What better way to commemorate one year of myurbanist than to compile ten chapters and play Gutenburg?
Using an online publishing program, and organizing around the theme of “provocative urbanism” from December 5, a paperback and an e-book were born.
For those who want to freely view the myurbanist reader or download a .pdf, see the scrolling, embedded entry below.
For those interested in a paperback rendition, view more information here.
Amid today’s writing on cities, there is a theme afoot. Something called provocative urbanism could define today’s excitement and communication about cities, as the focus of multiple articles, tweets, videos and lectures.
After all, we like cities when they work their magic of safe, dynamic and walkable multi-purposing, and provocative urbanism could aptly advertise such success.
No one has yet championed provocative urbanism among the many existing urbanisms of the airwaves. In particular, urbanism wordsmiths such as Yuri Artibise and Jason King haven’t kicked this tire (in fact, Yuri picked other monikers for his ‘P” Urbanism in his recent alphabetical list, starting with “paid”).
But just what are we provoking, and why and how?
Some of us are simply geeks about urban areas. Some see them as salvation—whether as city over suburb, or in the realm of economics, architecture, politics, law, transportation and health–or all together, in one of those silo-free nirvanas of sustainability, resplendent of both creative and contemporary buzz.
But a Google search for provocative urbanism produces surprisingly few results, and those which readily appear suggest an interesting theme: it is provocative to harken back to unplanned, spontaneous urban patterns in invoking our vision of the urban future.
In fact, one such Google result links to an essay on Richard Sennett’s The Uses of Disorder and champions urban complexity, randomness and conflict over prescriptive approaches that indiscriminately mandate technology (light rail) or policies (smart growth).
In an interesting, more structured parallel, Trent Noll has written recently in a Planetizen essay that the naturally occurring basics of placemaking (ie, comfort, variety, entertainment and walkability) have existed for time immemorial in successful cities, but today’s design challenge is a more purposeful implementation of such basics with a value-engineered mindset, to spur investment incentives for savvy developers.
At the center of provocation is the tension of imposition of order versus the wonders of a naturally changing city, often prompted by thematic catalysts and campaigns (e.g. Streets for All Seattle).
This tension is not new. Even in the 1920’s, colleagues of Clarence Perry critiqued his later well-known “neighborhood unit” approach in the context of the existing urban fabric of the New York region, then adapting to repercussions of automobile proliferation. Eminent Scottish town planner Thomas Adams wrote:
[D}iscussions… seem to suggest that neighborhood life is something that can be created. All city life is neighborhood life in some form. We should not discuss it as something that is non-existent and can be brought into being, but as something that exists in forms that need to be changed, improved and better organized. (Memorandum, Adams to Perry, January 23, 1928, Papers, Regional Plan Association, Cornell University).
There is something about the human condition that celebrates successful community, where and when we can co-exist safely, in a mutually supportive way. This especially rings true when this community can be conveyed through media that inspire the senses, much like the original experience of “being there”. As implied above, perhaps this celebration is most provocative when it occurs spontaneously, something seen more often in organic old world environments than in the new.
So, ironically, perhaps we wish to celebrate the successes of the unpredictable and disjointed as much as the successes of the prescriptive and planned. Unintentionally or outright, we often dwell in the incredible irony where the prescriptive and planned achieve what used to occur naturally.
Today, provocative urbanism can be communicated simply and democratically, which, frankly, adds even more provocation. With the wonders of technology and the grassroots web, we can now instantly connect around the world, and immediately display that the urban vernacular can be simultaneously multicultural and timeless, and that the two dimensions of print can easily become sight, motion and sound. Witness Seth Sherwood in the New York Times on December 1:
Damascus loves to flaunt its age. It claims to be the world’s oldest inhabited city — replete with biblical and Koranic lore, Roman ruins, ancient Islamic edifices and Ottoman-era palaces. But that’s not to say the Syrian capital is stuck in time. Dozens of centuries-old mansions have been reborn as Mideast-chic hotels, and fashionable shops and restaurants have arisen in the ancient lanes of the Old City. Throw in a fledgling generation of bars and clubs, and the age-old metropolis has never looked so fresh. [emphasis added]
In summary, today’s organizing institutions of land use–constitutional precepts of private property, or a zoning code or judge’s ruling–can be spun through time and space into a prospective dictionary term that adds even more color to the already crowded urban lexicon.
