•, lltld ill Ol'd t.: r ('() rcdlll'l' till llill lli j(o [ltt1 ~it t il~ ill I I I lr It% llll lll lll\i ll ll 111d pnliritll', ptthlk 1-l pn ct•, Hil i h 'i jl1lll lt tf i11t if'l rll ittl \h 1 h{l itll llll tlt'nl lr•tl ll tHI

oiiJIIIIpllllllt'd hy pt·lv.tt~· Hl'l(ll l illiCIL'~ l 'l , i Itt IHit tii H IHI( w tl y ill [I ll CNt.:i ti OIIIIII ttl l1.-oi11 tiiiiVt ' (po lk i11g) nnd lli lllfll l\1 1111 '• il l IIIli' HYNIC tli H (t ~;lccomnlllll kn t loll!l, lt \'l ttttlllll'lll :tl dt·sign) , it <.' t·wlt!lll du 111111, pt 111 tht• l'ight to the c ity t·l"·oup,h tl w li11; 1' 'lti'I IIIJ•,IItllhiguity of S!Xl <.:t'H r111d pl tll ~·~1, w hr• t'l' one's ri ght to possess tlw HPtH'l' l~ 11 ' lli:l.l' ll is by no mean s cl t.::ll'. 'I'IH•Nt' t'Vl' III S nrc supported and propng: tt t.·d h tttltll l plnnnin g ::~nd the enviro nn1 elll'nl professions in general, a process w hiv h ptrqtlll llld s soc ia l control by the sta te, and both physical control and elec tTo nic 111 vt•tll nn(;e by p rivate capital (Lyon 2002, Taylor 2002).

I .tw as Ideology ll11 • tll rlltll er in w hich the politico-juridical system impacts on spatial str uctutTH, lwt'l' hy s pace is crafted, bounded, annexed, delineated and institutiona li sed to rr Vt' spec ific economic and political intentions, has been widely acknowledgt•r l. i11 uddition, in so far as a large part of the social wage is explicitly organi st:d vln Npn t ia I units, the state derives functional benefits from the jurisdict io nn I lt iiJ',IIIl'llt·n tion of space (Kirby 1983: 228). Hence the continuing importan ce o l p11l II kn I boundaries at the national, regional and local level, as well as dw 1111 tdk:1l fragmentation of space within individual plots is evident. Kirby e mphn t'fl th e bo unding of space for political purposes, the function of the judic.: i11l 1ll ll'lll in o rganising the social wage via spatial units, and in the establishment ol ' , 1 ltt siona ry practices which codify class interests in relation to spatia l Sl'l'l tl ltiii'H: ' one implication of these analyses is that the location of bound aries is IIH liltpmtnnt as what goes on within them' (Kirby 1983: 230). t :11stell s uses the term 'institutionalised space' to refer to the social pro<.:<.:Hiil' 'Y itt vh, on the basis of the juridico-political apparatus, structure space. li e tti NII dt •lloll'S the ensemble of processes within which the institutional organisa t·io ll ol ptll'l' is determined as those of integration, repression, domination and r<.:!!,lll 1n 111111 (Castc lls 1977: 209). In contemporary capitalist societies Dear (19 86: .17 >) l111 MSll ggested that planning practice 'has devolved into a ritualised cho r<.:OJ', 111 phy of ro utines < and> will survive purely as a subordinate techn ocrnt:y'. l111'll'Cl: ill e denotes the juridical code as the embodiment of state interv c nti o tl lrt tlw •·elatio ns of production and circulation. He notes the important fun ctiott w ltt~·h t·he state plays in operating 'a juridical definition of the conditions lJild <.• t which the different social agents can appropriate urba n space, by definin g lntlll 1t;, 1~''t l n t ions a nd t hus the type of possibl e usc o n n pi ece of la nd ' (Pretece ill e 1977: I ll ). In nddition, he reflects that this illli't' vt• nti o ll itt spn cc nlso codifi es Hot:in l H'l\tdo ns, in t"11 e present and in th e futllt'l' 1 hy 11 11til ip11littl\ till' co ntrolled ou lplll ttl It·;<' vn lu es. 11 1'\ t I~ ~· I'•t c rnt· ur~ on so~•.o-s p:"ltt.:l I HI '" ' ~ '""'"• .'"''-, If 111 ll~t tii'Otll tlw ld l'Oiog tt:n l nntll rt' ttl pl it~"'''!i l Itt Mt 1\it•. l.ltl ( 11>H O) t' tll'itl<.•d 'I'IJt' ltlt•tdrt~ll '" ''f l'llllllli IIH 1 ' ~ 11 ttllclt•t'NIII II llilll'. tlu• id t•II IIIJ',tl'ltll llllllllttie !li

• 11111.1 IIIII i11 tlwtl' t"flotl 1 : 11~! 1 tl ll lltjll l' Wlt t'k It I I llf ~l tt p, ttliit it IIIli III lt il" I. H· "lll lllih l Nil

I,,,,


tt•p,lttd 11 1 Nm ln ll pillilll pt•oh lt•ttt N. I k HI IYH II,,,, 1 dt l• 11t\\' il., llltll tt p, In lw lit't' ll 111111lt llt nt't' vb trl y lot· whnt it is: r1 pa rti~·' "' /'•IIIIi i{'•'i••i' 111 tf,, , ,, fmp,p, lt• /111 111111/'lil tll l t'l' powt•r t1 11d resources' (McA uslntt l'l fW :2.'/ 0 ~ Ill )' itu lics ), ''"d idt•nt il'ies th <.: thr<.:<.: ma in ideo logies traditionally associn tt•d wl tlt plnnning, s111 1 i11~ th nl 1'11<.: law exists and sho uld be used: 111

to protect private property; to ndvance the public interest;

J

1'0 ndvance the case of public participation.

S<.:cond, in State Apparatus: Structures and Language of Legitimacy, Clark :;111<l l)cn r ( 198 4) set out to investigate the relationship between the state apparattiN and the socio-spatial organisation of capitalist society. In this context, the natun· of poli tical language is emphasised as a vehicle in the social structuration ol ·l:-1ss relationships within capitalism. In the context of the legal system tlw autho rs make a preliminary attempt to analyse the state in linguistic terms, '0 11 th e basis that all other articulations of the state to be examined in the book mn y properly be regarded as aspects of political language' (Clark and Dear 1984: I 02). T he most important contribution of this book is in its landmark attempt to ·onnect langu age, law and space within the structure of political action.

Politics and Urban Planning Theories of urban planning may be divided into two main perspectives: thost• th at originate from an a priori theorisation about the organisation of society and the production of planning and planning knowledge from within that society, and those that do not. The latter (which incorporate most planning theory) set• plnnning as a product of specific epistemological directives, unitary modes o l thought or of development processes. While these frequently provide insightftd nnd acc urate accounts of how planning functions, they fail in the last analysis to ge nerate a truthful synoptic explanation of how planning operates as part of th~· hi sto rica l reproduction and development of society as a whole. In the absence of this context, the function of planning (like law) within society is mystified by the inference that it is an autonomous and neutral nAe nt, motivated by abstract ideas of the common good, with the object of i11tproving the welfare of the entire population. While this has indeed happened wi t·hin the developed economies, it was not because plnnning w:1s pcn:neated by nleruistic motives. For example, the improved co ndi1io11 of tiH• wmking cl ass in th e <.:o re imperialist economies was to (I lnrg<' dt'l'/<'<' pn•di n tlt•d ttpon th e depriv ntio 11 a11d exploitation of labo ur powv t' i11 ll11• dt•v t•l" ldllj\ W<t dd liN 11 res ult· of co lon in I dcvelopmc n t (Wn rren 19HO, I I< 1ol\ Vl' ltli l'l H 1 ) \ q•,ll 1hl y 1hi Nsitu nrio n hn s tll'l'PCill'd, :1 llx-i 1· in new fon11 N, i11111 tl11 dtitd 11 illt'il!l lllill , . AcctH IIli H of plnnni''l'• ll~t•my il w1 • 1111 ijll' 1!Iii! ti ' ltlltii•d llt'llt l'nlit ,n wltil t• lt't'illl l' lill y o lft•t'illl', 1 ollt' l'l' lll " '; '- ''""' " HI jl i\·llh ,d, C• llll<llllll ttlld No\'in l

f~td \Ill . pl ttill tlu: itlt\'vii it!tillt!L'l ld lltlt ' IIHtl'iilll II IIIIIIHI 11 1111111111 l!i•lll il 111 pliilllllllj', l111111 Wliltil ttt•l "'' 11 lt;tlltllltti i'H, ill iWl' Vl'l' Hllplti t-Hkll lt'd till ' )' !lj\llt lu, 11m wit h l': ll'l' l'l\lt'lll itill '• 111111, tl' '"" ''l'lttHl Nql cn pit nli st Ul'hitlli HIIIIllll '· it ll'l tlllf',ll ,tl (Cnl sc ) u c<.:o11 11t ~ ttl tl11 ltllllltottill !!, of. the ca pilllli st syH il' tll 111 '1"1 \tlld Ill tlw huill <.: nvironntt''' ' (ll.. lttllilll I1JH J ). 'l'hc supcrficird politk::d 111' 11 ql ltl )' nl lii'I H.'Inssica l econom k th l'li ' Y iN :1 11 <.:xa mple of one such phil m;op lt y, l1 k lt lt ttH ltnd :1 direct impact on urba11 planning. It was rei nforced hy till' 1\it' l[\l: ll~l' or syste ms theory that drew from a range of disciplines as div cnw 1\lj "1"1\Y 11 11d operations research. In fact the production of the first major critiqtll' d 1.!111111i 11p, Iheo ry edited by Andreas Faludi in 1973 also marked a gcm·t·: d '~ " 111111 1o 1he widespread deployment of systems theory within urban pb 1111 iIll', tilt' nvl'r the previous decade, whose attempts to depoliticise the plnnniltf•,

tliii LIII!lt'!i,

I""

t!ilnt ·H'I t't• mnin with us. Nhll<'l in list theo ry, on the other hand, views planning as an intervention i11 tIll' IV( I'll II pt·ocess of production and circulation of commodities by the state, w hk It 11 d lj ll 1'11 lkd upon to manage conflicts emerging from the unequal distrib ut ion nl tltt • Hlll'j)IIIS product. Whereas a concept of equality exists within the law, as 1'111 1 tl11• !ormation of urban spatial structure is concerned, control over tlw •llllt'dlll't'S whereby space is appropriated remain private and are only lilllit t·d 11· til t• order imposed through state regulation. Essential conflicts are tlw11 I' lll'l'dlt•d between the conditions required by the processes of capital aCCllllllt Itt it 111 wit h respect to space and the creation of use-values for the reprodu ctio11 111 ltdlllll l' power. The privatisation of urban land on the basis of individu :'l l ll'f', ttl tti llt ol knd s to a situation where the urban land nexus becomes sonww l11 11 lllilt l'll k nnd the most important role assigned to planning within it is to m:ll lllfl'' tltl~ l''< tl'llded reproduction of labour through the provision of items for collt•l ii VI i,tt ii HIIIIIplion, such as housing, schools, health facilities, recreation (O tNit•ll I'J i'/), Therefore urban planning practice and the mainstream plannine: t·het lilt'

l

ltl elt i11form it o11l y be elucidated if seen as serving the ideological and apologetic fun cliOIIII !1 1111 llliiSI inevitably arise in a society whose social and property relations arc sul.'h

111 11

!I till :

ti11 •y 1..·nll for ever escalating planning intervention on the one hand, wlt ih• t•mdstin p; and obstructing such intervention on the other; and, tlw y res ul t in a form of state intervention that by its very nature prodlll't' llt.t ssive syste matic biases of various kind s in d1c distribution (and redisll'l lttttion) of materi al rewa rd s and pt't\i tlti t•s. (Scott nnd Roweis 1977: 111 •1)

.

ph1111ti 11g is requ ired t·o nddn·N~> pt11ld t: 111~ wlt111l 11 i~o ill l..' npnblc of 1mlvinl', , inlw t't'l.ll c<~tHI'n.d~et·iol1 s ol' ti w 1 lll'il ~tl i ~_l "'.' ''') ttult11 IIH'din,ll' i t~ pt·ohlt•tll tll,1ll pl ll tllllt ~f', II NI' il 1111\)ill'tN (dt•11 VI llj 1, lt lilll . !i!•__ IIIII ljll d tlt '< lllhiiiiO II nl till n~1 dl y dt•s q•,ttrtt t•d Nll t'plllfl pt~ulllt t ) ltiidl tl!IIIP'' . ,,1 tllllilll\ IN nlfHl vH•wt•d I •ill ll pit itl ll I1 V till• Vltlillll ll l'iljlll ti l il 111i t:lli( ih !il liti tilt ill ~ ill jiiiiVIdltlp, 11

(1 ,


\!I

llllllltJI•. dt .ll lill•t li.lll' IH'IWl'l.'ll lht.•i t• V(l t'iOIIN IIIII ll 'lil li. lil,ltllllllj•, IN tht•t•tt!O I'l l'J IIIj•,llt 111 tlt l' pt·ovt•t·hi nl Cordin tl knot fro m wlt llll 1111 lill t:llt tl tii tl o1· slrnlq•,it t'\i l IN 1111 unl ikely possibility. Beca use of thi s sittl ll lllltt , CllltthiiH'd with llu· lllldt•tdnhk t't:lat·ionship between big capital and th (: pl nttttill l', lltlll'l'ion, Cast·tll h l't'it'l'lt'd Orthodox planning practice as a process that CO uld evt.; t' rair ly represe nt tht• int't.' res ts of labour. He relies instead on the idea of urban socia l movements n~ th e nJ ost· npprop ri ate and truthful mechanism for the consolidation of urbntl pi'Ohlems. In tcrests are represented directly and immediately in relation to 11 ·om tn on ly perceived problem, frequently bypassing the narrow sectarian inter t'HI'S of social class, gendet; ethnicity, etc. Examples of this might be the alignment of freeways through urban areas, airport noise and the siting of runways, tlw t't• location of nuclear reactors and nuclear waste, and the destruction of first wow t·h forests. Whnt then does this mean for our understanding of urban design? If we return to th e idea that urban design is the symbolic attempt to create a certain urban 111 en ning in certain urban forms, how do ideology, politics as ideology and plntlll ing as ideology, promote or stifle the production of symbolic arrangements, ll lCdintcd through urban form? Here we can denote at least ten levels of struclllrn tion, each containing several key implications for urban design. These i11 lllrn will be elaborated in the examples that occur in the remainder of this .·hn ptcr. Urban design knowledge is affected at every level and political ideologies impact on our knowledge/practice. At least a dozen important manifest" lions of this can be identified. Through particular economic forms, for example capitalism, which commodifies land as a basic factor of production, packages it for sale and inco rporates it into the realm of exchange (Scott 1980, Harvey 1985). Until recently, socialist states had provided entirely different ideological :1ss umptions for urban development and design, and even within capitalism hu ge ideological differences exist from nation to nation. In the West, this has had the historical effect of parcelling land in particula r locatio ns, dimensions, configurations and densities on the basis of specifi " soc in I and property relations. .I More ge rmane, this process has involved the partition of space into publi" t1 11d private in accordance with a social and gendered division of labour, freque ntl y supporting the spatial segregation of social classes. In speci fi e ;, ttitudes to nature, epitomised by the J udco-Ch ristia n ethic where nnrure has a lways been placed in opposition t·o ntnn , ovt't' whic h dominion hnd to he csta bl ished. Western ideologies as n lll fl ll t' t n l pt'i nr ipic tend to OfX'rnl'e round binary op positions of thi s ki11d (ll tll Vt \ I IIIII•) , l11 portrnying nat ure in its cntit•t·t y ~~~ 11 plllllllltli 111111 111 Ill' ~H thjugnrcd tltrotll•,h co tnm odific::ttion and lt't'ltlllll lll\1, 11td I ·~ 11 111 '''ll tli lt j\ llt illlt'n l pro ll\~llt!H i1110 idt.:o logicn ll y l'OIIIt'IVt 'd ltlllll · fin ; 1!l t1tli(•lllttlf•lll 1 l'll( l'llflillllll'tll IIIII l'idkt dt•, H\l l' h IIH pn rk .~. 11111111111 Ill" t' fi•i l•.liiil ti! l li!t.llll ~, II'H'IVl: oii'I'II N, hottlt•vu t·dN, N(lOI'I tl I',I'OIItld ll 1t11tl 111 111 1 liiii t 1

l'l11 11 1 n l ~', wi tltill i111 ~:ltiitllll \ lil t•lltl ti• 111.! gll td t•tl hy dtllltill :llll idt•olnt•,ll' 1 " (l111p11tllt'Hl:ltld viii tl11• 1111111 1ill) l('lloll llltlll lor CC I'(:Ii ll ll l'l.'t'HN: It'y k :tllll'l" 111 ~ mit~ lt'l' j)I'OdU(;tiO II (t•dlit tlll&ill 1 Wti iiiH:, l't'CI'el11'iOn), f() l' f'l1 c l.'irt.'lll illiOtl ttl ttll lllll(>ditics, and for tl •: IIWII 1dt•11 lngkn l presence. As a brond gt' IH'l'll l tlm lion, this co nstitutes tl w puhl it n•nltt l. Where necessa ry, it also exp t·opri tlt'H spn(;e in su pport of big (;:lpitn l in its various forms (co mm cn.: inl, llldll stri nl, informational, etc. ). 'I 'III'Oilgh the representation and broadcasting of ideological formn!'ion s, lll't.: ifi cnlly the state apparatus in the form of law, the military, cd ucn tio11 , ti s nhi li ty to stage spectacles (for military authority, hero worship, stnlt' fttl ll'1':1 1s, etc. ); through the power of capital and its institutions; through n•ligious ideologies, etc., all expressed in architectural and urban fot'lll , thi'Ough complex semiotic codes, and usually allowing spatial domin nll rt' i11 their location. Ideological formations are frequently used as structuri11 g dt•viccs in cities. H 111 po rtraying the mythic and symbolic dimension of history throu gh ph yH it:nl markers that denote, celebrate or condemn specific events, concepts, individu als and places. Taken together, these markers form a semiotic wt•h tlw t may bear little connection to any 'truth', since their primary fun ction iH lo create social cohesion, reinforce dominant values and transmit an :11.' rt'ptab le history that supports the general trajectory of capitalist develop tncnt. This is usually done through the medium of monumental architcc ttll'l' :1 11d urban spaces. II In the formation of the public realm through the shape and form of i1 nssociated spaces, its scale in relation to functions associated with if , :1 11d I he signifying presence of the adjacent urban envelope. 1n In signi fying class, ethnic, religious or gendered spaces in terms of t IH' ll possession, use, imagery or control (see chapter 6). II 111 re inforcing all of the above in the configurations of architectural lo1111 n nd its semiotic possibilities, through the association of forms, mn tt'l'illl tnd spatial relationships, sculptural elements, historical referents and otlit•t ideological devices. I" Overa ll , urban design is involved in the generation, transmission and SIOI' nge of what Christine Boyer has called 'collective memory' in her book '/ 'In• :ity of Collective Memory, an idea that has significant intersecl'ioll: wit·h what the great psychologist C.G. Jung referred to as the 'coll ec ti vt• unconscious'. II

Allll lw ~IS o l tlw pllhli v ITII IIII itl l't• IJI I1111ll 11 il l! p•di!i L. tl tllllli.llltillf',l('l tllttll l I IIIII" IIIII cJI\f\ll iOfl ill ti lt' litt'l'.lllll'l' Oil lltl hlll tl1 ljlil 1 tililllilljt, ltll • l111i1 I IIIJ\1 ttl ~ t llltl ll t l 111 ~ ti i\Hh• t • \tt ~ llr: llltlllllltllltlll l ll li ftlltll••tlin tll 'l lljllli! fl~ {lit•··~· 111 111, 1'11h 11t

1


-' I

I'J / '1! 1\JI}I tldll I 'IHJ, I• ll l"o l I'IH I, ,It'll! kl< 1111d \111 lo tt!iH I ( 11/1 ·', ~· l ttt t ii HI' I*IIIH , 1 Ltt tlit •t 1 1'/11, I >t~ vt•y WO I) . tvlmt· dit't't..' tl y, fl11 II IJ',ttlllo "" ,, id !111 ptthlk l't•, tlttt lt iiN11 i•1o ht '''" 11dd ,.,.,~ilt'd i11 Webb ( I 99() ), Boyer ( I 'Ill I) '"ttl 1\ I ''' '" 11 plltll' (/)C I()) It I t''iNt' lll t' til!' puhlk: realm asserts a fundamental ptlllttpll• 11! dt• tnocra cy 1httl ll t l .~ 1''\L'i it'd sitt l'L' nnc ient Greece- the right to freedotn o l nsst• tnhl y, the spm' illt'y vn llt•d 1he agora or ms publica, which lay at the physic<1 1 and ideologiL ,tl to t't' of Cn.•c k de7!70kratia. Agora means 'a gathering place' or, as Hannnlt At•t• ttdl (I %9: 176 ) has preferred to call it, 'the space of appearances'. 'J'Iw ngorn was the location of monumental architecture in the form of puh lit l!1tildit1gs nnd state institutions, as well as stoas, colonnades used as a shadinl', dt•vit:t.• where goods and conversation about politics, philosophy and the tHI'• m uld be traded . The agora usually had spatial propinquity with the acropoli ,.,, iiH· re li gious centre, and a huge typology of building types for indoor a ttd tHttdoor assembly, worship, sport and other functions was highly developed llvt• n n t that time, the political and ideological function of urban space w:h 1ppn rent in a multitude of ways, for example in symbolically expressing '' dt 'tllO<.: rn cy that was only available to free male citizens, that the democrn cy wns ba sed in slavery and that the senate was usually dominated by a few powerful families. The actual location, appearance, positioning and detai ling of civic buildings were all highly significant. For example, Jencks and Valentint• (I !JH 7) ana lyse the ideological functions of architecture of democracy and cont llt t• nt th at th e symbolic location of primary seats of power were deliberat<.:l lllltk:rsta ted in relation to the agora. This conveyed two messages: first, that tlw l't•n liIy of government was suppressed and, as a corollary, that the primacy of tlw people and civil society was promoted. Number 10 Downing Street, the rcsi dvnce of the British Prime Minister and the symbolic centre of government in tlw l Jl( , npparently no more than a domestic residence, conveys a similar message. 'J'hc Rom:Jn Forum or fora Romana developed the idea of containing tlw illstit·ut·ions of the First Republic, symbolising the imperialism of Rome over it H ro lo ni es (as indeed other forms of imperialism would later do). Ideologies wen• 1101 o nl y expressed at the civic level of triumphal arches, temples and palaces, but l'Ve l1 :11' Fine leve ls of detail in the columns of buildings, types of sculpture and 111 ht.• r forms of decoration. Even the ideological presence of a single creature, tlw l'ill',ko, has had end uring monumental significance: 'The eagle on Trajan's co l lltttll, sy mbol of imperial power, can be seen on almost every democratic gov t•t'ttttt l' lll' building of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It is also found Ott Nnzi nnd Soviet buildings. Yet the eagle is presumed by eac h cult·urc to represent ttol jw11· power, but patriotism to one's particulnr fon11 of govt'l'lli11Cnt' (JenckN 111d Vnlcnt·ine 1987: 16) (see figures 15 ;, nd l (')), 'I'll! • nltiltnt'll go o n to demo11 1I'll It' Ilw pol iti c::~ l referents of the pi a:~;zn n nd pn In< <' dttllttg iltt• ~ lidd Ito 1\gcs, : ~ nd to il w inHt'itut·ions of mass democrn ry itt iltt• I '''~~ ttl 'lit, 1 tllttl'lltdt• with :111 t•\ llilltslivv nn:1l ys is of th e politicn l :1111l ttlt •~t l"l'" illl lt lllt• 11l I ' 1111111111 's plnn fot W11 .~ ltitt glo11 (n s wt• ll ns thnt of l.t•n11 f, lltt '.. lllo_('il l! ltll ltilllll 11.1 pl tut of l!JH)) Willi til!' nhNt' IV;t ti on ilt.tl ' /\11 .tnltitttllllt oildfli!!IHt ,tl\' tll)tll ~ lltttlol'lll is ;Ill thiWI'd lltl II dt 'lli (l( I'IH V of idt'll(lt 111 Lilitfl tl h l litli"l oH It•. •i tl lll•' lt/i t'G IIIH' wll t'l('

lll't• I :;

Exa mple of the symbolic use of the eag le in fasc ist architectur

1111o t• , < oun csy of akg- images. 11 )' huildin g is in a different style is as privatised as a megalopolis of con lllllt r 4, 'l'hu s a democratic style, if we generalise from these extremes, is :11 l u t~·e d , abstract, individualised and disharmonious' (Jencks and Va lenti n" 1' 111 :l.S ). I ·~, i• n t·hi s hi s torical context, it is den r l h:ll' 1'11<.' design of cities is a prm·tsN ''ftlt•; l•' wi th mea nin g, of memories, l't' ll l•t•fioll H ttlld drt•nms, a battlcgrouttd ltt•1\ ldvologi es arc chall enged a11d tltt• '""'''"I td I11 Nto1 y is brought to 11·inl. I ~~~w lt· t 't ' lw s thi s consrcii :Hion ol' tpHtltttt •ll '"''" IHII• 'I 1'\ PI't'Sflt'd th :111 itt tiH· lit til itt~~~ tltoh,tlc lwtW('l' ll two sodolof•,l'- f!i ''~~'-' ' tlt o_l till•lllllilt!llt ll itl 'hllildinl', of tlw •.CI.Itlf1\d 1\t•l'lin , ill,t ludill l', IIH• llt'W It IIIII.' 11l (o(l'itl t!lt j.\tt\'['.lll:tlt!tll illld hlli'l dtt dh IIV\il' tltt• t'l!'tl lnll n l il 1111111111111111 to.• du_, llo ill!ttlttr. l Vlo_lltti l! 11! th1 • ,1ll'llllltl W111 ld ..'\1· 11 (1\l ttiGII NI' 1111 /IC ; II , t :nirtjil itl ll 11Jilllj il l! l"ii !liu ~ tl1 '~ lill t II


ur•• 17

Monument to the Holocaust victims (Mahnma/), Berlin.

•11!• ·,, 1\y IH'rmi ss ion of Susan Thompson.

figure 16 Symbolic use of the eagle in spectacles by the Third Reich. Source: Courtesy of akg-images/U IIstein Bild.

gn ln ctic dimensions, gets down to the use of a single word describing tlw 1110nument, the chosen term being Mahnmal, a warning monument, rath e1' rh nn Den/<.mal, a memorial. While the chosen site is located between two mnjor squares, Potsdamerplatz and Pariserplatz by the Brandenberg Gate, Ollt' site was actually proposed within the government complex itself. At root , M n reuse's concerns lay fundamentally with the potential rebirth of the German politi cn l landscape of the Third Reich, the reification of the German stat·<· wit'hin the context of a unifying European market in a new multibillion dol1::11' ln.: hitectural complex, and its relationship to the Mahnmal for Holocaust vi " t ims (fi gure l 7). In contexts such as this, urban design clearly possesses n ll1 01Hitnental ca pacity for the expression of symbolic mcn nin g in specific urban fot'IIIS. Mnt·cuse enun ciates the meaning behind <'V('I'y fli ll j•, lt• Ni)',11i lyl np, :u chi tectur::d t•lt' llll'lll i11 th e new proposals in grc:lt' dt·t11il , inilllllj•, 11 !j ll\ ttdt t't lltl number ol' othl'r pmtninent· in te ll ectua ls and pol it icLIII '• 111 '"l" tilltll!l 11111 ' ' l'olli t1 ,~ 1 n m:1 ssivt' llolm·:w st mt· mori nl proposed for tl11 • ,,111111 "' 1\, •dit h t'·· lll l''lll ttt)', tlu· itnpoi'Js i hilit y ol' l't'P''l'St' tllin g nnd cx plni"i"l \ 11 ""'" .1'"'' . l d ~ i lillnd I" 11cul throug h ntl thtHt'l ll'l dt·Nigtl of Hl' lllpltll'l'll ''" lnll illiCitl'(' t!ldlil !'l t!" r' (l '""I.Jull 1'1 1111: I T \) . tvl11 n II III' ol l'f'. II! 'H tli nt ti lt! jlllljl'll i11 it.. !' !lfli t:i\' \!iilltdi' i' llljtll il"llll'll ( ;1'1'111 1111

lilt.illl y lwforc 1914 'where the meaning of each building, each style, each f::l t;: td t•, tlu tll ll Nit'IICtion materials, the location and its significance in various hi sw ri ~·: d i'tt lltHi fi ·, the Empire, the First World War, the Weimar Republic, fascisrn, post ._, 11111 1 Wo rld War, the divided and re-united city are elaborated, with tl w 1111 vtd ling philosophy of critical reconstruction' (Marcuse 1998: 154). M:.HCUSl''l1 tliltJIH' is withering in its perception, to the point where no designer c01dd l" llilie lhl y lny a single stone without serious self-analysis. He debates the iss tH' di lt!' II ~Ht'd by Korn in the newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung ns to lwl ht•r n rt after Auschwitz is possible, and refocuses the conflict fro111 11 l'l't hlt•nt of aesthetic packaging to one of moral and political consciOL1 Snnm, iw lt ll l Cl' rmans today want to say about Germany and the Holocaust' (M niTIIIW I'.I'>H: JJ6 ). Marcuse's concern also reflects an important property of built fo1 '11 1: 1 t 'l lll lie very easily or, in Habermasian terms, is capable of signifil..:nntl tli lllni'tl'd co mmunication. So he questions the capacity of urban desi gn I'O tt•ll dtt• lt'ulh , about its capacity for concealment and deceit: 'the issues arc powt'l 111d its uses, wealth and its uses: framing the debate as one about form trivinli Nt~l• !111• iHN ues, trivialises the history, serves to distract attention (perhaps dclil wt ll l'ly? ) from the underlying decisions' (Campbell1999: 174). While thi s is 11'\11', il Ill ItWI he less does not solve the problem of what to do, that a single sto ne in tlw df1 ht (or wrong) spot can form a monumental statement about national id entit y. Pt 11', t'XtHnplc, the Scottish Stone of Scone, a symbol of Scottish independ vll l'l', \'{111 t'l'lttoved to Westminster Abbey in London in 1296 and was onl y rcn· tttl 1 1 11<i II I'IH'd t·o Scotland after the creation ol' t l11· Scottish Parliament in 11) ) ! , 11\ "vt·vv t·, M:1rcusc's ow n answer t·o tht • p1 11hlt•ltt , 1111 nnri -mcmorial of a hnt't'i' ll 11 ~ .l tHI n sitnplc sign indic:1 ting thnl ttlltlllll f\ ''"'Ill' IHiilt 1111ril thl.<mo ti vn titlll lu•htl td Ct•l'tll:ll1 :t iTo<.'ili l's is fully 111Hitt Mitu ,, l, i ~ tllllil t•ly to lw rc:1litwd . 'l'lw 111 1\l VO I'It'X Htii'I'Ot iiHiin J•, tl w tH' W l',llVI 1111111_: 111 U' llltl 1111ltht• i'OII HII'IIt'tion of til t• 1 AIll J,,lll llllll 0 1111 • w itlli 11 tl H• l' ill 1'I•,n1 y 11 k 111_. d t f i lw Ll11 1,II tit Ilet yt ' I' nN ti lt' ' pol i 1ll ttl ~~~\ut~Ht' lll rt ltlltlllllllllll ', Slu• Nlll ',f',t '1 1!1 ti Hll


f\1_'1, 111'11 I \'rl)' l'llllllllllh illllllililllll Ill Nil ill IIIII I IIJ'III•i tlll , j ttdillll" !111111 Ill 1111 ili 1 l~ tl111h IIIIIVI' III1!111 1 il l"lil l lH' I'X j W~' I t•d ti ll tl tilt• l l j l l l '-l llilll lllllilll!llll~ 111 til t•l'i ty IM 11 Wil t I. 111 At I, Piiii Ot'il lll ll or Speclncl c rcflci.:t dillt •lltll ~ t 1 1J \1 1 111 l'lljlil! di s111 ... lll li lll t'II INIII n·ip,1wd lot· th e plundering of old sty les such llh tilt• ( •IIIIth , 1\iit'oquc, Ol' ( :ltt NNkn l whic h , <.: o uld nil be used to cover changes wrought hy polit ica l revolu tinii N, illdll strin li ....ntion, urbani zation, even the rise of the bourgeo isie with their lll iilt't'in list ic nspirations and blatant pretensions. The battle of styles and the city as 11 wot·k of nrt were consequently nothing other than a backward binding gesture: tryi ng to secure the turbulent present by tying it to the great artistic inheritance of tl w pnst, nnd mirroring through stylistic references the security and traditional Ol'tkr of pre- revo lutionary times. (Boyer 1994: 59)

Whi le this is no doubt true, the statement actually short-changes the shee r sc nk of rep resentational possibilities with a capital-logic argument, ignoring as it does the archaeology of human experience and imagination embedded in the ston es of the city. Several of these are acknowledged by Boyer herself elsewhere in t'l1 c book, for example what she calls the 'solipsistic aesthetic' of the global electro ni c media and its recursive serial mentality, or the embodiment of collectivv memory in fragments throughout the urban landscape. The idea of urban lnndscape is itself both an ideology and typology of form, critically assessed by Dennis Cosgrove in Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape (1984), where h gives an insightful account (among many) of the underlying ideological formations in one of the most important urban spaces on the planet, namely the PiazzA Sn n Marco in Venice. Likewise, Dolores Hayden, author of The Power of Place: Ur!Jan Landscapes as Public History (1995), has written widely on the idea that urb:1n poli tical ideologies run as undercurrents across a range of issues. One I heme running through the book is that while dominant interests and ideologies nrc rep resented, the symbolic dialogue with the past can also be uplifting and Cln powering to the human spirit, since history has provided ordinary people with signifi ca nt victories as well as defeats. She points to one important notion, that 111nny practitioners in the fields of public history, architectural preservation, p11hlic art and other fields 'are dissatisfied with the narrative of city building ns conquest. There is a broad interest in ethnic history and women's history as pnrt of interpretive projects of all kinds, and a growing sympathy for cultural lnndse:1pes in preference to isolated monuments' (Hayden 1995: 47). No tl Cth eless, the idea of conquest and domination is present even in th t'on cc pt· of physical scale, where monarchic, political and reli gio us leaders have frl•qu cntly resorted to inhuman scale to impress tlwi t· powt•t' nnd ideologica l SllptTmn cy on subj ect populations. O ne of th(' nl ot.t nhvin11 ~1 tit-vi ces urban d('sip,n h:1s inh erited from the past is eo nt nint•d itt tltl ' Hll'll 111 il~t • tttonum cnt·ol, both in nn.: hi t·ecture and enginee rin g wOI'k N, ~~~ wtl ! ,,,. 111 111tld11 1111 itttht• for 111 of 1-H." tdpltt l't', llllt rn ls, triumpha l nrdH·N, 1nltllttlt 'l, 11!11 ll wl\ 111d "llu•t d1•vict·s (ll nr VI'Y 1'>7% , Cosg.·ove 19H4, /\j',,H'w I 'IHII , \\ W"l' t'li uL I '!'J I, jlillltHo tt 11)95). ' l 't~ killp. nttl y Ollt' si111pl l• dt•vkt•, ll u ttili!Hid lld lit l ll i Will llll liC' ltnw IIH· HII II H' ' llt!Jnl il 1111d iii'Chitl'l'ltll'll l \.:llll filllh I l1 11~ h1.'[' 11 ii ,1 11t tH!i tr{l it\f11 11!1111 I' 11 11 d ti nlt',

1111 ttitllltplud '"'~h nl ot tll i111t !t11iiil 1,,1rj J'. i"'' tlttlllll',lt "'''"Ytt' • "'~ lnlltlltttntt • llt1h j,llt 'PI /\nit lt'tllll [tlljH II d l~lllil! lt tili !1(1_11 plt y~ll'll ll y l't'P I'IIdlll'i'd lli'IIIIIH III II ' •· 11tld , w11lt t'Ot't't•s po ,HI'" I', Hltilt il 111 t\tt', tttiiiH 111HI signil'ic:1tion (l'ig~tt·t· I H) . 'I'IH• tt1lt tl ~ ~y tttllOI has nlso ht•t•tt l'lt y~i•1t ll ) ll'lttt Nfot'tll t:d in a mu ltitud L' of l't' P''''N t'll 1 tttlltt ll, prohnbly the most cHtl "ttttHitttt•, lwi ti!J, Ecro Saarinen's Cntcwny /\l'llt 111 •,t Lo11i s, Missouri (fi gure 11>) t)l' L:1 Crnnde Arche at La Ocfens(; in P111'i (111\IIIC' W). !11 'Cnst in stone: monuments, geography and nationalism', Nuala JohWHltt ( 1'.1'.1$) ex poses the function of monuments to national identity, specific:1 ll y tlt c:

"l#,tUI.III>

:ll;~crei ~Ucr~ nrc bnber t'e '!Cob•r' U&tltln tbeV.lebtRnll.

C.GAVIO.C.F. STR.ABONI.

ltl;tfcltltrcs an cut in tljtinlllarD Ubtof tbe ~reb.

!t1J•fclcllcrs are alfo in l&t l!lebv

L, VITRVVIVS. LL,CE.RDO ARCHITt.ClVS.

Ualloft1)c :irabcrna<lc.

M. GA VIO.C.F• MACRO.

lt"l c .t••lt•l Vc•c 1 ll ln l11 Vc•tttl l.t lln\ll'l' Ill Sc•h.t o.; ll.llln Sc•rlln: lilt • ltlltltlltlt t1 tn \lltl lh l~ l ' l 1'111.1 , 11 (I I l·' l'lil lttlt•tl

1

'ttll/~ , t~ : ~ •. S11tl l11, 1/w /louJ,,., oll /\tl li //l't/111• I h l1y l ll'l llll ~id lltillll l11V1•1 l'ttiillt otlltill '


11~-;urc 19 The Gateway Arch, © CORB IS.

.~uurn•:

StLouis, Missouri, designed by Eero Saarinen.

:w I .1 < ll 'tltHil• All liP 111 I o1 •1'"', ,, < '"IIIP•ty "' .t1 .11 1 "'"1\~''1/'" "' ""

I Inure• 1

I lt' httt b 1''' '111

lti 'llt 'IIIH'. SIH· llttd t• t'N Ut lt ., tl11 l l'll!l.";, t tlitttl ,,1 ' JIH• oJitn' wiJ IIi11 Jlw 1\t ill ll lt • 1111 11'\ 1, tiOiillg tiJ:11 till' Jlllplll tll llll tlJ \IIIIIitlll I ~ 1101 ~' OIIIJ)il.'lt• l y llhiqtti!OII f• illlll lut niiH'N ll' t'l'itol'inli scd ill n VII I It I) 11 l J\1111\I•IJl ht c ~o~~: nles. In thi s t:o nt t.·x t JIH•t'l' .tn · i llt'l'll'H of ideologic< 11 batiks ht•lll p, lnii J', IIi , 101' exa mple between th t.• 1\l't.'d In ) tltholi iow :1 single national itlt·llllt y, li tH I of identifiable local identit ivs 1111d, \\t llltll t':H.: h, of the requircme1Hs of social eliti sm against the will of the peo pll', lu;JWt'l' tt mnlc domination and ge nd er eq uality. Johnson notes the signi ficn nt.T ol \'t il il lld ge nder in portraying memory, noting 'how the imaginary unfold s i11 t lw dt lil iii'Sive practices of identity formation' and 'the manner in which dividl'd ldt •lllitits arc structured and maintained in the geographies of cvcrydny lilv II lltlltflh the analyses of public art, popular parade and ritual' (John son I ~I)~: H, <.3 ). '!'Ia· ove rall contestation of political ideologies by urban design, public :li't 111d ilt'st hctics probably has no better example than the astounding circumst :111 tt'H s11rrou nding the installation of a single piece of sculpture in New York 'H lt•dt•t·nl Plaza, Lower Manhattan, in 1981. In contrast to the location of t ht• Al,t/nnual, where events of mythic dimensions were being debated, the fu r<>l't' ti Vt' l' Ri chard Serra's sculpture Tilted Arc resulted from the coincidence of 1111 111 q ll y public space with Serra's imagination. Nonetheless, the outcome :1 Iso II ~H IIIi c d in questions of national significance, of constitutional and moral right s, tt l 111C:1 nings attached to the terms 'public' and 'use', of the relationship bctwt't' ll 111 :1 nd society, of aesthetic ideologies turned to political purposes, ti l1d iltl' ~·ve ntual removal of Tilted Arc eight years after it was built (Dcut sclH• /)C ; I I, Beardsley 1996, Cooper-Marcus 1996, Finkel pearl 2000). Due to t l11• 1t' spccifi e nature of the work, removal constituted destruction, si nce it· W i t.~ t 'llll'ci vcd in relation to its surroundings. Superficially, the remova I of t lw t ldpturc was intended to improve public use of the space and to rc-cst<1hlifJ it Iill ro hercnce, since Serra's work was quite monumental, being some 35 11H'Il't' !11111\ nnd 4 metres high (figure 21). However, as Rosalyn Deutsche contends, tilt' 11lllt'X l was not about the correct use of the public realm, since 'proponent s nl n pllll tkn I site specificity are skeptical about spatial coherence, viewing it not tiN n11 1/ fil'iuri co ndition subsequently disturbed by conflicts in space, but as a fil-l i1111 111 1 1 ~ki n g the conflicts that produce space'. As Deutsche also notes, lnngll :lf',t ' t'l vt•d a hu ge ideological function in the overall process since Tilt ed 1\rt' IIIIINI powerful opposition insulated themselves against criticism with rcc.: otll'ilt' '" 111livl'rsal abso lutes such as 'common se nse', 'reality' and 'the people's illl l' l ,..•., •. 111 t'11 c official hearing, the politi<.:nl usc of lnnguagc, th e subversio n nl ,). 1\llll' l'iHic ri ghts, and state ideologit·:tl illii'IVI' Iltion ni l prevailed, and iiH•tor ic of democra cy pcrvndt•d tl11 ' dt•l11111 , dt ' lllllll ~ t t'il l ing 1he dt.')\l't'l' tn li 1vlt publi c 111'1 di scoursl! hnd ht •ttlltll 11 11 ilt • 11 l kllllp.J',It• tlVI'I' !Itt• llil'll tlill)', nl II• 111m l'lll'y. Covt·l'tiiiH'Ill offid :ti N dl ~ l "'' lf ~t ' t l 1.111 h d 1111 lllllit·t tltt' h1111111'1' nl i 'til t·liti Nilt ', 11 Htllllt'l' t'OII HiNII'III wi tl1 1 1!' '1". t,tl 1•111 lo11o \ l11 llt'n 1 ll ll ~t' I V11 11 Vt' til\ , ttiii'Nl' 111 11\'1 liN!' il l'l nl il l'l'lljl,lllh I Ill llllo [['~l;i l lJiijl . llllllf't1 t' I til 1t i111 1j llt ll l pt lVII I illJ.\11 111 , 11 11d jiiMIIi y 1<111 11' li ' II NIII~ illl' 111 !111 II !Ii iii !I I lltl · tl!iltl - otl ' i/:t l111t plt•' (lkll l oJu JIJI III ~ (o ~ )


Ill I I

llgurc 22 \

Figure 21 Tilted Arc: sculpture by Richard Serra for Federal Plaza, New York. Source: Copyri ght © 2005 by ARS, NY and DACS, London.

Aft·cr th e removal of Tilted Arc, another landscape architect, Martha Schwartz, wns hired to redesign the plaza (renamed Jacob Javit's Plaza) and to replace what w:1s desc ribed as Serra's obstruction of the site with more user-friendly function s, Ihe single prescribed use being to cater for weekday lunchtimes of adjacent office wo rk ers (Mill er 2001) (see figures 22 and 23). 'l'he form of cities is a symbolic representation of the historical contiguity lwtwee n social relations and spatial structures. In the geography of uneven l':t pit·nlist development, the built environment is a form of accumulation th at t·~· prese nts not only the materialisation of capital in wh at 1-hrvey calls 'the 1wcond circuit o f ca pital' but also the powerful confli cts impli cit to that reginw (llnt·vey 1985: 9). Citi es inherently represe nt t"his conll il' t lwcn use invested t'npitnl tn kes o n fi xed and immobile qllnlitit •s th nt fn1111 lll tt 'i'icrs t·o furth et· ll't' llltiUI :Hion ns well as limiting 1"11c hn Hic pllt l t '~'"'" nl l' ltH III tl il tll , circulntiOtl :11111 \'xc hnngt. As llnrvey ( 19R5: 2.S ) NIIY'i, ' tiH ,.,, .IIJ\1 qd 11l'ld l n 1HL~cn 1W 1'11nt t'l'N idt s is tlw <.' !'Ownin g glory of p !Hl l' l'I IJ lll dt •. t .1, ',_. 1" 1.'" '' 111 l\111 11 1 1ht• s:111ll' llltH' it I'X PI'l'SNI'H th1• po wt•r of d1 :11 d I d ut lll 11\' •11 li\•lilj \ 1111111111 , 111 11 1 11 11 Slt l' h i1 ittlpl i.'H III S 11 11d ittliih itHtl w 111 t tllltld il tll• tt 111 '" Iilii Wli lti11 11 ~ I"' llh Ht'l nl pli ysit ,tl III II 'Ji l 't tillt ~'. 1\tittlll• ll ll ll l' li ll li!O II II III I td li to Iii~· il \1 i1 11 !illll llillllll ' 11 11 111 11 ~i ll j•, l t•

i

I II

;,

Landscape project by Martha Schwartz to replace the sculptu re• lly

l·' l1 1\,ml Serra: plan view.

ttll/11 '1': T. Richa rdson (ed.), The Vanguard Landscapes and Gardens of M artha Scll Wtl tl

I111H It m: Thames and Hudson, 2004, p. 1 71.

•r•l :l:l

I ,\11d s(', qH ' pro j<'C l hy lvl.tilll lt ~ ·( ltWt ll lt l••

!i•pl•" '' llu • h< 11ipl111 1' l1y

l.tltl h.11d St 'I Trl: 1H'1''1 pt •< IIVl' vlt•w. '•111t~.••'' I 1\lt li.ttdlltlll (t•d.), l/11 • \ .t iiJif ltltd l tlll.lti ·lf•!'•J, IIItl (,,lf,/••11~ 11/t\l.ll llt.t '•t illl.tll l 1111~.1u1 1 ' ll ii llt ll '" ti ltd llllllillt ll, ' lltl L 1' I I,


lt•vt·l i11 IIH· Ol'l' h:t l'Ology of hll111llll history, tht· l t~glt "' , q titu l lwlll )\ on ly 01u· ditn t' IISion in the production of space. As Marx poitlll•d tlltl, !111 ll ll ll t• r·inl ba sis ol Iii'<: nlso nffects co nscio usness. The operations of cn pit ul lilt' 11111 vn l1t <.: free nnd ti i'C directed by powerful political ideologies that manipulut v 1111d craft spact•, from the morphology of the city to the form and content of the pub lic realm and th e nature of individual architectural expression. Consciousness, memory and hum an aspiration are the tools of urban designers as much as the choreograph y of burea ucratic regulation. The expression of these qualities in symbolic forlll res ults in dialogues, narratives, mythologies and histories, some lying, SOI11\' te lling the truth, but all forming the matrix of human experience and its expres sion that we call culture, and the culture of cities is what we now turn to.

h Cultu

Another problem, our problem, is to discover the place and th e I:'I WN 1 II articulation of this context, that is to say, of the spatial forms , in the sol'i1d structure as a whole. For if it is true that, in order to identify th em, li i'W phenomena have been named according to their place of origin, t:ht: IIIl i remains that 'urban culture' as it is presented, is neither a concept llOI 11 theory. It is, strictly speaking, a myth, since it recounts, ideologi ca II y, 1lit• history of the human species. Manuel CastelIs (I\

Introduction: Culture and Urban Design 1\•dny, culture can be viewed as yet another battleground round whi t.: h lilt' ll'lilt'rt l qu estions of social development evolve (Agger 1992, Blau 199H, J>C ; I 1) . Thi s fact was well represented in a recent article in the Sydney Mo/'11 111); llt•l'tllrl about how the National Museum portrayed Australia's history (MOI'I',II II OO.l). Not only was the museum reviewed as to its political correctn ess 1111tl lttiiiHit·o be squeaky clean on the basis of 140 expert submissions, but nlso il11 1 !1t\ ).2.0,000 spent in the process simply reinforced the same opinion readwd i11 11 Jlllm review three years earlier. While the review again exonerated tbe ntW't' lltll ' p1111 i1ion, other issues came to the surface: 'rather than a truce in th e culllllt Wi ll'S, 1he review has opened a new front in the way the nation sees ii Nt•ll ' (tvlmgnn 2003: 30). The debate raised issues of national identity, se tll t•IIH'III , llill',l't tl io n, native title, corporate involv <:mcnt, feminism, as well as thww 11 1 ttlt•thod (t: hrono logical progression, IHII'I'Illivt•s, foundation myths, thto1tli11 11· l11·rok fig11rcs, etc.) and had to considt•t' td t•ll llll',ic,d n-i t'icism of d1t' 111\lll\' 11111 ' · ~) , ,,·x i s t 1·uhhish' . All of rhi s wns ovt'l i111 1, IIIIIII M111 11 HiiiJ ', It- hliilditlJ\. ( :lt•t 111 1 , pltlll't' is n conlinuing nrcna of dt •lll llt w1 i11 1 l',ll_'lllt•t Hignificnlll't' l'o1' 11 11 111 \ IIII!Jlll' ilt ltll dH· politicn l p1·oc<•ss iiNt•ll Sl111i l11 1'1 y, 11 11 yo m· i11 vo lvt·d in dr•Ntglllll ji1 t Hi~ ·~ i ~ h•tlilh ·""' tl wit h 11 pl t•lltlll ll 11l '" '''" '" tl' lt•t't' III N to di ~ till i11t 1t '-"liij'ilt ht ll ~ ihl t, 11 11111 wu tl l11 111 "' 11111 11111Hiil \' 111 11111 1', p t1 1't i1111 Hit•ltl t1illt11'[ 1 l'll!! !.!l ll! il l lllli d o~ til11111 , tilt t1 d1111 d

N'"'"

w.


t:tll ll tlt tty, ii H• t tdtiiH' IItdtt Nit y, tll t dt il llltll n dt ~o tll , u tl i 11 i 1d ~ 'liii td, , ~t l ll ll ' ll l n•gt' ll t ~ n t lttu t , t tditll'll l pl uttll itt g, t.: llltllt'll l po lky tlilll t llllllt td hL'I ittlfl' :, 111 IIW II (io ll h11! 11 l't:w. I low do WI' nlllkt.• St: II Sl' of a ll th ese te n11 s 1111d w lt y i•, 11 111111 Ntl intpo rt :llttltt us? II sodl• ty nnd c ulture arc not ho m o logo us, how slt n td d WI' dt ·nw distin ctio tt ,• lwt Wl'i.' ll th c tH ? I lo w d ocs c ulture intersect with urba n po lit it:s n 11d 11 rba n des ign ? Sho uld <,; ul ture in fact be the central focus of urban desig ners, i. e. to transla tt• :ul t u l'n l practices thro ugh processes of representation into appropriate urba 11 l'or1ns? Witho ut do ubt, culture is central to urban design knowledge, despite the fac t th :H Cnste ll s (see epigraph) accords it mythological status and Mitchel (1995 ) suggests that it does not exist at alL Up until relatively recently, however, culturt• lt ns se ldom tak en centr al stage in urban design to the degree that it could be inco rpo rated into the fa bric of a definition as suggested above. Overall, urba n des igne rs h ave h a d a largely functional relationship to culture in two predom innnt a reas, environmental conservation and environmental psychology, region s w he re pse udo-science abounds. While the former has concerned itself with th t: preservation a nd conservation of the built environment, in so far as its buildin gs nnd spaces are concerned, the latter has focused on the relationship between peop le and sp a ce, often referred to as environment and behaviour studies, whos'· dom in ant organisation has been the Environmental Design Research Associatio n (ED RA ). Today, the terms 'environmental design', 'sustainable development', 'e nv iro nmental conservation' and 'cultural conservation' segue into each other in sing ul a r complexity, and there are major differences of interest in how these term s n re dep loyed between nations, as well as within the government, the private scc t·or a nd the academy (Bassett 1993, Griffiths 1993; see also chapter 7). In order to gain so m e perspective on the complexity of this situation, we need t l't: tu rn briefl y to some of the more important markers over the last sixty years so 1'11:1 t tbe complex interactions between urban design and urban culture may b un de rstood . For Lo ui s Mumfo rd, the culture of cities was of seminal significance to our llll dersta nding of the relationship between culture and the design of urban form (M umford 1938 ). T he same was true of E.T. Hall's three texts, The Silent Lt111guage (1959), T he H idden Dimension (1969) and Beyond Culture (1976), partic ul a rl y the first, where he defines cult ure simply as communication. H tll :ti ll tnincd that ten primary message systems constituted a generic and universa l ' t11 ap of c ul ture'. T hese also offered designers, proba bly fo r th e first time, a n tt.: t11 nl o rga ni satio na l templa te upon which their des igns co uld be based a nd diffl•rcnt c ul tu ra l practices compared (see cha pter I 0). Bu t if we s<.:rutini se the 40 ·lussi<.: tex ts I o utlin ed in ta ble 1, w e can sec th nt cullttt't', lil-1• nt ht' l" lll njo r aspects of t hl· so<.: i::d stTuctu rc (eco no mics, po lit·ics, t' lt .), •H ill tH ~ vtt lt11 tl 1•s rl usio n fro nt tl ~t • ttl :dtt SITcn m urba n des ign li te r:~t ur('. W lt t'll 11 1 ~ .tdd tt•!Hit•d , it I'l l nt~dwd in t he llltl l' tio nnlist nnd bch :w io urist thcorin• pttpt tl ll ' tlttllltJ· It tl11: I 'ltt!IN, IIJ70s nnd I 1JHOs wit h n sig nific:Htl <,; nt·ry ·OVI' I ll llit d tL' ,-~~, 1111 1•\ ,IIIIJilt ~ nl tlt is ll l'l' t'I'!H't'N t'lll t•d i11 Rud ofsky ( I%'!), Sn tl llltl 1 (I 'lftiJ , !'i illl!lttil~l 1 11 ul. ( 11>70) 1 Hllpt•ptll l ( 11177 ), Alt''l ll lld t•t' ( 111'1' ) 11ttl t ·(, ltl 11i d ( 11 lii /"t" ( l'l'ltt) , tvltll 'lt o l

ll~ lltlld l t~i l l ttn• uf lltl HIII i•H II Itt ll II tlttll)' t~ ll nt'lllt•d IO n tlt ltll , 1111111 I, ilt 11 11! dtlllil ty, 1111d dt•t\ Sity ittl d l'I'OWd lll ) ttllllt'll, tlll'il' ri'f~:<,; ts 1111d ""l 'llt 111111111, f'lltlutdit•tl '' lnq.1,c pnrt of th iH t•ll ot l

ti11.1 teiH't ll d t lltl dt•t itd-1'11 \\'tlli tt•tt\lllit'tl \\ 1111 I

(«lltldt~•t' t IIJH 5 ).

111

tltt· nrtidc

' Ma jo r ch:\ ll i',I'H 111 t'IIV IIIIIIIIH'Iltn l form req uired by socitl l 11 1td demands', C hl'i st op lw t· Ak xn nder argues that 'we m ust l'nn• ljllll l't'ly, just w hat the task of city planni ng is: it is nothing less tha n the lk t·dt'•'' 11!' tl tl turc. I\ cu lt ure is a system of stand ard situations. E ach of these sit untio ll 1H'l i l'iL'S ce rtain roles, certain allowed limits of behaviour for the per so ns in t ht''ll' 1 tnii 'N, 11 11 d the requisite spatial setting for this behaviour' (Alexander '1969: 7 >) . ' " hi s intell ectual justification for his proposals, Alexander leans heavily 0 11 Ihe Wt ll'k of Bronislaw Malinowski and three behavioural psychologist s, A bra h:t llt Mtl~low, Alexander Leighton and Erik Erikson. Alexander uses the cod ifit•tl \'l't·~ion of each theorist's work to determine how each element of ur ban stn tl' t till' hnu ld emerge from Malinowski's seven basic needs, Maslow's hiera rc h y ol 1•v o lutionary requirements, Leighton's ten basic striving sentiments and E rikso11 ' t•lt•,ht stages o f crisis. Here, as a basis for cultural planning, Alexander nd :q ll 'l'l't.ain perceived fundamentals of human existence derived from behav io lll'il l pHy<.:hology to a series of spatial patterns, a process which would be m o re ft~ll

r•••Y' ltn logi ca I

tt•n lisecl in his A Pattern Language of 1977. Another significant debate over a more sinister aspect of culture, fli:I II H' I III'Vci ll ance a nd policing, which originated around the same perio d , hnd it t•piccntre in two publications by Oscar Newman, namely Crim e Preue lll iull 1'/Jrough Architectural Design (1971 ) and Defensible Space (1972). T he sto t' 1 o11ti nued in D esign Guidelines for Creating Defensible Space (1976) a n d Colli 11111n i ty of Interest (1980) and was still being presented as a new pl }') nn itlp, tt•c hnology twenty years later in 'Defensible space: a new physical p la n1ti11 p, too l for urban revitalization' (1995 ). However, Bill Hillier's initial rep rifw o l 1973 was devastating. He argued that Newman's behavioural functio nnlislll (nnd, by defa ult, much of the work listed above), based in physica lly dcter11 ti ll sti c so lutions to social problems and with its attendant dependence o n tcrr it ol'i :tlity, ignores the fact that human occupation of space is heavily symho lit : ' IHtma n territo ria lity is largely discredited, and simply fails to exp la in t IH• lti sw ri ca l and ethnographic evidence that has been amassed in the lns t holl l'l'tttu ry . . . to try to derive <a> complex understanding from an acc urnu l:11 io 11 of t·cr ri tor ia l beh avio ur is as ridiculous as it is uninteresting' (H illie r 19 73 : 54 () ), ! ((• g;oes o n to dismiss behaviourism , w hich o ri gin ated in the 1920s and Wll l11rp,cly based o n anima l ethology (mu ch of w hi ch pcnTleated des ign t'I1COI"y) . It wus promoted by ma jor figures such ns l<o11 1"1 1d Lorl'n z ( 1963, 198 1), n NIIP pOI't'CI" of the N azi e ugen ics progratnll lt'N ttl ti ll' II) IOH. l ~vv n so me of Nt·W III ,tn ' t•lt•nw ntn ry st·ntisti cs ap pea r to lw p,nHiH ltll ll lll ll tptt•IH tio ii N of his ow n I"('St': ll't li , l lill it• l" w nt.:l udl!s thu s: Nt'W II \11 11 iHII III Hl iyh tl\ lll lytl ti ll )'. III 'W, td I 11\ll'ltfl, (llll.lii I ltill'llilillll tllll l lit• INIIII I I It • iNlil l'l'l'ly jlllljliiHilll',llll'lilll'll ll 'll itd Ill ,old jlli llii 1, "" ' II llltttill l ~Ill iltl ll tdt •l " "


lttlilil'tlllll Yll II WII H 1'11 1 iNt•ly !iii N ld lld "' iltild illlj\ Ill\ dti l•!ti;U I, til \VI' I111Vf1 di NtiiVI 'II'd, 1111 II IOi td ij',IIOI',III~'(' ol ii H' fl llt\111' 11i llilll!!llhilll'' lui ''II II ~ 1' 1 1 \l' illlti '"'' ''"" IH·illt VIOtll'. Wlt ttl wt• li lT hl' ing offc1'td iH11111 !111' llt tliolllit 11111 tllllliltt•l' doHt' nl tilt• poiHo tt in 11 l'l·dcsigned bottle. (llillit•l' I Y7J: 54'1) 1

Whilt· l'ir1nly rooted to the politically incorrect man-environment studies, a tt d 111 11 i.'t'rt'nin exte nt the behaviourism dismissed by H illier, yet another oppo rt:u n ity hnd been ignored to inform the next generation of designers with a grounding in how culture was embedded in spatial practices. By 1980, the realisation had 1'11ll y dnwn ed that something was missing, and the something was the inclusion ol sy mbo lism within any consideration of culture and design. Signs of thiN t't•nlisnt"ion emerged in Amos Rapoport's House, Form and Culture (1969), n hook which rep resented a watershed in the development of environmenta l dt•sig n, since it moved beyond functional criteria into the realm of symbolis111 i11 it·s fina l chapter. Donald Appleyard affirmed the importance of symboli ro nt'ent in 'The environment as a social symbol' (1979 ), reinforced three years lllt l'r by Ross Woodward's 'Urban symbolism' (1982) and Rapoport's Th1• M!'!l!ling of the Built Environment (1982). Over the last twenty years we can also see that key urban design texts havt• lllt'g<.· ly eluded any serious influence from cultural studies. Since Kevin Lynch wt·ote A Theory of Good City Form in 1981, little progress has been made t>Vt' t':lll. Lynch concluded his book with a review of what he called 'functiona l' tlt t•ory, having failed to rise much above it himself. Despite this, much of his nit ique remains valid, since key texts since then have dealt with urban morpho logil's and typologies (Hillier and Hanson 1984, Trancik 1986, Gehl and Gemzoc l lJ%, llilli er 1996), case studies (Barnett 1982, Broadbent 1990, Lang 1994), his tori cism (Gos ling and Gosling 2003) and design theory (Alexander 1987, l<n tz 1994, Madanipour 1996b). A few authors, such as Boyer, Ellin, and novey, sta nd out in their approach to urban design as part and parcel of urban sot'i :1l theory. But in order to contextualise this general problematic, we must l'X:I Illinc how culture has been defined, why it has become so important and how tlw politi cal economy of culture can assist in revealing just why culture, particulnt·ly its sy mbo lic aspect, is so important for urban designers (Stevenson 1992, 1\nsse t r 1993, Griffiths 1993, Frow 1997, Kincheloe and Steinberg 1997, 'l'hi'Osby 1997 ).

fhc Culture of Modernism AN I ittdit.:ntcd in my introduction, the twt•n tit•tlt tt'tlitll y lu w tll wi th ilw qu estion ol' ntlltll'l' when C:1mi llo Sitte il nd O tto W,tf',llt' t '4t •lll\ lil lctctlduu ly lilt' spirit of lh t: it· tinw into the urhnn fnhri<.: of Vit'IIIIH , ,, •••ttlllll ,, ldd1 h\ lltlutlt ~ t · d til l' birth of 1l11• ltl'hliil cttlltn't• of tllodnnisnt , Itt f!in ,·/, ''' ,/, 11iillll•:f! \., llttl''llq• nppropl'i , ,,, .~ i'vllii' I('N tki'lllition of idt•olom• till tJ dtttt tl Wlt ti tt lt!l tl:i)'tt tlttl ' I td11tll fit·st clltllttdt•t il11• Htllf',H it'III1Nt' it ~ t · ll 1110 11 1' iii11 1tl Cll l'ltl!-llitt oi tlt il \'ttltt UN 11! '' Not in l

liitiH\ Wt tlt 1111 I'"'' tlt iil 'ii ,., illlj •lllltlll IIi it til\""'' I, IHIWI \I I, ti HII '"""~ Wt! ''' lllllttlt q,. tl dt ·vtl''l'"'''ll -i l nii! 1lit ' t'~"•ti' ' ' '"'' 111' vttltit 'N tillll H(Htt r~ 111111 111111 ' (L.,tlttt~•tl, t• 11/K I : J I) '•" liltull 111t ''" ' dt itt~t•d 11 11 po Nt /Ill rlt• .~lt't'lt•, 111td I'""'""Hit •t tli iHit Wt't't.' ho tIt 11111 14'1 1\'1 l1 111 1!111 111 d ltpnttlhL·~:xiJ.It: lll'tl'H of t.•t·ottollllt IP\I IItj111H'III ovcr (;iovtlll lli AttiJ•,Iti 'll' lllll p, IWt' illit:th ce ntury'. O nt: or till' i'i t'H I dl!lllllttHt Mthat hn s bee n nt lldt• tdHHit t 1tlllll'l' (t'O be refuted later ) is thnt it i IIIIHI.IIlll'ltl :d ly n superstr uctu t'tl l i'ot•tn, n sc t·vo-mccbanism of capital that· r<.•fb:tH d•_ttll lltilttl di sco urses, interests and politics. While Marx had virtuall y nothitt g to 11 II IHtttl cult·ure per se, he did point out that paradigm shifts in superstructu t·nl 1, til WI Hlll' h ns ideology and culture did not take place independent to the m~ ss i vl' ,,, lllltll llk nnd political changes occurring in society as a whole. 1\ lllrX'!l view of consciousness in general, and culture in particular, was th:tl 1l11 y wt•rc wholly determined by the means of production. T he superstructu tT tit II t•nwq~cd constituted both institutions and the forms of awareness gene ra red 1! ) tlt~• tll. Marx considered that the division of labour arising fr om ind ustri:d 1 qtll ttlisnt, and the alienation of workers both from each other and from tlw t~ ltlt'ti H of the ir labour, made any coherent working class culture imposs iblc. lllf',t'ls, on the other hand, was prepared to accord some primacy and se lf ,I! tt 'l'tliination to the superstructure and its capacity to affect the economic ltt ~a·, p:uticu larly through resistance to various forms of oppression. Thi s pos 111111 is still alive and well in more contemporary Marxian literature, exempli ficd ltll t•x nmplc in David Harvey's T he Condition of Postmodernity (1989) nnd lll•dt•ric .Jameson's Postmodernism, or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalislll ( 1'1 11I) . David Harvey insists on preserving traditional Marxist catego ri c:-: h 11 t1titting a clear distinction between culture (as aesthetic production) and ti ll' 11 111101nic (as material production). In other words, it is useful to reta in till' 111ds ' modern' and 'postmodern' in relation to culture, and 'industrialism' ond jlltHIindustrialism' in relation to the development of capital, a point whk lt l•lltWHon cl early reinforces in reference to postmodernism:

1111111

tlt t• f11ndamcnta l ideological task of the new concept, however, must remain that ol lllll t'dinati ng new forms of practice and social and mental habits . .. with the new ltlllllS of economic production and organization thrown up by the modification < lt tpitn liHI11 - the new global division of labour- in recent years . . . it shoul d bl' ,,ddt•d thnt cultu-re in the sense of what cleaves almost too close to the ski n of till• rt:o nom ic to be stripped off and inspected in its own -right. (my italics] (Jameson 1991 : xiv- xv) ltiiH'N Oil nlso points o ut that his own usc of the t·erm ' late capitalism' dc ri vt, 1111111 the 11r:1 nkfurt School of Social Sck'lll't', who II Hl'C I the term in a so mcw lwt Lutitti~H fn shio n, correspondin g to Lc nin'H idt·ll ~ "" tllll llopoly ca pita lism, whk lt ~ "-~tlltlt•d impcrin lism as ' d1 e hi ghest sti1)',t' o l n tptlll lt'l ttl ', l low(•vc r, Jr~micsoll u Ht' !Itt.! lt'l'll\ itt t'OIItl'(ldistin<; tion tO priO I' !IIIII I jll ll lliltillllli ltll ll lt\1 i\ ll d in l'~~\tt1'i0 1 1 10 ill W ilti'III Hof illlt't'll :ltiOII:I IhwtiO tl tlt !it lt tiVI 1'11111 ill l11 ytt tid old ,sty lt• I.'Cltd lit I lui Wt't' ll l'O intti! il powv t'N, ' l'hiH lit d( 111 !lu• lit .!liLIIJit ~~~ l11ud u i ~H> lltll l t• t'~t'O t't'H tl tt• J,ul tiHtlil WIIN pt'II IHtit ly tiH• IIHIHI Ct llt l i ill lf' tll i111H'111j l lllll 1d tlH• ll lt•ll ttitlll illtt• Ill


IWt'lltit•lh <.'t'llltlty, ii'O ill till' mid - 1920s to 111 id l'' ltl w ·w; l'lll lltl', t1 trnditio 11 ilntt ll' itHtitiN wit h 11 s tothy. 'l'hi s is reflected in HilL It lltlllt lltptmtt y jou t"IH11 s n~o. '11•/us, '1'/mJry t111rl Society and others (Held 19HO, A1'1 tto .tlld ( ;t• hhnrdt "1982, 1\t• lln t•t' 19H4, ht e ry and Mansfield 1997). The Fran k furt Sdwo l wns founded 0 11 two phi losophica I bases: first, on the traditions established from Ka ntian critica I philoso phy; and second, by Marxian attitudes to ideology (the subplots behind his tOI"ica l events ), restated by George Lukacs, whose enduring influence pre vni lcd over the in stitute. Andrew Arato notes the ambiguity in the Frankfurt S<.:hoo l's interest in culture when he says: More often than not, 'culture' is represented as the sum total of the activities that possess the a ura of intellectuality or spirituality, that is the arts and the sciences. l1 11 t there is also an important usage, especially, but not only, that defines culture as I' he ensemble of those intersubjective traditions, meanings, values, institutions, ritua ls, customs and typical activities characteristic in space and time of a given soc ial formation. (Arato and Gebhardt 1982: 185) !111 !

Whi le this duality was noted by the Frankfurt School theorists in general, they were predominantly focused on culture in the former sense, and it was up to tltree theorists in particular to probe the specificity of culture within a Marxian il'llm ework, namely Max Horkheimer, Theodore Adorno and Walter Benjamin . 'l(>gethc r, Horkheimer and Adorno wrote a chapter called 'The culture industry' in their book The Dialectic of Enlightenment (1944). Adorno later published n nothcr essay called 'The culture industry reconsidered', not to mention one ·:di ed 'How to look at television' (1991a,b). The Dialectic of Enlightenment is probably one of the most famous essays in social science, given its historica l ·ontext - ten years earlier, fascism had hijacked Germany's entire historica l :ul tu re in favour of totalitarianism, and the finale to the Second World War hnd not yet taken place. In opposition to the 'high art' of painting, sculpture, lllusic a nd literature, Adorno's primary interest was in the relationship between th l.! proletariat an d the mass media of the culture industry. Of central concern wns the ability of a rationalised capitalism to deepen capitalist social relation s through the socia lly contrived opiate of the mass media, thus impacting systems of domination while at the same time generating even greater profits by con trolling and manufacturing popular culture: 'The omnipresent laughter of mass •tdt·ure is dismissed by Adorno and Horkheimer as "the instrument of fraud prn t:t iced on happin ess", and represents the narcotic dullin g of that critical sci f. vo nst: iousness necessary to open up the claustrophobic se lf-identity of the mod 1'1'11 wm ld to a lternative ideas and expe ri ences' (Connor 1996: 349 ). Waite,· lknj:llllin, n somew hat marginal m emhl'r of tiH' l•' t'l tldditi 'l School, d id not l111t't' Ador no's pessimism that a ll n<.·w tt•c hll o l''l',lt''l wf~ n ~ t~ vi l , I li N poHition wns tlt 11t the trw~ h n ni cn l reproduction of ;Ill tlt 'll lllllllt d tlutl tl11) llllllt' pl of nurlw11 t i<.· i 1y hnd ttl Iw t't' t hough r, nIo n1\ w i t It 1111 llttltlll It ) til 1 "- i 1li ' ,J 111 ' 111 lp, ttt11l ' w o ,.ks, lt~ • t'llldi tt l\ Roi 111HI Bnrtht•s' lll tt•t' pt olltillltt Ctitt'llt ,d ' ilp_1 ,j, ttlt 1!1 tlw 1111tlwr' (1\t•tli tttllill 1'> 7H) . Itt Wlly tl, tl11 11 td• 1 Hi tllti ll("iltidi• 111 •'1 ll' tl11 • lt~·1 111 of '" 't"v 111'111111 dt •N tp,ll ptllhlt • tll ~ ttttt_l wi ll lin 'c\'i -t HII I

''""'Y

Ill till' imnH•di.llt' JlWIIW ttl' I" 1lou I i lti)'IIIIHII I Wdli11111H puhli slwd ld :-~ d tH·ltlit (t:)< l ( l fi~H) , l'/11• LoiiJ.: Ri'V<>IIIfiun (11)(,.1) ,11111 111 the two key fig ures i11 Hriti Hh 1ttlt11t'lli studi es a lo ng wi th Jl ,I' 'l'lt11111(liHitt ('/'/Jt' Ma l<ing of the EuglisiJ WorH11-: I :ft m;, 196 3 ) and, b tcr, Stllll l t I lt1ll 11till h iN L'o ll cngues at the Birmingham O .: tllt't' ltll' Co ntemporary Cu lturnl Studi eH. i\11 d1 ese th inkers were, to a la rge degt't'l', l,,d<t•d into a concept of id eology that had strong connections to a Marxi:H'I dn HI 1t11dysis. This was strongly reflected in the work of Williams, Thompso n ttlld 11111\!\nrt ( 1958 ), who reified the idea of an autonomous working class cu ltut't', t'l lt' h individual being heavily influenced by prior Marxist thinkers, for exa mplt• Wi lli nms by Antonio Gramsci and Hall by Louis Althusser. Here, concepts ol 1 ttlt 11 re were again refined and tensions revealed between Marx's original d isi 11 II' I'<.'St in culture and the incapacity of revisionist theories to deal with tlw t•x plosio n in informational technology and its effects from around 1970 011 Wll t'ds: 'For Hall, the theoretical interests of Marxism and cultural studies wt'l't' tH' Vt'r perfectly matched, most particularly because Marxism fails directl y to •Hid t·ess the key concerns of cultural studies: culture, ideology, language and tl w nd)olic' (Lewis 2002: 133). To this one could also add ethnicity, gender, ~' 1',1',

t :lll/11/'t' tilltl Sotlt•fy l,dl''' " '--._1 I•\ t :11lltll'l' ( 19H I) , tllllrkillt', Wtllt ,llllll till 111H'

I'X II:dity, the disabled and other key social issues. Ove ra ll, the idea of resistance to domination had been too narrowly co nfitwd It 1 rlnss issues, with insufficient attention being paid, for example, to the fact th nt women cou ld be freed from class distinctions but remain dominated on the bnsil 111' their gender, or that domination had a multitude of forms, many of whkh t•v:~t.lcd a capitalist class analysis. Similarly, the mechanisms through whk II lth•ologics are implemented had been relegated to the background, p artic ul :1t'l tl t'l' lation to communication, language and commodity fetishism. Und erst:111d 11 hi y, there had to be a significant reaction from culture as ideology, into c 11l t lil t' tiN Hystems of difference and otherness. This did not mean that capitalism w :IH 111 1 longer a system of domination. What it did mean was that each syst·t lll nl dtlftorencc was perhaps addressing domination in a different form, to th<; poi11t 1ll11tnuthors like Foucault called into question the whole idea of dominati o n :tH 11 1 tlltKp iratorial social construct. There was an increasing awareness of the idt'l l 11111 111 any aspects of culture were not merely a reflection of the economic hast' , l'ltnl d1e mental was indeed as important as the material was asserted in the hirtl1 11l po~t·inclustrialism and a new postmodern attitude to culture at th e beginnittl'•

111 1lw I 970s.

Pnstmodern Culture W hik modt•t·ni st' nnnlyses of c ult'tll't' luu l ~tit\ttlllt ttll 11tlp,lt111 ft·otll tl w lt•lt itt ( ot ' I'II IIIIIY llllll 1\l'itnitl, profoundly illlitllllllll '' )' I" llll 'tll llltt l Al tiiii NHI' I, ""' " ' IM 1111 do11ht th,tt Jll'\' ll t'lt pltiloiHl piH•t'" ~1111l "' hlitl\iJli'IIHII IIt VI dlltllillllli 'd jlllll l ttlltdi•ttl tht~tktlll'•• lwp,tll ttii 'F, wit h 11111 II wil11 I H tili t\ilt l,rl hHII,~ tlltlt , lt" lll t'nu1~111 I yn llltd , 1'111tl HtltH 'I" tllllll•·~lll 1\ttlltlttll ni•l it1rP t lil!ilit i' \i llltlll~ llll~'' l11 .. ,tid


n ltt' ll' th 11 t dtNIIIIl'tiotiN IH•twt't' ll tll odc l'lli snt diHitllt>c lltl(•dcllli ''' Ill' ln111gltt wi tl1 lti i',HI. llldt•t•d tlw vl·ry t·cnH ' postmoclern ' is n dt'lll ~ lf\111111 1 dt tll poNimodc l'llit lt'IIHiiiiN t' lilhl·dd cd in modernity, in the same ll\1\lltlt' l ll1111 pnNINII'tl ctu ra li slll l't•lt'I'S to so met hing that co mes after structuralism, hotlt lt'tii\S ii iCO rporatiltl'o tht•i t· nntecedent without a cl ear terminological break from the past. Given tlw dinphnno us nature of much postmodern theory, this is probably just as we ll . 1\n 1·ry S111a rt for example says that 'Ambiguity follows from the fact that tlw IIOI'ion of the postmodern may be read as implying sequentiality, something whi ch co mes after the modern, and that indeed is how some analysts havt• 1' 111 ployed the term'. But postmodern does not necessarily signify that we have taken leave of tht• 1110dcrn; on the contrary, the term may be employed to refer to a critica I rt< lnt ions hip with the modern and as such it appears closely, if not intextricably, ll'liculated with the modern in response to the question 'What is the postmocll'1'11?' Lyotard has answered that 'it is undoubtedly part of the modern' (Smart 1996: 397). In other words, modernist and postmodernist aspects of cultural deve lopment segue together in ways not yet fully understood (Mitchel1995). l11 tddi tion, postmodern culture is also defined negatively in relation to the dying 1\ltSps o f modernism and, in fact, to the end of social theory as we know it, for t•xn mple in Ba udrillard's 'the end of the social', Fukuyama's 'the end of history', Debord's observations on 'the end of cultural history', Barthes' 'the death of th e llll'hor', Rifkin's 'the end of work', Gibson Graham's 'the end of capitalism', Nige l l-larris' 'the end of the third world', and so on. What is implied by these stntements is not that the world has come to an end, but that a wholly new meaning of the social is emerging, one based upon such concepts as simulacra (1\auclrillard ), hyperreality (Eco), heterotopia (Foucault), mediascapes (Appadurai ) and other emerging terminologies (Lewis 2002). Nonetheless, it is possible to identify certain features in the cultural transformat ion of Western societies. In the The Condition of Postmodernity, David ll nrvey has assembled some of the schematic differences between the old capitdi snt and the new, between modernism and postmodernism (after Hassan ll nhl , Las h and Urry, and Swygendow and others, Harvey 1989: 42, 174-9). Whi le tbese tables are complex and difficult to understand, what seems to l'i1n r:1cterise the move from Fordism into flexible accumulation and postmodern l'itlture is the overall ephemerality of its qualities, e.g. from design to chance, 1'1'0111 hi erarc hy to anarchy, from presence to absence, from centring to dispersa l, l't'Oil t signified to signifier, from narrative/grand histoire to anti-narrative/petit ln'stoire. Eve n these qualities are misleading, for once again they reflect a dyadic tppronc h to hi story. In other words, postmodernisr11 is Sl't'll ns qua litatively OPtH>Ht'd to modernism, which, as T have in clit'n tt•d nhnV!', iN ltol 11 pnrticul arly l't•vvn ling mct·hod . No t• is it t'OIISl'l'liCI'ive I'() sec tlw l' ltll 'lj\1' 1111 ' cd Ill \\' l' ltlll!!'td lt ll'lll 'j pun· ly ill np pw:i tionnlt('rllls, nlth ough till' dy11 d 1l1 ~~ 1 11"' d , l.t,ll!Htflll( t'· dt~ttd t tlltio n t'l' 11 11li 11 Nllig tlilk11111. (;ivl' lt tlw ift' ll lilltlit 11 ldlt !l•ntl ell, !1 -'J fiill ul• ·ttlttlll' In th 11 1 o l G ltliiiii ~N, lill y idt'll II II'I'NiNIIIIII'I' ill l"t l)ill d ill iii! ' il!iii

Ill

I ! Ill I

IIJ'I

liltl ll tl ii ii Ntnl lt'itl lt ~ I )\ I II'Jl lt1ll11 l11 l1o Ill l ' l~t • lt 'I I J•, IIII ' III !I I itt llOI WO ikiiiJ•,i lil Into tltt• poi!III HIII dill', 111111 j hl1 1 1dwd~' ll ll y 1\l'll l' t':lt l'N gt'l':tli' l' npp.llt 'lil c qt~odity .tt th e cos t o l till )' ''''"'• 111 ll ll lil fi ii Ht' to cn pi1 :1l. lnlk·ed, tl w gn·. tll' l' till illttll lwt of st•p: t~·n t ~· ilimml tlllciii N, tlw lt•Hs vo h c 1·c n ~.:e any resistn ncc co uld poHHihl lt rtvt•. 'l'ht• 011l y unifyi ng i' lt'lllt' lll IIH•II lwco mes the commodifi ed rchr·ions ol tl u llhllkt•t, th l.! perfectly un ifit:d cultuml exp ression of a totally frag mented pop11 l ilt', lndl•cd n po li tica ll y co ntrived multi culturalism such as exists in A11 SI'I'nli11 i !111 pt•rk•cl· too l to match commodified social relations with divi siona ry po li1it:11 l IJ II'IIII IIN (Jnyas uriya 1990, Clark et al. 1993). Harvey raises thi s iss ue, tht• 11 vo lllt ionary potential of postmodernist culture in relation to the shuping o l I'•'' t·, noling that it is precisely during periods of paradigm shift, as in modt'l'll 1 ~ 111 I o postmodernism, that the greatest spatial changes occur. liii C I I~IH N

II N PII ~'t: is indeed to be thought of as a system of 'containers' of social powe t· (10 WH' tl11• imngc: ry o f Foucault), then it follows that the accumulation of ca pi1·:d is jH'r'Pl'I U:1 11 y deconstructing that social power by re-shaping its geographi ca l bn st:s. 1'11t th e other way ro und, any struggle to reconstitute power relations is a srruggk 111 n~·orgon i sc the ir spatial bases. It is in this light that we can better undersl'ntld ' wIiy ~n pita Iism is continually reterritorialising with one hand what it was dctt.: t't'i lrll'i ttl ising with the other' (Deleuze and Guattari 1984). (Harvey 1989: 2:1H)

I li!ll: nn impo rtant question is the extent to which difference fragments work ill)\ r.ht Nil n tl tu re or homogeneous other cultures into microterritories and sc<.:IOI'Il l L tillt ii'OI identities, while at the same time reinforcing a nascent global co mmodit y 1tdttii'C :1s in that of Hardt and Negri's Empire (Murphy and Watson 1997 ). Whi le the reorganisation of space on the basis of new social relat io11N 1 tllll liNp llt·ed, such action is itself predicated on the process at the core of c:1pitnl 111 ~ nutncly that of commodity production in general and the idea of co mnrod it It li Nhism in particular. What we have to remember here is that the commodity 1 11111 nt t're ly a thin g but a fundamental representation of capitalist exc hnng1•, 11 111 in l,·clotion, symbolic of the power difference between owners holding c:r pit11l 111d iltose whose labour is marketed. This idea was central to one of the 111 o ~ t !itu l di::~tr ibes written about the specificity of the commodity .in the rl':11tll ol ttlilll'l', nnm ely Guy Debord's short monograph La Societe du Spectcrcll' , l'i1 Nt Jlllhli shl•d in 1967. Debord argues that with the deepening of capita list rt'ln t io11 11i p1 odut.:t·ion, relat io ns between people, and th erefore 'c ulture', beco nr c deri111'd wlutlly nnd <.:O tTlpletely as com mod ity relations: 'Tn societies wh en.• lll odt• tll rr1111 lit io ns of production prevail, a ll of lift• pn•fw nt·s itself :1 S nn imm t.: II H(' nn 11 1111tl 1tlion of specrnclcs. Everything thnt Willi dil'l't'tl y livt•d hns t11ov ed nwny i111 o 11 tr ! Jlll ~tw ntntion ' (l)chord 1967: I; ll ('V nltHr l .t~ y 11 1111 ( >ld N II)HH , CoHH I1 >Vt' 11) 1)7), llr 1 11 1 Wi' III I>Vl' ft'OIIl (:I'(IIII S~ i 's (.'OII t'l' jll itll 11111111 rOI rl li vt•rl •,y NII'tll o l Virlll l'll i1tl f1 I lll'W ('tlllt\'X I wht• l'i' II Hl' Vl\ ltl i!S lt i!VI ' lu•cll IIIII Nfttllllt 'rl ' wi1111 111 1 1111 ' 1 ~ IIII W i 11111 till' 11 t't•, tl ity " ol lnho111' ,!ltd pt·odl!rllirll , l1111 tiH~ llllttlllllllrtllr. rt'J•, til ll tlll l\ lr11r I' 1!1 tl11• hlllf',lliiJ',t 'N 111111 1 odr•'l wlr11 lr l\11\'1111 till pi"cic_lll•thrll r1111l r; itl; ldllllllll 11 l \' diii!N1 (< :ll lll tlll 111'1(1 I ~ '1 ) ,


f"~ttlilllc n•w<~ 1111 111 cllllllttt'cil oc1 B1111dc dl1111r . i.lo c tl111 tl1 11d1'111 dt•vt· lopl•cl l clpil rtl ll·lf l'l OIIOIItit\~ hiiV(' llll !isfit;d bn sic ll t'L'd N 1111d !111 II lutt 1 Ollll110di 1y pill diivliolllllllst now fm.: us 011 desires. In order lor· vnp11ul1~1 I11 1H imli o n to ex pu11d 111d ~·ou 11tcrnc1 1·he f::c lling rate of profit from th e pr·oviHiotl ol1•,oods 11 eccss::t 1'Y Ico suslnin li fe, cap ital must generate artificial requirem ents for who ll y unneccss:11 \ prodr~cts vi a the mass media. The aestheticising of desires so created thc·11 gc nerrHes a symbolic world of signs, whereby individuals become absorlwd iiii'O n system of spectacular production of their own volition. While needs <:0 11 he eas ily fulfiHed, desires can be endlessly renewed, and so the deepening ol .: ommod ity relations becomes complete on the basis of an apparently limi.tlts horizon to commodity production. As Connor remarks, 'The important thing i not that gratification is delivered to the consumer, but that the consumer i delivered to the dynamic needs and need-production, that is at once an economic system, a culture, and a technology of political control and integration' (Conno1 1996: 358). Which cultural forms will ultimately persist and which mutations ol ;ulture will develop, as commodity fetishism envelops social relations, is any body's guess. What is certain is that culture will remain 'the battleground of tlw ntodern world system' for some time to come (Wallerstein 2000: 31 ). ommodity fetishism was the term that Marx used to describe the reductio11 of social relations to commodity relations within capitalism, later traced to i1 s overall social implications in Debord (1967). In principle, the relationship between human beings first becomes mediated, then defined through th ei1 r·e lationship to objects. In the production process, different quantities of labout· time are incarcerated within commodities. Since labour cannot be directly :xc hanged in the marketplace, this takes place within the sphere of commodity .: irculation as a symbolic exchange of value. 'Once these relationships betwee11 1·hings are established they become coercive. Individuals cannot avoid submitting to th e social process which is the consequence of the mass of individual trans nctions between producers' (Urry 1981: 48 ). Fetishism is involved when peop le fni l to recognise in commodities the abstraction of human values which has tnken place, and identify with the objects themselves. Fetishism involves sym holism, abstraction and association, and opens up the possibility of a theory ol ideology and culture built around manipulation of the commodity relation to nt:-~intain or direct social change.

