Start Again #3 was another whirlwind tour down London Met's in-house Memory Lane. Kieron pulled out two of LMU's high-flying faves - East and FAT. Both companies have a long history and strong association with the ASD. Both companies' directors have been taught/teach/have taught at the school and Thursday was an opportunity for reflection and analysis on their professional success so far.
It was a little odd, because for these companies are so well-known amongst students, that they've become the usual suspects, rather than new, fresh-faced start againers. Neither have they been around for forty years and are now starting again by re-training as psychologists (which is something I'd quite like to see, and was expecting as part of the Start Again series).
However, to be fair, in the grand scheme of things, both East and FAT are doing new-ish things. Their approaches are new, innovative and have unexpected results. Compare them to Foster or BDP and it's easy to see who's doing the more 'interesting' work.
But is this enough? Is that what Starting Again is? Is doing something slightly more 'interesting' the best we can hope for as architects or town planners?
I believe it is symptomatic of the ultimate, constant frustration, that once having joined the system, it is hard to change it - because your own interests as a professional, or company director quickly align with those of the system, thus limiting your own influence for change.
This was evident in FAT's infamous social housing in New Islington, Manchester. FAT relayed the story of how, through competition with two other firms, they won the hearts and minds of locals who chose them to redesign their housing block. FAT then 'got to know' the residents, how they lived and how they spatially connected with their domestic realities. Having been inspired by their findings, FAT then created a terraced housing development wrapped by a thick facade that utilised some of the resident's own symbology in its huge, explicit form.
In principle, this doesn't sound too bad - that is until you notice that the inside rooms are standardised, the ceiling heights low, and the whole story delivered by Sam Jakob with a satorial and patronising air. Sam was convinced that because the architect is using the 'people's own stories' to develop a form for the building and because he is allowing the residents to choose from heart-shaped, diamond-shaped or spades-shaped kitsch fencing, that the architect is doing everything in his capacity to be a 'servant of the people'. But this is not the case, and it is the democratic pretentions of this firm that make it so unbarable. Somehow, I prefer corporate, commercial firms that are honest about their dealings and their courtship with big business. Renzo Piano too, suffers from this syndrome - one where he is alludes to being the hero, saving and 'fixing' the city, drawing out its 'urbanity', but says so with such a smug look on his face that it's hard to trust the guy. He's got rich quick and now he doesn't care. Hence you wonder if he ever did.
The 'process' may be relatively democratic, but it remains uninclusive and architecturally standard. Although I've got no proof, I wonder what the place is actually like to live in. By Sam's own admition, the kitchen was IKEA - but I mean in terms of space and quality. I would have prefered a story where the architect could have explained how the money was spent to maximise living standards, ceiling heights and light penetration. But maybe I just have a different value system?
I don't know. Maybe I got it totally the wrong end of the stick, maybe the ceilings are high and the rooms are spatious. But I still find the delivery patronising and fake. In my book, it's not cool to rinse public sector money to get a double spread in BD. And giving people a choice of three types of kitsch fence is not democracy. If we're talking about starting again, I'd like to see really inclusive, open design, not architects' egos. I would have asked Max Nasatyr to come and talk about his role in the Coin Street Community Builders, but sadly he died in 2003. Given the publication of the Localism Bill, it'd be interesting to see how community projects will take shape over the next few years. You can read Max's Obituary here.
Thursday 30 December 2010
Saturday 4 December 2010
London Met has been occupied!
During Thursday night's Start Again #2 lecture, a group of democratically organised, autonomous students occupied the Finance Department of LMU. This has also shut down the infamously beaurocratic and cut-throat HR Department.
The Occupiers have established a safe, open space for alternative, free education - demonstrating an alternative and new ethos of education and are actively starting again.
Come and join us, follow the blog at www.wearelondonmet.wordpress.com, and send messages of support and love to 07775531897.
...and get ready for Thursday!
The Occupiers have established a safe, open space for alternative, free education - demonstrating an alternative and new ethos of education and are actively starting again.
Come and join us, follow the blog at www.wearelondonmet.wordpress.com, and send messages of support and love to 07775531897.
...and get ready for Thursday!
Friday 26 November 2010
Start Again #1
The lecture consisted of a number of short manifestos by various ASD tutors and affiliates. It was great to hear a diverse panel presenting real thoughts and feelings without much pomp or pretention. Although I didn't agree with everything that was said, it was refreshing to hear what drives these people, what they like, what they don't, what they're fighting and what they're aspiring to.