This article was authored as the introduction to a presentation, “Vignettes of Provocative Urbanism”, which will take place Thursday, December 9 in Seattle. Learn more via Great City, here.
There’s a sign on the wall
But she wants to be sure
‘Cause you know sometimes words have
Two meanings
–Stairway to Heaven
Arguably, there is nowhere better than a bazaar to capture the essence or ambiance of an urban place.
In cities and towns across the globe, pedestrian access remains central to this age-old form of market expression.
in contrast, in the American holiday bazaar, hoop and converted gymnasium define a not-so urban experience of temporary tables and seasonal vending. A cynical view? Inadvertent walkability amid the commerce of the car.
Same word, different story, all in Led Zepplin’s signature song.
Often, to evoke the vision of an urbanist future, we reflect on images of public spaces borne of a sociocultural tradition from another place or time.
But with such indiscriminate references to walkable and compact, mixed use experiences, are we asking too much to bring the presumed richness of an evolved, world city to every American urbanist’s back yard?
A 2009 myurbanist entry contained video walks through Rome’s Piazza Navona and Campo di Fiori at night. Here’s another video of Campo di Fiori, and a link to the story of the place:
A former field, the location of gallows for minor offenses, a juncture of streets devoted to trades, a market by day and a haven of night life: do we do injustice to rich history by assuming we can recreate the physical form produced by this “back story”?
Six years ago, while on sabbatical from my law firm, I made a presentation that asked Cornell University students studying in Rome to reflect on the context of what they had learned.
The issue of context graced the handout, just as it graces the dilemma of imposing patterns from another history on an American urban pattern.
As noted, this dilemma may yield more questions than certainty in changing times, and a salient portion of the handout asked the students to consider the dilemma, described as follows.
Rome contains some of the world’s most successful “public spaces”. Assume you are an American planning director who receives a request from a city council member who has just returned from a trip to Rome. The council member wants to pressure local mall redevelopers to create a space reminiscent of Campo di Fiori at the center of a 1960’s era shopping mall which is subject to pending development approvals for a multi-million dollar renovation. What features can you insert in the development agreement draft to attempt such ambiance? Can successful public spaces be successfully legislated?
How would you respond to this question today?
A summary of the referenced handout appears below.
myurbanist correspondent Fiona Cox (@coxlaw on Twitter) reports from the United Arab Emirates with first-hand perspectives on an evolving cityscape:
City centers, thriving urban regions and cultural hubs were far from the Abu Dhabi of a century ago–the dominant features of the place were tents or huts in a desert. But six decades later, shortly after the United Arab Emirates declared itself a nation, there was an opportunity to emerge as a new place, and embrace the best of everything worldwide: culturally, architecturally, environmentally and aesthetically.
On close inspection, today’s Abu Dhabi reveals a melting pot, with most of the population consisting of expatriates and immigrant workers, and the majority of architecture reflecting a purposeful intent to be seen as an indisputable business center.
Each skyscraper has a function: the ground floor is made up of small businesses, such as restaurants, hardware stores, clothing shops and dry-cleaners. The ensuing floors are made up of either corporate businesses or residential living. Perhaps even more notably, mosques abound.
Ironically, the most striking element of the city is that buildings which one might consider “traditional” are absolutely exceptional. The Sheikh Zayed Mosque, for example, is unlike anything else. It is vast and beautiful.
Although each element of the mosque was made elsewhere (marble from Brazil, glass from Italy, clocks from England, carpets made from New Zealand’s wool and crafted in Iran), each such part merges into something quite extraordinary.
As a whole, this mosque leaves the observer yearning for more examples of traditional architecture.
With the imminent building of new international renditions of the Guggenheim and the Louvre in Abu Dhabi, the questions of form and function remain.
Will the urban design of the city continue to parlay a functional business center? Or will Abu Dhabi realize its potential to become a place of truly comprehensive aesthetic value?