Globalisation, Culture, Economy 'I'Ill' idc:l of n globa lisation has been widely I'I'Hl'nc't' lwd h\' 11 lltllll i111dc• of sc ho lars, pl'icnnl'ily fro m an economic and politicnltwt'N jH'c 11v1 11111 1111 cllllc'I'PI oF 'g lobn l 'lillltl't'' hn s no1· unde1·gone quite tlw iW IIII' 111 1111111 ,1 (It ltlll: r~ llllli' I 'J 1JO, 199 1, llc·r·y I 'NO, 199.), l.n sh :111d lJrry 11J'J·I, Appddtll ,ti I i}IJf!) , f11 l d~c 11111'1HI11t'tio11 to (,'/u/Jt!/ C'lllliir!' ( 1990), Mik~· Fc•n iiH•r ~elllllt 1 lru, ' ill tll fitlll llicdt, tl 1 tdlllt't•?' lli1 lll"lWI' I' INll1 11 1 i I' wt• t'OIIl'l'i vt · o lj •, lolt,tl ' 1111111• IIi tic r hi i •i 11 ""n; 11 ii 1111111111111 ~~ 1dII !I'll,

ill!'ll ll w IIIINWl~ l ' iN 1111 A111 illl(j \11 ii L'd 1\hol~,tlcl diiiH ' wo uld N1111il,11l y ll'qltill! 11 lithiiJ Ml'llft!, 1111 111tlil<e• l)1 jlll'ltl lhilit )' loti ·,IIIII 111111' tliiO till.' futlll '~'. llowt'VI'I', il' iJ p1i1c : cJielll' 1hn1 lhv Actlllh till tlt~tllilltllllll o l WOI' Id mnrk c; ls in ll' l'tii H ol il• iJt'pttl'llle 1110110polit•s, tlt lttl tlll tc l wi ll1 !111• power of its mcdin ind11 S ic· i ~:s, h11• lc t .u ly s.tlurnted man y otltt•r 11111 1o11 NIIIII'N llo lonly with the necessa ry idc:ologit .d 1//t;JI/ti,IW hut a lso with c;ulluml products: lltOvies, junk food, sportswcn r, llllt Nti, IIIIIIH'Iks :1 nd other items. ' f(> the exte nt that people relate to the rcs rrlln111 1111 f11l'k of Iux ury consumpti on that ensues, there is clearly a matri x oF dcsit'c• d111t1dy in pl ace that transcends socially necessary consumption and shared t'lll 1111 1l irtlt•rests based on professional, ethnic, gender and other association s. S11tillt 1 1'~11()) indicates the importance of a common language as the basis of culllll'i', l!ttlitlillf.l to the qualities of English, French, Spanish, Arabic and other langu:tl \l' i lt !l l tll'i' Iransnational in their use. On the other hand, the capacity of univers:1lis1'd let. It ollie media to bypass linguistic and local cultural differences thrca tens 111 rc lt 'J\Il iV spoken languages to second place in the culture war. 'l'ltis point is not new of course, and we can return at least to Marshil ll It l.11hnn's Understanding Media (1964) to discover forty years ago thnt 'tlw 1111 dhnn is the message'. More recently, Manuel Castells has reversed thi s id t•ll, 1 tllllf'. rhat 'the message is the medium' on the basis that the mass medin will 1 tlln1 programmes to any message people want to hear. The interconnection ol tl11 p, loh:1l media via satellite communications has also encouraged Caste li s tu 111\J',t'SI that 'we are not living in a global village, but in customized collilf',t' Jltlhll ll y produced and locally distributed' (Castells 1996: 341). He also 111 nkt ~ till 111t~res ting point that even at the level of the culture of real vitalil y, tlw tlil' t't•s ts of professional and managerial classes prevail, since they, more th nn tl11• llll lill of pop ulation, 'are living symbolically in a global frame of rcfet't'lll'l'' (I ·1 1Nit• ll s 1996: 364). In the virtual world of images, class interests mnin1.1111 do1 11tlnnnce over essential territories. This reflects Castells' fundamen ta l views 011 111 y n! lt•mpt to implement the idea of 'urban culture' since spatial for111 s nn• 1'". d tc'll i'Cd by the historical specificity of social relations (DC 1 ). Non cilwl t•t.H, tlu 1 oi nc.: idence of globalisation with commodity fetishism generates the frnltlilll', 11! iu w horizons in capital accumulation, through the absorption of cu lture :IN 11 '' tnt• of production rather than a consequence. In the process, the co nHci tHI '11 l1111isntion of popular culture represents a new form of imperiali sm ovt•t lllltiJ•,c•, I'C presentation and language, mediated through the web of an a 11 -cncolll I' tNN II'I\ cul ture industry. AN 11 h<1c kdrop to this process, globnl economi c res tructurin g is ::dt·endy ltd fil ll111'. th e ex pectation that the third 111illt•mti111ll wi ll generate cirClllliHifl ll l'l' • lt 11ll y 1111nnricipnted in history. For llu ~ lirNI 1i111c', l'lllllomic forces cvndt• pol II , ,d cn tiii'OI , ns internationnl finnnl'inl11111111 1 ~ lt 'l llt ~tl' lld IIH• nhili1y•of :111 y Ni11glr l'"l111v.tl mgn c1isntion 10 p,ovc r·11 lltl' ic npc1 illclltll, \ 1, y lc •: tllll'l' of 1hi N J•, l ol~td IIIIIIIII II Y i,~ il s (('ltdc·llc; y IO hl'('llk clll \\ II ~""" "" llo !ll rlitH;C~IW~ llil' llll'cllit 'll ll y, IIIII 111dy liN ,111 tllhi'ITIII ll'l ltnoiOJ•,iVII I 1111 l l!)~t 1 ) 1 !!!li 11l ~[i [1!1 [I )11'11f'.rtlpl11c Ill NIH in jlolfl ttl fc:ll! tll 'l' tll.tl lli'I'IIIII N1111' lll 't c •N~:il')'.[~~p !!!l! t11itoil ,,f I d lltll l 111 1 11I U ~ It lit !111 111111ol , lill!!l ll tld l111 11tlt Wlt tld 111cloc ll. \Xflrl!ll! lll!lllit! 11!111• 1 1111 tll llllll t llldllll ll \


1111 d wttlt two llll ll lll lt lt'lllid t' Vt lll ~. I it" 1h1!! ' !1: ilu 111111111 .111111t ,,j Jll'li lll tll lll ll'ltlly t(t'llt'l'rlll'd ('()1/1//l()d/lit·~ Ill !ill ,,·,du! '" llilllllhtlllll 1'1'17, WOO l! ). An: hill't.:ltii'L' nnd tll'hnn desig11 1111 td •••lll 't.l~ 111 ltllt'l',l'l tl Plitt •• I !111 ~ p1'0l't'SS nnd tiHtn y co un tri es a rc waking up to 1h1 lt~tl !11 111 dw ' ittl n tt:1tinll.d lylt•' whi ch was an inherent pa rt of modern an:hil t•lll ll t' IHl s hee•t wiH•Ih d t· .~ ll' lu.: rive w n r~t i o n a l uni ty and a regional heritage th :11 reinforces locn l 1111 llll't'N, idcnl'i ly :1 nd history. The second is the creation of specifically cull /1/,i/ t'.\'/)('l'iellces (in the realm of consumption). Tourism is the largest single ac ti vtl 1 !'O illhining both of these into a single economic process. Here, the migratio11 t_tl popu l:tl ions from the wealthier countries in search of so-called 'authenti c' t' \ peri ences must be contrasted with the migrations of people from poorer CO IIII lt'it:s in sea rch of work, from persecution or from material deprivation, w hel't· 11 is csti111a ted that over 40 million persons are displaced on a continuing tllld illl'l't'rts ing basis (Britton 1991, Featherstone 1991, 1993, Chambers 1997, Rojt-1 111d Urry 1997). O ne striking characteristic of the culture industry, which tends to counter:111 il w t·end ency towards an all-consuming globalisation, is that significant cultund produ ction must, by definition, emphasise culture. Traditionally, this has bee•• 11 ft•nllii'C of nation states, i.e. authentic, national culture. In fact, one could a 1'(1, 111 th:ll the greater the tendency for any cultural product to 'go global' would lu st· lf-dcfeating. Its market advantage is due precisely to the fact that it is llPI l'l·p rodu cibl e elsewhere. It is clear, however, that even within commodity pro dt tct·ion it may be impossible to localise completely, for example fashion hou st•r, nnd perfumeries in France may still have to import materials from other co un trit'l'. Nonetheless, other features of the process dominate sufficiently for 11 ·ultural hegemony to prevail (Molotch 1996). While there is no doubt th nl glohn l production and marketing is generating a culture of its own- with :111 overw helming desire to have everyone running in the same Nike shoes, wearinl', il w sa me Ray-Ban sunglasses, listening to the same rock groups and watching t.lw .~ n m e movies- paradoxically it is the conservation of difference that underwriu·s 1ht• success of the culture industry. ll erc, a major question driving current research into the culture industT ·o•H.:ern s the extent to which the spatial organisation of the material producti011 of ~ ultur::~ l products differs from traditional manufacturing processes, and tlw t'X It. ! IH ro whi ch tbe consumption of these same products differs in terms o l lll ll rkcrs. In pa ra llel with this process of production, touri sm, in so far as i1 l'l'PI't'se nl's th e market, constitutes an ever-shifting matrix in the demand and twpp ly of experi ences, one in fact that authenti city cn n IH'V(' I' s:t t'isfy. An impo 1111 differe nce between the cultural prod uct's nnd tiH • t tdltll'll l t•xpericnces th:tl I'OIIIhi ll l' 10 form the cultu re industry is tltill whilt • tll llllllltd ilit:s tend to lw l ll 'odu~'t'd i11 one pl ace and consunwd i11 11 1111ti11 1, !111 • 1111 11 1111 l''<pcriencc h dt•fitlition llHISI IK' consumed wh cl'l' it iNI'"" '"'' d I'!11• dt•tdfl ll 0 f till' h1 d It l' l1 Vit'O illll l' lll Ill (I till tl 111 i IJ ill [i h 1fttll p11 H t'NN, jli'OV id iIl l', VI' IIIII'N lot 1111 ll ll illt fll',i tl ll hk 1'1 1111',1' uf li ( I1 Vilii"1H, i !ill ]i!tdl!•_iillll ttl Ill! hitt'l'lll l': tl 111d 111 lut 11 t•x it-H ~ 111 tl11• ll ll ll t•linl lf·\'P I n i 111 it ii•n•. 1-tiii VII IIIIJ', nil' pot· t ~, 111

t

111111

u"""

I'"'"'"

II'

I

11111111 ltllltl ll., """' '

,.,rl

ii !IHii !'d 111 lllllllliiiii HI,ll tJ 11 lll )l!tt tl u l

1\' IIH_: II. lltiltHiu111 tl t•N ip,ll tdtt •i 't'l'i rlil "' - . """''h ' '" ''I 'd '"~'II'"" tll iiiJII ' 11 11 y1 11111 pt tvllll' tH' titl • illl l tt:'" "' 111ti11tt t11.!1 11111 y, 1 tvil Hm it•ty, rutd ht l', lt lt11i1} tl11 ltll llllll Hiit y L'ltlllll l ttl tl 11 111111itl 1 pt' I'S Otll tl nnd t. : Ot'p01'1\ tl' po wt'l1 II 1 ll uH ollll t•tlivt• hi story, 11\l' lll OI y llllll tt"l'il'lllio ns (Breen 1994).

P"l"""'

lhculidty and Symbolic Representation \11 •d tl11• ct• nt rn I cu ltural principles debated from the 1960s to the '1980s, wit h 1 1i liJ It dnwn effect into the present, was the concept of 'community' (DoxindiH I! •H, l't•t l'i n 1970, see chapter 9). Endless research was carried o ut into evt' t'Y IHl' iltl1 • IHl\WL:t of existing communities in terms of their functional cha ractc •· l':i i •~ 11 ! 'l i~.l' , Hhn pc, form, demographics, economic base, social structure, etc., as i,, I111NIH for giving designers some social dimensions upon which desig n de 11111,. ~l wuld be made. Beyond establishing the most elementary foundation fo 1' ·nl d 1wovision (schools, shops, welfare facilities, etc. ), the idea of 'designin ~· !lillllllllities remains elusive. Instead there has been a shift to the idea of pb c~· ~tulpl •tll' lll :1k ing, which skirts the problem of dimensions and focuses instea d 0 11 1iu h lt•t t of identity (Carter et al. 1993, Massey 1994, Liggett and Perry 1995) . i h 11 , 1wo of the most significant concepts for urban designers working tocb y nl't' l1 ti ll 'llltt·d ideas of authenticity and symbolic representation, closely link t: d to tlu l~• · w Rura li sm!Urbanism to be discussed below. 1111' ult-:' of the authentic is bound to all aspects of culture and therefo re to nil 1 .lll 't iHof urban design. It is linked at the philosophical level to concepts of 1i'lltlt lild H'ldity; to experience, for instance in relation to travel and tourism; :utd 111 dt l' 11 1 Ili n! representation of the physical world of architecture, urban spaCI' :1 1111 !t! lld"il ltPl' . It is also closely related to post-colonial cultures and the re-esta hli sl1 !lH' III of 1heir own 'authentic' practices and environment, as well as to devclopt•d l •itllllti Wl, wh ich are seeking to retain their own national identity in the fact' ol illii! ,,ill '•ll ti on (Said 1978 , 1994, Bhabha 1994) . For post-colonial cultures tlw •l•lt•nt is immense, although the dilemma posed by the demand for auth enti 1\' IMi111111Cdi ately apparent. Colonialism has had the most profound effects 011 111ttl y vu ltures, frequently lasting hundreds of years. How therefore ca n sud t ' IH'rlt•llce be considered inauthentic, i.e. fake or artificial? On the other hntHI 1 lt•• W lll'l' rhe useful aspects of colon isn t·ion, such as infrastructure, architcct'lll'l', lt w tl llt td ndmini strative systems nnd ltlll J',t l:tgl', to be rationalised within tiH• ft ,llllt 'WO I'k of nnt ional sovercip,nt y 1111d idc•111i1 y? •' l'h(' problem with such clni 111 111 tll ltllt'll l n t~rhentici ty is t'11 nt lh t•y "f11:11 lu'''" 'H' l' ltl tllll',lcd in an essent·inliHt t.:t dilll'nl position in whi ch fi xc·d pnllllt t_'ll lu·ttl lll t lt y lll'ldi~.t·d or co,;rnmillntt•d. ilti ~ it , Hlll ~ ii Ht,;OI'Oll nry, tiH· d,lll}'.l l Il l lp11111l11l ~ till IIII~H tllllily thn t Clllt\l i'('H II II I 1 .!1 Vtlop :1 11d ciHI II j•,t' IIH tl wi t llllitllllilll Ll! it ll!'/ ' (J\ I,IItlllli t•l td. I IJ')H: ). I), I "'lil' llltllll ~lll iM1111'1!' 1111'1' Hllllll'tililll'- 11 l 1 I 11oi'ili1iii h11111 Ill cudt•l' 111 hn•nl< lt f~t·


lnutt i111 • IHt lldNol llllj H' II ,tli NIIt , 1\~HI'Illtdli'<llt j;, , "'II' 111 l(j\l !llllttft 'llfl 'llf t:l_ly ~11111 if lllii Noliddtt•s o1 ltlliqllt' ol tt d slt ltl't•d IH' l of 111l111 lft U t. lltllli ii iY iN 11 11 11 tl If

Ull lfittll t'N lwyo nd lihe t•ntio n, then it cith~:1· tt' P" 111 111 ~ ,, l,ti Nt' t't•n lity sinl't' it ttt ny not· in <.:o rpornrc the coloni a l experience, Ot' II lw1 o tt tt'N 11 stcreo tyfX' wht•n• ll~t· dyna111i<.: nature of culture becomes suppressed . Oppt·t~NNion from the o~ll sidt• is tlt t: t1 replaced by oppression from within. All of thi s ra ises se rious question s fot tt 1·bnn designers in th e design and development of towns and cities ac ross tlw globe, even setting to one side the training that many designers receive in ·o untri es other than their own. O n t·hc modern cultural stage, one region where problems of authenticity is in its relation to tourism and its impact on culture. Here, the progres.~ of tourism may be characterised in five stages. The first phase could be charac lt•ri sed by the search for the authentic, up until about 1950. Genuinely authentit ·xpe ri cnccs could still be obtained by visiting other cultures prior to the devel opment o f mass tourism ten years or so after the Second World War. The seco nd ph ase co uld be characterised by inauthenticity or what is called 'staged authen tit:ity' (MacCannell 1989). Arguably, all modern tourism comes into this cat t•gory, where tourists are prepared to accept a staged version of the authentk licta tcd by their own mass presence. Tourists then gaze on artificially con· Sl'l'uctcd sites, events and artefacts that bear no relation to the original, but whi ch are nonetheless an acceptable compromise in the context of bucket-shop n irf~ res, air-conditioned rooms and aerosol mosquito repellant. The term 'post· fo ttri st', someone who actually welcomes the inauthentic and for whom tht· rc:n li ty of indigenous life would be anathema, marks the third phase. As John lJrry ( 1995: 140) remarks, 11 ho und

th e post tourist delights in the multitude of games that can be played, and knows th nt there is no authentic tourist experience. They know that the apparently :luthcntic fishing village could not exist without the income from tourism or that the glossy tourist brochure is a piece of pop culture. It is merely another game to be pl ayed at, another pastiched surface of postmodern experience.

It is but a short jump from post-tourism to phase four, where the construction of physicn l sites or 'theme parks' on a wholly unprecedented scale bypasses any ·oncept of authenticity (see also chapter 8). Some of these are already i11 ·x istencc, for example new designs for cruise ships expressed as floating town s whi ch move around, but whose passengers never disemba rk; massive shopping nt nlls such as the Winnipeg Mall that herald qualitatively different consumpti on t•xp<.'ri<.: nccs; and the idea that airports cou ld beco nl(• ' ilH'III t' POI'I'S', dcstinatiO.i~ l'll liWr l'hnn points of transfer. Plans arc in j)I'OJ•,rt·s~> 11 1 tltom ent to builcln shoppin g mnll in Ouba i costing $US7 hillio11 ill 1111l1r 111 ''"''llt'l internntio nnl folll'i Sin , dim ension s that will dwnrf t'V I' II i111' .. 1"'' 1 11 I• 111 W11 111 ipt•g, 'f'he co n1 pit•>< wi ll hnvt• th t• mc pMks, hote ls n111 1,, Jlr -"1111d 1 I '''-''' 11 I , wi ll t.·ovt•t· St )IJI( ' ·,oo tnillion sqtt:tr(' •nt•t•·es r~nd wi ll tord\(• ;;i\' )'i'lt l li lto t " '"I" ' 11 It iN pl ll iiiH·d lo tt t tllt lltt odntt• I ~· 11till io n IOIIt'iNfflo l ) ' '' h wl, \•i!' dw l!i il \• tl11111' ~tl li!•r wist• 1111 ollt•, iN tltill in ti N o( IH fllll l'l' kifO IIII' lrt·~ 11f ~I IIIo I lt\tJ/,111 I Jn.ul, /.o f /',I'll'//', 1,'/ ( )( loht• i

tl,,.

"Itt"''"

'till I) •;l .tW' livr i 11 1ln· tt "" i·.i 1 1 11 !it [: tiL l II tl, "" "' ''llllillll•tf. tit • ttr illt \• !L .titfll 'll 111 1 yl11 I'~ J H itl 1 wf11t1 tl ii !·11!1! Jill[ , ill• lllttlfllr IH I •llllflt ll/,ll td N11 f ltltii i ~ JII 111 llttlnvt·d t' ltllt't•ly, ''' l11 '' jd l!ttt l h) llltll 'r HH II p, ly Nop lttsli vfl lt•d t on tp11Wr lllttiJ\ 1111'. 11 11d t•qt tip111 ~' 111 (l lnj\111 d I (J' 'i•) lly llt,ll llttt t.·, c.:o rt l.'t' pl s of lll rflll ' IIIH~ tl II I111Vt' tnlw rt on erttin: ly II I' W tllt tiiiiiiJ\11, l'lw IH'l.'OIId irnpo rtn nt CO III.'I'fll , IIIII' III NI'IHtl':lbly tied tO nut·henti cil y, is th.11 of \ll tholl c tT prese ntation. Autlt l' nt ki ty nnd experience arc directly <.: onrt t't: lt'd !illllllj',lt lll :ll'eria I and symbo lic w nstructs, which represent or signi ry 'otht.· l'lH'Si '' 111 11 111ttltitude of dimensions. The built environment is arguably th e tii ONt IHtttl kn nt· of these, incorporating archaeologies of meaning signi fied in mos t o f 1111' 1 hnpl'crs of this text. For urban designers, authenticity and symbo lic I'V jWt' tllill lion ore therefore central to the idea that urban design is th e sy mbo lic lill'lltpl to express an accepted urban meaning in certain urban form s. M:llli h ·~o~ t11tions of authentic experience are inexorably tied to place, and placemnki•tl\ I ~ IIIII' of the key outcomes in the overall process of representation accomnto d1tl t•d in the design of cities. As we have seen, it is bound to the level of glohnl ltllll'iH111 rtncl a lso to the space of everyday life. As Harvey (1993: 12) rcm :Hk s, l'ltt n• is heco ming more important to the degree that the authenticity of dw ell iII J', 1111 l ~t•i t ig undermined by political- economic processes of spatial transfo rm a ti o11 11111 plnce construction'. Harvey is referring here to the search for, or associ:11'i cll t .v ii It , authentic community, something that was perhaps only possible b<.:fO t't' 1J t pitn li sm had fu lly fractured labour, leisure and domestic life (Berman 1982 ). l11 illi Nt'tga rd symbolic representation is not necessarily a conscious process, 11 11d llltt y i11 fact be so much a part of people's lives that it occurs naturally. ( >11 the o ne hand, we can see from the organisation and design of tribal 11 1111 lj\l'lll'inn cultures that symbolic representation is homologous with daily lift: 1111d I ~ 1101 a contrived art form. This process is well described in one of the firsl· hoo l tl u11 1riec.l to bring the realm of symbolic representation into the design prm· t~Nro, ~!Jt• lt l'r, Sign and Symbol (Oliver 1977). Here the phenomenal richness o11 d lllt'll''ntion between the culture of daily life and the symbolic structuring o l ll'ltl ity and space are manifest. At an altogether different level of deve lop n• <.•nt , ittl't' th e built environment professions in developed countries operate witltttt !11" t•nco mpass ing tentacles of capitalism, political and economic ass umpti tll t 11' ll ltiom atica lly built into the process of constructing the built environllH'ttl , tl11• rnost· obv io us of these being social class, the power of capita l nnd ilu• tlliltol'ity of th e state. Tables 7 and 8 demonstrate how this process opC t'll lt' wi tl1 rq;nrd to public housing in Hong Kong (Cuthbert 1987: 146-7). Sy111hoiH 11 pt'l'Sl' tllrHi on at both of these levels of engnp;ement bas serious implications l'tn 111 hun for m, neither of which rcp resc nt·s l'Oilst'io us design processes. <J11 ilw other hnnd, ttrban des ign t•fs ""' l'r ·c·qlll'tlll y fn ccd with problt•nts o l tll lltt l'll lt'l'flt'l'sc ntali o n, which a •·t.• ltlllf'll rtllllltll 111 ltt fto hthk with rh <.... too iHrtv11i l dtlt•, 111 il w Mn st<.· rs of lJrhnn lkvt• lop111t til ~111d I II'Nil',ll l'OII rSt' at dt t.: Uttl vt• t'Nt l 11 l ~kw Sw 11lt Wn l t~s irt whic h llt.t vl' pl it)''" t 1, )' 11111 • ovc:r th v lnN t It'll yt'I II 'S , WI ' llltV!' dt•vo tt·d tlllt' tlti nl ol tht: JIII IJI,IIIIIIItt•.• It• Jll llit't l'l irt Scl!l tfH•t tHI ANin 1111d l11 V11 11d , ( )VI' I' 1lt111 IH' t'llld IWO Ill lift I IH lH!\'ll lit:• II llllldttl f!'tf 11 1111111tll y, wl tlt ,1


1.1hh• ,'

'• l.tll' llllllllt l 011111 ••1 11) \

oHtiiHllliy) 11\ 1'1 1111' lljtt"olllllltttlllll,tiHHtl' .tltd

1'il v. t11 • •·1•1 l11t dt •w lopttll 't1 l.lt iiH 'llo11.11

nnd •i l!lllli )'lttll 1""1"

Functional expression ANIIItll.ll l 'ollilc.l l ldt •ologlcn l lt '!liH)I111 (' At hn i ni si rn tlv"

I I '!\• ,, l'ltyHI\il l Spatial I two~ t lon ( )t'J•,.tr1i snl'i on I )tiiiSity t\pptwnn

In strumental nature of pub li c housing Provi sion of soc ial welfare w rents o ll ection of ad ministered prices Tenant' s 'rights' M ass housing estates

Consl ruc ti on t\nwnity

Marginality, lowest land values Modul ar, highly structured H igh-rise, high-density Architecture of 'cages' Externali sation of domestic processes Labour intens ive Institutionali sed and elementary

I >ynnmi lt )t'111

Static Monumental

tlln" 1tllll'lhlll !-~ pt~tl '

~lt~ulllc •l!llon

l .tJ.It•ll ';j,t lt• t lllllitl l (Itt~! I 1d II II Iiiii' tlliltttilly) ttVI'I' 1111 1 l't 1ptodtll Ilo ll oll,dHIIII uttlpilv.t lt• ht't lot dt •wlttl'tll• 111 ltlltdl•_ltt.tl.lltt l '1 11\lllfylng pmpt •tt l<•s of lit ill llill.tll hil•' ( ('.

-----

Reproducti on of labour power

l:tmdlm ht l llljiH't•!C•Iun \ ~,htll>tl Itt lilt ,d

Legitimation of the system Subsidy to pr ivate sector w ages Exclusion from the property mork111 Absence of purchasing power Class structure/captive markets Poverty Functiona l economi cs Repression Crowd ing 'Cultural innovation' Surplus value extraction Tech ni ca lly demanded by daylight standards Absence of cho ice Identity unimportant

,.·oiii'CC': A. R. Cuthbert, 'Hong Kong 1997: the transition to soc iali sm-ideo logy discourst• .111d l lrbo n spatial structure'. Environment and Planning 0: Society and Space, 1, I <JH 7, p. 147. Reprinted by permission of Pion Ltd, London.

ldt lllllfllt ,,,

I ' IIIII Ill lit

dt1 !11 tl•ttrn t iv

Minimal code

I '•tt•tl 11lt yt.l!

,tl

Exc lusion of public involvement Rapid physical change

Ad hoc control vi a individu nl agreements Mystification of the politi process Finance and development cn pl\.11 tied to planning Internal power politi cs Continual rea li gnment to market conditions M aintenance of elastic produ cti w conditions for capital accumulation Money more important than memory

Absence of conservation

lhllhtl l•11 ,,lion I

!fl \l llliH.tll on

1

l1t •11HIIy lO inI of some twenty projects in fifteen different countries. In every case we haw l w~: n involved with real situations, working with international agencies, feder::t l, tnt c nnd local governments, private sector institutions and academic insti tu 1ion H, so metimes simultaneously (Cuthbert 2001). Two projects that manifested 1It ~· re in tionship between authenticity and symbolic representation were th Otl\' ~· o tHiu c t·ed in Bali and Beirut in 1997 and 1998 respectively. ' l'hc Bn li project was located in Karangasem province, one of nine ancient ki 111\doms on the island. The general area had as a major to uri st feature seve ral IH'Illll'ifu l water palaces built during Dutch imperi al rule, of wh ich Tenangn n woN th e most fa mous; 1500 hectares of adjacent lnnd IHtd IH't' ll tnrp,eted to cren tl• w lt 11 1 c.: un on ly be described as a Balinese v<·rsion ol I )tNIH'ylutul. 0 11r objectivl' woN to t'l'O ri ent thi s perceived need into :t tnon • 11ppt tl l ut ,tlt Hi ntI t'l',y, whereby I'IH· d ytHllllk of locn l cultura l trad itio ns eottld lu • l ' lll ttllltl!\• ~ d ll tllll •ltlt tlll l' t•d thrO tlj',ll lutl nnct•d l'l'O· to uri sm. Thi s implit•d Nlt Nitllll .ddt ·.t t lli•'Jiit1ll f11 1 tl11• lm·nl t• nvit'Otl t1H'1tl , wit h ll t'w fn c ilil'i es, rr: lillilll'. 111 ••1'.' llltilWil tlt!d l;iili '•lf•l ''' '' ''' t1P IHI I'IIIIIit it•i lot lo1'11 1 pt•op lt·. ll t• t't\ qtwNtinn lt ttl lltilullt !d!l' tilE! N) 1 iitl~ttllt " ' lllt:IH' llinli o n Wt' lt' pl'nf111111tl, Ni ll l 't' 1\nli Niill llt .tllll till· IIi\! ' 1!1 jljj t itltlll l dt NritH' ti Vt' ll tttl

Minimal cont rol over free market systems To promote the hea lth, safety and general welfare of the community Superprofits from land development Constant change of apparatus

Signification

"PI'"• II '•\1) 1 ti!Pillltt tion

. fl l••lll ly I I) llollllll'

11111 11

Central access to transportation modes Zoning policy Emphasis on land 'parcel' Non-statutory control over intensity of use Architecture of fa<;:ades Private sector institutional dom ination over 'symbolic' Labour intensive Degenerate 'urban design' quality and environmental monitoring H igh ve loc ity of construction and deconstruction Un ique physica l qualit ies of many bu ildings

Economic power Commodification of land and building Increased adaptability of systl•tttlt t private sector needs Extreme land pri ces and rent s

Surplus value extraction Absorption of 'soci al space' int o tllo sphere of the market Few restrictions to specul ati on Extreme intensity of us

.

c•,


illlt/'.i'lltn l •tilttll •d tt .ll llttlllt N Wt~tldwit l t , '''' , ln.•~.~tl , tilt' pltdnllup lt y ol Nplltlld otWIILtlllttt , 11111 tlu t\hlll!l!tl t t ~ ltotlt dt•tivt•d lt•otlt IIH• llit~tht t't•lt j•,lttll (l;lt tu •iil ut .l.tlll 'i' ), Wlu lt• tiH •Nt' two ro tH:t•pt s npp lied nt t'Vt't y lt•v1l ttl ,·tdtlltlll t' ll)',ll) ',t'lll tlll pmltlt'III NN llt' I'O lltld i t~ g th e redeve lopment of the wntt•t' ptdlll't' nt lJju ng tllulth 101'111 ol to11ri st vi lla ges indicate the kind of dil e1n1na fa ced in mnny Hilllll. ll pt•ojt•et s ncross I he globe. T he water palace at Ujung had, in an earl it• l' 111 111 lwt•tl ni111 0St destroyed by a severe earthquake. The Dutch gove rnm t' lli l1.ttl dt•c kk-d t·o fund th e reb uilding of the palace, and there were at least fo u1· p oN~ tld • dt•sign solu tions. First, the palace could be viewed as a sign of imperin li st 1111, 111d eliminated as in authentically Balinese. Second, the site could be preservt•tl .1 it wns, :1 true representation of the co urse of history, of the wrath of the gods tlltd IS 11 physicn l reminder of imperialism, whose memory had faded with the f: ~tltll of th u crumbling monument. Third, the site could have been redeveloped fo 1· 1111 ot ltc1· 11 ses deemed appropriate. The fourth alternative represented tbe clt om11 opt ion , name ly to leave the site intact as a true incorporation of the mem01 y " ' thl• people, but to include a small museum that displayed collective 111CIIIttl 1 using a variety of media, including the original drawings of the palace wlt11l1 l't'ln rtin in existence. It was also hoped that a perfect replica of the origina l t:o tdtl lw bui lt with the funds from the Dutch government as a central feature of' tl u r ommunity, but with the use transformed into collective social use. In the scc.:o11d problem, that of the formal representation of community, the preferred oplio 11 wn s 1'0 usc the most traditional and 'authentic' form of Balinese settlemen t nf! ,, p1·ot·otype, namely the Bali Aga, from which several transformations Wt'll •volved (Cuthbert 2001 ) (see figure 24). 'l'he second example of the ineluctable problems surrounding authenticity llll tl n·prcscntation comes from an urban design project which we carried out 111 lkirut, the capital of Le banon, under the auspices of Solidere, the comp;111 d1:1 rgcd w ith the responsibility of creating a new central business district l't 11 t ht• ci ty. Much of the urban area and most of the central business district Wt'll dt•st roycd during the civil war, which continued intermittently from 1975 tit II il ll)l)(). The famous Green Line, which separated Christians from Muslims, t'l lll t•nst to west and divided the city into two, along the axis of what used to be tl w old city ce nt re. It also cut through the old entertainment and commercial henr t ol tilt• city that previously contained the old souks, a place ca ll ed Martyr's Sq u:tt't'. 11 ow dereli ct· nnd virtually eradicated. The proj ect was to rt•(ksign l'he squa re.: Ill HI tltt• Slii'I'Ounding district (see figure 25). Mnrtyr's Sq uare, even in a state of tot::d nnnilt il.11 iu tt 1 l't•pn•st•n ted a site t oll t>ctiv c memory such that any building Ol' llll llllllllt'tll pl ~t~t• tl i11 nny locntio11 wottld in11lltdi:1 tely be chall enged, so dw p1 ultlt'lllli l111'"lv1 d 111 ll'hllildillg wt' l't• p1·ol'tll1 11d if not impossible. ' I () bc.:gin wi tlt 1 lt ll\\ Wt tll lll llllli\ 111 lw l'l'P I'l'St' tli r d ? A1H I wlt mw hi stOI'y shou ld it hd Wlutl , l111 ' ~~ lllqdt , tlllllltil lttt•d nut iH'III it l.t•IHIIH'IH' t• ttlttlt'l', givc11 tlt11t it hntl lu•ttl •· 1'111 ltfjt lll,lt_l It\ 1\\lll lll lljlll' ww ld II 'II P,III II M, lslll lil I\ IHI <:hl'iHIin ll ityt Itt .tdditl i)lll I eh•lllllll 'htiN lll't'll tnlt! ll itwd 11 Vill'ltttl'l titllt 'N it y Hll II II III Y illll ll' l ittl 1""''' 11 ~~~ i ll ll.i t lilll iltt • IUIIII' pl nl 11

GATES

-

.k

('< ... . ?I H%.-~~

~FU1fll i '71 I

''1

I

1!\

,

.

·t{f

Village street

1 >}() I 'X)\-

.J.. -\ I \<~ st<Ol'lltG COMPW (111?

