Saturday, September 19, 2009
Friday, September 18, 2009
Kenneth Frampton: Tectonic Form and Public Appearance
What follows is a summary of a lecture by Kenneth Frampton that he held 28 May 2009 at the Berlage Institute in Rotterdam. This lecture was titled Tectonic Form and Public Appearance.
Frampton begins his lecture by critizing contemporary architects like Herzog de Meuron. According to Frampton these architects put to much emphasize on the skin, and not so much on the tectonic form and the spatial aspects of the building. What is missing is the ‘space of appearance’, a term derived from Hannah Arendt’s influential work The Human Condition (1958). An example of the space of appearance is the acropolis in ancient Athens. However, we have to realize that architecture is not a preexistence for this space of appearance to come into being. This doesn’t mean that architecture is a powerless instrument in society. Frampton formulates it like this:
Frampton begins his lecture by critizing contemporary architects like Herzog de Meuron. According to Frampton these architects put to much emphasize on the skin, and not so much on the tectonic form and the spatial aspects of the building. What is missing is the ‘space of appearance’, a term derived from Hannah Arendt’s influential work The Human Condition (1958). An example of the space of appearance is the acropolis in ancient Athens. However, we have to realize that architecture is not a preexistence for this space of appearance to come into being. This doesn’t mean that architecture is a powerless instrument in society. Frampton formulates it like this:
‘Architecture can still intervene (…) in the urban fabric in a limited way, as an intervention. And this intervention should guarantee this of public appearance.’
The freestanding column can also be seen as a analogue for the human body in the public space.
The second example is the Greek theater where the body politic could gather and transcendent there everyday life. (The life of necessity or labour as Arendt would call it.) Not only provides the Greek theater a place to make this possible, it also expresses it in its tectonic form, this form is an representation of the absent collective body.
The third example is the stair – in its tectonic form it already represents the motion of the human body. I would say that the stair, and the theater are counter-moulds of the public.
Later Frampton comes to speak about the role of architecture. He thinks that it role is twofold: Presentation and Representation. Presentation is about what is provided, the programmatic elements for the realization of the project. Representation is the constructional elements itself that represent the public, think about the examples of the stair, column. In the absence of public you see the representation of the public.
Frampton pays in this lecture a lot of attention to the architecture of Paulo Mendes da Rocha and shows several of his buildings. This because there is – according to Frampton – a relation between the human body and the constructional elements. (He also shows the faculty building of architecture in São Paulo by Vilanova Artigas.)
The limits of Architecture
Answering the questions of the audience Frampton comes to speak about the MUBE, the museum of Brazilian sculpture in São Paulo by Paulo Mendes da Rocha. (See images bottom of the post.) This building defines a beautiful public space, however, after the construction the site is completely fenced. This ruins the building and especially the public character of the project. Frampton reacts on this particular situation in São Paulo:
Later Frampton comes to speak about the role of architecture. He thinks that it role is twofold: Presentation and Representation. Presentation is about what is provided, the programmatic elements for the realization of the project. Representation is the constructional elements itself that represent the public, think about the examples of the stair, column. In the absence of public you see the representation of the public.
Frampton pays in this lecture a lot of attention to the architecture of Paulo Mendes da Rocha and shows several of his buildings. This because there is – according to Frampton – a relation between the human body and the constructional elements. (He also shows the faculty building of architecture in São Paulo by Vilanova Artigas.)
The limits of Architecture
Answering the questions of the audience Frampton comes to speak about the MUBE, the museum of Brazilian sculpture in São Paulo by Paulo Mendes da Rocha. (See images bottom of the post.) This building defines a beautiful public space, however, after the construction the site is completely fenced. This ruins the building and especially the public character of the project. Frampton reacts on this particular situation in São Paulo:
‘ (…) at some point architecture has its limits. There is a certain dimension where architecture cannot really come into being. I think because society is so stressed by poverty and by the accompanying violence that come along with the poverty [that] architecture come beside to point in a way. The heroic gesture can still be made but they may not be consummated because society is under to much stress. (…) When we get to such a level of paranoia [this] paranoia makes architecture in a society impossible. I mean, if you think about designing embassies today, you need to have two embassies: you need one that is the kind of representational thing where you don’t mind that somebody puts a bomb in it, and you need another embassy which is a bunker. (…) That kind of paranoia is a killer. It is the opposite of a society of risk.’