Highlights included:
1/ Peter Carl's frank bashing of capatilist-economy-driven-city-evolution.
Finally he's getting to the point and explicitly drawing attention to the spatial divide between rich and poor in developed nations.
2/ David Kohn's proposal for a coppiced woodland and on-site Art Gallery in an East London park.
It was an interesting proposal that was neatly conceptualised and visualised. The aim was to mitigate the operational costs of the Art space by integrating the building into a public park and relandscaping the area with willow coppice to burn in an on-site Biomass plant. It was a cleverly integrated, urban proposal that reminded me of MVRDV's Pig City, which is also seductively self-contained. It was polemical and unrealistic.
Kohn's Deptford Creek Charrette proposal hailed a new era of participation and discussion in the industry.
3/ Studio Weave's grappling with the 'Money as Motivator' problem.
This was fascinating because the studio (two ASD alumni) were sharing their challenges of growing their practice. It was great to hear people sharing their moral dilemnas publicly. Although I disagreed with a lot of what Maria said, it was interesting to hear that discussion because it's seldom discussed in either education oro practice.
4/ Anne from ASD projects identifying Free Schools, Localism and Big Society agendas as opportunities for Architects.
Luckily Robert Mull questioned the government's agenda in a very eloquant way. He noted the Tories' dislike of the 'collective' and the smokescreen being created by these agendas.
Highlights included:
1/ Peter Carl's frank bashing of capatilist-economy-driven-city-evolution.
Finally he's getting to the point and explicitly drawing attention to the spatial divide between rich and poor in developed nations.
2/ David Kohn's proposal for a coppiced woodland and on-site Art Gallery in an East London park.
It was an interesting proposal that was neatly conceptualised and visualised. The aim was to mitigate the operational costs of the Art space by integrating the building into a public park and relandscaping the area with willow coppice to burn in an on-site Biomass plant. It was a cleverly integrated, urban proposal that reminded me of MVRDV's Pig City, which is also seductively self-contained. It was polemical and unrealistic.
Kohn's Deptford Creek Charrette proposal hailed a new era of participation and discussion in the industry.
3/ Studio Weave's grappling with the 'Money as Motivator' problem.
This was fascinating because the studio (two ASD alumni) were sharing their challenges of growing their practice. It was great to hear people sharing their moral dilemnas publicly. Although I disagreed with a lot of what Maria said, it was interesting to hear that discussion because it's seldom discussed in either education oro practice.
4/ Anne from ASD projects identifying Free Schools, Localism and Big Society agendas as opportunities for Architects.
Luckily Robert Mull questioned the government's agenda in a very eloquant way. He noted the Tories' dislike of the 'collective' and the smokescreen being created by these agendas.
Thursday 18 November 2010
Manifesto #2
Since the beginning of the course, I've become 23. I'm older, and hopefully wiser.
What I find very interesting at the moment is the recent change to the planning system and how this is effecting urban space, social conditions and the way Local Authorities operate. The scrapping of the Unitary Development Plans (UDP) by New Labour and the introduction of the Local Development Framework (LDF) system has allowed LAs to be very specific and very loose at the same time. Effectively, it is desolving power and discretion to LAs, allowing them to plan precisely, pre-empt the market, regulate developmet and plan the economy.
Of course LAs are still pressured by targets and other developments such as Crossrail, but they are now more able to accommodate and plan for that change before it happens, rather than responding to it once it's happened. There is a lot of grey space now for manoevuring since space is now less defined by boundaries. There is a loose relationship here at national, regional levels, which is mostly done through target-setting. At the Local scale however, LA's have to work out how to spatially arrange the implementation of government targets by connecting space and the economy.
In Islington for example, Local Neighbourhood shopping centres have been allocated and policy drafted to protect the scale and type of shops in the area, thus regulating the market. Similarly, in Hillingdon, open space is being safeguarded for mineral extraction and food production. This is in response to the Mayor's target figure of 0.5 million tonnes of aggregates per year for west London.
Three sites in Hillingdon have been allocated for aggregate production as set out in The Minerals Technical Background Report (2008), which concludes there are three sites able to provide the defined aggregates requirement for the borough over the Plan period:
Land west of the present Harmondsworth Quarry
Land north of the village of Harmondsworth, and
Land at Sipson Lane, east of the M4 spur.