IJrl)nn village

~~~~~~='(

VII/IIC'J ~

1tr

IIJ',lll'l' :l4 N<'W vill age design ,ltl.tptt•d fit till l t'llf',olll)\•111 Bi:l li Aga. t~ ll/111 ': 1\. It Cuthbert, MUD!) Yt•oit /uul/, /•1•1 / 111111 •,ytltll •y: l ,l<·ulty of 1h<' Hullt IIIVIttlllll\1 111 , tlw UnivC'I'Sily of Nt'W •;tlltlll w, d l'~ 1111111 I' Itt, Rt•prlnt('(l by IH'I'IIlh•.ttHI 1

til lilt • I ,It 11 lt y of tlw llullllnvltollltll 'lll


Ii i

ttu,ln*"t~'k

·- _--·-N~

~

llcthll

....

·•vk·i~••r•u tn~tllt•

...........

"'~

Mhtod•lltO

m::;::t:flf~~apartmonl$

:Z

1------+---- orr~ee:tOWOf'" Vlll~:tbf mall

- - - - : ' ~,.

Pt<SoatlfRn overhade bridge

The toukt

nwlia

Performing arttcontte

Qardenol forgiveness

l""~ l , lll l n l lltl l scH ec•ly' l11 ''''"' l\ri1 11i ll !iit~tl htl ll liii'NI-I dHHI'i r t Il l< HI! ' tiH'I'c· til<' 11 1 k iiMIIe •et ,tl'cltnt•ologit•H ol ljuliu111 111 , l'"il l)lliiid· to IIH• 11'01\ 1\gl', six ol whit h til e l.lllll llti y visihk. /\1 tiw 111111 "' !11, 11 111-111 y, Lt• hn11on wr~ s rcfcl'l't•d lo etH ti11• I 1 Vt llll , giv ing its llllltH' lo tl11 ' Wll td ' l.t•v utlti llc' as a rcspcc.:l·cd Hy c~thol ctl t11lc 1il llet', so phi sti cation, iltlt•ll t•tlll id dt Nl'OIIrsc and humane living. l'lti Nl'nmc to an abrupt l' lld wltcct tlt L~ Ottomans murdered thirty Ld)II IH ~H I ' il illlccll itls of various religious denominations during the Turkish occ.:u pntiot t, 11,11 111111', Ma rtyr's Square as the site of their execution. Here we now hnvt• 11 mqm pnradox. Since that time, the square has symbolised nationnl uttil y, ' ' ~ ~ ~ 1 1\ ll et' and sacrifice. Paradoxically, it also represented, on the basis of ti11: • iv d w:tr, a symbol of national division, war and self-immolation. Laycn·d i11111 ti1 11Nt' ll'ngcd ies were images of erotic and other desires, since the square hmll wt•tt tl11• lm·11s of the red light district, entertainment and other materia l pl c:tStll'c• ~ l111l y1·'s Sq uare in other words represents the historic and collective memo1'Y ol 111 t' lllin: nation, one that will not easily be resolved in bricks and mo rt:ll' (Nt't' il)l llt't'H 26 and 27). The departure of Syria in April2005 opens up th e possibilit y lc11 histo ry to repeat itself or for Lebanon to become once again the a <.: llt l' eel ll jlhi stic.:ation in the Middle East.

a ." = ~~

27. BEYROUTM - Place des Canons

p..... , .. ~thead bridQ&

Plaoo Oebbaa

--..,

~

Aparlments Mixed· US&

61.~---- OfficttfOVIOr P•<l<

Plallorm over road

l

"'"""""""'

Eltlttlng rotktondaJ area

,1 l'l~un• 2,r, Beirut: M artyr' s Square Corridor l'1n)c •c I. i\ l.t •.lt •l cII I li'h.lll I >c•vc• lc>p111 t)fll nnd Des ign Programnw, l Jn lvt• i•·IIY 11ll lt~v\ 'HIIIIil W, d<!S. So1111 c•: 1\. 1\. Culhlwrt, MUOO Ycw/)()o/, /'1 11 / 11'111 '•\ dill'\ I .11 lill y 11III1C • Hullt I 11VI IIllllllt 11ll, ll w lJni wrsily or Nt•w Selltllt Wt d ll~ i 't'.l I' Ill I ,, IV\ Itlly '>I<'W I !IIlii I 1'1111)\. 1\l' pt llll !ld hy 1H1e'lll h Hinn or lite • I ollllli) llllltt l IIi till iII 1111111111111 1

!Inure• :.u. llt•l t'lll : M.tr tyr'•, Sqll.llt ' (llllltlt 1l v I ,1 l'll!t i1 tlnu 1

11 1//11

t• ' l llllo llll

I 'I 'I I, 1' ' I

)llil i h1 1l 1

1

111111111),

/lc •)/111/l/1 Nttl/t• Alt1lllt•l/r:. 1 \lil ~ ! t lli liHI• llo'lllllli 'lll! .l


llll,.t ltitlll 11! !111 1\'Ptlil, II lh '•IIi ltlltrllll( • ill !111 IIIIINI J',t'lll'litl fH' IHH', joj td jHtr tltllllllll i111pc11 111111 • ' l11 tlri ·, I" 1111111 ii\•t', l" "''"""lc•t111 Nrtr ~ tlll ld lw ~on ~t tdr • ~t : cl I Itt II ~ hlit'll lll'(' ol fiH• Hpoltl t~lllti\\' 1! 1 (( ;llllc ' ll ll 1'1%: '12.0) . Wi thi11 poHtllrodvl'lltStn, rllrltttl'l,ltll'll l " '''-' 11d HIII d cs i~n pnnuligms h:tVt' 1wv '1 rl lowwly r·dnt cd ~ onlpotH ' IIf ~. l•' it'll l, tiH•tt• is nn internationnl ' postntod ('llt i.ll'lllogy ', wh ir..: h itself er n bt·:t<.'tN :111 t'l'lt·r t k r'nnge of styles into a t'CC0!-;11 iHn ltlt• I' IIHidH• of di ssociated images. Sl·~o nd , i11 line with and consequent upor1 tl11• 1111 t • rulnn ~y of Southeast Asia as an economic power, there is the idea of ·~ riticul 11 l'.l111111l ism', the suggestion that architectural and design outcomes sho11ld 11 ll(•t'l n dt·ure and place, not merely a faceless internationalism. It reject'S Wt ~N I • t 11 hc•gcmony over architectural aesthetics, Eurocentrism in design, nnd tl11• tltiHl'lll't fncc less values of functionalist aesthetics (Squire 1994). Third, tlwn· ,., tltt· t ottccpt of the New Urbanism as the emergent design philosophy rcft: rt't•d 111 111 '"Yintroduction (Audirac and Shermyen 1994, Katz 1994). This mov<.: nH'III I'· t ll'llt'tion to the urban- suburban dichotomy, reflecting a perceived nvr•d In llltlirm:e three primary qualities within cities: a sense of community, a St' ll Hl' ol pi1Ht' nnd a respect for the natural environment. Its contemporary origins ''"' prtllt.trily from North America and Europe, although Asia and other part·s of Ilit• ''fll t-·ld nrc fast becoming attracted to the basic ideology (see figures 28 and l ')) , l11 .1 ce rtain extent the movement is reactionary in both its philosophy nrul •th jt 't'l ivcs, assuming that communities can design themselves out of econortrit , 11 lll'ity and other problems on the basis of plundering accepted historicn l for' llt ~, II ttl it remains to be seen what the enduring effects of this movement wi ll lw . I ,t•ss t:xplored is the effect of global tourism on cultural production and h1til1 l11t 'lll in rural areas, particularly where first-world travellers descend on th t.: tl'i h:tl 111 lc•udal societies of the developing world and the rural areas of their ow11 , 111 111 dt•t· to describe this phenomenon, I coined an obvious phrase to de se d lw 1111• 11 onomic and cultural environment of our study - the New Ruralism (C11thl ll' tl I'11J7). Thi s New Ruralism exists on the fault line between internati onrd gloiHtl l1111t'iSi11 and its search for 'difference' and the need of local cultures (e.g. in lndr11 , f\h tl :tysia, Indonesia, Australia and elsewhere) to survive. As a trend it is sigttili l'lt ll tl y n ffected by the cultural/informational economy and is now cre:.Hi ng tH'W 11 •11 1 Hpa ccs, not merely in abstract geometric patterning of activities, but i11 II plt yMknl and symbolic expression. In this coincidence between post·nwdt•tll ,·trltllt'il l production and exotic tourist sites or, more accurately, tbe pursuit ol 1l11• ('X otic wh erever it occurs, there is a tendency to 'Disney-fy' the Ia ttcr nnd lo 11 l tdor·~l' th e former as spectators of emergent cultural disaster zones. ln 01'(1('1' 111 llltlVI' l:orwnrd, the N ew Urbanism nnd tlw New Ruralism must be St't'll 1111 1--Jli 'I'IS of !'11c sa me problem rather t·hnrt Ht'fl.ll'nlt' t'Vt'lli'S in the cu lturnl t·t'OI\OIII I d !Itt• plnllCt. Wltil(• the New Urhn11i snt :111d f111 • 1··~1 w Hltt 'l tii HIII rn n both l;e vi('W('d 11 f 111H itt ~ I N of 11 lohnli s:t li on, tlw lllio dtll\) '"" " 111 tlrtl pnrrrf. 'l'lw Nt•w llrh,lltHIIII 1 ~ t lt•ll l'l y n rlmm lwt-wd t't'tH'Iioll 111 ll'''~Q iVL' '-' pt .. ld,•tlf l• nl pmiltllodt•lft lilt• i11 t' llfi'N1 1111ltiH•t' Wlll'd .~ it iNidt •nloglt ttl 1111·, 1\Jfl\V !1111 d1 1111 i11!111• lllllllill •~ fllllllllld 1 lt :I;Hrllit ,llrtli 111 llllNiilltul t• lfl pt 1H IItdiinl A!i1\ii ''"'" du 11 lttlif\' 111 tlu• Wt~ rld

IIIJ',

figure 27

Beirut: dynamiting of the Rivoli Cinema, opening up the Martyr's

S qu <~ rc ax is to the sea.

.'iourcc: A. Gavin and R. Maluf, Beirut Reborn: The Restoration and Development ul thc Central District. London: Academy Editions, 1996, p. 58.

rhe New Ruralism/Urbanism In ~o n ce rt with material commodity production and the production of com rnodified experience qua tourism, we have in parallel the shifting geographies ol production and consumption in both regions. But any analogy between tlw gcog rnphy of production vis-a-vis cultural commodities and the geography ol ro nsumption on the basis of mass tourism can only go so far. In the materinl production of commodities, the experience of production is not being sold, it i tht• rn nnufnctured object. In tourism, the objects of tourisnt (nirlines, hot.(~';, tltt•titt' pnrks, beaches, marinas, architectural sites, etc.) tll't' 11111 !wing so ld, it is lit(' tx pcri cnce. ln eacb case not only tiH' r·t·Hrrlt rtrtl 1\t'HI\IItplty h11t· a lso tiH• ldtirllntr• cfft•r..:r on nnd concern for tht· h11il1 r· rt vit~rrllrtt ' lll i" 1 trlltplr •fr •ly different , 'l'hr• or·gnnisntion of mMerial CO IIIIIIOdil )' pt t~dtli ''''"' '-' ",_j~ I N jllllllflt'ily of spntinl rr•lntio11ships nnd pnlfems with lilfl r· ''"li''" ''"' tlu 1 plr )'hic rl Wtr tld No nt•:tt~·d IH'yo nd 111111'1\1 '1 t•ffirii'ndt'H, ns itt tl11 ,.,,,,,, tltfliqr ntid tltO.fiTiiiH nl pt'rHhtrtiw r 11 ti vilir•N, 111 t'tllttr·n,•H, i11 fill' llhllltllllllll f' " ' n iu iII ill m• iht 111 1111tl pltvNiv11l


Hgurc 28 The town of Kentlands. Source: P. Katz, The New Urbanism. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994, p. 43.

Wide Web to shift industrial (informational) activity anywhere it chooses, a •HI lwm:c reorganise physical space, the New Ruralism shares on an internation nl hn sis the need to generate economic development in the form of cultural pro du ction, and to enhance the revenues of both via the global tourist gaze. Six in1pon::tnt implications for built form in the New Ruralism are as follows.

'l'hc in tegration and reinforcement of commodity space in a web-bas(•d ru rni- LI rba n continuum via the culture industry. Th e or ientation of commodity production including archi tectu ral and urb:y:r for n• s to enhance the sale of cultural emb lems ::tnd rt~pn· st· ••t·:Hions. ·· ' J'hL' usc of informational strategies in mini•ni l'! itq •, lldwt/1'111'11 1 differences. 'l'he <.: on sc io us explo itation of the cult'lll'nillll iqllt'llt 'HN cd pl rll'l' 11S n rc v c nu ~· 1'oisi•1g n<.:tivity (l <:~ nd sca pc, trad ition s, 1111 1111t••ll 111 , II"' '' 1111d lniiiH1 , etc. ). ' J'ht• nostnlg i<.: us<.: of trnditionnl nnd N)' ••d'"lli '''"'' · 11. 111 olllllilt'C IIII':l l rllld 1 ' lld HI II tl t•Hil\11 VOl' llhll l nry, (,

' 1'111· I''< Jliiii NiOII

ilu•11

ld t•ll t v i i',

or

1

iiH· 11' 1'111 ' IH' III IIJ\1' Iii I ii\'fli" ('l!lilil l p~n l t1 11 V IIIIIIIII( ' III N ll llcl ·

-;;;

ll

I Inure• :l9 Clint on Community M.l'.lt •tp lflll ''''"c c•: 1'. l(, tl l, /li t• M•w l lt/ld li /•,11/ J·IPW \'•HI

1•- l ii'IIW

.\

IIIII, 1'1'1'1 , p. )()II.


ll1 1 pli ,\'o l! ,d 1' 1\ / 111 ~!! IIIII td i111 I'~I'W Hill o di ~l!l tcl lo[l l !tlf!·!i!ill 11 hLiffl i l tt l II 'N tlil 11 11 I' liN IIHII I I tdftllt 'N, IHII 'II l'lti ll l'l y ill iiH· di It \"'' " '1 IIIIIJ,)I It• '" ll 'tlli ll ll'lld nl id,•tlliti i'N, ti'Od itiOIIS nnd j)l':tclict•s, wl11 t l1 II i ' l 11 Iii)\ 1 ' '" '''d hy p oN t tn iiii iHII II IId til t• n dtlll'l' inclust'ry. The critical l't')•, lnl lldi ~ ; lll l d tl t•vt•lo pi'il\ notio11 l'l'ki ll j•, 11 i'd nf01·c.:cd o r new identity a fter col o ni s:t tl oll , Nl'llllll ll ll y cx preS!H.'d h 1\t'llll ~' th Jo'r:1111p1 o n lwenty years ago, is today ga th erin g lll OIIi Cntum (Fra mp1011 1 1JH.l, 19HH ). Fra mpto n used the term 'critical regionalism ' to denote a situn1'ion wlll'i't' 'n locn l c ul ture of architecture is consciously evolved in express oppos it io n I'O hege mo ni c po wer'. In developing countries such as Malaysia, Indon cs in llid Vi el'll rt l11, a rchitecture and urban form are important signifiers in eroding th l' irnpm:t o f colo nial ideologies and in the reconstruction of identity and collectiv1· lllt•n nin g. Th e same is true of attitudes to landscape, as recounted in the work ol ;osg ro vc a nd D aniels (1988) and Hester et al. (1999). Whereas the New ll1·bnni sm surfaces as a conservative and reactionary movement based on self ill('erest a nd isolationism, the New Ruralism has revolutionary potential since it is f.~C:trcd to escaping from the bounds of imperialist expansionism. Whether thi s ~·~·con stru c ted semiotics of space will be capable of expressing resistance to new forms o f domination remains to be seen.

'"'''fill

'J'hc worker is the slave of capitalist society, the fema le wo rker is l'h t• slnvt of that slave. James Co11110II y

lnlroduction: Gender, the Missing Component ll11tll l'<' lntively recently, the relation between gender and urban space has lwt• ll 1do1t1'd t o the periphery of investigation into the social relations o f ca pit nlis111 , 111d lll'hn n life in general. But in the field of urban design, the concept has virttt,d f'l tlllsion in university programmes, and in the foremost publication in the fit •ld , / il/1 /llt tf of Urban Design, only two articles have dealt with this iss ue in t·hc loNI t•nrs: 'Introducing gender to the critique of privatized public spacc' (Dn 1'1'1 1)i1) and 'From abstract to concrete' (Kallus 2001). The journal Built t •;lf l'll 11/ /1/lt'll l has had two special issues on feminism (Bowlby 1984, 1990) hut 11111 111'111 silent on w omen's issues since that time. While each of these dea l in dt• tlll l •vl tlt thc subjective experience of women in the city, none is fully situa ted wi iltlll !111• hu ge li terature in urban sociology, human geography and cultur:1 l Stlll li t' ilt111 hns become progressively available over the last twenty years. T hi s flt' ll t•nd llt•ld is cnco mpassed by the ideas expressed in articles called 'Sexua li ty :1 11d 11 11 lhltin l d yna mics of capitalism' (Knopp 1992) and 'Feminist empiri cislll rt 111 l •h• l',t'O!J,I':lp hy o f social relations' (McDowell 1993). More importa ntl y, 1111111 'd 1lit• 40 texts listed in table 1 as representing mainstream urba n des ign dt•11 l '"I tit th is problematic, even peripherally. If we separate architectural fro111 tll'lll lll dt •N il', ll, nrchi tecture has a somewhat better record in addressing q uest' io ll H 11 1 1' \lll il ity nnd ge nder in building design. Dolo res Hayden's Th e Grand l )on lt',o, f it /lr 'I'UIII I io ll ( 198 1) was a symboli c m:1 rk cr of t he beginning o f a new co t• sdo tt ilt 14N itl thi s rega rd , a nd a handful of iiiOi't' i't•n• nt· p11hlicatio ns, such ns St'XIIt!IIIJ t111t! Sfitll'l' (Co lo min a 1992 ), Th e Si'.\' uf ,\ ,, f,ll t't lll l'l' (/\grcst et al. I 1JIJ(,) 11111l 1 ,' ,•t!rlt• l! Spwl' r/!Jtl /\ rchitecll41'1' (l{t•iid t•ll t•l 11 l, WOO ), h:wc illu•n•in ntt•d tl 11• i''"h lt•lltS IISsol'ia tv d w i 1h gt• nd t•n•d Hp 111;1 111 1d dt ~ 1 g 11 Nw u·t hcl css, in l'l'f\.1n l 111 tl11• lo l'ill of tl w ci ty, urh11 11 dt'N IJ•, II ll'illl lll ll tl •l4 illll 111 1 111 iHN li!'H of 1\l'''"'''' .11 ul 1t11 lit y. II iNnl:<o q1df t' clt'lll '""'' fl, , \\'1'iilil 1 ,,( ,,-: Cf' lll ' ''IH'II I't l1 i11 o tl lt 't 111 1'11 tll ilf iitl ll lll dt•N if', ll l'l'll 11 1'1' ll li .. NIII J', II III 1111 till ill1f11JI'Itlllf II~J\ill ll o f l(ll llW lt•tlw•,


I

wlti111 dt•s pil t• Pl't'v. dlill j', tlllil11d vs is u11doldll 1dh '' "'' '" 111 !1 11' dl •ll'i pl itH•. 111 m dt' l' lo hl'i1111 th is iss ut: to t·hc fo rd ro n1· of ud m11 d1'" ll\ ll (W ill II 11 NIHntld be), wt• li n~ l ltrlvt• lo co nsider so rn c o f the fund ollll'lti ttl H·l•lll oti HIIips bctwct•tl 1\t'lldCI', pnlt'inrchy, ca pita li sm, urbanism and th e pt·ml11 dio11 of space, before looki ng :lt their co llectiv e effect upon the form of th e ciLy a11d the implicatiOII N 101' design.

.cnder and Society Whil e sexuality has been biologically determined since time immemorial, that is Wt' nrc all oca ted a particular sex at conception, gender is a social construct th ai :on f<.: rs concepts of masculinity and femininity in the process of socialising indivi du als. Given current developments in genetic engineering, not only can Olll' sex be artificially determined but it can potentially be constructed or even do ncd in accordance with the needs of our parents. What the future holds is tn ybody's guess, but some indication can be gleaned from Sex/Machine (Hopkins 1998 ), which probes the relationships between culture, gender and technol ogy. Whil e it might appear that the biological determinism of sex and sexuality l't' lldcrs the topic relatively distinct, biology generates anomalies such as herm· ttphrodi tes, where even sexuality becomes problematic. Also, two sexes do nol t•nsi ly translate into two gender divisions either, since certain pre-feudal cultures Sl1<.: h as the Nahane and the Mohave have four gender divisions, where both men 111d wo men can cross over. The Navaho have three gender divisions, where promotion to womanhood for someone of male gender represented elevation wit hin the culture, since women had a higher social status than men (Kimmel 000: 59 ). In modern society there are also examples of gender roles being tempo ra rily negotiated, such as in prisons for example, and in certain other II H11c-do m inated institutions. Within the capitalist system, relations are gendered and sexually coded, and Iht:ir in te racti on is both volatile and complex. While it is tempting to consider p,t•nd cr, sexuality and social class as somehow independent phenomena, this posi t·io n is now in question, since the alternative view 'that it is possible t :lnss ify ce rta in aspects of our interactions neatly as "sexual relations", "gender n• lnti o ns", or "cl ass relations", and that some might be logically or empirica ll y p1·ior to others - has been shown increasingly to be untenabl e' (Knopp 1992: 1S:l; sec a lso DC 15). In other words, we are not primaril y for med by any of th ese qu nli ties as singularities, so much as by th e rclnt·io ns lwlwt•t• n t·hcm, des pi1·c t'SNl' lll'inli sr nrgum ents about biologica l dNt'l'lllilli NIII , f\ 11npp I',Ot'H on to argtlt' Ilt n1 whi le sex nnd gend er a re intim ately m n .~ l illll1 •d, !Itt• foj u1 1.d di11H'I1sion is a lso pow(' d'llll y woven into th e cqunrio11 . Oilll 'l ' !I 1111111 ~ 111 111 It ' ' "' l'lll't', clnss ;1nd t•ilttti d ly Ill\' t'q11 nll y i111po rtnnt in lht• lollll llll t• ll •d 1 ll lll ld'lt ltll nl ,lll lll'i llgs. SilK'!' ilt i'IH' l't• lnli o ii N l't•quil'l' (() lw l'OIIi'il•, lill 'l l Il l _JO.II I . t. r•Jl!i ld dtii ii'IISioll ill it s ln111 111 y Is 11 VIIHI Nig nili t•l' of f'.t• ndl~ t• : d l t · l ~ l iliill ~ 11! !lr [' i nl I'IHH , Ho 11d i I 1J1J(), l\ lllt pp 1 '1 ~15 , Ln ngiii iUll WO1) , ~~~~ wli ilt1 PIH l1t:lh it r jli Pi!" lll li i111 ll ll'lltht• lil wi llt

"![1

II' 11dt'l tttt ld t• l t~,

o 111

1\li lld •.- 1 ill iit 11H i

il tt• lli iiN('l dtiH'/I t• llllllllll lll ttt ll I

iii

il l

1-1' 1

1"li 111 d 111\ll lll il l t ltc lll ll ii Y VII I it t!li N wi i11111

p i IIIII IIW II lift• J)l'Ot.:CSS. ~ lll l'l' th t: COill'l'fll o l 11• 111 111 1- ~~ ~~~ tlt ll lt 'N it•d t·crrnin , I'IH!I'C nrl' sip,11il'i l'l llll I

t!d!'l

tl ilh•l't• nccs a m 0 11 ~·. lt'lllllll .. l ~~ l tt d tll ll fiVt 'l wlt il' h thco rcticn l pos iti on offnN !111• 11 1oNI powe rfu l insight s, wl11•1t' !I tt• tlt n•t• Nignificant dimensio ns a rc th e sodo 1' )( 11 11 1di vision of lnho u1·, 1\CIId t• t• sy1nho li sm and the processes of co nstru ctillJ•, .111 11 divi du al gendered identity (M cDo well 1993 : 162). While a signifi cn nl 11111lll wt 11 l mnlc writers are concern ed with gender studies, the area is co lo11ist·d h wol tt t'n writers for obvious reasons. Within feminism, four central th corcl kn l pw~ i 1 io n s can be determined, namely radical feminism, Marxist femini s1n, liht•t d t ~ lll nnd dual systems theory (Walby 1990). Others such as Lovell (I <J% ) ljiii'IHion the nature of feminist theory and suggest that a qualifier must :1 lw11 Ill' rtdd cd (Marxist, postmodernist, poststructuralist, Foucauldian, psychoa11;1 1)'111..' , li beral, etc.), rendering any simple summation of 'feminism' sc ri<m~ l p1ohlcmatic. While being forced into embracing and confronting M:1r xiNIll 1IVt'l' iss ues of class, modes of production, etc., feminism is also antagoni st il' Io MII I'X- at another level he is the ultimate patriarch. Radical feminism focuSl'H 011 1\I' IHI<.: r inequality and the institution of male domination and supremacy thro ll t•, ll Jlll ll'inrc hy. This involves everything from the domination of personal bchnvitHII ttl tl in te rpersonal communication, sexuality, domestic life and the fo rm s o l 1 ilt lt• nce involved in all of these, to the political economy of labour rclal'ioii H, lilt luding women's subordinate roles in the workplace, differential remun crnl ion 111d wo rk conditions. 'The main problems critics have raised about radi crt I fl' llll rti NIIt are a tendency to essentialism, to an implicit or explicit bi o logki tl 111tl 1H.: tionism, and to a false universalism which cannot understand hi siOI'ind • lll tllj.!,C o r take sufficient account of divisions between men and women hn~wd 1111 t' l hni city and class' (Walby 1990: 3 ). Hn dica l feminism also tends to reject the qualifiers noted above, in pnrli vttl 11 1 ~I til' Xist feminist theory, gendered as 'malestream' theory, and its tcnd l'lll'Y In lj',IIO I'l' relations of reproduction that occur within the domestic splll'l'l' 11 11d tiiii Hidc the mandate of the capitalist state: 'Marxist feminist theo ry hnf.l lwl'll till' fn mil y household, where biological reproduction, childcare and the p1'tlll,ll 111 i.t lisn tion of children, and the rest and replenishment of the worker to res It 11 1• II Nt•d up" labour power typically occur' (Lovell 1996: 310). M arx ist fl'lltill iN IIt vl••ws t.:n pi ta list social relations as an encompassing totality, where gcnd t• t' n• ltt 111 !l iS 11 rl' <.:stabli shed as an inherent part of cl ass structures, and wh ere pnl ri :11'ci1 l'lltlwdd cd wi thin capitalist class relati ons and docs not constitu te n st•p:ll'll lt 111d ind t.: pcnd cnt system. T he tend ency hl'l't', ns wi th oth er Ma rxian proj t•r t·s (t·.p,. !111• t'll vi t'OIII11 <.: nt, sec chapter 7), is t'O l'l't hl t't' ttll iHtl'i :d I'Pinti ons to polit kn l r1111l n111 tt 1111 k fo rm s, igno rin g bmh llw i d t•~t l llj', l t'l tl tlllll I H~yv h o l og i <.· n ~ dilll t' ll l·littll 111d l't'lldl'fi tl f'. inl l' I'PI'l' l':ll'iOilHof f'. l'lllil' l Ill ill lf(tllil tdl ll'l indN pl'ohl! 'lll;lli l, lut ill wi il tir l 1111d Ol ll sid!• illdiiHII'i:tl cn pit n l1 ~ 111 U11 ti l tit I lltl )•, Mo ll \1~ 111 !1 .1~ nl1o111 l1 11 d tl 11• t'll tltll ill j\ pm hl t• llt of dl'il lill j\ wi th l"tloiiu)tl•_lltlll Ill Wt•ll tlll Jll tH IIIIil ll ll I du• ~r tl i N I I I I I l illd t•'l ltlW I II 'd NIW IId l ' l ri i U ll fl dilft i!liii!J ll!u,l'll li!ll tll li litd t•"' lll\\' tlld Ill)' ll il tt•t 1 1 ~ 1 11'1 1 td NIII II ' I Y l11 i 11l ll1 '11~' iiiH tl fl\' rltl(liiH'III ft l! 1'11-.1111 1til ~ I lu•ltlJ'.II


... IIIII j j

jllllll'~ll

dl' jli'IVI'd o l iltty ittlll'l'l'ttl l' Xp lo tl iiiiOII , dllttilllltlli•!t i_ll· l11:gt llllllly, ltl lt't tli Ntll iN itll'npuh ll' ol' ndL•q uutcly ndd t·essing tilt' 1111qtHdllkli lttvtt lvt•d i11 gt•lldt•t d ifl t•t'l'lll'intiOII 'b ut rather COnCeiveS this as th e Hllllltt llttilltl of tiiiiiii'I'OII S Slllnll s~· nk dcprivnrions' (Walby 1990: 4 ). Dual syste ms tltt•my IN 11 rontbinatio n o l Mnrxism :1nd rad ica l feminism, where capitalism and patri:trchy nrc viewed :111 in terdependent stru ctures, and where gender relations arc determined by tltt• o ngo ing dia lectic between them. Once problems surrounding gender are placed at the centre of our concc nt rnthcr than the periphery, many of our assumptions about society are irrevocably nltcrcd. Nothing looks quite the same. For issues of gender are enmeshed with oil orhcrs, from capitalism and patriarchy to poststructuralist theorising, the natut't• of power, hegemony, sexuality, culture and experience. More specifically, gende1 forces us into reconsidering space and territory, from the global to the domestit nrc nas. In considering gender and the existential place of women as 'other' within patriarchy, we are also compelled to consider both direct and subtk forms of oppression and violence, not only against women but also othct opp ressed groups such as ethnic and religious minorities, children and thost• with physical or mental disabilities, as well as non-human forms of life (SCI' chapter 7). Problematic also is the fact that feminism does not view women as n single monolithic group but a form of belonging that has a myriad facets. As Wl' have seen, there is no single accepted orthodoxy in forms of interpretation fr0111 within the female gender, and feminism has frequently divergent intellectu::t l positions, theoretical interpretations and political agendas. Because of thi s, fem inist studies of gender now cover a huge terrain, for example in relation to social science (Momsen and Townsend 1987, Maynard 1990, Kimmel2000), tht· deve loping world (Brydon and Chant 1989, Ostergaard 1992), history (Sco tt 1988 ), space and place (McDowell 1983, 1989b, 1993, England 1991, Massey 1994, Ainley 1998, Day 1999a,b), social class (Huxley 1988, Bagguley 1990, Rcgulska 1991 ), oppression (Hearn 1987, Valentine 1990, Pain 1991, Namaste 1996), public space (Gardner 1995, Ruddick 1996), zoning and planning theo ry (Sandercock and Forsyth 1992, Rizdoff 1994), architecture (Boys 1984, o lomina 1992, Rendell et al. 2000), urban design (Hayden 1981, Boys 1990, 1998, Roberts 1998 ) and the urban landscape (DC 16).

Gender and Patriarchy Pntrinrchy refe rs to male dominance in nil socit•tks .tnd nnoss :1 11 hi stori ca l rwriods, and therefore constitutes n vi t·tu nll y lltd vt •t•Hd pltt•itOIIl t• non. Whilt• i11dustrinl nnd postindu stri a l soc il' ti w• nll t•t l'· ' ''l tlt •t fl l'l''" 'lt tlitlt•s I'O wome11 , nwn still domin:He :1 ll in1portn nt s pltt · ll ~li td i~tlltttlll~ ' '• itt p,tt\11111111'111, tlw tllili tnl'y, h11sitwss, l'diiL'ntioll and otltt•t ti 'JI.itill tl pi Hill. itd dC'Vt' litl'lllltil '!'Itt• t'('II HOII lliONI lt't'(jlll'lltl y giVi'll fot' l'ili H iN Wtt ltli 11 111 hiiili•j \i•., tl lf! ll f: lillllltlll ~ tht•it• r ltild bt•t ltltl p. t'II IHH it y II tid 11 dt•twlld,•ttt )' 1111 tlli'll li lt tltli \• iilitti \ ilt t' lll lllt 't htl l u t ~ i N lo t

I

I'

tlu ll!lllily. Wild t• NtH 11 ,j,,,., ; 11; 1H l · ht!iiii)W it 11 di N ttti ~H·lfV(' o l hlologtt .d dt•lt'ltll itt ' ''" • tilt•y :tt'(' ltt•qttt tltl) llii•~ ll!l!itl i wiilt 11 Vtt tot·in tt t.:om:t•pt of bio logy l'lltlttt !iltllt wlt :tt hiology ll 'ptt 'H t'lll t l•ulq• (l.it\'1II I'J')(l). In pre-indusl't'i: tl sodt• lit'Nllt lll i11 Ntlt it•tk•s whost• Not l! tlll •lnttttll ll Htill tlt•ttlllttd that wo men's role is litll itt•d Itt tin .lttttlt'N tk sphere, ttS lo t t'){ l!t ttpl t• 111 tl HII IY developing co untri es nnd thoNt' wttl1 lillltl itlltt:nta list rcli gio11 s l)t'IIV tkl'fl, patrinrchy remains entrenched. Si nw (Hilt I 111 l1y preceded cap ita lism t1 11d also exists within socialist and co mn111ni st Nlitlt •M, tl11 · o tt ~· cannot be directly conflated to the other. Hence th e acrunl fo ttii N 11l 1111lt in t·chy within particular modes of production become signifi ca nt·, :do ll l', w11l1 tlw NIWt.: ificity of gendered roles and the oppression of women. ln nddi ti o11 ~ tl 11 p111 i:d organisation of gender roles is frequently extreme, as for i11 NI. ttlt1 i 1t tt' llllill Islamic societies where segregation between men and wom en (n11d ulht't ltt•l wt·c n children) verges on the absolute. In the developed countri es of Ilw W1·~ 1 Wtl tt H'n now represent a significant portion of the labour force, whi ch t'l' tl lil lll 11 ttl'! urcd on the basis of gender. While the figure varies from place to pl 111:1,, ttllll\ hl y tw ice as many men are employed as women. Despite this o pp . 11 1~ 111 lllw1'ntion, women occupy a disproportionate number of low-status :111d low -pii'N Iigc positions, such as secretaries, nurses and waitresses, as we ll 11 ~ i 11 INIH' tllb ly line operations, sweat shops such as the garment industry, nnd otllt' l llll' tlinl tasks. Along with this comes lower remuneration, benefits and opp111 1111tllil·s fo r promotion, and the poverty trap that many women find th ~· tl HW I VI 11 , Wn lby recognises that patriarchy as a system of social relation s m·l.'dH to lu tlll'mi scd on a series of levels, not just as organised labour. In rccog niNi tl l', tl u lltttitnt·ions of any classification and the false reality it indicates, and du1t plil i 111 lty nnd capitalism are not homologous with each other, noncthclt•ss ' p11 11 111 lt y is composed of six structures: the patriarchal mode of prodtllllt111 1 llt tll'inrchal relations in paid work, patriarchal relations in the state, 11 Hd1• Vl11 ll'lll'l', patriarchal relations in sexuality, and patriarchal relations itt tll lttlt ttl wlli1 111i ons' Walby (1 990: 21). As we ca n sec, only the first three categories respond to an o rth odox M111 ~ 1 111 1 lltlll ys is, the remainder being a product of superstructural phcn omc11:1 tl!'tl llt lj wit It ideology and socialisation. Overall Marx paid little attention to pll ll'tllll It ) , ,. 11 11 instit·uti o n and, as Marxist feminism has noted, not at all in the dtttlH'II IIf pltt•t'i', n situation somewhat corrected by his benefactor Friedrich Engl• ls itt / '/ I lt l,t.:/11 of tiJe Family, Private Property and the State. Since that ti rn e, p111 tit11 11,, lltt ll lwl'n subj ect to many definition s nnd form s of in terpretatio n. It htllj Itt I'll lll',ilt'd t·hnr nny annlys is of patri archy mu st· com bine the gc ndcn:d di vi t< lll tl td l t~ hntn· wirh conrrol of ferti lity and biologkn l t'cprodu ction. Ano rhl•t• di tll t'll t>l itlll 111 tlti Hs;11m· prohlcmnti c see ks to i t~ rol' pmll l t~ piltl'iilrdw l ~·o ttt m l OVl' t' wo tllnt '~t 1 xtJ ttl itya11d t'hcit· :1 cccss towOI'k (ll1'1111tl t•t td, I',J')•I) . IIt•t tt'llnl :t"itHitittS tlt nl htttlt ~tllht•st• npp t·ont.:lws ill't' l'SHt'l11in liNt itI tl11 lltll llt.! dt tll tl11 •y plm t• l'l'tlltll tll il' t iii i'W 111 tlltlllllty i'i·lnti o ll to l't· t·tilily ll tl( l Nt' '< lli tltt y, 1 ttlt (l ttlt (lltllltdtlttll', ' 1111 ttttdl'l'jllltttlllll 1 ttl Wll llll'll 't-. lljl l'l'i'HN illll hy 111111 \Ill ,,t/ (;;/,1/ liil/ iii 1111'11 , IIIII 1111 11 H lljl jll l'ljlf illll Ill 1 ttttl ~ ~~~ /,tf n•/,ttlull to wn tll t' tl , th .tt IM1111111 )'(' I tH'itltilt l• tllltlltlltl ~ t 11111 ltt lj ttt •tt llt' (llt 11111 I 'IH'/ I 1) '1'11111 '"' " ltt1 11 jt!lrii nll \' Hit il iijpoli1lu .I wttltl11 tl11.tl II YII It 111


tlu•oty wiH' I'l' tht• l'Ot l\.'t·pt ol n n10dt of J)I'Odtu tt1111 l11 . l11t11 tl tllt Nit•t't't•d to tltl• dollil'N ik t'L':t lm , a ll'l lOugh fe min ist theorists lt' ltd Itt l ~ lltplt t t ~ i l'w tltt• l'Oncept ol pll tt·inn.: hy nncl ge nd er domin atio n. B111 eve11 this co mbination of Marxist and rad ica l fentini s111 is a lso open t·o cri ti<.: ism despite the fact that it combines the concentration on l:.1bou1; ideology nnd class of the former with an essentialist view of women's position and the spe<.:i ficity of other forms of oppression. Some of this is at least partly due to ;idd ens' concept of structure/agency, with a move to the latter in understanding domination (Giddens 1979, Bryant and Jary 1991): 'so it is not patriarchy, "the sys tem" which oppresses women. Rather it is men who are the unambiguou s agents of women's subordination. This emphasises the everyday and nonmed iated experience of oppression. It stresses the existence of active agents who "do" the oppressing' (Maynard 1990: 274). Even this idea is denied if we <.:onsider women's relation to patriarchy through a Foucauldian lens. An import· nnt dimension of Foucault's conception of power is that 'although power is described as having an objective or aim, it is not the product of intentionality o n the part of a subject. Second, the very existence of power relations presuppose forms of resistance, not as an external effect or consequence of the exercise of power, but as an inherent feature of it' (Smart 1983: 90). So the idea that peopl e 'do' the oppressing may be to deny the essence of the power relation, which Foucault considers is contained within the anatomo-politics of the human body, a nd the bio-politics of the population. Much feminist theorising depends heavily on a simplistic concept of power on the part of some oppressor - father, husband, boss, priest, state, etc. What Foucault suggests is that we must completely transform the concept of domination/resistance based on sourced oppression to a much more ambivalent, subtle and pervasive reality centring on the idea of disco urse/practice. Here, everyone is simultaneously oppressor and victim, a situ ation perfectly expressed by Franz Fanon in relation to French Algeria, where he comments, 'The new relations are not the result of one barbarism replacin g another barbarism, of one crushing of man replacing another crushing of man. What we want to discover is the man behind the coloniser; this man who is both the organiser and the victim of a system that has choked him and reduced him to silence' (Fanon 1986: 63; my italics). What Foucault opens up is the va st limension of human subjectivity within patriarchy and its incorporation into th e ove rall equation: the place of psychoanalysis and the psyche, how submi ssion is psychologically constituted, the coding of sex drives and the constituti on of sexuality, as exemplified in the work of Deleuze and Guattari , Jacques Lacan, ,luli:J I<risteva and others.

cnder and Capital '!'Itt• iiiiJHl l'lllllt'l' of l',l'lldt·l' lO th t• dt•vr llljllllllll fi HUL ip l Jil l't_ll I I 11 1111111 lw OVl'l' t'N iitlllll t•d, HiiiVl' it WIIN p1'ollnh ly tl11 • Nlll plt Ill tj!il '1~ !1 !1 ill jj l dttlill'l l ~ lllllllll '; tl i,~ t thtni, II IJ', 11h11111 l'tip lt ll lltH II , l'i'ittl 1111 tli l. lllj ' tl l!'li!l i it•i! ifl ll ~ lllltl ll ill !'ltl lll tlll il

111 d Ht H 11 d Iii It'll• 1 w 111 Ill• .'I '•tl tl ( I , , f I"' ' 11 I'" ntl i " I•, tl H· l'l i tin d 11NJll'l t,., o l 1111 w•ll llltit'ttivity n111 l dtll11t11 •• ti1 1U •f•ll ·1111111 d ttt lltt•ltlpOi'tii'Y sodt•ty. At tl11• Mt llllt ti(lll', tltt· idt•: t tl H•t tl1 1 '11111 i11l 11 l,1111111N' o l cnpitnli s1n Wl'l't' nlso i'nt'lllt'd n 1 ~ t11tlly eodud, 1',1'11\lt•ll•d ll 'lllliiiiiHWIIN 11owhere mentioned . Mn 1·x's Cll ti U' IIIt •l 111111 011 mod es of p1 ud tll lloll, ti ll' d ivisio n of labour and class con Il k I wlto ll 1 t ltll kd the dilll t: I\NiOII Nof 1\l'lllkr nnd sexuality from the nnn lysis of Httlll' l}', tl1 •11 pit c the fa ct that it wa s largely men who were exploited by cnpitn l n1HI11 11 11 wl111 t•x ploited women through patriarchy. In addition, the im mense t•ro llllltll t tl lltll'ihueion made by women's domestic labour was also un acco unt l•d fm 111 ilu ~ 1 , 11 x i :m concept of surplus value. For all practical purposes, wO illl' II 'H lrd utlll l111d 110 l'Conomic dimension. Exploitation in the classic Marx ist· semw l't'it•l H111 ti ll' production of a surplus by one section of society that is <.:O IIII'OII 1•d h lllntht•r·. lienee women's position is usually referred to as one of sup~.: n·x plt~ll t l 1i1111 , Men's labo ur was exploited, but women's unpaid dom estic ltthtlt ll Wll lthNttnwd to men's labour and therefore represented an added bonus wi tl1111 tlu 1,tpit·1di st class system. Women were therefore not only subordi n;Hl' to 1111 11 wi tltin n system of patriarchy, but were doubly exploited within th ~.: t'~'ll ll lllll ) f~ 11 whole. On top of this, women have been historically constituted :\ S 11 111111 t.ltiHN, involved almost exclusively in social reproduction and non -pnid lnlu tlll Evt~ ll n woman's social class was established in relation to her hush:111d . Wltl l1 1111 td nin g cleme nts of a traditional class analysis as significant, Ma rxin11 fe 1tl iiiiHI I111VI' II':Jnsform ed the concept of mode of production into the 'domcst·ic 1111H I1 11 1 I'"H im:tion' to account for women's labour, and others have gone eve n ft11 'tl11•1 111 l11111 1t' it within a system of non-capitalist production, thus creating n p11 11t11 1:1 11 ·1 d il y I'<> traditional patriarchal economic theorising. ( ; l , t ss i c~ l politica l economy has therefore been severely cri ticised for tl11 •M1 1111tiNH ions and the consequences that flow from them. In The End o( ( :t/f!/(,t/1 ··111 ( I ~ Wt• t<new It) (Gibson-Graham 1996), the authors provide a with l.'l'i ii J', lltilljlll 11! pol it i<.: :'l l eco no my and , in the process, challenge most of its prcs untpl i1111 Nttl 111111 l11t w Ro<.: icLy is orga nised (despite being self-confessed Marxists). A mnjo1' pnl11ll11 ilt~ • il :llt nck is a rej ection of the concrete encompassing qu ali ties, nSH IIIII I'd 111 II tlt!lll'l'io liHt :'Ina lysis of ca pitalism, wh ich acco rd the capita li st system wi tlt i'i . , d tlld t'tHiurinp, properti es, i.e. eve rything takes place within ca pit::~ l i s m . In odo pl l111 till• idt•n th nt <.:a pita Iism is a 11 -cncompassing, we deny other fo rm s of dL•vt• l, ' I11111'111 11111 tl11• rt·n lit"ies t·hcy embody; afte r all , existing capita li sm livt·s nlo ltj ;Hidt• p11 u tpitn list 1\ IHI feutbl socia l relations in many parts of the wor ld. In till t•ll 1111 111 , 1111 tl y til1• lliltlll'l' of t·hi s rigidity, th ey point to :1 dimension thnt tlw y lt'l'lll ' Itt ill 1 1pt111 lis tn '. T his includes su<.: h di spa rate clements as sc lf-cntp loy iiH'III , Jll'l'i piH'IId lltll lllllti v d('vrlopnwnt thnt is not fu ll y cnpit·:di sr, :111d tl w pln n • of WO III t' ll 111 tl11 ti•II III'N ik II HHk of pi'Od llction . Within llt i\ll' ri nlist llllitl yst·H, dot ill'Mtil lil t• '" Ji, lloltl'd liN tl11 • NJitl l'l' of ~'O IIIIIIOdit y t'O II HII111plillll Ill ' IHH'il tli 'I'Jll'lh ltt t till ll1 II III 1111 tl11 p1111 ' ol 111111 cn pitn liH t pmd11l' tio11 .ttHitnll lll llll]ltl lllt ' l11tl11 II H' I'I IItlth ttll t lll tiftt l ll lt 'II JIIIttli NIII Itt 111111\ iiJlilllll i-1 111 li t•s (t'lll nlpJ Wtl) tlu llll!i" tltilit y o l llll 'tll \'i llll \ 11)1 lllllllil dtli t' ll' ll l ( 1 111 IH ippllllllillp, tl11 • dl lll ltlll ~l' il r I ijtll ttll iil 111')1111 11111 \' Wil li II plttntlit)' i1111111 CI1111fll lll 'll y 1111 111111111111 l~tllll ~· (i dlt,ll ll I oi ttii iH II j •JIIr, II) 1


' J'Iu• IIIONt Sit•,tli fil' ll ll l of th ese I' L'<.:C tlt 1C<.:OIIItlll ll lttllt ill 1 ilt i111 jtiiiii!IIIH' I \() 11 u l 1\lolwlisntio tl , whit.: h nd<.ls eve n greate r co n1pl ~·x n y 111 ilo; tlllllttlt ~ hip hctwvt•tt gt• ttd cr nnd cnpit::di sm, wh ere much of the th eo l'i :·li llg IN '' '''' "" 0111 withi n tlu· co nfines of the nation state, or at least within the <.l cvt• loJH'd ~· oll tl tries of tlw Wcs1. ll ere, in the new international division of labou r, tradiLionn l categories ol domination an d exploitation take on new dimensions. Surplus value is now t•x rrn cted at a global scale, and the relationship between capitalism in tlw dt•veloped world and gender in the developing world remains problemati c (Momse n and Townsend 1987, Brydon and Chant 1989, Willis and Yeoh 000). Given globalised communications, gender orthodoxy within traditionnl ·ommu nities has been severely challenged. Mass media such as film, television 1111d the Internet have exposed individuals to a multitude of other possible gendet• t·oles. These new codings have the potential to destabilise entire cultures, and so th e political economy of feminism is fraught with conflict over how fast soci al :h;1 nge should take place in relation to the gendered division of labour and to ;ultural practices. All traditional institutions, including marriage, family structure, child-rearing, forms of inheritance, etc., become seriously challenged. Significantly, women are placed in conflict with other women over the status quo, between those who seek change and those who wish to maintain th tt·nditional roles of nurturing and domestic life. The same is true of men. So 1he binary opposition implied in masculine/feminine is a crude if not impossibly ove rsimplified terminology. Also, because gender roles are defined in relation to n social totality, changes in the role of one gender will automatically have effects n nd implications for the other. The global migration of female workers creates new racialised geographies of indentured labour from enforced prostitution to near slavery, much of which invo lves the global criminal economy (Castells 1998, Pritchard and Morgan 000). Unlike men, who are merely exploited for their labour, women are one 1gn in superexploited and trafficked, both for their labour and their sexuality. Th is arises most significantly in the relationship between global tourism and globa l prostitution, one which also involves a parallel and integrated relationship to the exploitation of children. Not only are children exploited for cheap industrial and domestic labour, but also as part of sex tourism, sometime simultaneously: 'These domestic workers work as much as 10-15 hours a day, nnd studi es report what ILO describes as "alarming evidence" of physical, mcnt:1 l and sexual abuse of adolescents and young women working as domestics' (Cnsce ll s 1998: 151 ). On this basis entire markets are established, such as sex t·ou t·ism to places like the Philippines, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam, and dotn cs t·ic l ;:~bour in Hong Kong, Singapore, Sa udi Arnb in, l'iw USA, and other :out ttTies. Domestic labo ur hence becon1cs n splwn• of l'l< dt illlf•,t•, wht• l·e educated 111iddlc-dnss women in the developed wo rld " '''' ll' lt•t t'lt·d llllct ti ll' workfo rce o n tlw ho sis of cx ploiti ng worki ng-cln N~> Wil li II 11 i 11 !111_1 d, ,., lc 'I •ti iH wo l'id . li en.:, lnt dition :tl nSIHI111pti ons nhotll ' dollH'~1111 lilt ' lu l~ !lllli' thii ll,tq ·,•_c_llllltnth l't•gio ns. Mtttl y wo lt lt' tl tlt't' il w ot tl y 1l1'1'11dwlltllt 1 l111 I t11 ti l ir~t iq t!t £1 dr·; • lc1Jclllfl wo rld nnd j\l'llllt•t' l'llit•H ht 'l'lll lll' II'VI' INI'd, 'i'lu I. IIII I o Ill I!II !!i !i! Iii!·, II 1.!1 11 11 , NiiH I' llti

iHIIt !l it'l' ttl Wlllllll l I 1!\ll!lii! !till tl'tH It li!! Jt ill "11111111 I 11111111\ 1111111 il 11111 dull l111 •lt•IIIIIH111 h11i11 lttt dl hlill; i h iii 1 1111 1t!l! lt"l 11! / '/11 • I•.!Jtl of ( :11/11/,J/1\III !lllf',f',t'•l il oll till· ohjt•d tlll tlllloil iif \\'il lli{ll t i(lihn' ill til lllljli'()Vt ll j•,, ~ ~ oll lll .dl y l'l< tl 'lllll d 1 1!11111 J•,(ohn liHII IIIIII '1'!11 I Ill Iiiii till til t!I 1'111111 II W0 111t'l1 S pt' I'HJWI.'Iivt• j•,lllh,tlt iH I ltclll iN lllt'rely anotl11•t ltllltl "' nqu , tltlll t•vc tt th e ge nd ered lnngun )!.t' ol dt •v t•l lqlltH' Ill denotes vioh•nt 'll' '< ll td tllllllltlllt toltS (domination, invasio n, pellttl'olllltll , tq•,iil tt•r ri to ry, etc. ), 1111d th :ll 'Consistent with the often exp ressed view th nt tiH IIIII' thi ng worse than lx:ing exploited by capital is not being exploited 11 1 11 ll , ilu II ' is n sense that not being penetrated by capitalism is worse thnn t.·wnillf ', itld tt it·s colonizing embrace' (Gibson-Graham 1996: 121 ). J'l11· domestic mode of production must therefore be accounted for in n•l. tt inll 111 ilw dominant system of capitalism, if for no other reason th an the wo tl d tel lid gr ind to a halt without it. Despite the above 'non-capita.li st, non ·l' Lt •r' ~It •H 1·iptors, it is clear that the domestic sphere cannot be adequately theo ri st·d 11 1 Nl'pnr:He and distinct system due to the myriad connections betwt.'l'll ilu pi11•1\'S of domestic reproduction, wage labour and capital. As Christine Dt• lplt ttlllilrks: ·l ,lkt• nil modes of production, the domestic mode of production is also a modt· 111 1ll'n il al·ion and consumption of goods. While it is difficult, at first sight, to id!.! lll i l'y 11 1hi.! capita list mode of production the form of consumption that distinguishes lilt' dwninant from the dominated, since consumption is mediated by wage, thin i-\H till' vt• t·y different in the domestic mode. Here consumption is of primary im por1:u1w, 1111d hns th is power to serve as the basis for making discriminations, for one of !1 11• I'~N\' 11 Ci a I differe nces between the two modes of production is that domcsrk pc•o dlt~·t·ion is not paid but rather maintained. In this mode, therefore, consumpl ion 1 1101 se parated from production, and the unequal sharing of goods is not mcdi ntt•d lty money. (Delphy 198 H: 2.1i I ) llt•lph y is also conscious of the fact that the economic subordination of wotlll'tl 11111 Ol tl y be partially explained by the domestic mode of production, and tl u11 II dil'fku lt to contest 'difference' when the concepts and terminology l't'll ll llll 11111 hllllf!,Ccl. Her main contribution to our understanding of the dom estil: splu •11 In reve rse our traditional framing of the gender/capital relation. In this ro ll II ''~ 1 1 IN110rmal to situate the constraints on women's capacity to work wit hi11 ilu dltlltt'Siic sp here where patriarchy determines how a woman may Ot' nt ny 11111 tltlllk, net, reason or believe, and on this basis what role she may piny, if illl )'o wit hin the eco nomy. Delphy considers thnt the reverse is true. In actua ll y ~·x i ~> I IIIH •11pi tnli s111 , labo ur markets, through syslt' lll nl·ic discrimination and ex pl oi tttl loll 111 l'11 t' l co 11di tion women's trrt jt•ct111'y i111 o dom esticity. Social rep rod ll l' t i1111 , wlwll y nt•cessn ry t·o ca pit:nl, l'lwtt ht•tct iiii'N 1111 tlltp ni d fo rm of labo11t'. Wltil t• ti11 t~pp t't'Ns io'' of women rcmnins IIIHII lll ,dtlt , 11td ti11• IIIO Vt' mt• nt· t·6wnrdl'l t'ljtiitlll p, ltll i11 l itt dll tl':tl'll't', th t• fn ct l't' II Hiiii Mtl111 "'" '" ' 11 111 till' dt•vt• lopl'd wnl'ld 1111 ;d VI Iill itlf', IOWII I'dli :1 J•,l'l'l\ 11'1 Nll llll' Ill dlil t'lll!l ti•HIII lc lll 1'1111\()11\ y, Wlii lt• Wll llllll 111 tl11• fil tH wo tld 11 111 rt t lt'II MI (ll lll i'li qiltitt' W•i tl 1111\ ltt ti Nidt•, 11 11d tlll'll' lllll t:lll l' ll lllll !111• idt'll nf fl ll l:llii'I H l1 tcitl .llitil[ 1il ! !i it\' ji " i_ IPH it ldtlc•1 I,H iiHII 11 11d ltllctlll


11id 1111 llllot•,t•IIH'I' dill't•t'l'ill ditiH'tl Hioll (l\1 ydttll ·111•1 ~ h 111i l'i ll 'l ) WIH' II' hi ,HI 11.11 ions wt•n• oppt't'NIH:d u11d ct· crlpil :di snt , ntH I ld 11 I " "''" 11 i111 tl11 •t t•x piiJtll d llltdt•r ilwi t' own systems of pn trin rchy, leve ls ol "1'1'11 ' 111111 11 111 t Nttdt Ill (It 1nH I il io11 :tl fcm ini st nttitudcs to the domestic sphere ns ttllt' , t1 t~ppl 't•ss io n en11 l11 t't · v ~· t·sc d for bl ack families living in white societies: ' Yct I o1· hind< wome tt , t lu l'nllli ly can be a refuge in a heartless world of racism, somewhere secure to rctlltll to, and develop a resistance to, the external world of racism outside' (May n:11·d 1990: 280) . Taken to extremes, we can see from the example of the Bedouin i11 lsl'ncl , n nomadic tribe with no fixed settlements, how space, when striptwd down to absolute essentials, is even more strictly gendered than it is wif'llitl developed urban society (Fenster 1999). Space for Bedouin women is divitbl int·o ' forb idden' and 'permitted', distinctions which seriously limit their mobil it :1ccording to patriarchal principles, analogous to our distinctions betwee n pl'i vntc and public space. Even the boundaries of permitted spaces are determ itwd on the basis of the type of clothing a woman wears. The embodiment on cultlll't tl meanin gs attributed to space 'include codes of "honour", "modesty", "shanw" , "di sg race", "1nanhood", "women as property", and "men as women's owners" ' l'hese codes determine the spatial boundaries of the individual' (Fenster 199'1· 8). When settled, women are limited to home and neighbourhood and at'l' proh ibited from going to other areas in any town. Fenster points out that tlu ;once pt of the 'tent' is also symbolic and that when a stranger enters the howw, th e space s/he occupies immediately becomes public and the woman has t11 vn cote the space. Settlement for the Bedouin therefore denotes a serio11 ;ntrcnchment of cultural codes surrounding a woman's modesty. As we shn ll sec be low, this general condition of fear is, for women, universal.

Gender and Space 1\t th e most elementary level, the gendered division of space reflects the historicn l rclotionship between production and reproduction, between the economic l.'l lld dom es ti c spheres. The geography of gender also cuts across 'rural' and ' urbn11 ' di stin ctions. Manuel Castells, in concentrating on the sphere of reprodu ction , brought the problem of gender into high relief when he defined the urban as tlu sphere of collective consumption, which some might argue finally bra n<.kd wom en's own collective sphere (see chapter 9 ). In rega rd to women's unpnid dom esti c la bour, Castells comments that 'If these women who "do nothing" evt•t stopped to do "only that", the whole urban str u<.' llll't' li S Wl' know it would lwrome comp letely incapab le of maintaining it N 1'1111\ ' tlnn ~· (Cnstells 197H 177-H) . Des pite this contribution, Cnst·ell s lt1tN ht 't'tl '11111 tlwd lor ignoring do ttH'stic lnhour: ' I lis focus on co ll ective'"'"' '' tlhlll I'' II till t•d ' tJti Nitlltpt'iOtt , 01 IIIOI"l' gvtwt·:d ly on th<.· soc in I rcln tio tt Hol tlu• 1' 111 ""' 1\ 111111 1d l11 htHtt powct· nH'IIII' IIt iII tl H' d Iy j tSl' If I (' II ds l () lw Sl '('II II NI lit• I" '• ' Ill "' II r•llullll I I II II ( 'nll Nt'q I It' ll tl y tilt' lith• ol tiH · Lt11ti ly nnd ptltrinrch y lll lli J\ Itlt, ,rl ' (i\ ILIIt l"t ll 1'1111 : ItO) , <:nNit•ll ljlilll , (Jtlll' l' hi ghl y i t~l l ~tt : tll ill l (tll ltit•) tl1111tl !11 1 lioi PulHqd • l111v 1d ll ntVt'Y 11 11d

d 1>1111 , l1t vt • lllltt i11 llif \\ l!ltt lll ijt 1 tll h llt lii !'t11111 lt]!tlllilt; l 11tltlill tlutlll ll lll Ill itli LIL'II •111 It till ' l\11 )'\ lt~ W i1 1 (! ll.l!fltl iH fi)IJ I ) 1111d ' ti lt s lhlt• tii'S ill lll ' (1\1 111'1141 I Ii " I) , l'ht Ml'tlll ht• 111Nil r MT tt 1111 11 ,,, il ruh ni nf 1111 I'IIIIH' lit·ld , Hill~'t' 11tln111 1Ji' 1.1f 't 1ph y lut H pt't•dntl lllt.·tllth L"iH. •F II i: .l itro.t ll wllh tltl' puhl k Hplll'rc: '' l'ht tN i11 n111111111 wi th tht• otltt•t' ~~~~ l,d ~di: lll l'ltt, I'· ' 111\lllllll y wkes fo 1· grnnt:cd tlw g11 ligltt tilllltll dl f. tinction betW\'1''' ilu p1tld11 tlllllth t• private, and implicitly, l'lw !',I'll It I I d tiNNOri llt'iOil of th c~H' Hpht•t'I!H 1 (M t•l )ow t• ll 1993: 165). \~' llll1• it is t'empting to :11'1-',lli.l th <1t women's position within the 'eco not nk ' iit ill lt nl pi'Oduction has altered radically and that women are now siw1ifi 111ti ) IIHtt'l' emancipated than they were within prior feudal or pre-capitullsl "" 'd' ''I 1tl pmduction, it is probably more correct to say that the di fferell t:\' i jltltll tll tl y lt•chnical rather than social. Women simply have better technology ii1 tlltdt•t'lttk c similar roles. They drive children to school rather than walkilll', ,, , 111 yi ng th em. They use washing machines, driers and vacuum cleanl'l'i 1 tdllt th1111 performing such work by hand. Women's behaviour and mobility, tlld tlu•n•l'ore their occupation of space, remains constrained, from the type ol l t~d li lll\ th ey are expected to wear to their continuing role as low-pnid o1 tl ~ t 11 ,,nd domestic servants, otherwise known, in more politically corn·rt illiTWi, 111-1 'c:Hcrs'. While employment clearly plays a major role in the sp:Hinl t i ll CI t1tl11 g of gender roles, other factors such as patterns of inheri t·ont'\', tlltil itll lion and the differential distribution of childcare facilities and sc hool 111 IttlVI' Nil.!.nificant influence. Added to these, the material dimension must nlsn IW I,,dll tl <."tc•d by ideological and symbolic qualities, and the meaning of lt o11 H', i\ \\·t •ll ns th e entire realm of women's perceptions and preferences, must lw

I

', ' '11111 n l for. ' •' tHk•r nnd space interact in highly complex ways within the overa ll pt·ou~ tl' 11pmdu <.: ing the social and property relations of the capitalist sysrcn1 . 1\ttt ii HJ~i' ph t· nomena do not exist in an existential despatialised vacuum . ' l 'lt~•y i p'J t h IIC I'OSS historical time, sedimenting physical and symbolic archn eo lof',li' iii! !HH t', con structing environments, and building cities that mirror the inlt t·ll'lll it .ldit•l' lllre of our societies. This is also echoed in their planning. Here tht'l'l' li li t 11'111 t ypcs of planning theory emphasise practice, political economy 11 ttd 11il'l•l tiH'OI'y, each requiring that differing gender issues should be addrcsst·d. Wltll t• • n di stinctive feminist epistemology would be controversial, femi11h11 11 l)l.ltt H, ltowever, would expand the planner's perspective beyond scientific n11d 11' llll lu tl know ledge to other ways of knowing' (Sandercock and Forsyth I YlJ J..: ! ) 1/,111 i t'l' cit·y structures have been gener:1 t·ed on the basis of pa tr iMt'hll l qtlt 1di N111 : lnt1 d-use zoning patterns, includitq •, the form, location and tyrw ol 11 el dt• tllinl nreas, trn nsportation network s, p11ltl il' opc 1• spnce, and the rci:H io11 ltip ili' IWt'l'll work nnd home result fntlll lll ttlt• dolllitl:ltt·d expectation s .111d dtll% 1\111 p~·opl e do not occ up y Sp lll'l ' Ill I 1111 1111)\ Ill tlw Hl ltlli' co nvcntiOII N1\IH I tll ll li llllllll ll. 1\s ti ll' l' II Vii'Otlll H' III Wt' I\IIVI lltll!j(IIIUt'd lllittlll'HSO(ill l dn sH, HO II _tl '" "llt•ll t~ thl' p,t'tHI I't' of it Hon·tq Htiii M, 111.! tl11 j 1,C tip/ ltPit y nlt iH'N I' t'\•l:ttiottNitip 1 1 II IIW 11 '" " '"'' i'i1•ld ol HI11d y ( Mt I It~\' til 1' 111'! 1' ' ' 1, llll j\l& lltd I ')IJ I, M.t NN11 1 111'1 I, U11t11 1111 11111(, , Hoht•ti H I'1 11H, L•nqd1111 1t i IIIII ) , Ut'l i11l pl1 nl111'1111plt

''''Y


I 1'1

l lt•t tll )l tllti,~ tl'll lt~N vi iiHN dt Ntill vtio ns n11d IIH• dilft It lilt Iii i\Ht ll "I'll''' ~ l .t sH ll i't'llr-., wi llt lnrgt• ho ttscs, sw imtning pool s, tw o-Cal' 1-\fl l'lll',' '"• 111 11 111111 )' to pnrk s !I tid Ht' I'V i t.· t.~s, t.· l ~., and th e poo rer secti ons of the po pul ut1 o11 , w11l1 IHII ttllv r crnnqwd nt.·commod ati on, poo r ma intenance, lack of open spn t.:t', pt·o xitn ity to mnj111 l'onds nnd so urces of pollution. On the other hand, gend er di stinctions arc 11111 so rea dily apparent, at least to men, simply because patriarchy is part of <HII psyc ho logical make-up and is not constrained to a single social class. A ma11 looking at the same cadastral map would probably be conscious oft ht• ·lass nature of physical space ('his' house being larger or smaller than someotlt' else's). But a woman would also read the gender implications. For examplt•, suburbs in their entirety remain a potent symbol of women's non-capitalist, ge ndered, domestic realm (Saegert 1980, Watson 1986, Fraad et al. 1994). 'l'lw sexual division of labour is expressed not only in the location of housing i11 relation to work but also in the physical layout of dwellings and how space i:-. occ upied within them (Hayden 1981, Hanson and Johnson 1985, Rizdoff 199'1, Ainley 1998). In addition, women would look at all sporting venues as spaces ol male domination (think cricket, football, rugby match). Similarly, open spaces, parks, gardens and so on, while representing opportunities for physical exercist• and leisure, also offer opportunities for sexual and physical violation of wome11 in a multitude of forms, and public urban space in general is frequently proh lematic (Lofland 1984, Boys 1985, 1990, Gardner 1989, 1995, Valentine 1990, Pain 1991, Ruddick 1996, Drucker and Gumbert 1997). McDowell (1993: 169 ) has noted that 'studies have shown how women feel that their freedom to ust· urban spaces varies over the day, as well as how men's differential control ovc1 private and public space affects women's behaviour'. The physical world is th erefore read and experienced differently by men and women (Ardener 1981 , Bowlby 1990, Walker 1998). Public and private spheres became increasingly polarised within capitali Stll du e to the increasing separation between consumption/reproduction and pro duction, which corresponded partially to the removal of production from tlw domestic sphere in developed countries. Along with this came the generation ol particular forms of space for both activities, connected by what is referred to :1 .~ the public realm. Particular gendered spatial forms for extended reproduction then became part of the spatial typology of modernism - new towns, suburbs, hi gh-ri se apartments, walk-up flats, duplexes, single family homes- all of whi ch ·o nto ured gender relations in highly specific ways, in particular the idea of tlw nucl ea r family and its attendant ideologies. England gives th e exampl e ol Roosevelt's Greenbelt Towns programme under whtH wn s cn llcd the N ew Dea l, wh ere 'The preferred tenants were rhc "rnHiit iott.tl " 1111t'1 m r fn mily with a co mmu ting husband and home-maker wilt•: ilttlt•t•tl , 1Wll t'lll'lll'l' ro upl cs wert• ofl'l' ll prohibit·ed, as the wives of employt •d lllt ~ l li ltttl 'i "' ttl II Ili pt •l'tllill cd to huvt' pnid jo bs' (1\nglnnd 199 1: IJ H).IIowt 'V t'l, tll u, '"'' '~"~'' • " 'I ll wlfh tiH• t·isl• ol lt•fllitli Sill ill tiH' l % 0s thnt S11hUrh1111 lilt "i'llll trll ) ti t lt_l\1ti111 1Wtl WO illt'll . 'l'lt t• lo w dt• rl .~ i t it •N ol' tlloHI sttlmdlHllli':l lll i1 1111 III II! ' )' \V !ilil• '" Wt! lt d, iltl llt'd IJ·or11 illl )' 11\ll ilu ·" ''' NtH in lllt' lwmk , tl'l wt·ll "" til t' lfll ilitlt ~ tl! illl 't! illl tl , lly, pll lllllll ll tl "

l1 1 i lll ~j l 11 11l ll lillll , Wltd l) \\ 111111 ll l! i\ !!il l i ll , dl )• l ~ t tl , llt• d " "" Hilllllll illll'tiii Niy " '' llli Vt:d

,,f t' lll tltlllt k

oppoltllllll ~ 111 il H r. uln11l • lltO1,'11111 11 11 ry is thnt dt'll Ht' lllhotll

HI'•";' lt(l\'1 11 lilwmt itt p, 111111 1"'l '" "'' 'l li iJ' 1111 11 11 tl ,tl lm womcn. Wh crt· t' XIl' II Nivt• 111 111 lll lll iti J', hy cnr fo,· IIH' II Wil li 1111 t11l 1, Wtt lll t' ll t: n11 nlso spend n di spt·opot'tlllll ll tl lll ltll lllt o f t·im e on sltttplt• dt lii WNiil dtit lt•N. Thi s quickly lends to tlw s itti ll l l ~tll IIIII' 1 11 Hl rri cd wom en tll't' lt•Ns postti vt• nnd less satisfied tod ay nboul li v111p, 111 tl 11 ~ 11hurb s than th eir h111;bnnds . .. 1nen also enjoy being able to t'CI'r't'lll l11111 1 d11 11 IH•t.:tic city jobs to a relaxed life which offers many Olltdoot· tll.: ti vl lit···' (I' II J•,III nd 199 1: 140). The spatial design of homes not only rci11i'ont•d !111 '" '"' ''' rwtion of gendered space but also reinforced the idea th at t'11 cst• Hlhlll \' tii dtl be heterosexual spaces for families, leaving out single peopl e ns Wl'll tl l1~ h i11 11 nnd gay domestic arrangements (Lauria and Knopp 1985, Knopp 1'1'1(1 \tl lt'l' nnd Brenner 1992, Duncan 1996). Valentine (1995) shows thnt tht• p11 I 1ll lll't'Hof gay and lesbian communities have had a profound effect on l'lw NtHIll 111r litkn l geography of American cities in terms of neighbourhood dcvclop111l'tlt h• lll l'i l'i t.:ntion and commercial facilities. Importantly, she demonstr:ltcs tiH• ll il 11i ll t'll tl t.:C of transcending the materiality of social space 'to examine how lt•N ill tll l ·•lli ll'l'H nrc also produced or claimed through collective imaginings, :'111d NOIIH tlt ttt'N l'nntas ies focused upon social networks, individual celebrities n nd spt•t 1111 111'11' (Valentine 1995: 97).

t•nder and Urban Design l11n h11 bl y the best the design professions can do in promoting gender cqlt:tlil )' 1 111 npprcciate in significant detail exactly how they have been compli cit i11 !It t l\l' ll dt•l·ing of our existing environments, consciously or otherwise, by tl11 ' I" " 1t'HiWN explored above. This takes a multitude of forms, from the bl at::1111 pl t~ dl lt 1111ho li sm in the competition between cities to build the tallest buildill)..li In ilu 1\1 nd t•r·cd layout of towns into central business districts and suburbs; Io il11 llil llll'l' nne! expression of our architecture, monuments and symboli c spn n •f,, 111 !1 11• l ttt t• rn e~ llayout and external landscaping of buildings and spaces; a11d 111 ti11 1\l lll lt•l't:d content of retail outlets. It should be clear from the preccditt p, lt llll llll'lll ll t'Yt'h:lt a non-sexist city requires nothing less than a Copernica n r~· vt~l11l ln 11 11 how we think about the world and each other (Burnett 1973, Weism1111 Jtl l) 1, V ti t•til i11c 1993, Borden 1995, Eichler '1995, Roberts 1998, D C 10). 'l'hi Nwo ttltl lll'l i'NHnl'ily stnrt with the sociali sntiott 111' vhildrcn nnd proceed d1m11 gh ull t ~ l ll't' I H of the eco no my into the ac t11nl plt yNit 'll lt Oltfi gllt'nt·ioll of spn cc hy dt'ill)\11 , lit•• qtlt's ti o n th en nri scs ns to wlwtht•t tltt 11 ''' ' ' ' l11 • ttNpt•t.'tNo f 1 ~t11d v r dillt•n•ti Ct ti htl 1\ r't• wholl y <.: onstru t.: tiv e, thut ittdl vl tlll td'· ttl \\ illll t•vt•t l',t' lltlt•t• llliJ•,III 1!1\" ' lu11dd Jlt' lll ll illt ll illl'll. /\l so ti'I III Hjllllllll I· lh i1 111U til (ll till IHIII in n lutlti ll lllll 11 / 1 ljllt ll liNI di'V t'loptlll'tlt , with tl11• I 11111 11 11111 '! IIi l•1 11 d!' ll ,j ,_ Ill ph111'd 1111 Wll llllll will II Il i lu• l'll tl tVil ll y ll it l'l'l'd ll VI' IIII J• lil \\ lt lli l l! i'!J ij \11 ~ ~~ lltf\11 •11 l111 II 111 111 ill •, jij t r' il)' 11 11' >'''I 111 lu• dt •lt•ttt tl tll•tl , 1111111 tl1 (1 it11tll H i11 lllipl!!lill' lit II tl t•III IJII II' JII ltltllllll


IIIVItlVt 'd ill tlllt'l' ll llNUl it tl t•d ol l 't'l l ~j of k tlti Wln JI\1 1 1111111 J1 d11J (d jjlttl'il' ll l lttli di r<t•d dollll~H t k wo t·k 11 11d impl ica ti o ns fw ' ilu• t•llhlh ll}tlhtl ,

I'Cl' Oi d ,

llw hi stori cal record While t'11e ideo of ge ndered environments might seem a new concept to introdult' into design, it has a long history. It was also a concept that had to arise from with i11 n socialist consciousness since it remained the only political perspective thnt ~ mbodied real equality between men and women as fundamental values. Hen~· t• 1'11e utopian socialism of the early nineteenth century saw figures such as Rob(•tl Owen in Scotl and, Charles Fourier in France and John Humphrey Noyes in t lw USA propose changes to the social and moral order of the day, combined with r;,clical adaptations to settlement organisation and the design of buildings. Both ·:.u ne as a reaction to the decay of the Industrial Revolution, with the object not merely of changing the condition of the working class, but to accomplish the taHI on the basis of gender equality. In order to do this, the non-capitalist, no n ~co n omic domestic sphere of women had to be reconstructed. Men had to pat tic ipate equally in this sphere, and in order for this to happen spatial relationshipN hnd to undergo radical transformation, and the kitchenless house became a potent symbol of women's liberation. In 1800, Robert Owen, a Welshman, was among the first visionaries to put socialist principles into practice in an experimental tow 11 in Scotland called New Lanark. At its peak, the community he organised had 11 population of 2,500 persons. His unrealised ideal, a community called the Inst i t·ute for the Formation of Character, was one where women were fully liberated t·o work equally with men on the basis of collective childcare, food supply, laundry wo rk, etc., and where both sexes had a commitment to domestic duties. Owen's ideas transferred to the USA in 1824 and generated a spate of simibt• projects. Charles Fourier's approach was even more radical, his communities being referred to as Phalansteries, although the fullest expression of his philoso phy was realised by his student, Jean Baptiste Andre, who built what he called Fnmilistere at Godin in France in 1859. The largest expression of utopiati so<.: ia list ideals in the Fourierist tradition was a new town called Topolobampo in Mexico, designed by Marie Howland and Albert Kimsey Owen (figure 30) . For the first time, the physical design of these communities obviated the conce pt of the single family house, not merely because it was difficult to have collectiv1• fncilities o n the basis of privatised accommodation, but also to encourage a new lll Or:'l l o rder implicit in collective social life: 'In contrast to th e private house hold w hi ch all these reformers denounced as iso l:'lted , wn sll'ftd , nnd oppressive, the von 11nunitarians hoped to build communnl Ot' coopt•t'lltiv<· f11dlitie s for domestil t:1sks, tnngible architectural demonstrnlio••Nn f tlw W•li i·III)I,N ol ,, tn o t·e ega lit·nt ' i1111 SO~.' i <.• t y' (I Iayden 198 1: 37). fn 11HIII Y NIH t. tl i'lt di'Nil\11 11 1111111 tlti N pl'riOd, 1'111• Nyt nho l of won1l·n's c n ~lovemc nl , tlw kttllt, 11 ! W!i·• 11111 dh ,,l ,ttt tll'd 0 111 of nwn dnt•wstk tll't':"•l'tt• nwt•t·s (1wc fin'"''' II) llt c~ , , l !! t lt i•. '"'•1111d11" ltllt t i llt~ l'd nN" n111i<u' ti ii 'IIH' tht'll ll l', holll tht• nitH'It•t•tlll• U' ltillt )' 1111d \11111 tl11_ IWt'lllt t•llt , w ht•H tl11·v w1;11' q·vltlill•d lt v HlwtH't"' ·''' ll tl\\ t1 ·d !Hill ht - tlltltlit iiHPH ll.ttt y Pllt 'kt•t litH I

~

./ t• ' "' f •

, c

Pl,.A ~

"

,u/~~~•.''11

.o.:::-.. ~~.

.~

IIHIIfl' 30

't~lll/11':

Master plan for Topolobampo.

1) . Hayden, The Grand Domestic Revolution: A H istory of Feminist /Jvsl!l lll• 1111 \tlll'ricAn Homes, Neighbourhoods and Cities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,

1111\l , p. 107.

Hll yt11 o nd Unwin. Cooperative hou sekt'l' pilll ', wn s itworporr~tcd in to OtH' nl tlu litiH ti \'W towns they designed at Letr lt wo tllt 111 111()11 ,

rlw domostic: sphcr W hil t• IIOl'illli Nt'd don wstir wo t·k •t'llt l!in c I n ! lhlll l 'lq li iii Kitlll t'll.tll l t•tl hy ('tl 'l llll l lfl l t\!i ti!! HIII! ltl1 11d, Wlt ll h WII N htHH'd till itlltl dll iiiJl fui lillli tlll


j

I I

itlltllnll 11l Wll llll 'll frrr111 ttm !r !Jl lr t ! tl!ld It IIIII 1111 lol'll tS o l 11\' I'Vkl·. ( :lv~·tt tl 11 tl dilllllll ~ l ll'd dt•ll,'• illl'll rtl•.11 iitqoliL"ti tlir!!illl l~trl p11hl k lr:l ii HpOI'f, 1110hility IWl'll llll r'irr tt Hiy pr·oh l t· ~r rr tt k I 1111rlrli!t:d wi ilr 1111 lr•tlll'lll wea th er, yo un g <: hildr•t•rt nnd illft r tlr ~t' ll l't' of tt rl nf1 '11tl1 tl lrllrlil ), trr.ttt y wo lllen did not view g::u·dcn suh11tlr itlt till' snme enthtt Hii iNtll ,,•• tltt•lt 11 11 tl t· ndvOt:ntes. Whatever the configur·nttoll .,f ll tthtll'hnn space, tl w t•x istt' llf in l pl ~1 cc of women remained un nlt·ercd. 'l'l11• . •111tlri11t'd effect of lnbour-snv i11g devices, fast food and television actunll y i11 11 .t flt•d women's labo ur rather than reducing the time she spent working.

w z

:::l

1.11pi tnlism had socialized only those aspects of household work that cou ld lw tt•pllll'L'd by profitable commodities or services, and left the cooking, clcnni111\ 111111 nu rtu ring for the housewife ... Although the dense urban environments of 11ri11 NI rinl capitalism ultimately gave way to an artificial privatism in th e Unit t·d 1 llil tt•s, and workers' suburban habitations proved that Fourier and O lmsted, Mnt')( 111111 Enge ls, Bellamy and Gilman had misjudged the pace at which the urho11 rtt lll'l' l1tr:-ttion caused by industrial capitalism was hastening socialism ond wome n's liberation, the debates they began have not yet finished. (Hayden 1998 I: 2o )

~ z

i20:: w

....J ....J <{

q,

A

BRONX PARK EAST ROAD BARKER STREET

I >o lores Hayden had also expressed many of these ideas in two prior ptthli • tllllllS: fi rst, Seven American Utopias (1976), which illustrates clea rl y tl11• rllllt•t•ing aspirations of men and women with regard to housing and ui'I HIII rlt •III IJ',Il ; and second, 'What would a non-sexist city be like?' (1980) , in with It ll ,tydt•n suggests that while most women are not interested in pursuing n rt ull 1111111111 Iifestyle, they are interested in the provision of community servic.:t•s Il11 11 11pport the household. She suggests a basic organisation called 'Homes' (I lo tli t tllltkt·r's Organisation for a More Egalitarian Society) and proposes six IHtl'l lt I II tpntics that are required if housing, housework and residential ncif\ h lr1111 1 IIHtds arc to be transformed (Hayden 1980: 272).

I

·· ·"""~,

~~····

tt_~-~~"":l

.··.·.···"] ~·· ·;

8

j .,.,.".,. •j!!tX·; "'' "'t

":::::1_

~

FIRST FLOOR OF DETAIL-A

rlgurc 31 He rman Jessor: workers' cooperative colony of 750 units of housing wl lh r.o llcct'ivc se rvi ces, New York (1 926): (a) site plan; (b) detail. Suurce: 0 . I Iayden, The Grand Domestic Revolution: 1\ 1-listory o( Fem inist Designs lut' l\ lll<'l'iCil n flames, Neighbourhoods and Cities. C"i llllhrldg<', M/\: MIT Press, I IIII I 1 p. 25 6.

l' iiH' in pl'ivnt c rn ot'o r· vehicle ow ncr·sllip wu • . d ~tt l l !l iprlllll 1111 ttt rllr ihtllor· irr two ltt njn r· dirn t• nsio11s, First, it ncn· lc•r'r tlt rl !111 •lllltftli"lr '' 1•11 11111r1 111 wmkp lrH'I' fr'lllll ltOIII I' lift•, tlllt Hilltp:ll'tillj\ fl11• 111lr 11f "••!iWit i11 rl tll rlrllll l'lllil ~ plll ' ll ' ll f till' ttlllrr liN (I >.tvi N 1')')()) , St•tcll td , tl\\llt rd11p fllr!ii! )' t! 1ii 11jl r r 11 lr rl 111 Ilit· 111 11tr•

11

l11volve both men and women in the unpaid labour associated with child i illt ltll unequal basis. l11volve both men and women in the paid labour force on an equa l bn sis. l ·~ l iminate residential segregation by class, race and age. l•', lirnin atc all federal, state and local programmes and laws that offer impli t it 1tr <.'x pl icit reinforcement of the unpaid role of the female homema kcr. Mi 11imisc unpaid domestic labour and wasteful energy consumption . Mnxim isc real choices for household fl conce rning recreation and soc inhilit ,,

l'.trn do xit.:n ll y, in the twenty-five yt':li'N ~ i1111 ' il utl .tr t iclt• wn s written, infw'tll.t llru ud t'np it'ftlism has differentially nllt•lir •d IIIIINI 111 tl11 ·~~ · n · l , ttion s l'l"ip ~o;, witl1 tl11• l"llt'ttti ,ll for· man y people to w01·k wltull r 111 prllll ill y lrtttllltollll' vi 11 11 lttrlllttll rtllltt o l tl w lnH: r·rwl, fnxt:s, hrcwdl uu11l 111d " "''-' '' i1111il\' lllllltli, rllnl~ ill)', lllll'IHI Itt tltt• lr11tlily 1'1 11 ' k sN pr·ohlrtnntit 1111d '"~ '" itlt\ (1;, i ltildr\ 11 l'"''"ilully 1111111 ' t•rjttll tltlr•. lrt nd d itinrt , tlt t• ttt riiiiiiiiii J\ 11il ( r"i ll i ~ 1 !!!ti dllllf'll '''iiiii\CIIttill lt tllllll , lt tl IIIIII 'IIIH'd ll ''j lllt• lll il rll" "li ~ l!ii! l!i ll 'rri! t!l ti ti pu, ( li l' t~ lllltt I11 Jdlrf"INI

'"'"'" ''I'·""


td

It dt!V tlll i11111III M, Ill IIH • I,INI It'll Yl'll llt !Iiiii II !!IJ ,!! til! Iii ! II li lllldill l'l lllllll Ill i111 • Vl lllt'IY 1111d t'O III il',tll'lltioll o l lt oll fdll )', lypt ll, illtltltlilll\ I l'lillllt' III N Ill •,,, lt iiii Nill t•, ' whic h ~:o 111hint• p1·ivn tely ow ned pCI'N tllhd "i ,:t 1i•J ' wi lltlllllt •l tlvt•ly ow•H d dn lll t•s tk l'nci lit ics and li ving spaces. T his idt•n lt t~N 1 li ~t11 lwt• n dvv elopvd 111 Swt·dvn, o nd fi ftcen such projects are assem bk:d " 11d I'I'V lt'wt•d in Jlcllllu/1 /( o /1/'l~ livlms (fifteen co llective houses) (Lundahl and Sa ngt·ego1·io 1992 ). ll lh

rhc pub li c rea lm Due to the erosion of the public realm by state corporatism, the cohesion of ntl )' ' public rea lm' has been rendered analytically indistinct (see also chapte r 4) Firstly, the concept of the public realm is by no means guaranteed, tha t is, it :xists to the extent that it is enshrined in law and is part of the make-up o f civ tl society. In many societies the public realm has no legal existence, which mnlq• th e co ncept somewhat tenuous. So 'public space' has at least two fundamen1rd ·oncl itions, legal and permitted, borrowing a term from Fenster (1999). In lit~ • private realm, urban designers also have to distinguish between private spau• nnd privatised public space. Similarly, privatised public space also has two fac<.•s , First, there is space that is privately owned to which the public has necess:11' nccess in order to support personal and luxury consumption and the sale ol ·ommodities, for example shopping centres, malls, large stores, entertainmc11l and sporting venues (Kayden 2000). Second, there is also space leased or otht- t' wise managed by the private sector on behalf of local government. I havt• referred elsewhere to this as ambiguous space, since it is unclear as to wh nt rights individuals actually retain in space which is public but otherwise managed by private sector interests (Cuthbert 1995b, 1997, Mitchell 1996). Public Ol' private, gendered space is the norm in whatever form it arises, and it is german1• t·hat even the flaneur of French urban life who freely wanders the city in search ol new experiences has male gender. The flaneuse is nowhere to be seen. This i1 ·!ea rly due to men's domination of space and the forms of behaviour thnt 1·e inforce it. As a result, women's conception of permitted space is intimate ly ·onn ected to their vulnerability and the fear that this engenders, and it i1 ;ssc nti al that any male involved in designing urban space addresses wom en's spnti a l psychology and deals with it accordingly. It is also telling how much ol th e li terature on women's relation to public space begins and ends in fear (Boyf 1984, Valentine 1990, Pain 1991, Bowman 1993, Gardner 1995, Nam astt• 1996, Day 1997). For exa mple, Day (1999b) exposes in signifi ca nt <ktni l t·he complexities ol ;lnss nnd race in women's fear of public ph c<'H, front wlt ilt• ll tidtl ll'-class womt·11 to poor lli spanic and black American WO IIH'n , l>c •!~ ptlt • Wll tllt' n's t•tnnn cipat ion , 't•:ll' is legion, and improvements in wotlll 'll '11 ~< I ,1111 11 10 111 'I tl y "WII p one mn tri x ol l't'i ll' For nnOI'h er. lb ce, socinl cl:t l-lfl :111d 111'11.1, 1 11111 tliuJc Itt 'tllii plt•x woys to N tl' lt ~· ttii'V fvnr inn multitude of d ill t till!', .11111111 !"'', fl llil 11 V111 in 1t N pltyskn l Nrn lt•s, Sl11· Ntntrs thnt in tlw ' nt•w N< 'J', I t:~\llli"ll. "'"iti.'ll Uii t ~i tlll 111ltlll'l' hol'dt•l' toltlld HOIIII ' NIH It t:l li ml, t w~ · · · ihi ll )l 11t• litl ltlt!Htlii! .. i ii liltlll}l fi ( 1111~ 111 , ,, , P11ltll

1!1!• ~ ! I''" I'll ill ~111111 I lllt 'H (t •ii pU i.dh Wt"lt Ill" !'! •I I IIIII IIIII 11111/l t plthlll ll jlilll 'tl ill 111111 I lti1 1.11 t 1111 111 ) \\'1 II) Ill.!!! 11 111 " 1 1111 '11) i11 ( >t',lll j\1' ( :ot tnt y well' Nl'l'll '' !it P~ (1 '11111'1 ittll )' '' lll ·· l'lllli L" l!t ,,,.liiiJ\ 111 lu•1' l'l'N t':ll't'h i1 w:Hi vitit•K tltoil Wl' ll.' , 1 1-1111\1tlltt ~>' (I >11y 1 1'1111, I I ') , 1111 •111 1'"1'111 Npn<.:c int·o four gt'lll'l'ic l.'il lt')',ll l' ll~H 11 1 lilt tlfd , 1101 indi vi di ll tl 'l 'd11 1 It n lltliv tdfl nnd outposts, whi ch slw ddi1wN '' !t• "'• l'tnhllssics, ll t'lltnd IIIIII'H, 1 i1iii1J WN (l)ny 1999 h: \ lit 1 1),

I"'"

I

lltt dutss y public spaces arc those which offer white women ex pct·it•ii rt1N 11 1 ftllt'ig n or exotic cultures without crossing city race borders. ~kt ttt·n l zones are public spaces that in contrast with embassies do II Ol liii'J',I 'I 1111t'l k uIar racial or ethnic groups. I :tll'nivnl public spaces are those where middle-class women encountct· t'i ll'lll ll'll'd od1crs, also outside perceived race borders. I >111 post spaces are those where white women experience racialiscd o tltt•t'Nll" 't'IHis ing borders into outpost spaces where white people are min o riti t.•s. Wltil v these categories are framed in terms of white women, both black 111HI lll ~ pt llt k women have their own sense of fear based on racial discrimin n1i n11, 111tl tlti s too has a class dimension. While Day's research was limi ted to !111• \ 1111'1 'k nn experience, there is good reason to assume that wom en in ot ht•t Wt}ll lt'l'll societies share certain generic qualities. Overall, it seems that WOIIH' II 'N 1111 11t :tl maps of their environment are composed of entirely different p1·opoMI illlll h to those of men, and the behaviour of men that makes these fl't'li11 p, 1 p11111tihlc has been well documented (Ardener 1981, Mackenzie 1988, 1 >HtJ , (,ll dll t' r 1995, Duncan 1996, Walker 1998). However, it is not Jll CI'l'ly tl 11• iti i''IIY of race, class and gender that is significant. The actual contOtll'ill t•, 111 j hlt 't' it·self into physically designed environments is also deterministi c o l pH)' t llltlogii.:a l content as to which spaces are perceived as 'safe', 'dn ngt•t'lttt N', wt•k01 nin g', 'threatening', 'tranquil' or other qualities. Hence the des igtt ol till ltittldi11gs, spaces and landscaping that make up the built environm cnl lt tti'l 11 tiiii "Nivt• influence on the personal security and well-being of women (1\ t•ll t: t I'JH I) . While much of this has been discussed in the context of Oscar Nl'WI II IIIt ' llllll'I'Pi of defensible space (see chapter 5), the idea has yet to be ext·e t~<.it-11 111 ' ti Vt'l' th e entire public realm, not merely that of housing typology and lny11111 , dtltott)-\h 1·hi s by itself is extremely impo rtant. l11 ' 1\t.'yond maps and metaphors', Boys ('1998) indicates how the lnnd n11d lutddilll', development markets, alo ng wit h rh eir :1ttcndant regulato ry rl'J',i iiii ~N, l""vidt• tilt i11 frnstruct ure for ih<.· pt1hl k rt•tdm t·hat :1 ss umcs specific deHi)', tl (ll ll tll llll'H h:1scd on n masc uli1tist t'ltllllltil lll y. 'l'lti s n~s ull·s in whnt Vnlt'lti llll II I lit Htlt l· ' lwleroscx ing' of SIX IlT oi H II lllllllltt I Id I IIIIJ',!'II It•d (HlS UI11 j")ti OII S iIII ll'l'l'llt 111 tllthl k Iii\·. lmportn nt nlHo iN l11• w !111" ' 111d.lit ' lil t• lwco nws pt·ivnli st•tl. l{1 i11l11n ilt J•, ilti N poHition, nn y (I 'l'llltt) 11il• 1 111 111 .It jil lt '"' nlysis of l',<'lldt·tl'tl , l''i vll llfll'd, p11hltt NtHit't'H Ntl t lt 1111 !il~tqqdlli\ il! HII , l~ ·~ ll vttl ll ll tdo· tplmi'N 11111 1 illl' llll'd lli fHnli n tl dt•fHittllliii ii M i11 Jtt llillllll ( ttlll111111 11 , !-t ill' poiiiUI [II till


Jllflllll)pt III,H ll'~IHh lt • llti Httl HJHirl', till' ( oll 't l IJ',IIit l, ll!!iillj iltll jj' WitH .1 HJlilll lt lltltill'd to tttl'lt n11d th e Wl'nlthy. She nlso ul1w 1\1'11 tlt nl tin lll ttjot' roll' l1'1 11l 1111111nlly t'Oilsigttvd to publk: spn ce by 111en, th 11t' lt l ittltllllillllllll l'Xl: hnngv, 1 vlwwd to wonH.:11 'si nce women of colour and whit l' Wll llll'll oltl'lt llt't:ess di ffet 't'lll irdol'lttutiott in different spaces' (Day 1999a: 161). Also irnport:H1t is the fact thnt in pr·iv:Hised publi c space, women frequently need to combine pleasure n11d do111escic life into semi-leisure space which combines caring functions witl1 ki sure activity, for example jogging while pushing a pram; thus 'Womc:11 ' work in privatized recreational space is often invisible. At the same ti nH·, pt·iv::ttized spaces traditionally associated with work may provide leisure opp01 !unities for women' (Day 1999a: 162). What is happening in effect is th ,ll women a re ca rving out their own 'public space' which is configured from l lu resources they use on a daily basis - libraries, supermarkets, parks, grocn) st'Ores, resta urants, school playgrounds, shopping malls, and other places - 1 1~ n para ll el gendered universe to that of men. The inferences of this for design nit both revolutionary and profound. Finally, apart from the spatial division of the built environment into two majw li visions for production and consumption, there are the other two signific:1111 dimensions of architectural space and symbolic representation in monument ~> While 1 do not wish to discuss the gendered space of architectural interiors, thi •, too has had significant coverage over the last twenty years in edited collecti011•, hy writers such as Rendell et al. in Gender, Space and Architecture (2000). Mudt of thi s literature also feeds into the conceptual framework of urban design, fot the simpl e reason that the concept of gender covers all forms of space and is not Ii111 ited to any single sphere. Similarly, it is frequently difficult to isolate t l11• interior space of buildings from the exterior space of the public realm. As wt• h:1ve seen above, these concepts overlap and interact in singular complexity. Of greater concern to gendered urban design is the rich symbolic ma t·,·i '< sed imented in towns and cities in the form of sculpture, obelisks, statuc:s, fo11ntains, follies, towers and other monumental and symbolic constructs - tlw typo logies of the urban landscape, a topic which I broached in chapter 'I M 0 11 um enta I architecture provides focal points, permits orientation, reinfon;(' identities, celebrates events and expresses the aspirations and expectations ol ge nerntions, and it is frequently impossible to separate the concept of 11101111 mentnlity from spatial, architectural and other sculptural constructs. Mon11 mcnts condense history into accessible symbo li c form s and situate a wealth ol t•ttltllr::t l c::tpital for citizens. They contextuali se nnd nrticulate places for puhli L lift• - celeb ration, remembrance, worship nnd tHtl io11hood - ::t nd freq uent! ovt• t·whelnt loca l architecture as signifiers itt n 1111tltlt11d t• of t't•nlms. Of intt't ll ltliottnl rep ut·e :ue monuments such ns till' Ji' tlld ' litwtlt, tlw St;t lllt' of Lib<.•t'l 1 , tl w Montllnl!nt to Vittorio Emn'l:llltu· lll itt I<"'"' (fil\lllt1 '! ') 111111 till' l\n1ndcnhvt'l\ <;n it' in 1\erlin. l11di vidu nl buildinj•.~ ~t l "'i t '< ltwl Ill rttOilllllH nt ~ .tpntl 1'1·o n1 tltt•it ltltllllnll .tlttst· liS cilli!Thvs, opt'l'rt ltn11 "' ·i 1 (tffkl'H ,;, WIH!ICV•: t '1111111' o l 1111• tliONI lll tii iiWI o f lht 'l'i t' 111'1' l111 ildiii )\N Nll t ll ,.. 1•ttft ( 'ojj'iti iii J!ttri N, 1tl l't lt' l 'N 1\itNilil'll Itt

llnur•· 32 n tl/lt

Rome: Monument to Vittorio Emmanuel II.

t•: Courtesy of Hulton Archives/Getty Images.

llttltll', d1 e Pentagon and the Sydney Opera House. As in other dim ensioii M1 tl tltlllt tt li fe, gender differentiation is not constrained to domestic and ptthltt j"ltll t'; it· pervades every aspect of human creativity, and monumenta l :11'd til t•t IIIII' 1111d sculpture are no exceptions to this rule. Here we find male dornin nlitlll 'tltl lt•ss ly expressed in wars, heroes, philosophers, dictators, kings and a rti siN, ttl I 11 11 cont'inuing symphony to patriarchal capitalism, imperialism and the sv111 lutlil' nd ul ation of the male gender. Wht•rc women are represented, they tend to be representations of llH'II ' tlt•t tli Nl'd 'other', from the caryatids on the Acropolis in Athens to the Ven11s tit• Allin nnd the Statue of Liberty in New York, rather than the recognitiott ol \tt lll t' n's m::tterial achievements: 'The body is still the map on which we tn ntl 11111 11 Wll l1ings; it is the chief among metaphors ... men often appear as tht•tll tdvt~S , ns individuals, but women attest th e identity and value of somethin g t•hlt•' (\X/H t'll t' t' in John so n 1995: 57). H enn· wofllf•tt tt' nd t·o lw used in an nll cgol'irli l !' 111itio11 , where histo ry is fundamcnLtll y p11tlllltlt•d .trtd inlt't'pt'l't<.: d by nwn . '1'111' !Htltlk t'l•nlm is therefore th e sprH't' wl1111 p,t• ttd t• ~t ~d lltt'llllillgs "''<.· inlpost·d 111 111 1\nlinwd. 'l'lt <.: ttt onumenl to Antut 1 1vtt l'ltll'll l•t• ll t•,, '' , tt•d itt D~thli11 111 I'I H II till · lot' III () r rl fotlll t·n iII , is :1 p l'i 1111 ' I '• IIIII dI ( ll j\1111' I ') I "111111 Wll N II d ll ll 'rt l II' I iII tl~t • lo yl't'i ill t•pic J lillllt',~lllt 'l\ Wtll-·r•, ,tlltlt _, ~ ttd•toliL it.>lll-i]lit_ lllllliotlctl tltt ' ttl)' ctl l ltt ltltll 11 11tl tl11• l'lvt'l' l.illt•v tlt ll l II '"'~ titi illlttlt !Iff' liiWit 11l11llll v ttll t'l it


1111 tl l 111'd (() d11tl ol j11'Wllillll1' Ill 1111' 11 ,

H)

1111 111 t ype of itnngct·y iN (lllll ltl ypll td lit IIIitH tll'btln space in all Wes tet'11 dtit•n. ( lr td y th ere is mu ch wot·k t't'lll ll llltlll', to lw co mpleted, both in our mind s and i11 Iiiii t• tt vi ronm ents, bcforL' dw ht\.'t of '' tru l y democratic and non-sexi st c ity l'n tt l11• ll'; tli Hcd.

Figure 33

Dublin : statue of Anna Livia Plurabelle, 'the Floozie in the Jacuz ·"

Source:© Rose Hartman/CORBIS.

con str uction, it went through a series of renamings, from 'the Floozie in 1i11• ,lll l'll:t.l'.i' to 'the whore in the sewer', an undisgui sed Attempt by men to recapt'un• tiW dominant geode red pOSition by debasin g t· h <,~ f~·1110 1<.• i111:'lf!,e. JohnsOn goeS () II to nrticulnte the deep psychological stmctt tn· of p.ttri tll'thy i' Xpn;ssed withi.n tltl ' hittrtry opposi t·ion of acceptable ( clom(~s ti r) nnd lltHH tt •ptllhlt •, (publi c sphere) : 'I 'hi' ft•tnnl c figure ... invokes p;cndi't'· (·odt•d Nll 'tl 'nl 11"'- 1d wn tlll 'll Itt ptthlk spn ci' n,· whw't', ll'lllptress, pollu tn nt', nnd m•ttl1 •d '" vl 1111 d tlttlltl ·.It ptnptttliniiH ns slw l111tllt·s i111'1w wili\'I'Hof th(' t•it y. i\ lil tlllll \lt dh l',tlth il lllr•'" 111! 1\'tltllt'll llll' lltndH•r htltd 'tllld Jlt'OIN'IOI' ol iiH' jWiVIIII'ItJIIil'tl 11llt1111Hio111d ltllitil j1 t lljll\' tlltt•pt iltl\1' ill


1"il

hapter Sev" nvironment

I heard the ruin of all space, shattered glass and toppling masonry, and time one livid final flame. James Joyce

Introduction: Nature and the City The use of the term 'environment' is fraught with consequence. While it t' lll bod ied the hopes of an entire generation, it is a word which now has littl e Ol' 11 u substance. When it was first brought into currency by Rachel Carson in Sill'lll Spring (1962), it was pregnant with meaning. This was arguably the se nli1111 l work that directly focused attention on the harm that was being wrought 011 0111 •nvironment through the use of pesticides. From that time until today, an e11111 1 vocabulary has come into being to denote both personal and political prdt•l :nces towards the problems of urbanisation and environmental degradati011 111 nil its forms . Since then, the 'environmental movement' of the 1960s has givrtl way to a plethora of descriptors and competing discourses: environment:1IL~ 111 (O' Riordan 1976), ecology (Odum 1971), Marxist ecology (Grundmann 1911 I, Henton 1996, Burkett 1999, Foster 2000), deep ecology (Zimmerman 19H'/), 1-ranspe rsonal ecology (Fox 1995), ecological socialism (Dordoy and Mdl111 000), ecological economics (Costanza 1991), political ecology (Clark 200 I) , wee n politics (Irvine and Ponton 1988, Reolofs 2000), environmental di scOIII'IU (Yo un g 1990, Hajer 1995), liberation ecologies (Peet and Watts 1996), ct t1 feminism (Mies and Shiva, 1993, Mellor 1999), trans-species ecology (Woltll 1996, DC 20), ecosophy (Naess 1989) and many others. There is also a va ryitlt \ degree of overlap, from almost total separation ton co111pl cte homology a mo111' a11d betw ee n each of these positions. Across Ihi t~ Hl' lllillll'k min efield , tl101H ·onccrned with the form of cities usunll y I'!'HOII 111 tl11 • It' ll II 'IH ist·nin a ble d~·vt • l op111Cnt' for clea rly the form of cit·irs OtHI tl11•11 di'N ip.ll l11t llllll illlltWnse impn <:t 011 how l't'SO ttrces, both hum an and 11:11111'11 1, 1111 ' tit plti l't'tl , As wt• shnll sve, th e term 's ustni1 111hlt• tlt'\t l•q•llll 111 iljtll tll lti\IVn l, rcfcl'l'illf•,ltt t'tll'l't'lll )il'ilrtin· to how nw r h li bltljl ll itllll • 1 111 '"!IIlii 111d t1illll't' tl 11111 to ho w lltlllll it Nllollld lw t't•s pt•rtt•d. Fn1 tlu llttii 1 Jj !l ~ !l!!!lilltlt t' ll'ldli •d t•tilH•t' to 111111 111 nt• tnlt1hll 11 illt ll ln tl , lt'tt llti l11l Wt'dd nl t" dt ll HiHlt ii \ li'J \t ilt tllll)tlltttt ~C II l tll p i l n l ll llll

I 1 ioltlllllt',l1'~ 1 wltll li lll lll ,llll I IIIIi i i IIi llit llli ll_ll otdV tthlt• 111 1tllt t' l ~. 'l'tlll' Nlt hl'rtill tthlt.l ), \ , lllpllll'llln•lit•H111 ii Nttlll 11)11111 du_ 11111 Ht 'NN tOII nl' t'lw l.'npitn li Nt syHil' tlt ll h it lllll' lllly l'Oli H(I'lll'll'tl , ~II tl11 lllllliiii)IIII'III Y USC of t·h<,; (<.!1'111 f'l'tll ;\i tl H ,1 IIlii n ~d ~th•nl ogy th nt COIII.IItW tlllllll' llt '"'" sc t·iou s flaws. /\s :1 s 11h~wt o l tltt 11 111 , til l' idea of sustn illohlt• 11tl H1tt dt·s i~n is built on sand, an d cnn o td y lw ill•lllllllt'd ns n concept if it hypn ssl'S significant theory: ' most in the c<.: o li l illt \ t' lllt'lll ignore critical left traditions, class structure, militarism and inqWl'l 11 ~ 111 ' (l{~·o l ofs 2000: 139). Hence the tendency of most writing on sust'n itt nhl t• tllh 111 dt•s ign is to jump immediately into 'practical' solutions to the prohletll Nnl tlll htll j•,I'OW I"i1 and change, with a heavy dependency on three central idcns. l • tt~t , thnt: physical determinism, and the assumption that questions suri'OtiiHI 1111~ • llfll'l'pts of density, growth forms, architectural configuration, land ust.\ l'll ., •111111111 the key to more efficient cities, without any required shift in the UtHh' t 1 I 11111 Hysttm of morality, ideology or economy (Hough 1984, McLoughlin 11) ) I, lltt IH'IIY 1992, Newman 1994, Troy 1996, Frey 1999, Williams et al. 2000) . t't iiiH I, t·hnt improvements in technology can be relied upon to reduce vdtivlt• ttti M Nions, create more efficient forms of transport, improve waste dispm11 d, 11 dllt'l' po lluti on from industry and generate other forms of renewable ent't')', i IHtiiiP,h wind, water and solar power (Newman and Kenworthy 1999, StOll!.' :tnd 1'''1\l'l'H2001 ). The third concept involves that of urban governance: cit'i<.:H wil l lt1tllllll' more sustainable if they are managed more efficiently via the mec hani Atll td tlt'hnn planning (Haughton and Hunter 1994, Gilbert et al. 1996), and I hnvt• dt~•11dy outlined the planning- capital relation in previous chapters. l lvt•rn ll , the basic assumptions are that answers to sustainability lie in fot'II Htl 111! II ions supported by appropriate technologies and better managc mc11t 111 t•tlilllhle resources. In the absence of a supporting political agenda , tlwst• 11 11111p1 ions seem highly questionable. While urban growth may indeed lw i111 jiiiiVt'd through many such devices, within the usual economic and poliltl'l tl 11111 Nit'11ints, another three facts stand out. In the case of physical dcter min i ~ nl , 11 111 ll'nn sparent that architects, urban designers and urban planners (who 1111 tl 'll )ltltl~iblc for manipulating density, land use, etc.) implement, bul Jo tl ttl dtll'l t, urban development, which is predominantly determined by urban poli tlt Ill ton junction with the market and market speculation. Those most din•t 11 ll vnlvL•d in advocating so-called 'solutions' to sustainable cities have their II OIIt~ llll 'k securely to the grindstone of capitalist production. In the seco nd l ' II IH' , i llqH'OVt'd techn ological production is part and parcel of resource depl cLiOil :111d ,,. Wl' shnll sec, at a global level also cnr rks serious impli cations fo r thinl wo dd tit ht ntld domination. As to urbnn p,ovt'l'tHllllT, thi s is massively nfft•t: tt·d h)' 111 fiUi t'pm:He planning strategies wlH·It·hy 111pit.il 111td th t• stnt·e in thL' fot'tll ol 111 htttl pln11ninA nrc seen to hnvc L't lll l'· '"' 111 11111 I I'N I ~, Ill' 111 lt·ns t' ,,O,lt: so vo llll111 1111 th :ll th l' 'stnkdw ld(:rs' willtutt tdltllllltl ) lf \111 ttllttllltollH'H. 'l'ht• sn lttlt tlll llltplit·d in physil'n l dt• lt'l'lllini Httt , ' tlt t 11 l lt~l'ol''l \ 11, tl II ' tttd ht•ltt•t 111 h1111 "' '"I 11 \l'lllt'lll "Hij)jiOI'I ii H' )ll'l'V Itilittp. tolt lll ~tt'l' i!f ll\l ~i (i lll tloilll\' ill tht• lt111l1111tl p11lt1 tct tlt•tntHIIIIY lllp,ltliHtli Mntitllt !\ " w1_ ,,,,.," li \'P lit n '"''"'''' ',.,. pllllliltltlttltllllfl t:(tlllllllllllltllfllll . Nll d11 Wt• lt \'1 ltllllll'il \- lltlllltlt ttl \\- !li ll tl11_ 1\IIIWiltnlt lilt '" 1111tl


till• dt •flillll lillllllltlillll l(' di Nl' l'lllllll ill l'ly .1111•1I I \I I \"''!!~' ~ 1!! !lith!!' [11 giV(' 11 1\'l lllill)'. 111 iiH· j1 l'm'l'NN ol dt•sig nlti g ci t'ics, n1HJ to l'Nrll pl' lt 11111 !It t! IIIIWitti •t p, u ll in n ~·t • tl11 11'1'111 'N ustninuh le' in 1pnres, we must ret urn to 11 jlll llil 1'111l)' )'I'I II N11go in o•·dt'l 111 ''ISl ligh t 011 th e prese nt and to p lace our kn o wl c d ~·,t' of 111I HIII d t~sil.!. n in n vin l•lt 'Oill'eXt.

Origins and Development O nce again, the great critical tradition initiated by Marx, which continues tod11y in a multiplicity of new forms, was the first to document and theorise the ravnp,t• of capitalist development during the Industrial Revolution in Britain in 1111 middle of the nineteenth century, and has the longest history of addressi ll )\ environmental issues (Castro 2004 ). Likewise, his friend and benefactor l<'l'i1• Iri ch Engels, in his masterpiece The Condition of the Working Class in Englc111rl, one of the most measured texts ever written in the face of such oppressio11 , documented the environmental degradation that ensued from the unlice nst•d greed of capitalism (we can forgive him for including the populations of Glnr. gow and Edinburgh as part of the English working class) . His lesser-known te xt, The Dialectics of Nature, published in 1925, situated his previous work w it hi11 more general 'environmental' concerns. In volume 1 of Capital, Marx refers wit It supreme irony to the destruction of first-growth European forests and their IWW ~ row th as 'the primordial forest rate of interest', a scathing commentary on tI ll' destruction of wilderness as early as 1860, and a battle still being fought todn y (Marx 1959: 363). It was Marx himself who argued that capitalism was envi1 on mentally unsustainable in a quote from Capital that encapsulates the basis <II environmental Marxism: But the way that the cultivation of particular crops depends on fluctuations in market prices and the constant changes in cultivation with these price fluctuati o ns - the entire spirit of capitalist production, which is oriented towards the most immediate monetary profit - stands in contradiction to agriculture, which has to co ncern itself with the whole gamut of permanent conditions of life required by the hain of human generation. (Marx 1981: 754)

1\t the beginning of the twentieth century a new generation of thinket'N :o nt·inued the struggle against the ills of enviro nm ental degradation, such 11 Pa tri ck Geddes, Ebeneezer Howard, Lo ui s Mun,l'o•·d nnd oth ers. However, it wn s during the period after the Seco nd World W11 1 11 11 11 tilt• environm <: Jlt ll l revolu tion gnthered rea l momentum. ' l ' hi .~ Wll"i dtll . 111 tt Htll )' lnc tms: t·hc :1fl t'l mnth of two wor ld wars, burgeo ni111', Pllllltl tlt l• •tt l\l•t l\' tl t1 !111 • lll'l'l' ll' l'lltt•d tt st· o l fossi l ft 1cl s, mn ss prod 11ction of •lloltll vtlllllt 11111 d iilCit:lftll ilq: p11 1Npt' l'it y. H11t it WIIS til(' IH't'd fo1· illl !WOVtd np,l'it ttlltll tl jll lltiiiUI"!l ili lll )\l lll' lll tl'd tiH· lii'H I dilltl'ilw ilf',.liii NI tiH· d inho lku lll li ll ii NI ld II IIIII [' dt !ll Wtlli w lttll\ pl illl', Altlt otl )•, lt tl11• lllllll'd S tnl t·~. <;IIVI' I'IIIII t'lll li nd jll t:••u. d hi\\' ~ 111\•\i ii ~ l 1l il ll "tl 1!1 pt•N tilldt

'"' I'l l() , tilt• w1tl1·· l" t••li l thH ittjtlltCil l id l ll'~lk'tlil'H ult l'l' the St'l'OtHI Wt11 ld 1 Wttt q111dd y t't'N ttltl'd 111 11\'ti 1111 til•• ,;,J Mhfli lll', p.INt·wd hy Co 11gn:sN In 1 1•1 '''''"1 Ill \ 1 (Mn t\'0 t:t nl. II) H7 ), 'lb1 lt'ttr ll lti t t, ll.nvltd Cnrson wrote Sill'lll Sfn llt).;," 1'"" 1. tlt nt wDs •·c vo lttt itttlill) iti i t!ii tll tt iojt'tlllt'tH.:es, since it chall cnw:d til t• t•ttlll t lotiiiH I.ttion fo r pcsti l'idt• li Nt' 11 1111 11 11 t• llt•l'IS on all living creatures. lt~d i t•t•v tl )', II 1htt qllvst ioned the mOtt opol ir-H k· p•·ut.: tk:es of multinational co mpn ni l'S 1111d ti 11 ltdt• ol' stnte regulati011 in support of big capital. i :11 1'H OI1 was one of the first to question the use of DDT, now ban11cd i11 "'" " ) dt v1• loping countries, and the synergistic effects of chemical pesticitks 1111 tiu utviro llment. While standards for each might be within 'safe limi ts', tlw ut llio liitu·d ingestion of many could result in the disruption of key meta boli c pn1il w1 t 111d tlw prod uction of tumours and leukaemias in animals and humn ii H .tli k1 I Itt• llSC of pesticides, while destroying the natural capacity of the U:l l'tlt , 11 1'111 tutlllltl'd groundwater, with devastating effects on plant and anima l CO I111tlllllll 11 tll ld wide. Others quickly followed Carson's book, albeit with different tl'l til 't llltlt•H. O ne with similar impact, which was adopted by several geneml io11 t1 1d .It •'< lf', ll l' rs, was Ian McHarg's Design with Nature (1969), still unsurpa sst•d i11 tIt olt tll y of its message 'that natural process, unitary in character, mu st lw itllt idt• t'l'd so in the planning process: that changes to parts of the system n fl't•t 1 d u I IIIII'\' system, that natural processes do represent values, and that chest• vn l1 11 lt111 tld be incorporated into a single accounting system' (McHarg 1969: () ) ), ( ltt thi Nhn sis, McHarg proposed a complex sieve method for urban dcVl' lop111111t htiNt•d upon ecological principles, as well as one for mapping human p: ,thoiiiH) Whil e Ca rson and McHarg were concerned with the toxic effects of di'Vt'l"l' lllt'lll :1nd ecology respectively, Schumacher's Small is Beautiful (I 97 1) Wt l lllllt tl g the first to look at economic questions, challenging most of tlw tt'llll 1d I'V o nomic orthodoxy. What he did not recognise was that underdevl'IOillltt 'tll I ~ 11 prod uct of capitalist imperialism, not merely a stage in the avera II pt'Oi't'NII 1 d t'ttpit :d ncc umulation. He proposed what he called 'intermediate techn o logy' 1111 11 lltt'tltod whereby developing countries might become sustainable with tllll IH Jll lllillg dependent on the technology and surplus capital of the first Wll tld Wll ilt• the texts of Carson, McHarg and Schumacher were extremely in I IIH• IIIi t tl ~ Pill II in its own way was a polemic against injustice, exhibiting mi HH ittllill )' jiiiiPl'rti es and fl avoured with anarchism. Schumacher's chapter o n l\1iddlt 114t tlll iiOllli cs for example was unlikely to go very far in the West. Mt•ll ltl) ' l1111lk wns di spl aced from substanti al th eo ry, and Carson had no support wl111 1 Jl till' t'Hwere invi ted to undertake her pl'(tjl'r t (Mnrco et al. '1987: 4). In odd itl ll ll 1111 II wns hugely divorced from :1 ny :; ip.llifit'llltl IH il'in l movement or key pii l'lldlj\111 tl 111I wo11ld nll ow the work to lw I' ll du•tltlt •d l11 11 ltil'l',i' l' hod y of soc in I t ht•o t y. l 'h t~Hi' tht'l't' dnssi cs were t.:lmwly lnll tt\\t •d It)' llt_lllllll M1•11dt Tws' t'l'!W; II'l II l11t tl11• ( :l11h of l~olll l' ( 1972 ) cn ll t•d 'l '/1,• I 1111i/j /it (,'lull'il' ' l'hi1, lnt lt'•' st11d lu1 tl1 l ll ,tll t' ll j•,i ti JII II HI ill ill ll'llt il tl It Willi 1tl fi11 pi'ltilfll il) II III rvllll tillt Mil lll Ill tljl p1111ll lt , 'i'"'lll toll ilt l', ti ll' ~~- ·l!lliU I htttf, nt tl, r1 111 NIIPIHII t ,, lt11t ll''"ti "l'• jHtpt ditliotl (1\ltl'lt•lt ,tttd l'lltli tli 1111![\ 1 l l~i! ') lltt! Hll ltltttl )', Cn~tltt (ll Hll) 111111 '1'1 ti 1111 till' ~ ~~~t lll lldlllll , lii t!Uiil!lll ;ljl jll 'lli!"illl• 1 11 o 111111 I•• tlu

""'"'·'tl

I''""'


T'""'f,

I dill II~ /u ( ,' 1'!1111//J litl'l'l\ 1111'1.', whi ch J) I'O(HINt d 1 111 \ iVt 11 .!til Ilw1 i11 tlw lllll Hll111ption of ll utur·nl n.:soun.:cs, both in dcvl•lopt•d '"1d d, \I l••plllf\ 1 tHIIlt r·il·s. ' l'ltt wnH givl''' offi t.: in ll kc nsc by the Un ited N atio11 s, wl111 ltlt'd thl· co n<.:c pl td Htt stninnb lc developme nt in two reports: the repor t o l th\· WOI'Id Co mm iss io n 1111 Enviro nment and Development (1987) followed by Agenda 2 1, the o utco mt• o l 1he Eart h Summit in Rio de Janeiro (1992) . These were immediately follo wed h)' the launch of the European Sustaina ble Cities Programme in 1993 (see tab le 9) , From t his brief account of a few key moments in the development of I ht • environmental movem ent, two things become obvious. First, the stimul11 given by visionaries such as Carson, Schumacher and McHarg has now devt• l oped into significant movements that have prodigious political and social in fl1r ·nee. T hese may yet change the course of capitalist development for the better. A review of critical theory demonstrates both a rapid acceleration of interest in th t• :nv ironment combined with a splintering or valorisation of such interest si mt• 1980, and an even greater surge since the Earth Summit in 1992. Seco r1d , sustaina bility is a politically charged concept. It has been swallowed by big ·ap ital and prom oted as a benevolent and sensible method of dealing w itl1 urban growth and change. Good people from all sectors of society have bCl' ll deceived into supporting the very strategies and tactics that in the long term wi ll undermine the very foundation of their lives. In order to see more clearly w h sustaina ble development is fundamentally unsustainable, we must link togetht' l . ·"rta in key concepts, beginning with the relation people-nature.

It''''"'''

l.•hh

1 •)

Mo~jtll

llllt•ltt .tll"tt.d ,,,tlltit t'l" ,l'" l•_•w l po l l< lt •B .ttH I Itll l l,tiiVt "• n11

ll ••l•tlll,tll l!• ll l'l l.t ll dl •Vl •IIIJIIIII Ill l~vcnts

y,,,,

an•l h•lllutlw

I litlil'd N<Hions Conft-11 1111 11 1111 11!11 llttnwn Environment (LI N( Il l.)

Ill

JJ,tlill ,il 1 (Vancouver)

1976

I ••I.JI>Iishrnent of United Nations I t•ntrc fo r Human Settl ement (t!NCHS) W lll'ld Commission on lnvironment and Development

1978 1987

l ~t ·port

I lnl led Nati ons Sustainable Cities l'rogramme

1990

l1110pca n Commission' s Green l',tper on the Urban Environment

1990

IIIIO j K~(I n Commission's Expert

1991

People-Nature For thousands of years the Judea-Christian ethic has survived on the fund am cn t·nl principle of antagonism against nature, where the basic strategy has bee n to 'mu ltip ly and subdue the earth'. The evolution of early animism and pantheisn1 into monotheistic institutionalised religion corresponded to the separation o l man from nature and the placing of nature as 'other' in the new pantheon o l re ligious practices. N ot only was nature 'other', it was also to be feared, ta med nnd subjuga ted. From the beginning, the philosophy was written into the b<.:d rock of Western civilisation: ) n t he su bject of m a n-na ture, however, the Biblical creation story of the first ;hnpte r of Genesis, the source of the most generally acce pted desc ri ptio n o f m a n 's ro le nnd pow ers, no t o nly fails to correspond to rea li ty ns W<' o hsnve it, b ut in its insist·e nce upon domination and subju gatio n of nn tltl't•, t'lll 'lll ii'IIIWN t he most ex· p loitiv c ::~ n d destr uctive in stin cts in m ::~ n , r~t th t· •· tli ll ll t li •INI' tl ltll 1111 ' dt·fcrc n tinl ::1 11d l ' l't·n t ivc.

( ) Jt rt•

ngni n l ht• J'(' :l iT VIISI llltlld ll' t lol td li

tl i lllll'l'~ HO IIII ' of lltt• 11 10 1'1' iii NiJ'. ltli iJl l u·ill

{11Hl 1.l),

<;t tttttliiHil tl t

{1 11111) , tim ( I CHH)

II 1!!.1 \X\;!1 [1~ 111 llllilltdt•H Ill i•l itl1 ( I 1_IH 1I) , Mt••'t'hil lll

I !J'J ~ l,

F.dt ~ l

{1'1'11, ),

( iroup on the Urban ltwlronrnent

I liil lt•d Nati ons Conferen ce on

1992

lnvlronment and Development l111npo.1n Sustainable Citi es I 11'1 1)\riH'IllW' lillll[ HI.I Il Sustnln,,bl e Ci tl os

l 1.1!l:l

1'1'11

Ci llttp.tl!',ll llitllllill I I ' l l11 • C'lly Stt llll itl l'

(•.H!I

Link to susl·ainablc dly

"!111111h1

Recommendati on 1: Pl.um l ng 111 td M anagement of llum.1n Settlements for Environnw nt .d Qua li ty Establishment of in tern 8ti o n.tl programme designed to slow down the growth o f urban ·" "'"' Specific remit to deliver mOl'<' sustainabl e pattern s of li vl ll!\1 11 urban and rural areas 1 Chapter 9, 'The Urban Ch;tll t 111}\1 • , describes the need to crc,111• more sustainabl e urban communiti es in both th developed and developi ng worlds Integration of the sustainab le development remits of tlw UNCHS and th e United N,l (IOII'• Environment Progra mm e~ (lJ N II ') Response by the European Commission and lead in g European citi es to the 1wn Plwd neglect of urban envirc>t111 HIIII•d issues relative to those of t'tll ttl areas Independent group compoHt•d ol national representa ti ve s ,11 11 I experts with a remit to ('OIIttl dt •l how future town and lnnd IHtt planning could deve lop tlu• urban environmental fnt 'l'l ~ 111 the European Communll y'H Environmental Programn 11• Agenda 21 , Chapte r 2, ' IJt'Oiillllllll\ Sustain ab le Hum an St•lll t• tlll'lll Development' I .Hmc-hrct by the Europt'.lll 1 C 'nt llt lll HH ion' s Ex pvrt 1 .tlll'l llll II til I l ti hllt lnvlronnwn l t '"dlll111111 l lltl u rh~111 ,ll ult l'fdlltlld lttlltlltllll "i lillplt•ll li'lll lll p. wl iltt.tltl" tttll.tll p111lt It "• II III till lltt • liiiplt <IJII 'Iiltilllltilll I Ill d I I Ill lid hlll tll l'i l

"II''""''

I 11 111111\' lltlltllll tilliill IIIII \!1 1 f li/•111 1·lt11/t1 'IIIII


jll 11 I J.n Vt 'Y ( l 1 11t) 1111d Citll ti'N' :trrd 1\r' lll lll ( l i/ 11H) 1\ ~ i 1111 il tldlllllrtli IIIII ll ddrt'NNr'iJ IH•tt• lll 'l' otlt lilll'd in Cn licott nnd Arn es (I VH 11), lrt hiN l'lnNsk tex t, 'f1u; Social Constructio11 of Ntlllllt ', F lutll'l Hdl• r· sugges ts tl t~ tl thi N (ttndnnwrrt ::d process ca n be viewed either· nN tltt• llltl ttr·nl l.:Onstituciort 1d Ntu.: k ty or ns a social construction of nature. These in tur·n resu lt in cillu ·r nn ILII':l lisc or culturalist positions, embodied at different periods of their intcllt•t t trul 011 tput by both Marx and Durkheim. In the naturalist position, domin ntln11 is the governing mandate, conducted through technical and managerial p1•o :eNses, with problems that are readily discernible to all. On the other hand , tlu nnturalistic position also has problems, because 'There is no natural econotrl\' 'l'he idea of nature as an exchange value is likewise a fiction; Nature doc~ 11111 yie ld to the rules of the market without problems. Instead, the normative contt'lll >f nnture slips beneath the laws of the market ... there is no economy beyo nd 11 rnoral economy' (Eder 1996: 26). Eder does not try to replace these theories, h111 I'O reinterpret them in the light of a cultural sociology of nature, whereby SOrilll !vo lu tion is conceived of as part of a human history of nature rather tha11 11 11 nrt tagonism. In order to do this he proposes three 'framing devices' in order Itt ·onstruct a new moral economy. First, there is the moral framing device of nlllrr ' responsibility towards nature. Second, the adoption of empirical objectivi t) lends to a mechanistic conception of nature. Third, there is the concept of na t11rt ns n subject of aesthetic judgement. Taken together, Eder claims that 1ht') represent a sym bolic packaging, which enables the construction of a 'prott'lli frame' within which three types of environmentalists (conservationist, ecologit'u l nnd fundamentalist) can constitute themselves as protest actors:

The conservationist package is separating nature and society, reserving for eac h n po rt of the world. The political ecology package, contrary to the first, is integrath·t!{ nature an d society. The fundamentalist package is fusing nature and society: natUI't· becomes a fellow creature. These different ways of linking nature and society Ol't· rames of collective action, which give both meaning and purpose to it. Thc~t· fro mcs then are the material with which public discourses on nature are constructed. (Eder 1996: 177)

Another attempt to grapple with the complexity of positions in man's re lario 11 ship to nature is given by Warwick Fox in A Transpersonal Ecology. Fox a rw ~t· Ihn 1 most philosophers who are engaged with this dilemma are interested 111 dt'VI.' loping a theory of value in relation to the non -hum an world, both of whilll lt•cwc out what he considers to be the most ~ ignifi cn nt departure from lid 1r•ndi 1·ion, namely Arne Naess's 'deep ecology'. 'l'ht• 1wo poHit·ions rcfcrrt-d 111 II'(' i11Sirtlllle1Jtal value and intrinsic valu.(' lh t•ot y, 111 ~ 11 llltit•nt nl vn lue 1·heo ry lw thr·t•t• ht•trristi<.: co11figurations, all of which 111'1' 11 '1• '' lt•rltlll tin• I111 Nis f'lt nt nn11111 rll!l fl l lw ncccp l·cd for its intrin sic vn lt ll', llltl 1111 '11: 1)' ,,. tt ljl' Vll ltt t·,~ fo t· hlllll llll t•x plolt ntion in Olll.' for m or nnot' ht'l', Pir 'M f, i11111 i ~ tllll l'~ ll llll!•tll' 'l ploilllfiorl lllld t'\ JHI II NtOIItN til , wlrich is chnr'l ll' l!·tist•d l1 ) !111 ll'ltll (j lf-:•tiitllilllt nl tiH• pl ry,•.it 'll l Wtt rld wi tltollf lli i'II HIII'illg flit • VII II NI'Ijlllll((lfl , ' lld 111 flJ iplti!!t. it llll tllflll'optH'I'IIftlt , 1111 l lttllttWN tlu• lmsit dh 111111 dt rll J\lli \\' dl i~ 1 ili !lll iii l'iliJ\ II 'II!i, l\li11d lrtillr i11

1111 1·· di n llitii,Juii '" ll l ''"''lll ll'~· 11 1td stupidity. St'\illld , ll litllll'l't' ~·onscrvu t io ll t tllll dt 11 l"fillltlll 1111 p1 11 1lt11t rtt ate rialt·csout·ceH tin' l'i11itt 11rd tl~t: rt: fore t·hey sho11 ld !11 1 •.plt~llnl tlllt it•lttl y. 'l'his position is nt (.' r't· ly 11 lt~ll p.t'r' l'l' t' m app ron ch tl utll til t• 11 1111 . II ln trt ttiii Nthe same underlying :mthi'Opn • 1llll'iRrn, and a concc nl ntlioll 011 tit ~· t•x lr'ut.:tiort of the highest sustai nab le yiv ld tl11tl l ' llll be generated. Fox points out that transnational capital can di sto t'l tit" 11 pposcd rationality of this principle in accordance with its own geogrn ph i tttll lp(I SS, by acting unsustainably in some countries, then moving the base of it ttpt•r·ntions to others. The third approach, resource preservation, is mer<: Iy 11 dlll't·r·cncc of emphasis, since the instrumental value of the natural world is sli II dtt• operational principle driving development. He points to Godfrey-Snritlr ' l1111r bn sic categorisations of the arguments normally used for preservi ng til t• 111 111 ·hurnan world: the silo, the laboratory, the gymnasium and the cathPdt ,tl (Fox 1995: 155): tS ::t stockpile of genetic diversity for agricultural, medical and othct· p111 poses (the silo); for scientific study (the laboratory); for recreation (the gymnasium); for aesthetic pleasure/spiritual inspiration (the cathedral). llttK suggests that the latter category should be split into two, since aestheti cs n11d ~t • l ip, ion might be seen as separate events, hence 'art gallery' may be add ed fot· 11 f1dl y of five positions. To these, four more can be added to make up for SO II H' ' II'll r· deficiencies in this list: free goods and services (the life support system argument); IS :1 thermostat for (1) (the early warning argument); IIH a symbolic referent (the monument argument); tiS 1·herapy and bonding (the psychogenetic argument). l'ltt• nq~ um ent in the first case states that because nature provides us with ln •t 11111tds nncl services, we should respect it since it constitutes our livelihood. In tltt• t•t ond, the instrumental value of nature is held due to its ability to warn tHl o l IIIIJH' Hding crises in the life support system. The monument argument is a co td r 11 1! 1111' nny position that views the non-human world as a symbolic referent fo r· ht"'' '"' 1 \IN tt•ncc, or whi ch views its essentia l fun ction as instructional, providing h·sso11 tlt 11 1 w~· shou ld live by. The psychogc rwt it- lll'j•,tlltH·nl iN hn st:d on the iden thut wt• ttt• ttlor·c thnn physical bodies and tlt :tt " "' plt y,tku l t • r~ vi r ·ollttH' nt nlso pmvidt·H 111 w11lt tlw opportuni ty to develop n llt'ii ltlt y flN\1 l ~ttlllglt ·H I I'\hllt· rH't' ~~ ~~ wl•ll , t•:11rl• of the H in strumcnrn l npp11 111t ' " '" ,,·, 11111111 lll ll llpNt' 1111111d ttlll' Ni111plt rlt•ll, th t tltt11flrl'~' is nol' wnn t·t·d if NltWIItlllrltt Qil' dtll 11111 ~ ~~l~l• •t IIVil)' 11~ rlivtrlj' ' "1 \ll lli ~t llt , II ir1 nlwny Nvit·wt•d 11 1-1 '11 tl11 1'\ IH•\Vil\frl tl £1 l1111111 d 111 "'Y 'IIJ h ttllllll ~ ilu JIWi ittllll lllt j',ltl IIJll'l'l ll', ' J ' I~t • ll 'lll1 11 l ll(iihl!tii ill 1· 11 \'i l!illlt!i.lli ,tl t)tlrli y1 111 ~ Itil N tl tt' 1t•l""' Iu ' 11 ltn w 111 , 1111 1-1 1111 i 11 ilu HI\ !l i li li i it i'fl wltri'i,l '\' i IIi Iill i 1i 1~ 11


f' v.dtu• tN' '''"l',lii'H•d 111 n•lnli ntt fo htllll ll ll tll fll•tt (11, 1• 'I! I'Hil t~ 11 ~~~~ I 1JH(,, Nn ~ lt III Hlf, ll.llvt•y [I)IJ() ), !lo x tli :·H.'liSS<.:S LIH'I-1\' Ill !111 •CIIli!JI! I ttl VtllillliS t' flll lll l tppt'OIIl'ht•s (l•t hic.:n l se ntieflf'is nt , nutopoeti<.:s l' flll l N, tttt~o )· Nittll t tltl l's ond <.:OH IIIII. ptll'post cthi <.:s, Fo x 1995; sec a lso Hargrove J9H!J ). Uvt•t•tdl , tl~t· 111 ost powt•l'ltd 1pp1'0nd •cs to intrinsic value theory are those of ecology, 1X1rticu larly dt•t•p .'<.: l> logy, and post-Marxist theory, particularly materialist ceo-feminism. 'l'l11· .·xte nsion of one ideology into another is obvious. Ecology extends into d(•t· p :<.:o logy but also into eco-feminism. This crosses into post-Marxist thc.:ot through materialist approaches to ecology, for example eco-socialism and 111.1 ter ia list eco-feminism (Castro 2004). The nature of the debates that surrott11d these ideologies is so intense that it is easy to forget that for all practical purp<>IWI• the sa me outcomes are sought. Basically these are, first, to accept that we arc 1111 integral part of the natural world; second, that preservation of biodiversity in nil its for ms is fundamental; and third, that a Copernican revolution in hum :llt va lues is required, with a resulting change in social organisation, developm ent and aspirations. It is the question of how to achieve these objectives that <'ll't' contentious. The madness, as it were, is in the methods, and the frequ ent! conflicting philosophies, values and objectives that accompany them. The difference between the ecological approach and that of deep ecology is :1 case in point. Charles Odum was arguably the founder of the ecology moveme nt , and his text The Fundamentals of Ecology remains a classic. Since then the wor·d has come into common currency, and the term has become all-encompass in[•, (Bateson 1972, Bookchin 1980, 1982, Grundmann 1991, Sachs 1993, Mellor 1999, Foster 2000). Ecology retains the values of science, and 'stands in relation to ecological politics as physics does to machine engineering ... But the problc11t is that ecological politics or ecological landscape planning, or urban plannin1-1, whenever they want to prove they are participating in saving the world witlt their limited designs, only very rarely understand "ecology" in the technic: rl sense' (Trepl 1996: 86). Ecology has also been criticised as 'anti-urban' with ;o nservative tendencies and a class bias as well (Trepl 1996). Overall tlw trad itional ecological approach does not engage with the reality of politics 01 socia l life, and views the natural world as an object for scientific enquiry. In this ;quation, urban ecology reduces nature to symbolic concepts of landscape and :'!esthetic preferences, with orientations such as ecological urban design ensuri1111 thnt nature remains unattainable in the context of urbanisation. Professionals ndopting an ecological approach therefore tend to isolate issues such as air, noist· n nd water pollution and look for technical fixes for these problems. In 11 M<.:I Iarg's sieve-mapping process is a case in po int, whl'rt lw II SCS the rationu l scien tific method to compensate for the rn vn ~ws of IIII H1 1ti1Hifion witho ut ad dressing the underlying problems. Dt•ep t•m lo1•,y, llltlltdt •tl hy /\ r•nt• Nn css rlw No r·wcg ir111 p hil oso ph e 1~ tri es to co rnp<'llh.tft• l~tl 1111 l11r11t 1111111 ~ tt l tht• eco logkn l tppronl' h (Nn css 1986, 1989, Lukt• III HH , llr, ll uttlu 'L IIIIJ I) lit• nlso dn1w s lfft'lllion fo dw fn ct th nt ck•ep vco lng)' 1 ~ ""' 111' ., 11 1!(1 li -" d dur t''i fl'r'lllisltl o t l'll di t'll liHIII , li N j)OW('I' iN ill 111 Hkirt)', li N Ill lllli_II IIII P \\I Ii \· W•_l lir: lir Vt' wlr nl WI ' do 11ht11 11 f111 • Nill gttl ttr' i ~ttpwf n lllt' n lrt ttllll l',li tHIIIIilt!liii '. ii Mi ii lli'l flr tlllill' wl1111 lutll h

!h i![;l•rli!l '"' 111 n •, tll~t· th1· 1',1)" 1 f)l11 ~ 11 11 1.1111 tl• \1 lltld , wllt'l'l' lllllll llllil )' l!ri!!ll ~ !i l 1ii(q i) till II li Nf)WII Wl' littt't•' (l{ofht•lli H' IJ', 1'1'1 1 1 1 ) , ' l'l~t· frtlldlllllllll tl1ninupk1 lwro ~ ~ 1lutf 111:"' is subs11n1cd i ~tlt tlt

to ""'

of ll :l fLII't• nrtrii M"''' •t'l -•!1 1111 0 '"'"'it. Bookchin ( 1980, 1982. ) rlffm [. N tlr I" III II ion o n the hnhiNfi1111 11 It'"""· i11 tlw p1·o<.: ess, to ignore the polif'il·nlr·t•t dll )' ,. t 1111 rl liFe and its inht•r't'llf tl~N port s ihi lit i es, and proposes instead w h1tt l11• 1,d IH 11 tl cw logy, an attcrnpt to fu se deep ecology with urban poli tica l t'l.'OIItllrt 111 wv have only looked at nature and how our perceptions of nnt \ll'l' H(llltlll r rill 1ttd es and ideologies. Layered on top of this, however, is tlw pr t~ltl, 1 11l t11·bnnisation and capitalist development in the context of ' l.:t t .~ (,tllllthl 111•v t•loprnent. ,. ill II'

ustainability and Development

'•II Nfuinable development is without doubt one of the most close ly l'OIIft ·fl lt ldr•ns within modern society. It is also a concept almost as nebul o us ~~ ~ ' fir rllvironment', given that it can mean anything from having chi ckens i11 )' 1)1 l111l' kyard to international agreements about the biosphere. The Wo rl d Co11t111 1011 on Environment and Development (1987) otherwise known as 'f'!Jt• 11!111/t! lri lld Report, had arguably the greatest significance for sustainabi lity, wlitr II Nfninable development is defined as development that 'meets the n c~·d s 111 tl1 pr ~:se nt without compromising the ability of future generations to nwt.•f fI11 11 (111 Castro 2004: 197). We could speculate that compromising th<.· l'tllllll 1 ('1\ ll t.'f'ly what we must do in order to survive. Overall there arc Iwn '"•il l 11pproa ches to how sustainable development is constituted, nam ely mnili NI11 ·1 11 1111d <.: ritical perspectives (Eichler 1995, Benton 1996, Castro 2004). 'l'lw 11 11111 11'1'11 111 position accepts the capitalist system as a fact of life. Progress is dt•lltl t lttl'l\t.' ly in terms of gross domestic product. -Faith in the market· 1111 '1. 1 11111i ~ 1 w· m·rntes the belief that adopting this system and waiting for it to dt•llvt I' it IHHI IIL Y will solve problems of underdevelopment. Aid from more dt•vt•llf jll t o11111 rics will act as an interim measure until economies mature a11d lost• tiH!I dt'lll' nd ency. Any problems of capitalist development in the core cco nolltl i~N wi tl so be solved through the principle of supply and demand. When ovt•rpt 'lldll t flo11 occu rs, the reserve army of labour will increase through uncmplo yrtll 111 lnlwur costs will decrease and capital will be switched to investment itt ~ttlit t•cfor·s. Since the market seeks cquilihl'illllt , it is o nly a matter of ti 111c llllfilllt Nfl' lll self-co rrects. Mainstrcn 111 o pp1'1lilliii ~N :lf't' fundnmcnta ll y lib<.•rn l, fe'l 11111 tl': lfk, <.'<.:onomistic (so-ca ll ed cnvirn lllllllll id t'rtlitll lil k:s) nnd hav e hli~tk t• t 'H IIIII i politkn l n:nliti cs of cnpi t·nli s111 . /\t pl't·svnf , hnlf 1he wo rld 's Pllllltl trll llll li vr lll'etplt·, wil lt th is n,',lll'(' st•f Ill"""'" ' 11\t ' F dit1 lll1)i l tl titf)1 )'l'II I'N, Mlllll ~ fll 'l ll ljljiiCHilllt'N vit•w tlt iNIIH jllllllill tl ) Ill''"! ili!li l jiP•hlr:llt , wit It N ll lllf itlll ~ 11 '1)'111 lll•ttvily 1111 tl11 • 11 1111'1"'1 llll 't l hl lll ~t tll 111\1! 111 ! i't • ~! il jii111 l11r fi vify 111 11'1\11 111 I tit Vt•lopl ll )'. 11lllllfl il'lj 1 ( ~• III II II jd tr• ·- !1!! \\' lll if' i! ltiill -tr[ 1111 lllli! fltllll llll il lf llt_l h Ill