Thursday, September 17, 2009
City of Walls: Summary Chapter 8. VIOLENCE, THE UNBOUNDED BODY, AND THE DISREGARD OF RIGHTS IN BRAZILIAN DEMOCRACY
The increase of violence during the process of democratization is by Caldeira seen as, what see calls “disjunctive”. Brazil is a political democracy, ‘the civil aspects of citizenship are continuously violated,’ as she expresses in the last chapter of the book. This chapter focuses on “the body,’ as Caldeira approaches this theme from the disrespect for human rights and the campaign for the introduction of death penalty.
The disrespect for human rights comes clear when we look at how the discussion about the rights of prisoners. A very common attitude is than to say that human rights is the same as giving rights to bandits, something that is really not done according to a lot of people. To give an impression of the way the media speaks about human rights, I give the example of the daily radio program of Afanasio Jazadji who is a popular radio star in São Paulo. In April 1984 , the day the National Congress decided to deny the population right to vote the president he said:
When it comes to punishment a lot of people think of ‘punishment as inflicting suffering of the body,’ as a form of ‘physical revenge,’ as Caldeira calls it. ‘The dominant discourse is that of private revenge, as system that uses pain and interventions on the body as a means of creating order.’ [So the problem with public space stands not on its own; it goes much broader in a much wider incline of the border between public and private. JvB]
Something very important Caldeira makes clear deals about child beating: ‘Unable to understand language, children nevertheless are clearly believed to understand pain. Since fear of pain generates obedience, provoking such fear is considered good pedagogy. The marking of the body by pain is perceived as a more forceful statement that mere words can make, and it should be used especially when language and rational arguments would not be understood. In general, the people I interviewed think that children, adolescents, and women are not totally rational (or not always rational), in same way that the poor and obviously, criminals are not. Towards such people the use of violence is necessary; it is a language anyone can understand, which has the power to enforce moral principles and correct social behavior. Pain is understood as a path to knowledge (especially moral knowledge) and reform. Violence is considered to be a language closer to truth.’
Body and rights
‘Clearly, the body is conceived of as the locus of punishment, justice, and example in Brazil. It is conseived by most as a proper site for authority to be asserted through the infliction of pain.’
Caldeira starts to speak about “the unbounded body,” which mean that it ‘has no clear barriers of separation or avoidance; it is a permeable body, open to intervention, on which manipulations by others are not considered problematic. On the other hand, the unbounded body is unprotected by individual rights.’ The main reason for the appearance of the unbounded body is the openly discredited judicial system.
Caldeira gives also different examples of unbounded body that are outside realm of violence. In the fist place the high percentages of cesarean births and sterilizations of women in Brazil. This is seen as a alternative way of birth control, and especially the poor use it. Another medical intervention is the plastic surgery that is very common among Brazilian women in order to become the stereotype Brazilian women. Nonmedical thing Caldeira mentions is the carnival, the ‘occasion for displaying the body and playing with transformations of the body. (…) During Carnival performances people expect to touch and be touched: it is considered in bad taste to repel such interventions because one is out there to play, and the mingling of bodies is the essence of the play. Not only is Carnival a realm for the merging of bodies, their manipulation, and display, but it is also one where the threat of violence and actual violence are always present.’
Having this said, Caldeira derives from Michel Foucault’s theories the standpoint the emerge of a liberal-democracy moves away from bodily punishment to the punishment of the mind. But the progressive abandonment come always simultaneously with a process of democratization. What appears is a “disjunctive democracy” where, as in Brazil’s case, we have very highly developed social rights [think for example about the social movements] but civil rights that are not protected. Important is the relation between the body and civic rights. ‘In Brazilian society, what dominates is the unbounded notion of the body and the individual.’