All of these are situated between Heathrow and the M4 in the Heathrow Villages - ie: on land that could, one day, be used to build a third runway and two new terminals. LB Hillingdon's Draft Core Strategy identifies how the Council will support business and the local community through transport infrastructure and by supporting business such as hotels. But by doing so, it'll also make it more difficult and more expensive one day, for BAA to expand the airport northwards.
I find it fascinating how Councils can produce policy that supports development expansion but, if allocated in a certain way, can indirectly limit the growth of unwanted, damaging developments. It's interesting to see to what extent they are simply regulating the market and to what extent they are actively planning the economy.
I've realised that the reality of the planning system is about creating better environments for communities, to create positive regeneration and to protect these areas through the careful articulation of policy.
However, my concerns remain. Democracy and inclusivity is important and is often side-lined. The way policy and plans are produced, are still unknown to most people. Regeneration often equates to gentrification. But I think that all these can still be tackled - through more precision in the maps and policy as well as through increased community involvement. It would be amazing to see the system developed at grass routes levels in collaboration with Local Authorities, but I am not convinced that this will be the way that the government's new Localism agenda will play out.
What I find very interesting at the moment is the recent change to the planning system and how this is effecting urban space, social conditions and the way Local Authorities operate. The scrapping of the Unitary Development Plans (UDP) by New Labour and the introduction of the Local Development Framework (LDF) system has allowed LAs to be very specific and very loose at the same time. Effectively, it is desolving power and discretion to LAs, allowing them to plan precisely, pre-empt the market, regulate developmet and plan the economy.
Of course LAs are still pressured by targets and other developments such as Crossrail, but they are now more able to accommodate and plan for that change before it happens, rather than responding to it once it's happened. There is a lot of grey space now for manoevuring since space is now less defined by boundaries. There is a loose relationship here at national, regional levels, which is mostly done through target-setting. At the Local scale however, LA's have to work out how to spatially arrange the implementation of government targets by connecting space and the economy.
In Islington for example, Local Neighbourhood shopping centres have been allocated and policy drafted to protect the scale and type of shops in the area, thus regulating the market. Similarly, in Hillingdon, open space is being safeguarded for mineral extraction and food production. This is in response to the Mayor's target figure of 0.5 million tonnes of aggregates per year for west London.
Three sites in Hillingdon have been allocated for aggregate production as set out in The Minerals Technical Background Report (2008), which concludes there are three sites able to provide the defined aggregates requirement for the borough over the Plan period:
Land west of the present Harmondsworth Quarry
Land north of the village of Harmondsworth, and
Land at Sipson Lane, east of the M4 spur.
All of these are situated between Heathrow and the M4 in the Heathrow Villages - ie: on land that could, one day, be used to build a third runway and two new terminals. LB Hillingdon's Draft Core Strategy identifies how the Council will support business and the local community through transport infrastructure and by supporting business such as hotels. But by doing so, it'll also make it more difficult and more expensive one day, for BAA to expand the airport northwards.
I find it fascinating how Councils can produce policy that supports development expansion but, if allocated in a certain way, can indirectly limit the growth of unwanted, damaging developments. It's interesting to see to what extent they are simply regulating the market and to what extent they are actively planning the economy.
I've realised that the reality of the planning system is about creating better environments for communities, to create positive regeneration and to protect these areas through the careful articulation of policy.
However, my concerns remain. Democracy and inclusivity is important and is often side-lined. The way policy and plans are produced, are still unknown to most people. Regeneration often equates to gentrification. But I think that all these can still be tackled - through more precision in the maps and policy as well as through increased community involvement. It would be amazing to see the system developed at grass routes levels in collaboration with Local Authorities, but I am not convinced that this will be the way that the government's new Localism agenda will play out.
Glossary #2
Here is a list of my revised terms. The original terms are indicated with (a) and the new or revised terms with (b).
Planning
(a) Setting out a strategy in order to facilitate something happening or changing.
(b) Setting out a strategy in order to facilitate something happening or changing.
Spatial Planning
(a) Planning the city.
(b) Planning the city, which is a complex process that necessitates the inclusion of every aspect of the city and knowledge of how they are related.
Design
(a) A discipline that combines problem-solving with material appropriation.
(b) A discipline that combines understanding, balanced consideration, problem-solving with material appropriation.