~~~~ 11 111 1 ~ '"tit[' \\ul l il l ltlill ~, ~ lll'lllltlt d l• 1,t11 llilll 't! ld wtttl ilp,c• lld.t N. l(ll tiH'I tl 11 111 llt•tt clll illj \ [ll(· tl .i1d W" ild , t\11\ill ( 1'111 I) IINNI' t INthnt tl11• WOI' Id Hntt k hns n\.:tt•d 'nNtttt itJi.•lll 11 lc llf111 , , , ~ 1 i~ 111 fl ltpputl n tpit nl'K pt' ll l'tc·ntion of th l• third wol'id d1rough lt'tlll'l thtllllt i!tl /'1 1 11 11d poi11t s to '1111 I ' IHll l~Ss mund of strn tegics t·a rgetcd on the d<.: pend l•tll 1111\W'II tt o ll of thinl wc11 ld t'I.'Oil0 111i es', :1 process which res ults in massive debt, tli l~ destru ction ol .~ 11!1 sit·Hc ncc cco no tTii es, th e annihilation of the peasant world , tbe expl o itntio11 cd fit·st·gi'Owth fo rests and the erosion of communal land. After promot'in g HIH It destru ctio n, the United N ations remains convinced that 'poverty' is the pd11t1 ·nusc of environmental degradation, not the fact that the developed wotld :onsumes a vastly disproportionate quantum of available resources per cn plt ,t So the und erlying assumption of liberalist sustainable development is thot tlu problem of third world poverty can only be solved when the developing wol'ld ap proaches the wealth of developed countries. It also ignores the rea li ty tl u11 globali sation is fundamentally about the deepening not the amelioracio11 td ::1 pit~ li st social relations, through the erosion of national boundaries, the rcpt n duction of political and economic instability as a basis for such exploitation, tl11 ·om modification of culture, and the plundering of the third world for labo ur 1111d natural resources, whom as Amin (1997: 125) asserts, 'experience actunll ·xisting capitalism as nothing short of savagery' . The paradox here is self-evident. Despite liberalist claims to improved p1'01< perity for all through more of the same treatment, an increasingly internat:i0111d divi sion of labour results in a geographic structure of exploitation and pove rt y 111 n global scale that parallels the class division within nations. Chossudofsk)" bliste ring attack on the operation of the IMF and the World Bank is a case itt point (The Globalisation of Poverty, 1998). He demonstrates that the w o rld i governed by a handful of international banks and global monopolies, and tllltl regu lation of world markets, which depends on the supply of money, is in tit~ • hands of private creditors. Certain of these monopolies now parallel the m:;u·kc•t ;np ita lisa tion of nation states. He notes that central banks in developin g atHI develo ped countries alike have an illusory independence, and largely operate 011 1'11c guidance of the state's creditors, i.e. the private sector. More 'open' ma rh t sup posed ly designed to bring about an overall improvement in the world sys tl' lll m:1ss ively favour wealthy nations over the poor (Escobar 1995). Suppos<.•dl )' ' free' IT'ta rkets are a euphemism for manipulation and financial genocide of tl11• eco nomi cs of smaller nations: 'The power of the Wall Street- Treas ury- IMP Co mpl ex is both symbiotic with and parasitic upon n c<w n:ively imposed fin :uc :in I system built around the so-called Washin gton mnsc' IISIIS nnd l:'l tcr elabo r:l tl•d throu gh the construction of a new fin a ncin I nrchit c•t ltll't•' (I lll t'vt•y 2003: 73 ). ' l'lt~• lll'l'CSSa ry impro vement of living St:lndnrtl H 1111 iltl ' lll 'tijtlll 't )' 11 INo dcn1 nnd th.tt ilwi1· econom ic growth be based ~tpott " ll lllllltjll•h "' tlllt•ll c•t tt11 tl en pit·nl 11 1111 tt•du10 logy in co n: eco nom ics thnt til t• tlchd w•• tl.l 11t lllc ll1 llclttt l'l' httSl' t'hi'Ottf•,lt tilt• vl·hklt· of lon ns or nid in lit·ll , .c11tl tl11 r•ttl\l1 lice l'~!l [iiiHtlltttc 111 tht•i r ILillll ttl i'l '~l lltl i'('('N, ll t·ll~'t ' il wi t• dqwndt•llt y 114 il l[ tlt tl t\ltti-d jl l !ltt1 11 lltll' IIIIH' tl li tl till ')' 111'1' pllllltlt•i't•d l'ot' tlt~ • il' lriW ltl ll lt'l i! tl ijl Lll!ll i Iii ii· 1\!i\1['1 Ill ill Ill ~ llltdt•ttll illl'd h"

!111 I'"' ddt •; llllllttl , ltlltll il ll' ll11tl1'd

1\'lt tlcl tl l.icl\l'llh l"t!!t i\;t 1 1ttlllll!j!iilti l~ 1 ttltlltlllf',(' 11 111 1 Olll lt f•, ltt olf',f',lt'NN IIlll ·I lHI\'1' tll't'll ill !1 11 •ti'tl ' (l i ii c1lft 1 ! lti lj hll'lt lt tf\Y, wi t'I IO lll tlt t• t' tl Vi t'lll lltll' lll ttl t<lll'li,l'\ lfl il'd lltillll tl111tJI\'It'tiiiiHLllll lcl U iMIN, 11 11d in spit'(; of hnvi tl j', f:dlt•d Nlt ltll 111 dt•vt•lop th t• IH'Iipllll l', It .ti lll ttthclll ~ till' lt~nd a m c n ta l ::t ppi'On ch to PII VI'II \ c11d t'lt vi t·onm t• nt.d dc•)•,ntd,cl 11111 .• , l ltt 1his hn sis sustainable deve lop1111'111 fi ii Njl i~tl t "' l y so und s lik t• pl nlt t old dt•vt• lo ptll l' llL' (Castro 2004: 198). llc•lln' l'l1 c entire cCO II Oillic npprop ri ation of world surpluses in all of dwit· lottll It )' pt'ivntc ca pital, through the manipulation of 'free market' mechan is111s :1 11d t l11 litltr tl t•x ploitation of nature, must have a limited future even for its pcqw lt ,tint I Itt t ht• h::~s is of the above processes, it can easily be argued thatthe term 's pstni tt tlhl1 dt •vc•lopmen t' has been hijacked and presented as the benevolent face of en pit 111i 11111 (ll11wke n et al. 1999). It disguises the fact that not only the fundam entn l t•x pltlll 11 loll of nature (including human and non-human species and their habit·ats) i t-~ Nlill 1 dd ll j), place, butalsothatthese processes are being further consolidated, dl't' fWttl 'cl 11111 t•xt·cnd ed through globalisation. There is no better expose of th e ce ntl·:clll .l\\ IIIH'I'Cnt in the concept of sustainable development than James O'Connor's d 1WNI1 I'"Nily 'T he second contradiction of capitalism' (O'Connor 1996; see a lso ' l'olc•tl ll l'l%, Panayotakis 2003, Castro 2004). O'Connor starts with Polanyi 's tli iiHII' t pil'rl' The Great Transformation, which describes how the capitalist sys tt'llt 'H'I tllllltl' destroying its own conditions of production that it depends on for Stlt viv1 cl 'l'ht: first contradiction O'Connor refers to is that between the fot'l'I'H 11 11.! 11'111 1ions of production and the actual conditions of production, bctwt'l'lt 11111 dtt l'l ion and the realisation of value and surplus value (profit from la bollt'), ~ II II 1 lt tpit·nli st development is geared to profit not to equality, periodic cri st"l c'II NIII .!til' t·o the overproduction of commodities, which in turn are rootl:d I11 I1!1 11 1\ll l:CCSSary exploitation and ultimate exhaustion of nature. Parnd!Pdnclh tl wsc cri ses are based upon overproduction founded in scarcity, a l'OIIdll ll ;11 Ihil t is socially manufactured within capitalism. O'Connor's first crisis t''< lllllit t lw perverse nature of capitalist production, which manages to create cri st'N ltlllll l"<l'l'SS, to manufacture poverty from plenty, and to threaten its own t-•x isll'llll lt'OIIl the overconcentration of the surplus in the hands of the few. Th l' St'tc lltd lllllt'l'(ldiction refers to the production of natural scarcity from the exploit. 11 i111t 11l t'l'So urces, hence 'After turning scarcity into a purely social phenomCIIOII tl utt 1nuld be overcome through a social reorganization that would use tec hnol o)•,i n tl dt•vt• lopment to satisfy human needs and enrich people's lives, c:1p itnli ~o~ cll lh•·cntcns to close the window of opportunity for a freer society th at it h:cd it Hc•ll tntwini ngly opened' (Panayotaki s 2003: 97). In contrast to mainstream libcrnll'lwod1•s ol' fl ii Nt'll infl hi Iity, ITadition al111att·l'ill lt111 t ht•ory hfls bee n criti cised in its :'I ll it udt• t11 1111 Itill' .tMht•ing 110 d ifft•rent from l't'lij•,llll t nt·thodo xy. While reli gio us bclit·vt'I'H Wl'll ' llt p,e.l ln11111lttply nnd Sl<lhdtw tilt· t'i il tit , Munds l tlwOI'y, based in the lnho11 1 tl11111 1 11 1 1 tltli , 1111 dd lw Nl'l'll 1\S 110 dillt•n'tll Nn llll't' wn s ttH'I'l'iy 11 11 o hj t·~· l oll 11 hu111 '" lu it 111 l11tttll d l11 tl11• II II'II II N11 l ptodtu tln tt i1tt o I'Xl iHIIl)',l' vl illl t'S, Sttl ulllitt)', tl11 t'ttttlt illltiii!Jtlltllltlllt•I\Y Wi tHllllltllllllitj \1 pit 1I o l tl ti N p t'l H 1~NN. I lo wi'Vc• t, Il1111 11 11l i i it\ 11 i ~ i ill II i 1:1 I!PIItt \\ l111I 11 111 111 w 11 11tl 111110 I t:nllt l's l II lp,1111t1'N lut lll ~ l u t X'!I til\1 11 drvrhiflililll!, ti ~ Wt' ll !t'l tl11 "' vt ltqutlllll u l

il fiH \Vt}


I 1.11

Ill lllil ttli••l iltl 'l ll )'

IIVI~I IIH• I t l ~f

l''~'•t' tllt, tlmlllt•drtt:N~

ll'llflll)' ollld I lttdl , {l!ill! •ll li l\ 111 ° d1 111 lttllllillllf wtlh llllill rt• W.tN Mtti'){ IHIII 1N Hl•ltlltlj l ik•illi

1

II Nt't'N lt lllllllllil y ns hoth l'mbcddcd in the ccosyslt'lllllltd 111duulll•tl wtthin its ow 11 plt yskt dily. In this it shnrcs clements of deep eco logkllliltoll l\ ltl hn.~t·d in cco log icn l who lism. 'J'h c impo1·ca nce of the materia li st eco-fe mi nis1 onnlysis is t·hat it sees tlw t'X tt•r·nnli7.nt·ion of women and nature as central to the material basis of male· do minntcd soc io-economic systems. This analysis makes a theoretical distinction between soc ia l and deep materialism. Social materialism describes the structures o :cono mic exp loitation within socio-economic systems based on sex, class, race, ;o lotiia lism and so on. Deep materialism refers to the structures of exploitati on based on work that needs to be done to make human life possible on a daily bas is. (Dordoy and M ellor 2000: 42) In other words, the connectedness of woman and nature is not essentialistic, it iN soc ia ll y reproduced by the mediating role women play in society, and the fac 1 that women create surplus labour time for men, by caring for children, tlw :lderly and the sick. Eco-socialism focuses on ending both the ex ploitation o l natu re an d the m a ss o f the world's population for the benefit of a tiny fractio n o l the world's rich, and the disproportionate allocation of benefits that results f ro nt s uch exploitation. Eco-feminism a dds the gendered division of labour into th i1-1 :quation, w h ere the concept of alienated labour must be ex tended to includ (• other forms of social discrimination. Here we can see that one of the fund amc n ta l d ifferences between the m ainstream and critical approaches turns round tlw idea of emancipation and alienation of racial and gendered subjects. It is therefore easy to see why critical theory denied the approach to develop mc n 1 n nd s ustaina bility promoted by liberal thought, since it p r opagated the very mock I that refuted any p r o spect of meaningful sustainable d evelopment and soc iAl c ha nge. T he accumulation of capital at a global scale and the values that g o w if'i·t it nrc so fraught with conflict and crisis that it is difficult to align economic grow t h nnd sustainable d evelopment a s viable partners. This is even more evident wh en deve loping coun tries are ex pected to repress economic growth on the basis o ( g loba l warming. The only r eal alternative for sustainability in this contex t is fo ,· 1he first world to dow ngrade economic production, due to the fact that a m on· ·qu itab le dis tri bution of w ealth would compensate for O'Connor's first law o f :np ita li sm. AU thir d -wor ld debt should also be cancelled and non-polluting tec h· no logics provided free o f charge. Developing countries could then gradually elim · innte pove rty and a s ustaina ble level of globa l equity m igh t then be achieva ble. 1\ f ti tudes to nature and critical theories o f d eve lop me n t n Iso come together i11 ~·~· In 1·ion to ur banisation, and to the conce pt of the s ust·n i11 11hi t• ('r<H.:iry.

Sustainable Cities Fo ll owi ng th e nhovt :trgumc n( ll'() li l llotiiii L' llilll d0\'f' lfl lli1H' tll !ttlti'IHIItiSillion, il lt•n r' I hoi vf l it·.~ lil ll,~lll lso lw l'O I I'o l dtmlull ~ it W i iliiittlil[l dli f't .!il [llld fl ll l'll' f ol il 11• Wlto l1• fl i'Cit't'SN olt'l lflll rd ;lrl llill ll lttflllll ll llt ,tf 111iJ!it lilli1itliif111/ N lii iNI'd <Ill illl' IN l

II, I

1.11 f l lmf it t u• t lllill111llllltl l:H1 t'l\11 1 itlr~ti 1 tll''""" ' ttoll IHI S ill tp t•ovt•d In tl w (!11111 1 w ht• ~t• ilw l' lll'l\' 11 1 It vt l td lllh ,i!ll ~. !iii i ll iJIIIIII 'IH' I'Vkt'd. ' l'h i:; 1'\: lll ili ll S [I'll\' oiN 111111'

Wt' l'X ll'l'll:t lil!l' ti ll' Ill\ ililllliirllf litllll f" 111 ('I'OSion, pO ll utio n, ).\l' IH'fll niiH iti t 111io 11 of pb ni s n11d t•llt •t 111 1111 ~tilll • t hit~NyN it· m s s uc h as a ni ma l a nd tt lnl'i ll l' Itit·, ttot IO me n tio n tlw Hotl 1tl ut NI olll ll t' rt tployn tent. On this bas is it m rty lw c l. 11 11 11 d iltnt cities are no ! cn vi t·on tn t' rlln ll y s ustainable a p riori: ' by dcfi nif'io n, il 11•1t il' t'l' it·ory is too de nse ly popu lated with humans to be self-suppo rti ng. 1\ ww ld w hPre urbanization is increasing fas t, and moreover, where ur ba n izn fio rl t•hnrn ctcrized by urban sp rawl, is thereby a more unsustaina bl e wor ld . 111 d11 ·11 Ion; of unsustainability are also indicators of social conflicts at di fferc nt lltll lt ··' (Mnrtinez Alier 2003: 49). Sustainable cities have three m ajor dim e nsio 11 H t 111 n·sponding to different levels of analysis, although each has signi fican t Vll t ll I 11 ions with the other two. Only the last is commonly referred LO i 11 1l 11 '>~~ s ta i na ble ' urban design and urban planning vocabulary. First , we nnr sf toll idcr the position occupied by the built environment in relatio n to l' ll pil til ll'cumulation, and how capital formation affects the very nature and f0 111HI 11 1it 111 of sustainable cities. Second, we must assess whether the o u tcomes o l· !111 process are susta inable in terms of social justice and democracy - soc ird 111 11 1 po li tical inequa lities, such as class struggle, access to resources, leve l.s of vio lt•tlll 111d crime (DC 7). Third, there are the material problems of p h ysica l SII NI. IItl 1hi lity, predicated on the geographic distribution and allocation of spn ct•, 1:0111 11 10d ity circulation, transport and energy transfer, pollution, etc. T his l111< t t'tl Lcgory I w ill deal w ith under the heading of sustainable urban d es ig n. In the first case, it goes without saying that Western cities withi n c:1p i1rdt f1 11 1 11·e a reflection of the value systems they embody, and we have to lwgi11 It IIIli king the simple observation that none of these cities has eve r lwt'll 1 nil I t·ucted, even remotely, on the idea of sustainable development in :111 y i'ntt tl So how co uld they possibly become 'sustainable' on the basis of t'tT I11 1k11 1 pi'Ogress alone ? The concentration of capital as an economic ren lil y l111 or responding geographic concentration within and between citi es. C h;11'111 11 1 l ~t· d by central business districts and their satellites, the concen tric grow l li 1tl Wt:ste rn cities mirrored the parasitic nature of their economic systems, w lt t•t't' 111 order to expand , each ring in the concentric pattern was forced to d evo ut· tlw n111 tdjn cc nt to it . To a certain extent, the sam e w as true within ench t'iii J•, 11 powe rfu l institution s expanded at t he cost of t heir neighbo urs . Overa ll , Western cities have bee n Sf'r llt' l'll rt:d large ly o n t he bas is o( tll lll'i•t •l pl'i nc i p ies, the symbolic need s ol' d o 11 ti 11 11 111 It i(• t·nr·d ti es, nnd shift·ing id(•o lnnit 1ht'Ot lgh w hic h the rep rod uct in 11 n l H)'lli t'IIIN nl do ll ti ll of·io n t"t: nt ni ll t•d I'IIVt ' l 1 ! :ornpct itio n between in stiltrt int l'i l111 11 \lldudlt 1111d 1 ttllttt•ttl i'IIPifn l, t_'o lltl ll tll •d w ith t'vcr· in c ren sing lnnd v:tii ii 'N, • l"'" .'' '"'lt tll1 1 tltd 1 , 111,~ ,· l' l t ittl.lii t·N, lltH I IN liN yt> l 11 0 end in sig ht IO fl li rt~ lfl.lllilj'r !11 l!l llll I 11 Itt !l UI i t tfi ~ l l ~ lltt~llll tll l t J1 ll.t rllti , Oil (' is II Httnll y itll pn'NNrd h)' !f li1 ltn ! i!• •ii iliq· lt i!Vt1 ttll ll ll1 It 11111 \Ill 1111t, ,11 dl 'vt• lop tll t'llf 111 1d ;t tt t ti l t~ t lll dt " '' ' )' jll! ~nllr,m liP:·. ilit:illt)!iil 1!11 llu • 11111 l1 ·1 tl N11 ltt •t•ll j l'll tl ttl ( ;ltillol l11 1 I ·· tiitjil w otlt 'i lll l111 11 1111 fl' iv ,llt tltlll l" i Ill

1

fi,,.,,


ll fii' VII itii •N, du• IU IIl t' lltll l ' l\I'OWt h of tllit •H 1111 d1 f j-,tlhiW 111' llllil'ld hu Hillt' di NI1I1 IN did 11 0( t•x ist · th ere WttS 11 0 <.: ell(l't d hll t~ illl 'h!l Ill 11111tl111t 1 110 co nllit I ovt•l' Hylllholi c l'npital n11d no land market. ll elll t' IIU 1 Vl'tl dl ~~t ll ' dllltion of hu1d ww l'unct·ions became possible at near uniform dcn s iti~· N ttli'ONH lll'iwn areas, witl1 co n·c.:spo ndin g efficiencies in associated land-use fun ctio ns. Forces behind tId phenomenon as w ell as an idealised territorial socialist formation have bet•ll di scussed by Enzo Mingione (1981) and Ivan Szelenyi (1983 ). In David Harvey's classic text, Social Justice and the City (1979b ), he discu sst'N t·hc relationships between social processes and spatial form, the redistribution ol rea l income, concepts of social justice, urban land use and the spatial circulatio11 of surplus value. Later, in The Urbanisation of Capital (1985) he lays ban· xactly how these processes overwhelm ideas about the city that choose to view it as a mere cluster of inefficient technologies. Harvey begins from clw same point as O'Connor (see earlier), and the dilemma that capitalist strategivs in aggregation run against their own long-term interests and survival. This iH based on certain inescapable properties of the capitalist system: the overproduc tion of commodities leading to crisis, falling rates of profit, an oversupply ol capital and labour and switching crises between various sectors of the economy. Harvey characterises this process as three circuits of capital (figure 34 ). The primary circuit of capital occurs when investment concentrates on pri mary production and the manufacture of commodities. When overproduction occurs, capital is switched into the secondary circuit of capital, which Harvey refers to as the built environment for consumption. By consumption he does not mean the consumption of products, but the infrastructure that makes suclt onsumption possible. He also points out that transportation systems for ex· ample can act for both production and consumption, depending on their use. The built environment represents a form of capital unlike others, since it is fixed in space and therefore constitutes a long-term and immobile investment. Overinvestment or crisis in this sector is then switched into the tertiary circuit o( ;apital, where investment is directed into two main areas: first, into science and technology, and second into the extended reproduction of labour (hospitals, schools, welfare services, recreational facilities, etc.). Harvey goes on to explain in detail both the instability and tendency to crisis in this system as a permanent feature. In an essay entitled 'Urbanism and the city' he notes that under capitali st ·ond itions of production, cities reproduce three transmuted forms of surp lus vn lu e in the form of monopoly and differential rent (on floor space), interest (o n loa ns) and profit (on capital investment) (Harvey 1973 : 239 ). These do 1101 :vcn have sustainable economics in mind. let ::t lon e other forms of sustaina bit development. None of this imp lies that citi es do no t' wow 11111 11 1111 111\t', th.lt rh ey ca nn o t p,I'Ow and chnnge in a susta in a ble lll :lllllt'l, ll l111ph· lwt 1II IIH 1l11• t••ll ll't' ~> y s t e m 1·hey I'I'PI'l'Ht'lll' is 110t driv en by SUSI'ninnhillly h111 It ) !lltdit 111tl tl tiHil l''l ploit·nt·ioll , ll nwkt•n t'l 11 l, ( 1999) try 10 t11'l',lll' 11 1111 !111 u 1 dtn . 1 111 1 " ' 111 1 ' l ' l t~ •y lll ililltllill th11t ill tilt• ll l'X I indti NII'ill l I'I'VO IIII1 1111 1 II !111 1111-,\1 liill 1 illllll tti tjll pitnli N111 1 wi ll pit'V IIi l, II III 'W Nm lt'l y w hi'I'I' I'VI'I)'IIIII tliiHt_"l! !i lli \\l iiit ]ii lf, \X 'tlld l~ llli NN IIII', lt nlll

II''"

(

Ql

"":o_ 0 0

UJ

"OQ)-

c - c :::J _o Ql -~E c :::J c

af

Ec Eo

(.) g g_l

oe~

:::J Ql

g~~

E E c

c

UJUJ-

Cc:= 0 0 :::J

E-g :g crl

Ou_o

:::J

3:

crl

c"" E

~mai X _c U

---~Ql c::o 0 0.

-

:::J

,.-C\1

Ql

:8_cg

0. 0

0.

B

~~ ~

Ql

3:

·5

a_ (i;

ro

~

0""

.Q "0 0 :::J

~

UJ

()

:;:::;