Caldeira ends the book with a few questions, one of them, maybe even the most important one, about the future of public space. ‘Is there a model that protects people’s bodies and enforces individual rights while maintaining the indeterminacy [Dutch: onbepaaldheid, JvB] of borders that constitutes the democratic public space.’ The task no is, according to Caldeira, to ‘find new ways to democratize public space, renegotiate borders, and respect civil rights.’ Very interesting in my opinion is that Caldeira looks for more flexible borders, because she thinks that flexible borders combined with great inequality, ‘works only in one direction, from dominant to dominated, without any institutional restraints or boundaries. Caldeira gives a hint here in what direction see does think: ‘I advocate more rather than less boundedness for the body, especially when it involves relationships between unequals.’
The disrespect for human rights comes clear when we look at how the discussion about the rights of prisoners. A very common attitude is than to say that human rights is the same as giving rights to bandits, something that is really not done according to a lot of people. To give an impression of the way the media speaks about human rights, I give the example of the daily radio program of Afanasio Jazadji who is a popular radio star in São Paulo. In April 1984 , the day the National Congress decided to deny the population right to vote the president he said:
‘Some should take all those irredeemable prisoners, put them against the wall and fry them with a blow torch. Or instead throw a bomb in the middle of them: boom!, end of the problem. They have no family, they don’t have anything, they don’t have anything to worry about, they only think about doing evil, and why should we worry about them? …
Those bastards, they consume everything, millions and millions a month. Let us get this money and transform it into hospitals, nurseries, orphanages, asylums, and provide a respectable life for those who really deserve to have this dignity. Now, for those type of people … people? To treat them as people! We’re offending humankind!’Comparable reactions are made regarding death penalty, and some of the ones Caldeira gives are rather shocking. However, we have to be careful not to judge Brazil as a whole on these populist statements, and we have to keep in mind the violence most people experienced themselves or on their relatives.
When it comes to punishment a lot of people think of ‘punishment as inflicting suffering of the body,’ as a form of ‘physical revenge,’ as Caldeira calls it. ‘The dominant discourse is that of private revenge, as system that uses pain and interventions on the body as a means of creating order.’ [So the problem with public space stands not on its own; it goes much broader in a much wider incline of the border between public and private. JvB]
Something very important Caldeira makes clear deals about child beating: ‘Unable to understand language, children nevertheless are clearly believed to understand pain. Since fear of pain generates obedience, provoking such fear is considered good pedagogy. The marking of the body by pain is perceived as a more forceful statement that mere words can make, and it should be used especially when language and rational arguments would not be understood. In general, the people I interviewed think that children, adolescents, and women are not totally rational (or not always rational), in same way that the poor and obviously, criminals are not. Towards such people the use of violence is necessary; it is a language anyone can understand, which has the power to enforce moral principles and correct social behavior. Pain is understood as a path to knowledge (especially moral knowledge) and reform. Violence is considered to be a language closer to truth.’
Body and rights
‘Clearly, the body is conceived of as the locus of punishment, justice, and example in Brazil. It is conseived by most as a proper site for authority to be asserted through the infliction of pain.’
Caldeira starts to speak about “the unbounded body,” which mean that it ‘has no clear barriers of separation or avoidance; it is a permeable body, open to intervention, on which manipulations by others are not considered problematic. On the other hand, the unbounded body is unprotected by individual rights.’ The main reason for the appearance of the unbounded body is the openly discredited judicial system.
Caldeira gives also different examples of unbounded body that are outside realm of violence. In the fist place the high percentages of cesarean births and sterilizations of women in Brazil. This is seen as a alternative way of birth control, and especially the poor use it. Another medical intervention is the plastic surgery that is very common among Brazilian women in order to become the stereotype Brazilian women. Nonmedical thing Caldeira mentions is the carnival, the ‘occasion for displaying the body and playing with transformations of the body. (…) During Carnival performances people expect to touch and be touched: it is considered in bad taste to repel such interventions because one is out there to play, and the mingling of bodies is the essence of the play. Not only is Carnival a realm for the merging of bodies, their manipulation, and display, but it is also one where the threat of violence and actual violence are always present.’