Urban Design
(a) Designing the city.
(b) Designing the city is a process that brings together an understanding of Spatial Planning and Design and applies them simultaneously to the same space. Often however, Spatial Planning will operate at a larger scale than Design. It will provide the needs to which the design must respond and accommodate. Sometimes, the design process will feedback to the Spatial Plan with proposals or amendments.
Consultation
(a) A dialogue with citizens that needs radical reform to make it a two-way process.
(b) A complicated process of discussion and debate with citizens to ensure a democratic endorsement of an area's Spatial Plan. Most of the time, this is done by writing letters to Council Departments and Officers and making comments online about draft policy documents within the Council's set timeframe. Interested parties are also consulted by LAs. Unless there is a high level of community organisation, interested parties frequently outnumber the voices of local residents.
Democracy
(a) A thoroughly accountable system of leadership controlled by grass-roots organization.
(b) A thoroughly accountable system of leadership controlled by grass-roots organization.
Local Democracy
(b) Local Democracy is a phrase that alludes to consultation and accountability adopted by Local Authorities and Borough Councils. This is mostly done by writing letters to, and lobbying elected Council members, and by holding them to account through political parties.
Need
(a) The requirements of a city that often catalyse planned change, and yet the beneficial, relieving results of that change are often slow or the last to manifest.
(b) The requirements of the city, such as jobs, homes, transport infrastrucutre, health and education services, utilities, power and the environment.
Ownership
(a) The condition that reveals the governance of property.
(b) The relationship governance of property. In the case of land, ownership, governance, market forces and value, all influence how the land is used. Ownership however, is the last link in the chain of deliverability. In order to implement a plan, 'buy-in' must be obtained from the landowner.
Delivery
(a) Is the last phase of the plan that straddles the planning phase with the actual change. It is when the money is spent and the plan becomes manifest.
(b) Is the process that includes setting a timeframe to implement the proposal, securing the funding to do and actually implementating the change.
Economy
(a) The financial systems that contiribute to and indicate the viability of a plan.
(b) The financial systems that contiribute to and indicate the viability of a plan. This can include global and local economies and markets.
Governance
(a) A system of control that determines the legal, physical and social conditions of space.
(b) A system of control that determines the legal, physical and social conditions of space.
Planning
(a) Setting out a strategy in order to facilitate something happening or changing.
(b) Setting out a strategy in order to facilitate something happening or changing.
Spatial Planning
(a) Planning the city.
(b) Planning the city, which is a complex process that necessitates the inclusion of every aspect of the city and knowledge of how they are related.
Design
(a) A discipline that combines problem-solving with material appropriation.
(b) A discipline that combines understanding, balanced consideration, problem-solving with material appropriation.
Urban Design
(a) Designing the city.
(b) Designing the city is a process that brings together an understanding of Spatial Planning and Design and applies them simultaneously to the same space. Often however, Spatial Planning will operate at a larger scale than Design. It will provide the needs to which the design must respond and accommodate. Sometimes, the design process will feedback to the Spatial Plan with proposals or amendments.
Consultation
(a) A dialogue with citizens that needs radical reform to make it a two-way process.
(b) A complicated process of discussion and debate with citizens to ensure a democratic endorsement of an area's Spatial Plan. Most of the time, this is done by writing letters to Council Departments and Officers and making comments online about draft policy documents within the Council's set timeframe. Interested parties are also consulted by LAs. Unless there is a high level of community organisation, interested parties frequently outnumber the voices of local residents.
Democracy
(a) A thoroughly accountable system of leadership controlled by grass-roots organization.
(b) A thoroughly accountable system of leadership controlled by grass-roots organization.
Local Democracy
(b) Local Democracy is a phrase that alludes to consultation and accountability adopted by Local Authorities and Borough Councils. This is mostly done by writing letters to, and lobbying elected Council members, and by holding them to account through political parties.
Need
(a) The requirements of a city that often catalyse planned change, and yet the beneficial, relieving results of that change are often slow or the last to manifest.
(b) The requirements of the city, such as jobs, homes, transport infrastrucutre, health and education services, utilities, power and the environment.
Ownership
(a) The condition that reveals the governance of property.
(b) The relationship governance of property. In the case of land, ownership, governance, market forces and value, all influence how the land is used. Ownership however, is the last link in the chain of deliverability. In order to implement a plan, 'buy-in' must be obtained from the landowner.