-

orn>(f)ucn :::J 0

0

0

"0Ql

0

~~

Ql

_.(tjcn

~en.~

~

~

crl

Ql

"0

~

c -~

~~~ ·6. ·o 0>

"'iii c

crl

~

rncO~E ~

~c

c

:QQJ

-~E crl :::J

c

-""' "0 0

g-

Q; -~

UuC

"O:::lQl Q)"'O;!:::

x o-:::J

·-

1.-

LL 0. _o T"'C\1

c 0

-g iii

E

>-

~

__

ro ~ ~ .(.)

uQl

UJ

"0 Ql :::J

"S 0. .<::

:;=.en en

Cil

Ql

>- .E Ql

-

0

cc-ro 0 crl >

g~_2

:::J o§o -g (ij> e-

Ql

~

E

[l_

UJ

Ql

'6 Ql

E lii

E

>.Ql

cnu 0 c

-

Ql

0 --

c u

_c

UJ

Ql

c

u-o

f-- crl


I n lit~ •

lu11tl· i11t l11 dt• ilw lollo wit t)', ltt l•.tll It )', illl'llll ll llt y, lltdit nl'i Nitt , d ~· vt• l op tll l' ttl , ~h · ltt , p1 1jtil ;, 111t.l '~ " 1111 , 'l'ltt• honk dt •Ntt•llwNllf•,lolw l t'tt viro ttm cnt whcr·c th e thir·d world h•t ltiiJII tlllh.'ll l purpo1w d1wN rtol l'X ist, nnd 1'11c few references in the index to dt•v t•loplng nations :11'1' tlnt osl 1:0111 plete ly absent in the text. It relies alm.ost· cxdwdv cly on a virttnd nlcht'tlli t:nl process of turning lead into gold by means of technological progress, wit ho ut· questioning the global political environment that dictates resout'l'l' di str ibution. How nature will be able to sustain the required level of techno logica I progress in the USA alone, let alone bring the rest of the world into tlw frnme, remains unexplained. In the second case, the nature of social and political inequalities also has n profound effect on concepts of sustainability. For in discussing sustainability, WI' nrc not merely mapping properties of a sustainable environment that efficiently stores, circulates, transforms and disposes of resources, but one which offers n sustainable life to its occupants, one which includes human and non-hum an living organisms. Indeed in Social Conflict and the City, Enzo Mingione (1981) is ;ritical of Harvey's position, relying as it does on past accumulation and insuf. ficiently on the complexity of the renewal process and future accumulation in the broad sense. Either way, they both agree that class confrontation, that is between ·apital and labour, is central to this process. Hence the fundamental problems of sustainable cities are not those of efficient garbage disposal and pollution-free tra nsport, but of increasing social disintegration consequent upon issues of segregation on the basis of class and race, ethnicity, urban land use, marginal isiltion of the young and old, women's rights, gendered spaces, as well as deprivation in terms of education, health and access to affordable transporta· tion, unemployment, poverty and freedom from fear, among others. Since it can be argued that under state neocorporatism urban planning in·rcasingly comes under the control of capital, any foundation for meaningful soeia.l change is usually promoted by urban social movements (Castells 1983). Jn t·hi s context, both the function of state urban planning and the legal system that supports it fall increasingly under private sector influence, and the privatisati on of urban land use increasingly tends to anarchy: 'precisely because urban land deve lopment is privately controlled, the final aggregate outcomes of this procestJ nrc necessarily and paradoxically out of control' (Scott 1980: 130). Apart from this fundamentalunsustainability, Scott also points to the control of monopolies over basic goods and services (water, power, electricity, transport, communica tions, etc. ). Since it is in the very nature of mono polies to cnp ita lise on their· ·o ntro l over markets, discriminatory pricing res ult s, nnd t ht.: snwoth operati011 of t.: ivil society can be serio usly disrup ted : ' ll rhn r1 pl llllttitlf', iN tlwn left with an tl't·(.•t· l'l1c fa ct sea rch for feasib le r(.• nwdit·s 111 tl11 • 111'1\t iii Vt' tllll l'OIIWS of this · on tt·ndi ~: rory process of land c.kvt•lop1111 'tll ' ('ltnll 111111 Htt Wt'lll 1')77: 1109). Ovt•r·nll , it is elcnr· l'hnt tn ckling l'tll'I 'J', )' nr 111111111111 dtlt •PH jtl•tll fll wllltotl! tkn linl\ wit It tiH• instnhility of th e CCOII () Itl h 1'1) ti lt;ltl hilt_l if li ~ •• ti! tl tll ll 't l ljlll ' lllt ~N wi lltl (l( II'N tdt illt'II Vii'Oili iii'II!HII y SliStni tlllh lt tIt it;~ . !•'ttti1U llfll!!fl'1 iltl jll lll t'Nrl olt'i lpitnl II:Gtlllllrilltiotl viii till' lll'i ll lll fltlld ltl' 'i tf ' IHiH tlf li!l t!HH dt ilil i ll tl \ I I \ dtlft ~ ll ~ tll ' kitH !

i111 111d1''

t~lltti ~IINIHillt lhrltl\, •titi_, wilt,,

ili.l 1111 1!!1111 wt11ld ol pl ;tii! N1111d llllitl uti Nlut HIH't'J tllt ll dl y t•lindtHtlnl• · ••l'i I! •• ,, 11 1111 it )' l111tlt•nvir·otll1lCill HHll t' h ns npi.tdt~llll ll• 1111N, l nt~dst:npt•d l',llttltll '; till lilt llllllllthl.· t· in stit11t io ns. ( )ur rclnt"io tt tolllllll htl '~ 111 "''" 111111 11111 lt'sttlls largely in attitud es thnt till') 1111 J•,oml t·o cat, good 111 lnt lt 1111 111 w oN, p,ood to provide us with th t:i •· sk11t N l11 ltm~s, good to gctWI kn ll y 1110d il'y :111d provide spare body parts, nnd good 111 1. il lm cntertainment. Reinti vel y recently the ontological separation bet wvt'll 11111 IIHd s and humans and the entire realm of animal welfare and an irn nl rif\hl .., l111 lll'l'll raised as a serious ethical, moral and social issue generally, and nl so l11 tlu l't•n lrn of sustainable development, urban environmental planning in j)lll'ittlll ll r (Soule 1991, Platt et al. 1994, Wolch DC 20, 1996, Davis 1998, ll cslt' t nl ttl 11>99). The debate is sparked by many difficult questions. Do anima ls fl•t·lt ll lill I )o nnimals possess consciousness? Do they have a sense of species beillJ•,? ' ll11 IHtsic issue is over the subjectivity of animals as sentient beings, and ns Hilt h t• l'Otnmand jurisdiction over their right to life. Wolch in her landm Drk JHIJ 11 1 •• ".oopolis' points to the fact that this disregard for non-human Iifl· iN 11111 t•ncompassed in any urban theory at all, mainstream, neoclassical, post-M.11 \ 11«1 or feminist. She suggests that in order to make up for this deficiency, :1 II'll 11 pccies urban theory is necessary to progress an eco-socialist, feminist, nnt i t'l it mba n practice: 'Today the logic of capitalist urbanization still proceeds w ii1 11 1111 l'l"W:trd to non-human life, except as cash-on-the-hoof headed for slaughtt•r 111 th e "disassembly line" or commodities used to further the cycle of accunnd ltlltlll (Wolch 1996: 22). She argues that granting animals subjectivity is n tH'l'I'NNill \ l'irst step in a process of recognition, and that this is not for their matcriallwlil'l lt !Htt as a necessary part in developing our own humanity. Wolch call s l111 u i\' naturalisation of cities by accepting a bioregional paradigm w hcn·hy lutlll human and non-human creatures are provided with appropriate hohil'lll ll 111 tlu l'Ontext of urbanisation (figure 35). Part of a trans-species urban pro.:tkl' tlu~ ll

I'"""

!'ore depends on: the utility of reconceptualising cities as ecological disturbance regimes rntht•t' tl 11t1t :cological sacrifice zones ... This in turn could inform decisions concerning p111 spective land use changes (such as suburban densification, or down-l.oninl',, ln11d sen ping schemes, and transportation corridor design), and indicate how they ll il fl lil influence individual animals and fa unal assemblages in terms of stress lt·vt•IH, n10rbidity and morality, mobili ty ::~nd :1ccess to multiple sources of food and sltt•lt l'l, t'l' procluctive success, ::~ ncl exposnt·t• t·o predation. (Wolch 19%: 1'1)

Cknrly any dcve lop tt\l'tll ol tlu~ tllllt t•pt nl ii ii NIItitwltility in cil'ics IIIII NI lu pt•t•pnred t·o accept' th t• t•tltlu•ddt dlll 'llll tll•l 1tttl \' td till' 1 il y ill m1 t url' h11l niNu t llltllli'l' in th e l'ity. <:ivl'll tl11 tl1 llllttit 1 ttl 111l• 111 llllllll llll'kl•t:;, it ifl lllllik t•ly tit lnt'l',t' lt':tl'! HIIf ln11d wi lll u lunq ~ltl 111 • tlld il rvt •l t'tlt• J w tldt• llll'~.~ cnr·ddot'N, l\111 WI' do tiOI I' II J',IIf\1' ltd\) 1\ ltlt tl! l It!' !di', tli i!l i\('t;ij\illll p, t iii i'N, tht•n till' Hlt•tl t uNt idtt~thl t• d,•vt•lu 1""'"' will I••, •·v111 i111ilu' t~ ltrtllttt··l '"''''" 11 11 ,, wrt llltplll llll'.tltitll', 111111 iH' II NI' ttl jlllll'!' ~l


II ltiANI!IA Ill IN

ANIMAl I IIIIN N~t llit t ll l 111111111 llllttiiY 1\ttlillllln llllllllilltlllll Diilolo(ly hnpnoltt ullllllllllltllnnllon

~

~/

URBAN ANIMAL ECOLOGY

Ecological Disturbance Reg ime Theory Feminist/Postmodern Critiques of Science Political Economy of Cultural Diversity

TRANS-SPECIES URBAN PRACTICE Social Theory and Urban Design Political Economy of Landscape Ecology Network Analyses of Grassroots Activism New Social Movement Theory

1:1gure 35

W ays of thinking animals in the city.

Source: J. R. Wolch, 'Zoopolis', Capital, Nature, Socialism: A journal of Socialist I m lo~y, 7:2, 1996, p. 31.

Sustainable Urban Design S11st:1 in able urban form and design is now a recognisable subfield of the discip lilt l', a ltho ugh it only started to coalesce relatively recently, with a significn nl 11111nber of texts on the subject over the last ten years (Breheny 1992, Haughton 111d llunter 1994, Eichler 1995, Gilbert et al. 1996, Jenks et al. 1996, Mou ghti11 I 1)96, Frey 1999, Newman and Kenworthy 1999, Jenks and Burgess 2000, Hnndn ll 2002, Whitehead 2003). Collectively they all adopt a mainstream np pt·onch to urban theory, where the city is viewed as n pn ssive co nta iner of fixt•d tnd 111obi lc objects, which generate air, water nnd soi l po ilu Iion, consum e l't· NOI II'l't:S inefficiently, manufacture ene rgy thnt is 1101 tll ili•H•d, nnd which need 10 hl• mo,·c efficiently organised through lllOI't' 1'1til l',It II' III d p.ttVl'l'llllH'nt. Enc h o l ll wst• iss11cs nrc specifica ll y cove red in sij•,llliil 11 111 dt jtilt •l tl ll V• IIII'IYof fronts, fo•· t''< ll lllpk• globn l wnrming (Sa mut•IH 111111 l11 11111d 11111 1), llu 1\lt'l'llhoww vfft:l'l (Nt'WIII illl :1 11d J(c nwort·hy 199() ), ti ll' l\11,1,11 tl11111 II l1111 (f\ l11lll'llli11 1111)(1) 1 lll'hilll ll'III N(Hnvt•l;t, ).()()()) , ii H'I'Illlllt•llh 11 '111 I 111.! llu lti"tli it l111tl1 ff11 I (S III IH' 11 11d l (tl)',t ~ I 'H WO I) ill ld IIIIIIIIIIOI!i lt• dt:ptlllillll )1 (\Vt\l hij t\I HI I 111\lllltl I 111U) , Ill

II ••I IIIII Ill illllltll'ill lll l'l'f',('ll\'1'1\ 1IIIII lfoVII'Wl d , 111. 11111 tt•N (Hn ~s l' ll 11>9J, C 1·ifli!'IH. 1'1 11 I, (; tfll· it1d ,,,,d f\l1111 i 111~ 1~)' ! !! lJIJ, Wtlll !ilutlt•llf•,il 11 11d Mngcan 2000, i\ shwol'tlt /)! 1'1), < >vl'l'nll , ( :wll/'''' 1 f ,,, r ill 11ll'llul t "'"'tpk• of the main st rcn m npp 1'0:tl.'lt tl uli ,lt ,um tl'l'iscs th e 11 \t'l'll ltlll lt VI'Iillf. II i 11 si••H tl r::.neously an interesti ng Ulld wwltd luutk 1111d :1t the S:l tlH' I IIIII' 011\' t lt 11 1sytnbo lises the lack of critiqu e thnt' Pl'l'lll\'1 111 tl11• hll'll of sustai nuhl c u1·bn 11 deve lopment. It also addresses th e singlt: id t'll 1d tllllllll density, around which debates have raged for many years wi thout 1111 IIJNOIIIIi on. While I have already discussed above the type of critical nnd qu ll lt hl II Vt' thinking that urban designers should be aware of, the idea of den sity ll tlll tlll ll tll consolidation represents the major interface between urban po lit'icN 1111d 111 h,111 efficiency, and needs a brief consideration to conclude this chapter. 111 d1e literature on sustainability and urban form, the terms 'susta innhilil y' tlld 'consolidation' have a corresponding resonance. Consolidation ollt'll dn t~blcs as 'densification', 'urban containment' or 'urban intensificatio n'. 'l'ht•Ht lt'l'lll S are used as binary opposites to 'urban sprawl' and 'suburbanisatio n', ' l'lu dl'lln t·e over consolidation or 'suburbification' continues, one that has rngtd ln1 1111111Y years, and Australia represents a classic example of the issues in vo lvt·d (llt lllk er '1983, McLoughlin 1991, 1992, Troy 1996, Newman and Kc t• wolllt 11JIJ9). Newman and Kenworthy's analysis is totally pitched at the prohh-111 ol 1111 omobile dependency, and provides an exhaustive analysis of all aspects oi' il l!' pmhlcm. The conclusions are too extensive to state here but are summ:1ri~l·d it t I)( ; 18. Nonetheless, two of these are singularly important and directly l'l)ll " llt'l.' ted: first, that automobile dependency can no longer form the basis tor tii'I HIII pltllming, and second, that the collapse of the public realm as an outcorn t of li tH jll'lll:CSS must be restored. This view is by no means generally accc ptt•d, 111111 ( ;mdon and Richardson (1990), on a pro-automobile ticket, hav e HIIVdll':d t IH'i r earlier conclusions on this subject on the basis that the process of dt•e;:il ' lt'll lisntion and non-work-based trips were discounted. Troy (1996 ) hos 11 1'1 1dit ,tlly opposite view from Newman and Kenworthy as well, a position n•:tdt• 1 l t~l ll i11 hi s book The Perils of Urban Consolidation. Troy (1996: vi) aq~llt'~ il wl 'l llf1'11 Structure costs and environmental stresses can and should be rechl l.'t'tl , l\111 11 points out that these objectives can be achieved without changing tl w ll'tll l 11 io nnI for m of our cities'. In Australia, this amounts to a reification of Sll httti HIII lt vinp,. l lc also argues from a polar opposite position, that increasing hntHHII p, dt•t• sit y decreases our ca pa cit y to den! wirh domestic waste and recycl in p,, h111 vt•H I r11 inwnrc r, produce food nnd dt•td wiil1 nir pollution, and d ec rease~ wi ldlil t l1 nhitats, etc. McLoughli'' (I '1 11I , I 'I'IJ) ltl')•, tll'NTro y's position so mew hnl dillt•t t'lllly when he sugges ts tl11: 1 '1~11 11 dl ,ll' 111 il ~o tl ' iiHt'I'IINt'd l't ~si d c ntin l d c n s itii·.~ IHI\'1 ' i1111d ; dcn rl y th ey SllVl' qttiit itt !i ip,lllill 1111 llllllllllll ~, 1'\'1 '11 lllliilor th(• lll OH I fn VII III thlt- (l HHlllllpl'ioll H, :111d ilu•y d11 !IIi 111 wlt ll\ till ) l11 ltlllll tdt•l'uhll' soein l, ~·~· o11ntld1 11111 l'll vim'''' H'IIt nl l'tt'liN' Uv1L I 11111\Idi•t I i)IJ 11 I • t) ll11• dlll t•••t••H't'H t: ~< l" ' '""' 'd lt t: l't' hy t''< ll't'ltt l'ly t'lllllil t "" '' " lpi·M ~t il' Hli l r: ilitp!)• 111111111 , il~t •y 11 11 ' llllllllodl r mi l lti Nivn . Wlt 11 1 ilH•ll IN!1 11 Jill dol t iit ' AiHII, IIW t•t !l Wt' litlllll lt•t'lll lllllltlti li dt•lhtlt II Vl' l !111• tdl•II I IHIIlhl li li tl tlt 11111111 1111 ill


II

1(, 11111\W I' I' thi N wt• hnvl' to go hn \: k to tht• ~· ~· ttllt l.d jltl.ju}l l i~· ,'u•1ll '""' Rowt•l ' I Jd11111 pl.•11ni11g in th eo ry a nd practice: a reappt'iii Nitl ' 111 p,t• l h1JI11W tlw Ntnti slk·nl hlit :t.kl'it•g of th ese debates (above ). In deriving n tli t•n t y o l 111 " " '' plnnning, they ' t't•jt•t• t t·ight M the o utset any attempt to derive such n tl wory ou t of a bstract 1 II Ot'tu n ti ve pri11ci plcs as to what urban planning ought in ideal circum stances to be. ( )ur <.:o nce rn is uniquely with what planning is' (Scott and Roweis 1977: 14). From tlw perspective of political economy, all the above debates ignore the reality of urhnn pl ann ing, pointing instead to a hypothetically ideal situation. While on" mi ght· agree completely with the positions of Newman and Kenworthy, or Troy 111d McLoughlin, they collectively ignore the internal dissonances of the accumu 1:11 ion process, and the shifting relationship between capital, the state, urban plnnning and the morphology of cities. What is nowhere considered are th" inherent contradictions of capital accumulation in Harvey's second circuit, bel ween the free operation of the market and the state regulation of urban land. Add ed to this, 'capitalist urbanization processes simultaneously require and resist plnnning; that is, the social and property relations of capitalist society create an mbnn process which repels that on which its continued existence ultimately depends; collective action in the form of urban planning' (Scott and Rowei s 1977: 24). Since urban planning is a product of, and is embedded within, th e operation of the capitalist urban land market, it necessarily reflects the inherent ·ontradictions of the overall system. These contradictions are that in order to have 111:1ximum room for exploitation, a free market ideology must operate. On the other hand, it is also clear that some regulation must take place otherwise anarchy wi ll ensue. Because the urban land nexus is fundamentally out of control, such a hnlance is seldom achievable. To assume, on this basis, that somehow the answers to sustainable urban development lie within the planning apparatus is to deny its confusion when fnced with the realities of the capitalist land nexus. The same logic also suggests t hn t· a rational choice can be made between consolidation or continued expansion when the very foundation for such rationality is largely absent. Over the last t wcnty years, the privatisation of planning has been consequent upon the deconstru ction of the welfare state, the rise of the neocorporatist state, and its relation ship to the built environment professions as a whole (see chapter 10). In functional terms this simply means that an increasing number of government operations ar :om modified and packaged for sale to the private sector, a process that further intTgrates state-capital interests. State planning products are then marketed to the pl'iv:1te sector like any other good. As Mike Dear succinctly states in The Post1/Jodc?'n Urban Condition, 'privatisation portends a fundam enta I, eve n irrevocable chnnge in the way in which planning is conducted ... e.g. t lw growl'h of planning JWnm nn cl in private sector positions, tl1(' pncknp,i11g n1ul 11111il· t•t ing of pla nn ilt )\ Nl' t·vi ct•s for sn le, ::t nd the promim·nt IIC'Jtd 111 pl oiiiiiiiiJ \I' dlll 'll ll o ll toward s :1 dt•w lop nwntor ic nt <:d curri culunt ' (1)!'11 1 llllltl ~ ~~ ) . ll111•1 1. 1\ltl .llliJ\ hlin sue li iH'tl yrtllldtldes, ' pol kit•s fordt 'II NII )' 111111 1' .111.1 11 0i ,, \'fl t)'L' fft't ll Vt' p111't of:t n 111 h1111 t oii'Htlitl.t l io11 HII .111'1\Y' (Mi I ,ttliJddltt l iJ•J II 11Hi W l!t!l 1111illd tt o l Nny wnN !ltllt Il l Oliti lll tiiiH Ntll llt'I\Y ol J1111 Nllilll1!1111 ~ l ilill ~ ljliiiiiJ lill \!II i\' [l ffet: II VI t•ttilt'l ,

The allotted function of art is not, as is often assumed, to put UCI'OSS idt•ll"' to propagate thoughts, to serve as example. The aim of art is ro pt'i'[lllll' 11 person for death, to plough and harrow his soul, rend ering it cnpnhlt• nl turning to good. Audrey Ta rkovsk y ( 11111 l)

Introduction: Aesthetics- Objects and Experiences Why did Marx insist so vigorously in his early work on expluildllf•, 1lu• aesthetic, on searching out its sources and defining its nature? ... li t• Wil looking for man, or more precisely, social, concrete man, man who, in tlu• historical and economic conditions of capitalist society, destroys, 1111 11 lates, or denies himself. This mutilation or loss of humanity takes plnu• Ill work, in material production- that is, in the sphere whi ch hnH 111 11 d1 • possible aesthetic creation and in which man should affirm his htlll\illill y In his search for the human, for our lost humanity, Marx f0t111d In !111 aesthetic a stronghold, as well as an essential sphere, of hum an r xhilt'tlll lf man is creative he cannot keep from aestheticising the world ill tll I• assimilating it artistically, without renouncing his human condition . Adolfo Sanchez Vasq uez ( 11>7.1: 17)

or all the qualities of cities, arguably the one that concerns us most· is lh t• 11111111 1 of th e aesthetic experience. Why arc some cities more beautiful 1'11 11 11 11tl111 W hn t makes a city ben utiful? Why do citi es with a long hi sto ,·y illV Ill 'lllhl) poNsess greater ben uty t hnn rhoNt' of Ill ore rece nt times? T hen I'I1Ni' tll'tl ilo tl\Ot't' acn dcmic qllt 't-Hio ii HHtii 'I'OlltHiitlf', lil t• idtn of :1csthctics. Arc ntHtlwt lu.; 11 11d lwll lll y II CC('NH:J I'il y l't• l ll i t•d ~ hi dtt• llt~tU III • tit I''< JWI'il'll l'l' purely JWI'SOII Id, Ill 1111 lht•J'l'l\(' ll('l'ic qtndliii'H 141!1111 d h1 Jilllllldt I j•,IVI' II III IIIIit iOII S? I low is tlt t'II I'N illlll l t 'X j W I' i~· n ~T t'11dmd11•d i11 tllli .,. Wl1111 IIi tlt P lll >ttil•II MIIip lwt wi't' ll ''"'" '""' itllt lt'llt ? Wht•ll I h<·1~1 111 wtillll l, t!li ll !l'K 11 I (liilflllltl tlill ill thi H~ h n ptt· 1 w1tt dd I tltt• I'IIHit•H I Ill Willi ', " IIIII tiH1 ~ i•l]il('lih til hU\•1111 di ~lf il\11 ll tid nt :N ilu•ll lll Wllt tltl l•t~ lll III IIHt ll jlj HII t! lll '111 II l1 1111 llliio 'il iill l i\i litl tlt L1 ill i_IH[ dtlli t tilt '1'111 lilllllil


"' !111 'l ttttl y ,,f ttt 'l;ilu•tt nl• ' th o 111 1-1 1 llt vnii'C!I Il K l;!lllh id i111 ptlltt'NIH'N td JH' itt'pltttll , lOj\lllttn tt, ond ult itudc lot'tll rt linll, \\ ltil, til t' ~ 111111d tll vo lvl'N tlu l• lttd y ol nt•s tll vlk philoso phies ond the cren li vt' I"' HI"jlft'l' (l t111)', / )(; 2 1: 27'i ) Lung t hl•n 1110ves f1·otn hi s two bas ic divisions o l HJH't td llt tvt• nt·sth etics n11d t•mpil·icnl nestheti cs, prior to formulating an approa ch to envii'Otllll cntal aesdwt ics ns n who le. ln tbe first category he includes hermene utic, phenomenologicn l, :x iste ntia l and political approaches. Empirical aesthetics includes another fo 111 ba sic ap proaches, namely information theory, semantic, semiotic and psycho biologica l. Following Santayana, he suggests that an environment is aesthetica II pl easing if it provides three basic ingredients: pleasurable sensory experiences, n pl easing perceptual structure and pleasurable symbolic associations. Second, Aldo Rossi's article 'The urban artifact as a work of art' implies :111 objectification of aesthetics: 'our task consists principally in defining an urba11 nrtifact from the standpoint of its manufacture' (Rossi DC 22: 285). Whilt• Lang's concerns are primarily with individual experience, Rossi's are with tlw properties of the architectural object, noting that collective memory is the centrn I feat ure of urban artefacts. Third, Barbara Rubin adds another dimension to thi N debate in 'Aesthetic ideology and urban design' (DC 23). She disagrees with both prior approaches in principle when she says that This dichotomy between urban function and urban 'culture' reflects a deeper polarization in Western civilization wherein sensitivity to art, music, poetry, and other 'exalted manifestations of the human spirit' are appreciated essentially and ostensibly for their own intrinsic formal qualities. By placing a primary value upon aesthetic behaviours associated with transcendental aspirations, students of culture have been unable to come to terms with the city - the modern city - as a symbolic manifestation of values mediated by forms. (DC 23: 291)

·Io these we could add a fourth dimension from the theoretical section in Designing Cities, that of Paul Clarke's article on 'The economic currency of architectural aesthetics' (DC 2). Here, the relationship between economy and aesthetics is located in the interaction between aesthetic production and com modity production. In this process, the aesthetic experience becomes closely linked to the production of symbolic capital and the reification of commoditi ell in support of flexible accumulation. Traditional ideas of aesthetics as experienc(.' or· object become linked prima facie to the processes of production in advanced ·n pitalism: 'Late capitalism or the multinational world system . . . penetrates and co lon iscs the unconscious ... with consumerism, with the enormous colonizati011 of the apparatus of the media, mass culture and the vnriot iHot her tec hniqu es o th e commodification of the mind ' (.J :-~ m cso 11 1()9 I). The above positions are not lwr lltt'li t•tdl y ~~·ll l t • d ln n11 1'111 11 ut lt t· r·, and to n l.' l'l'lnin exte nt· reflect the proccs.~ ol l11s1•11 I' tllld tlu 11 ltlil 'llil'ltt 111 idl•ns ovt' l lt isi'O I'i<.: DI tirn e. In Ol'dcr tO plan• 1'1 1111 Ill ltt •. ltotlt d l'i.l'lqlltll\1 1 WI' IIIII Nt tnkt'l l look .11 how tlw ;wstl wti<.:s of lltl htll lttllll ll tlV• '· l•t'!" ll \'1(1\VC tl•l\11 tlw ll' llltll'it·N. Pow ll ll ljOI' l'O I1Sid\ 1'11 1io lls dolllll ll lll llu iii"ht ill wil l! nhr. ll iiCI '"''liN til " ''IIIII 1

dtlllfl !Ill: di !il~t•lf'rl~·~ I!! !IH IIIII \[:Ill ~!iII I. I ill lltiltlll'llllllil N, pll yfll\ •j, phtltt~.tl 11ll)' 1111d llll'dit i111 , -l' lldiiilllli'ti !11 il! t' W•n I ,d l'y tlt .q~om s, 11.udid ttttd lltpp111 1 1 III N, ' !'Itt' Sl'l'OIId I ~I II M i.itl i!illll i!i Wlt il tlrllllrl lllOI'ph o J o~y, wht•l't' ll'll till llllti'pltolop,it.:n l ,tll r tll)\l~ ilttlll r 111 '11'1 11 111 possess greate r or lesse r· :tl's tlll'lil 11 11 1"'11 1, n project tl1111 lttllll' 111 lttltltoll 111 th e cnd of the nin etee nth t.:i.'llltii'Y wil lt t ,11 r11ill o Sittc ~111d ( >tto Wngnt•r·. ' l'his wnflict concretised into two Hl'lllllltll IIIIIVl'mcnts in art.:hitt•cttir'nl ond urban design, namely the co ntex tunli HI 111 1d l'rt tiona li st schools of thought discussed in chapter 3 (Sharpe 1978). 'l'lw tl111.l to rt<.:e rn is referred to as the 'picturesque', an aesthetic position gov<: rrwd llll tlt hy landscape painting than by any derived from urban form and st r·ur ttllt' (I l1 llotton 2002). While this movement has no figures comparable to Pytltnp,nnt.,, lll'h<l l1 designers have reified the work of Gordon Cullen in this rcs pe<.: t, 1 1 <~ w1 II IY others who have advanced his elementary ideas on serial vi sion (S111 Id1 11>74, 1976). From this point we will investigate how particular co nl i.'111pi11'111 1 tpproaches to aesthetics either advance or refute our adopted dcfinit io11 , th .tt tll'hnn design is the symbolic attempt to express an accepted urbnn 111\'tlltlll)\ 111 t.:c rtain urban forms, pursuing the idea of symbolic capital de ri vt•d 1111111

Ill

l'krre Bourdieu.

Mathematics and the Divine Order

111 hi s book Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea, Charles Seife nolt'H, ''l11 th~· Pythagoreans, ratios and proportions controlled musical beauty, plt yHh ,d lwn uty, and mathematical beauty. Understanding nature was as simp ll' liN t111d1 1 tnnding the mathematics of proportion' (Seife 2000: 31). The conccpl ol 11 111, tlld by extension the 'void', were antithetical to both the Greek univ crHt' 11111 1 !Itt :hristian. For this reason, the refusal of the Greeks to incorporate zero i1tl 11 tl11 il yH t·em of logic constrained mathematics and science for nearly 2000 yt'l lll' 'II II ntystical symbol of the Pythagoreans was the pentagram, a five -sided fip,tllt :, tlltd Pyt hngo ras' invention of the musical scale, with its reliance on mntlw11 HI Iit~1tl i'll li os, led to the idea that aesthetics in all things had a mathemnti<.:nl eHNe ii(U , Wit hin the boundaries of the pentagram was embedded the 'golden t·ntio\ of11:11 n•krrccl to as the 'golden section', the key to the most beautiful propor·titlll t'Vtl lO rt <.:e ivcd. Not only docs th e golden rnti o exist in mathema ti cs, it iH lntt111l I'Vl' t·yw here in nature, frotn th t· Hll ll J'll' of j•,n lnxics to the archctypn l tt ,1111tl11 llt' ll or the pattern on tht• Hlllllln wt• r· ,11111 tlw pine co ne. While tl w pt·nhllttt wi th :t.cro was thor it h.td tll 'ttiH•r tlluqu• 111.11' 10 11.1\ 11 11d dt•fitd nnturc w lw11 tt tJt•d 11 1111dtiply or dividt', tl11• H11 ld rr1 14t • Ill til \\ 111 tl l~•tll l r llillrt ,tl , sinn· rtt its Clll't' llly tlu rill io of tlw sq trnr'i' root 111 ' , 11 IIIIIIII •L'' ._,1 litfl1dl1 ' 11'11)\tlt (I A I ~ .2. 1 I~~~ J. ) l'IH 'N(' ir'l':1 tiortnl 111111t111r,. tiii \'I II Prt•: d dt [l ( ;i\'i_' l' [111jiiiW., 111tl Pythnp,oH'r lll ~ Wt:II Wll l'll Ill Ht't 1'1'1 y, llt'VI I It t ! (1\'['· tl dli.l b! \' !hili! [i ttJ.J,I! 1. (111 )' tiH•It' Wllt ld 'II VII twl11 y, tll'lllliH 111td 111 t l11( 1~~· 1 ~ illiil!!i \'! 11\• h1i!l\\' ilt•tl tohlt\111 d11tl lutV11 11t111 1 tlltrn lt•rt t\t lt 111 wtdtl1 r11 1~ ilw lilii~ i tiCI!illrl h lil,. ph tlt!li iJ \, ll ttd tl11 r 11 h• ttul'f'll llo !11


lll1tl11tll11111 111 ttf llhlll )' WO II·.II ttl till 111111 lllddtl 'tlllll '1111 -. lqtttll .lllli td ltlll iui WI'I II oll'llliit•tl lfl, l'll tillll 1 111111 tiu• lltd vt• t'll1' 1 IH'IIIIIil IIIII ' ol tilt tf.' llll'i d illlt.l lwt j•, lttNiiltl', ll•tii'IN ol Wl 'l•lt'lll ' tvili Nn liott ' (St•li t• ),()()(): H •1) . o l 111 u · i,~ lll 1 ,,, 111 AH nil n t·dti 1t't' l H ,ll't' n Wlll't', tlw 11tost l'ntii OII H h11i ld i 1111OI'PIII '.t l t•s tlt l' go ld t• tt st•t.: tioll thi'OII fl hOilt i ts <.:O tt Stt·uctitllt , tl tlltll;l y tlu l'11 tlt~ • lloll , tlt e t.:t• ntt·nl s h owpic ~c of th e /\tlwninn At•t•o poli s. But li ll ltll t: tll ll lli,!l \\1! 1101 tlw on ly prin ciple govt' l'nin g archi tc<.:turnlu t.:sth t.• i kN itt nlllit• lll C tUtt Sdt• tt t.:t ntld mcdi <.: inc ~1l so plny cd u h11 gc rol e in 1'cfi1tin g til t· nppt'I II'II IH I ' ttl h11i ldin gs. 'l'h t.: work of Tlippocrnrcs :1 11d knowk'dge of nwdit'nl opt ks llltllllt l't•vt•nk·d 1'11e imperfect nature of 1'11e humnn eye, whi ch pcrccivt•d Hlt'nigltt lillt'llll l'! ll' vt.•d due to changes in perspe<.:tive. Euclid wn s nlso fnsci nnwd hy oplk.s. t ltt tlti H hns is the G reek s built a sli ght curvature into most long HITnight S lll'i . ut •~, d kd entasis, in order to correct an inherent deficiency of the hullltlll cyt· .111d 111 ilw interests of mathematically perfect architecture. Templ e co lumns wl'rt• givt 'll I sli ght· OUtWard Curve al ong their length, the Outside CO lumnS were off Vl' lli lll l 111d k·n nin g inward, and temple bases were curved upward s in o rd er to ~· 0111 IWIISnte fo r normal visi on. All of this convinces many archi tec t·s even todny tlt ll l :rt'ek nrchitecture was the finest ever built, at least in term s of i ts att enti o n Itt dt• t'n i I. Until .relatively recently, it was thought that these refin emen ts W('l't ' lill)ited to the architectural object, and that the design of urban space rem :1itH•d nd ho<.:, depending very much on the layout of the site, f unctiona l relation ship lw t ween buildings and other such considerations. ll owe ver, a relatively unknown text of Constantinos Doxiadis ca ll ed 1\rc!Ji lt•ctu·ral Space in Ancient Greece, based on his doctoral thesis for the Univet·s il of Berlin , demonstrated that the golden section was applied not on ly to urb:111 spn <.:e but also as a fundamental tool in site planning, along with what Doxit1di: ·nil s ' the system of polar coordinates'. These principles were followed through out nncient Greece in the planning of monuments and marketplaces. A s Oox ind is states, 'Just as we can consider a temple as representative of Greek n r<.: hitecture, so we may consider the layout of an entire sacred precinct as typi cn I of nil G reek spatial complexes. The layout of the agoras at Miletus, Magn cs in , nnd Perga mon for example, appear to have been governed by the same laws Ml the snc red precincts' (Doxiadis 1972: 24). Doxiadis states that site plannin g i11 hot'h 1'11e Hellenistic period and the Archaic and Classic periods that preceded it were precise ly calculated. He notes that despite their interest in geometry, and despite their use of the grid system for military settlements in Asia Minor, th " 11t<.: icnt G reek builders did not use a rectilinear system of coordinates (Wich erley I %7). The unique properties of each site w ere first explored, and polar coord iltOit'S esta bli shed on the basis of th e hunt :ut viewpo int·, II SIInll y n vantage po int tlt ,tl t•nco mpassed the entire site. From th111 JHt illt l ildit Wl' t't' pln ~.· c d so that n l ht'l'l'· qunrt·er vi ew co uld be obtained of 1'111 h lllljtlttl lllll ltiiddlllj\, nn d n co mp lex Hll' ll\ of nnv.les, distn nces from tlw vit •w t•••lll !, j'lt'iliiJ Jd ,,,. " I IHtt•tllllntion of the htltdHVI IJ W il tHI ollwr fn ctors wt·t'l' 1dl ~~ -~~~ ~ itll'tt ' d 111 tt•. l11 11l1w 1 w 111t :-q wdficd t11I1•N. Whi l1· ti lt' ww of tlw go ld t'l l Ht!1; tin11 did tii!i IIJ i l '' 't li· i11 1d1l\' 11 n1 11jo t' 1•o ll' in liii p 11111'1' tllttllip lnl of n :ll•t• l. Hill' plntlllilil',, nl ilth etll llll l.llt HI i ll i_l!iliiit q\i !

''l't

d;

tid1t}' dCI I"-·c tlllf \lt' ( ·\il 1 fdl, 1'ii. 1 111. 111 ,) \V'~ ' '-1 t il ~ " l1clol 111 !"' '''''· pi•• t•tt!iCH 1 1111 ,~, 11 111 lt HI"' "' 11 11111 11 tl11 11JIIi1Htf1t td ll itiiiJ', I' , w i th It W1t Il l ",,, itlt 111 ~'1\" ""' '1111 A tlll lilt 1\ l ,lillllllcllll ltl ti)'ll l i lll ~ fllt l ll tti lll ~ \\'Ill tlllti' llljl ' ~'· '""' .I dtvitH 11 1•1111 1'1 w ttltlit tl w C lt 'l' l· tliiiiiHtN, w ltt~ tt ' 11 Wt l ~ tllllll tdt 11 11 tl ll tl !iu clt tt ll d IJIII 'M II ct ll .. lllt ·siH I I' II ~t · tllll ltii H' ll'dlt tt •d In lt llllilltlltlli l 1111 J\lt ld tll lilt I IIlii , I ll 'p.o ld t• tl 1111'11 11 ', di Nt IIVI 'II 'd i1y th 1• ( ;11'1'1 M Wil l •_lllllllt 11 11111tl i1 Wil Mll'dt Hl'OVI' I't•d hy I.I'OII.tl'do 1' 1:-HIItll. 11111 '11 in I'I NII ill II tl11 l uj\lll tliii J', o l lilt• 110 t ttll1·d Pi t'H I Hl' tiiii NNfl tlll', l'iNfl tll l (o lt w l l l' lt' I H'd 1ft 11 l il llll ilill 1) 1 11 11 lt nlt llll llll'l'l'lllllll 11 11d ll Hllht•it Hitivill ll , I'Vo l vt• d 0 H l ' l ' into~ o l l llllld ll I 1 d111 111 lllll lt•d 1 lnNI' Iy Ill tilt' l'ytlt ,ll',lli'I'II II N go ld t• tt Sl'l'l ioll . ' l 'ht• llloltill•ll lllli tl d U jlll 1111• n dlt•d tiH· Piho l lit~·~· i Ht'l'it•N WIIN l'i t'NI ll illtll'd by 11 Jlt ov m· llllt .tlllt • ll~tllli i1111 , 1\ lttllltrd Llll'll'l. llt ' OII N i ~ I H of tlw Ht'qllt'm'l' 0, 1, )., .), 5, H, 1.\, J. l , l•l , 1~. WI l jl jl , 'ITI, 1'17, t' IL 'l 'ht• hi ghvt• th t• tllltlllwn> 1\0, thl' III Ot'l' clo1wly tht•y llltlll lilt Wiilt titt• go ld 1•n flt'l'tiOII . l •'iholln t.:l'i 1\lllllhl' I'S l'e J)t'l:St' l11' thl• lllll tht•llt il l it'II II HIIIIH fill Pr illltJ•,o t t'll ll l't•r l ll llP,kH, i li Hi th l' t'l'fOI'~' hold th e se<.: rct to 1lw gold t· " Nt't lioll 111111 111 t•s lt'IINio iiH, n pt'Ol'tHS w hi d1 111\ s nhs<)l'bt•d mnLI1 en1 t1 1ie inns for u· n1111 it' I1HI11 y, tl11• .~1' \111 1' 1\ l't' hns inlnl (.'II IW npl'l licnt·ion , from J)l'l•di <.:tin g stm·k 111111111 piilll 'lll fl lo t'OIIIpl t·x nppli <.::ll'ion l' in mnth cm:lti<.:s, and th e jout'll nl Jli/nliltlt, I II IIIIIIIIH'H lo vx plor·e tlw i111pl ka t'ion s of' Pi sa no':-: ori~i n n l id t.: n. II Willi 11 01 11111ilt wo t.:t..• nturi es Inter, ut·ound 1400, th nl th e lt·nlinn Rl·tuti mH IIIII lu •p.11 11 In llo wv r·, nnd p;till t<.:rs who were nlso mathent ;tl i<.:inns first IIP Piir tl 11l lulluHTi's di ~K· ovcrie s. I lis se ri es w :1s ,,hen used as th e b;1sis of linen i' JWI HIH'IIt vl, 1111 1 Nll'lll'lllt'nl hnm10n y in proportionnl sys t·ems np pli ed t·o pnilll·in g, Sl ldplilll tllid tll'dtilt'l'l'lll'e nlikt', linking the nr t·s t·o noturc o n the one hnnd nmllo Nlil 'tlt 1 111 1 tltl· o tlt t• l', th e harn1oni :1 111Uildi o r hnrmon y of t he world . '!'It t• lltll ' tll!t~ l l(l'll :ti ssnnt..·c ar<.: hit c<.: l , Leon Bn tri st·n J\lbert·i, wn s complete ly nwllt't' ol lilt• 11 11 1II llt'li nn· of ma 1hcm:ll i<.:s to ::~ rchi t·ecture, and deploy ed clnssic:.l NyN I 1'111 '1 1d pt 1 1por1 io n in hi s buildin gs. Th e great arti st· Leonardo da Vi 11ci n Iso t't•u tp,tii NI tl !111• power of the go ldcn ratio, nnd <.:oli o borated with a Minorit·e fl'i :11' ~· t tll1 •d I 111 1 11tH io ll•, w ho pu bl ishcd :1 book <.:<1 l lcd Oivina Pmporl'io/l e in 1503, willt til Wil t •t 1ioii N hy Lt.•o nn rdo . 'I' he golden sec eion and the close ly rein ted sy m holt!• 11pp111 Kt lllllit•d th e H: 5 rntio which Leonn rd o noted w as t he proportion ol' 1l w 11111111111 ltod y w lll' n divid ed :H t·he novel, ns illustrated in hi s drawin g of uni vl' I'Sil lttl llll 1•\• !111• divi n1.• n:ll'urc of ,,he golden se<.: t·ion co ntinued to be recogni st..•d tlll nllp,lll tlll tltt• Hl'llni ss:ln<.:c beca use the proporrionn l systems it impli ed Wl' t't• !11'1' 11 111 pt •ttllt'll l t' th e u11iverse nnd therefore reflected the work of Cod. 1\y til l· end o f the si xtee nth ce ntury, mnny fundnme tll'nl propl.' t'lit·H I',(IVt lt titt j\ till' t H~s tl wti <.:s of urbon des ign h:1d been formulnted: till.' organi sit1g l nt ttii 'W cll l ttl 1ilv gt·id nnd polnr coo rdinates, l:tw s governin g hnl'l\l Oil y nttd pr·npntltcttl 111 mltitl'~' llll'l' ntH I silt' tlcfdgn, incorporn t ion of dw l.twH of opl ics, I li t• ll.tlllt I ' r tl pt' l HIH'l'l ivt ~, 1111d p1·i 11d pll'H lwnri Il l\ 0 11 qlll'S t i011H n l pmpml ion , Ht•.d1•, d l nlt '11 Htclll 11111 I1H'Ill (~11' p111 ' 1HHIII I'J'> ~, Pndovntl 1 1) 1) 1)) . Fo t I()()() Yl'llnlll ll ll'l' ti ll' lhtll' lll !111 llllil'lll (; 11'1 '1·11, lllilll ll'lli ll li lN WIIH II H· Nlljlll' llll' lllill ll pl t• HIIVI' tllill p, tlll 'l lilllllll ~· ti1 •N IP,II 1 IIIII ' tl 11!1' I)K [itllitd tlp,l11 111111 !Itt• I Wi ltli t tit ctil l Ill y 11 11d w ltil lt l 11111 1111111 1'111 t'tlll ll lll \' l li l~ l titetl "' 1\'1111· ii1J 11 litdll y, ' 1'111 j iii'IIIIIII CH I HII I ~ Ih i t• lt l l I lliillllllillj ~ tit


••tl, od l')' tltil jl,otlolo 111d l•d""' IIH I \\oloo tit• lttll•lt tlltl!iit\ 1 l c Ltotl!lt ~ l (" l ll jl ll dlol )' du; lll m l 111111111111111 lil \lllt 111 i \\·! l!l!t d1 ttttllli ~ oitt llllo l ill II ( ',lllofl·,iot Wll lll' IWII l'!i iCIIdt•tl lt'\ IH ill tll llllll IIIIIJ ' j• i!!llll' lttJ th'il\lrd 1111111 !o'dtt111111ol l'u llt •d fvlodtdm I notd Modu loo J, ( 10!1!1, •lllf!iii tl l I IJr. '•l l 1• ( :oo hii Nit•t ,tl .... IH•Ii t•vt•d 1'11111 ilw htllll ll tl figul'(; ~:otil ll lltl 'd l"''lru l•tPP"'iiiiii N (n s indt•t•d olid l ,t•ot lllt'do) t1 11d that buildings sho uld Clllhod y il ll 'lol 111 tfo •11 pmpol'tionH, wltll It illcor·po,·n ted th e geometry of the golden se<.:l ioot , I .t• t 't" lllt Ni t•t·'s basic unit Wil li ,1 111 11 11 ()feet ( 1.8 met res) tall, the foundation of the Fihorto i.'t.: i se ri es used in""'''' or hi s buildings. In addition, he claimed that this system resolved discrepnru II hi.' Iween metric a nd imperial units. Le Cor busier derived two scales lt1111 1 Jo'ibonn cci. The first scale, called the red series, followed Leonardo's len d, 111111 is th e ratio between the total height of his universal man and the height nl Itt tHlvel. The second scale was based on the ratio between the total height of n 1111111

lti ll li flll!lllp ~ i'rt ! l i! d •lltrl!ll• lu 11'1!1 rll ltf tJ II ti Vi.l l (lit\lliU lhi. 'I hr 1"" ,, 11 tirtll lli.tlt'tiltl l ~trt,i\ j!l!l!! ·!!ll<llliliil! "I liN,, 1ll l t lll ll jlill . d iol!illlli, II IIIII 111.! jli•iportllllllld NYli iPIII II lltfiii do t t loil I• ol i oi l I I 1111111d Ill !111• lt ll li1111 H1 '11 11,.1111 1111

iih

[" i! l

11!1 111111 llllllit•llt I IIIII ''·, tlir j!!!\\<! 1 11! ltlltlll' lll ii(I UI llfl ol llltlll lllllllli.tl illtd Ill li'lli. llll iii J', lll'l' hitt'l llll d 111d llll i!lll ~ I hill IN lllllllll'N IIOIIt'd , At !111• t•lfd Ill tl1o !lillt:il'f'il lh l'('lllfii'Y, lll tWI VI I, till I lllitd y dtill'I'VIll ditll~' ll fd()ll WIINIH'IIIf', d 111 tl11 Nt'l tl'r h fo,· n tr'llt' llt~N ilu 111 ltll' ur·hun des ign, rhnt o( 111'il1111 lltnt'pltolfll',lo '"'"'II Nt•d in the wl'ilillf'.Hol i111• Vit·nn ese a rchitect Cn millo Si t tv .

'''I''""

nutc•xtualism [lt•'N m ll cction of essays, Der Stadtebau nach Seinen Kuntslerisclmt C.'m11tl't 1/ (ol'igina l 1889), is accepted by most urban designers as the book th 111 I',IIVt l1ili11 lo th e profession of urban design. Until this time, arch itecture.: hnd lu•t•ll lll illl t' tH.:cd by many great texts, prime among them being Vitruviu s' 'J(•If /lou/" ol/1 1\rc'!JilectU're (1775), Leone Battista Alberti's De Re Aedi(icatorirl ( I • I H~). \ll rlt•t•n Palladia's The Four Books of Architecture (1570), Sebastinno St• t • l~tl 'l /ttt•t' ll ool?.s on Architecture (1611) and Quatremere de Quincy's I lislolit'tll I lft /loJtary (1832). More recently, there have been several massive C0111~·s dt•di ' llt•d LO architecture history and theory (Kruft 1994, Hays 1998, Bit•t'lllllll Ill() 1), nil of which have progressed well beyond Sir Bannister Fletcher's Nl'lldll ,d 1/ /$/ ory of Architecture (1961). While the subject matter in all these ttxi H Wtl jiii ii Hirily focused on the design of plans and the entire vocabulary of :1 t'l' hlit't 1111'1 11 detailing, some consideration was given to the layout of town s ::111d l'illf n, IHII'Iit.:u larly in the work of Alberti during the Italian Renaissan ce. II Wlllt1 1 howt'VC I; left to Sitte to open up an entirely new horizon by cxtc ndi11 g !111 IPN Ihetics of architecture into the aesthetics of urban form, by first inv t·Hi itl''' itt( 11 gl'cnt detail the physical qualities of European towns and citi cs Jh .tl l1111l llt'vivcd relatively intact over the centuries (Collins and Collins 'l9R(,) , Wltdo '• lilt' is known in English for The Art of Building Cities, this is large ly d111• In 1111 i"llt 'l that it is his only work to be translated into English, and many rnon• o't'll ll lill 111 1he original German. 'l'he school of thought that Sitte brought into being is referred ton s 111///r'l/ lltilislll, which focuses fundamentally on space rather than building, 11ltl11tllfdt l lt•n rly th ey cannot be separated. t'll

\l"'l"lm 1\t.I~·I? I~. L •U$. ll •'"'! ir l'"..,.,,.n o "'oin.pkment l'"'m;•t ole '""'''"''" ~~.

~·,.,,. ~""'"'" •.1 • <liru<.,.Jon, ~ui

"'"'""' ~,.,,.._. hum";".,,...., ~~ l~t..:;f.,. ''" h• mado.M.,•tiq• ....

n ··~;, .., f•lt d'm'"''"'' 1..,. ~ .. ·~· ''• r~w ... - d~l.trut , ...;,, ..., ""u•·h~. ~;.,,,..., fd!loit-il ) l"'""'"'l I.e <h><t<m ,\.,tlr<~, SJI<'i><r (•n~thtm~tti.rit") a hrlt c'••• ;.; I•

B

.. "<

"'

q'"'

l''<"•~im "''• qa·,.~ "> • • ~- d~ '"""""~'".......Cnt ..,.,~>;<.. nonH'I"~ .., ,...,,., .• h;, .~ "~' Ia Mill"'• lmmo ino.

~~tt3

~ ~ "

2:261

183 - • - 'j· U3

....

It ~

'j;

~--r------,--.-.

t·~

'

I I I I I t1H~

...

JllJ11\~~ ~

0: Gn.J"-~G

"\~<;~'

IU$. UVR ~ •1.1> \I(IIH IJIIt o

li<lh:

I'Ar.:l.11.-.o"' " tll\11)~,,-1 1'1.

J~ ,.,IOK " " o,

l C:.,a...~ ~ICJ~ ~~~ .....H r1<:

dr

r~

"'"n ·'~

lo ""·

~l"i'"'-'n"l<r de l'o\ teltoc ;15

"'''of<

,pirok ''" M•..Jukot All

L -c

;;~~:;::.;:::.:~~:;: ~:. ·~::.:;•.~ ;:·~:~:~:~:~.... J•at .J.,,,;., Son-a· h" ot

"""'''' '~' ""'

v~ .-- ~ 1.

-

~.. - - - - - •.'.·0. £1

II

r:~ttn><llt ~ •.,,~a,.....,,.J do J'Vnit< d'llobl<•o;.,, ~ ..

Mu....,ille :l•~~rrl(«• to{od~)o:<>llt•nono '"'"

r....m•. c.:.:r.,., ..,,...,.,,rr

,;~nlf~•• lldu .\I<Hi ul~•.

n

I

i1 I '

I! I ~lf' ! ~IJ~1 u !!

/

1·•

I

!.II

il

t:lgurt.l :J6

I.e• Corbusicr: use of lll>o11,11 1 l llt•IIPIIolli

""' llllc •c ·llm•.

o1

l''"l"lil ltlllotl •;ysl<'m 101'

( llillll• l• I I"'"';! illttlllllllillll • 111•~ 11111 ollid At l io.l ~ ( "PYIIf\hl Soc lt~i y. < opyligltl ti:J 11111'• It I I! /A I 1:\r,t•. l 1oiil lltr ll lt\C .~., I 1111do11

lilll// 1

t•: l\l1jll'illlt •d hy pt 'l'l lll ss loll oil fl

1'/

'l'hc co ntinuity of space, in which buildings were mere instances or JWOvidt•d 11 lo'II IISitory framework, 1111d iht• t'tlllltllltily of tim e, which caused :1 111'1'11 111111'111 1't•vo l11 tio n of the tll'hlln l11itoll , wr11 ''" ~ lilt '. the fundamental aspect·s olold11 town s. In the :1ppnr·t•lltl y t " ' " ' " ' 111111ld• nlllll' lllipllltlllt'd, he searched for n11 iollll'l tr· u ~· ttll't', n hiddr11 pill !loll , !11 11 dlo; wo d '"' llll!'lldilll', (' hnnge in rcspo nst• lo !111 dt'llllllld Hof I illll', (Codi111Nnnd Col lins I 1)!{1;: 1•1) .1i llt•'s posi1io11 tt•llt•t trd ii1 P pldl t'tjlllillv wi th llt•ttl"'"'' ttllti \1

r lt tli'ltlll l ·," wi 11 , who11t l~t • tllllllirt'l l !!fljt~IIICtf !111• lrtlll'l' III WN nl lll(lillfil


.1 11d I l'!olllll1111 1 ·lf'.•lill'oi ii1 111111\ tllholll ph111 ~ '1'111 llltdll 111.111 Wl' ll' lllllldH•tll ll Ill Stilt', who dtttio d jill \· iid!llt IIi \11\llo ill httlldt •ll ll )ll'lll lllll \ ilpplit•cl iltd iNl'l'illlill.llt• ly I O t tly til 'll lj',lh jill iiiij!li[jj idC\ 111111 111 d11• ( oll't'l· 111IH11'•1 ol' Ol'dt•t' bn t-wd itt lltllnhers. l•'o r S111 1, 111 duih "1 11 11111111' 111 lo tilt• tt1111 lt tl'llditiOIIS CS tnhli shcd by l'i1 c grea t f:ttt• lt'tiN llttildot ~ 1d tl11 tlllt it'll( 1 lltl'dit•vn l oillll lh•nuissa ncc periods. He was not CO II'-'CI'IIt•d wt tlt oH'it tlll'tt n; ns an nbs tl'llt ll ttlt hut· so ught to derive laws from what olt•t•ttdy t•x lfi ll'l l, 1'1·o m the prc··t•xill lillf nctuo liLy of urban growth. Hence his concentratio11 0 11 clc1ne ntary units W illi"' ut·most concern, particularly in the interconnections a nd relationships lwlwtt ti streets, squares, monuments and private spaces such as courts and <.: t't'Hl'!' tll (Webb 1990, see also chapter 9). Sitte's ideas on contextualism, eX I'CIIHivtl) illustrated 150 years earlier in Giovani Battista Nolli's plan for Rome of I'l l H have frequently been interpreted as reactionary, a retreat into histo ry, 11 11d ,, deni a l of development (figures 37 and 38). Clearly this was not Sitte's positiott ~ iven that evolution is a dynamic process. Mimesis was not his advort tl t•d position, which very much reflected the abandonment of style and its rcpl lltl ment by principles that could grow and change in accordance with the laws ol natural selection, the survival of the fittest. Despite Sitte's overt concern wlllt wh a t he calls 'the laws of beauty', he never clearly articulated what these wt•tt , although a concern for high art, a system of polar coordinates and the rejccli tlll of symmetry - 'the notion of symmetry is propagating itself today li kl' 1111 epidemic' (Sitte 1945: 32- 3) - all dominate his vision. j\II!W ill

lly.urc 38

Examples of contextual urban space as promoted by (A) Rome; (B) London; (C) Copenhagen; (D) Kyoto. 'ull tWI':

P. Bosselman, Represen tAt ion of PIRccs: Reality and Rea lism in

mi ll o

~i ll It •

ir y 1Jt !.~ f/111

1\t ltkl'k:y, CA: University of C1lifornl.1 Pn•ss, 1990, p. 48 .

l'lgur" :17 Nn ll l''l pl.ttl fm 1\nltH •, '''-'' ''II' '•, tltil!"tl!i-'!llt} l',utltll'llllllf',lt t•o,t•.

llowcvcr, :;,itte's :wstl wlit : wll l'l wlntll y ll.lll'm't'lll l'k , reflecting prc-cx istill f', lot1 l111'k l'OrH..Iition s in cilit•H Nlldt 1114 '• d t lll llfl,, rvlt lll ll ll'l', 1<11'1, Copcnha~,_·n , Pt•tll f,1ol Mn 1tlt ttl, Vkl'llf,n, i\ 1111111 , lllld .tpr~! 1111d 111111 1 llllljllt •t'lllt't•s.Dc~pitc t'h t· l11v t tlt tll tlw lll \ldt•t'll ll HlVI'Illl'llll lll lillllilliltl ti1 i1 i·,qll!ll il ltii i i'I'I 'IIHH'h nft'l' l' I <J I (), ll) ll\ 1'\ l t~~tl iNII\ W•IH Ntillllt ltt\1\\tp,ltt II I 1,\t\'\ 11 1 ih~o (\lilj' l l'illll llllt'l'll ll liOil ll \ d' i\tt ltil l'l ltll't· M ndt' l 111 • i 11 I ~~ JlS, .ICl iu • I 1ti • iH i i 111 HI 1! il j\ I' 1iI'd c o11 ·d11111 lt•c t lll't•d tl w 11 11d 11 '" ' ,


,, (ltli lltd ing I e) Ceu hwm t) ettt ll tllte( :.il!lilt, lllt!lllll fl illtli lll ei!I //Jt' IIH•IileHIIII 1ho Ce~ttl m~ 11 l lo w1111 tllld 1itlt ll ll ttWt·H i1 l!u ~~~~~~ t VII IInti 1h n1 'Nt111 e IIH•11 , t11od1 'ttt ll l'l'idlt't iNlt nvt• t' td NI'cl ftlllil ilu11 1111 ill11t·~, 1 ldllf',IH t).W for di .~ ''"' i1 11', tlw lll'hott !.'OIIt t•x t' (ShniiL' I 'J7<,: ~ I ) clti tlti ,J II ~ Ih• 1)11 '- "I'Pill'lt'd t·oday, ltNlit! .~ncin l is NtthStlln t::d 10th<.: t<.:chn i<.:o l i11 ,ttdltlt'llt lt ,tl. di Metiiii Nt' 11 1 t·he end ol i111 111illennium. Shane outlines the meth odology hc•l1111d tilt' ~·o111 <.:xtu alisr a<.:s tl1111 t 1s fo ll ows:

dt·~'H''"'I\

Th e; co nt·extua list is concerned with the figure-ground interface. This is a double• pt·e-occupation that can be confusing, for both figures and grounds have a li((' ol 1hcir own, which can be classified as regular or irregular, formal or informal, tyfn' .1nd variants. Each figure (or its ground) can be considered as a field (zon e), 11 prec ise a rea that has a sharp pattern. Such an area has its center or centers, .t supporting infill or tissue, and a clearly defined boundary edge. A well-defin t>d re la tionship between figure and field is termed a set-piece, with all its parts netd rclntionships known and fixed. Set pieces should occur between fields or at tl11• point of overlap of fields, as a resolution of an implicit geometric conflict. (Shane 1976: 25 )

Th e question as to whether Sitte's ideas are relevant in today's metropoli s 11111~1 b<.: 111et with a resounding 'Yes!' The propagation of Sitte's basic philosoph y 1 legio n. Almost a century after the publication of Sitte's Der Stadtebau, Rob I( I'l l' 1 pub lished Urban Space (1979b). Krier's analysis is a superb extension of Sill !'' bas ic thesis on urban typology and aesthetics, which he has built into his ow11 urban design projects across Europe (Berke 1982). Rowe and Koetter's influt•ll ti nl Collage City, discussed at length in chapter 1, also owes its existenCl' '' ' Sitte's philosophy, as does the even more recent City of Bits (Mitchel1995). H111 we have to return to the late 1950s to detect the origins of another dimensiotl 111 l'l1 c aesthetics of urban design, namely the Townscape movement. A brief gl:llllt :It Der Stadtebau is sufficient to demonstrate that Sitte was predomin:1111h ·oncerned with the figure- ground relationship or what is called the 'gestnl1 1, whi ch tbe French refer to as the 'psychology of form'. His text is infused wi i11 ·ou ntl ess examples of urban spaces in Europe, while perspectives, sketches 111 photographs are limited to around half a dozen examples. While Sittc w11 :l<.:a rl y aware of the effects of perspective, he did not articulate the idea of 'sN1 1tl vision' that drove the Townscape movement in Britain. This new approa ch w1 1 in f:1ct initiated not by any particular text but by a jou rn al called The Arcln'll'• lum/ l~ eview, which published two special iSIHit'S in 1956 ca lled 'Outrag<.:' 1111d 'Co unter-attack' . Collectively, these iss ues l:dd h111'1' IIH' di snstrous environtllt'll In I i11 heritnnce of the Industrial Rcvol 111 io11 n11d ll11• S1•t o11d Wol' ld War. COt·do11 Cttlkn 's 'f'ownscape (1961) wns t'lw fi t'NI e"llll ll i~l'cl '''~ I''"INt' to the situ nti1111 t'x po1wd by 7 'lnJ !lrchitectura/ H1'1'/t•/IJ, Wit ill.' il' is so111ewhnt of 011 OVI'I"IIIItpltlt. 1111111 , Wt 111 ,11 whil t' Sill n' II'H iht•lics WI'I'C co nn· t'tH'd wi tl1 IIH! 1"'"'11"""' 111 td 111\' 1 I 1/ 11//1/1/ Njllll't' lllltilllt \1 lliH'I' WIIN t'IICiost•d tt lld hOIItlde :d, ( llll tll !.li lt!d Iii idc11 ttl ilu• pnsilio11 nl 1111 llhNI' I Vl' l' IIJI'IIII,L:!J Ill' t/1'/'IIS,\ NjHIGt•. '1\, tlti 1 1 ~ 11111 Wil li cl vtHII IIft ,

"'I')''""'"''

II II

li letlill/'. wil lt kill.tf:ll flllli t, ( ~ 111!11 jiiii! OJ u tll ccl tl11• 'l lld li llt' IIIW, 111 11 1 o l IIIII VI 1111:111 ) 1 lltndntllt'tll.tl ljllnl11y •tl tlt o IH'I! tltt1111.1 1 \jH'I'it•llt.:t.: of t.:i ti es. '1(1 Cullc•11 ilu jil'llt'II L'l' of tiiOVt'tll t' lll Wil t dlllllj~lllll t llll , 111 d<.:scribing one E11 p,lish vil logt• l111 1111plt', Cull <.: n Sllyli '' l'ln ill ll ttWIItp, IH'Ijlll'ttt.:<.: in Blandford Ponnn t.:OV I't'N i11 11 j', \\ hltlldred linear yu rd H11 11 lt•HH 1lt1111 Nix different effects of closure, nll gilitH•cl illltlllf',h the med ium of tlw lllnin t'o11d ' (Cull en 1961: 107). Reflecting thL· C t•t•t• l( 1 IH't'knce, Cullen denotes three items in his aesthetic that are paramou11L Fii'N I ~ "l'liL'Ii, by which he mea ns the sequence through which urban space reven ls iiHt:ll 111cl generates emotion through the medium of serial vision (see also Thi<.:l I% I) , 1 1 1 oml, there is a concern with place and the body: 'At this level of co ns1:io11 III!I•N we are dealing with a range of experience stemming from the major imp.1 LI Il 11lt•x posure and enclosure' (Cullen 1961: 10). Third, concerning content, C ull t•ll dt •l incs this as the fabric of the town, which involves 'colour, texture, scale, ~t l ylt•, 'IHII't\Cter, personality, and uniqueness' (Cullen 1961: 11). From a sin gle.; hook , ,mdon Cullen had an immense impact on the theory and practice of III'I HIII 1lt ~s ig n , the tradition being continued through texts and articles such 11 Worskett's The Character of Towns (1969), Peter Smith's Syntax of Cillt ·~ ( leJ76) and The Dynamics of Urbanism (1974 ), Olsen's The City as a Worl~ uf II'/ ( 1986 ) and Nigel Taylor's 'The elements of townscape and the art of 111'h1111 tlt•sign' (1999). :ullen's Townscape, which was based largely on the aesthetic qun lil it:H o l htg lish towns and villages, also brought into high profile the entire idea of i111 1'1'1'11:.1cular, and a renewed interest in Italian hill towns, Greek Cycladic vi ll llgt• lttd other seminal urban forms that have been described as 'architectu re wiilttilll 11\ 'hi tects' (Rudofsky 1969). Neither could this perspective be detached fr·o111 i111 English landscape and landscape architecture, which had significant ol'ij\III N 111 jltlinting and what is termed the 'picturesque', particularly such pnit111't'N 11 t :onstable, Gainsborough and Turner (Watkin 1982, Andrews 1989, Dt• l\oll1111 W02 ). Nor was this limited to England, and the relationship between pni tlf llll\, l11lldscape design and architecture has parallels across the world, fron1 ( :1ti 1111, j11pnn, Persia and India to France, Italy, England and the USA. Tlw W111d picturesque' is derived from the Italian pittoresco. While one might <.:X IWI 1 i1 In refer to the actual properties of landscape, it originates in the word fJI/ItJI't ' 1 lllt·nning 'painter', and the even earlier Latin word for a painter, pictor. 1111111 ( 1992 ) demonstrates the powerful effect that painting had on landscap<.: dl!Nigll tlltd the idea of the garden as a metaphor for culture . In this regard, landscape nrchi tecrure cn n be viewed as an embodi nt l' lll o l t•tdtttra l ideas, which relnlt' 111:111 to lll tllll'l\ 1111d h11s for tll ill enni a symboli sed 11111 plncc in the cos mos (< :osJ•,I'IIVt' I IIH I, H1• lplt I 'lH 7, Swnl'fil· ld 2002 ). Ln nd Nl'il l"' p11int·ings and lnndsl'll lll' 1\llltkll!j i11111 f1111 ellll ll llllllt: tllll tplt•x l'l'xru nl t'l' ft·t'l'lll tl1111 (.:(1 11 he dl'l'OII fl lt'llllc cl l11( i]ll 1111111\li Hit lll l'lll ltiCc_l Wi fltlll flu •i 1• S(l'lll'llll'l' 11 11cl lll'gn 11i sn tion (Biliii"II NICII I'PI I, l ' d'!1ti ~ t elled l\!td I'.J'JII lltt l.ll tt•lld WOO) . ' l'lu• ll'N ilit•lk, SC'Illllllt it ll lllllllii l_lillil td tl liiti !'l !ittit ~ IICI \\'('(1 !1llllcl ~til l 11' olld tlt t•tl llll', lllltd Nt'll lll' pl ll tllllll l\ til Ill tl1 [1 pi'litill l e lill! ~tll jlt I ii VI· t· II liitt!\lllllltlllllllll ' '' lii Nflll \' 1111l lt ilVI' l111cl t1 ii if\ tdficitlli ltitjl;li I 1111 IIIi ell f. ( ill li t ·1 ii i pri HIII de II III" (I Ce\t jll\


l 'r/ 'l , ,\d ,llit 'l l' lill , lltllil lli ti i, l11 i1111 l 11'lft) lhllll l!l!l\ t[li ' '' du 1,111 tll tlldt Hll llli lll IIIII I ( 'ill' ll l llll t tlll i It jtlllll itlll tii tlt til t!II" ii ;lfll; !• I'' h.il ' I ll htllll tllllll ip.111 wl11 d 1 ''" l', ltl IH· tt•ft' lll'd Itt tiN' " tld t:ll!r lljj' i it ,dt.ll tit ,lo lt 1d''''ll lt' lo 11 IH' t "''" ll ll lllt'l', t!ll r'/'t /i/1 lltllll l'rllll , 01 ' tl11 • l llitlll td itl ll thtl 'I '' l""ti iH1 d hy htllll illl lit ll l! ii 111d vvo htti o n, 11 l'u•H..:tiowd c.k ·fi•litt li tl 11f t, ttlltl ll 1111 '"I' td li ti s, th t •T is 11 tltit d 1\ il llll'l', fi n;[' no t·ed by .J a<.:O p<> 13o nl'ndi o In tiH• Nl•· lt 't lltlt lt'lltll ry: 'l'ht· implicati on of this third nature, as ind ~:t• d of Ck••tn'H Ht'l'ond, was its nii P,IIIl'tl lnti on of an existing state of affairs. Gardens went lwyo nd th e cultural l n 11d H~'I IIH , nnd rh crefore those humanists drawing upon Cice r·o, in vented new terminolom· Cnrdcns were worlds where the pursuit of pleasure probably outweighed l'h l' tll'l'tl fo r utility, and accordingly where the utmost resources of human intelligenct• 111111 techn ologica l skill were invoked to fabricate an environment where nature nnd 1111 ·oli oborated. (Hunt 1992: •I) La nd sca pe painting and architecture therefore had a huge effect on acs tltt 'lll sensibilities in urban design, not only in the context of the picturesque to w11 sca pe tradition. What is now referred to as the urban landscape is a meta phol'i n d ·x tcnsion of the concept of landscape into the urban realm. The sheet: sen It• 1ll ma ny landscape projects, and their close integration with the architc<.: t li nd design of the buildings that they incorporated, meant that the design o f l'i t it nnd the design of nature went hand in hand. This effect continues even todn y 111 the idea of 'environment and sustainability', discussed in the previous chn ptt'l, where a new aesthetic is demanded in urban design based upon the principlt• nl ·o nse rv ation, and in all areas of human action.

l illltllll ll •li i 'i ill l tl i llll ll " ltll tili!l 1

o_ltl llllri l' ll ' llll ll l tit! r k l! , ,j

liHII

Itt\

11111111 II! li• W il jd rlllllll 1j\, r11 11 l W ll l'l i hlltt_• d 111 111 11 I1!1HI Iii!tlt 1til il \' ll li' IWI, lll l!lllilllll l'll ll ll ll i'l, !tH IIti h l

'' II'' 1ii ,, tl t~lir r il l titi Apl a 11 Wi\H nil lllrt ll hrlltdll tl r'd 111 o l I111H.:lio11 rtlt ll l ptlll! !ti lll, 1u l1111 "tl-I ' ( I •JH I) ex pl ains in gt'l'lll th•ttlll ho w 1 \' lj!,lli' I'~S Ol'i !-;ill :rit'l't Hii 'l~lll lll Il l\ It• fl l ttdtll tll y !J,::IVC w ~y tO hi s USC of I\ I' ( II O II VI'I III '" rl• •lOt':lt e the et~~itll'\'il tlf', wn tl N tl 11tl hL· had to exec ute. W::~p,ner's l'un vtin tll tl 1 111 dt•t·ived from hi s itJ vo lvL'tll l'tll wiLh architectural enginee rin g, cnl'l·il•d ove r i11111 lti N rationalist aesthetic in urban form, where his acceptance o f nil thi111 tit trdt•t'll stamped him as one of the key strategists in the fun cti onali st tr:rd itiltll , Wt lf', lll'l" embraced functionalist economics, functional planning and ftlll \'1ic111 11 1 ll '" ti H•ti<.: s. N owhere was this more evident than in his plan for a modt~ln r ti ty \l ll tl'kt of 1911 (figure 39). This philosophy implied the acceptance of unli11r ilr' tl tlllllln expa nsion, commercialism, the subjugation of nature (no green bL•II H) ,11111 , tp ll:l list economics as form giving, with uniformity, hierarchi c stnH: IIIi t'll, llltlllli111Cntality and consumerism as the basis of his aesthetic. Schorskc Klllll Ill' l he difference between the two great architects of the period , whi l h ill tt•tl llci ng differences to their simplest components is represented in the ty poloJ', H'

iitl!l rtlld lll llliii iH', All )" rlli • 1 1' 11 111

ttl Ntrect and square: C:unill o Sitte and Otto Wagner, the romantic archaist and the rational funcl'i o11 11 l INl, di vided between them the unreconciled components of the Ringstrassc lcgt" y.

Rationalism Whi chever aspect of contextualism we look at, from Cicero to Sitte to Kri er, WI n re dea ling fundamentally with feeling, intuition, emotion, experience a 11d tl11 • wo rld of the senses, aesthetics qua experience. Rationalism is motiv ::~ te d lty rcnson, calculation and concept, aesthetics qua logic. Going back to th e (iu tlr1 sic)cle and Sitte's attempts to restore the place of history in the contempor·nr \' develo pment of his time, another movement tb at a ffected the aesthetics of urlm11 design is represented by his nemesis, the archi tec t· Ott·o Wagner. Wagner pcrs011i fk d everythin g that Sitte was against, primnril y hi s tH't•d to sy mboli ca lly rcinvt'tll tht• wh eel , wh ere a powerful new id e;"~ rnll11•r' tl11r11 thr • idi osy ncras ies o f hi sto1 )' dr·ivl'S mot·iv nti on and action. Ti c wn s ft~ttd ~t rrll ' lll ll ll )' rr l'll till llillisl'. The tw e11tii'llr ct•ntury in its entirety constituti'd n tlll'll ll t '" ' rt lltllt r l l t~• l w • : t ' ll lwo posi linrr N, lwlwt'l' ll th e co ntcx tu a li s t'lctnpil'irt ~ t ~~ " " tlu " " ' It 111tl 1111tl th v r:ttiott nli NI/ lur lt' tiollnli fl t'S on l'h c oth er (Shnq w I II 'H) () It o Wnp, IH't''s pl :w for Vit•t1f ll t 1 111 11 ' ""' )'(', ir ~ t!fl t_l i l!i lr t ·~ I lt 'l' Sltl tllt• /1, /11 , 111d 11)1' 11 ll pt'll t'l k rtl IHII' jlOIWN II 111i l\ l11 1 \V i II ii i II phlltl ll t 11 11' I ity (li N ll jljltlllt'd tll ill i't l'fi;,, j! l1iii ltll il

llnm•· :11) Vlc •llll ol. 11111/ 11 1

1

(

( )ll n W• l) ', l\11 ll lt ti jilllli

11p y iii \I11 11) \ 1V \)\t['\.1\i tll

tit I

til li t~l j tl!tji 'f It'll Ill

l"" t'll ly

t1 tl!f t.i :H ii Win t

'•I '(

011d d ihli lt l ftl


II

;1111 1 IIIII td il11 llll'~dllltltilll1111 1 1tid•itli•tllliltl',(ld 'll ftl ~ l illlt l~llllllitllilll 'l f1i p111j1•tt " ' " '''''""'H11( """ '111111111 t,p, Lil\', \Vilh tilt t•h it ntt l hqtt.tll ,, ~ I ti Nlll tH I1•11111 illl• lttllllt', Wilp. lll'l, 111 11 ol 11 h11111 1\1•ti~ lllillllllillilllltll•·d•llli•·• llll nlngy,t' lllht•:nl 'd 1 ~ t'NNt'lill' whnt Si tl t' llll)NI 11 hh ottt•d l11 ilu 1 11111\~lltl-~i , II 11 '" '' ''"' y dy11 nmic ol 1111 lo ll'l'l'l,

i ll

1

(Sdtors kc J 98 I: I 011)

Evl'll through the postmodern movement , the l'll lio nnli st approach nfft'l lnl :ll'<.: hi tectura l and urban design with equal fo rce. Funda mentally, ration:1li st11 i n philosophy that architecture has borrowed to substantiate and explni11 .1 pnrticul ar theoretical approach. Beginning with Plato, and continuing thro11gl1 Desca rtes and Kant, rationalism in architecture, despite its superficially log11 .d pos ition, was fundamentally rooted to intuition and the 'eureka principle' ns 1111 basis for design, exemplified in the work of Louis Kahn, James Stirling, M ies VIlli der Rohe, Le Cor busier and others. Empirical research, evidence and proo l 1d 1heir ideas were all cast to the wind. Intuition ruled as much for the rati o na l1 •11 ns it did for the contextualists. While the rationalists were prepared to ndnpt prior historical typologies and to invent new typologies appropriate to th e 1i1111 , the functionalist branch of rationalism sought to discard the ancient city in 11 ~ntirety: 'Their view was that such types and forms are dead without modt'lll mea ning, and that they could be collaged together, as Piranesi collaged Ron1 11 11 monuments, without reference to their past or past rules' (Shane 1976: l. lo) Ove rall, however, Charles Jencks is disparaging of the rationalists and notes, 'n 11 nrchitect must be able to justify everything he does, Laugier averred, and it Wll th is proposition which really proved fatal to the rationalists. Their aSSUtlll'd truths, like the primitive hut or the grid used for all planning, have alwlt) seemed embarrassingly absurd. How could one possibly base a sophisti cn l!•d urban architecture on such simple notions?' (Jencks 1977: 68). Jencks also 11011 :.111 unfortunate tendency of rationalism to go hand in hand with totalitarinlli NIII (i.e. fascism) 'because they both emphasise order, certainty and clarity, and illl ') both tend to look to a classical past for inspiration ... this poses a great sem :111111 problem for architects such as Aldo Rossi, because try as they might to di ssoci. 11 1 themselves from the fascist architecture of the 1930s, their style is histo1·ir. dh lied to it' (Jencks 1977: 74). Interestingly, Jencks classifies Rob Krier and l11 brother Leon as rationalists (although somewhat less irrational than otht•t ~). des pite the fact that they clearly follow Sitte's exa mpl e. So it is clear thnt i111 divi sio n between contextualism and rationalism remnins r~ contested space, 1111d th nt· there a re limits on the explanatory possihilitit•s nl' flitch rypologies (Pert"t, d1 /\rce 1978, Petersen 1979, Berke 19R2 ).

ymbolic Capital 1\ N wt· hnw .~t'l' n , 1lw :ws tl~t • t 1u1 11f 111 hu i1 il• 11\11 dpt i\'IJ 11111 111 di VI' I'St' SO III II' pltilwmph y, lll ll lh t••ll ill k s 1111d P•llliiiiiJ j If! !!liltl ' "'' ,, ll'·\\', ,, ill , d ~ti l ljljll ll'l ' lll 11 111 1 wlul t• W11 11ld •jt't'til 111 ,,,, ,_111 1!lit I "' ' ' ii ill fitltl, ""'" '!Ill' j ltlWI~ illil

''"' It

Ill' "''"

i!ll( ltlllllll'l liiiii N, whidt ll!l\'tJ IHlli l!l lj ~j\i~ lttf dHI Vt',/\ lloiiH•t ll'llll tll 11 11d jlllllll• li ll ll )' dtltttill .tlitlf'. 11 11'1111 ' 1. tit 11 "' l q•ll d Wltilt• Mnrx wo uld M't' lll lo ht• '"' lltdd-t•ly sourt.:t• lot till ) H.,lllltll 1 1t l tl 11111 111htlll design, Sa nchc:t, ohHt'I' Vt:H' II , " ~ l il t \ sn id in 'f'h l' J•;, !1/lt•llllt ,,,,/ 1'/tt/u.w fdJi t'ttl Mamtscripts, m n n is lllltll.tll lu i111• t'X It'llt that he is 11h lt• to ~~tiNt' ltitllst• ll obovc nature to beco nw 11 lntllh/11 ll illll1'11 1 being, th en nt'l is tl1 nl nt.:tivi ty through which he elevates rhi s spt•t tl11 1_ 1p11ri1 y to humani:t.e everything he touches' (Vazquez 1973: 105). Mn t'X l'it•t iil )' ll't liP, II ised the impor tance of art and aesthetics as a fundamental q un IiI y of lwi 111 11111111111. lle also held the opinion that capitalism was basically hostil e to :11'1 Ni tIt 1 ' 1pit :tl va lued production for the sake of production, i.e. in its own inl el't'HI, illld 11111 beca use it contained any inherent capacity to humanise society. Wi tl1111 ' tpitn li sm, art is commodified: it becomes a part of the exchange vn l11t'H nl ,·,,pitn li sm, an investment for the sake of material gain, and part of the gt' IH'IItl 1 ~ tt·m of capital accumulation. Specific paintings by Van Gogh, Ga uguitt .ttlll l'tl 'IIHSO for example, which the artists could not sell when they were nli vt•, 1111 IIIIW worth in excess of $US50 million each, and the art 'industry' has lwt'll ll't'ognised for decades as a major form of speculation and profit. 'I'here is no better example of the production of art as concrete labo ur 1h 11 11 i11 !111• med ieval and Renaissance cities discussed by Camillo Sitte, where th t: n:li lllt't' on crafts humanised and perfected every aspect of building. Here the 111'111111 II'~ I he tic was underwritten by each part of the labour process incorporn 1i II J', II 11W11 :1 rtistry through the efforts of each individual to master and improvt• 1111_11 1 11tl't. Labour had not yet become alienated from production as it wotdtl l n lt~ l 1hmugh Fordist and Taylorist production strategies applied to the hiiiltl ilt J l11dustries. In reality, when we admire the beauty of medieval town s n11d 1 1li• ll l' h ns Florence, Sienna or Bruges, we are first and foremost respectin g'' ln11 11 '" pmd uction and consciousness that has passed into history, namely thnt nl 1111 t 1 hnnt capitalism. The urban landscape so produced was a direct prod11t'l nl tl1 1 lll ll lcria l relations of the time, wonderfully portrayed by Dennis CoNJ•, I'IIVt l11 ~ ~ l lltpter 1 of Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape. I have also dl' lllltll ll'lltcd the paradigmatic role of modernism and industrial capitalistll 111 !111 1ltll'rgence of a rationalist approach to urban form in Vienna. In toch y'N Wt nld , l1nwevc r, we are faced not with one but with a multiplicity of different t.:npi tnl lmlustrial, commercial, informational, cultural and symbolic. But it· is to ti ll' lttllt'r form that we must now turn in order to investigate the domin:-~111 lol'lll 111 ncsthetic production in the built environm ent of the twenty-first cc nt·ut·y. Wit hin the overall co ntext of cult·urc within ca pi ta li sm, Pierre Bourdit•tl w11 tll'f\ \lilbly the foremost· ph iloNopiH'I' dt·ll liltl\ wi 1·h I'IH· conce pt of sy mbolic ~· nplt11l , 1'\l'hnnge and taste ( Sr hll ~ l t' III H III 1111111, llttll l'tl it•ll WOO). Post- Mnrxi.~ t IIH'nl )' tli hjWilSCS wirh the t•igitl di l'o lll ll llt•ll • l•t.•IWt I II 1111:: 1'1 tlllll ild t• hn st.••:llld i'IH • idt'll lllJ•,k: d supcrstru t: ltll't' (• 11111111 ), ttul 1(\lil\tditi:!l tl11 tlillh 1tllit•11 invo iV\'d i11 till )' lll1'111pll0 IH' jli\1'11 11' 1111 '~ 1 ti lllll ll lil til ~ ld r!! l!il\i!'l! 1 111 (\lllllll\ ll)''< II' III H1 idt 'lllll )' tllltl IIIIIIJ',(' ,II'(' illt illl ll lt'l) 11111 Ill lil l! 'l! l!i!ji[i!l!1 1 ttlllti fl lilll \ 1! 11)' lltl ll litllllll pj ' 1!1 l't lt lllllll )'' ln1111 1t tl1111 11 till titliilltl'!) jil t dd t Hltlilt Ill [lti~ 1111 111 · I , 1\n tlltli t ll II J\111 '.1 fltill 1!11 11 lt 'W I ~i lit•ll IIi 1!\'illllltllt I •t jll! :l l "·tlh lirii!lj\111 tlutlll illl ll iiJ ', II tl11


H;l;lllllld lllillll llr Hill pi IIll VIl li II Ill "' I I iiili! tl l I ll!tt!lllit'ii, ,, Ill II c•lt'llllllldl I ll ll ll l' l'ill l (HIII'VIVII I) lll't'dH htt d ltt•t• tt IIIII llt.!!l_l· ! Ul!ll!ltiil_lll tilt IIIIW ,llij •, IH'd Ill IIH• pt•m lm·tio ll t\ltd l'OilHlltllpliott o l s y t~tlu•lll 1· tltt• 111d l11· tttll 'll tHII dt'tll tttHkd lty til l' ll Htlt•c·inli ty of cve ry<..by li fe. Sittl't' luiHtl tt 1 1111\\ tltiiiiNI wl1 o ll y ulk tt tllnl l'c·o cn nny 11nil y with aest hetic prod uctio t• , i.t·. wl11t 1 ctillllt l' 11 11d work coi•H idt th e formnt ion o f culture moves from produ ctio tl to to tt NIIIItptio tt , n process ll t~u th en permits the establishment of commodity cu ltu n: nnd commodity aes l'l wtll ns o ce ntral pill ar of informational capitalism. ln thi s process, needs (tltl\1 snt'isfied ) become overtaken by desires, a process with unlimited potential ltt t m:1nipul ation and control (Haug 1986, 1987). Each commodity cons titlllt· .~ ,, t·exr that can be constructed in accordance with images, aspirations, mea nill f\ a 11d identities, designed and targeted to consumption territories within sot.:it•l 1 o n the basis of age, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, gender or otlt r t nssociation or affiliation. The mass media plays a key role in the continuittg reproduction of referents with which individuals may associate. As with ot lt 1'1 for ms of capital, symbolic capital can also be accumulated in the process 1tl cons umption. In a society where art and aesthetics have been commodified, tht•tt is clearly a correlation between 'taste', the type and value of commoditic• purchased, and the accumulation of symbolic capital which results. The ent it panoply of relations so generated is what Debord referred to as 'the society o l the spectacle', a process which not only applies to art and commodity produl rion but also to architecture and urban design, where symbolic capital in m:tll" cases transcends the use-value of built form (figure 40). Pierre Bourdieu dditt cates his ideas on symbolic capital as a scientific theory of social meaning i11 Outline of a Theory of Practice (1977), and across many of his other work Pascallian Meditations concludes, for example, with a section on the significa 111I ' of symbolic capital: Every type of capital, (economic, cultural, social) tends, to different degrees, I'O function as symbolic capital, (so that it might be better to speak, in rigorous terms of the symbolic effects of capital), when it obtains an explicit or practical recogni tion, that of a habitus structured according to the very structures of space in whi ch it has been engendered ... produced by the transfiguration of a power relation ini'O :1 sense relation, symbolic capital rescues agents from insignificance, the absence of importance and of meaning. (Bourdieu 2000: 242) 'J'h c terms 'cultural capital', 'habitus' and 'symboli c cn pitnl ' nrc central conct• pt in Bourdi eu's work (the French muvre is n lwtt t• r· lt't'ltt , litl'rn ll y tra nslated 11 ' work', but in this context infers Bo urdi eu's t' ill i11• pl11it 1~11p h y nnd wri ting). 'J'I11 IL' t'rn ' h::t bitu s' is simil arly comp l<:x. Lilt•t .dl ) 1111~1 111it11', lt t•ltl (of HI ud y, influen n ·, l'Ott ccntr:Hio n) , h::tbitu s is used hy 1\otm ltt •tr lttlllt\ 11111111 'll tlllt t'l' life-wo rld , fi' O III tl w gt·s turcs o r• c n·trt kcs, to th e pl rHt'll trlll 11111nldt t. '"till pt•n pl t• ont• nssodn lt:fi wi llt : ' Alth ough HO illl'l'inl CS ltl iH ittl·i 11 l111 ·)"'L ifi l 1\itliitl ~ l llitl't' l yd. ty lift•, 01 ,1 1 Hylloll yttl lot' Nodn li :t.:t tiotl , l t~ tllllll ~ I. Itt 1,11 i ji1111 ill' lltHitdll•tt 'N lltt•o ry ol jll 'llllllt' ll li till' di tl jiiiNitio rt ol 111 Ill td tt lti!!li li• lUll fHI li llt ti.t' 1,1 ll11hltll rl iN11 I• itHI

l~lgure 40 Cover from Debord's Society of the Spectacle. Source: G. Debord, Society of the Spectacle. Detroit, Ml: Black and Red, I 'Jill.

of grammar of actions which serves to differentiate one class (e.g. the tlotttlll l\111) from another (e.g. the dominated) in the social field' (Lechte 199'1: •IH) , t-Il ot·herwise, 'The Habitus acts through its bodily incorporation o.f soci:t lr t• l t~ t ill ll ships and meanings (i.e. those involving reference to others) but witho111 ttt•t•dttt) 1o a rticulate them in terms of explicit rules or practice' (Schusterm nn .WOO• ~ ) Sym bolic capital is not merely another form of accelerated accumubtioll itt tl11 form of surplus value, profit, land rent or whatever. Symbolic capitrtl 1\' PI't'IH' ttl 1he added value over the mnt·cri a I value/cost of any product, process or silttlll ltll l l ienee, for exampl e, dw Hy lilholk vn luc of Norman Foster's Hong Ko rq •, SIHIII J h:1i Ba nk, the most t'X IH'II Hivr hrtildi11 p. i11 th e world at the time of itHr:o tt NII III t ion, iS on ly p:'ll'ti y t'I' PI !: HI IIi I tl111 II '4 I IIII I. ' i'lH' itll :tJ',I' it· ge nerateS, whi<:\1 d llt 'H I'I Ill tlt c good t·nsH·, nlpl ul•l;tll )lll l Ill' irii i'I\IJ ,, Jtt >~ htttldl' t 'j, iHnrguabty worth ltH!I'I 111 till' ll HII'kdpill l'l' ti 111 11 !111 111'1! Ctf lllti ltl ttl j', II I lWIII'Ifl ltip of the itlll\!'11' 11 11d wN tl wtil' propt' llll ''~ • tlc t_i tll- ~lti••it til d!fl t1ti' ll l0, !111 ttlllljlll' q11nliti eH of tiH• nr•d t lt•l'[lll'l', itH lO IIIIII tlllli lt\' (1 1 liih!iil !Hi iii !i!td l! li t~ hilll ) ltl dottti ll ill !' it Hillllt lt'dl tll ! ,. ,, vi t~tlllltt'nl ll tltl l1 il•1 i11Hii U11 rii i li~'~ il•r pl 1iiH' i IHIVt ltt' lll' r't llt'tl n wt•~t llil nl


I 'J I

r 111lt11lh ltljlll,iiUIII(Ijl c.f .Ill\' Ill c 1111 cl111 dlt i 1,11 \ tdl!t I III Ii\ dllt lfll 11 IN11 l'\ (l'lldt•d Ill \'1 11 ) 1111 ', dt'l\ll'I~N, fl tlll j,)' IINM Hi tlli tll l, 111 II, lllllllll!lllij 1 11·1 l'lltllld l'Vt' ll ihONl' wllllst• 1\il~. t· Inlis 11pott i1 ns !OIIJ'i.~I N (H"I' I '"'" "" )' l'''~ ~') 'On this hnsit. ",~y 111hol k t'opir:tl" should no t be th o ught ol11 ~ 11 llltd cd t·t qlllnl, htit os a way ol t~ntphn sizing ce rtai n relational features of ca pit a lllll ',l'IH'Ii tl ' (Hot·k· 1999: 182). 'l'hen: is no doubt, however, that symbolic capita l a lso i=ecds back into add<:d vnlue fo r rea l investment and production (Zukin 1991). The aesthetics of urbnn fo rm is therefore intimately connected, on the one hand, to the production ol cul ture thro ugh the culture industry and its associated commodities and, on tlw other, to the accumulation of symbolic capital. Allen Scott points out the essenct• of this process in the conclusion to his seminal work The Cultural Economy o/ ~ities, where he sums up his study of cultural production with the observation that there remain many puzzling issues related to spatial organisation: 'not the least of these is the tendency for the emerging global cultural network to condense out in the landscape in the form of a scattered patchwork of urban and regional production systems, constituting the basic nerve centers of contem porary aesthetic and semiotic production' (Scott 2000a: 216). The production of symbolic capital is also closely related to the production of cu ltural capital and the cultural economy as a whole. In the urban design process this usually means the ability to capture some aspect of historical or cultura l development, and the desire to package this for sale as some kind of new experience that retranslates or transcends the old. This process is most obviously manifested in the attempt to capture the tourist dollar, while at the same time blurring the boundary between tourist and local consumption in order to capture an extended market. Countless examples of this abound, from the famous Ed inburgh Tattoo, to the operas staged in the ancient Greek theatres in Athens, to the repackaging of old Gold Rush towns in Australia and the USA as cultura I attractions. These sights integrate history with contemporary spectacle in order to esta blish economic, cultural and symbolic capital, a process that now underwrites much of the design of cities and their aesthetic assumptions: Und erpinning much discussion of new urban spaces is Pierre Bourdieu's notion of symbolic capital. The reinvention of city centre spaces since the 1980s has largely involved a pursuit of external sources of investment - jobs, companies, tourists and wea !thy residents for example. For this to be successful, cities have to accumulate reserves of symbolic capital, for example, blue chip architecture, loft living spaces, public art, aesthetisised heritage litter, and other gilded spaces, to help create the :1 ppropriate 'aura' of distinction with which the providers of these sources of investment wish to associate themselves. (Milt ·,~ nnd ll nll 2000: 99) At nnothcr level, symbolic capita l also rcpl'l'IWiliN !It t in r..tllnhl<• lluture of humnn 'OII Sumpti o n, whereby severa l fot'ltt N ol t'lllt' ll ttitllllt~ lll lt \ 111'1it• t~n· need to lw m mbin ed to sntisfy the desire fot· ditlt•lt' "'' \ ll l"'ll !i 1\n 1. 1111pl<•ll t'l' g.-n du nll y ttll'nin g inm themcports, providi11 p. !Itt lll ltlll .tlitllll!l '' '"'"'' w11h Nltoppiltg l'l'llfl't·s, rlwntl'l'N, gnllt>ri('s, l't'Niillll tllll l! 1111•_1 ,1 ,-dr ilttiiti •d " 1\lti'N Ntll'h !lt nl n NIII'I'OI\II tt • tnlll'i Nt l'X jll'l'i<•llt't· iN lw1111\ ~~ i flll ti'il • ili r •"•IHH [ ht'tiiiiii'N " point ol

II 111 11 1( ltll lllllllltllll•ll d .li!!tilr·it/ 1!11•1 1 .it 'ltllll tllioll fo1 lou d lll 'llpl<• Ill Vl ~ i t 1111tl lu • t'll t<'l'llli llt•d, '1'1''"' l•llltl lil!\ "' drlltll 111 I'll lwtwl'l' ll tourist iiiHIIm·nl i 1~ ll fl lllllcll I III II Nl'qlll'lll'l' 11f l'l tllltllltit 111 l}~ij~ l! )', tiVII iding th e nt·td IO dot1hll• lip 1111 ftllil 1111 ·~. ti S ir is in pnt vll lillll l111 dMt ! ll ~ ll t <'. 111 n very renl se nse, WI' l\ l't' .til tolltl ll l llll't' th e sen t·ch lot' lllll lt< 'lli lttty 111 tilt• tourist domain bct.:o mes nttllilit•d hy rlu 11111dnrdisation of l'OIIIIil odily Jll:lrk ets, hotels, restaurants nnd tlw t•ntin · pit t dill'! ion of surrogate lOUI'isl ex periences, as well as the homoge nisn rion ol lid s manufactured fo r the to urist industry. To a certain extent thi s tn•11tl 111 l lltl'opy through standardisation is offset by the culture industry, a pt' Oll'~N tlt,ll l'l'ks 'to go beyond, though not to abandon entirely, the notion of llw ttdtllt ttl ,.,·onomy of cities as either (a) the commercialization of histori co I heri t llgt', 11 1 (It ) 1,11·gc-sca le public investment in artifacts of collective consumplion i11 !111 illll'l'ests of public renovation' (Scott 2000a: 5) The forms of culttll'nl v11 p1t 1tl pt·oduced by the culture industry adopt four main forms (Craik 1996: '1·70) ,

I'""'

built environments (amusement and theme parks, cultural centres, t.\ 1 ~ 11111 ,. 1 shopping centres); spectacles (events and festivals ); property markets (internationalisation of real estate speculation alld dt•vt I opment); festival markets (dock redevelopments, tourist-oriented mall s and clltl' l'llllll mcnt centres). ( :1·ni k also points out the influence that these forms of devcl opmcnr hn VI' 1111 lohou r markets and trends in infrastructure development, and notes l'lw i111 It' ll 111g w incidence between patterns of behaviour shared by tourists t111d t l11 INl' 11 1 lm:al people: 'Thus the continued growth of the tourism industry must lw pl tllt tl i11 the context of new forms of consumer development, and in pnr1ind111 , !1 11 l on vergence between patterns of consumption, leisure and tou ri s111 ' (( '111 II 191.)7: L25 ). The overall fundamental shift in the aesthetics of urban dt·~ l l\11 '' I co nsequ ence of these forces is therefore profound, and some or tlu• ll ll lj OI vo nsiderations driving the evolution of aesthetic production have nll'l'; td)' lt('ll ll 111dic::tted above (see also DC 2, 14 and 26; Harvey 1989, Soja 19H~J) , W<• Cilll lwweve r summarise the most significant of these influences as follow s. 'l'he deliberate formation of cultural economi cs ac ross the glolw h11twd 111 hnrn cssing cu ltural cn pit·nl ns n form of monopoly aesthetic. 'l'hiN i11v11lvt :verything fro m ilw lll ii1Htfrtr1111'(' of clot ht~s lo tlw co mmodifi ~· rll in11 ol It lory rcprcsenltd i11 rlrt ltitt•t tlllll l tllllltll 'hilll 1111'111 , 'l'h l· de1r1ands lor .~ y ttthnlit ,,,pi1 11 l h}' !It t' ll l'tH ' " ptll lltl' H t ll tt ·~ n ·~Htlt111g 111 ''" nt•s!lw!'it.: of llt'lH 1111"'' ''' ' p il\\'l.lt ulld ll )ll d utll ~HII, whit It ~~~ sl11 wly l'l' pl w 1111 tlt11t of tl'l tdi!ic1111d jj ltlt pnwn nm l ''"''"'lit )'• \~ ltil l tiii N 111 tdthjlllltllllj, 11 jll'(•d ()II ti 1111 ll "l Ill " " ' Cl'lll i'ltl ll I)' ill! d i I~ N.md Iilt1N •• i"' nll\1 I 1111~11 ( ( ;, ,, i •'1 111 I'll! 1,) Nt•w tltl ll ttl dt !N ijill ,-dtl!ii ~iJ jilli! lll 1 t: ll t li 1 1 ~ l'mi tilt•d Ptlli•HII,, tlti•ulll •l\lttlll di ~ lll 111 tlw N1 ~ w lltl•dlll hllt , whit li ll·!\'P ri jliloll!ll!ld '"'" '"''" tl illtft,tt' l 11il I


p1 111 111111111111 (.llld lolllllllllilo '• j,,,h 11i !111 •11 (lll•tl!dti!i iihllt) . 1111 ll ot; tllllll td tltt• f~I 'W lili hlill lt llli1111 ' '· '"il'l t I, li a\iiiJ\·illllllt lllll!il!ll iill iii JII! l,lili!HIII I\1111 1pJ11'11 1'1l Ill I'OIIillt ll flil', llil ll 'lllll II 1111111111 \' t lt lii l iii '('JH• provi si (ll l of Vl'IIII\'S lot NJll'll lillt .tlld l: [•t'Li li! .lll lll' JIIIH illl' tiOII .IS J11111 11 11d J) III'I.:C I of w mpetilion lwtwn'tl 1 llit ll 111 dl lt.''''.: h11 111 tlw hknll'l'" )' ;onvcntion ce ntres, sites for ex positiO II I'l, ( li )' IIIJII' ll iHi ntllt•l' forrn s of spo11 i11g venues, theme parks, hotel and touri st llll.'i liiii•N, Mll', ll llt ure and 'b lue chip ' nrchi tecture, etc. Th e process of branding and advertising in both visu a l and electron ic for ll ll, , Media -ge nerated environments, particularly at night, have the capacit y lit tota ll y dominate built form by the use of light, image and sign. Physicn l arc hi tecture then becomes a prop to the electronic. :1 Post-Taylorist forms of production permit off-site manufacture of buildinJ•, components, leading to entirely new possibilities in the appearance of indi vidual architectural elements. 7 New building technologies, which arise out of the informational economy, and the manufacture of new materials and products by industry (this result H in altogether new methods of building, new perspectives in shaping and forming of materials, as well as their increased durability and strength). 8 The increased potential of computer graphic languages to construct comp lex geometries, and to portray three- and four-dimensional images. Ward (1996) also points to the consolidation of cultural capital in the design process by large corporate firms, due to the major capital investments required by new technologies and software copyright fees.

s

On this basis, there is no use trying to determine some kind of single universnl aesthetic that is gradually overwhelming the design of cities. Rather the abovl' forces will create an immense variety of environments when combined with specific geographies, populations and urban administrations. Each will have its own partic ular political economy of space and aesthetics. So it is more signifi ·a nt to esta blish the forms of aesthetic production of urban design than it is lO predict specific forms of appearance in particular locations. Here we can identify two central processes. First, regulation of the built environment by the state in t"11 e form of densification, design control and conservation, all of which overlnp in complex ways. Second, there is the idea of theming, a process both volunta ril y Dnd deliberately set in place by private sector interests in order to establish :1 unifi ed aesthetic which promotes the sale of commodified products and experi ·nccs, Disneyland being the classic example.

Regulation 1\ fllnd nln t• nt:11 property in l"lw :H'Ill l111 11 I"'"I W i iiJII '" lid'''" l'mn t is l'i t:ll o l of d~· v,· l opl n l' llt nnd it N llllll lillt 111'1'"'! i11 tPi"lil td '"'w tlin p, (Ct llhht'l'l Whilt• 1lw hifl iOt'y o ltiH• IWI IIII!III iit ll111 )1 lu ,_Uitt •N pctttdt•d In tht•

dt ' l l.~ ily 1 1 1H~) .

lo I j ( \'i\11)1 dtll 'oll)' 1111 ~~~~ h •i•C ol 1\. ltllli . tlttl!tljl,ll I '• II 11 1'1\llliid lltt' rn·lipl!i-1 1 ill 11.1 hitN 1tl 'tll lll t,tli[it!t lil tl111111 t'li!l)', tlott~llio llllllll Ill iHIII1k ll\111 .. ill '" '!IIIJI1 II • 1 111 11 d hii HIIli'HN tli •lll l i ll tlid 't tll'•l t lli ll . ( ell ~~~""()!IVI'Y 1 1'1 '1, (~llllili 1'1 1'1) , Ill• 11 •1~111)', ~'Oili[ HII II IIII lntWli 11 lt tl"il 1111l ll ltl io ii H, ~·tllllhiill'd wllh till' 1Vf' l "' '''tHii ll g dc1ll :11 HI \111 t\ lldutlh , ,qdt ,d hy multinnti011itl t01'pt11.111clll'i1 l11t '' "il ilt t·d in ce nt r:t l htt!~ lllt~NN d1~t11! IHht•lllf ', lort.:cd to acco m111odu1v :1 nt•vt•r t•ildtll)' pi 1'11 1 of hi gh-ri se dvv,•llllllllt'l11 ~ 11 11d th e ;:~ssociated need to bui ld tl w W«ll'ld '-., ll')',ion's or nation 's t:1llcHt Htrll t.:Lurcs (Abel 2004). It remains to lw Nt't'll wlatl 1 ll t•ct 1he destruction of the World Trade Center's two tow ers in New Y(ll·k till II '-t•plt'lnber 2001 will have on high-rise development in general. l\11t Hill tt' till pt oposed replacement project by Skidmore/Liebeskind contains two I M ~ l1111t lt lWC I"S with a spire to 1776 feet, they are significantly tall er than t:hosl' tl wy 1111 ll' [llncing. So it seems that the race is still on. Paradoxically, develop in tJ, co ttlllll l ~~~·h ;:~s India, Malaysia and China seem to have learned nothing fro111 ll11 11hsession of Western economies, particularly the USA, with high ri st•. /\ '1 ol ntbol of national achievement and corporate power, skyscraper art.: hil t't lllll , il~t• most inefficient form of building, will remain part of the domin::tnt ntstiH•ti t nl urban form for many years into the future, if cities like Shan ~rh a i bcl'OIIH' 11 1

Y111 bol for developing nations. 1\ second feature of aesthetic production is that of design control. 1\ HOI\ IHII 11111ities to increase the complexity of urban form and structure exp::tnd thi'Olll\11 th e eight properties described above, so national and local govern mcnt H 11 11 lorccd to deal with the problem of the regulation of the built env ironnH' Ill "" 11 whole, and aesthetic production as a specific subset (Carmona 1996). 'l'lw l'llltl i tpparatus of urban planning has regulation as its primary obsessio11 , i11 11 11 1tt empt to control development and design in accordance with econo tn it 111111 llt'sthetic imperatives. While urban design is wholly controlled by thi s sysl\'111 , tl11 p1·edominant mechanism in many developed countries is 'design !J,IIitli•IIIH't." 'l'hese form a loosely coordinated set of principles that attempt to !J,OVt' lll till dom inant features of any development project, such as building env elop!', 111 1 1 nnJ egress, setbacks from roads, the use of materials and other fa ct on;. ~ntlll t'Otlntries have several levels of design guidelines, and a system wh ert hy 1·1 11It pecific development site will have its own system of design control s nl tm lwtl 111 planning consent. The main problem with design guidelines is th at they ntl t'llll '' to govern urban desi gn outcomes by regulating the appearance o f i11d ivid1Htl trchitectural elements, conflatin g the aesthetics of urban design wid1 tlw Ill' thtti cs of architecture . 'l'hest• nrc ent"ircly different problems, and an nppl'tl(l l lllli ys tem of regubl'i o11 I'm lll'h1111 dt~HiJ•,ll l'l' lll:l ins to be developed. Moving on ro tlw tltini 1111H', wltll ,• lll tiVt' ll ll't'll dy disc ussed conservn ti o11 i11 IIH pn.: vious ch:1ptl'l", I dHIItlll ttt llllllllll till Ill "' tlll't tc'l. Thi s subj ect co uld oW IIP )' 1111 ('lltil·t~ vo lt111W nlld I wtllttid )' 1'."''-' II It' \\' 1.' '• llliplt·~ or thi s proce~H in tlt t• Jll'tllltll tiOII of l'tdtlll'l d ,1111\ lily lldoodi t tlt!li !id, '•( 111111\ illll tlt• tjlll'H tiOI1S l'l•intitlj', Ill tlu politi c1tl hnttlt•J•,tlllllld ' 111\ til111i ,1 iii li•illlt l• till Ill (l111 wlt nt n ·nso 11 , i11 wlt tt14t illlt'l't'H l 11 1HI lttl wltil l"''l 'ilh!'), i1 it: t llltii tl• 11 111 111111 y pl.1 yY 11 1\l.tlo ,· 11,1, 111 till: 111:1Hitt•lll p11 1JIIi lli_ · .. I ' '" u • ii i· i i11Jiltil111 l tilo llll 111 11 111 tl111 t:ltv lll il llllillil


dtfllllllll , 11111(1.1 ~ 1'. 1111. 111111\

llid ltdil!lt , tillll •lltl:lllii t ;!ili iiiiU !S ld III NIIIIIi ld ll' lll oli lt til d11 .d tl\111111111 ,,j li hHii1 ti\i!l uiltu· j,,f,!l ~ llltllllrt ', llu ltll 'lllintl nl N igt~llklllll h11ddiii)IN, 1111d i11 11l ,, qH ~ r lt' lll[l iii W, ~~IIIH' tht· l ~·ss, i111 ljtlolnlion i'I'O ill Mill~S a 11d ll nll ulmvt• 1111d 1lu 111 ttllltl l\ ttdltttllt' to 'nt•sth t•ti d Hn l l wriln~(: litl cr' co ntni ns a certa in clc llt t· ttl ol lrllllt let 11 11111 )' dt•vt•lopcd co unlt'll' rhc frantic searc h for symbolic capita l has rcsultt•d 11111 siltllllioll where 'co nHt' ' vntion' means anything from facadism to holes in the !J,I"Oulld, and the iden 111 'authenticity' has undergone a Copernican shift in meaning. In Sydney lot ·xample, the majority of buildings downtown suffer from this phenomcno11 , where only the facades of the original buildings remain, and 'original' buildint •, may only be 300 millimetres deep. Other examples are not so easy to judgt. I was recently on a design jury, also in Sydney, where a prize for conservation Wll awarded to a project which celebrated the absence of the original building exct• pl for the front portico, the rest of the building in its entirety having been demol ished and the site left empty (figure 41). In Hong Kong, during my ten-y<.'ill sojourn, the last bastion of colonialism, the Repulse Bay Hotel, was tot:1ll demolished and all its historic artefacts auctioned off to make way for a new high-rise development. Due to a property slump, a large hole in the ground remained for some three years. When the project was finally built, the develop<.: I' decided they had made an error and rebuilt the Repulse Bay Hotel on exactly tht• same spot using the original drawings stored in government archives. Tlw restoration was hailed as a masterpiece of conservation (figure 42). Also itl Hong Kong, an important historic government building, the Murray Building, had to make way for new high-rise accommodation to house the government bureaucracy. The building was taken apart piece by piece and stored in :1 warehouse for fifteen years, before it was reconstructed on a new site in Stanley on the other side of the island, now housing a variety of Thai, Chinese and othct restaurants and memorabilia for tourists (figures 43 and 44 ). In each caill' 'conservation' was deliberately used as a descriptor for the manufactme ol symbolic capital, first in the absence of the original building, second in tlw building's total replacement and third in totally removing it from its originnl site. Even from these limited examples, it is transparent that 'conservation' as 11 concept has moved so far from its original meaning as to be unrecognisable, and that the aesthetics of conservation is a wholly negotiable proposition in tiH' prod uction of symbolic capital. llllllpltolngtt•~J

Theming ;lose ly related to the question of sy 11thnl il i'll pil ltl tttlll lil t' III'N ihcl'ics of urbnn dcsi!-\n today is the concept of thcmillf',. 'l'lu•1111'd t'll\itlllltllt'lll ll ltnvt• lwc n :H01111d fm mill enni a in one form o r ::~ n o llt t' t ' (< :,d vi 111 1 l''ll(, ~ I' 111! ., jl)'l I, ( ;1'1'1\0I'y I {)l)' l, Cottd i{> n(' t' 199 7, /)(; 9) bill' tiH'IIIIIII', lt .l ll Ill d) l•f'(' ll IIi"til I" I IIi ll 'l llll'illl'd itll () li lt' HyNil' lll o f (H'~' \IIItlll :1lt0 11 OVi' l' !1 11• ltt!il !(11111!1 )11 \\' 11{'11 \l' lltid 'll l,tlt NNIH It li N i! H' 'hil'ngn l•:'< posil in1 1 ol' I H1J I, ilu• t,1 lt~td !! l's pll:: it i11 11 p j I'll) !111 ilu· l'ntt PtH ili1

rlgure 41

Former baths at Coogee Beach, Sydney: conservation o f dt u 11 W.l )

,tnd ori ginal site.

Exposit·ion in Sn 11 Ft'll tlll ~l"''ll 1 1 1 ~"'I 1111' Nltlllll.lnl of rdcren<;c fot· II PP'' 'I'II ll'Sthctics for 111'h1111 tll ·~>~ lf'·" ,d· tl1C1 111111 (II III " '' I'l · <lVi't' the .'la llll' pl'liod tit I whok tH.'W IH'Nilll'li l tt 1d111 Wltlt I'Ltlttt'. 111quli!1'd 111 V111111 11 lnr tl w ITH IOII I,tlllllll t•lltlllntl·, l{t dllll (1'1 ") tlt' iiliill l;!l lill l! th tli in tl11 11', ,\ ilw wt';l llh y 1111~1 1ut wi11 1Ht' l'o1llttWtl h,td l•ull li;•llt·d hi tijli It 1d111i'o 1 ,.1 111 lllltl dltt'tl tlllli iH 1 \\ holl t l'.l'OI H llthtllt 111111\'it ill' li ili \\1 \iit i11HI1i 11i p: 1 1HI"I'1'd !111' lllillltlt• td ~tH ll''liHIIINih dil y 1111d tdttltii!lii il jll' liioll li u li \H nltli 1 iit ttl• .I Ill 111111' 1111~ 111 ilu_ 1


I lgurc 43 Figure 42

The copy of the original Repulse Bay Hotel in Hong Kong.

The original Murray Building in Hong Kong.

'•ullrcc: 5. Lee, Hong Kong Past and Present. Hong Kong: Form Asia,

1"11 c old agrarian elite still dominated in the realm of good taste, and expected t'lw

·ity to provide them with symbolic capital in the form of an elegant urbn11 ;nvironment, which reflected the sophistication of their country estates. Rubi11 demonstrates that 'the tyranny of high culture aesthetics' had been set in plac1· over the last half of the nineteenth century, where 'the good taste industry' wa s rclntively new. Legislated aesthetics did not take place in the USA until the middlc· of the twentieth century, when the Federal Housing Act of 1949 used the conce pt of bli ght to achieve specific aesthetic objectives (Rubin 1979: 294). The propaga tion of themed environments in the form of expositions were therefore adopted by ·ommercial capital as the central medium for promoting 'good' over ' bad' taS l'l.', ni1110St exclusively in the form of classical, Renaissan ce or hnroque environme nts nnd architecture: 'The Columbian Expos iti on nt C hk:nl',o, <ll' " White City" ('J893 ), I S it was popularly called, had a ph cno ttH'tlili i11 qw I. 11 '1 1 lllltiN, pa lnces, arc hl·s, :o lo11nadcs, domes, towers, curv ing Wll lk w , t)'~. w••••d• d t ~ l il tHI , ponds, nnd ho tnnknl displ ~1ys elicited ecstatic respotii-H'N lt t~tll "' ~ ''''' •·, 111 wltlllttiiH· " Wh it·v City " w 11S link short· of n fniryln nd ' (R1thi11 Ill II "'I) 'l'h(• l'Oilt'!'pt of tiH'III('d ( ' II Vi ll tllllll ' lll ~ li Jtll j\•tlit l illlttll)llt II ltt yt'itHl o l lt'IIII NICti'IIHitiOII N.~ im• t • tl\1\t tiiiH', illlllltlt. tllt_ tl l( lliiiii! l i it tl t' ii \' IIIIIIIIII ' II( H .. 11\' ll II

ll1mr•• 44

rltn ~\11111', 1 llllil!\iitll llllllili o\ liiltiii!'vCi ll•t 'tl.llllt •y Vl ll. q•,t•


1=1gure 46 Hollywood and Highland Project, Los Angeles: perspectiv fpmj< •<1. Source: Courtesy of Ehrenkratz Eckstut and Kuhn Architects. Reprinted by p rmi ssi< HI of Blackwell Publ ishing.

figure 45 The Court of Honour, World's Fair, Chicago (1893), planned by I ),1nicl Burnham. Source: Copyright © Bettmann/CORBIS.

I )is ncy land, to entire cities such as Las Vegas in Nevada or to new urban projects iHii.'h ns Babylon Court at the Hollywood and Highland site in Los Angeles (DC \;sec figures 46 and 47) . These examples are, however, early prototypes of tlw l'O IH.:cpt. From world's fairs to Disneyland, the realisation of theming wn s 1\l'<>grn phica ll y bounded, and had not as yet morphed into an entirely different dilttt•nsion as it has with heterotopias. Old-style theme parks are still mutati11g ll'l'oss the planet in the form of major tourist developments, internationn l <''I positions, shopping centres and multi -mcdin cnviro n11 wnt·s, nnd even 'authcn tit'' vers ions of a copy of the original - Dis1wy l1111 d (/\11111will1) into D isncy l::~nd (< h lnnd o) imo Curo-Disneyland, duhlwd hy 1l11 • lllt 'IH !1 '11 1t d111rnl Chcrnohyl ' (Sw ll 2000n: 2 13). More recently, i"IH•ttllll l\ 1,,,,. ltlll(ll' d 11 pi( rlu1111 of new fol'llts 111 .t lllt't hod of ncsthcticis ing the htdll n1 vi1 11111111 111 111 til (' 11111 II 'N INof sy111holi .. n q>iln l. 'J'il l'Sl' ex t·cnd fro 111 1'11 C01Tiicll l , 111111 111 . 111 .ll t llii Ltllllt 11 111 11 1111 1h1 · N(•w liJ hn11iN111 , whk h l'l'IWt·scnf.~ o t'Wilt' IIIJ"'' 11 ,1 "111ld wi dt' l!ioJI' 1111 111 In 1•,ood Ill HI<· i>IISt•ti Oi l ho iltl'l'llt'fi@ III'V fl(',~ fllt•fiiN 1111d i•!!lili lll ifi iJ iitidl lllti 1tlll ddoil 111117),

lo the hyperreality of the virtual urban stage, exemplified in the IIVIIh ll populated 'meta verse' in Neal Stevenson's novel Snow Crash (Stevcnso11 11)'1 J) ·fhe concept of hyperreality goes back at least until 1972 when Ita lo ( :11 1vII Itt ' :ssays Travels in Hyper-reality were first published in Italian. Calvino poi111 ~ ttlll t·hat hyperreality does not just apply to themed environments as a wholt ·, h111 Itt th e entire edifice of unreality that people choose to live with on a dail y lll tll i", much of which deals with how the past is represented. Calvina denotes v.t 111 111 1ypes of institution in America: 'Fortresses of Solitude', including a rl gn ll t• tl t~ nnd museums, particularly wax museums ('Satan's Creches'); libra ri es, 1111111 ~ 11 lcums for the dead, Lyndon Johnson's mausoleum in Austin being a pa rnlllOIIIII exa mple; 'Enchanted Castles' such as William Randolph Hearst's castle 111 S1 111 Simeon in Californ ia and theCa d' Zan in Sarasota, Florida; and 'Mo n a s tt· J' it~M o l Sa lvation', including Ct' IIH't'vrit•s nnd pl aces like th e Getty Museum, whk l1 Ill) ·ompares to ' tlw ~· ,·oro dil< • lt'.II'N of th (' Rom ::~ n P:Hrician who reproduct•d tho grn nd cm s of tlw Vt'IY IIi ~ tO IIIIIt'y hnd h1t11til iatcd and redu t.·t·d 111 11 ·o lony ' (Cnlvino l 'IHit \II), 111 111 It 111 1\iiillllill .ll tllltllt'N in America, ''l'h(' C<•fl lllli SC lllll wht•l'l' old p,til!liiiJ \Il lo tttl· Ill\\\ ltlt .It l11tl 1111tl f', lt'll llling, clen ii St;d 11111 11 pnt·inn II IHi t/111/111 ''"' ''• wldt jlll llilliti td 111 .111 dttl t•t ll ()( 'li th t• fnkt• PolliJll'lllll (h'lll' 11 ll lll'lllllill tl11111 (i\:liidtilllltd Jf!llfil i l) ( tii VI IIII t•ltll'i dn f('S 1111 1'111111 IIIXIIIIIIIIIV 111 111h11 11 loll Ill ~ il 111i 1!1 1 !!'1 1l , IIIIi (' ,j !it j'l,fl li ttil y 1'1 11 1 ill hit< lit'l ll dl

c;,,.,.,,.,,,,,, 1

1


ha Ty

I

I

In the work of the new rationalists, the city and its typology arc rcn sst•tl t•d as the only possible bases for the restoration of a critical role to ptthlit architecture otherwise assassinated by the apparently endl ess t:ydt• tt l production and consumption. Anthony Vidl cr ( 197H)

Introduction: Taxonomy, Typology, Morphology, Syst<'m 'I' he concept of typologies is one that has permeated urban desi gn in l't')\ll l'tl

Figure 47

Babylon Court, Hollywood, and Highland Project, Los Angel es.

Source: Courtesy of Ehrenkratz Eckstut and Kuhn Architects. Reprinted by permissi on or Blackwell Publishing.

for the a bsolutely fake city, with Disneyland and Disneyworld coming out on top of the list, and as a headache for conservationists, says: The United States is filled with cities that imitate a city, just as the wax museums imitate painting, and the Venetian Palazzos or Pompeian villas imitate architecture. In particular there are the 'ghost towns', the Western Cities of a century and more :1go. So me are reasonably authentic, and the restoration or preservation has bee n ;an·iecl out on an extant, 'archaeological' urban complex; but more interesting arc those born from nothing, out of pure imitative determination. They are 'the real thin g'. (Ca lvino 1986: 4 1) 'J'hc iss ues Calvina raises indirectly a rc legion, pnrt ict~l nrl y th:'lt o ur environ lll t' nt·s a rc entirely saturated and thcntt•d, not 01 dy with i"' ''I',I'N (,·o nl the past, but wi th t·hc reco nstruction and transfontl itli nll n lli 11• fl l l'j / l l'j 11 11 n1tgoing process. In 1111'11 t·hi s ra ises questions not o nl y o l ll11 • 11'1 tl 11 11d i111 111111 ,tl , lilt• 1111/h l•nti (.; nnd th e ina 11thcntic, th e ITue :=~ nd tlw fnL~<', II ~IJ I'Ii llddt " ''lit 1 rltt t lj)'~ ft · liiN 11s to righ1 111d wt·o ''l-1. good nnd hnd, IIHII'II II )' JII Htlludd, ''' i t'ftllllt dh lll 'l',lt j•,<'lll , w ht•ll ltll't•d wilh rli'N th vtic lilll'S tiOIIN i11 llll ltlll dt·~ jl\ lh ii•itt l lif 1\'ftlllt hiiVI' I'I INY 01 ftll 'ltllif lli(' IIII NWI 'I'N, 1

Itt

st ructure, function and form, in its recent history. The word itsc l f dot ~H 11111 belong to urban design. It reflects a fundamental need in many di sci plillt '~ 111 :lassify the component parts of any problem or situation being invt•stignll'd , Whereas taxonomy is the science of classification and is used aC I'OI-IH 11 11 111 \' disciplines, for example in archaeology and biology, typologies usunll y gtt h1 yond classification. Within the concept is nested the idea of the wholt• Hyt< /1'111 an d hence it is strongly related to the idea of hierarchic structures (Wi etH' t 111 Ill Bc rtalanffy 1968, Simon 1969, McLoughlin 1970). Typologies a rc prll'l 1111111 workbench of urban designers. They can be used as tools in problem -so lvi ll i\ Ott r·he other hand, tools are usually made to perform a single task, and t y pt~III JI.II nrc usually adaptable and extendible to fit a variety of contexts. In uf'llll ll ti i•H IJ', II 1'11c concept of morphology is also significant since it deals with spa t·in I Hll'lll 11111 and form. In Herbert Simon's book The Sciences of the Artificial he di s~' II I'IN<'H I 1!1 idea of artificial systems. By artificial he does not imply any fa lsity, f'l•ll t•Lii ll l r·hat the word 'artifice' from which 'artificial' is derived simply 111l':l ti N ' tll tlll made' . In relation to systems, he suggests that the perfect typology is ohhtllll'tl whe n all the elements of n sys t'('lll :11T sta ted in such a way that nOI'hill )', lll ll lu ndd ecl (redu nd a ncy ) ot· IHitllilll\ l't'lltnvt•d (dt•privi " !', r·he system of so tn t· (•t-ml' tli htl .·lc ment). Typologit•N i11 l'•''tlt 'l'ld 11 1/l'lltpt 111 do tl w HI IIIH· thin g, rh at is, to stnl! 1111 it·rcdu cibl c co mpotll'lll ~ ttl" l'•llll t itl tll l'' "'' lt•ttl ttll l 111 l tlxo n o t'~i1i cs, th iti i•,N1111 :lnssificd hul do tlltl ll nt 'lll 11tl) 11fti P l11 'YI'"'"'"' 'Iil th<• l'l' l lltio~tn l nNjH'tl i ,' l'it kn l. ' l'lw It'll t' llttlt lll i t l r~u !H!·tiL!III P 1f1! 11 I"'"' 11111 ~ 1 ~ 1 i11 11 1yp11l111\)' ln1 llt' h :ttl dl•H ij•,ll 111 11 I''"' 1111 111 It \'rd pi til! jli!dt l{"lii 1 ' '"" tl11 llltitllllltilllp ltt •l w' c11 tiH· '' '''''"'lit Hut11 l ilu d,,.,n, til " "' i l,q, wltitll jllitilt ''" 111 t• ,;11111 ,,1, Wl11f,. 11· 1 JlllNN ih il• 111 11 11d tl11 ' ""' ' Iii tilt\ !!lilt! 1'111111 l!liill \ iittJH" W•tttl d lu ltil llhl' d II


d tll l llll'l tl l li \\Ill IIIII II •tl .l\ i lit IIIIth oi H( IIII H ulllltt \\l lttlw , Wltl l li

lildll

1,!1!1 ill !IIIII ' "'" lll i lltlt

Ui

1\ lt•liiplt yN itN: ilw plti loHo pltt n d ftllllttlll ioli! dt'N II',II I•>! IO Wlt•dgt•, Epislv11tology: the development ol llt t• thod s.

11

111 1 1tit

lt.l ll

"l 'li l j\ 11

tttkq tt tllt ilu•ot'y ol' It Ii li i II

ll ftt t tl it tttltlttl

dt·.~ign tll ethod

111

l,ogic: l'l1e cnnons of valid reason ing in ttrbn11 dt•Nigll th eo ry. Ethics: the basic rules of conduct for parti cipa nts in the process of urh.t ll des ign. AsHociated with the problem of typologies is the closely related concept o l ttt odl' lling. Model building is an essential part of learning, and our ea rlit'N I tii Cillories are invariably connected to processes of representing the wo rld Wl' li ve in. The essential question here is whether typologies are also mod els ol processes or structures of some kind. The best way to answer the question is 1'11n1 ltlxonomies, typologies and models are three steps towards some representat·ioll of rea li ty. While taxonomies classify and typologies outline and relate elemen ts, ttt odcls claim to represent actual living and non-living systems with varyittg dt•grees of accuracy. To structuralist theorists such as Troubetzkoy, Piaget a11d !,(•v i-Strauss, the concept of model building was intrinsic to their investigations, Si nce the use of models and modelling is part of every creative art, the question L~ 11 01 'S ho uld models be used?' but 'Does the model in question best represent tlw ph t• nome na under investigation?' It is also wise to bear in mind that the questiott of mod elling cities has been severely criticised on two basic fronts. First, models lt' ttd ro lea ve out those elements that disturb their assumed logic. Second, what is lt•ft out arc invariably qualitative and subjective considerations that by definition do no t lend themselves to quantification, e.g. urban politics (Sayer 1976). Tlw ,~ uhj ective dimens ion of life is eliminated in the process. Closely associated is tlw q ll l'Stion of structure. Levi-Strauss, the great structuralist anthropologist, cia ri fil's both of these ideas. In Totemism he is explicit as to the structural method 111d it·s ope rations. Defi ne the phenomena under study as a relation between two or more terms, t't•a I or supposed. :o nstruct a ta ble of possible permutations between th ese terms. 'Iit ke thi s tab le as the general object of analys is which, nt this level on ly, cn tt yield necessa ry connections, the empiri cn l piH'ItottH'II OII co nsidered at tlw lwgi nning being only one poss ibl t• co tnh ittn lio ll " '" '"'I I o tl wrs, t·he complct·t• s y ,~ t <.: ll1 of whi ch mu st be co nstl'ltl' tt•d ltt •lot duttltl (l t•v t -SII't iiiSS 1962: 2H) I It• tlt (' n t.:ontinu es in Struct/11'111 1\11/lllt~/! ft f,tf].l' 111 1\ll'1' It lt'II V Itll'~·. 'J'Itis co n s i s t ~> of a modt·l llllt llitfll t' •llii ti ll ptd fi , tll tt't'N polld to it H s tt·u ~· ttll'tt l vn lt11 \ tt lltl (tiiilli l! il!l i il1111 t'NNt•ttli nll v tltlllll·o po loglcn l htll lwlttllj lll lr, th r tit tl ili lldil lti

nw 1t tl t' finitio11 ol wld r lt 1111 ljiii 'N IIOII I,~ llltl II ljltitt ' llii ' III N

II I IIUI.IIl t' l ti J',(' III' I'JI I

11 ti ll l, lftt ·. tt!l li! ll ul 11 !I)'H it.~ tll , II 1 ~ tll ,tt.lt1 llf' "' I \1 ltd t It lt ll "ttl h, It llttdt:lji,ll dHI II f\l l wtti111111 t tfft · l~ i l ll f' t lt tlllfll'tl ill ''" lltit (: l ih iii ~ I 'IO tld , fltl tllt) /',il'tllllillt l[ l1 [ltt'll 1i1111tld ht•ll pOSI'li hilit y ol ot•dt•t'ill(1,11 l-1 1'11" nllt'II IISfo t'ti tt tllllltll 11 tdtltl l\ 111 ,1 11'"''11 of mode ls of th e :-W itH' ly )w. 'l'lt i1·d, th e uhov t• p11 tpt 1111 ·~ ttt ttl·t' 11 poss ibl e to pred ict h<>W th t.• tn odt•l w ill t't•nct· if one o1· tltOi l' o l li N t. •lt•ttt l' III S arc submitted to ce rtain modifknl io11 N, l•' inall y tbe model i-d•ould be constituted so as to make immcdint·ely itll t•lli gih le all of the observed facts . (Levi-Strauss 1978: 279-8 0) l ltH' mi ght assume from this that structuralism is a method rather t ha n do<.' lt'ittt•,

111d t·o a certain extent this is true, a trait enduringly exposed by pos tmode l' tti ~itll , llowcvcr, a major problem in uncritically adopting postmoderni st thinki ng 1 tltn l' the question of structure cannot simply be disposed of as a useless COII l'!'pl . l'ltis tends to be the case with much postmodernist theorising, and the tt• t'ttt ' poststructuralism' is in many ways a better concept, one that acco m111 odlltt• lt'uctura lism and tries to take care of its deficiencies. A consideratio n of tlw idt•t t td' structure leads to two common aspects of structuralism. Firstly, we ha vt• ti ll' pl'inciple that structures are self-sufficient. In order to comprehend th e111 it IN ttnn ecessary to consider all ancillary relationships. Secondly, structures i11 l',t'll t• t·nl seem to exhibit certain common properties in spite of their fundnnwlll td div ersity. Piaget defines the concept of structure and its central properti es 11 Ioll ows: At first approximation we may say that a structure is a system of transfo rm nl'io n.,, Inasmuch as it is a system and not a mere collection of elements :1 nd il ll'it properties, these transformations involve laws, which never yield results cx ll'l'ttt d t·o the system nor employ elements that are external to it. In short, th e not io11 1t1 structure is comprised of three ideas: the idea of wholeness, the idea of trn ll s l tt~' lll :1tion, and the idea of self-regulation. (Piagct 197 1: ~ ) Mnny of these ideas are implicit to typologies, in that the concepts of slt'ttt lltt t• tnc.l system, as well as Piaget's ideas of wholeness, transformation :md Nt•ll t'l'g ul ation, usually apply in varying degrees. Apart from exhibiting tht·st• It'll 111res, typologies can be viewed as either programmes or meta -p rogrnll tltl l'~, tit ho ugh in general the latter is usually the case. The difference betwc<: n tl It'll I ·once ms the question of representation at various levels of the problt'tll , h .' t·eating a di stinction lwtwet· n th e surf::t ce structure of any programme o•· o t•dt•t ltt g system and l'lw nu•Lt fli'OI'/IItllltW, whi ch und erli es, reinforces o r d e fitl\'~ II Met::t- progrnmn wHIt t'!' tdNo tt ~ t· lttl i11 lt'l tt'lting how t·o lcn rn , since they opet'il ll' 11 1 llw leve l of lnn J•,ttt tgt•, ll)' ttdud ''"" ''"' "~' ' "'' · Wltilt• Cht·istop hcr Al exn t•d t· •· ll tttl o th ers hnvt•v xpttMt•tl !Itt 1""'"'''1"' '" llltt llttltH ilttllk ltt g th:H p l nys~ sil-\ ttil'icn til pll t't in tli ONI l y p t~ I IIJ'.It 1, I lt'tl,,.,, hi tiiHtt l11 ~ ti •H t ltlllt•tl tltnt· th e tnind wo 1k l1 it•t't trd lit·nll y. Wlt ilt• ih Ill ll li '" '' ''"II " L~t· li tis litttit nlttllt I i lidt t d 111"/ I, I A l' il y IMlit tl Il l


I 11 1'1 ', d111. !lll), i!il:l)' tktl \ 1, l11 1 1ripp111 Jif', tldNI IJ 1.~ 11 !1 11 1 lltlld ll lilll t rt hvh tl t• o111' lrd H•t'l'fll lt'lldl' lll y It• ltlt li·rll t ll) , ii ll illl! til•!! \'l' (111~1111' l >t•N pitt• th is) ll t•l·lwrt Si 1il 0 11 d ni 1111C il t11i 11 rl u·1r· 111 (' ''" I '('' ' ~' ' '' 'lYNit'III N i11 tlr WOI' Id , whk h nr'L' co rnpl cx with o111 ht'III Jt. hit rrlldlit 1 tl11 ;~ : ll lil)l ltt n t.'Orl sidt•r•nltl r I'X it'lll' li e 0 11 tw id, o ur o bser v:Hion 11 11d llttd r•tMIIIIH IIII I\ 1\ y dt•litli tio n, Sll l' h s il.'lll S wo uld a lso lie o uts ide o ur a bility to I.'Oit ti' IVI' tlu•11r , 'l 'hi.Y is in the n:1illl'l' nl 0 111' li111i tat io ns a nd of the distinctions we must •nnke. Whili,: this mi ght lead Otll' I'O t·hink that Simon would be generally supportive of the idea of a gener al tlwo1 of syste ms - one which abstracts out the properties of vario us types o f sys li.'lll , the feat ures they hold in common- he is suspicious of the idea when he sa ys tl 11 11 'syste ms of such diverse kinds could hardly be expected to have any nontri vio l prope rties in common. Metaphor and analogy can be helpful, or they c~111 lw

I I ii~ I

II

I~:

.

I

I

II I I II ~ II/! I ! I I' ' J I WI II ' 11 I II I

II

I li II!Lfi I ' ,

~} ~~lU~. · ~~ ~It 1

jl

-=1=f

II

II . !~I H

r

L-·rtt:;-

~~ -llrur

Ill/ 1=~ ~1f1r= 11

-

_

rf#. -:tilIll r1 . B - .

- lf'l):

1ff, A'rfl -- I 1

J

!J r· ·r--

1W-l-1 r T11W..r. ·m J W.

i

".

I

1

l)

I

I

11

1

1

I

1

· II ·

.

FH ~~-

rr T. . rT1 .. J.

l11 1111 111 I

r

1

~c-f[, ~ ?!rll f' ~' I

_,_Q ,

'-' :-:w

II

1 1~ -

LJ: lJ~w I~ /!

.

rt:, 9' -::·J.lA'~ . . , __ . Ill ~ /:Jl IYirrt '1;t:J. ~f'JG:till·~f~Mlb fu •

11 ·

I

,Ill II I II I

1

1 1

I .II v Ill~

Ill lllllll .,

1-

=

-~~ I} t 1!

_/1 -1-1

I r- -lilf!= =/:c-1

1 1

I I

ll1;ure 49 1

11 111 /'CC:

ttli sleading. All depends on whether the similarities that are captured :11't' .~ if•, tlil t or superficial' (Simon 1969: 84). '!'he basic meta-programmes deployed in human thought pattern s :1 1'1' 1'111 ilr ltltcd through the use of hierarchically organised list structures, whi ch l'tll ll li tlll vin sy mbolic codes of some kind in their basic manner of operatio n. Wt• llr 11 tl !tHing the medium of these codes, which we call languages, structures ilt nt llll ' 11 lll't.:essa ry prerequisite for any advanced intellectual activity. In additi o n th t•tt ' 11 11 tl 11·ce main types of code according to whether the sign stands in n lnJ•, tn d l't• l:t tion of exclusion, inclusion or intersection with the phenomena bci11p. '''P" t'll ted. These list structures can be classified as diacritical (distin cti Vt' ), It/,\ t 1111111 ic (classificatory) a nd sem antic (signifying) respectively. Pierr·c (; 1ti1'1 111d ( 1973 ) has given ex:1mpks of c:1 ch kind of set. A phonological system is hy it vt• t·y nature purely dinl'l'it it-n l, In litllll il ll SJWl'c h, tone a nd articulati on nt't' itrd t• IH' tld cnt to eac h otltt•t, 'l'lr o N ig 11 ~ llil' lt 11W ivt·H h1tvt· no nbsolute men11i11f', , 11 11tl dt.•t·ive their signil'i tll lll l' lll lt dy I" '''' tl u 11 t~ • l.td nm lt i p . A taxpn otni t· syH it'll l IIII L'I-\I'Il l'eS signs ittill II ~ \ IH1 : 111 trf 11'11111 11 11'1 \\ lt ll lt 1ll l' lll'l'l'SH:1 1'y, 1111idit'('l ti11111tl 111d int:l11siv e: • " 11 11 1111111 ti ll t!! '- ~_ ·~i-1 11 il )• iltqtlli ,., t lt lll·t tll'' (<:uit·nttd l•J'l 1: I ') ' l'ht• Lrll t' l' 11 tlti N111 1 tttl tllt lill!ii•!! iii dH• '''""'' 'ilt r• •U tli tlllt l o r· l(•xirn l ~yN I1 : 111 i111 lttd <·M holltttll'll tl tllg 11111! Hi!Hiiil•irllli! 1 !lit.11 il1 r• ~lj\ i lt ltt\'1 '11 ll t'l'I'NIH il y tl q•,tt'l' til IIVt•t•lnp. l .t •t t VI~Ii " ' ' ' 1\(,!lt'i trl h· l:irt It 1111 hi! i 11 1' lit e ,,d,tm •,.,,,.,.,t ' 1.. ll ll llt Htll 1 111 11 t

\ l'lgurt• 411 l'1•1< •r I is1•nrll.lll : 1\r·o tlltllt ' ''" " • filll i' lilll ltll'lld <

opyl'll\ltl (1 ) 11111'11111.111 1\l'!'lt llt•t 1•1,

Peter Eisenman: Wexner Centre, conceptual grid. Copyright © Eisenman Architects.


ii l l!lfi t t i~' "' " ' tl1 ' ' ,; f,!Ct t ' l ~·, d ', ll ttl lu t\'P• lltt•l"l!tll•llll I IHtiiJ ',!" l " lil tll n!ld I! II II I ;.-Il l It• Iii ii' '" ''' .til fl ll:lll il ti llg.·• .11 1. 1t1!\'dl. ! !ltil lt!!il iiidiE 11l ilt t' I)• Ii iii "i ll tl 111 1111 1111 ll d ltj~\ lllf fltlldt f>j 1 il 11 111 1111 II i~ l_llll~llti llli d. dill• III II d lltd lflll t.tl ~1·tl lltl'jj' pt ltH1plt ·~ upply 111 ll l'iN 11 Wld t• lllll ji,t.' 111 d1,, qd1 111 '• 11 11tl f111 )' It t 1, , 11 11 I l lltdt• t ~ l ll ttd l y po l oj•, ll·~ 111 gt' tll' t':tl 11 11d ill! • diNt ipl11 11 ltlt ll fld ll d1'N ij•,11111 fl lllil t !d tl 111 II H' t'\l tllt plt•N l ltttvt• d tww tl ti N i l l us ft': ll iott~-o, I wtll ,,, ,"''ttlt lllt• w t dt nHt wl1[1 lft t' IH' III illll il' fttll t' fio ll is III OXillt iscd. 1

Wi ll ti 1t lll'htlll dt•s ig ll , it is clcn l'l y imposs ible to disl.' tl ss nil f'll t' lypo ll,f-\ 11 "' ;l ,tt lll tvt• lwt•tt dt•ployvd i11 o t·dcr f'O und erstand urban design in th c01·y 11 11d jll .ll ti• illltct.~l l'VI' t'y a uthor who wri tes a bo ut th e subj ect has developed n lypo l"l'.l 111 Olll t' sh11 1W or fo ,·nt. Christopher Alexa nder is probably th e bcsf· cx:lltlp lt• o l tl11 o ll i•l'i ttg n typology of 253 interacting pattern s for designin g urban spnno, 11 ll lit wny ft·o nt th e reg io nal level to the des ign of windows, scats, dorttt (.'r Wltlll•• 111d o th er nrc hit·cc tura l deta ils (Alexa nder 1977). Krier bas written fwo t' llfll hon ks on f·hc subj ect o f typologies, in terms of the elements of nrd tilt't 1111 ..! VO IIlposif·io n ond the organisati on of urban space (Kri er L979 b, 1988 ). 111 udd i1io 11 , I ha ve alrea dy considered or outlined several different typo log ies itt fill 11 O il S dHlptcrs. Whi le it wo uld be possible to return to ancient Gn•t•rt • lpt i 1 1.~ pi nHion sta rting with Plato, due to the immense range of possib il it·k·s I , ·" ' o ttl y il lustrate the idea with recourse to some of the more no table exa mpk·N. I will ilNo limi t this choice to typologies that bear on urban design k nowledge ovt'l lit lnst fi f1 y yea rs, with the single exception of Patrick Geddes (ori ginating i11 I 1J I \ L 'I 'IH•rt• nrc nlso many ways this could be done, for example by fun ctio n, Sl't'tll 1111 1 w· l.' hro no logy, but I will adopt the following three categories for th e rctnni111lt 1 of th e cha ptet~ i.e. typologies derived from associated disciplines, tradi Iio 11 tl fll'hnn desif!n perspectives, and spatial political economy.

I t!'tldl ' "" '"·;np lH.'I fl l trdt til~ 1.. l'l.q oltl!l t\ ttJ \111,1 (1 c:ll lllj lfl . II '".'''il'· tl 11 l',l•:ui 11 .ti t11 .d !H I! 1111 ~ 1 I II I hi '·• !! '- ,._·,fd t 'I W1 IHo1 11 111d, 111 E! Ji,lt !llti!H! \\·1 1 ddt 111 11111tl y II H• lltl t•nu Ill ttl l u I Wil li lltP iltll '( tllmdtt hlf l'l! " ' I t' 1'! 1c\''ll ~! " i ,j "" '"' )', 1/t •ll, l l't/fltl/l t•l / tll ll lllt• , wlw It ddt 'I I1 1111 Ninll'd u,. 'pi "' , ,, .. i ·l~ tli!d l11 ll ', 111 j•,t•ogntph y, v<.:o n o 11 ti~·s n11d ~w i,tl I• 1111 , l> 111'i11g n pt'll tll l td ltttq un 11 )' ltlliidllcss resultin g ft·o m n S(.' Vl' l'l' i llt ll~N ••, . ~_ ddt N plnyed with tlll 't•t• dl tt tt 'll lt itiiH tl ll ti 11 ki ng machines, whi ch later resulii.:d it t lt11 'w lit·t•l' or typo logy of lilt- (Cl•dd<.~s 19 15; figure 50 ). Thi s was argunbly 1lw t•t·io us attempt to rcl af·c the activity of urban and regiona l pla nnin g l'o · llllllltt il:s, sociology, geography, psychology and space. The diagram gc ncr:l lt s 1 , ttlllp lt.:x system of relationships from his original 'place, work and fo lk'. If llltl tld nlso be expressed three-dimensionally, due to the fact that th ere nn• 1\' I 'I'll I levels of complexity in each section. In each quadrant there are th I'Cl' 111 if' il' nctivities on the diagonal, whose effects are plotted in the other six boxes. lu 1,1r h of the four quadrants the three elements with their six derivatives a rc 1ddl't•sscd at qualitatively different levels of functioning, active or pass ive, lt ltil'l'live or subjective. The critical contribution made by Geddes in thi s

'"

I

' (GEOG)

·o~

i

'l'ht• nrchetypa l typology for many urban planners, designers and enviro tiiJI I' tl In lists wn s initiated by the Scottish philosopher, sociologist, botanist, natul'rtll~f tlid pl nnn cr, Patrick Geddes (Delfries 1924, Kitchen 1975, Boardma n 11Y/ H Mt•ll t•r 1994). Geddes was born in Ballater in Scotland in 1854. Gener:lf'i 011,~ 111 I lldl' nt s in n who le series of disciplines have bee n influenced by his work, n.~ wt•ll Ill 111 :1 jo r theo rists in urban history (Le wis M111nfmd), natura l ecology (ln11 Mt I ln1·g) and even in contempora ry d(.•s ig11 ttiO VI'ttll'llf N (1'11 c transect of il 11 Nt•w lhbon ism). Wh ile Ebeneezcr I lo wn11 i Wtt"' llu• ol'i~:i tl ll l'o t· of th e Cn t•dt 'll C :ily lll o vcmcm, which preceded dw lo lt1 11 1lic111 " ' tl11 • 'li•w 11 l'l.t11ning lnstilult', Ct•dd l's prov ided a mu ch-ncedt'd pl1tl " ,." f'l111 .d 11 1d itll t'l lr·clwil fo~tlldn f ittll lo t' lll'h11 11 pl:Jnning in rh e lJI(, ;ll ltf Ill I II dill d l\' itf1 i111 ld11f1 of' IIIOdt'l'll IOW II 111d l't'fiio nnl pln nni 11g, prin<:l plt•N cd tl&iiltitllk 1'f 1·• 111 1 11111 11 , t'II Vi rnllltlt'lil ltl 111 11 11 >11\l' lll t'llf 11 11d SII SI:t i11 :1 hlt• dt 'VI'ft ii1III11II J \~ l li!P j ' "" 11d Willi illf flll 'lll!'d h) i1 11• I<II NI,i:t tl 1\l'tll'. l'll pfit•l' 111'11' 1 l\ 1111111 11· Ill (W l lii \\'till lf.ili jl!_i ll li iltf ,• l111 dt'VI' fll jllll)', ll 11• IIH•o t v o l utt ll lt'lli Nf t'll lllllliiiii Ntlll , lil t' lli lltll tllll i i wddr'll 1 l ll~opl l •ill llll wt•~t• tl1 c

I

I

II

place-Work I o ~~ (Natural Conditions)!

I

lace-Folk

I

P

--- - -- ~---- - --- -~-- -- - ---

work- Place

Typologies Derived from Associated Disciplines l';ll r ic k Geddes

ACTS

1 I 1

\II~

WORK (ECON)

~.o,..

I I

I !"'"~<I I I --- -- - -~------ --1 I I I I

t "'/

I folk-Place (Occupation)

I I

I

t

I I

work-Folk

1

----- ---

I I

DEEDS

achieved Polity 1 and life 1achieved Synergy I (Death, Tragedy) I (Rhythm) I

synergised PolityI and life 1 (Career) I [CALLIOPE] I

1

t

(3,4.

·~

I

~~

c.<,;.

«-+~

I

t [CLIO] I

[ERATO]

[POLYMNIA] +

I

I

--lt---~-t---'·'~~<t- I IIKRltolm ll••" ~/.()' ,. l•lll

r.n l'.t lilt I· '·•·dtl• ' tllltr t• A I lt • lli l t~ll, /111 ltll o·tl•t rf

ond

synerglsod [THALIA]

- - ---- ~ ----- -- - ~----- - -~ I ~0 0~ I ~o· ~o politised Synergy I 0 & c.'(' Love (Wisdom) I

I I

&~ ~

v

~~q\o~ 1 Achievement q,-<. ~0,.,.(H i story) I(Success) (Comocly)

--------+---------r---It I

,~,<V

~~ ~",NaM

'1'-v ~0"