Having this said, Caldeira derives from Michel Foucault’s theories the standpoint the emerge of a liberal-democracy moves away from bodily punishment to the punishment of the mind. But the progressive abandonment come always simultaneously with a process of democratization. What appears is a “disjunctive democracy” where, as in Brazil’s case, we have very highly developed social rights [think for example about the social movements] but civil rights that are not protected. Important is the relation between the body and civic rights. ‘In Brazilian society, what dominates is the unbounded notion of the body and the individual.’
Caldeira ends the book with a few questions, one of them, maybe even the most important one, about the future of public space. ‘Is there a model that protects people’s bodies and enforces individual rights while maintaining the indeterminacy [Dutch: onbepaaldheid, JvB] of borders that constitutes the democratic public space.’ The task no is, according to Caldeira, to ‘find new ways to democratize public space, renegotiate borders, and respect civil rights.’ Very interesting in my opinion is that Caldeira looks for more flexible borders, because she thinks that flexible borders combined with great inequality, ‘works only in one direction, from dominant to dominated, without any institutional restraints or boundaries. Caldeira gives a hint here in what direction see does think: ‘I advocate more rather than less boundedness for the body, especially when it involves relationships between unequals.’
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
City of Walls: Summary Chapter 8. THE IMPLOSION OF MODERN PUBLIC LIFE
Caldeira rings in this chapter the alarm bell when it comes to public space: ‘People feel restricted in their movements, afraid, and controlled; they go out less at night, walk less on the street, and avoid the “forbidden zones” that loom larger and larger in every resident’s mental map of the city, especially among the elite. Encounters in the public space become increasingly tense, even violent, because discrimination, and suspicion are the new hallmarks of public life.’ The most important question in this chapter is: ‘how to conceive of the relationships between urban form, politics, and everyday life. These relationships are very complex and usually disjunctive: simultaneous processes with opposite meaning may take place in the same public sphere. São Paulo offers a compelling example of disjunction: its walling process has coincided with the organization of urban social movements, the expansion of citizenship rights for the working classes, and political democratization. (…) Nonetheless, the build environment is not a neutral stage for the unfolding of social relations. The quality of the build environment inevitably influences the quality of the social interaction that take place there. It does not determine them completely; there is always room for diverse and sometimes dubversive appropriations of space and for the organization of siacila actions that counter those shaoed by spatial practices. However, the material space that constitute the stage for public life influence the types of social relations possible on it. (…) Usually it takes organized political action to resist walls or to dismantle patterns of segregation.’
The modern ideal of public space and the city life
[Caldeira takes a few social theorist and philosophers to explain her idea of public space. What strikes me is the fact that Caldeira uses only very western European or north American scholars. In this part of the chapter there are no south American scholars. What does this mean for the conception of public space in the Latin American city? JvB]
About Jane Jacobs: ‘When public life is absent, the alternative to sharing too much may be sharing nothing, and suspicion and fear of neighbor are the expected outcomes.’
About Iris Marion Young: she ‘defines city life as “the being together of strangers,” whose ideal is “an openness to unassimilated otherness.” Young tries to sketch an ideal image of the city containing in four main virtues: ‘(1) social differentiation without exclusion; (2) multi-use differentiation of social space; (3) eroticism, understood broadly as “an attraction to the other, the pleasure and excitement of being drawn out of one’s secure routine to encounter the novel, strange, and surprising”; and (4) publicity, which refers to public space as being by definition a place open and accessible to anyone and where one always risks encountering those who are different.’ [Interesting writer… JvB]
Caldeira distinguishes two types of social movement: the fist that emphasizes the sameness of the discriminated group (blacks, gay, women) and second, the fact that “universalism” is often the basis for exclusion and that we should focus on, what Young calls, “difference without exclusion.” This second notion is also comparable with the writings of theorist like Claude Leford, Chantal Mouffe, Ernesto Laclau, and Étienne Balibar. The modern city forces confrontation among strangers. ‘Such spaces [public spaces, JvB] promote interactions among people who are forced to confront each other’s anonymity on the basis of citizenship and therefore to acknowledge and respect each other’s rights.’