Delivery
(a) Is the last phase of the plan that straddles the planning phase with the actual change. It is when the money is spent and the plan becomes manifest.
(b) Is the process that includes setting a timeframe to implement the proposal, securing the funding to do and actually implementating the change.
Economy
(a) The financial systems that contiribute to and indicate the viability of a plan.
(b) The financial systems that contiribute to and indicate the viability of a plan. This can include global and local economies and markets.
Governance
(a) A system of control that determines the legal, physical and social conditions of space.
(b) A system of control that determines the legal, physical and social conditions of space.
Thursday 11 November 2010
Friday 5 November 2010
Rip It Up #3, #4 and #5
The last three lectures of the Rip It Up series have been interesting and informative.
#3 - Thames Gateway and Thames Valley
#4 - Liverpool
#5 - Belfast
A few moments have stuck in my head from each:
#3 - Thames Gateway
There was a slightly melancholy feel about Mark's lecture. He took us through a history of his career and what DfL have done. It was as though he was preparing for the imminent death of a sickly relative, which was understandable given the fact that the government have decided to axe Regional Development Agencies.
#4 - Liverpool
Paul from the Liverpool Bienniel started his presentation with this clip, the first part of an amazing short film made in 1971 called 'Who Cares'. Its an incredible insight into areas of Liverpool from the ground and through the eyes of people who live there. He went on later to describe some of the Bienniel projects. There was some very interesting work shown including a project to regenerate the canals, their use and access. Another urban intervention was initiated by an artist who had created large scale neon displays in collaboration with local school children. These were copies of the children's drawings of animals, and when scaled up and produced in neon were attached to the sides of local buildings. Peter Carl described this project as 'tripley tragic' and Robert Mull implied that the neon artworks did not take regard of the city's radical political history and that to a certain extent, undermined the legacy. I agreed and thought this was an insightful comment but was impressed by the Biennel's audacity in other ways. This year, the Bienniel have taken advantage of the economic climate and its spatial affect on the city. They have acquired a large, empty city-centre block to host the event HQ and on its third floor, in a large, red room, they have filled the space with five hundred books by, and about Marx.
#5 - Belfast
Yesterday, Peter Brett, a writer, presented an insightful and thorough reflection of the city. It was refreshing to hear a lecturer give such attention and enthusiasm to the geological history of the place. He made many connections between the geology, geography and the urban fabric. He also paid regard to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive (NIHE) that dramatically altered the terraced street pattern and replaced it with a series of literally, defensible streets. He also examined the ways that space was measured, defined, experienced, named and associated, and the land law that governed it. Later, Mark Hackett, an architect, complimented Peter's approach with an account of the live projects that his office is doing to help 'micro-repair' the connectivity of Central Belfast. These were interesting notions and identified how Architects, as designers, could identify the spatial consequences and problems that result from 'fragmented governance'. It was really refreshing to see a collection of spatial-thinkers discuss the numerous problems of Northern Ireland and Belfast and discuss spatial solutions. Re-connecting the city is a good place to start but it cannot provide the whole solution - real economic equality is still desperately needed. Given the broad discussion, it was evident that as architects, there is only so much we can do.
#3 - Thames Gateway and Thames Valley
#4 - Liverpool
#5 - Belfast
A few moments have stuck in my head from each:
#3 - Thames Gateway
There was a slightly melancholy feel about Mark's lecture. He took us through a history of his career and what DfL have done. It was as though he was preparing for the imminent death of a sickly relative, which was understandable given the fact that the government have decided to axe Regional Development Agencies.
#4 - Liverpool
Paul from the Liverpool Bienniel started his presentation with this clip, the first part of an amazing short film made in 1971 called 'Who Cares'. Its an incredible insight into areas of Liverpool from the ground and through the eyes of people who live there. He went on later to describe some of the Bienniel projects. There was some very interesting work shown including a project to regenerate the canals, their use and access. Another urban intervention was initiated by an artist who had created large scale neon displays in collaboration with local school children. These were copies of the children's drawings of animals, and when scaled up and produced in neon were attached to the sides of local buildings. Peter Carl described this project as 'tripley tragic' and Robert Mull implied that the neon artworks did not take regard of the city's radical political history and that to a certain extent, undermined the legacy. I agreed and thought this was an insightful comment but was impressed by the Biennel's audacity in other ways. This year, the Bienniel have taken advantage of the economic climate and its spatial affect on the city. They have acquired a large, empty city-centre block to host the event HQ and on its third floor, in a large, red room, they have filled the space with five hundred books by, and about Marx.