~~~~~~~~i~~:_r~~~':~J __i:~~~;~l I I

rootingSense Ifeeling Experience I ~(3, (Home) 1 (Mastery) 1 ~'<-.v..~0 I I ~ v oxporlonced I ~<?§~0'~nse 1 «-i'J ~f''

II

llftm·c~

I

IJ!I!Ii Jr d11P1 11.1.{' ,

I I


1\'j'olllllf\)' 1\'olil 11 111!1 o111111 ool dttt'l lo,j•,j, pliil llljolllil lnt I" ll jol o oii!ol dto 111\'lilo lllll illl, tl1o tllol !111 ~ 1' 111. ~ '1\) 11 f lll l} ljl, lt ~ !lt.tl i'tlll ilu 1""1, 11f ol llllditdillll ' ll ~ llllt.d N)'llil 'lllil; fliiH I'HN iltoll II'II III;Uo_'o_l il lllllll ollld Wo lll o;np,dtl 11i1ind tW II !i• ll t·~ linn li N I11 N wiH•t•l nl ltl't• d k l'lllt'fl 'lltt ll l)' plllllf',)' w '" 11111 IIII'IIIIIII VI' o f l'llll(l'lllf Hll'l ii 'Y lll'i ll lll pl111111ittg, 11111 lotl11y 1111f•,l11 niNII oil I 11 lll ll lil'il'li n·. \!tilik P tll ntt y plnntwt·s who cume :df t' l' hi1t1, Ct•dd t:N dtd 11111 ,-,iill io11n l i ~o~t• hi s vkws 011 l'l w 111'hn11 tnviro nm ett t, and nlwnys i11 sistt•d 11 11 tl11 •· l'tii of t•lt•nwnt n ''Y eco logicn I, t:<.:o no mic, soc in I and psycho logkn l ll ll' tll IIIIi lwmdntio n for npproprinte plnnning nction .

~.

IIDIID

e

<'onslnn l in

Dox iad i

' l'hl' Creek Co nsta ntin os Doxiaclis was one of the most famo us nn: hilt'l 1/pl IH't'S i11 the latte r part of the twe ntieth ce ntury, pa rti cularly durin g tilt I" 11 lr·o111 1960 to 198 0. He is best known for his atte rn pt to genern ll' n 111 11 "' , hum nn se ttlements, which he called ekistics afte r the G reek work oil~ i:;. u 1111 111111 1o ' rnn ke a settl ement'. El<.istics, the journal he fo und ed, is stiII opern 1io tud 1111_l,i Doxindis wa s born in Greece in 1913, and was awa rd ed hi s dot:tot't tlt• 1'1 i•tll :hni'I OI'tebe rg Univers.ity in Berlin. Despite his academic qualifi catio ns, I )o, II! II wn s first and foremost a businessman who had a rat her chequt:rPd 11111XI ·111igratin g to Austra lia early in his working life where he mnde n lntll trlo wowing tomatoes. Returning to Athens, he then started, in qui ck Slf l \ I'NII il •II Doxiad is Assoc iates, an international architectural and planning firrn ; n lttllll ,, business; Athens Institute of Technology; and Athens Centre of Ekis t iPl, l!i Inli er being a research centre to promote the concept of ekistics, o nt IH'I t\i l supported by the Ford Foundation. Doxiadis Associates carried out mnny l t~q·.• scnle projects in the Middle East, Africa and the USA, his most notnb le fll 'lljt• 1 hl'ing Islamabad, the capital city of West Pakistan, as well as the Univendi)' 1d th e Punjab in Lahore. He was also involved in designing master plans in C lt 11111 lt•nn, Ni geria, Sa udi Arabia, Rio de Janeiro and Detroit to name but n ft..•w, 'll11 Oll l' pl::~ ce wh ere he was systematically ignored was in his own country. Wldl1 l11 cnrried out intensive research on the city of Athens, he was never awartk•d 111i tnnjor projects in Greece during his lifetime. Dox iad is had four major research projects, which occupi ed him for tnu clt 1-d his life. O ne of these dealt with ancient Greek cities; the other three fof"fnt •d 1 ·losl' ly interlin ked typology, which wa s sinl!dt :IIH'Ously survey, annlysi s 11 11d Hy llt Ill'sis. They probably constituted th<.• moNt t ·~ 11111 11-lf iVl' studi es of their· ki 11rl t'Vl' t' cond llctecl. T he first was ca lled '' l'ht• < :ity o l tltt• l<'lltlff't',' which D,> x it~dt tli llllt•d I.:C um enopolis. T he seco nd wn s "' l'l11• ( :tqoif ,rllll ( ;1'1 '1'1'< '\ 11 stud y th nt 111Wd hi s t: Oil l.'l' pt of the dyn amic ci ty ot' I >y" ' 'i'"ll t~~ ' ll11 II !II d Wt!M n dl t•d '' l'hc llull lit tl Colllllllfllit y', t:omm unit y cln ss lo111 111 lt lll Itt! 1 ll olt y ;,f o_: l ~l! llllllfllitit•s. l>o xin d 1" 1 rdt•ns dr•t•w ff'Om n fllldtiplil: it y u l IH IIII ( o l lo xi,11 lis' ccutt·t•ptt rnl fr·nttii'WIIII· \\' it llli lttilj ~ l idill\\' t !id tttd llt:vc:i' ll ll t•t't'd dtfl i11g lti s liltoliflll'. li t• llt'ld tllltf tlt c 1\1(• 1\t tli•jli!ll ~ ioi•H iil ltillllllfll J,,, lt: tlll ( ;llllll lilll

W!!Oll t\A il

ll(il ltiiNil\H' II! VWillll'"llriN~

= IN\)Uft !IIIA.I/(:)tll

~UIIfiiWnf . " ll )\ Ntt.-,t,l.W: A.

-

I11L

lmTI!IAilMY

-

SPI CIA.I I)UIIIllt~{~Q lt,j 1~111 I U ,t.IU!A OPCN f)ll.A.CI n f'AWU.

g

onr.tNA1UA8

IIIDJI -

N-'TION.M Otl()l\ 11 ( 1 NttU lAIINGPOm" tl{)t,j It i\MIIMI

-

AI\.!LWA.Y 8'tA110 N

- - - - OI.OilAII.WfiY IINi - - - PROPOSUS llAII WAY ti W

Aqu orklfl\

~..

"

1~

:. 1,1-

~

~

Dolonlcoi On riiO!IO

3

MotJI()tii Conl!O

4

NorloniiiUnlvori iiV

5

Ed..clltlonlll lil llilOtl•ll~

6

E~lbU\011

AtOO Atorn lc llOitiiiCh lri. NVI II

~

Constantinos Doxiadis: plan of Islamabad (1960). Ekistics, 62: 373 . Reprinted by permission of The Athens Center of Ekistic

IIJ\urC 51 •., 11/f'('();

~

2

~.

have to develop into Ecumenopolis if the world was not to sink i11111 11 il1 1:1tion of total urban decay. Ecumenopolis was his sane version of the ftllllll , l'lw structure of Ecumenopolis was organised on the basis of direction ai !!,I'OWIII lwtwcen regions and major centres. Because the concentric growth of citil'H Wll t•t• n to be the major cause of their decay (each ring in the pattern succcssivt•l d1·vouring the one next to it) and because linear cities could not work in pnw tit I' (11 centre would always develop on the point of maximum accessibility of tIll' l11 w), Doxiadis proposed the idea of Dynapolis, a dynamic city centre w horw I',I'Owth would be directed towards the next major regional attraction, and whoNt' l't'lll're travelled along a corridor that expanded as it grew. He maintained tlt nl 1ltt·rt: was also a basic building block to cities, which he called 'commu nit·y cln lo11r', rou ghly the sa nw nH wlt nt tl lOSt planners would understand by the t ~·t'lll ' llt'if!,hhourhood'. Ftll'tht•l'tll lltl', thi H hn sil' building block was ne~tecl wit hi11 11 ltit•t':lrt:hil.' structllfT o l 111111 '1, l·o it lt dt•litll'd hy tl11• qc111lity of thei r central futll 111111S, :1llthc wny fmfltlllllllllllll li)' tL'"'"' 11111 '" '"' ''"""lil y clnss ten. Ill' npp lll'd tltt•'l<' idt'IIH i11 lt iR owtt dt 11'11 11 (!itt1 Iii'"'' -, I 111ol \:l) M11 r h of this hn s lwt' ll

WD trld


11I iblttt~ UIW9

kll llu •l••u•u••

I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~g~ dJ ~ ~m i.~! ~ ·~~~d~ I~ s

~

~

Q -

c

~ li

, ,

rn

00

s

00

z

~n~a1~g~~~~ fug,~~(jg:

m11•oomm o~~s~~oon1 IIUfillill tillJ~l&JS~[ij/mJU

tillJ

ltHHt"'"

ol•oor•hlltl y

l.. llhlllly

IIJ[~

,~

t!: ~~oa: >- m s~:<e;iQo Rfll~ w ;:; t-<r«__,«OOzzt:l); Q ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ lli g ~ ~

luuo

~ ffi

•11v lv l•t Ivlv1•1:;·1•1•1vlv I•I ..Jvlvl•l•l v

N•ture

~ ~ 5 ~g: (!J

l!l

!It llill !til

l!!lllltllltltl Ill

c

>-.: m ~ 0

/__ Anthropos

1::::~(1

\:

I

++++-f-+-++++-t-+~+-t--l\\\H-1-+-+-H

Networks

~-Jrffiiiifffffll1ffrifl4111tfH~v v •lv

I I

I

I le

:1,,,, v• ·wv' "" v•• ,,, v. vv•v ~ v~

·r:r 1·1;1

VIYI•I V

·~~

I

1 1

c

S OCIETY -

Sociely

Shells

m~ \~Network& \

HS

/

~

v v v

IV

.::;:::~

le

'---Nature

//)<J\/.

v v

"nlhrOpo&

•I• • •

• •

; v v v v

v

v v v

liii·1·1·1·1·Etfvi•IVI·

v

v IV I l@i i::;l

!l"£f1ffj1f.;;•pJjt~tlvl•l v 1 , , :; : : :; : ~ : ; :; : : : ~ : :1:1:1: ::~jj~~

~{:~

:~:j:~

:·::i;

Nature

/Anthroooa

co

NETWORKS

r

!:::~:' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 p; 1 1 IJ 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 t 1 1

rif£~•rsi"~~~· : :~ : ;:: ~: ::~ :~~ :~:~~: :: [ ::,1 ~

0'\

.-

-==:::::::::::=--------------------~ version ol model lor EKISTICS

~~1- llll d

l'l~~urc 53 1

111111"\C:

.I .,

.

Constantinos Doxiadis: ekistic grid.

Ekislics, 62: 375. Reprinted by permission of The Athens Center of Ekisllt , ,

Wl'ittcn up in Ekistics as well as in several personal publications (Dox i adi s I% I , I %H, 1974, 1975, Doxiadi s and Papaoa nniou 1974). Ov<.:r th e course of a l ift'l'iiiH''s work, Do xiadi s I'('Sorrcd to the use of gridN In t' l! plnin relationships bctwt't'll lu ~ idt•t tN, 1111d hi ~ tlnt•t• lw:-dr co nce pts, I•:ntltll'lt tl poli s, Dynnpo li s and 'I'IH' lltlltlllll I 't tlllllltllllty, wt~ll' ~t~ IIPIHlllt • d h•y 11 hn Hiv t'tllt tt• ptun l frnm cwork (t ypollll ',\) " l111lt !11 ' til , ol il 11• t•l t.. lli p.11d (Il l'•"' ''' 'i 1). I 1t:1 e ( ;,•dd1•s' hn Hk~ ' pln rl', Wtt d· tw.ll "ll " • t'li l'lllltll'd 111111 111'11' l1 ltH'Iti N lhillllt, 1111111 1 .~ llvit• t y, lll'iWiil'k H 11 11d tdlt·ll l! I li!i{' ~ i HHHil!ll~ I l l i'Lt dllj\)'! li llillllljlltlttp.y, m io iOf\Y• ll'ttlt Npnt 111 111111 IIHI Iiit lti l!t illtr ! l utu · il\'1' ll.l ~ h lilii'i'lli:li llll' l1 tilt til 111 111 ~ I Yptl lllj'.Y W1' 11 1 111111 ill(llll iid t r! llll•ltllltllll•illl 'tilt 11 1 •liH I pi"i' ~t" lill ol I l1


'I 1111 11/i lltllit' l) ll llfllll itud liill!il lltll tlt "IJ\III' tN In ll ~t' Ill I \II 111i111\ litl lit ll lflllj t'\ IN, 'l'ht• hot N I~ II NI' 11f Jill j'l iol i 1 I jj li llplt• 11 11d t•fft.'l:lil'( llll 'illiHI nl ~t• l n f illg fl~t• l'0 111 p lt•x ify o f flll'ICII''l 11 111 llhtlh l'll l'IHI Il( t'l'l'd ill llt'ltifll !'ld111i._. g t id ,

' ll li ~ i ~

01 11 1tl \IN til,

~

pill,,

I)

ddt'll l'l', t•x ploitntiotl ,

10

I

11 11 11 SITesses three pri11 l 1p11 1 ttlll flldt•tllf tolls when using thi s method: ri nH iy, llt lll

L.T. llall Soci:1l :1 nthropo logy is another discipline that has impacted on urba n des ij',ll 111 I he ge nera l a rea of proxemics, a discipline that deals with the proxima l rei n I it Ill ships betwee n people. One theorist who has had a significant impa ct o n ut·h,llt design was th e anthropologist E. T. Hall (1959, 1969, 1976), specifically be~·n 11 ~1 he offe red a typology and method for analysis that simultaneously co nthitlt d socia l and spatial structures. Hall treats the question of culture as a fol"lll td :o mmunication, and offers a contextual rather than a verbal definitio n in l11 fi:lmous matrix of culture (table 10). He maintains that culture has biolog il'u l roots in the ways through which people experience the world and hm\ they communicate their ideas. Three different types of consciousness or awn 11 11ess may be identified, namely the formal, the informal and the technicnl Th is tr iad incorporates a theory of change based on the principle that peo pl t progress from formal belief, to informal adaptation and finally to technitoul :1n:1 lysis. While this idea can be seriously challenged by more recent rese:1nl1 , it is easier to agree with his statement that 'culture hides much more th:t•t it· revea ls, and what it hides, it hides most effectively from its own participottl ' (ll::t ll 1959: 39 ). ll a ll a lso believed that culture was primarily dependent upon communicariott , therefore the communication process and its typologies were centra I It t understanding how any culture worked. His Map of Culture is based upo11 11 1ypol ogy of ten separate types of human activity, which collectively incorpon ll t' the most important features of human interaction. The first, primary messngt • sys te ms (PMS), involves language. The others are all non-linguistic for111 s ol ·ommu ni cation. The existence of such a model offers a singular matri x 111 u rh:1 n des igners who wish to analyse how space interacts with other dom i11 11111 nspects of c ulture, such as learning or play, and as a means whereby they t'llll hnse the ir designs in the context of a particular culture or cultures, an d uiNtt ts n c ross-c ultural comparative method. PMS uses the following element :tt '" 111 xo no my: :1nd

(i

illt·e rn ctio n, lSSOCiation, subsiste nce, hi s~·x 11 :1 Iity, ,,.,.,·itodnlit y, lt' lllpor:tlit y, lt'.l t'tti ng,

IJ IIC h PM S must be :'\(;Ct'plt•d u l 11 hiologicn ll evcl first and foremost; seco ndl y, tlt rt f

t'l l«..' h PMS may be e:xa 11t i11ed by itse lf, but will ultimately be men surt•d hy if Hf'emi c contribution; a nd thirdly, that the ultimate object is to eX f)OiW 1l 11 : 1\l'tl e ra l network of the cultural matrix as a framework for soc ia l nnd spill lid til'gn ni sa tion.

C' o n stance Perrin Another person who was centrally concerned with introducing a soc inl d i tlll ' ll ion to urban design was Constance Perrin (1970), a time when enviro ltlltt'llf ll l psyc hology and human studies into the inception process in env iro nlllt'llf ll l tk•s ign were just evolving. This movement was in part a reaction to the ll li ll'l fl ' t ll'(;hitect's assumption that somehow his designs could accommod :Hl' t'Vt' t )' l111111an need, provided the design was sufficiently brilliant. The gene ra lt't'll<.'tion In this situation is well stated in the following quotation:' "If anyone wi ll1t•ll11 lt'(;hitects what people need, we'll tell them how to build it. We can on ly n•ll t•tl what civilization and what culture we have" said Mies van der Roh c, I'O w ltcull 11 0 one seems ever to have said what they need; so he maintained hi s prNOI•,Il ii VI lo build for himself' (Perrin 1970: 113). That prerogative expressed a vit •w 11 1 power over environment that is passing: the unified plan, the single id en 1111 11 1 ,1 tH tl" to perfection - whether it is a Mies van der Rohe buildin g or 1.'1 1I1 ~H lilt Was hington or St Petersburg - is always a manifestation of unsha red po wt•t l11 mdc r to compensate for the wholly unreliable intuition of architec t, dt •N il\111 1 when it comes to human needs and behaviour, Perrin made refercnvt• 111 tl11 1110tivational theories of people such as Abraham Maslow, Karen J-lonl <.'y, Ft h l1 Fromm, Hans Selye and others, as a conceptual bridge between envi i'O IItill' llf lil tlt.:sign and the human sciences. She focuses on the work of psy dli illl i ~ f Alexander Leighton in his book My Name is Legion: Foundations for a '11Jr 'UI v u( Man in Relation to Culture, where he fully explains his typo logy of' ' 11';1 •sse nti al striving sentiments'. This typology represents a gro uping of sdW III ilf ll (beha vioural data) that sho uld be in co rpo ra red into a ny ba sic des ign pt 'lll 'l ~ do ng with the usual dcnwf•,f'nphi c sfnfis lk·s, nnd n·q td n·s n res pon s~· fro 111 ti ll' t' llviro nrn ent to fulfilltrtl NJH't ill1 l1.1'l h lll~e tl!~:

I I

i

phys ica l SeCIII'it y; sex wll sn ti sfnl·tioll , ~·x pn·ss io11 ol lt11Nfillf t•x pt'I'Ns ioll o l l11vc , Nt't lll'lllf•, ol lo vt•, 1'1111111f\ ttf ll' t: IIIUiillinl


路 oi culture. OrganisaI rrteractional

tional

0 Communication Vocal qualifiers Kinesics language

Economic

Sexual

2

3

Status and role Excha nge 01 02

Territorial 4

Instructional 6

Recreational 7

Protectr.-e 8

How the sexes Place of inter- Times of inter- Teaching and interact action action learning 03 04 OS 06

Participation in the arts and sports (active and passive) 07

Protectil1'2 ana being protected 08

Protectors (doctors, clergy, soldiers, police, etc.) 18 Care of hea!l! protection a li velihood 28

Temporal

5

00 Commu nity 10

Society C lass Caste Gove rnm ent 11

Econom ic roles 12

Sexual ro les 13

Occupationa l group ings 21

Work Formal work Ma intenance Occupations 22 Family 32

tarri age groupi ngs 31

Communiuty

i8ritory -ID

Group territory Economic areas 41 42

Interactional

Organisationa I

0

1

Community

o-des

Group cycles 51

_earning sroups

&1

Economic 2 Economic cycles 52

Reward for teaching and learn ing 62

Play groups: earns and troupes 1

90

Defence sauc- groups: ;;6ence armies, police, pub lic health, organised rel igion 81 O rga nisational networks (cities, building groups, etc.) 91

Age group ro les 15

Teachers and learn ers 16

Entertainers and athletes 17

W here the inSexual division of labour div idua l eats, cooks, etc. 23 24

When the individu al eats, cooks, etc. 25

learning from working 26

Pleasu re from working 27

The sexes Mascu I i ne vs. feminine Sex (biologica l) Sex (technical) 33 Men's and women's territories 43

Periods ass igned to indi v iduals by v irtue of sex 35

Teach ing and learning sex roles 36

Partic ipation in rec reati on by sex 37

Space Schedu ling of Forma l space space Informal space 45 Boundaries

Teaching and lea rning indi vidual space assignments

Fun, playing Privacy games, etc. in 48

44

~

Sexual

3

local group ro les 14

Areas ass igned to ind ividuals by VIrtue of sex 34

Territorial 4

Territori ality Men's and women's eye- determined li cal activities cycles 54 53 W hat the sexes Places fo r learn ing are taught 64 63

Recreational Men's and Professiona l areas sports and en- women's p lay, fu n and games 74 tertainment 73 72 Economic patte rn s of defence 82

Food , resources and industrial equipment 92

W hat the sexes W hat p laces defend (home, are defended 84 honou r, etc.)

Temporal

5

83

What men and Property that is W hat periods are measured enclosed, women are and recorded counted and concerned 95 measured ' ith and 0\\'fl 93

terms of space 47

Instructional 6

W hen the in Times of dividual learns sequence 56 cycles Calen dar 55 Schedu ling of Enculturation Rearing learn in g Info rm al (group) learning 65 Education 66 Instructional Play seasons p lay 75 76

The w hen of defence 85

Protecticr. of sexferti l" 38

Sc ientific, religious and military training 86

School b ui ldings, training aids, etc. 96

Protectn"e 8

Recreational 7

When the in - Rest, vacadiv idual plays tions,hol~ 58 57

Makin g learnin g fun 67

Recreation

77

lj

=-

--

sta 68

Exercise 78

Mass exercises Protection 88 and mi litary games 87

Amusement and sporting goods and their industries 9

Fortifications, armaments, medical equipment. safety devices

98

Lse tion 89

\aterial,~

em5

99


'I I ' I'II~NN IHII

nl

NjiOIIIIIIII ' II )'l

H Ill it 'lll ll l lll tl Ill fi' I'III H ol OIH•'s .~ol'i. tlj HIN IIIIIII I) 1-ll'rtll'il ll', of lll~' lllbt• •·s hip in n dcFi11ilv llltll lflll 1\ ll !llp; I() 1 St' II SC of h<.:lonui nu to a mora I orde r. 'I 'lwsc esse n tin I striving sentiments represent 'a clustering of human tendcndt•r., u rgcs, affects, drives and instincts' which individuals require in ordt•r 111 fu lfi ll their sense of competence and self-esteem (Perrin 1970: 123). R eflcc1i111\ the work of Roger Barker, Perrin then goes on to develop a method of a na lys 1 bn secl on what she calls behavioural expectations, circuits and events, in 11 11 :ll'tempt to facilitate the design of flexible, liberating and supportive env iro11 me nts over those which are highly structured and authoritarian. In her appcndi' I'O With Man in Mind, Perrin elaborates Leighton's typology into an extensive St' l of attributes that should not be present in order for a neighbourhood to havt• ame nity. While this typology is too extensive to reproduce here, urban ~111d :nvironmental designers should refer to this process as a foundation for d es ip,11 s tudies that have low adaptive costs for inhabitants, rather than relying on 'Xpcrience, client briefs or some arbitrary overarching design concept.

hn~< ic

pn.~ l

Typologies Derived from Traditional Urban Design Perspectives Anthony Vidler Typo logies derived from traditional perspectives on urban form are legion. Proh nb ly the most famous essay that deals directly with the subject is Anthony Vidler's ''l'h c third typology' (DC 24, see also Vidler 1978). Vidler begins by arguing that IT:Jditional architectural production has been legitimated by two specific typo lo g ics. T he first of these reflects back to the natural origins of architecture, the id eo o( rhc primitive hut (after Laugier 1755). The second emerged as a consequence ol th e Indu stri al Revolution, where architecture surfaced as a logical outcom e o l mn ch inc production, exemplified in Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon. To these two, Vid le r s uggests that a third typology needs to be added:

We might characterize the fundamental attribute of this third typology as an ,'spnusa l, not of an a bstract nature, not of a technologica l utopia, but rather of Ihe l'l'ad itiona l city as the locus of its concern. T he city, thnl' is, provides the mate ri al fot· da ss ifi cation and the forms of its artifn cts Ov('r linw J)I'Ovidt' the basis for its r•t•composition. T his third typology, like l'lw fir-.~1 lwo, IN1i1'11 1'1 y hnscd on reason, ~·lnssificorion and a sense of the publi" in~tn·h ilt'llllrr, 111dil.1' tl!r• lil ~llwo, howeve r; it pr•oposcs no p:1nacca, no ultimn t ~'lr pniiH•tJIII~ 11/ 111111 lrl tlltltlll'lll trt•, 11 0 positivt· t·,~v h n 1o logy.

~~~~~!Iii' \\'rill !lit ~ iil td lil l ill{"

V1dlt•r· rl clft•s thnt Ln tlgit' l''s II H'I •I(lhllt lru ' 1 ,J11deo C:ltri.~lifl ll pltiloHoplt y o ( 1111ill'!tly llit [l

(I>C4'1: 11 7)

hn ~li1•

''"' '14 1 w lH' I't• il11• 1 I 111lt ' WI IN fl ill lliiiOIIIII

1111 nllloll ,d IIIOdt•l ll( !l it , 111 Wdll ili l " 1.. ,1 tlu fll ll'dl.' rt qtt.t ttiiiH:d fort •IH. l11 tl11 ll ' lattion lo tilt• rliltl ll ll l ""' 1.1 , Vi,ll;_· l tllflllr 'lil tlt11t tht• II':Jils ft• l' of lht• lt'l'lll 'll ili 'III'M' ltl II IT hit Cl'tlll'l' iiH' II lu•1 IIIII 1 l11J\il tl jllll)\ll~SS ion; he nce ' 1'11e l'X Il' l'll ll l l'flt •ll 11/ tlH• building wa s to lllltllllllllt' 1 lr•1 11 ly II H j.;e nera l spec ies, and it·s SldH qwt It' l illl' l' ehis ana logy wn H l n iii NiolllH'd hy th e functiona l an d co nstit uli o na l l' losN I lh•111ion of the ear ly ll iiH'It'l' lllh ce ntu ry (C uvier)' (D C 24: 318 ). In l'lw Sl'l o r11l typology, the nature of artifi ce domina ted by way of m achine-gc ne r:ltTd 111 11 pi'Oduction processes and the social technologies that accompanied t hc 111 , Ntll It 1111 Ford ism, Taylorism and in-time production today. Robotics in trod ll t..'t'd ti ll' poss ibility of machine reproduction paralleling that of humans: 'the pynunid ol pmduction from the smallest tool to the most complex machine was now Sl'l' rt r1 11 11 a logo us to the link between the column, the house and the city' (DC 24: .\Ill) , ' l'hi s general Weltanschauung was reified in Le Corbusier's dictum that 'n h o11 ~1 IN o machine for living in', and echoed in such texts as Reyner Banham 's '1'/ml/ v 111d Design in the First Machine Age (1960). While the first two typologies Nt•t•l to legitimate architecture as a natural process, in the third the nature of tl l'l' lll II 'Cture becomes self-contained. Vidler comments that the third typology, 11 t•x cmplified by the new rationalists, empties the city of any social con l'l' ll( 11 1 nnalogies with nature, allowing theorists to deal with urban form as a p111'1' l tt.::Jdemic exercise. This is perhaps more concisely described as the idco logil' ll l 11eutralisation of the city (Goode 1992). Overall, the former is a par<~dig111 o l t1rban design that I have tried to disavow throughout this text, o ne w hit l1 hn sically ignores the idea of the production of architectural and urban fom 1 11 t consequence of its social history, thus allowing an approach to urba n fo 1'111 ti Htl l'C)llld best be described as 'content free'. The city is considered as a whole, its past and present revealed in its plt yNiit d structure. It is in itself and of itself a new typology ... No longer is archil't'l' lllr t• 11 rea lm that has to relate to a hypothesized 'society' in order to be concc ivt•d 11 11d understood; no longer does 'architecture write history' in the sense of pa rl it:td ll r i ing a specific social condition in a specific time or place. The need to spv11 k ttl nature of function, of social mores - of anything, that is, beyond the nnlllfl' trl architectural form itself - is removed. , " 'I : I W) An interesting extension of Vidler's critique in 'The third typology' (I Y7H) i ' lh rance Goode's 'Typological theory in the United States: the consumpti o n o l ll't.: hi tectural authenticity' (1992). Goode traces forward the history of t ypo logi ca l theory from Quatremere de Quincy, Laugier and Nicholais Durand to Lt• Cor busicr, Rob Krier and Aldo Rossi. Goode explores typological theory i11 1111 l'Ontexr of a uth enticity, a concept T hove enun ciated :J I' length in chapte r 5. li t tl'l1 ces t he ce n tra l pro bl em in llw liSA to tlw l'l · l ntio r~ N hip lwtwce n type 1111d illl lh enti c it y, t·o d1 e ow ners hip 11 l itll tll \1' 11 1111 ti t~ • • nlllll tfldli'll·ntion of socin l Nj)lll't', in n rn n nn e r l'hnl' it s l•' llt " I" 111 • r tlllllr ' ll' 111 \\'ttll ld 11111 pt ' llllil wit h lilt IIIII' fnd lity. lnl t' l'l'IHi ll f•, ly, ( ;,1111lr I'""" t•i il, r, !d•'ll 1 1111_ ., din till' q11o1ntio11 11'11111 Vid lt•l' ( t dHl vt·)~ i'l'll 't'lllt li tl11 Il l'" '"'''' :iljH ii in i Hi lfliid t' llt ht tll , tlllllllntilll ll1111 ' tlw lui l111 1' nl tl11• t\'jlltiiiJ 'il d tt!·n jf'!! ''" u rtlttll!l',\" it ! tniH ilttl•: r:,, tt llt•tl 'l 11


l!liltlll! 11_1 cfktth'dy 11 ' 4iNI llb'lll ljlllllll wtdli11 tit[l f'!!llliUit !III II III II Y o l Ul lllt'lll 1'0 ' '111')' '" ' hitt•C IIIII', olllt'l llllllllty tlw1 11111 ' ''' Oil" lt lti11 tltt tll!itkt•tp lnn: ol nn;lti lt •t llll ll l di Nl tHII'NI' liN Wt• ll nS wit'hitl illl' tt'll lllt 1d ltll ht dt•t l'OIISlllllCt' l.'ldlllt i ((;litH It• 1 111) J.: l l ). 'l'hl' projcct of the ll l'W t'nl lll tll dlsiN tdso co nfo rms lu 1h l'it'N I ol ,lltotht•l' three typologies given in !lillie•· (I '>H'>: C1) ns fun damenl'ol lu11 llt•n•sstii'Y for· u11d crst:l nding the city: 'l'ypc I : Lows for the generation of the urban object, i.e. laws govern in!-\ t l11 wnys in wh ich buildings can be aggregated to form towns or urban n1'1 '11 these we mi ght call the laws of the object itself. Type 2: Laws of how society uses and adapts the laws of the object to givt· spati al form to different types of social relation: these we might call the !till' 'rom society to urban form.

Type 3: Laws of how urban form then has effects back on society, i.e. the old iss ue of architectural determinism: the. laws from urban form to societ'Y.

Oren Yiftachei/Chris Abel Moving fro m Vidler's large-scale historical perspective, Oren Yiftachel and Abe l offer typologies of theory and form respectively. Yiftachel's paper of 198'J 1 se lf-expl anatory, 'Towards a new typology of urban planning theories', in whit It lw attempts to systematise the academic discourses surrounding urban plannitt)l for t·heoreticians and practitioners alike, although it now needs to be brought Ill' to date given the sixteen years of development since it was written. Nonethclt•s th ere are few papers since that time that have attempted to explain the ovcn dl dl'vc lop ment of planning typologies with such clarity. As a foundation for hi t~ typo logy, he divides planning theory into three streams of thought, where cndt one ndd resses a fundamental aspect of the planning process. Each of thest• n•prcse nts a self-contained debate about the analytical, formal and proced ut·ttl tspc<.:ts of urban planning. Yiftachel also comments on the functions of typolo gics: 'A typo logy is a tool with three basic functions: it corrects misconcepti01111 tnd confusion by systematically classifying related concepts, it effectively orga tt iz~·s know ledge by clearly defining the parameters of a given subject, and it luri lit·ntes theorising by delineating major subparts of distinct properties a11d fori for further research' (Yiftachel 1989: 24). Si n<.:c 1982, Faludi had dominated planning theo ry by dividing it into t w11 typo logies, name ly procedural and substanriv c t'l wory. Yiftnchel points to ti ll' wOI'k of nnothcr major planning theorist', Philip Cookt•, wl to rejected Fnludi ', distin ction ns a false dichotomy, on tiH• h 1 1 .~L~ tl111t NllhNtll ttl ivt• nnd proced ut·nl tltt•o ry were n o t two separate thcOI'it-s Inti tl l't' '"NII t \' ''"IH't iNol tlw s:1mc tlw01 (CooiH• 19HJ ). Cooke elabo rntcs tltt•t•t• I\'I"'" ,d plittt tdllg nnd spnli nl it• l ~t tloll s: llwol'il•s of the devdop tllt' lll 1tltH '"· •· till "'It ·• "' t I~~~ pi tt1111 inl', pt'Ol't'SI uHI tiH•OI'it•s of tlw s1n1 e. As ,, l wH~t frn t' ~ itthli l11111 . tlu lj puliul di tll t'ttsioll nl pllllltdlt)\, Cool,i• nlso offt• t'N 11 11 · ~X It ' tt ~ irP 1\'l ifiltijl\l ill ~ r• , q i, dll' di ~tn ttlilttuttt l ~thtll ll ll lillkt•IN, 11 11t ll j•, llu •ol'it~N u i' drt ll!i li lllldlili t!i;d! lrlH'I tfl lll liiiiiN1 1 ~ II hll'ltN ltll

"" '" '''II "'

1'1"' ""'1'• dt•l·it~i oiiH(<:llltl· , I q il \, ll ~ 1 , t1 ~u ,' ,-, ~). 111 Nttll'""' ry, Yi It 11l'l w I •1111 '·N II 11

plnnnin~

~inn· prc~<.:l'iptivt•,

lltporlll ti Cl' of 1-lillli' tlll'" ' y 111 tkt•AIItllllll)l hnw fun ctions, pl 11 11 ttlllp, tl wory, whl· th t·•· tHthNtttllt h•· 111 l" '"''dtll'nl, ex planato ry or i nvt•lopcd by, and t; tlll wddt•d Itt , tl w ku l tconomy of th e state. Yifrnchcl tl w11 his typology ol phttlltltll'• thl·ot·icH round the types of debate indit:n ll'd thnv c: the analytical dchui L' (' Whnt is urban planning?'); the urban form dchtll !' ('Wk1t is a good urban plan?' ); and the procedural debate ('What is a p,ood

~tq~1111iscs

pt~lll

plt~nning process?') (see figure 54). ( ) n the other hand, Chris Abel has, as a central concern, Yiftachcl's sc<.:o tHI tlt•hnte- what is a good urban plan? Abel has been at the centre of mainSI'I'Cil tll tl'!'h itectural theory and criticism since 1969, when his landmark article 'D it<.:h i" I'• till' dinosaur sanctuary' was published in Architectural Design (see also i\ lwl I'IH8, 2000, 2004). In 'Analogical models in architecture and urban dcsigtt' (I )88 ), he outlines a general typology of the models that have traditionally bel'" 1 ti Hl'd as paradigms in designing cities. He argues that a mature architect will dcsil',ll 11 nccordance with some overarching theoretical model of architecture: 'Thh tIworctical model constitutes an a priori system of integrating ideas or interprcti Vi' ll'llmework which largely predetermines all the relations between the differl'lll ltt~:t· ors the architect must consider, and the values he attaches to any of th cnt' (i\bcl19 88: 163). Abel then enunciates fifteen analogical models that have hnd 11 dominant influence on the design of cities. These he divides into two groups. 'l'lw fi t·st group of eleven models are sources of formal imagery, and involve the Ufll' ol llll't·aphors in their construction. The second analogical group are also II H!taphors, but refer to processes of some kind, rather than formal imagery.

powt•t· l~tl

(lormal analogies Spiritual model :lassical model Military model Utopian model O rganic model Mechanical model Artistic model Linguistic model Commercial model Identity model Sci f-build model Process analogies Scicnti fi e model Syst·cms rn odel Sn ni otic nl(Kkl I ,l'gll l 1110tli'l

Wlt \lt: tltl ti lyptllllp,y ,tlt t ttlf•I Wj p i'[itlll ll llllllll\l~llhlt· IH' I, Aht lllllll I ill lll ;i

II

tl' ill' , md~tnh ,tl"" '" ''l" to 11 I il (I II tl 11111dt ~ ~ I!I p1lll (II


r

I Iill lllitllyth ·II""''''"' 1

('Witlll

IIIIIII

I~

lltlllllll hllllllilil'l")

II

I'"' lllllllll llllllllio•lodl ("Wiutl

I~ lllllllllllltl••lll 1'1~11

I

t t1tllilllll D/iy

""IIHII/111111111

ll 'illllllllllf 1 1 111110~9' )

I

I

I'IIH I "l~ ttl ti t 'lo lj'.ll ll]i!\1\'.l!itlif \\' li1 1 j, l 11111111 l11• IH'pi il'i lf t' d 1111111 tilt d t'tl)\11 jllllii'NN tiN II Wi111i1 , !. /Ill_( ' ' ! \>! it "In 11 1 dlllllllltl lll IIIOd l' i iH i'N illhlt N IH • d ~ !111 ltlllltiJ',tl'lli pt'tK'I'IINt'H '"'''i ll't'd ''l'l"''ltllli ty 1:o" sc~.; min g l y vndl t'fiN Vttlll 'l)' 1 illllllt' t' pr·e t:llioll td tl11~ U~ 1111 1 d 1111l tlp l1111 (/\hcl 1988: 179). ti11

I''"''"''

+ 10 10

~~~ >b Krier 1 0~0

Design meth od

1030

Architectural design

1940

'1950

1960

1:1,;urt' 54 Three typo log ies of tll 'hotlt l'lolitit lll)lllt""l 11 •

0 , Ylfl,wlwl, 'Towllrds n Nt'W 1 ~ 1 '"1")11 11lllil, '" i'ltttttlitll lilt ''"'' "'', ln vf!·clll/l tt•nt dnrl f'I.JIIIt fntt ll: 1'1111111111!1 .lilt II,, ,;,;u ,,, 1' 111'1 '1 1'1, p , .1 1. Hllpt'lll lt •d lty I H'I'IIIhHII)tl of l'loli ltd, I o11dnt1, S tl/ 1/ ( 't':

Whi le Yiftachel is concerned with urban design as a central chord in tht: pltiiiiiiiiJ jll'ocess a nd the production of plans, and Abel is concerned with tlw m t1111l 111 ode ls that are used in design, Krier adds yet another leve l to the idt'll 111 typologies in his focus on the actual discernible units of space that a rc nv,ti lnltl t to the designer (DC 25). Krier's book Urban Space is subtitled Ty pologi(tl / tllltl Morp hological Elements of the Concept of Urban Space and t he book l11 II t'll tirety is dedicated to revealing the inherent geometry of urban for 111 . Wildt Hob Krier has sketched out the framework for a typology of urba n spn ct•s, tt 1 tl scful to note that urban design has spatial and building typo logies 1\H t 11 11 t•lcments in both theory and practice. Squares for example have bee n ex hnwu ivcly researched (Zucker 1959, White 1980, Vance 1981, Webb 1990), nnd 1111 snme with streets (Rudofsky 1969, Brienes 1974, Anderson 1978, J\pplt • yt~n l 1981, Moughtin 1992, Jacobs 1993, Celik et al. 1994 ). Related to stree ts i11 tlu idea of arcades, and Geist's Arcades: The History of a Building Type ( l lJH ,~) 1 t·xemplary. Fascinating also are the typologies of housing revealed in Htlt'llt' tl ',, /\ Social History of Housing (1986), one of the few that locates howliiiJ 1ypologies in their economic and social context. In addition to th(.'St\ Splitt Kostoff looks at the totality of elements of urban form through out h i11 1111 )' 111 hi s books The City Shaped (1991) and The City Assembled (1992 ). In contrast to other theorists who have chosen to remove urban forn1 lt•t 1111 tilt realms of ideology and politics, Krier's work is deeply engaged with sif\111i lt till t·heory. It is also difficult to separate his work from that of his broth er I ,t•t 11 t, '"HI n reading of both immediately reveals major common interests. For cx: llttpl t•, 111 Leon Krier's book The Reconstruction of the City (1975) his c ritiqt H' nl !Itt modernist project and the Charter of Athens is devastating: 'One ca n Hll y 1II ttl 11 t the post-war years, the European cities have been more destroyed bot I, plt yNil nll y and socially than in any other period of their history, inclu ding tht• t wn world wars. Our generation is both witness and victim of a cultura I I rngt•d y ''' which there is no precedent in history'. He allocates the blame fn irl y 11 1111 sq uarely on the radi ca l comm erc ialisa tion of the city, facilitated by ma nilt•N IIt of the modern movt• n~t · nt sur h ns th e Chn rte r of Ath ens, assisted by ' dw o 11 !11 rccts as se rvil e <.:>Wi' tttiniii ' I'N n l p, t'iltlll ,4IH'l'tdntion ' (l<l'it•r 1975 : 38 ). 'l'hc l<l'it•l ' ph il osophy is wt• ll Sllllllttitl lip l1y tl11 l11llll w l11 1\ Ntll lt'llll'llt from tlie sn nw scHIIt ,. tlllltili'tllli [l ' :11111111 tlu ''''"' lu tl tll' ol' dto •·t•ogrnplt y. 11 1 t, ltil ! 11i lltit111 14 11i tl11 1llo /IIIII ~ nl tll'li stk Ot ' lt't llliit td PI'OJ•,t'!~NN, ""' ill 1111 lt illo_:t I IIIIi tti "' ' ' I it )' lilld il ~ ht ''"' \, 1111 11 11 NIH' li tl liN !' "'"' Wllll ' lll , ' 1'!11• II'V IIIilltlll il li \' ( it Iii! ill Il l iifl ~ Ii i\\- 1111 lii ll 1i llli1 .!111 •• IIIII lit !11 i1 11 !111111

T he pmh lt'lll ol

t'tlt illllld

.'1\ llllOI l'i11d it s tllllil\•lf t hoii N Ill tt


lnu l11 ll•t !111 lilt Hit I ttl l11thlit dttl ,

il ~ ~uditl

11111, 111

11 1 L"lt r. t! li t'· l!t

tiii

tftii l] tllllll fllli ttl "'' (l·~ tliH

I '.1 7St ,1'.1) The Kriers, npart f1·om :1 som cwh:H fllnd nnH'II It dlm r\h 11 ,l,llt ll lll d yNlN, nlso 11 htlll the idea of architec ture as a history of typ(.!s, ol Nt•fll t•llu•JII N, spll i.'t'N, llldldllil l forms and elements of construction. In many lid s 111 ig hl· lx: <;nll c:d 111111111i aesthetic since the primary focus is to delineate form s of urb:1 n spn <;c out'sidt • til any aesthetic criteria or assumptions. Also shared is the rej ection of the botii'J\1'111 attachment to monumentality, typified by L.N. Durand's Typology of ftt NIIIII tional Monuments in favour of the actual production of the 'ordinary fa l)l'il 1tl the city' resulting from building traditions. Implicit to this position is th e t'<'C'tt) nition of alienated labour as a result of modern methods of production, and 1li t responsibility of architects to recognise this in their designs. The use of hist·m 11 ally based typologies of urban space are therefore viewed as part of a COil! pit ' process of restoring the public realm, reconstructing the social life of th e l'i I), reversing the process of alienated labour, reconnecting the city to its historit'ill origins, and providing architects with a meaningful social theory of arch itecllll t (see Leon Krier's plan for Luxembourg, figure 55). While these intentions renm i11 laudable, the continued erosion of the public realm, increasingly commodifit•d labour and a neocorporate state definitely restrain these ideas. Rob Krier's position in 1979 echoed that of his brother, and was centrn ll 1' focused on the need to systematically reveal the typologies of urban space, w hit l1 underlay the aesthetic character of cities. He maintains that this is dOLthl)

wn y~o~

LUXEMBOURG CAPITAl[ OE L'EUROPE

ll l'tl 1iillll l }' dill Itt !Ill tli !Hi •i II " IWt lllli'lll 11' 111111 y. Il l l•ttilll ll I Uii ii iiJ\l'OII Il !J111 lltllll illl·i,:ltll 1 1111 ~ 1 1 1

l11• ttl li llid ont•d ilw llltdlli ttll , 111 1u;tll 111 11 11 tl ll' ll , th ~l l' nrt S ii ppot· t ~·d by tl11• iidtli l\ i iiiNNt'N 1'11joycd tlw lllilllll' 111 lt•ldtl ll lill y lllld, being at an ndvnnccd stlll\t' ol dt •vtl ll plllent, n1 ntc ri olly sluqwd tlu• iH·rlods whi ch followed. (two s n t'Cvo il ill 11111 ll 'lll ovc, so as to spen k, fo1· th e Acarlernie lived on, and indeed, comt• iiNt•ll 111 lun·u the sa me confused hi storica l sense as the followers of the revo lution. (Krier I 'J'/ 1ill t l )

l11 w·de r to redefine the concept of urban space, Krier resorts to two bn sil' ltttlil l•lt 'lll CI1 tS, namely the street and the square, which have their counte rpnrt Hw tt l1 i l11ti ldin gs, i.e. the corridor and the room. Reinforcing an approach to urhn11 Itt! I q t111 nn anti-aesthetic, Krier warns against the confusion of aestheti c 1111d N)' li lro lk ca tegories, on the basis that both categories can transcend the itllll it 'd hll ltlll t.:tionality of spatial forms, and that these are retranslated and a dnpH•d In n II II I.' hi storical period to another. His classification is therefore as va hw · ll 'l't poss ible, concentrating on elementary forms, their relationships and t i'Ot1 Hitttl1 nti o ns (Cuthbert 1985: 95-8). Krier then demonstrates in great detai l how lut pncial types originating from the square, rectangle and circle are combi111•d, tl d ive rsity of forms of intersection of street and square, morphologi c::~ I IH' I'it ~M 1 llt' hnn spaces, the modulation of spatial types, and the complex effec t· ol tl11 whe n incorporated with building sections (figure 56) . While Krier's typol!t j\)' the most extensive of its kind, focusing entirely on form deprived of n 11 y N1H I1 1 y111 bolic or other meaning, this of itself generates problems across n fn i 1Iy wII li cld. For example, no matter what the typology, architecture is Httlili '' 1 t deo logical appropriation and intervention, and cannot of itself so lVt ' 111 11 It 1 pro blems. A return to a rational architecture will not change this fact', 11111 It ill lw a ble to reconstruct the city in the form of quartiers or districts, wlt11lt 11 11 • l'lltionalism demands. Similarly, it is unlikely that any architectw·ol ld t·tt l"l I.'(Hlld have the desired effect. Because of the tendency of rationalism to l' liljill i11e order, structure and clarity of classical forms, rationalist or JWO\ ht II'C hitecture has in the past lent itself to fascist politics, surfacing predotll lill lllt in Ita ly and Germany during the 1930s and early 1940s. The paradox hen• I t~ tit th e ra tionalists, particularly those whose recent history incorpora ted lnw I Nt:1tcs, are force d either to accept the use of rational architecture or to r'<'N t'lll lll t k ise its imagery, the first be ing historically unacceptable, the second id<•olttl \ 11 ll y unacceptable in nn; hit"l'~ tur:'l l te rms.

Chri stopher AI<'Xtlllll' •l rlgurt• 55 I < on l<rl< •r: lux<•ntl>ntlln I'll tl tii 1 1

1

SU /1/( '{ .'

I. '""'' '''

''1'111

1

('1111'•1 Wlillliillll • I II \

II', ~llf /i/li lf ii/f, j/ /lp

11 IIJ, l tl'?tl, I IL:I .~ ,

/\1 one lt•vv l, it iN il11j li t1411i ld t 111 ~ l1 1 tft 1 Tlli 11 11d dHlil f\t' fr 'OIII tlu td l 11d I ~ jl() lit ('ll ll lilp lt•H. 111'0 111 Ill ~ I Ill it ,I Wtti I wl ll1 t v p u iiiJ ', It'~ '" .111 , ii i ti iliiti •

iittl i 1'11 llli•nrks of urhn11 l', tu w ' " ' 1 d, 11 1111 ,, l11 ~ w01·k is r·<•plt•tl ' w \'!'''''' H 11/ f ln /111 1 WI' 11 1'1' II Ili tll fl fli , Iii Ml/t '•· Ill• 1M llt NI ~I I


.....c

·~

"' (T)

I ~ 1:>

"'

.!:;

.Q

E:

c(.)

vi

(\)

.Q

Q)

"""'

0...

c

E: [;-

~

sc "'~i!

;S .<::

~

ro

·~ 0... <fl

1:>

c

"'

..0

~ ~

'-+- ..0

c::

ro ...: Cl) ,_ ·.:

(T) (\)

::J ~

0

0

<fl O:::

"' c2-

·~ (Q) ~ cr\ ro O'\

c"

~

~

§

I

~I

"21 C1l

·- 0 b.O "C 0 c: 0

1\flll!Vl

_g ....~

e- ~

lY INJJi JO

~ a

wuum

Q;

1.1')

-~~ ~:::l

~

"'

t;

t Ill

.

,_

u c:

Jnoneo

I

I•

I

I

..o . 0 .... eli:: ,CIJ

M

II

htii'IIIIINI llltllt'I'IH'd with tlul ,\tt-.iJ' II III '" ' 'MPI wht•t't•hy 11111111111 ~<wttlt•nHitl \'t•lnp 11 11d dl'fill l'H dt•H i!',ll 1111 ' !111 jiii H I'HI'I of iiiVCIItill!\ ph ysil'11 l tltit ll\il wl tlt '1 pl ll1 )' 1H'W ph ysicn l Ot'dl't', oq•,ll td•~o~~ tmu, lonn , in respo11 HC to lum ti!lll ' (.\1 lllth•t' I %'1·: I) . !lis nn:llysis of ,111 Imli nll vill age is a classic of it s kitHI 1 Wilt I tht'Olll',h th e t·hirtccn central typologies that structure th e vi lh gc ntul dt•llttlltlll Ill', t hl' complexity of the social structure that results - a t:1 xonon1 y ul I II b IH't'dH t·ha t arc to be met in its reorganisation. The adv:-~nccd llllltlutll i\ dt• plo ycd in Notes was the last time that Alexander used hi s m:ttlwn ltlt! hnckground to deal with complexity. In 'The city as a mechani sm fot' NIH~I II Itl lnu11 an contact' (1966), Alexander enunciates his typology for gt: tll't'll lilll \ tit ll'lntionships necessary to avoid the alienation that results from ud111 11 lil t p11pcr that was closely followed by 'Major changes in envirOtlllH'IIt ll l li t't•quired by social and psychological demands' (1969). Both these papers owe a significant debt to George Simmcl, l.l'wi:~ \X' II' Abraham Maslow, Eric Erikson, Alexander Leighton and others who hii VI' l1 directly concerned in some manner with the socio-psychologicnl dy1111111 lt 11rban life. The latter paper is in response to the ideological posit·ion Ill' 111l11l In regard to architecture and planning: 'While architects dream of 11111:tl )' 1, l111aginable futures, the planners talk about piecemeal incremental pl:lllllitll\• •1 visionary architect is imaginative, daring, but completely mad. 'I'Iw pl11i1111 pin ns are utterly and boringly sane; though based on facts, they off1'1' 1111 ' 11 prehensive vision of a better future' (Alexander 1969: 1). This cxi Hil'llti ,tl p ition does not seem to have changed over time, and in a re(;t.'lll 111111 vi Alexander states 'I have never had a rule in my mind tellin g nw tl utl I 111 pnrticipate in the psychotic process we call architecture tochy . .. 111111 wl nrchitects now claim is simply being laid aside as the nonsc nst• 11 11;~tl lj (Sa tingaros 2004). Alexander's ideas of patterns, later to beconw iltlh• lt'ldt In A Pattern Language (1977), are also present in the 1969 pllpt•t, '''lt CIi describes a typology of twenty patterns that are central to mnillllltllltl f\ t •~n l logical health, and defines a pattern as 'a new cultural instituti011 , IO)W iltC!' \' t·hc physical and spatial changes needed to provide a settine: fot' tl11~ imli 111i lt

(Alexander 1969: 82). In other words the concept of 'pattern' is much more tha11 11 Hit11pl1• lt11iltl block, and accounts for its social context as well. Alexander's hn ~dt lilt ljll ltll nnd disregard for social reality is also inherent to his patterns, for t.'X,1111ph• 11 is no central business district in his anticipated city: 'The city con NINIH11l l1 drcds of small residential islands, each with a different subcultur<.:. lk ii NII Y th e edge of these islands and falls off towards the center of each on~·· (Ait.,HII 1969: 84). But centra l business di stri cts are not established by pl:11111i111', l111 mnrket forces, so unkss 11111• J•,t'IHrid of t"11 c m:-~rket it is unlikely dt nt d tlt·~l l' vt.: r be pl ann ed withlllll tl 1111 n11 t l1 y 111' t't'llll't!H, whkh Doxi:-~dis p1·opONI'tl. t : th l' l' ffcct·s of ~:k-rtt'llllll 1llttlnt\ltll• llll.ttl , till' llllt•II Nil y of tlwsc ct•ntl't'll ti l'tHiil'llll y siH·ink 1'1 'tHII tlll' lt !'II ,, 111 ltt l'lll , t J,tl , utl v tl11~~ IHtl :1 nt·w lllllt'll lll ,tl~o IH't•dH 111 Ill' ~~~ ~ 111 t'l H r 1'111 1\ l!'l\11·" '1' 1 . •11 11 11p.h•N 111 Wtll'l' It ln111 lll qlpl'llt'd nvt•t tlu Ii iii lo il l \' \1 ': \ \ 11 Hi Iii~ Wli t lr . i1111l II Wlllild lw 1111 111t


I I

tli;\'!lllltlr r 111 il11 111 ' ' lt111 1 \•1 I 11 -1\'1 litdlt llf l'd llitltuplr •r I , lltl 'l llfopi ,llll hf I ul 11d- lip 11111!1 IIH• jli'I'N I'tlf IIII II\ Wid It• IIII I) lltt j I Wll Vll lt lllh'N 11 1 I!Ill Ill liNI il 't l'lll wmf<, Nttltlt't' 11( ( )rr/r•t (WOJ11 rl ), It 'PP<'I tr't•d "' II is sti ll inthtr (•d with tlw ldt•n li HIIt , 1.4 " "' ' " ll tnl t' ritiqll l' is 11 01 Ol'<.: trratc, his lll ot'ivot'ion lntrd nh lt• n11d Nt• rlfrtrr ott httlll.liH'. B111 if wt· f·okc n look nt the wo rld nro und us, i1 is no1 :rhot rt to llttd. 1 11 Co p{·r·nic.:n n revo lu tion in th e wny it goes abo ut· doi 11g brrsincss.

l'r · t~lllrr lti.~

A lr•,,tllrlr•r '~ ~'

At~.~ lt· n lin,

'I ~Jt'

.~rl llll'

'l ' lti,~

l.thlc• l 'l

h i,~

Implications from Spatial Political Economy

3ot ln logll'i d

In this fi na I section .I will cover a few of the n1.orc signi ficant typo logies 1hnf t' III L' ' from co nsiderations in critical theory a nd spatia l po litica l eco no my (:dlltilll Foucn ult might be co nsidered a ca tegory in his own right). Here we sec n1(('"11 i n:lntc fo rms of space to the processes through which it becomes configured, 1\ idr need in so me cases to evolve new vocabularies to describe them.

Analytic(ll tension

11 lllnnlr.ll systt•m

1. 2. 1.

ri~

1111 ·lo-spa tia l

2. 1.

~ ys t e m

tcr Saunders

2.

A bnsic typology of theoretical forms of urbanism has been given in S""'"'', ( 19 86' 245i table I 1). These "'e not typologies of cities but typologies of thi" 1. 1bout urbanism, each of which has its own history and analytical tension. !-, 111It :oncc ptua lisa tions are extremely useful for urban designers as a basic rcf('l'l'tlt 1 11111 point for substantial ur ban theory. Implicit here are the ideological 111ight usc in analysis, a point that enunciates a chosen vision of what ul'l '"" tct·unlly mea ns. However, these conceptualisations do not include more r(•tt lll developments in postmodern theory, where altogether different i1 r 111ight add va lue, albeit from an altogether different perspective (see seccion11 1111 Soja nnd Appadurai below). Saunders also points to the fact that in the sea r·d, l11r nn ' urba n' object of analysis in order to support the idea of a scientific ui'I H11I sodology, none of the above approaches was successful, and he rl critique of each one, delineating its strengths and weaknesses: 'wlt lll wos II Ccdcd, and what was to prove so illusive, was the specification of SOIIIr socia l process or phenomenon which could be related to a physically boundnl ll't·o withi n the co nfines of the nation state' (Saunders 1986: 243 ). 1'hi.~ 1 prl'dsely what Manuel Castells atte mpted to do.

"'I

choict.~

persp<.·~· r

providt·.~

.~ignifi<.:a nt

Mc~nu(~ l

l'vl rtrttr t• l Cnsw lls is o ne of th e gn•, tt t'HI Nut trti iH

11 111111 1~ u lo11r fiiiH ·, soot <.'O IW wl111

l (' ll llli ns nl dw fordro llt' of <.' l'ifitlll llli11LI1111 "'"Ill 111l•1111 dt •v(• lop "H'II I. I It I • 1/ol'.y, 1 '11u• IU<1• of 1/u· NI'lloood· .l'oo/, II', '//!(+ /', '"'' 1 "/ 1./o'll/ II y "•IJ I 1•:11./ oof

Allllt 111tlllttt, pr·ovidt•d n sy11np1 it 11 111l 1 till• rd ilttlii' 1111

llrl ll tiii NII flo11 ,,, ll u t'lld ol fiH• lwt'lllit• llt ('1:1 11111 )1 wlflt t iLIIfll u liif '''"' l. '"lllldo ·d in tplr vrti i<IIIN /111 fWt' llf v 111 111. Wild t• I l111vo ,:.-' lllillo'itf l'd ii ii t ihiiili .. 11/ ltllj wu rl. t•I•H•w lto•tt

tl1r~

-------~

I h•l'lnlllcm uf urban

r l illill'il l fo rm

1

111 "'

1p.ll ial unit of

1

I'O il< t•p lll ~ d l,,tllllllllltllhoilliSm .

1.

ro llective ronsumption

hco ry of the c ity (observab le processes) versus Theo ry of adaptation (nonbservabl e biotic forces) Soc iology of number (Simmel) versus Sociology of modernity Demograph ic analysis (Wirth) versus Class/life cycle ana lysis Soc iol ogy of spatial inequality (Pahl) versus socio logy of the state Soc io logy of the c ity versus ana lysis of soc ial stratification Theory of cap itali st urbanisation versus

2. Analysis of state functions in reproducing labour-power

legacy 1. Communit y slud k•s, el'hn ographi 2. Functi onali st soc i<1 logy

1. Theori es o f mornl density

2. Cultura I th ca pitali sm 1 . Corporati st state theo r·y/

studies of bureaucra ti c ,lltd professional domin ati o n 2. Focus on consumpti o n cl eavages

1. Political economy o f Sp i11 '1'

2. Sociology of consumpl lo 11 (non-spatial 'urban' sociology)

Source: P. Sau nders, Social Theory and the Urban Question. London: Unwin I lyma n, 1989, p. 245.

(C uthbert 1985, 1995a,b) and also in this text, I only wish to illus!r'nft• 11 ll lll f\ 1 tspect of his thinking here, namely the relationship between urban ftllll f1 1111 ~ 11id 1hc political dimension of urban space. Most of the methods of il~'lllllllll111 1 f,ii Innd use by planners and urban designers have resorted to abstra<.: l In' 111111111 i1 of functions, disembodied from any economic or political contexr. Ln1td 11 111 1 111 1hcn be discussed in terms of'zoning', a wonderfully neutral devi ce tl litl pt•tttill pin nncrs and others to stand outside the reality of what Scott ( J 9HO) en li Mtl u ' mbon land nexus' . One of the most exhaustive of such systems, and th v ht•NI rrl its kind des pite the fact that it is now over forty years old, is that of C utlt'lti ll'q\ ( 1959). Guttenberg made several major contributions in this paper, c h ~tll l'llj•, lll p, 1he ass um ed co ncept of 'use' and the semantic nature of the phinn crs' h~t N i t ll'l'll1inology, pa rticu larly 'land use', one still used by planners on a duil y h.tNi 111d ort t: whic h hlls no clear mea ning. C t~tl'<: nbe rp, proposed hi s own typology o l ll'livily r h:tl'nct<.· r·isti<.:s nnd nn exte nsive lypnlol'oy of fun ctions, hut hi s nuti 11 id t•ll WIIN llltll' h Hiltlplt•l', li t• p1'0fl0S('d hn•n ld ll l'o ri11 Wtl tl11• lt'l'lll ' lnrtd ti S('' lllftl liv rlt Nfllllt dlttlt ' tl ll l<tll ~, wltit h Nlt o11ld lw II Nt'rl ltt dr l1111 111 tltt• t'II IH't•pl of ' li N t •'~


J,thll• I 'J ~ lolllllr lt. oi•,Jr II•.' lollld ll ~ol' 111111 111111 I'

li{IJIIIII ~IIdp 1!i 1 1

li

~iti ililti 'frlrlllllr lhtll ·llid

l'ttrtl11tll1111 ••JI•illrd i'~l'li"•'illllllllllitt 1111 '' '"" ttl1111ul11r llttil ( llll'illllijllifrll ~ 'l jloilf.d 1'\llii";'illllilll lodllilll jllrWr•l I \ 1 ltolll)ll'! dt•tl vc•d 1111111 lioilliolt •IHht •lwt•llll I' ollld ( Wl lltlll I' 111 v.ll ltffl 1 ldPolo1:lc .d: '• P<'dllc oillort Sy111hollc ·: <Olll<•nt

(

I I

s

(I) Constunptiun ( I Itt• c·onstllllption c• lc•nwn1 rdNs to llw pr Sltnpl(\ l'<'producllon I c·onomlr c~x t c..• n slon lllhlllutlwwl extcmsion ldc•olol\lci11 extension

•ss of tlw ropro<lll< 'tloll ol loilllllll 1IIIV.·r 1 I, e.g. housln1: ", e.g. 0j)l'l1 Spt1CX1 , c•.g. schoo ls .g. socio-ru l!u ra l tlllH •nlty

>li ly I• 1111 E1, e.g. commerce and distribution

E2, e.g. urban transportation E3, e.g. goods transportation E4, e.g. res idential mobi lity

(4) Administration

l'hl~of ntlwHc•gory enunciates the relationship between politica l strategies and t·hc arti clll.tlt r111 urbnn system. Four articulations are possible:

( iJuhal lid

'"II ~ysl t•m

(!r) Syntl>o ll!': not spc'c ifk~d .'11111/it':

Totality 1<11111 ' 111

Political system

I ,CII 'itJ

AI

A All

\ I

M. C 'o~s11 •lls, thv Urlhlll ()1/i"dft,l/ lrrltrlrrtl \1111 drl 1'1

1'1' 1.111 10,

II!"Hd Jd itl rl(111 '"1'1111 Ill ii (l palfl pl ll t i•rll (lulllalitlj\ I ypr •/r, it(l l11t.ilil)) I' Ill d IIIII (till I )'Ill ' Ill til I lVII )' ildd iii\JII oHI) ;

IIVt.:tl li Nt 1 tiVIIY tllltt'lil;lt'II NIIt,.,,

Fo llillllllll

!t

'' ll 11' tiJlJlll llll h to lnnd -usc funct·ion s wn s to n: lnlc the·"' to tlw to ll tH' It' IPill ul p111~ lin·N, whkh deriv e within ca pitalism fromrhc int e1':H.'Iion lwtwt't'll ,.. t:i.! 111111111 t nltlpOtH'nls, th ~.: eco nomi c, the politi c::~ I nnd 1'11e ideo lof!,icnl. l•:11d1 ul 1 '' " dt • vn lvt~H i111 o Hll hHyste ms of interdependent clements n nd the I'CIn1io11 i•illdillt'd hy IIH'III . ' l'lw full explnnntion is given in Castc lls ( 1977, chapt er I 0), 1id I wdl11ivt• n lllltt' h-u·un catcd version below. ln add iti on, we must renH.'Iltht•l t11111 ( :uN tt•lls :tl tlw tim e wn s defining urban functions, not in terms of urban :11111 111 '1 !1 , 1101' i11 tNinS of ce ntre and periphery, but accord ing to which fun ct·io11 rJ I' 11dm11 and which were non -urban. He comments that 'For it < gencr::di st•d tl!hlllli Hn tion .. alrendy presupposes the distinction, and even the contradictiorl lu tWt'l'll ruml and urban, an opposition and a contradiction that have littlt• llll ttllillf\ in ca pitalism' (Castells 1997: 446). Hence in Castells' terms, 1'111• 111I HIII w:ts co nfin ed to 'the processes relating to labour power other than ill .lllt't'l 11 ppl icntion to the production process (but not without relation to it, si11 (.'1' It " l'lltire reproduction is marked by them!)' (Castells 1997: 236). Urban then· I• lit ' mcn nt the space of social reproduction, which was physically connected I'O 11 l" 't'il'ic geog raphy of daily life, the raising of children and the sphere of dont{:! til 11 y. In precis, this was his basic rationale in defining the urban system. lit• lllllt'N thnt the economic system has two principal elements, and one thnt is 11 111 oduct· of the transferences which occur between them. In addition to Ih t•Ht 1111'<'1' principal clements of the urban system, there are two others that den I w11l1 t lw genera l processes of government, and the ideological and symbolic HI H'l i li 111t io n of spatial forms. These five elements can be briefly set out as the ll<lVI'III IIJ', typology of the urban system (table 12). ( :ostells is somewhat vague about the exact meaning of the symbolic i11 dt•liitl II would appear that what is required is an appropriate semiotic classificaliwt 1rl lll'hnn spatial structure as it intersects with specific ideological processes. 'l'lt lul'i< of clarity may be due to Castells' mode of enquiry itself, that is, not tr(;nl i111•. !It t: se miotic aspect with sufficient deference and assuming that polici cn l t'<.'OIIOI n ic factors are sufficient to explain the necessary, as opposed to con 1i11 p,t•lll', urban relations.

Fd Soj Whi lv Cns tdl s was concerned wil'h a definition of the urban based on a spn1i11 l 1111i1 of co ll ective cons un1ptio11 , oiiH ' I'H N11d1 ns Sojn nnd Appadurai have foctt Nt•tl 1111 il~t• ro nc.·c prunl frnnwwod.,H 111 JllliHIIIIItlt •llt ttl'lllllli NIIl nnd their geogr:tplt it tl'l'ilij',IIIIH'Ilt. l11 opposi 1iun111 CJ I14 tt 11 ~· '''' tl11 '!dil 'O itll t ltll'tlii sl cconornism in '1'/Jf• llr/it/11 ()III 'S ( /1111, tiiOI'I ' l't't till lll!t'lrql!ll l'l f\ t'll jtjilr "·1t l1 tl11• l'lltt'l'l\illg ~',l'OI',I'iljllt


ollltt' tlt i,·d ttdllt'l111itll11 dt'tll'ly dt'IIIOIINtt·a ltt ll 1111 !111 11 ill, 11 11 yt• t, 1111 tlli l1 vt dl'lll' hL' IWl'L' Il nt.•w spnlinltypologil'S nml : t r~· t• pll •tl Vttt lll!ld illl oN totk•snilw lltt.'lll , 'llu ·oi nd dcn<.;e bet ween the m:Herio Iity of ii1L~ ind 11101 111 d ' '~'•'' 11 11d II tl' t.:y bt·rl'i 1il'N ht•l111 constructed on the old infrastru cture ge nem te till' tH•t·d lo t' l'ntirely new t'OIII 'I' tual systems, relating new patterns of humnn und informational nctivit)' 111 nostalgic conceptions of place (Graham 2004). Digital hi ghways arc now t'l'ltltl figuring urban space as canal, rail and road systems delineated the industTinlt'll 1 Shifting patterns of neocorporate urban governance result in a complex .11111 alienating restructuring. In 'Excavating the material geographies of cybcr<.;il it• ' Graham notes that new forms of uneven development so produced result in a complex fracturing of urban space as premium and privileged financial, mcdin , corporate and tele-communications nodes extend their connectivity to di sl'lllll elsewheres whilst stronger efforts are made to control or filter their relationshipN with the streets and metropolitan spaces in which they locate (through defensiVl' urban design, closed circuit surveillance, the privatization of space, intensivl' security practices, and even road closures). (Graham 2004: 139 ) In Postmetropolis, Soja grapples with the complexity of discourses, models :11111 vocabularies where he enunciates a typology of discourse/practice for the post modern city in part two of his text, 'Six discourses on the postmetropolis' Drawing on lain Chambers' Border Dialogues: journeys in Postmodeml/1' (1990), Soja points out that his term 'postmetropolis' includes many 'post s', postmodern representing only one: 'Of all the "posts" that can be applied to ll11 contemporary metropolis, the least applicable are post-urban, post-industrinl , and post-capitalist ... but at the same time, the postmodern, postfordist, post keynesian metropolis does represent something significantly new and differ<.' Ill ' (Soja 2000: 147-8). Soja maintains that Los Angeles represents a paradigmntit form and incorporates his six discourses, interacting on a multiplicity of l c vt• l :-~ , While this indeed could be seriously debated, since the basic assumption seL'tll to be that the rest of the world will necessarily follow in its wake, Los Angeles t, no doubt what he terms a 'synekistic milieu' within which new urban procCSt\\'N, and hence spatial arrangements, are manifest. The six discourses outlint• 11 typology of form that deals with separate and discrete forms of urban phcno111 •na nnd analysis.

J

The post-Fordist industrial metropolis: restructurin g the geopolitica l ccotl omy of urbanism. :osmopolis: tbe globalisation of cit·yspnn·. Exopolis: the restructuring of urh:111 fnt'tll , Frnctnl city: mctropolaritics nnd tlw n •s iiiH ltllt ~ tl ~ ~~~ lltlllttlsnir. 'l 'hc Cn rccrn l/\rchipclngo: govt•ttdlll\ 11 p1111 111 tl11 I"'Ntllll'llllpnlis. Si lll ~· itit•s: rcst't 'u<.; t'urinA dw lll 'llitll i111111\1 111

1 1 u.~ II/II'I/'Of1U//$ iH11 11 itllt•llt'l'ltll tltttlll 1 nllt't'llll'lt tt'

dr

1111 1 lt :qllt '' H, wld1lt .j, .,tl ,

1

tild IIi li;lll d1 'ill) llt!l'tl wi ll wi Nit Ill liitl '"''"'\

~~r 111 " ' "' 11"'''

Arjllll App.Hiurni

lllt11 tll y, nftc 1· looking at the idt•n ul thcmed landscapes, a nd ol ht•lt'ltttlll lutttlscnpcs in the previous chapter, we ca n now look at the ossocin ted typttl"t \i of morphed land scapes. By morphed lmean landscapes that :1rc fllltd iiiiH'IIt ttl produced from changes in social development that have mnt'ut·cd 111 11 pn where naming becomes appropriate, reflecting the coincidence bet Wl'l' ll d1 11 opmcnt a nd urban forms not previously encountered . At the same t'inH·, IIH'NI '' itnultaneo usly aesthetic statements in that they will exhibit spcd l'k: ftllllt tl'Xtual and physical properties. The most obvious representation of thi s I'""' IS in the work of Appadurai (2000). As Appadurai comments, ''l'lw Wtllld 1\ 11ow live in seems rhizomic, even schizophrenic, calling for theories ol t'tHttlt 1wss, alienation, and psychological distance between individu als nnd 1',1'11111'14 11 1he one hand, and fantasies (or nightmares) of electronic propi nq 11 i I y 1111 til other' (Appadurai 2000: 95). As in Foucault's 'other' heterotopi as, di sOIII'"d ~, l'npitalism produces fault lines between place, economy and cultun:, 1\l'lll'lill ltt lnndscapes that do not lend themselves to traditional geographic dcs1 t'tpt tll Rhizomatic forms then arise, as in nature, where plant forms do not· ntt't't•ly h111 rhrough the surface from a single seed, and are similarly reproduced, ,·ntiH•t ti ll surface sporadically and uncontrollably from an extended root syst t'i11 tl 111 generates random surface features, as does bamboo. Appadurai clcnoll'H :1 htt"'l typology consisting in five dimensions of global cultural flows: cdtnost 'II IH' mediascapes, technoscapes, financescapes and ideoscapes. The wnu 'Nt .tpt ' most usually associated with 'landscape', also denotes an analogy to lot Ill ollll \ place. These environments emerge as much from individually projt•t.:lt•d v• tllll and needs more than they do from historic places. Appadurai defin es t ht•Ht' It' ll II :1s follows. Ethnoscape: the landscape of persons who constitute the shifting world i11 whit It we live, tourists, refugees, exiles, guest workers, and other moving !J,I'OttpN tllttl

individuals. Technoscape: the global configuration, also fluid, of technology, and l'lw 1':111 tlt ill technology, both high and low, both mechanical and informational, now lllti VI~II III high speeds across previously impervious boundaries. Financescape: the disposition of global capital is now a more mysterious, •·npi d 1111d difficult landscape to follow than ever before, as currency markets, nnliou nl stw I exchanges, and commodity speculations move 'megamonies' thro11gh n:ttillt lltl turnstiles at blinding speed. Mediascapes: these refer hoth tn llw di !HI'ih11tion of 1'11c ck ct'I'011it: l.'ltp:lhilit lt•N 111 produce and disseminnll' inltll'lti ll llnll (111 WII I HIIH ' t'~ . II H1p,n:t,itll'H, tl'lt•vlsinu Nl ll l ltill ~, film studios) which i\ 1'1' IIII W I ll' 11\1dt\1 Ill I 1\1111\'1 111\ lllllllht'l' nlp11ltitl 1111d 111 iV1ill iutcrcsrs throughout tiH' Will hh 111d 111 tlt!l 111111'' "' tl11 wt~tld tll'tllt•d hy tl11 •11t nwdin . l'OII l'lltl' ll iil lllll 1 d 1111•1 fn•q111'tltl y h:tVl' Ill t\11 1111 11 !111 Iii 11111 \11' 1111' 111 ~ I''I PIII lth "'" lll• 'tl lllt·ll~lo i!H 'II Ill lllll 'lll t!.UI ni II

ltft•OSI'cl fii'S:


I

I

IIJ I~iilf ll IIVIII

if 1111I l11i1 11 ttl ldi'IIN, fi 'IIIINIll ttl

ftllillll '~,

I

Itil /tidftt jl fll.l'dlltll Wll ll ttlt', I ll'.llt

11\111) 1 1t'pii'N I'IIf llflll11 0 1111d flt t• lllll ll ft 'l 101111 tl11111 111'111 ,\'•

1

hlll\'ftlllf 'll lll'tidt• lilt S it s II Hthtl d111 '1i q 1111d l1i H Ol'fi llltH'III

1

(Applldll l'lli .WOO: I

1 ·

iN, ON

0111' Wll tdd

IH'll, 1'oo1nl to hi Nforit.:n l t'l•lt'II'III H lit• po i111 s to th e: l'n cf th nt t.'OII L't•pf N o l

ill llw Middl e /\ ges wen· ditmo lvt•d hy c:n llilco's di sco vcl'ics, ll lld N illll~ Nt'Vl' lll'l'e nt·h ce ntury, loca lised t11 edi cvu l space was repl aced by tht.• spm·t· o l ' fl' nsion . Whereas the nineteenth ce ntury was obsessed by hi story, nnd fot111d fH tll yf·hologica l reso urces in the second law of thermodynamics', the er:1 wit hi11 ~· lt ic h Fouca ul t found himself had its parallel in questions relating to spa ct. 'l'lw l'!lllt:nce he denotes is from localisation to extension to what he call s 'a rrrtlll.\l' 1111'111'', whi ch 'is defined by relationships of neighborhood, which ca n be (or ti111lly desc ribed as series, trees and networks' (Foucault 1993: 421). He dcsc rilw I11N interest not in arrangements of transition- how we get from one pl ace to 111other via transport systems of some kind - nor through related pl aces ol' li' lllporality (restaurants, theatres, beaches, airports, stations, cafes, etc. ), 1101' 1vc n in arranged spaces of rest in the domestic sphere: 'I am only interested in 11 lt•w of these arrangements: to be precise, those which are endowed wi th llw 1mious property of being in relation with all the others, but in such a way ns to 11spend, neutralize, or invert the set of relationships designed, reflected, 01' 11lirrored by themselves' (Foucault 1993: 422). He describes these as utopios tllld heterotopias. The difference between them is that while utopias may lw dt•fi ncd as being in opposition to lived space, i.e. spaces of otherness, hetero fnp ias are spaces of otherness defined by society itself. In consequence, Fouca ull 111nintains that all societies are constituted on the basis of heterotopias that Vl11'Y Irom culture to culture, but equally within so-called primitive societies as they de, In life in the third millennium. These he calls heterotopias of deviance 'occ up i1•d by individuals whose behaviour deviates from the current average or stn ml ntd '!'hey are the rest homes, psychiatric clinics, and let us be clear, prisons, i11 11 lt ljf I hnt must be extended to cover old people's homes, in a way on th e hot dr 1 lwtween the heterotopias of crisis and that of deviance' (Foucault 1993: 42.1) , li t tl so includes such institutional structures as cemeteries, theatres, gardens, lt11l1 dny villages, brothels, colonies, spaces of purification, etc. In 'Of other s p 111 1 ·' I ;ouca ult describes his six principles of heterotopology, the last cha rac t t•t ,., , ii being that they have, in relation to the rest of space, a function that takes place withit1 IWII opposite poles. On the one hand they perform the task of creating a sp:'lCl' ol illusion that reveals how all of real space is more illusory, all of the loca l io1H within which life is fragmented. On the other they have the function of formillf', nnoth er space, another real space, as perfect, meticulous, and well arranged, li S ours is di sordered, ill conceived and in a sketchy state. (Foucault 1993: 425 ) /\ s we have seen, typologies have been an integral part of designitig cities l'w tt Hitly ycnrs. T hey have been npplivd i11 n whole diversity of ways, fro 111 tlw pl'llrlkn l n11d th e metap hys icn l i11 l'11ft i1 l· <:t•ddt·s' Wlwt•l of Life, through Hoh l{ rit•t·'s typo logits o( nrchirl.'t:llll't' 111111 111 lhlll li pllt:t, ,,, l"lltlt'll ttlt 's lwtcro t opi t t ,~. <) I th t• lt•w c·xt llltpl t•N "'" ' h nvt· l ~t•t• ll t1111 ~ 11 11il'd 1 il In 1:!• 11 '" ~" tlt tll tht·y h~t vt· II ~W d IIH tltittl• llll', IIIIIIM, IIH lllt 'tlllul , ii i jllitd i't!ih 1 llh Wfl)'li 111 l ittHili lyi lll', li till jll l\1'

I Oll< \ lUII

tl~t •

Ot~t• of th e mo re interesting typo logies applica ble to today's society is lltfl l "' IH•It'I'Oio pi us, a co nce pt deriv ed fromMichelFoucault,firstexprcsscd in /,l',, Al11 1'/ I ,('$ Clmses (trn nsla ted as The Order of Things) in 1966. Tbis idea was ex tt•11d1'11 int o v:1rious typologies in his lecture 'Of other spaces' that is reprodu ced i" ,""' <kk nt nn's edited collection Architecture Culture (1993). Sarah Chap lin 's nttid ' I flolet·otop ia descrta ' researches the concept in some depth in relation In 1,, V<•gns (I) C 26, sec a lso Rothman 2003). She also notes that Los Angeles i~o~ ''" ' th e do rnin :lllt case study, du e to the intense interest initiated by the novelist 'It !Ill Wo lfe in 1965, one which has continued over the last forty years in the wotl. 11! l{ <·y net· Ban ham, Edward Soja, Edward Relph and Mike Davis. The term 'I klt 'tll polis' has :-1 lso been used by Charles Jencks as the title of his book about l11 1\ ttgcles (Jencks 1993). While this would appear to be a direct refcrcn\.'t' '" Fou<.:n ult wh o first used the terms 'heterotopia' and 'heterotopology', .J<'IIt l o nl y ma kes one pass ing reference to Foucault in his final chapter, and thi'l'l' t lillie relatio nship between the one and the other. Like most concepts originofllt'l from contemporary French philosophy, the concept of heterotopia is by no 11H'ttll sft·nightfo rwa rd , a nd one has to struggle with its meaning. Chaplin actually arg111 thnt Fouca ult left the concept deliberately fuzzy: 'a productive fuzzy fi eld , lll ukes his gloss ing of the heterotopia not necessarily definitive' (D C 26: .1'1.!.) l{oss King clarifies tbe idea in relation to Foucault's work: 'l'hu middle ages, argued Michel Foucault, were characterized by an hierarchit ':n,~cmble of places' - th e Heavenly Jerusalem, the earthly counterpart, church, squoru, lane, house an d so forth . With Galileo . . . there is the presentation of a new, t nvclop i11g 'space of emplacement'- space better described by grid references tho11 by hiernrchi es of places. With modernity, this opens to the endlessly unfoldiltl\ 's pncc of exte nsion' of material progress and the appropriation of nature. 'l'lw :hnl'tlct·crisl·ic spaces of present experience, by contrast are 'heterotopias', !'Itt• t<.: ltlldl y lived and socially created spaces of li fe at its most intense and 'rea l'. (King 1996: 12.l ) 'l'hl• kin ds M spaces alluded to by FoLtc:udt· :1t't' llllt Nc ums, ga rdens, prisott,, tltt':lft'l~s, <.:c nt ete ries, sa natoria, hospit·nls, lihrnri<•s, t' f(',, t':H:h o( which is defi tlt•d by pnr·tit•tdnr soc.; ia l relatio ns a nd n f>nt'fi cul nt· ur •s tlH•fl t, 11 1111 is cn pnble of 1'1'1111 lo t'lltllfion in re lnrion to its envit'OIItiH'Ilf , < :lhtp lllt "''IIIWNIN thnt since th e t• lld o l IIH· I '.loOs, l'l1ere hns bee n n r·nd it 'o tl Nit ill lr ""' 111 Ml tlt1• tppt'Opl'iltlt • pnradignt fo r posf~ttndt'llllf\ '• lt r tit! \\,. 1111 ll dlil\ ltnilt tl w f ~ r · nt : lltd l' l11 i'id11 1t:s i1s co ttlt 'lt 1 in r(•g:ll'd 1" I .t iNVt II•"'• '' It k'lr l"'llllt 'IINtJii 1'•t tl ltn 1ll tli 1y, 11 11d 11 tlllt ht•t'Otllt\~ n<•s tl wtit•: tll y 'ntlH·t ' ' " 1lllt\'l.lltil •l tttf llttltitcut ll ll l tltNt'ill ll',~ t·, 1111d Ill II) NPIIfItt l NfI'll\ fIll'!'N: ' I ,fl N Vt 'l\11. '" ItI 'I I Il l IIi II !lf" I[" I' ") ' \'I t IIll' Itl If N I' VI' I ydll'' tpfldltit•N, 111 hy vl t'ftf t• o l lt Nr dlillll' '" ' ··t 1 illrilildil tlw i'l't.t'l'tl,q·' (I)( ' ~ fi II i' )

'"""'''~ l~t•ft't'ol'opins

!i"

J,,.,."


haot~-~

1111lt till)', pllltllllllt'll ll 11 11d ol' l',t'll!'l'i llitlg vcu d•lll1111 • lc11 Ill!' t•vo lvitl)\ ll!l•tflt pilli'N ol IIH• illlt'd lllilll' nll ilflll , No dotlhi il11•1t II NI wi ll lw l'X It' fld l•d 1111 !In' pltt'lltlflll'll ll oll'l' itl vvsligoll'd, u11d desig nt t'S 1\"llpplt• 111 llttdt•t'S innd 11 01 01tl y il wi1 own t'nliollnlity but nlso th e nnlure of th e udm11 Jli'OHjWt' l. I now movt· ft'OIII i11 l',l''ll'f'll l pl'i11ciplc o( how we cnn think a bout the prob lems of urbnn desil\'' 111HI SOIIlt· of l'i1e too ls t·hnt h::tvc been used to do this, to the pragmatics of whnl 11'1 shou ld know abo ut the production of urban designers and urban design l<1111\\' l l'dl\t', 1·he non-heterotopic spaces of professionalism and education.

Pragmati-r~

Professionalism is one of the public ideologies of the New Class. P•·olt•N sionalism silently installs the New Class as the paradigm of virtuOII H:111d legitimate authority . .. The New Class is a cultural bourgeoisie w ho 11p propriates privately the advantages of an historically and co ll ec tively produced cultural capital. Gouldner (1 979: tt>)

Introduction: Cultural Capital !11 thi s final chapter I will limit my discussion to the two most important l'nt;ltll the production of cultural capital (knowledge) within the field or lll'lli lll tksign. Here I refer to the triadic relationship between the professions, 1111i vl' t ir·ics, and urban design as a socially sanctioned activity, now enshrin vd wi tlti11 ll'ttiary education, usually at postgraduate (Master's) level. Rather 1'h:111 ~t ill ild l di sc ussing the ed ucation of urban designers on the basis of existing pt'Oj•, lillllllll I he opinions of practitioners or the outcomes of individual urban desig11 jll lljl t 1 I wi ll continue with my basic theme that in order for urban desig11 111 '"" ' • forward it should be sourced from the larger socio-political co nl t•\ I \\' 1111111 whi ch it finds itself. So instead of trying to be prescriptive about ul'i11111 dl 'l lj,ll t•duca tion, I will concentrate on this larger context, leaving the detni ll·d 1111111 111 o( individual programmes to be worked through on the basis of more ell'llll' ll hll}' vonsiderations (see Cuthbert 1994a,b, 2001). In order to do this, fo111' s t· l ~~ til' t'l• lntions need to be explored in some depth. First, we should undt.•t'N iilllll Homcthing of the political economy of professional intervention within clw Nlll'illl lormntion. Second, we should consider the monopolistic role of profcssio11 Mi11 en p1·u rin g knowledge sys1·c.; n1 s. Thi rei, we need to investigate the positio11 ol I Ito Ill li lt· environment proft•ss io•I Nin tht' production of social space. Fin all y, tht:n: '"' ' lht• prngmntic conscqllt'II II'H nl tl11 Nl_\l'lll't'ul t·llvi t·o lln wnt· for the rrnini11l\ of III'I HIII dnlij\m•rs. Ill


10nal l 'ltt• Nllll1dogy o l

lnh~t·v·~nlfon

p;-olt\~Nion.~ is now n wv ll t'll l,dd i-. ltt •d " 'l:io n of sol'io l

i rlf t'l' l '.~l t•d l Hl r' lil~S 11 1igh1

Hotrl~·

loehlc• Ll S\

theorisL~

11'11(1

wis h to refe r to o l lht• 111njor i11 ll li 111'1 1 ( Yo ung l 'JSH, Et%io ni 1969, Elliot 1972, .J o hn so n IY72, JIIich 1977, l.ttr'lllil l•>'/7, DNhct· 1982, D ingwa ll and Lewis 1983, Abbott 1988, Frc idso n I 'J'' IJ Pr·oft•ss io ns do not simp ly act as an apolitical h omeostatic device w ithin sot 11 II' rnnilll'ni nin g th e ge ne ra l good on the basis of altruistic and benevo.lcnt rnoli vt nvn 1ir1g sta bi li ty a nd socia l cohesion within the relative anarchy of the 1111!,,11 lnnd nex us. Instead, they can be seen to form part of the social const ru c tio; 1 ,.j t't·n lil y. Th ey a rc responsi ble for the formation of specific domains withi n il11 lol :ility, nlo ng with other agencies such as the church, the state and soc inli1wd t•du<.:n tion. The territorial constructs so manufactured constitute politicised cl11 11111i ns whose existence is ideologically reinforced by secular knowledge, 1111111 opo listic a nd mystical practices, self-legitimation and, in many cases, il 11 stdwc rsio n of democratic processes. Consequently, autonomous action by ind1 vid 11 nls becomes a tten uated, certain liberties are extinguished, and participnlw 1 po liti<.:s arc frequently red uced to an unacceptable level of involvement. 'l'l11 lihcrn li st vi ew situates professionalism as a benign contribution to the mnt·k, 1 .~ys1 c111, where services are sold instead of commodities, but as Dunleavy Sill\ 1\t'St's, ' ma ny urban professions have historically sought to minimise o r "I !)HO: politica l" control or public "participation" in decision-making' (D unk•uv1 I 12). 111d

rl'.~lltl

'J'hc emerge nce of modern professions and the entry of capitalism into if l'OI'porate ph ase were synonymous events. The constitution of modern proft'll I ma rkcts was the result of a collective effort by the producers of partic ul d 1 fot'ms of expe rti se to insert them at a critical conjuncture of the prod uctio 11/ 'OIISutnption process within society. This was a unique event within the cn pil !l ist sys tem , since it saw the introduction of what Polanyi (1 952) referred to ns 11 ' l'l<.: lir·ious' as opposed to a real commodity. He first used the term in regard lo ln11d, lnbour and money, elements of market exchange that have not actua ll y hl'l' ll pro du ced for sale. These relations are clearly demonstrated in table 13. 'l'lu• 111 hit: nlso demonstrates the position of professions in relationship to the pt'o dtt t.'lion of s urp lu s value and to the reproduction of a class-based society. Wil'llin Iht' syste m of ca pita list social relations, the citizen is both enhanced and disa h lt•d hy pi'Ofcss io nnl dominance and its attendant iclt.-o log icn l pos ition, whic h pt·o vi dt•s lt:<.:h11icn l services but usually on the ba sis of 11 sigtlifit.·n nt s ubo rdin atio n o l n utonomy (which a lso del' pvns llu·IJ· pnr-d lion ns nn intc rpc ll ol't•d Nllhh·r in 1\ lthllsSc ri a n te rm s). Dl'pr·ivt·d o/ ii H•It lo 1w lf dcre rminnrio11 II H'i1· wor·ld lurn s in to 'a n cc ho-ch:111tl wr "'"'' rl•t' (lll11lt 1'1 /: 17). '!'his proct·s 1 11 01 o nl y a lie nnl't·s d1 e individ11 nl llf tll l ll11 11 11\1' 11 ,., ,, ,.,_, 11l n11d flloti vn li o n, h111 dw ol' ll; •;•d 1111 '·111'; ;1·,) _ , , lt';llr ll lnlu l ir111111 dt•fldv tr l·y. Ill ii Ji H OVI' I'il ll j) t'OCI'SS, tlw l'll lllllll tdlllt .rfii•fl !!i' jlif [l f!!UII 114 1'\ l!' tld t•d IO 11 1/ ll ill(•f' llt 'l'ds, II pl'ill\'iplt• i11 11 1 t'lll 'fl lllf id ll I iii;j till l\1 lt111tl 1111d IIIII flill'l'lll liO II S h11f

.~ ionn

i~tdividt~:ll

111\l11 ~

conc~·pt

I~

11~Npo11sihi l it y

1\t• Lil lollhhlp ht • I WI}t~ lllll"h

l1111•d '•I'IVIt I' tiiHIIh t• t o~p l l , il l•, l •,y•.l1 1 illll i

pint hit'IIOIL

c.·rvll't•N ''xc:h.mgcd for ·a pita I I HM·tl y incorporated into Expert servi ces included producti on of surplu s value within the corporation : professional and managerial (including freelance consulting) lllto rporated only indirectly Contribute to the (contribute to the reprodu ction of the reproduction of the labour workforce within the force) corporation or (rarely) in privately owned service firms (e.g. health professions, instruction of different kinds) Nol incorporated Supervisory or controlling services

Services cxdlolllg••cl for rcv.,mw Expert for profcss ionnl servi ces whi ch coni l'l hult • to the produ cli on of constant cap ital (In non profit resea rch and development) (a) M arket situati on: cl i1SSi t personal profess ions (b) Non-market situati on : welfare profess ions in the serv ice of the stale

Services related to ' law .1111 I order', containment .llld ideo logi ca l prod uct ion, including 'free profcsslotl"'

Source: M . S. Larson, The Rise of Professionalism. Berkeley: University of Ca li fornl l1ress, 1977, p. 215. Reprinted by permission of the University of California p,.- --

nlso the material forms which are reproduced in the built environme nt·. 111 IIH tra nsference of autonomy from the individual to professional man agl' tll t ttl ', 11 sy mbolic structure is established by professional-technocratic elites thnt l'l' ll tlll lntes concepts of need, autonomy, competence, right, use-value, legalit y, t t ~ll p 1111 si bility and ownership, all of which have the same basic obje~· t fIt tra nsformation of the individual from an active to a passive subj ect. I hil t. ll!ll I tt ·orrect the idea that this is necessarily a conscious process or the o ut<.:O iill ' 11 l n vnst conspiracy. Nonetheless it is deeply ideological in the Gramscian S~' II H t ' 1tl' n ' liv ed system of values'. While professionals themselves are class-divi tkd lttf ll those who hire intellectual labour and those who work for a wage, the idt•n 11 1 professionalism as a situated monopoly practice guarantees living stand n rd H l11r its members across the board. Professions therefore occupy a complex relationship to society, moclifyin 11, 0111 perspectives on socia l class, pa rticul a rly the middle class, the division of l:lbot11 , sl'nte legitim ation, cn pitnl nnd id eo logy. T hey constitute a new class. of in t't• ll t•c• twd 1:.-tbo ur in o ppositi1111 111 till' pml t• fnr int, hut ' ld cn l typ ica ll y, profess io11rt l lltt·o nom y is the ntllitlu •iWI ttl tll tli 'lll li llll: tiH· wo t·kers themse lves dt•it•r lllitH' w hnt wo •·k d" IIH)I, .. w tl11 y "" 11 ' (l<' t t•!d •HIIt 11)94: 1611·). 'l'lw y 11 11 •ot lllt 'l'ft•d 10 till' t "''"ll~t ati•ilt •d \\' ltl ti11 111 llltt l\t.' llll 'lll 0 11 tlH· h.wiN 111 i(lttt w lt•d l',l' l'i ltltt•t tit Ill j «l!hitlltll Wif litq rl i[• lh ltil iili~IIIIIIVI.' NVH II ' III , ' I 'III'Y 1111

""'>'

I" "''""

I""''"'


''I'''

i11111li'rd 111 ,u_;l"'t '· 111 ilt1 1 iltfl ! ilu l,,i.Hf 111 rnn 11 '' !\'Hill''''"' fli "''"'l''"il' ll'•" "" '""'''"iltlfll l"-"''' u d ltdd11111 1\ i._l'IIIH' IIIillllll i1111t '• lll l' i\· tl 1 l'tcd t ·•~ltllflrl ll llrl ll lit ·c fl '' jll lrllt trl 111 lt'lll llllll •lli11 '" lfll'if td Ill ill.tl d11 1 tiilillllj cdi~t' j, lfii\VIt•dgt• ll ll ltl·t 'i'l IIVI 'I lr ll dflillll rfl llllllllllltilf\: lll tlll·t'lll 1111d tit ld!tj it' III II Vt' ly liHil'l't'N,~I~~lt• lwo wlt•dgt• hill-It' II Nillg I'N IIIttlt litl/ , 11i ~llt 11 11d ltlltlli IIH it•s, ftl NOIIII' t'1 1Nt'N 1 ll~t•i t• Ol: liviJiL•H, ON in JIH• l'f•lnlltllli·illlp llt'I Wt'l' ll lift llll:dit•tl wolt•ssioll ond lltllllillnlionnl phnnna cc uticn l <.: ontpnnit'N CH ' IH•Iwtlll il1 lt'I\H I pt'Oft•ssio n ll rtd big cnpitnl, nn.: so interlink ed thnl d1l'i r· illdi' IH'Ildt 111 ( I .~ t·r·iot tsly I.'O IIl iWOrniscd. Profess ions nlso act in a qunsi -lega l sc nsv hy t'N IIIIt lfl.ltill 1hvir own conditions of existence, determining the stnnd tHdH hy whlllt "'' OiWt'nlc. 'f'his situntion spi lls over into ideo logica l beliefs :1nd pt·nrlit't's ln ltt 11111 support for th e mnrkct syste m on the bas is of n1onopolistit..· 1111d '"'l\1 '111''"' :olll'rol ovc r one r·cgion by demon ising others, for cxa 111 pic Iht..• tllt'd iv,d 1" 1ol! sion nnd its relationship to chiropractic and a lternative nJ cdi!.:ill t'. <)\til till, howeve r, Frcidson (1994: 44) is wary of a ll tota lising dcsc riplors: '' l'ht • lllt f:tl r·t•n lit y of whi ch both arc but part is too co mp lex to be reduced lo sw:lr ll lllijol nnd swee ping cha ra cte ristics as "dominant", "hegemonic", "pr·oklnl'iniiiNt tl " ·orporntiscd", "bureaucratized", " rationalised", or "deprofcssionn lifwd"' On the other hand, we could argue that all these features arc, or hnvc• h11 11 1-\l'll l'rn ll y true at particular stages of history, specifica ll y over the lnst 200 Y'•" I'I'Ofessions, like every other social construct, are continua ll y evo lving. Nol 11111, I his, but as in other aspects of the economy, uneven deve lopment chnr·nvll'li'" professiona l organisations across the globe. Over this period different profwm11•11 Ita vc n ppca red erratically in different countries, and even tod ay, in mn ny sod I' ll vnrious profession s have yet to attain a unified organisationa l existence. Pot If lit socialist co untri es such as Russia, China and North Vietnam, ope ratin g on t-r tlllt I> different ideologies and with no private sector, have only recently Sl':ll'lc•d 11·, :onsidcr association with Western professional institutions as a method ol lq:lf illlising socia l prac tice (e.g. the Royal Institute of British Architects). Pr·ofc·ss lc"' n Iising the socia Iists represents a burgeoning new market. As Western dcmm'l'l ll 11 hn vc cmcrgcd from the Industrial Revolution into service economics and i ttlr11 lll:Hiona l ca pita lisn1, so professions have also shifted ground in their cco tiOIIIIt , or·gn nisntion a l and political goals. As markets for services, professions ''"', IIH>v<:d with the ma rket system, and over the last 25 years have made :1 l'flpld II'll nsi1·ion from the corporate ideology of the industria lised world into a tlt'OI 111 por·nJe ph ase of development in line with todny's economic and politica l cli tll lilt 'l'lw influence of co rporations as the in frns l l'lll'llll't' of h11sincss within n:tl ioll td tTono nlics hegn n to accelerate at the lwginni 111\ ol illf• lwt•rHit•lh ct ntury, nnd 1111 lt'r'llr \ ·orpor:rtism' at its most ck~ nH' 11 Inr y l1•vt• l Nllllpl y llil'IIII Ht'OIIII'OI of tlw .~ lrtlt (p11hlk S('t'I'OI') Or C;'l pit::t l (privnJt• Nl'tllll) It)' lil t/It; illft'lt'~l 1\f'O IIpS 11t111 I oiii inllllt'lln• tk·t.:ision-mnking i11 lirw wii11 f111 11 ""'ll tll 'i'd!i, Crupllt.tii NIII is ll~t•r'f•lntl 11 11 idt•ology lhot npp li<.·s eq11n ll y Wlllti11 lutiii i-Ct lltt ll 1 ""-' ~ 'lil'tll ll floll l'l'fH't'.~t'tlf fll/', IIH· or·g:lltist~liollol fnllll< 'wntl. 11111 l''"''li•l t'll i111 111 tlr II II lllltH'I'Il iN nl !111 'l lllkt• lf<tldi'I'N, 'l'ltf• n•ln lio11,~ lfipN ht 'l\\'t 't1111"1tijliit rlli t: lll llt 'tlltlf lllll flfi iOIII ll lld jllll lt ' jl-l illll ,ill NIII lu1v t• wdv lwt•ll "'''' Hi tl tlll l• liildt'fltwf'd

1

it~tl )' h)' t\'lt lt·u lt fl ll (,'! Hi) 1.:1, ""' ir~vc l. lip,nlcd ilre "l'''"" tt l1111 "'"' iil; t.i tjtlll ill l.lll lllit.l ("til\l l!H~ ill( il it tiiii 'N I ill Ct lll.tdti , 11 11111)\ 1111 ( _,Ill ll :ilt iii Niillilt 11! 11ltlllllt 't'" (C II') ll!i 11 i. II IH 11111tl v, 1\I 1 11 N I11tll11tilt ·~ flu ltlt. illldri 'l' ' i IIJi, Ill I t lljllll ,,,, Nit tiI1'/',it•N: II

i111 l 1l'l lllltlll l11111 ~lltlt• l y 111 1111• lvVl' l o l politkn l '""'''l'OIIOtlltt NyNit'III NIHt• lw t tl I d•nltd llllltllltlll/111/'t l/1,~111 . llllt'I'Vt'lllioll i111 o s 1w~· ilk Hi'l' IOI'N Ot' lltllt'kt•IN, ollt 11 1111 11 itil Ill ~ 111 tli VItllti p, hd lll lll' Nl'l'IOI'I til y (such ti S II'Odt•ttll d proft•ssiotiii i ii HNIIi i11fi1111 N1111tl I""''" lltdtut N) IN l<ttiiWII IIH 1/ti'SIJror{)()rcr/islll. lnit: I'Vl' rllioll ol 111l' li•vt•l ol d~t• 1111 1 l1itlld i i 1111 Ill t'lll'iJIII'IIIt' l'll(il y, Sllt.:il !IS tl nlUili <.:i pnlity is c: tl kd nti t: I'OCOI'I!OI'I Ifi Ntll , (MIIrHh:tll .2.000: f1H) itH!i iHiii ii iNn tloi(~N tlw tb11entnry difference be1·wec n co rpornti sn• :11 1d '"''" '" jlll t'll tl 1u 11 1111 lo ll ows: I~1111 mpo,·ntism shif1·s nwny from corporatism's 'earlie r preoccupation wi ll1 II H• 1111111111' of or·gn ni ~c d interest intermediation, to a collatera l emphnsis 0 11 IIH• lllllti ~NII of policy· mnking nnd implementation' (Schmitte r 1982: 259 ). If !1 111 lllli Vt~N

nwny ft·om defini ng distinctiv e properties of corpo ratism and specul lltitlll tlntlll it s origins. lnstend it has an empirica l focus on the measurement of it I'"'N t'II CC ond the nssessment of its infl uence in policy and decision-mak ing, tlt11 1 , li Npower and effect. (Marshall 2000: 7 1)

\ lt t•r'lllll ively one could say that the move to neocorporatism represents n sig tti I i 1111 dl'cpening of co rporate ideology. Corporations are no longer mere ly illlt't lr •d in organ isational efficiency, narrow sectarian interests and profit·St'l'kl ll f: ltt llt·gits. They now seek to become embedded in the political process, inll11r .ll 11p, nnd co ntrolling the relations of production at a much deeper leve l. Thi Nll' nd 1 whol e new meaning to the idea of monopolies, and John Ralston S:11d (I .-,1f/) 111\ll t:S that the legitimate basis for social democracies is being undcrr n itlt'd I IIi 1 lilt' tlsion of corporate influence into the realm of urban politics con ll ~tft •N un Jll ll'i tl c interests to that of society as a whole. In the case of profess ion1tl '"1 111 " 11 ions this implies a move away from the somewhat principled, in di 'IH 111lt iii r lltk:tl position of the past, to being an active partner in the opernlioll 'l 11l tl11 111 1t', from carrying out state policy to forming it, from lobbying for coni nit Ill 111 dt•l'ining what those contracts will be. State power, supposedly reprcscll lillg tl11 pnwl'r of the people and previously independent to private interest, gntd 111111 )' Iu•rornes the legitimating agent for capital in all its forms. In 1he Ca nadian case, the .Canadian Federal Government has had its ow n l'i tlGIII 11iHis l'o deal with, and like most Western democracies has wholchc:ll'tl'd l l'llthrn ccd the private sector as a means of reducing the costs of urban nd nti11 l1'11 lio11 . Marshall (2000: 116-21 ) notes ten ways in which the Canad inn Nlllll' 1 !wing reconstr ucted, includ ing Flex ible Federalism, the Social Uni on FrtlllH'WIII I· Al'/l' ~' II Wnt (SUFA, des ignl'd In ''" ''ll to ttiRl' government ad mini stration, IJm 11tl pt'Oj',l'll lllllleS nnd d ivc t·st· llrtdt•rlyilll\ ll llilitdt·s), new federa l rcg11l:11'ol'y pol11 y OIHH IIi nl io rt rt..'qlli r't' tl lt' rt lli, 11llt IIIII lVI dt llvt!l y Nysl!•rns 10 non ·SI'nlt· m' lor'll '"'" oiiH•r llll'dHIIfi NIII N, '1'111 lltlllt tl l•lilj\ !1111111 Ill lllltd lllis fl('('lll ,~ IO ht· II wlwbwl1


1!\ UII hli"IIUilltl ,.f tilt ·,1.111 Ill fltdU ' 111 l,ili lltdl lljt~dl[flti~~t tlllf Ill )\11\'1;1 lfllflllf {( f! illf fll i1'1 ti1 '•II i !li llljllllli NIIIIIIII l lllllfltlli'd Wlflt olilt' l jli' Ctlt•HHIItll~., !Itt I "fl • lljtii :III'III NIIII I! jill Ill ttllt 1111 ltNtll , '"'d I will IHII ttpltrttst• lilt• tlltilt ""II'''''"' ll'tiiiii i'N ttl !111 ~ It M,tt 'lliutll (WOO: I (I J.· 7H) . Mn1·s hnll :ll'f\IIVS 1hn1 rhc IIIOV<.' to Jlk-xihk Ft•dt•t•nii HIII hy lilt' Cl lll ll dt ,llt j\o .'I'IIIIH'Ill hn s ul'l'ordt•d opportunities for the CIP 1'0 csln hlish 11 llt•ou"l"'i t'ti posi1ion, si111 iInr I'O those in the business :md profess ionn I world , 'I'lu ' 1 1111 .11 :IV<.'n•t e of nppronch nfter '1996 was to establish the CJP r1s lite I',OVt''''"""' ndvisot· on public policy. This included participation in policy fof'llllil11111111 . ·I well ns th e exe rcise of power and influence over governnwn 1 ns 1o !111• 111 1. 1,til lrnjectory of development in Canada. M arshall quotes ClP Pn:sidctll C:o tt11111. st:Hing thnt the role of the CIP Council was 'to focus on nntionnl issllt'N tllld 11 •s t·nb lish a stronger presence in national policy a~d decision m:tking. In !Itt I til we addressed the allocation of < the CIP's> resources, both hu111nn nnd li1111111 1.i to chat goa l'. This and other statements led Marshall to observe, ''J'h11,~ 11 11111 ·orporatist ideology took hold in the organisation as a result of the sot.: iopoltlll tl sit·uation in Canada, the influence of the state's neocorporatist ideo logy, rtnd tlt1 t hl'lt St taken by the two consecutive councils of the CIP' (Ma rshnll 2000: I,, '!) She goes on to note that neocorporatist strategies were by no men ns lllltllll sc ious or superficial, and were deliberately embedded into the very stru cl tilt' II! ttl ideology of the CIP. This was done by hiring top staff for their ex iWt'li'lllt with government, adopting a communications plan in 1999-2000 to dt•t'l" 11 t·hc relationship to government, a strategic plan 1999-2001 which emphn NIIil d gove rnment relations, and a one-year action plan that had the same ohjt\liv( In th e short space of fifteen years since 1986, the stated goals of the CIP til t lVI d r:1pidly from simply establishing a 'planning' identity through a nationnl ll SNtll 1 otion, dece ntralising tasks to its affiliates (i.e. down the hierarchy) to t·he opp11 it·e position of direct influence over national policy. She then illustrn 1~~H 1111 mec hanisms through which these goals were achieved, with directives nt i1111 1 nation a l, national, regional, urban and local levels, providing policy stateiiH'III positio n papers, advising government in international conferences, worki111', 1111 :IP- go vernment policy directives, and exerting influence on national COllllitll Ices on the environment, infrastructure, housing, urban management and in1t1 national development. Marshall concludes with the observation tha t 'lko~·t llll!t professions have the quintessential corporat·isr interes t mediation structure, tilt 1 nrt• nlso idea lneocorporatist actors .. . I( i1 tnni111 rd11,~ i1 11 pt'l'Sent traject·OI'y, il 1 on ly o matt·er of time until the CTP willlw nh lt• lo t'II NIII't• rlu11 it·s organiz:Hio11 i illll'grnled with the state' (Mars hnll 2000: 1.0 1,) , 'l'lu• ttVt 'rll ll inft'l'('llcc hc,·e is rlt ul if Nll t.:h intense Stra tegi c int<.:I"V('IlliOII IN ltd·, lll j\ pltc I l11 II it•lctlivt'ly illiiOl' IIOII pi'Oftss ion such ns urban plnnni111 \, 11 !jc;( lll lj It "·"" ddo Itt llNN IIIIIt' thnt , l'ollt•tl iv<' ly, pt•ofcssions () rC Signific:tlll l)' 11111~!\'l!ldlll\ ill tlll_l llllliliiJII;IIII 'tlf of Sodn l lflt• Wldl(• IH'Ol'OI'j)Ot':ttl' ideology dt 'l' l11 II~ jtt l_lfflll~it•llid t:lij \t i/!U ti CIII' Wl lltitl fl11• ovt•t til polifit ,tl l'l'OII0111y, ti H>vi111•, ltctlll ,, I'' !!VIi lfll o! 111 1\'iu · 111 d, 1 itli 1tg wl1111 riii 'N I t' l vitt~N slt1111ltl lw, pmlt•NNIIIII~t tll lfllt td~·~ liillif! !, iit tl111 1111 , dtlt•lfd tt11d , II

jll llli_l

""j' ~o pltLl l'

\'tMliii N iii l ~liliC III

em~ ~ mel

Iii ildllllll itt! . lllitf I 1111

!11 iii dt:1 • !ti L'Lu "nr"'"!! tlli ll,l ,~ 1 .11,,," lilit"ll\• iii VI_'!I IIJ \IIIll WlHi l ill lit V1d \lt'd itt

Ktmwlctlgc Sysfl•ms

l'tttli 'NN IIJI II il III'IWOI'kH d(• t•ive thcit• nuthot•ity ft'OIII illl'l't' kt •y 1H ill1!1'1l 1 lhllllll \ ftlllll llll' H1111i' 1 lt'OIII l'OI\Ill't:tions I'() C~tpitnl tllld ft'OII1 lltt•ll lttllllllllllti IIVII ill lf lilllflolls nlldghi''' lt•:tt'llillg. Within t'el'tial'y (;du (.': \lion , pt•olt•HN inn Nt•x ptlllll'l '''' , 111o11npol ist· .tnd nt ys tify knowl edge in ord<.:t' to pi'Oil'l'l llwi1 pnNtfltlll nl [llt vtlt•l\1' wit !tin llw gt•nern l sc hema of cnpitn li st CIIU.: rpri sl's. Motwpnli HII! pt llt tit t'N II Nsm·intl·d with the development· of ca pit:-tl h:we cnshl'i tH•d i<tHiwlt •dl l' \'H it't\IS qua cultural capital as an intrinsic part of the ovcntl l sys tvnt ol n tpi1 1d ~·,, tllltlllntion. Ov<.:r hi storica l time, th e ruling eli tes of mosl sot.:k'tit·s lt 11vt lilttllopolised knowl edge (mystica l or otherwise ) in the interests ol' sot.:i :d !'O IIIt 11! , !111111 Sum eri :1 t·o Egy pt, China, Mex ico and Peru. Howevel', th e cvo l11t it11t ttl lllotkl'll libernl democ rac ies concomitantly with capitalist d eve l op~tH' IIi , tlu tn ii iK' ious reproduction of labour that began with the lndustri :1l Rt•vo lttll lllt , t! No dcmnnded new institutional forms whereby knowl edge syste111 s cottltl lu 1111 ilnrly reproduced and extended. New horizons in capital accu tTlll lalintttlltdd 11111 tnke place without social housing, health care, education and tt·cltll~tlnl\11 d ulvu11 <.:es that maximised the capacity of physical and cultural C<1pit~t l 111 , ... 1 "' lt Hh new thresholds in social development. In turn, these social procl'SSI'N lt'II IISformations which demanded that traditional ideas of social cl:t HN !11 lltl t 1 1111\llted - social control was no longer limited to those who had <.:O illtl lltliciii Vt"l llthcrited wealth, social status, mystical power or religious authority. 'l'l11 1'\'fl!i fl1• th ce ntury was to incur two major processes that would force n n•ll111ti i11J\11 I ot·lhodox class analyses. The first involved the two greatest sodn l n•vn lti! lllil il t:ll the world had ever witnessed, namely the Communist revolul'ioll N111 l 'l t H~ il! 111d Chin a, where the concept of social class was entirely abolished . ' l'lu IW( IIild of th ese was the burgeoning of universities and the creation of a new kIIII Wlcdpt1 cln ss within Western societies, which rapidly cut across traditi ona l cl rtNN ihtt 1it 1 llowever, this knowledge class was not new, since the idea had nlt•t•; td y lwt 11 t• fl shrined within the idea of the 'new class', a phrase coined by Mikh:1il H11 lt111111 II'Ound 1870 in order to conceptualise the potential division of labour wtrllitt ot.: inli st states. At the same time, the idea contained much re leva nce lor rl11· 11 ~ r of the meritocracy within capitalism, and a new class of int·ell eclulll lnlu1111 or1-1n ni sed round the idea of professional organisations. Since then, tlw t ·xi~ ll tl U of such a class, with its division into technocrats, bureaucrats nnd inH·Ib lthtl 1s we ll ns its relation to orthodox cln ss distinctions has been tlw fHd1lt 'tl u collsidcrnble debate (Brlll't' 1\l'ii'.J',N I tqt), Couldner 1979, Wn)ng I 971>, < :11t'i1!1: I1 JH S). In hi s clnss ic lt''i l '1'/w Jlllf!llf' of fllfl'llf' r fuals and t/;(' 10sl' 11/ t!Jt• Nr 1/t! C:/r/,.,,,, Cot tld~t l''' dt'I\W Htl11 hctwttn 1110IH'Y cn pitnl :111d cullllt ',tfl 'll l'll lt (kllt~WII•dp,t • ) , 111'/',llilll', dtll 1 tpi qtl !it fi\' ' " d1 llltl' d liN nny pt·odtll't•d ohi1'1;1 II Nt•d It

'"""''.I

'"·"•'!\}'


1111d·tl ll illt ,ddt

tlldiltt~~.

wltit It 111 111111 I''''' idt'll it ti

l;,,~~i!IHu_ii'

witlt lllltlltli

lit

I'IINNI~Nt-. 1 1111 ol tl diill 'f tl Vrtplfrtl dcH'Il lll!ltil'lt '~IIJ II·JI )' IIJ!l idi Ill iti(II'II Nt•d l'lll ll ltlllll

pt·od ttclivi ly, IHtt os i11 thl• ~·n s~· of oih l't' lo t'tti N11f tlllpit ttl ii Ni111 d11 sic l'll tt lllnll 11. '" bot'h d1 c in <.: o mc :111d the socinl k~H' t'.tl',t' 111' tl1nNt' who <.: <'> tllt·o l if. Monopoli stic practices arc part and parcel of cnpitu lis t· dcvclopmvtlf llttcl 11,, formation of monopolies in business and finance is paralleled in monopolit·N ,,,.,~ , knowledge (and therefore of forms of power) that constitute the esse n Iin I ltt /11• client in this new class formation. However, the type of society within wlt 11 It ou ldner's new class attains political and economic power remains prohll'ttt,tltt . Also, the political conditions within which cultural capital may repl tHt' iii reinforce money capital as the power base for new forms of domi nation t'l'ttlldtt unspecified: 'The essence of the teleocratic project is to gain power by CO ti Sitl li 1 ing or reconstructing meaning systems, pre-empting the democratic disCOIII'I.t' l•1 monopolising meanings' (Gouldner 1979: 7). Furthermore, the particuf:1,· lot 111 of power/knowledge, its specific mechanisms or agencies, and its co ngnll 'tll t with societal forms such as professional organisations and state appa t'nl ll '<~ remain relatively unexplored, although Marshall's work suggests so n1 t 111 11 directions that this might take.

i11crt•ns~.:

Professional intervention in capturing knowledge systems is not only polil it d in nature, at its core it is profoundly semiological: it constitutes a pt'Ot ,. through which a particular matrix of signifiers and therefore a system of 1111'1 111 ings is adopted within society. Central to this process of colonising and rnotl<tp olising a region of knowledge is the establishment of a specialised la ngu.tgt unique to the discipline. Specialised languages are as necessary to professio t11d monopolies as stock is to companies. Gouldner has termed this the 'cu lturt· ol critical disco urse' (CCD): An historically evolved set of rules, a grammar of discourse ... which is the dl'l'P structure of the common ideology shared by the new class. The shared ideology ol the intellectuals and the intelligentsia is thus an ideology about discourse. Apnrl from and underlying the various technical languages (or sociolects) spoken hy specialised professions, they are commonly committed to a culture of cri cicnl discourse. CCD is the latent but mobilisable infrastructure of modern 'technicnl' lanrwagcs. (Gouldner 1979: 28, see also Edelman 1977) Whil e specia lised professional languages a rc a nccessnry pnrr of professionnllilt•, their usc transcends the material relations l'hnl tltt'y Ol'gn nisl'. Within the ov~· t'll ll development process, for exa mpl e, cnii'Y 1o dt•lmlt• iNl ti iii i'O il t-d by the ex pt·o pt·iorion of power structures, sptl.'inliN(•d ktlt~wlc •dgt •, lt•tllldqtii 'H nnd prnCI'i<.:es ,,,, 1ht• righ1·ful domain of the expNI. C :nl t vt·t~t ly, ll11 '"'~' 1111 11 1 lllll,~ l('l'y ov<.• t' Nil\ It ili'Cnllt' pnH.:I-iccs, of nn appro pl'itllt • l•tiii Wkdl l' 111 1 tlfllll ' "' ' nl d( '<.'odi tll\ (lilt 'l'SNl'S, cf((•t'J'ivdy t'f illlin:l i('S 1111 y h111 tlo 11111~ 1 prll(lt IIIII 1111111 l'll(('l'illl\ i1110 it jlt'Oft1 1111dl y polilirnl pi'Ot'l'NN. 'l'll c• 111111111 11! d, hcti [l i" lt liii illll ) litllilt•tl : lit'.~ ll y, l11 lt'('. IN wlti( l1 lt 11vc• IWI' II ll)',l't•t•d llllllll I') •- ·~ ,,, . ,j ~ l!li Pitdd t ltlllh in t't • l~tlltlll In ('llltlll tl dt • •ltiiiiHtlilimlt •\i)'.t 'lll_lt lf, .. LLi !IHII r, illf t! !lidt i"llltllltt vtl ll11 • t ldt·~ I')'

will\ It dt•lllllt• iNot')\.ltti ~owd ; illitdh , llllltdltiJ \ Itt wlt111 1 ~ l('f',llll y I H'tltti N~J ddc lti Hi! )I IVI'II fl l(ll.lliOII j IOIII'Ihly, Ill till cltldui tlll' ndlivutioll or , lnlhigllllll ~, pt!Ut'l dt •fitH'd 01' tl Oil ·Cx istcnt l cgL~ I ollllll 11 11d lil t~ ~.:x cl u s ion or purtivipiiiOI)' fi1d11 (( :IMk :111d Dear 1984); and fifth ly, llccuu se of the complex S ~' tll ioli\ ll illll tt' •t l'ilkn l di scourse (legal and techni ca l codes, graph ic systetns and N y ll l t: tt l ~ ! n•prcse ni :Hion, conceptual frameworks, specialised means of <.: Onltllttt dn tl itlt t • l ~· . ), whi ch is consciously or otherwise rendered inaccessible to th(• rtVt nlj t' ilizcn. It is evident within this context that the judgement of poli ti c::d Olll ltll tll 1 ~ conditioned by a near-professional monopoly over all signifi ca nt v.tl'i ,tltl t pnrti cularly when the entire matrix of professional engagement is StthNIIIIII 'd 1 !11 1.: discourses of commodity-producing society. Scott for example suppn tl •t lit position and points to the embedded nature of urban planning :1ctin1t tit , 'ucq uires and changes its specific targets and emphases as well its su pp11tt l\ ideologies (planning theory, planning education, professional codes of pt'l ll Ill (' [ C .) in relation tO definite urban manifestatiOnS of that Same OeCCSSi ty' U11 II 1980: 187).

Professions and Space Directly involved in this crafting of space are the environmental prolt ~IIN IIIII nrchitecture, urban design and urban planning, but others, including l1111ldtt1 rea l estate, civil and structural engineering, surveying and landscn pt• llt dlili I u re, also make significant contributions. Because all professiona I al.' l i vII )' t.tl place either within the private sector or in support of state policy, 11 1J t.!t nrgued that 'professionalism' is by its very nature a profoundly polll i• tl 111 ideological event. Professions have a direct role in the production ol idt "'"H i forms and stereotypes throughout the entire range of techn ico Itt Ill 1! H_II!! structures erected within society. Their activities are enshrined in l('f',lll ~.I 11 !I I! In the case of the environmental professions, such laws define dw 1'1,p • 1 11: interests of the state (and by extension, the various capitals): in th e vxlt'll• 111111 surplus value and profit from the development of space, from land i11 1l11 11111 '' dimension, to building in the third, and from the transformation of tiH• '"1 \111 ·omposition of capital in the fourth. In the general process of urbanisation within Western societies, lnni',I HIJ di scourse and the law are inseparable elements in the framework wlwt·t' ll y rclntions and spatial structures are created. They are central compon~· tll ~ 111 1 mn struction of an ex tcnsiv(.' ideological matrix through which the rep1·ndt 1111 of the rel ations of pmd11t'lint1 ttl'(' 1wcured. Every revolution in the pt·wn l':lpi1:11 acc umul nti on i'lt lttt llttpttttit•d hy :l correspond ing id eo l og i cn ln • vt~ lllll • whk h covcrl'l y t'eNII'IIIItllt 'lo !111 lu lie 114 UtH I di s\'OIII'N('S ttnd crl yin g n11y tlt 'W I1H W tl i11 1he dl•vt•lopt tl ltll td 1 'I'll tlt .l' ·"'' d ~tl.tlilltl 'l, 'l'h(• Ot'gn nisnlinl l nl lu tll'livilit•H, ll ~t • idPo ltiJ\i' 11 il ttd tlt t. Ctt itliiitdl_.,, ,,, ttllll tJinllo ,, Nig tti fint tll den iltl'llllj',lt till' Nlllll' ijljtll i\!11 - tlli it ! i li 11l ll i dtlli \'l' l' llj tlilll tdt •olldilit!II N it"tt .-1


pr r ~ulrh " " " · 1rr c rrl .rrrrrrr

d ilr_l rrKtlr ntr /', r: 1d •. •ll!lllli u)iill llr r "'llrllll~illlrnr ltild lliltlr 'fX fl tt tf ' ~~~11 11 f llllt r IIi I)• p1 1ll ll llll rH III fr• flll 'lil' llr fll 'iii Iii rtddtfl ll ll 111 flu •1 tr Hif ll flllrH !III' o l' tll'hll rr jlll pllllitfll ll 't I111N IH'I' II il llr wll lnl l•.i lrHINI' lllll ilfll!ll ol t'II VII'OIIIIH'IIf'lll ' pr•o fl!NN I Il i L~.

r) rll ~ flllt lillli rrl ,r t. p1rlt rrl

Stll ft• lt•gi lilll nting is rll fht' l'or·c o f oil pro l't'NN iorr nl nl·fi vitics, wh k h irrr11drr 111 Nllr vivt• llltrSf lw l' nshrin cd in lnw. In some di sc iplines, fo r cx:1rnplv tll 'hll rr '""' nin g (tlw pr·occss thro ugh whi ch th e state maximises th e rcprodrrc!'ion of tll pff ,tl l'r ·wn spncc), it h:1s no o th er existence. Without th e law, urb:1n plor1rlirrg 11·. r pmfl•ssio n, unlike architec ture, is wholly deprived of authority sirr <.: t' itH pr i1111 fllrH.: t'i o n is Sl':l tc regul ati on. Within the neocorporatist state, such lcgnl ''"" hns bee n enh anced by the increasing coincidence between profcssionnl irlfr•r11rr li on and sta te contro l, particularly in the realm of policy form ati on. In r't'j\llrd 11 i l'opit·ni , urba n planning as a professional activity had been limited histol'ir nll1 '" implementing state policy 01; within the private sector, in genera ting .~ r1rpl11 va lue from la bo ur on the basis of selling professional services for a fcc. I 1rlr"" plnnning in th e private sector gave up any pretence to independence, fo r CX IIIIijrlr irr th e UK, wh en the law was changed to allow professional fir111 s to lwvor111 devel o pers as well as offering services. In other words to ex tend th cir JWIIIII from cxtrac ting surplus value from hiring intellectual labour into spccul at·ioll 1111 la nd a nd buildings as well. At that point any claim to neutrality in sn v11 11' IWc icty's needs went hand in hand with profit maximisation for sharehold,., No ncthclcss, this allowed the built environment professions to extend both 1111 11 influence and profits by integrating professional services with big capita l (t'llll str·ucti on firms, developers, banks, insurance companies, etc.). :o llcc tivcly, the environmental professions manipulate the physical mn111 within which the social and property relations of capitalism achieve a con <.: n•lt form (sec Knox D C 27). In their professional symbiosis, architecture, urh.r11 des ign and urban planning constitute exacting ideologies of form, both sol'i. d a nd physica l, which underwrite the prevailing ideology of power. As the requirt• mcnts o f th e capitalist system are transformed over time, professional organis11 fio ns :111d th eir supporting structures are modified to mirror necessary changes in th e fo rces and relations of production. The singular failure of the environ mcn fnl profcss ions to make any significant ongoing contribution to a general theo ry trl 1rr·hn 11 spa ti aJ stru cture (despite their intervention in tertiary education) mn y hr• lt'lll'l.'d directl y to a constellation of factors. First, their primary collective obj t.:l'l iv(' (likc a ll po litical parties) is to stay in power, nnd to retain political and IIIOilopo ly co ntrol over a specified region of knowl l•dgc. The focus is prim <1 1'il id t•o logica l rn thcr th an intellectu al. Second, fht•y l'mrn pnrt of <1 spccifi e frac t iorr o i' fin:rn cc ca pi tn l whose fundam cntnl lll'it•l iN 11111 111 t''l plnin l)lrf· to explo it fl~t• tll'h:r n systc m in term s of profit rt rrl\ irlll ~llflllll 'l'ldtd , 11 ll pro fess ionals tll't' t nrr1pr·or11is('d hy r·hcir training (i11rlnt fr i1111f i1tll ) lllf rt fi11 \tl r 11111 ~ 1110 nopolk·s ol I'OIIIj Wit'llt't' whosl' t.•con omi c i ll' lll' flf ~ i111 1 i'l!il'y, 'II,, 1"lllllll vt• h11 sis of lh t" il' ll'lli ning IIH'I'l' i'OI't' inclin('S 111('111 fii i! IIJII '' " [ IJ II !l1f tl itl rl lllr llf lr llll' 1111• Nllhsfnrl l'r' nl wllilf lill'y do, Fnllrfh , ll11• 1111rllfl11 11 d " ' ' " " ' '" l111 l fl'l illlologi t•l tlr•ploy r•d l1 y Jll'llii'NiliOII~ 11 1'1' tllll~flllt l \v l ill~' ' 1 ~o: i~; ,~ ;, · •~· lf' ljlllii•tl lo r• llr r•

pllrpoNr'N ollt•gititiii Hing prt~lr 'lllit l ll ll d ll'lli rdrl l\ '" " ' nt lioll , .rntlt111t to t' ' PLIIII 1111 p1'rHI11 c1 o l tllci 1· com bill ed t'lltl r•r tVIIIII N, ll i11 ttll y, th L• it· pl'inw purpww iN to IH'r VI til t• vn r·io11 s t:npi cn ls and tlw Ml ll ll' wi th i11 whic h th cir polit it:n l :tnd i'irt.tlll r.d llll t' ITNIN n1·e embedd ed. As we slurll sec, these qu a liti es plr:t y :1 signifkn 111 rol r when th cy intervene in tertiary edu cation, where the skillin g of lnhour· 011 tl11 l111sis of market requirements usually takes precedence over society's lt t•t:dti 111 r•du cn tc its o ffspring.

.~ ""'

lll~i inf!'!l 1

Urban Design Education ll ere we have to consider three elements: first, the relationship bctwcc n 111 hitII dcsign and the professions to which it is most closely related, na me Iy n rclri 1,., Iure and urban planning; second, their collective relationship to terti a ry t•dJil ll li on and, third, to the education of urban designers. While professions such as law had been established as early as 1739, t'lw ri 1111 ;n vironmental discipline to acquire professional status was architecture, ori p.111 nting in 1834 as the Institute of British Architects, which would later be nwn1·rlt•d n royal charter. The first planning legislation was established in 1909, nnd 1!11 town planning profession five years later in 1914. The reason for th e dt• lny 111 lcgitimising 'planning' might seem rather obvious: architects had for ct·nt111ir • been involved in building and planning cities. The physical organisation ol f111 built environment, to the extent that it was not merely a reflection of gcogi'I IJ ,1" land ownership and crude expressions of religious and individual power, dirl11111 require any additional knowledge other than that directly connected w iII r I 11111 rl ing, predominantly engineering. Architecture and urban design have ht>t'llr l111" l correlated as praxis for millennia. A more satisfying reason, howt'V t'l, lllij ' lil follow the path of political economy - the idea that social pracri rt :N 'illl It I! professional organisations surface from structural social requiremcn ts, i11 i l1 1 ~ ,_ ifH the overwhelming needs of big capital for some form of instituti<)ll fl r. il \11111 1!1 ta ke care of the disastrous consequences of the Industrial Revolution , he11It r111ti t landscape and on the human population. The state as caretaker fo1· t lrl'l 11 sibility co-opted the planning profession as an appropriate agency to rll illl lt)•,r ti ll social wage. For the first seventy-five years of the twentieth century, pl n riiiiii J ~ Wfl almost wholly concerned with health, housing and institutional reforr11 . While architecture and urban planning both constitute social pract k t•N, 1111 h one can claim to be an academic discipline, namely architecture. As the 1 \ l 't ' ll l r ~N f of th e arts, architecture has existed as an academic pursuit for mille nni ~1 , witl1r1111 1'11c legitimation of any professional organisation. Conversely, one could 11 1'1'· "' th at urbnn planning as we k11ow it h('l s only ever existed as a pr~fession " ''"""' ts nn ('lca demi c di sc ipli111', •jill t t• .tr·r llitt·cts nnd engin ee rs carried our n•ONI ph ) irn l plnnning. Th e pl1111111111\ 11l f11W II It4 rlllll l'i tit•N, ft 'ollr th e Gree k tow11 Nol A•nn Mi11 o r· lo dw Bnstirlt• Ill\\' II •· rol 111 !1 11 l\1iti ~ lr N1·w 'lh wn s of i111• 1111 rl IWt' lll it•th l't•rriiii 'V, Will "" ''' ' ' I ·• 'illl1111i ill ll t lli ii'L'iiiHI I II IIrlllrhnn i'rll'lll , Ill rriiH

'" I""'

'"' "I"


H

!ij

11 0 11

,~ i~Jdlo!u IH oti!\ lli' i11,ii 11111 1111•11!1 ~it:ltlf\il \'vllllti IIH•• i' ti•.U II oll (' d •ollllhllll id rl llllill, ~ lj][tj till • ll\'i llfltill !Jlflili i)', il l[! l ii Wl lll tl 1111111 1111

ti! li!i ..

1

I

l'l t.i(t}!l!l 11 11.1 Jll [l) II jill ditlt:d 111h11 11 plolllllilljlt lll It !IL\1 1!'!·11 I IIIII i111111 111 IItt 11 Cll llllllu m lll ~ oil fll ttfi~t 1111 "" "'" "1,1'1 11\11 , '1/,,• r\1( "' 'ill' '" ;,, I HWI, 1<'11 yt'" ' " lu•ln11• n•1 y •H 1111Io~1 'j ill "' fin"" w•lf'''H '"'""' I•' pl ltlllllll j•,, 'l'lt t• I11 1111'IN111'11' W1111ld jll'llhnhly lw IIWilrdt•d lo l•:lll'll l'l';•c• t lftt\1 11d 1\IIVI'IIIIlll'llf Nfl 'll<l)',l'llpiH•I; wl10 fi1·.~f puhlislwd hi HfiiiiiOIIS li'I'IIIINI' (,'tlltlt•fll ·f 1 u/ '11>111111'1'11/IJ i11 I HJH, tllldt•,· 1h1• ol'iginn l tiil t: of 'lluflorrlilll: A l't 't ltt '/111/',,JI Nt•ttl 1<1'/t>l'llt . llvl'll fh l' n, llownrd 's plnn was fund :IIIICIItnlly llllt'Xt' l't'INt• 111 tn·lm, dt·.~il\11 .~ iltl't' il l't· lit·d h<•nvily on n (o,·,n nliscd conce pt ion of plnn·H 1111d NJ!d (i A IIIOrt' fht·o,·efil'n l focus 011 th e n<.:fun l dif(c,·t·nc.·t•s lwtwt'l'll dl 'tl11111 Ill! ! pl 11 1111i11g nnd urbnn des ign th erefore revenl s S0111e ol'lwr ill(l'I'I'Sfittg Jli'II IHI'Uiii!i! llt ,lf huve se rious implic:Hions for edu cnl'ion. For a disci pline fo hn v1 .Iii M iJ•,Ififk ba sis nt nil, it hns f'O possess either :1 rea l or n th cor·cfivo l oh1n 1 "' t'llqtJi,·y. While nrchitecturc ha s a rea l object for theoretica l cnq,Ji,·y (lilt• ltttdol 111g), plnnning docs not. Architecture ca 11 therefore clnim Sl'iHlls ns lt11tlt 111 ll'll d('mic discipline and a profession. Pla nning on th e Of' her hnnd l'il ll l'l11illl 111 IH' 11 pmf<:ss ion on ly by virtue of its legitimation by the state. The defi nitioll l\ 11'1.11 thovt·, thnt· profession a l action shou ld be based in theory, is difficult· to npp l)' 10:• pLt1111ing in the nbsence of appropr iate objects of enqu iry. f fence its t'L1ir'' Iii pl·of,•ss ionnl status is reduced to the legitimation process and not to nny inft'l 11 .d m lt t• rt• nce of its own. Planning is a mongrel discipline, ritu a lly bred '"''" t•lt' lll('llf'Dry particles derived from social science, econom ics, a rchitt·~ lllll lll'flnn geogrn phy, law, engineering, etc.