#5 - Belfast
Yesterday, Peter Brett, a writer, presented an insightful and thorough reflection of the city. It was refreshing to hear a lecturer give such attention and enthusiasm to the geological history of the place. He made many connections between the geology, geography and the urban fabric. He also paid regard to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive (NIHE) that dramatically altered the terraced street pattern and replaced it with a series of literally, defensible streets. He also examined the ways that space was measured, defined, experienced, named and associated, and the land law that governed it. Later, Mark Hackett, an architect, complimented Peter's approach with an account of the live projects that his office is doing to help 'micro-repair' the connectivity of Central Belfast. These were interesting notions and identified how Architects, as designers, could identify the spatial consequences and problems that result from 'fragmented governance'. It was really refreshing to see a collection of spatial-thinkers discuss the numerous problems of Northern Ireland and Belfast and discuss spatial solutions. Re-connecting the city is a good place to start but it cannot provide the whole solution - real economic equality is still desperately needed. Given the broad discussion, it was evident that as architects, there is only so much we can do.
Tuesday 2 November 2010
Critical Mass October 2010
A short video of October's Critical Mass can be seen here. Interestingly there was more reappropriation of private space on this mass, in addition to the usual 'reclaim the streets'.
Key private spaces visited:
Broadgate Tower Plaza
Jean Nouvel's new shopping centre on Newgate beside St. Paul's
Paternoster Square
It was interesting to see how the mass utilised the space, reappropriated it and controlled it. In the shopping centre, a few security guards were powerless against 400 cyclists, but the mass quickly lost interest and moved on to reclaim Paternoster Square. It was an enjoyable mayhem that has massive spatial potential, if it wasn't for the group's desire to keep cycling!
Key private spaces visited:
Broadgate Tower Plaza
Jean Nouvel's new shopping centre on Newgate beside St. Paul's
Paternoster Square
It was interesting to see how the mass utilised the space, reappropriated it and controlled it. In the shopping centre, a few security guards were powerless against 400 cyclists, but the mass quickly lost interest and moved on to reclaim Paternoster Square. It was an enjoyable mayhem that has massive spatial potential, if it wasn't for the group's desire to keep cycling!
Monday 18 October 2010
Rip It Up Lecture #2: The new ruins of Great Britain
|
Friday 15 October 2010
Monday 11 October 2010
Rip It Up Lecture #1: What is the city for?
Last Thursday, Peter Carl gave the first lecture in the 'Rip it Up' series curated by Keiron Long. It was enjoyable and revealing but overall, frustrating.
His content was dense and self-referential that alluded to, but never seemed to get to, the point. The question 'What is the city for?' was briefly dealt with when he showed a slide of Westfield's Stratford City shopping-living complex. I was soon lost in the mix of swirling vortex of vocabulary that I found hard to connect with and I suspected that it meant as little to me as it did the next person. I wondered:
Why did he choose to describe the city in that way?
Is it useful to describe the city in this way?
Does it answer the question?
I began to wonder what this lecture series aims to do and how it's started off. For me, a lecture is as much about the content as it is about the communication of that content. Overall, I felt frustrated that the there was too much discussion between all the usual suspects. This made me wonder why this series is happening. Is it a genuine attempt to generate a conversation within the ASD and beyond about cities, or is it just another self-promoting and self congratualting mechanism by the organisers?
His content was dense and self-referential that alluded to, but never seemed to get to, the point. The question 'What is the city for?' was briefly dealt with when he showed a slide of Westfield's Stratford City shopping-living complex. I was soon lost in the mix of swirling vortex of vocabulary that I found hard to connect with and I suspected that it meant as little to me as it did the next person. I wondered:
Why did he choose to describe the city in that way?
Is it useful to describe the city in this way?
Does it answer the question?
I began to wonder what this lecture series aims to do and how it's started off. For me, a lecture is as much about the content as it is about the communication of that content. Overall, I felt frustrated that the there was too much discussion between all the usual suspects. This made me wonder why this series is happening. Is it a genuine attempt to generate a conversation within the ASD and beyond about cities, or is it just another self-promoting and self congratualting mechanism by the organisers?
Film: Koyaanisqatsi
Marx wrote:
“In changing nature, we change ourselves.”*
He was talking about the process of production, in which man exploits natural resources and human labour. In capitalist society the aggregate, global exploitation of labour and nature is at the most it's ever been, and the consequence of this is a life out of balance, with nature and with ourselves.
Koyaanisqatsi is an 87-minute visual illustration of this notion. It combines old and delicate nature and industrialised society as if to say, ‘there is a great need to redress this relationship. Look at what we’re doing to ourselves.’
It starts with footage of wilderness and natural cycles, cloud systems and stratified rock formations. These reminded me of a geological perspective of time - that our existence now is less than a speck in the whole of the universe’s existence.
This depiction is then followed by footage about production in a globalized, capitalist world. There’s footage taken in food, garment and vehicle factories, monocultures of flowers and views over the tower blocks in Manhatten. It seamlessly weaves together extremities to create a narrative where the common denominator is always Mankind, and where every shot further illustrates our lives out of balance. The pace is important and is always increasing; only slowing up over the wildernesses.
Made in 1983, the film describes Man’s relationship with Nature during Thatcher-Reagan Conservatism and before climate change became part of Western politics. The film doesn’t show any ice caps melting but focuses on the extremes of the society and cycles we’ve built for ourselves. The film takes the audience on a journey to a destructive, catastrophic end. It is a serious, dialectical film, not a cautionary tale. It is about symbiosis and balance and it has all been brought together to make a perfect object - self-contained, technically brilliant, evocative, compelling and visually dazzling.
I liked it very much.
----------------------------
* "Labour is, in the first place, a process in which both man and Nature participate, and in which man of his own accord starts, regulates, and controls the material re-actions between himself and Nature. He opposes himself to Nature as one of her own forces, setting in motion arms and legs, head and hands, the natural forces of his body, in order to appropriate Nature’s productions in a form adapted to his own wants. By thus acting on the external world and changing it, he at the same time changes his own nature." Chapter 7, Capital Vol.1, Marx, 1867
“In changing nature, we change ourselves.”*
He was talking about the process of production, in which man exploits natural resources and human labour. In capitalist society the aggregate, global exploitation of labour and nature is at the most it's ever been, and the consequence of this is a life out of balance, with nature and with ourselves.
Koyaanisqatsi is an 87-minute visual illustration of this notion. It combines old and delicate nature and industrialised society as if to say, ‘there is a great need to redress this relationship. Look at what we’re doing to ourselves.’
It starts with footage of wilderness and natural cycles, cloud systems and stratified rock formations. These reminded me of a geological perspective of time - that our existence now is less than a speck in the whole of the universe’s existence.
This depiction is then followed by footage about production in a globalized, capitalist world. There’s footage taken in food, garment and vehicle factories, monocultures of flowers and views over the tower blocks in Manhatten. It seamlessly weaves together extremities to create a narrative where the common denominator is always Mankind, and where every shot further illustrates our lives out of balance. The pace is important and is always increasing; only slowing up over the wildernesses.
Made in 1983, the film describes Man’s relationship with Nature during Thatcher-Reagan Conservatism and before climate change became part of Western politics. The film doesn’t show any ice caps melting but focuses on the extremes of the society and cycles we’ve built for ourselves. The film takes the audience on a journey to a destructive, catastrophic end. It is a serious, dialectical film, not a cautionary tale. It is about symbiosis and balance and it has all been brought together to make a perfect object - self-contained, technically brilliant, evocative, compelling and visually dazzling.
I liked it very much.
----------------------------
* "Labour is, in the first place, a process in which both man and Nature participate, and in which man of his own accord starts, regulates, and controls the material re-actions between himself and Nature. He opposes himself to Nature as one of her own forces, setting in motion arms and legs, head and hands, the natural forces of his body, in order to appropriate Nature’s productions in a form adapted to his own wants. By thus acting on the external world and changing it, he at the same time changes his own nature." Chapter 7, Capital Vol.1, Marx, 1867
Friday 8 October 2010
Manifesto #1
I was born in the Whittington Hospital in Archway in 1987. It's not a glamourous part of the city, despite its proximity to Highgate and its hillside views across the capital. I am twenty-two years old and have lived in London my whole life.
I come to this course after having worked at East Architecture, landscape, urban design ltd. for the best part of two years. At East I was involved with urban projects that aimed to plan parts of the city, such as Farringdon, West Croydon and Tottenham.