P,l

1

II/""""'"·': I,,,,

Significa ntly, the a bsence of an object of enquiry renders any ideas of pin 1111111 fltt •o ,·y nnd planning history problematic. The closest planning has come fo .Ill\ inlt'l'll:tl co nsiste ncy was in the late 1980s, when it wholeheartedly cmlwr11 rd y.~ f t• m f·heo ry ~1 s its possible salvation. So-called 'planning history' is a l111 1 11 IIIOI'ihund subj ect for similar reasons. In the absence of a theoretical ba s(·, ''" l;tl'lllnl ' plnnning' history should be limited to the history of the professio11 rtlld lt.~ :ll'fiviti cs since '1913. Otherwise, planning is seriously constrained in CSI:ih l i.~hi11g nny claim whatever over the history of human settlements, given tlt111 do:.wns of ::tcndemic disciplines are involved in how economic, politicn l 11 111l m·in l processes affected the material production of social space. Even wlll'11 pl11nning took form as the Royal Town Planning Institute, its members wt'tl' dntosf who ll y nrchitects and so it stayed for 1'11e next' hnlf ce ntury. In contrns f Itt trdlitl'l'fmc, the es ta blishment of 'town pl::tnnin11 ' ns n 1w pnrntc project wa s l'(·nll dt •pt'IHit•nt on th e Institute for its existenl'l'. ' J(, thiNdn y, tlw nrrhit·ccturn l profe1 io11 hn s sig nific::t ntly more power and :lllll~e" II )' il~o111 do,·~ plnnni11g. I low vvt' l, IIIII' l't•1tl l'O II <.' c rn here is not thnf :tl·c ltitl 't 11111 11111 pl1111111111\ lwn,· :1 ll('l'l'SIHI I ll 'lll tionship fo (':H: h other, but thnt hni11c ltli lll 111 ''"" "' '1111\11 1INilll'ir ow 11. So wiH·n· does this k•nve llrhon dc·~il\11 111 !111 lc'l' llflllllllllt l" 'lli'NN? My n•p ly In ilw1 is Hi lltplt•: il is 111 lt•nsf ns Sll'llll/', .111 ltcilll•• IIII o_' II''' I ·1/',ll ill ll lllfl y HIIJlt•l'im 111 111'! 11 111 pl itllllillg, If WI' jliii'S tll' lilt' ·"'" I'Ll Jllj\illiH Iii II liU ftll illc '• \VI' 1'11 11 111'1' III III lllbilll dc·~ll\11 VI IIIIJ • i111o t•'dNit 'll tl IH II lli il i iod 111111 i1 d I'' It lilt I''"" 111 111'h1111

plt\il!i!iiJII tli tl l})icllllj'ti.J 1\iVt'll 1-,)' fti!ii 1liii ,j•, Itt i11h ll11t II " "'' ttll' il (l·, p,it lt('i lu·tt i11111 1 t ~ "'' II, ~ illlc Wt '.111 ,_1, li111 d11 tl11 1111111 '""''It' 1 111 11111.111 d, ·• 'I'·" .t·· tiu p11hl1t dttlll illll , II I IIIII I pi 111tl11 ddnl Wlflti11 , 111111 III ~H Jll ll'l lhlt Itt till, fl11 ldt .t d ,,, II Hllllt •fy ()If tld Nh.HWl 1111 !1 111 dt •N if'o ll IHilllllll'dlllit•ly IH•d IIIIII '"''"''"" "' '" ''dil l p1111 I 'NNt ~~. tiiJ• !II'ii~N n11d Jll'l tl' l irt•s. It lt ns lHiilt n "'''OI't'll t't il ohlr•tl (l! tvi l Ill il lY) o iNwt• ll.t HII l't•nl ohjc<.:l (I he pllhli t: dOinnin) . So, IIH it poillf '"'' d l' h l tft~. Wt l '"" ld oll l'o lll' tlt•tf 111'hn11 d t~s ign hn s both n rcn l nnd :1 tlworc t k~ tl ohjc•cl, nl'litift•t 11111 lt iiH 11 tt•n l ohit'l'l (the building) , and planning has ncirhct·. 'l'miiSPIII't•nfl y, tlw 11111tv1dtllliH llt nf l'O IISfifute society arc not dimcnsionlef:s cntiti t:s. 'J'Iwy t'xiiH wtfltlll ltiHIIhrough spn ce.l'he co nstitution of civil soci ety is th ercfo ,·l' intilltlllt•l jj,;d lo til l· nt'fllilll'oncretc manifestation of spaces and plnccs. The l'l'llll'llllottl "r 111'1mn dcsiJ.l, n is on how th is public domain has evolved, how l'hc s p i t~'' ' II "'' "pies is trnnsfonn ed, exchanged and designed; what form it takes; nnd ho w 11 llllllt'l'inli scs as nn ::tccretion of signs which embody th e meanings of hi s1o1 I'III'IT nrc signifi c::t nt impli cations in these ideas for the training of urban det·liJ', II plof,·ss ion::tls, so I will now take a look at the domain of tertiary educnti011 .1 l t•ytHo nc in the process of professional legitimation. Whi le I have referred to urban design throughout this text as a profess io11id ll livity, in fact it ha s no independent professional identity, retaining a SO II1 ~·wh.11 lll'f:trious rel ationship to both architecture and urban planning. Thi s ntiNc~ qtl l'S Iions as to whether it should be considered an inherent part of flw Ht 111her professions or whether it has sufficient integrity as a discipline to dt•llllltlll pi'Ofessional status in its own right, and I have suggested above that· if dtll' While architecture, urban design and urban planning have a coterminotiH1'\ l'tf t• ncc as praxis, they remain both theoretically and professionally iso ln 1l'd (t'(t!i 1 'itch other. This position allows several events to take place. First, anyhnd)' tJ ill ltty claim to being an urban designer, thus opening the gate to ch,lrl lli (lll!l [i l ,til descriptions. Second, the two professions that colonise urban tlt'IIIJ',II u!i i ·ontinue to be self-referential when it comes to defining the discipli11c•, wlt( l! li tlrban design becomes politicised rather than theorised. Third, 011 !111 ~ j,, urban design education can continue to be anything anybody decid(•s il 111 II• 11 1 1he training of urban designers adopts the format of what teachers lwow ''' wlt r11 professions require. In other words it becomes structured on th e h11 "1 IM'tl 111 1 so na I and professional ideologies. At the root of the problem lies the q 1II'~ II1111 'd 1heo ry, the only unambiguous way to determine the integrity of tlw di Nltplllll nnd the training of its members, thereby eliminating problems of ch;Hln1111 II NIII professional haggling and appropriate educational curricula. In the education of professionals, production costs are undertakc n hy !111 public through the general educational system, and paid for by tax::tti011 111111 th e surplus wage of families. But the products (trained professionals) an· t'X I" 11 pl'intcd by professional organ isations in the process of upgrading. and I'CI)I'Ildll r ing p,·ofessional service.~, hnvin g t::tken no material responsibility fo 1' illl•lt l'dtll'nf·ion beyo nd t'slo~h li ·dtitt g illl'i, · own corporate interests. I lcnct• th t: tll',tlloll of ll'llill('d proft•ssillll tdll Ill llll illtollt •ly l'O IIIW<.:tCd IO lllfi Vl' I'S itit'S :tlld IOWIIId 111111111polies of tllii'IHI111 Li't ''' 11111 1 [Ill llltdnl vnrinh l 1~s i11 ilw dt•vt•lopnH'III td


dt r Pi!ill'l··""'' d 1''"1' • 1 II ''' ltt 'lli'I•J Wil!~llli t·'•, lit II i.iJif r\ i";'a/ ( ';r/I,Jf'M' 11 1 ll iii/IUJ 'S i/ 1 (I '1'111), p!tdt ·'4-. lllll ,d ltiult t;!j lt ti\•) ~illitil ~1111i1 )' '111111 dtllittl 111 !111 dt I tl}' '') ,d11 lll lfilll \ j, lllt Wlt•dl \1' IIWt l)' fttllll i1 11 lll llt.hiiiiL"ill tfl ll'lljl 't llll\ II( tll~11i I l l lfi Will dNII llliiil rlll illl ,lttllilliiHilllt•d 11 11d tit II1IIIIH"d jti iiii'NIU

~~~ IW IIIIIs IIVI'Ivlt•w l Nlll\)'.l'N IIJ ill!· dtlll)•p· ol pmlt'NN IIIIIIIIINIII)IIIrlldt•ttllt

lt t•ld11, '"'" lt nvt• dt'IIW 11 Nl llll(' lllll'llliOII . 'l'lt til II lt 11 Mdt'I IWII NO VI' IY 1/ifl t Ill OVI'I O il I' i11111dr·t•d Yl'n r·s ind icn les how u·ern endously powcdu I is il ~t• 111 111 1,, proii'Nsio nll list· 11 11d dni m n fi eld for one's own group. A group cloints 11 11 1111'111 111, powt'I'Nof mimetic engul fment mold the identities of its rnembcrs, nrHI hl'l1111 ' 11111 kno ws it , th e group pulls away from others and parochialism di sg uist·d liS 'st li•IH t nnd 'sc holorship ' pt·e v:~il s. (Wilshire 1990: 101 ) fiii N diillj \1'1' Nh111 tld

PnnH ioxic.:n ll y, scnte legitim ation for professional practice goes to ilw !WO II 'II" '''" 1101 1he university. In turn, professions consolidate th eir in terests nnd tlttllll ,; lh ei r nurhority, using this derived power to influence professional prowr1111111 wi l hin institutions of higher learning, trading sanction for co ntrol, wi ilt "'' finnn c.: inl co mmitment of any kind. If universities wish to have tbcir progt'll llllll ·nd orsed as legitimate professional activities, the entire stm cturc or dt'/',11:1 jWogrnmmes then falls under the surveillance of professionalmonopol ies: 11n It t lt'l'lure, urban planning, landscape architecture, building, civil engincc t·ing, I'll 'l'he c.:e ntral problem here, given the relation of professions to the state a rtd '''1'. .· n pi n·d, is that society's needs become conflated to professional in tcresrs, w11 l1 Iht potential editing of educational programmes that this implies. Urban design fits uneasily into this overall scenario. Several reasons fot· 1!11 hnv e a lrea dy been given, namely that urban design has traditionally been 1111 pi'Ovincc of architects. But the expansion of knowledge systems during il11 1w<.·nticth century, combined with immense societal change over th e It t ~~ IWl' nty -fivc years, has resulted in urban design problems being diffused n<.: t'o l wide spectrum of disciplines, from law to urban geography. Similarly, the fi scu l 'l'isis of th e state has forced planning at all levels of government to engagt• 111 puh li c.:-private sector partnerships as part of their neocorporatist agenda. At iltt tll'bn n level, private sector intervention focused on profits from land deve lop nl l'llt has dive rted much planning intervention from regulation to deregulal'i o tt l't•o nt policies to plans, and from zoning strategies to project-based design 0111 t'Oiltes. As a consequence, urban design has become central rather thanma rgi n:tl to pl antt ing, symbolically replacing the tired 'land usc planning process' wilh 11 tn o t'l' dyn amic and strategic urban design appron ch in o rder to accelerate ca pi111l let'lmtul:ll'ion from land speculation, profi1 ft·otn h11ilding nnd surplus vnlllt' lront lnbolll: T he demand for plannet·s wiilt 11rh11 11 d,.,~;l',tl knowledge is clen rl in ilt t• nsc.:cndnncy. 'l'his ove ra ll co ntext res ults in dt e jHnd"'''"'t"f 11\'11 1-lltd'l ll lllt'hnn designt•t".~, r'oltgh ly hn s<.'d in archi tecturn l nr11l pl tttlrllll )' '"''"' il\lt 11 '"" ll~t•it· pr·oft•ssio nnl 111\t'rll lns, :tnd I hnve to ge ncndi w '"' ' ""' 111 tltt ! ll l" l•rtl '""'Pit•xi ly of pt·o l', l'll nlltll 'S ll lld dq~rt'l'S. lr1 IIH· fii'N I lrlilll ! il l lllli litll( !•tOf'i IIIIIIII'N wllllirl IIIIJ;t' lllti vnloilit•s lr·,•qiH'IIli y o fl t·r pcn•ll\itlrlt lll l( ill"j!l ii il !11 t!ii•JIII "' '~11:11 d ll tl tll't• 11111 li tted Ill Nllldt:t ii N wlill ll ll llndc•IJ\ IIId! ll tl (l tl· jlf! i • lio till hij {o IIIII "''" '1\ 11 II 1

I""""

i"-· ,u:ivcd II!II IIII.'X Itllll llllllll ctiLhiin i[111 t• 1111 .,

1)' IIIH\•_It' htlil.ltlll'.'·l tllid tHdll tit '" •"' llllllllt ll llll ttll r diJitlrli.t lti l l'' " l' ''"" l'''"tll " ' "'ber'!i llll '• tl ~ tt.dl y tltt"t' u )'f'l ll '111 pi tH lilt In 1111 11 11 htlt'llllt ,tl n ll ill '~t •t tlltdly, 111 oilut' lllli Vt 'tlj illt •R (l},l_l, Iii ) tll lll' lli dnlt ll llll Ill th t• l!lliVt' I'IHiy ttl r~t · w Sct ulh Wll lt•H ill Sy dlu•y ) ilu • '""''" dt ·M IJ •, II p11lJ',ill ltlnl!' is 11 lso o lf'l· r·l·d 11 1 poslgrnduntt• lcvt· l, oltlllltt ii ii Y '1 l111lt 111 wl11t lt tiN 1111 lltl!lt•t')',l'll(lll ntc deg ree wid1 t1 diret:1' rci:Hionsltip to iiH· d i~t ip ltlll', '"' 1 ;ttlltp lt' nrr hilt'l'lure, I:Jw, civil engineering, ren l es talc, lnlld:K'ilj W .tn lt ilt•tlllll , lflllit tl gt·o~rn ph y, c.:o tnm erce, etc . This kind of a pproach to lll'bnll dt•NiJ', II 111 11 111 ll'tog niscd hy th e nrchi tcct ural profession, whi ch usunll y arg ut:H lil nt ntdtll t•tl " '' itt vo lvl:d in professional indemnity for th e intcgri1'y o( 1·hcir· w01·k, Nil 11111 m ·lt iwc.: t· urbart designers ca n attain membership (substa nd ard httildittf•, ''" '' 1111 nu bur substn nd nrd pl anni ng on ly maims). So despite the hi stori <::tlt·t·l.ll1 1111 NIIIp lo :ll'<.:hi tecturc, the Master in Urban Development and Design :11' th e Univt•r•d t y 11 l Nl·w South Wales is recognised by the Planning lnstitu te of Au st rnlin (PI/\) , llnt il 004, wh en the PJA relinquished its requirement for urban design f11'0grll tllllll ''l l11 lw nsscssed, it was the only programme in Australia with such recop,11ilion . Whnt is certa.in is that architecture and urban planning still vi ew ut·bnn dt •H tj',ll ts an opportunity to colonise another region of knowledge a nd hnvt• Vt' l \ different perspectives on the discipline. People like myself sec it as :1 11 iml vpt•tttl i'll t discipline fighting a rearguard action for legitimacy. O n the one hnnd , 111 htlll design qua architecture remains wedded to the idea of sectarian ktt ow lt•dp,c , physica l determinism, a renaissance concept of the architect as mns l'l' l' ht!ildt '• 1ncl the domain of architectural aesthetics as the proper locatio n lot llll u111 design knowledge. On the other hand, and somewhat paradoxically, pl n1 11t i1111! because of its own diffuse origins and weak theoretical foundation s, t'.tll ,tllttitl 1'0 see urban design as pluralistic, open to a diversity of disciplin es. S i~ttil iil l )', tl1 ve ry power and integrity of architectural ideology and its profession nl 1111 '._11111 has forced it into an extremely limited perspective on urban design, wiH' II'II• !Itt weaknesses of planning ideology outlined above in this instance off~· ~· fli J•,II ill• 1111 op portunities for an evolving urban design knowledge. This year ilw 1'1 !\ 11 dd r d several other chapters to its planning base, which included urbnn dt•lf iJ \11 l11 doing so, planning formally recognised urban design as a part of ii H ttVI ,,til mandate. How all these factors impinge on the actual training of urharl dt::IIJ\1111 needs some additional consideration. 111 111111 1

Educating urban designers Overall, the education of urban designers has had comparatively li111 l' nllc' llll llll in the academic press, nnd l'lwrc· is li ttl e written on the subject. Of wOI'k ir t ptltti most exhaustive of tl ~t:Nt' iN ""'"' Vcmcz Moudon's 'A Cathol it: npp t'OIIl h In orgn nizing whn1' tii'I HI II di ''I IJ\1111 11 Nlt o11 ld know' (1 992, D C 2 H~ nnd , lllllll' 11 ".· nd y, Thomn s St lttlll~ lt '11 '!It ' 1111·tl d1 IIII I', lll'llil n dl:sign' ( 1999 ). .JotHll hil tI lltll tll'll ·onfl:tll'S tll'hll ll di 'N IJ •, II ,·.111, 1111111 111 ll 1llll l't 111r'nl t'd ll l'nt'io rl i11 ' /\r·cltil t•t 1111 1d t'dll l'll lio n: lt'l lt IIIII}\ 111l •nit t!Pt!l~ ll !lirW tl u 11 l lit• tti N Wil tll i1 ' (Bill'll1'11 I 11Hit) ( :oh tHitt (I 1/HH) IUIW lltl !f! !! tl! 111 ijill 11 ~ t1 lit ld ill llt•t•d o l ht'llltd t•dlfl ll lltlll!tl


1 lltttUI'IIIItttl 1111d 111111111111 ( 1 ' HH) vi1 wul 1 11 " rwn lllti( 11 , '" '" """ dr •lj '''·' ' ., t ldlinti 'V illl' pl ollllllil/', pllll',nlllllllt'N, Cr lltdtt '~o IJII Iil_lf 1•1 'IHII 11111l.•H t tlll lllll ll ld 11h lt•, Tl11• INN IIl' o( ttl'lltll l dt •s lgn l'l'IH.'ll t'dt niN11 lt11 11 ,, '" '""'H 1111 111'll1111 d~ ·~tl\'! t•dm.ttion , illld two key Hl'tk les :1 1'(.' Ihost• or ./lllllhN ( 11JI) I) nnd I kidt• lllil Wii tllwlt (I 'J%). Signifi<.:ntHiy, the UK Ocpo r · trll~lll ol' lilt' Hnvil'o nrn ent , 'l 'n 111 por·t ond th e Rcgiot1S (DE'I'R) has produced the onl y st·:He co mmental'y nvn rl 11 lt1, on 11rbt1n design ed ucation in its report Training for Urban Desifi ll (2.00 I ) Din-Moore's a l'ticle 'The scientist, the social activist, the practitioner n11d flr t ·leric' is a lso highly relevant (2001: 14) (see table 14). Moudon begins by searching for the various fields of knowledge t·htH itil orllt urban design, a nd notes the significance of individuals such as Lewis Mrnnltlld , :hristian Norberg-Schulz, Donald Appleyard, Amos Rapoport, Edmund Btlt 1111 nnd .Jonathan Barnett, but stressing the collected works of Kevin Lync h ns ht' '"ll of prima ry significance. In order to map the knowledge necessary for urh,llt x lucation, Moudon distinguishes between normative, i.e. prescriptive infor'"''' tio n as to 'what should be', and substantive descriptive knowledge as to 'w lt111 is'. ln doing so she separates the principle of understanding cities from the al'l 111 d process of design. For me this is the fundamental conceptual flaw in the pnp1 •1 'onsidering that the substantive dimension is in fact the most importa nt, Hl11 oncentrates on substantive research and epistemology. Moudon identifies 11i111 ncentrations of enquiry (D C 28: 367) (see table 15):

,,,

·~o I~ fl t'''

o1:: c.. ~§~ c ·-

o:l

c

4

5 7 8

c

d

~

:J

(!)

..c

u ._

c

...

2Q)

:?

0

!J)

,_

<J)

·-

(!) Vl

(lj

·.;:: <.J ru

g? l ~ ..c u

0

V'l

ro o-o _ro a; roc..O:::J"'O ·c; ·- !1: ..o ~ 02>E,_ <f> ro ro ·- Q) Q) ,_ 3:

rn

<J)

c

ro

~ o g? o

_g

I

'-1-

0 Vl

>(lj

3:

c

c

·x

-o (lj

''"''II"''

cbO

·-

3: 0

c

~

'-1-

0

Vl

>(lj

>- ·-

....... c ~ 23

Q_

-5

,_ -ii)

I··oE 1::

Qi

V'l

Q)

(1j ,_

~

ill

E

~ ~ -~ Q_

u

V'l

.......

~

X<f>"""'U

Q)

"'0

"'0

0

c u

E :::J ~ ~ 3: I

t)= ·;:; -~

c ~"'0-.:: u

·-

0

~

e

<J)

,<f>

"' Q) Q:;tn~E -o~ <J)

"'0 Q)

-~ -;:o o.. :"'_ ·~

Q_~ -~

(1j

"'0

:::J c 0

..Cro..O o u <J)

~ ro .......

l....

Q)

c

m~ ~

~ro~"""' ..o-o (lj!....>Q.., .., ,_ o c :::J E oo ., o u ·1 2 a; .!: I;J -:;:; 2 0 co::c ~ It .'t: t;) U ::= 0

=c<f> ro a_ u ·- ro E ~ Vl

' .~

Ern

}..... 0

o_ CO·- "'0 '+o_ "'0 "'0 Q) "'0 ro a; o...., c ·co'"3 E · ~ ro .~ o E o.. t -5

c

i ~ i6 .~

o :-] 1~ ./:l

~COQJQJ:::J

c~u-oo..ro

ro

co

X

u.J

:::J c(!)

....,

~u -'

3:

6'Z

0

0...., c

0

c

(1j

E :::J

"8

L

0

·=

. ... t1 c ~ c Q) ,_ o-o~ :::J 0 ~ >

Q)

Q)

:::J ,_

..:!!. >- CO-o

-

(1j ]

(ii

ct

::::l~V')w

""'i::

~~

c .:::-' ....

<J)

c

>

~:Oa;"""'

..020-o (1j · -

~

3: c L > >- co (1j tOuV'l=c..r:. .:..= d.> ro ~ a; ~ ~ Q; ~ ·~ 0... o :::J - > a; > c E o E o..-;:o 0 > ·- Q_ > 0 ·- Q_ Q) u

·~

E

Q_

o..C:::J c rn~o_ o.... u ~ ro 1- OJ ln' ..o I ~·1Q >OJ I E o -o o .~ iJ E oo Q_ .2 :§ 2 6 2 ..no...rou-=tn uV')...c E 2 ro ..o ro ·c; c Q) r1l 0.. ~ · - (1j ~ o....s:! Q)

-

:oo~ii)

<J)

c

c c ·.;::::;

<J)

<J)

@

Q)-o~a 2 0 ·-

<J)

·"'=

cU~

·Q)

Q)

~ >-

X c

:o·;; 0 ·.;:::; I u ...., Q)

L

3: oo-~ o..

Q)

c

t

.,

...., u...., Q)

-5

t)

cornro 'Vi ,_

-o23:rn·.;:::;..O cco_cu -.:=oc .... a;ii) E -o u ~ ·3 ~ o.. ~ ~ a;uaJ '-rn<f>_o:::J """' -.:: ..0 "'0 Q) L Q) 0 . ~ ·Q) Q_ :::J ,_ (1j

<J)

0

tJ)

co ._ --

-~

..._

d.>

~"'0 - c

ell ·.;:

.)!)

u

V'l

0

tJ

E > a; E ·:;: :::J > ,_ >

(lj

(!) ....,

·:;

~

~

'+=

-

!J)

<J)

I

·:;; "'

.~

<J)

-o (!)

E

"'0 t

c c ·.;:::; 0

coOc

co u c u ·- - :::J (1j c c\..;:<JJCV'lo.-=:·.;:; ro ~ ·.;::; ·c ·i: ::J ~ UJ V1 o

... ern

..0

ro

o_ 0 CO iJ 2j -~ 9 ~ 0.. '- .~ :;'f a; ...... ~ c ,_ -;:o E c -:;:; c ~ i6 Q) ~ u 0 0 .~ Q) 0 E L :::Jco c . - "'0 Q) co 2-Q:; Q)~ Q) 0~ Q)- :::J (1j · - Q) "'0 ·,_ ~ -- ,_ u ..0 0 E25c:c=~~t)0~2_c :::J :::J E > ro 3: o.. o.. ....,

Q..

>-

c

<J)

·-

"'0 ....,

o_

c

u

~ ro ro ~ a.>

0

Qi

Q)

,_ --

lll

(lj

"Q_

c

:J

Q_

·.;:: u ·-a ...., ru

X

Moudon introduces three other dimensions that add significantly to th e CO lli pie xity of the task: first, three predominant research strategies in the form of t lw literary approach, the phenomenological approach a nd positivism; second, rh t• idcn of modes of enquiry (historical-descriptive, empirica l-inductive and t·hco r c:tkn 1-deductive); and third, the specificity of dw r·t·sc•tlfT h focus. She notes that it 1 th e USA the favoure d approach has been lilt• pt•oplt•l.~ llhjt•ct orient:1tion, cxt nl plified by the so-called 'man-enviro"''H'III l't•lrtl filii~<' o l AllillN Rnpoport, G:n Moor<.', D:1vid Ca nter a nd others, 'l'l11 • lll!ll 111 11 I 11/ ll11 """ t·~s i.~ lo sc ree n tht' two ll'l'lll S fro 111 r·t·:wnrc.: h for what she terms it s 't• i111 1N', lttlll,_l\vi rl l\ Hnpopor·t, 11 nmdy \·ric/~.:Jttic', wo 1dlj 11 lilt I; tf li !'l.l tl t111111 IIIJ111 ,d I''< PI't'SNioll,~~ tl.lllll'ly frllll-:111' (wl'ittt'll lnng;rrtl\t ') lltd /'•"'''' ' (~l•fil!t'it '"'H"•'III') , ' App lit•d In llldit~ll nf pt•op lt•N ,111d u dllll t'N, tllr 111d flili l ,,:l,; r: it• tir e· illlllit• o l il11· Hlllil't I ' ol il~t• tllltll'llllllillll 1\llllit•lt 'd ' 1' //o Ill ilrr I oilll. i• l ilrol iil{f-tll ll illll ht 'IIIJ I fl11

c

c (1j 0 ~ ·- ~ u

·~

-o (lj u (lj

!J)

O:::JCc"'O

3:0

(!)

urban history studies; picturesque studies; image studies; nvironment-behaviour studies; place studies; material culture studies; ty pology-morphology studies; space-morphology studies; nature ecology studies.

QJOQJ~~ u Q) E ·.~ > ,_ aJ

Q)

~

£

Q)

E


lahlt•

" ii;' ·'

~-§ €

C.· ·-

co 0"1 ,....

~

2

"'C

cs ·=

'€

~

..... ro c

e

00 0

~oc.

b<:

c:

CCJ

l t'l r-.,0'1

a-. a-. ,.... ,....

~~

<f>

<f>

Q) · -

>

E

ro o ..... 0

lJ _,

~

~ c

.2

~

Q) Q)

Q)

r::

·.p

't 1.:!

Q,

a.

0· I

·-

U

a.:= ro o

,_ 0

0

c -rti

t-'

c ' '

Q!

._._

~Q)~

0 "- tJ') ro x -o c:- ~

> u._ c: ·-ro c Q! ·;::; :~ E ro o o ro ',_ c o.o ·. -o ........ c '- u M o 52 -o U a\ ~Q)_gcct!ro~ 2oo .9- fr ro 0 j2 2 2 13 tO ~ u-o=-oct;:ro"'

·-e

c:OG! :.Cc

ro ·-

0...

u

c ~

>o O~ ~ +-'·-a; ..... u ~ CCJ

u

0"1 0"1

u:;- s

('. . ;··

oo -o

0"1 0"1

0"1 0

X

~ 0"1 0"1

Q)

ro u 00 0 00

ro

,....

-o Q)

E-o 0"1 ~

.~

,....0

-:;-~ ~ ';;' Q)Q)Q"\ 0 >-. c~

lf)::;!

a.

n::l

s

~ u

Q)

't;;

·;;;:

'tro iU

·u 0

V)

cro

-o 0 a. 0 ·oo.~ ., t Q! ro

> a. -~ ..... ,_ c 0

Q)

f,l ·~

=0 ·u u

c c ·~ <f> u ._ Q! ro ::J+-- '-""0 ro o... c

~ 0"1 0"1

'@

,....

lt....

~ ~ ~

·- > o ro ~o-' Q)

QJ~ Q)

CL

+-' -

c

a:i o tJl

'4-""''

0"1 0"1

ro

·u

·.;= 0

X ro ,_ 0

i

~

0"1

a;O

<.!) ,....

,Q"\

,.... ,....

0"1~

0"1 c ro

~

::J

>-·"' Q) ~s

0

<f>

cO

~ 0"1 0"1

-o

ro

s

.g ':. __:. ·-a ~ ,....ro oo 0>-,....

oa. 2:\G!-5

Q) _c .... ..._..., m

0

....-

~

.2: c.::

NU

't;; '.;:J

c: Q)

·o Vl

Q)

.2: .2:

\J+-'

c

·-

·.;= Q)

._ a.

c Q)

-o

E 0

u C-o Q)

c

frro

0

...,

0"1 0"1

...,

c c u 'i:: 0 QJ ' lfj u C ro ..... ..... tJ')

;:0"'1

G!o..o a;c 0"1 "'9 u 00 ~ . 2 .:::: •v C '-' +-' 0.0 "- -o ·- QJ ro c ,_

~~ -g~~j2..2

<f> · - 0 a. c E Ui ~ c a.:.c ~ -o ·- ..:::t:. ro .....

UJ

o-ro ·-

lf'l

ro u

Q)

-5~ CCJ

Q!

00

00

~

0"1~

,....t c a. 0

'

Q) \::)

00

0"1 Q)

..Ca_

-o

0 "' Ue<::

lf)

'(jj

...,

2 "8

-:5 Q) E

ill

.::

c::

m

..c ....:... -a.~ ~

Q) ..., ::J ...,c .....

·u .<:!:!u <f>

~ .....,

QJ

tJ')

·-

c:

_c

~

uG! ..r::

...a;t--<C ...... ·@ 0

. .ar Q)

Q)

c::

u c:: m

~ _c

Q!

~o

Q)

b.O

.S

Q)0"'"'Q.

"""' "'-0"1

~

QJ

o.~ Q)

.~ ro

"' :'2

.

c a.

ro

0"1 0"1 ~ ,.... 0"1

~E

0

-o

ro 0"1

c

g

f'OtJ'l

O CQ!'-'-

::l

_c'<t ..., <.!)

0 ·~ ..., 0

Date

Molld1HI 1'· 11phH•IIIOioglr,tl l)) ,lp fOI' llrlhlll dl "ilf',ll . lmpad 1111 Key Rcscard1 ltt•Ncarch pral'lk•• distributors• clhos focus

Crl tlr•ll Dyos (1968) l\SH!! HHIIII 1111 Ill M orris (19 72) post dl •tllf•,lw Mumford (1961) nnd fo11 II!• Kostoff (1 99 1) Vi Slltd ,11111 1111\I •M !If Cullen (1961) 1950s- O bject eti c l>icturesque 1\I!'H H alprin (1966) stud ies Sitte (1889) Unw in (1 909) H ow j>t'itpli• App leya rd (1964) Image studies 1960s Su bject erni e pt•rn •lVI' .till I Asi hara (1983) to u n<l! ' l'~l .tl\1 1 H iguch i (1983) 1970s II it!H Lynch (1 961) How pt•oph • Altman (1 986) Environment- 1950s- Subj ect and erni e pcrn •IV!', II'''' Gehl (1987) behavi our obj ect and 111 \(ll'.tll M oore et al. studies wllh ti ll' l~ttl\1 (1 985) nvlntlll111 11tl Rapoport (1977) etc. How p1 •opl•• H iss (1990) O bject and etic and Place studi es 1970s pt'l'l'I•lVI •1 \1111 \ Norberg-Schul subject erni e US!' ,\ltd 11111 •1•11 I (1 983 ) wit h tlu•lt Relph (1976) SUI'I'I lllllll lllf , Whyte (1 988) Tlw oltl!•l I Brun skill (1 981 ) eti c 1920s Object Materi al qu.dllll'~ lllilll j ackson (1 980) culture h ull\ Venturi et al. studies !'I lVII Cll\1111 •Ill (1 977) W olfe (1 965 ) Urh,llll hMill ' •IIIII Conzen (1 960) Typology1950s Object etit ill1 • 1 l y•11~ 111111 M oudon (1 986) morphology mOI'jiiHllll}',Y Rossi (1 982) studi es Whi tehand (1 98 1) Urh,ul 'lpotll ,d Anderson (1977) Space1950s Object eti c Gottdiener (1986) fol'lll ,,, ill morphology Hillier & Hanson gt•onwl ty studi es (1 984) N.lllll'itl !IIIII I INIIII Hough (1984) bj ccl and eti 1980s Naturetllld 1111 1 \lltlll M cHarg ('197 1) 1Hiltj! •CI ecology I'IIVIi 111\1111 1111 pirn (19H'i) stud ies v ,1n dl'l' Ryn ( I ')I\ h)

lJrhnnh istory 1920sstudi es

.8

Cii

0...

/\r11H' VNn<.l/

Cml<'cntra tion of enquiry

1\l

N Q)

u;

Object and subject

eti c

.

~ I Ol' fu 11 l H'l' d1 •I,1\ It• 11l 11 I• 'I i' IIi i'll i ili'd l1i•l n, ~, . , , ~ \!tilde 111 ( I qq J) Sow·r·r•: 1\ , Vi•llll '· i\111lld1111 , '" i ·l ili11lll ll i'lili!ll lilli ll\11•11 11 Ill}\ wlt ,lllllhllt rh•~I}',III 'I ~'•IHIIddlll"' /ol!il tl·illlll'llfllllltto l/li'lo ilill• ' ' ' 1, 1'1'1 ', 1' ' I l-'i•pl illl• •d lty jli ' llill ~loittll lll't~qH t l'~tltlil 1111•111 Iii


fl I I I

I'C!tt 111 d lt l, li u p1 1 ~1111 wl1 11 W illll~jl il11 llii (J IIII II iitii1 1 1j1H I (1/11/o ill fl 11• III NI' tt l !111 i11kllllldlll IH'"H " " N''' v"d ' (i\l o ruhr .!H1 Jr, ' l l' 1rd 1 tt l II H· 1111 11· 111'1'11 '' 1 tbH 11l u•d, 11 11d ii Jt • Nlllll\ 't'N whir l! l'OIIfiglll't: ll 'lldll ltt ll td 111b1111 dt'N IJ', II k nowlt•dl~l '"' ln1d 11 111 ;,, sig11ilku n1 dl'luil . 1

nu

Whil c• th l· n•·ti<.:lt• is undo ulmxll y 011c of th e ht•sl o l' i1s kind , o ffc r·i"l', 1111 I'II Vt•lope fo r urhnn design kn o wl edge, it is co nfin ed to method: 'this first nlil'llljtl 11 building n11 episte mology fo r urban design emanated from th e practicn I ''"'" lo illt rodu t:l' students to a large body of literature, to encourage them to l'ot 'll ll wi1· readings a nd to help them relate these readings to actu a l iss ues n11d jWo hl cms in th e field ' (Moudon D C 28: 378). As a result, there is no Ct'lllt'lll ho lding nil of the pieces together, and we are left with the feeling th at ur·h1111 dt•sig'' m~y be defined as the quantum of information read by urba n des ign l' l 'J'h c.: 1·c is no disc ussion of theory or any substantial explanation of wh :11 ,., I'SS<.' ntin l to urban design, over architecture or urban planning. Simila rl y, il11 idt·n that what urban designers should know is viewed generically and indt•t•tl 1'1'0111 n singul arly American perspective. Nor is there any attempt to sugges t th 11 1 1he ct:o no mic, political and social basis for a resurgent knowledge is influent inI i11 how urban design as process actually comes about. Hence the dominant fo rct'l• str·uctu ring th e ur ban realm are excluded from the nine concentrations of VII q uiry de noted as essential for an urban design education. 'J'hornas Schurch (1999) concentrates similarly on urban design as a fie ld 01 !Wol'cssion, defining it as 'form giving to built environments as a primary ac ti vit i11 vo lvi ng the professions of architecture, landscape architecture and plan n i11 g ' .111d reso rts to a hierarchy of physical scale as the appropriate meth od o l l' IH.':l psui::Jting design intervention. He denotes the most significant aspects o l this hi era rchy as quality of life, the public realm and something called 'process'. w~· nrc in fo rm ed that 'urban design can be defined as a process should come'"~ 11 0 surprise to anyone', that 'urban design has been realized more or k ss rno nymo usly' and that 'urban design cannot be limited to any one paradig111 ', Ih us opening the floodgates to a nefarious and indefinable form of pluralism and •lll thiguity. T he article takes us through a familiar series of prototypical urbn11 dt •s ig n r·acti cs, defi nitions and homilies that restate the importance of the wo rk o f Chl'isfop her Alexan der, Kevin Lynch and Jane Jacobs, retreads relationships lwfwl'en the pro fessions and arrives at yet another taxonomy of eight esse r1f'i nl q11 :d it ies desc ri bing ur ban design (place, density, mi xed and compatibl e uses, IH'dvstrin 11isntion and human scale, human culture, public rea lm, built enviro n llll'll t nnd natura l environment) . The public ren lrn is dl'fi n~·d ns 'pa rks, sq ul:ln·s, ,~ l l't't' l s nnd !'he like, owned by th e p11hl ic' (Sd 1111'l'l r i')')') : 23 ). The a rticle is illr pol'fnllf' in thnt it indica tes exa<:l'l y why 1111 )' Nil\ lll li c11 111 lh t•orisntio n o f dw 11 lljt•l'f l ~:1s been absent to da te, wh y lll'h11 11 d.:!jiHII I Iu ~ '" ' II III) p••o hl cms and wh 1 11'ho1 11 .dvsig n <:d ucation rema ins wl1 nll r cd1c lit , 1'' '' 1II' "'''' ill t•d nnd idt•o ,, ,,.,kill

1\tl o ~t • lo II H• poi 111 is fl w DI •~'J 'I{ piildic 1tld11 I p1od 11l'l o l o1 l'l' jlOII hy ti H' l k pll illll l lll ' 1/, ltt il' lhcll l 11 ll iil illllid lll'll11 11 dt•N il', ll 11 '11 11 11 \\11ih dt li11111

I,,,.,,, I '' '~ l.t.:/1 (}.()() I), i l1 If i I j1

4

urban development design; design policies, guidance and control; public realm design; community urban design.

The report goes on to note that five professional institutes were invo lvt•d, tlu Royal Institute of British Architects, the Royal Town Planning lnsrituf l', 1111 Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, the Landscape Institute and th e I11 Niil11 tion of Civil Engineers, which are collectively responsible for 166 <.' Oill 'll offering professional accreditation in England alone. In addition there tll't' 1!Vt' l 30 urban design programmes (DETR 2001: 5). Nine have professiona l rt'<.'OJ', IIi tion. A list of the knowledge and skills required by urban designers W:lS dt'IIW II up, with a template for urban design education enclosed in three basic cn tt't•,n ll t (DETR 2001: 2).

1 Contextual knowledge about cities, development processes and urbn11 dt•ll lj•,ll 2

3

theories and principles. The activities in urban design, from analysis of the physical settilll',, till ll ll j' l' formulation of design policies and preparation of the various kinds ol tl t•I.IJ'." at various scales, to the processes of implementation including d('Vt 1"1'"'' 11 1 appraisal and development control. The generic skills specific to urban design, including creativity, wapl111 111·1111 market awareness and negotiating, and visualisation of outco nwr-..

Each of these was seen to have significance for training, and is deta iit'd I1111 111i 1I precise level of specification. For example, six aspects of implemelll'll ll t 111 .111 given to suggest the range of urban design intervention (DETR 200 I: I I) .

1 Design and development briefing: proactive as distinct from reactive fo1' 111'~ 11 l guidance prepared in respect of development types (e.g. residenti ::d) , Nilt'N 111 areas, and capabl e of coordinating the design requirements of n 1'11 11 1',1' 11 1 stakeholders n11d 01her ro nsull nn ts. Design and dt·vt•lopllll 'lll llllll•'o l: tlw prm·vss by whi ch govern,11cnt l't'f •,ld ll lt hnnges in tiH' II RI 1 cll t11·11t ii' J', lljljll'l ll llllt I' 1111d OVI' I'il ll qo nlit y of ilw (' II VIitlll ll)l' llt.

II

dt lllclll tl t•d !I ll lt'NI

I ;Iiiii lp '"'• " '

dt'lllf'," • l', ll idl• liiH~H show i" J', ''""' 11"'" 1 rl t~ll il'o ll l'll ll sup polll oca l pl tllll', 11 11d 11 1111 d illll' II Sio nnl spnli nlnHl Stl'l' pl.r llt~ Hl1nwi 11H how o new dcvc lo pllll'lll wi ll Wt lll• 111 11 s wid v1· ut·ban co ntext. 'lbgt·IIH•• wi th the Urba n Design C roup, ''" ll•l hl!l lk sign Alli ance has bee n fo rm ed, co mbining five professions wi th n tot nllll t! lll hersh ip of 2 16,000 persons. The report noted four kinds of co ntc mpo1·n r·y 1111 Hill design practice:

111'1111 II

3

DI'VI'IopllH'III' IIJ 'I" , 1 i ~t1d 1\l'l't!N o l 111 ' 111 1' .)' ll iH I l'l llll' pt•rl ll lllll lld' rn !''

tl u 1 inl,i lil)' .-d· J!"l i H HJ~~ I I. In Vllll ll ll.. tl, 111o l Ill illi' [ 1111111 I 11 l plivll lt• 1111d 111 1hl ll


1 1\ \\' Vi1:•Wil i_l ll i\ 11 •JII:c\fh II I d IIi ltti!l d! ~ij\11 11111 \J.\ 1111111 1)\ l'dllt o tl ll~ •il \ 11\Vl \111 1! l 'ldtlt~l u .I ' '"'w it t 11, tlll il 11111• It ., J tl tt . It t!1 lu• 11 1tttl uu lk d wi tlti•t tlu I Ii li 111 l lt •M q•, ll l't tlp,n lltl til 1l 11• l.ltti \'11 1111 \' n l I h w lltl lilt \Xhdt ~h 1\ ly l11t11il II J•,III III III i li npl t• i11 iltl~ tt')',11 1d . ' t'n1i11 i t q~ 11tl hlll .lt•~<lp,t ll't N Nlt11111.1 11 11 1 l11 •ltl 11il ll 111 1111111 tl HII n•llt•t Ill pt•niOII II I, pt•olt•NP~it ll lld Ol' t•dll iii ii OII II I idl'lllllp,ll'll \t111 11\11 11 ild lu 1 Wlll '\((• t\ illl'lill t',h Oil il w b:tHiH of itfl itti H' t'l'lll t\H'Ill'l' ll l'll l p11 t(t'l l !111 jtllltl ll doll lllltl . So I wi ll not elnhonll l' li"''C<.:(!HHnril y 011 wlt il' h 1yp1' ttl tt iiii Nt' IMII PI'" ' prin H• 111 wh ic h ~,; otH ext, on t'l1 e immim·nt chnngt:H 111 ll'l'li lll y l'dt ll otl\1111 111 t ylwnqw el', th e pOt(! nti nl dee p(! nin g of neo<.: orpot':t lifl l off\ol'i111V~ tlll'tllll',ll wt l' hllst•d edu t:ati on, or wh ether urbnn design stu tknt fl 11ll o11ld o1' Hhould "' '' 11'11 111 1hout phil osoph y. O veralli·hi s hook h:1s bee n lkd kn tt·d ton Hill!',lt· ptll'pww, tl utl tt rba n design ca n be inform (!d by subst·twli :d th cot·y in th l' l'ot'tll o l Hpll tild poli tit:al economy. Moreover, its m::~ ndntt: is no lesH 1'1"''' tl w l.: lt HioditiiHllt ip tt l 1he pLtblic rea lm and that the grentest t:on t:et'll of ud1n n desif.\ tll' t'H (:tHoppoNI'd It t cnpital or the state) should be th e reproduction of urbnn nwnnin g. Ot~thi H lmNi'l I :un sec no reason why it should be dcfin ('d from Lhc out sidl• hy 1111 .tdlll nll collection of professional institu tions as sel'111Hto he hnppl· llill g in th t• UK, 11ttl11•t 1han fr om its own academic and professio11 :1 I ns pi t':HiOII H. As I hn VI' 111 11111 t1 nbove, urban design has signi ficantly lll OI"C int·cgrily in th (!ory ntHI pnulll t th an does urban planning, and I look forwa rd t·o rhc day wht:n rlw Cil''l1 pt o lt• sionally sanctioned Institute of Urban \) (!sign (!x ists in its own ri ght .t i'l 11 letd l imate region of human kn owl ccl!rc and ~1w a rc n css . I

It

l't 11 j11 l lillt.i itlt i,J i_11 111_1'1111:d \\'lilt llil tllli lid iiild i liiiil iii lli tl ll ll it lll ~l ~ ililll ~ II IIi Il l 11111111111 l'llnlllltl\ tll ul dt•vt•l11p111t 'lll lttWit tll t',.,., ,,, i,d It "'' '~•\,... ,,. ''" ,,,1 ,,,,1 d e~t ip, ll li itd dt•vt l11p11 11'11l 1 IWIIIII I', lh t• lt•g.d poll'll lll!'lt'lll itl l lll ll_ t \titlltll i lll ll l t~ l ll lll l\1 ~ l1tt llt't l dt•lt vt••y ntHittl.tt Htj',l'IIH'III : t'l'l'OI',III Nt'd lty ti 11• 1111 Hitl 'l'.t Nk F~t t lt ,, ht•ttl l'. ol' pnl'l iv ul n•· n· k vn nr t• in th (! itnpl t'IIH'III tlllo ll o f pt·o jt'd ll 11 11d I" " J', I'I IIIIIIH'H fot' lit'b[l tl dt•vclop111 (!11 t and rel.((! ll(!l'tlti OII .

l•' innll y, illl' t'CIIlplnte d(! t1 0tcs seven ge neric skills that arc suggested ns 11 lotlllll lt lio tt fot· ut·bnn d(!sign tra ining (DETR 2001: 11): Ct't•ativit y nnd inn ovation; dl•sign awnreness and visual literacy; 3 grnphic communica tion skills; I itt! t: rdi sciplin ary team working; tn n rlwt a wa rcncss and business sense; ncgotint ion skills; nhility to interpret plans and visualise intended outcomes in both two 11 1111 thre(! d imcnsions. 'I'ltes(! three exa mples offer somewhat different ways of looking at urban des ip,n i11 terms of how the discipline should be conceived and how it should be ta ughl Moud on co ncentrates on epistemology, Schurch's paper seeks to establish th n.:sholds o f scale and process as a foundation for the discipline, whik tl w DOE is hea vily focused on the needs of the professions (all five of them). To 11 large degree, th e hidden message is that it does not matter how urban design i dt' fin ed, as long as somehow it is wrapped up in particular processes and scalnr h k- rr~ rc hi cs; ca n been contained in a whole series of methodological intcrvCtl tio ns; and can be defined, both by what urban designers do and what a diversif y o ( pro fessions require in terms of market strategies. None of _this implies thnl til l" !"(! is not a lot of truth in what is said, and it is undeniable, particula rly itt Mo ud on's paper, that traditional urban design may be understood pragmatica ll y in tt nns of wh at urban designers do, and her nine concentrations of enquiry givt• 1 subs1·nn1·ia l envelope to urban design knowledge. When all is said and cl ont•, howev(! r, we a rc left with the uneasy feeling that the door to what urban desig11 lll'tu nll y is and how it can be theorised is still closed. Without this, urban clcsig11 l< tl ow lcdg(! will be endlessly retracked from th e sn111 c components. So theo ry i11 llt'hntt design will be condemned to rccrcnlc poll'lll in ll y litni tless taxonomi es of \ •Nst•nt·inl cha racteri sti cs' that began widt K1 •vi 11 l.y111 l1 'N l"i vt• di sc rete units of dw l'i ty ( 1% 0) , i.(!. p::tths, edges, di stri ct·s, ilodt•N tlll tll ,,,ulll lllll·s, ll lld hi s tn ore recenl i'i VI' ditii CilSions o f rwrfo rm ance ( 19H I) , I I \' i ltd i ll>iq, Ill' 11\'l'I'SS nnd COillt'OI ; t'OIIIinut•d wid1 Chri st·opher /\l l'XII tldi' I'N '' 'i lp, ll it} t l l ~l 11 111 1 p1 11J',I't 'Ssing ri gltl 11p It• d1tl l' willt Schttt'l·lt 's t· ight jnt'l',llll 11 11 tli"dil lt11i 1 J\i 'ldti tlll d ptl 111tpl1·11, l.t', pi 1H't', dt•nNily, 11ti xl'tl tllld l'Oiilpttlihll· II NI'It, I" d t •. tt il!lll ~! ll i !t ll ttlld lllt lthlll twult•, hiiii HIII l tdlllll', II H' Jllthl it~ l'l'll lttl , ltt dlf I'II VI1 11IIIII11l l 1\i!l l !loiltll tll t'll l' ill:ll lllll'lll ( JI_)I )IJ) ,

I'·. .


)~ . lti•dtt/1 ', JI,I_I!llll

I

'"''tl;,

111 '"Yintrodu <.: fion , I dearly stated thnt this hook wns not nbo11t doi111'. dt •N il\11 htl!' n bout knowing it - understa ndin g the co n<.:c prs ond vn l11cs t hn 1 i11 (uq;, !l lll' ncfions. So 'I 'he f iorm of Cities docs nor· have answers and Otii' C:OIIIl~N ~~ ~ i! lq•y ohjt•<.: tivc. Noncr·heless many important iss ues hav e bee n raised in th1• ('t'''' h' ol wl'i ting, nnd I would like now to highlight so me of these observnl'ion N, 'l'lt jllll'flONl' h<.• f'(' is t·o provoke disc ussion and to ex press so mewhat he,·er·k·nl id' 'il tltnt lll't' frequent'ly more interesting than those that ca n be reaso na bly d<•h~tfl d I lt· •tcv no t•eferenccs or justifications arc given (other than my past wriring 1111d 111 y inh~·,·cllt' logic) to the opinions expressed below. As t':H.:h ern ndvances its own material basis for life, it impa cts on 11 p1 t•xiH t ing <.:o llngc of apparently random three-dimensional form s a nd sp:tc<~N. l11 on lt'l' to undcrstn nd the resulting metamorphosis, the concrete instittl! io, ,d fnlltH·works of society must be understood, along with the accontp:11tyi111 d1•ologics dtnt inform their administration. But evolution cannot be rcp,·est'lllt•d by :1 11 endless straight-line graph. As in the natural world, our social univ1'I'N1 IIIOVI~S in jumps. 'J'hc terms 'climacteric' or 'paradigm shift' try to ca ptur(' fl11 1 llfllclys rni<.: change t·hat ca n take place over relatively short periods of tinw. Wt• livl' in Sll<.: h ;~n age. Not only has history been abolished, we have a lso abolisht •d fllllllli'I'Ow: w<.: live in a permanent state of acceleration in a futile race to l'(:ti'OIIf wlt11 1 hn s nlr<"ady been discovered. Nor is there any apparent purpose to tlti 1'11111pl'tit·ion except to increasingly comrress the wor ld's sto rehouse oF w<•nlllt 111111 tit (• linnds of fewer a nd fewer individ11nls.

Wltilt• I consider myself an unr~·st•·ninl'd optinlisf, I l't'tnin a deep Sl.' ll St' ol fl't•pidntionnhout' rhc un enlightened nntlll't• olglnlllll 1ll pitnlisnt , tlw first· pror1• fo tl'i lll,~t'I' Jtd nil histo ricn lly ddin1•d 1111d dl'llltu 111 111 pnlllin d P•'on·ss~:s, si t11ntt•d wi llli11 Ol' :11ttong n:Hion st·nt·t·s. Si111 I ' ll1i lj l""' ' 'llll l.. ll"'""'"l\''''~ wi ll1 tht• id<•n ol dt 'VI' lllpllit'lll , II III 'W in.~ titlltiOIII d SIIIIJtllll 11 l dlllllllllll,d lt~l_ d /•, lohnl l'lifl',~ .~ tlfl l'lll(l'd hy l'lllt'l'l\ill/', iiiHiiftlliollll, litW II 111d ill, " '''I'll Ill l•tl lll\ lllilllt•d IIIII Nidt• fl11plll ltl I OIISI'II I< IIS, (Jntil 1'1'1 1'11tl}' tl l_l lll titl II ) " .i ll d11 p Ill Ill '" It}' 111tly two Nlj\ 11il1n 111t 1ltlllli'IIIWH i11 iiH: IWOIItl, •ill ',-Iii Ill \· I llflliJl IJ! fll 11, ..j in till' lt11111 ol 1

"•il

111d ltil itl i!JII i1iil '',) I ldlt " 111111111 "' ( Ill hliJliiiiY IIlid it! lli lili t, lil , ''""I '"'"'"'~ II ', piii YIIIJ \ ,, tHJ\ IIlfl 1111 111 11111 ill kl\iJillll 'l lll j', Ill II ~~· olillj' i111_ f111llli 1"' lllllllllll'lllll tlll lll lll ll111' IWII lll lljJIJ jlllll ltloii M•ll'f" ''" fu dllilllllllft', II WI 11dop1 11 'llilltflll,llr_tlil!l p11HIIio11 fo dt·vt• lop•IH'IIf , WI' II N~ IIIlll ' tl u11 11111111' otlw• 111 otlwrll 1111' ' " fll ,dl y 111 tll lllrol ol iiH· fii 'OI..'t•ss. II wt· do 1101 , 1hen W(' ltnvl' to :INN IIIIII' tl uil /', loi Hd l'll flil.di NIII i11 f1111d :1Jllelll'nlly OUt of <.: Ontrol, its trnj <.:<.: IOt'y dk tll tl'd !Jy Wli ll fi 'V I'I lo1•,iv l'l'llt :d•t H within !\darn Smith's 'invisible hand of th <.: lli (Hkvt'. 'l'l11• rt' llliid 111H it11tionnl fo''"' <.; ommanding this process is the transnntionnl <.: o•·pornti1111 , It l.~x hibit s thre<.: primal qualities: first, survival no matter wh at Lh <.: J'l'il't•; l'l.' OIId , l'he <.:xtcrna li sation of all possible costs; and third, crimin a lity, si11n• tlw largest wrpo rations such as Exxon, lBM and Pfizer all have <.;r inti11nl l'l'<.:ords. In th e corporate universe, breaking the law is viewed merely :1s .1 l11nccion of transaction costs, not morality. Corporate power, which is the ktoy generato r of gross domestic product (GDP), has also set .in place pow<.: l'ftd id<.:o logies through its ability to manipulate the mass media. In so doing it hn1 tlso acq uired the capacity to absorb various forms of resi st:111u• by usurpin g their vocabulary and philosophical underpinnings. There is 110 better example of this today than the terms 'postmodernism' or 'sustai11ohlt <.kvelopment'. The recent important documentary The Corporation suggested wit It 11111111 force that transnational corporations do indeed rule the world, that· tl11·y 1" getting bigger and bigger, that they rule invisibly and that they exhibit fl l•> ' l11 i pathic tendencies that would be unacceptable in individuals. The only tlw H I ~ ,,;i,_ can extract from this is that the public good will invariably be sacl'i l11 ' ' l ''' corporate profit. For example, the unjustified war in Iraq simply ofl t•n d H!l appropriate and timely vehicle for converting the surplus wage of all Allll ' l 11 HI! in the form of tax dollars into massive profits for American companies. ( )v, 11dl the spiralling wealth of developed nations reflects the fact that n <.:e tl ~ •IN 11 signifier of progress have been satisfied. We now live in a world wht'll il l( infinite space of desire fuels commodity production. In this regard John < 11 nr' book Straw Dogs poses a serious challenge to ideas of development, wiH'II l11 suggests that progress is alien to our position in nature. The philosoph il._·,tl 11 111! religious foundations underlying the concept of progress have brought us to tl11 point where continuous expansion of GDP based on a parallel exploitation :111d exhaustion of nature and labour has become the predominant yardsti<.: k h which nations are judged. He postulates that progress is a myth upon wlti1 l1 human development has been predicated, a proposition that warrants scl'i ow. consideration. Paradoxically, transnational neocorporatism reifies the idea of imperinli HIII , albeit in a vastly different form. Thus the concept of imperialism, and tlw twill concepts of empire a11d sovereignty it contains, remain significant. Each is lwin1•, reinvented in a new ft11111 , wi1 It 1•,lobnl implications for the design pro<.:css. 'l'l11 old · styl e W<.:st·cnl illljllll l dl ~ lll ll ll.t l l· t•d hy I ,('llfll wn s nn ideology for dw fl11hp1 p,n ti on n•HI opp1'1'HN I1111 11 If" " ld' Il l• "111111 ' 'V I!IyW IIIII', wi d1 th<.: sin gle cxt't:pfi,lll


'" Jr11 ~1 ' '"

' lld ~o li ltll 1«1111111 , ll uwi'VI t, ll"'l'''''"lt. \\t ill

ill i'"l lllt llltild tllll I II\ 111111 VI I )'11111' wi lllu l',nlltli•tl l iti:t•IIIII HIII 1\ lt oi lt rl ilt •t iUiitit' tl Ill IIIII Wlli lt tlw tii'W iiii(H' I t. di NIII III IIY indt•t•d, 1 1 .~ III IIII Y1li l'ollt, l11 1 l11111! !'ttl' liiH'IIV, l'l jll1tl11 1 IIHillllll li llilt y, tilt• t•: ll'l y Wlll'llillf.!. signs 11 1'1' 11111 "'""" 'I'IH· dnrk Vt't'tOI's of doning, nnnotedm o logy 11 11d 1111 p,t' tll 'llt t'll!',i ll t'l' t'illj•,l d ,til livi og Ot'gu nis111 s progress fnst·er than society is ~' ll l ll thl t• o l 11 hsorbing 1ll1d t 1111 ti'OIIing th e111 . Co nseq uentl y, the product of billion s of yenrs of evol11tio11 , tl11 l~tllll a n ge nct'ic code, is now in the hands of the private secto r. One day i11 1ht• 11 111 too di stnnt futll rc, we may all be branded and patented. Added to th is Wl' I111Vt t ht destru ction of biodiversity, the rise of religious fundamentali sm, COI'POI illt in t·crvc nti on in to national politics, vast urban decay, and an increasi ng di sp111 it)' lwtw ecn ri ch and poor, representing only a few of the issues we confro nt :1t tlt t Nt'tlrt of the third millennium. All of this exists on a bed of quicksand , w here tl11 US/\, the ' richest' country in the entire world, could bankrupt the planet. It p11 for its sta ndard of living by borrowing on the savings of other nations, ::1 Slllll 110w close to its own judicial limit of $US700 billion. In the face of such cxct·s .. , th e developed world as a whole donates less than 0.7% of GDP to the develop ing world, which now generates a significant portion of the developed world ' wea lth and where a high percentage of nations are continuously in defau lt. T he implications for the development and design of cities are indeed pl'o found. As corporate power builds more sophisticated target markets usi11 g ·once pts of difference and deconstruction hijacked from postmodernist thec)l·y, spaces of meaning represented in prevailing communities are being transfo rm ed into Castells' new tribal microterritories, reflecting ever new forms of cons ump t ion. Ln between, traditional societies and communities are disappearing, as dw new imperialism gradually transforms the historical process by reorienting c011 ;epts of conquest from the body to the mind, as Foucault predicted. ln n borcb ·less planet, bodyspace becomes the essential geographic unit, monito red hy so phisticated data gathering and processing systems of surveillance and 'OI1trol. Much of our autonomy as reasoning, free -thinking individuals m:Jy yet be compromised by globalised production. In parallel to this scenario, space is also being transformed to accommodate n new po litical, social and moral order. In this context urban design has a ce ntra I I'O ie to play, since the public realm remains a theatre for class politics. Urb:w design has the capacity to resist dominant ideologies by creating new form s of spn cc whi ch restate the trajectory of politica l and cult·urnl development. As ou t·comcs, two architectures are likely t'O evo lvt·, om· of profusion and o ne ol d<:sp:'l ir, as the economic differences of tiH· Nm it•l y nl t ht• spectacle bcco nw 111n gni ricd in a new global empire of im·rt 'IIN ill l\ tllllljll'tilinll nnd ineq ualit-y. /\ s in 1nge, the expe rience will not· lw l11 1 11 11111 wl1 11 t I li1du11n lk o ~·n il s the Ncw Midd le 1\gcs. Co mpetition betwt·t• lt tlltl 'll 11 tlll, ~t l ~t 1111lw ltit'l'l ti'C hy i111pl ie1 tlwl t he1'C will be both winners 1111d I11Ht 111 i11 ilu I" iiu'NH, f' qtllu llNitl h11s nlwny H t•x hihitt•d 11 11 ~·x tl't' lll t' cn pn eit y ltll IIIII \Ill di 1·1 1"11111 i'lli 1 jllld !11111 I ~ lltll't'IIN<lll IO vit•w tiJi Nillt y dii'(t' l't'll tl y lntltt y, IIIIIP,IIItlillj \ !ii'jllfiJ!ii!tlllt tlltd dljtlt •llilf', l't'IHI III't't' ll j',P,I'Iil th 11t tlti :1 pol lll'iflll lioll will II)J- Iclttii !1HIH'1 ilt·in '"'' """''' • 11111 1 tl1111

llllhllli~oottltlll

111ill iiltit·illlllttl\ lu tl!lllltlllltird hy tliv1~q\i llt'• tiiVit"""'' ill'• ;; I tllltilll ,lllll ""' dt ~'" i\'u\!1111 .11 ,, II it \'t l ~ l• l tlu! tt1lu11t lti1 ! nm~l1 y, ' l 'l ~t• tl1t1tl 111ilk1111illl1t ptllditHiltiptdl ll tit lil·t•ly Itt di M"i pttl l 11 ll111i d i• v d ltlld lltodt•l'tt ltH ttt lll t l1' . id tho LilY I\)' '""'"'~'• ld Hitllk ,dl y ,lt•lilll 'd toinllilll tt "'.! l'l' lltll·l'ill j', III V I ~IItlt jll tlVH tltill\ ll)ltiiiiHI nl powl' l', Ill l'OIIII'II NI lo I""'' ht ,.lllt1• tl pt'riodfl, wlt t'll' tlt t p11Wt 1 ttl' lllllll ill'l.' hy 01· the stn tl' o lkl'l·d lnlltll t1 '"'""'' ~~' ttions of wcnlth ll tlll lllttltntlly, new power strucllii'~'H l'O tlt itlll till' tt ltiltl y Ill remain multivak·nt 11 11d hidd en. Vi sible symbol s of 1'11 e n~·w polit k11 l 111tlt1 wil l he in short supply, makin g their presence felt instead wi th in IH'O llntlh ~lllilll structures of surveillance and control. While it is Iikel y t'hn l' urhnn d1•1J~,illl ·" wi ll ;ontinue to reduce, the 'densification' of cities remr~ins :111 ll l'l'll ll ol Nl' tiltll disagreement and debate. Themed environments designed lO ll<.' l'OIIIIIIIItlllli li [H cific consumption processes will reflect the increasing com pl ex it y of tlll ttnttHIII Y space in the market. Cities which attempt to project n 11n iq \ll' illlll[\1' 11111l opportunities, either real or symbolic, will do so on the bas is of tl~t• i 1· t'll [llll 11~ to commodify history, simulate authenticity, provide sit·cs for· H(Wl' t.H lt •11 111 conserve exotic natural settings. Reconstructed centres for desire, spt'l' IIHII• 1111d commodity fetishism are already nascent around the world , in Wi1111ipt•j•,, l 111ht11 1

Los Angeles and Las Vegas. Even traditional modes of transport are being reco nstitu1·cd i11 lilt• ltHI' nf global tourism, both literally, in transformations of usc, n. nd l'if\I II'II II VI I)'• through virtual reality. Airports and other major points of tran sfer wi lll•,nll llll d Iv morph into themeports, destinations rather than points of tr:J nsft•r, t'l;pll ltlt ttl providing all the surrogate experiences tourists require. At the mOIIH'IIt , old "') !1 cruise ships are being reconceived as floating town s that arc dcsigiH'tl 111 II'' nowhere at all. So the post-tourist simulacrum built on the disposn hl~· W•'l\1 11 ;,r the developed world may actually negate travel, as simul ation tr:nt l'l't' IHI" 1t•tt llt )'• Why should one go anywhere? As Alain de Botton (2002: 2 7) SII!',P,I~HI ~. '!In imagination can provide a more than adequate substitute for th e vul t•,lll ' t1 11 ltl )' 11! actual experience'. In the light of global terrorism, epidemi cs such nH Si\Hh 1 111111 AIDS, and catastrophes such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions :111d tlt1 11111 i11 east Asian tsunami, post-tourism opens up a parallel universe, ll lltt•tnVtllll 11 non-threatening travel. Overall, prevailing institutional struct11 rt~H I h.1t 1111\1111 iNti capital and labour will be radically transformed , and hence tlw fi OLIII NP•Id,d environment which results, the object of urban designers, will ch:l ll l',l' ill It IIIII n

with them. In this process, urban designers may choose to abandon :111 y ll llt' ll'l'l 11 understand whnt is ~oing on and simply design to briefs. l'or th osl' wlt u wi~t~ to engage i11 :1 11 y Nl•l'itl ii Hdl'bnt·e about urban form and urb:J n design , ""'"Y11tl11 iss ues nvvd 111 Ill' 1nll~ttll'l' t•d , Over the nineteenth century :1 nd in to lht• IWI' IIItl tl the stud y 111 t11lt1111 dt V!' l11p1111'11t wns dominated by inv~~sl'ip~ltioll wlll' lt' "'" soci< H'tWIIIJJih 111 •"' •1·1·~ lll ;llll 'll'd. l<:nl'ly in thr twt• nti cth rt· lltiii'Y• ti ll' l111 1 !11 spnn• n111 11 1II· 111 rivt .I iliLI[', t 11111 II '' tlj•,llition . ' l'o d11y, ,,,·hnll tblil', ll q1111 jttllfl si onnl 111 •11tit ._1 !t tHiiH\11 littiil Jl11 llltlltll 111 p,lollll list•d prtHIII t llllll, wlu11 d i11 1p11tt111111 "' ftHiii 11 ·1~ 1111\\' IH\P IIIt t lj'.llilll'llll l ' t'h1• wnNii ii i',IIWIIV ol tlu• ll lllifl


l llf t_' , "' ' ll '.t t d lt j; ltt lt.di ,. ill tlltljtllldh

"'~1111 1 d '" ''' '' Pil l I I•II NI d ln"''"''111 111 1.1, llli htll di'N IJ\11 lljljll lltil lt ,

41~ i til t\lttitttl jil! llll !_'lr:l llp ·. 1111 d1 11ltqJii iLW , ti ll p i wllid 1 '"11'1'' ''· .,n .

jttfl ,li {

In 111111 , fl11 1. lt ll ll IWt'tl IIH• .llllh o l'tl y o l 11ti H111 pltllll tl iill lll 'l!t.' lk u d ittlilli Nit 111 l11vo t11 ' o l urhnn dt•s ign. But du l' to th e uhst'IH '!' td 11 11 tlll ttllt tl t·s i,., n pro lt'N'I IItll httilt 11pon s~thstH nlin lthtory, th e di sc ipl ine hns IH't'll swn llowt•d hy lh t• .111 lllt t' ltll'r tl nnd pl nnnin g professio ns. Arguably, urba11 design n lt·e:~dy <.: onslilul i\~ 11111 hnlf o f urhnn plnnning practice, wi th po licy pla nnin g a ncl reg ui:Hio n fomlin /', till o ilwr. I( we extrac t urban des ign from th e agenda, planning is left with 01d y "" ' ho nest leg to stand on, namely the legitimation process. In th e preceding text I sketched out an encompassing theoretica l fr·n ~twwntl fo r th ose wh o wi sh to be info rm ed about the design of cities. Each chnpt·cr· l'otdd he ex pa nd ed in to a single book, so I have only been able to to uch o n il11 :onceptua I scaffolding of a significantly larger edifice. Prime am ong th t•st• i lhe prin ciple that the vast array of social, political and economic fo rm s f11 n1 structure o ur li ves generate the form of cities and the design that is imprint·cd 1111 1hc environm ent. Urban design and the consciousness that informs it a rc hoflt soc ia l products. T hey are born within society and emerge from a histo t·ic:dl " specific po litica l economy and its contingent social relations. li enee an urban design knowledge should involve nothing less than the stud y o( how the glo bal built environment achieves its physical form and how i1 mate ri a lises through design. Significantly, we must begin with the assumptiotl 1·hnt a II urban space is designed by human action of some kind, and docs 1101 t.•mcrge as a totality from the drawing boards and computer software of a rchi ll'c ts a nd planners. If this single observation were to be generally adopted h urba n design programmes internationally, they would necessarily commit th crn selves to se ri o us educational restructuring. Indeed, depending on whom Otlt' q uotes, architects and ur ban designers are only involved in the actual des ign nnd constm cti on of 15 percent of all building in first-world economies, dec reas ing to :tero in some developing nations. So over historical time, designers ha Vl' ncttr all y played a rather small part, however significant, in dictating the forrn ol citi es. In :.1 pproaching this problem I have chosen to adopt nine elements th nt constitute th e building blocks of necessary theory. While I would mainta in thnl lhese cle ments are irreducible, there is no reason wh y oth er methods co uld no1 sn1isfa cto ri ly accomplish the same task. Sinee l'lw ovcrn ll t·cxt adopts one of two rn njo r approaches to economics, a se pnrnl c ~·h n pl t• r o n t•co no mi cs is not in d rtdt.:d. Th at approach is political ccon orn y, o nr• wlli r l1 dot•s no t se pa rate ceo II Orlli c decisio ns from politica l dcc i~> ioriN, < :l11rplc•rN,,, ,, 11 INo Ntrh jt'rt l'o rh eir o wn fw·11r of un t.: vcn development·. Spnti nl jll llil llll l r•tll li tll ll) 1,,, ~ llt fl t't' t·vlc vn n<.:t.: i11 80 111 1.' ill'<.'ns t·hnn o th ers. M os1 · signili t'ltlll ctl tlt t'"C: ~ ~ lllld tt rd rll'lll y ll11· ~·h n pr t.· t· on 'II Vil'() fllllt'rH , wh cr·c I sen n:lwd ill VIlli! ltt r ollfl fl1 II " " I ltl lh t• IIIIIIH'I , ll i~>t micn lly, sod:d l'O tllr·ol , IIIOI'II Iil l '"'" 1 \V!' IP t ~~ ~ 11 t u cllht'llll)•, ll d1111'l' h 11 11d Nlll ll', wi i11 hiiSill t'SS lt• fl Ill J;t' ll t l li t 11 \'. llt l1 lii !\\'!l\'('1 it W i~l 11;d, 'l'l11 • Wl'llk l' IIIII J', o l lh t• 11111 in11 Nlll ti• huN 1111 '1 1111 ti tfll ritlir iili uiii ' i """ llf l~ l il p UVI' I ilrl'~l'

""l''

''II'''

lid

1i tlt \'tt it !. d 111 tl rr jll ihll l '11'1 -ltt i, \\' lll}lll l!l' dit lw llll l! tl r• IIVI 'I ptiiH rplc • 111 lll t. il y ji ito.lo ll I" iv 11 1111 11 II II' '1 111 r. d tr tll lr tlll l I l'mhl,•ll ll ll it is tl w lm l tl ii rl 1111 111 cd tl 11 rii J',IIIIIt'il! s nho111 ll tt lll r. tl t ,tptt .tll ·"' II HLiit tr thk tl l'Vt' IOplllCIII 01 lt•t lill ll illp,y OI'C t.:OII Vi tl rt ll)', . 'l'lit• VI I)' I 11 1111 1'1 of HUH!Il ill nbili ty has bee n ~·o l t~ l li st•d by hi g ca pif·a l '""' 1\lt'rwd 1111 n " " " " " ' lr11 gt' n~:Hk c tin g operation to gu:Hnntcc the re production o f l'or pOI'II It• I" " '" Th e idcn of a sustainable urban design is locked into this pnr·:1dig111 , wl11 11 Ho lu tions arc constrained to areas where big business ca n makt.: 111 0 ilt'Y• tt ltllllll ·xclusively limited to technical fixes in the form of photovo ltn ic l't' II H, 1Hrl r11 ;ne rgy hot water systems, double glazing panels, light rail systems n nd l't' l Y' 11111 materials of value. Unfortunately there is no technical fi x to th e pt·o hlt'tll li wr now confront in designing cities, which are primarily about susta in a hlv VII h11 systems in the face of enormous problems of equity and environment wo1·ld wi dt The relationships between history, theory and philosophy ha vc sign ilh 11 111 overlap, and it might have been better to write one huge chapter rntlw r tlr tll three. If we are to learn about the values and value systems und erl yi111', 11111 actions as I have suggested, this is probably the best place to start· ntr tl• 1111 choices. The marriage of philosophy and history has generated a vast n1'1't1 y '1 ideological perspectives that condition any understanding of urbnn dt •Nig rr Urban design is imbued with problems of theory, identity, ownership :111d It 1'. 11 imation. There is still no precision to the term 'urban' or whetht.:t' 1lmug11 I homologous with professional activity. I have indicated a prefen,:ttt t• l111 1h phrase 'the production of urban form' rather than 'the productio11 nl 11rl h11: design' but, once again, questions as to what is actually being lot til l d ' designed are legion. Many answers come from philosophy, where semiotics, phenonWIItti iiJ \1' flil political economy provide a significant framework for analysing th~,.· p11 ttlll o!ii of urban form and design. While the task would be enormous, it shw tid l11 f I attempted at a global scale, to include the processes of imperialis111 it11l11,11 1 above. No text on the history of urban form in post-colonial crt vtt ll llltl tll would be complete without this inclusion, as attested by our :1tllllltd lti ll national projects in the Master's Program at the University of Nt•w 1tlllll Wales to Jakarta, Beijing, Hanoi, Taipei, Jakarta, Cebu, Mumbai 111111 11 tl 1 locations. The politics of imperialism also need to be understood i11 m dt 1 I comprehend why many Asian cities ended up being designed as they :ll't• ltuhr Mike Davis' Late Victorian Holocausts is a psychologically harrowin g t'lllt part of this process, one of the few texts I have ever read that mad e me nHI11 11111 to be human. Urban space, culture and design are inseparable concepts. The CO II VII II I urban design practi ce is th e public realm, and once again urban desigll t't'N 11 h11tt not avoid knowill j•, how rhi s rubli c realm has been reprpduccd, ho w 11 legitimated nnd I111 W it i11 l l' jll 't ~N t' lli t•t l. I lrn vc wri tten elsewh ere t'llill 111 y Ill impression ol I· ti ii J\ Wt114 tl utl il l11 rd niiiiOSI' managed to clilllill ll lc• d ptthl k n·n lnr i11 it ~ 111111 111 li n I till }' Wit\ l 1 11 ~ i ll t 'IIN 1 o11ld t•xt·,·nct nt1 y IIIOI't' l" 'i l't'OIII HIHH:t: Wit" It• l""tlli• • tl t11h rllt ltii rl l '" lllitilll ll lwi ngs. EitiH'I' Ihut 111

''""II


''111'""' 1

. ,j , u tl !lllt_-,111" ilu

'"'''''"dtll' td llt lll , Willi lll tl !ill l\'1

' """' \\-htti

1 .

lllll'i iiJ \14 ill Hitlt 'Wiill." liilt_l 1 11\n~jlt!l l itl lltl lllltlllll l•111 111 tillltl ) ilti ~ iNlllllil·t' l)' tnlutppt ' ll , ll tHII111 1tl 1 11l1111t ~ !illtiP IIIII II PII Iut!ll tht• pllldlt 111d dnillt'N IIl spiH•I't'No l Nod nll ik. So lll h1111 dl'llillllt ' " 11111,.1 lu 1nii Ntlttlt Nttlltttl\1 llilllll'< ' iNli'I III SI OI 'III l 'd ll l the !•, loh:d, ll ll l iO II II I 1111d lw ii llt•v t•IN, wllhout IINN IIIIIill li lltl tht•i1· ow n pct·so lt :d cx pcl'it'IKC wi ll suffi ct'. J11'0ill n dcsig11 perspective, it is nil too easy to sec culture ns mo no lith k t'll illl 1 th nn co mpo~cd of myr inds of diffu se interests and a lli ances. Cul ture is n dy''''"'" pht•tt omcnon, :'lnd as some cul tures die, others are re born .in fo rm s thnt 11 1't·likt ·h to lw nli en to popul a r consciousness. But we cannot forget that such t·r:w sfo111; tli OIIS co n occ ur in one or more dimensions and remain static in or hct·s. 'l'l11 t11ost obv ious example of this hiatus is the position of women in soc iety, :111d tlu !',t•nd crin g of space remains an altogether ignored consideration in dcsig1ti11J\ :iti co. As in most theatres of human experience, men have historically dorninlltt•d dccision -maki ng processes, and the time to set the record straight has lo ng si111 1 pnssed: I 0,000 years with patriarchy in the driving seat is perhaps excessive. A .~ 11 mn t rer of so me urgency, ur ban designers need to address the problems of uri Hill space in relation to equality of control, access and design, indicated in the tex t. It is nlso well within the bounds of reason that if more women were inv o lvt•d directly in se nior positions of power across the entire spectrum of decisio11 111 nking, then the life-saving shift in values indicated above might have a s i ~ nifi t.:nntly higher possibility of success. Finnlly, at the level of pragmatics, designers do not exist in a social vaCLIIIttl , They operate from a perspective of highly persuasive educational and proft•i sio na I processes and rule systems. The training of urban designers must escn JW from nn accretion of outdated and obsolete ideologies with a new consciou snt•s of wh at they do, how they understand what they do, and how they 111:1 j,, fluence development and design to generate more humane outcomes. ln '1'/n• florrn of Cities I have tried to suggest how our knowledge needs to change, nnd how th e substance of this process of critical self-reflection might be structurt•d, The outset of the third millennium seems like a reasonable place to begin .

Abbott, A. 1988: The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of EX/11'1'1 Labour. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Abel, C. 1969: Ditching the dinosaur sanctuary. Architectural Design, 39, 4\ r-..,- •, Abel, C. 1988: Analogical models in architecture and urban design. METU Ji ll\,

8(2}, 161-88. Abel, C. 2000: Architecture and Identity: Responses to Cultural and

Teclmolo~llli/

Change. London: Oxford. Abel, C. 2004: Sky High: Vertical Architecture. London: Royal Academy

tions. W.H . 1991: Nature Perfected: Gardens Throughout History. Adams,

Ptlltl ll •l

N ('W )

ntl

Abbeyville Press. Adler, S. and Brenner, J. 1992: Gender and space: lesbians and gays in t lu 1 II 1 International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 16, 24- 34. Adorno, T. 1991a: The culture industry reconsidered. In The Culture l rftlll •lt I' London: Routledge, 85- 92. Adorno, T. 1991b: How to look at television. In The Culture Industry. l.tllidllll Routledge, 136- 53. Agger, B. 1992: Cultural Studies as Critical Theory. London: Falmer Prc~H. Agnew, J. 1989: Place and Politics: The Geographical Mediation of Strt/ t' 1111tl Society. London: Allen and Unwin. Agrest, D., Conway, P. and Weisman, L. (eds) 1996: The Sex of Architect~tre.

Nt •W

York: Harry N. Abrams. Ainley, R. (ed.) 1998: New Frontiers of Space, Bodies and Gender. Lond o111 Routledge. Alberti, L.B. 1966: De Re Aedificatoria. Milano: II Polifilo. Alexander, C. 1964: N otes on a Synthesis of Form. Cambridge, M i\ : 11 111 V1111l

Al cxn ndt'l', t ;, I1Htl1 • Tilt• l'ity II H 11 llll'~·hnn ism for susta inin g hlfll1 lll1 ~·olll lllt Wo•·ld ii J', 1''11" 1 t~11 ~ II I ' t 11111 ! 11 1 Ph•'""""· nnd Dcvclopmcot ltcs~n , ·t.: h, \ l11i Univc,·sit y Pl't'HH.

1 ~•1•'' ~

htlll ',\~ 111 (W· IIIIIIIIIi' lt ll tll o t'llll'i'l\ltin·d hy Nl tlhtl 1111tl

V(' I'N \ty 11ll ;, t\11 111111 I l\1 tl t lt \' i\ lt•>W IIIIII , l l tlHI 1 pHyt lllll llp,lo

,tl d~ ll ![ltld ll i

l!rt/11 II,

/IIi l rt'l), ll llto


ISBN 1-4051-1640-4

II

The form of cities alexander r cuthbert  
The form of cities alexander r cuthbert  
Advertisement