This gave me an insight into the various factors and variables that need to be taken into account when designing the city and it gave me a glimpse into the organisations and governance of the city, be they private stakeholders, local residents, businesses, authorities, transport bodies and quangos.
It revealed too some of the limitations of planning and got me asking questions like:
Why do we plan?
Why are we financial bound?
Why do we plan the city when we don't plan the economy?
Who knows what we're doing and to what extent are we accountable?
In the end I became dissillussioned with the masterplan. I see it as a top-down, flawed system that is too dependent on private land, private money, personal relationships and personal agendas. It marginalises the communities it is designed to serve and its fat, red, site boundary, by default, will always exclude someone or something in need. And in the end, the market will dictate and landowners will decide.
So I stopped. And I wondered how I can better grapple with the subject - perhaps as a Planner? Not as an Architect. As an Urban Designer? Where am I best suited? How can I make the change? Where should I put the lever?
I applied for three courses - not wanting to do any of them. I do not want to just be an Architect, or an Urban Designer, or a Planner, or an Educator, or an Artist or an Activist. I would like to be a floater.
I enjoy engaging with the city. It is my primary concern. I hope to use this course to test my critique of the system. I need to assess my understanding so far so that I can experiment with new ways of planning the city and engaging with its inhabitants.
I come to this course after having worked at East Architecture, landscape, urban design ltd. for the best part of two years. At East I was involved with urban projects that aimed to plan parts of the city, such as Farringdon, West Croydon and Tottenham.
This gave me an insight into the various factors and variables that need to be taken into account when designing the city and it gave me a glimpse into the organisations and governance of the city, be they private stakeholders, local residents, businesses, authorities, transport bodies and quangos.
It revealed too some of the limitations of planning and got me asking questions like:
Why do we plan?
Why are we financial bound?
Why do we plan the city when we don't plan the economy?
Who knows what we're doing and to what extent are we accountable?
In the end I became dissillussioned with the masterplan. I see it as a top-down, flawed system that is too dependent on private land, private money, personal relationships and personal agendas. It marginalises the communities it is designed to serve and its fat, red, site boundary, by default, will always exclude someone or something in need. And in the end, the market will dictate and landowners will decide.
So I stopped. And I wondered how I can better grapple with the subject - perhaps as a Planner? Not as an Architect. As an Urban Designer? Where am I best suited? How can I make the change? Where should I put the lever?
I applied for three courses - not wanting to do any of them. I do not want to just be an Architect, or an Urban Designer, or a Planner, or an Educator, or an Artist or an Activist. I would like to be a floater.
I enjoy engaging with the city. It is my primary concern. I hope to use this course to test my critique of the system. I need to assess my understanding so far so that I can experiment with new ways of planning the city and engaging with its inhabitants.
Glossary #1
Planning
Setting our a strategy in order to facilitate something happening or changing.
Spatial Planning
Planning the city.
Design
A discipline that combines problem-solving with material appropriation.
Urban Design
Designing the city.
Consultation
A dialogue with citizens that needs radical reform to make it a two-way process.
Democracy
A thoroughly accountable system of leadership controlled by grass-roots organization.
Need
The requirements of a city that often catalyse planned change, and yet the beneficial, relieving results of that change are often slow or the last to manifest.
Ownership
The condition that reveals the governance of property.
Delivery
It is the last phase of the plan that straddles the planning phase with the actual change. It is when the money is spent and the plan becomes manifest.
Economy
The financial systems that contiribute to and indicate the viability of a plan.
Governance
A system of control that determines the legal, physical and social conditions of space.
Setting our a strategy in order to facilitate something happening or changing.
Spatial Planning
Planning the city.
Design
A discipline that combines problem-solving with material appropriation.
Urban Design
Designing the city.
Consultation
A dialogue with citizens that needs radical reform to make it a two-way process.
Democracy
A thoroughly accountable system of leadership controlled by grass-roots organization.
Need
The requirements of a city that often catalyse planned change, and yet the beneficial, relieving results of that change are often slow or the last to manifest.
Ownership
The condition that reveals the governance of property.
Delivery
It is the last phase of the plan that straddles the planning phase with the actual change. It is when the money is spent and the plan becomes manifest.
Economy
The financial systems that contiribute to and indicate the viability of a plan.
Governance
A system of control that determines the legal, physical and social conditions of space.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)