Garden city and modernism: the lineage of the fortified enclave
According to Caldeira the rise of the condominium in Brazil and United States has its origin in Ebenezer Howard’s Garden City model. This because it had the same idea of living in a green area and it has the principle separated functions. The condominium can also be seen as a variation on Le Corbusier’s Radiant City, that he himself once described as a “vertical garden city”. The condominium follows naturally from modernistic planning, except the walling of the space. [It think this is not true. JvB] What Caldeira is arguing is that in São Paulo the city is build by the bad aspect of modernism, and the good aspects are left aside. This results in a public space that ‘expresses the new intolerance. (…) In the ideal modern city life, “borders are open and undecidable,” suggest Young. Fixed boundaries create nonmodern spaces, an undemocratic space.’ [I do not agree on this. JvB]
The strange relation between democratization and the walls in the city Caldeira reacts as follows: ‘While the political system opened up, the streets were closed, and fear of crime became the talk of the city.’
Street life: Incivility and aggression
Both the rich and the poor neighborhoods are not accessible: Morumbi is a neighborhood for a car, the pavement is bad; the favela has only a few entrances and is not surveyable. Other people privatized their streets by closing them of with gates or other objects.
The systems of security are not only for safety reason but also to ‘discipline’ and to ‘discriminate’. ‘The image of the suspect is made up of stereotypes, and therefore systems of screening discriminate especially against the poor and black people. The entrance guards do not bother people with the right class signs, but they give a hard time to everyone else. (…) In a city in which systems of identification and strategies of security are spreading everywhere, the experience of urban life becomes one of social differences, separations, exclusions, and reminders of the limitations of one’s possibilities in the public space. It is, in reality, a city of walls, the opposite of the boundless public space of the modern ideal city. The rich and the middle classes, more and more try to avoid the street and start to do their shopping in enclosed shopping centers and hypermarkets. The street is also very dangerous because of the traffic. Nobody obeys the traffic regulation.
Experiencing the public
Another interesting disjunction in the process of democratization is has to do with the occupation of former elite space (for example the movie theater) by the poor. ‘With fewer obvious signs of differentiation at hand and with more difficulty in asserting their privileges and codes of behavior in the public space, the upper classes turn instead to systems of indentification. Thus, spaces of controlled circulation (such as shopping centers) come to assure that distinction and separation are still possible in public. Signs of social distance are replaced with material walls.’
In this chapter Caldeira names only two public space that are, in her opinion, exceptional in terms that they have a plural public space. The first one is Ibirapuera Park and Praça da Sé.
Praça da Sé
This central square is extensively discussed because it is a very important public space in São Paulo. It contains tree important landmarks, namely the cathedral, the central subway and the “zero mark” of the city, indicated by a stone on top of a compass engraved on the ground. Teresa Caldeira thinks that the space has become more and more a place for the poor people, because of the homeless people, beggars, street vendors, ect. However, still today we see a lot of business man in suits, but also preachers of different kind of Christian movements, musicians and policeman. According to Caldeira the rich start to avoid Praça da Sé, because of its dominance by the poor.
But Praça da Sé has also a very political component. During the military dictatorship this was the only place were demonstrations were held, such as on 25 January 1984 when three hundred thousand congregated in Praça da Sé to demand free elections. ‘Demonstrations were moved to Vale do Anhangabaú on only two occasions, when the square was too small for the expected crowd of one million: the last rally for direct elections in April 1984, and the demonstration for the impeachment of President Collor in September 1992. (…) On the one hand, Praça da Sé symbolizes the political reappropriation of public space by the citizens in the transition to democracy. On the other hand, it represents the detoriation of public space, danger, crime, anxieties about downward mobility, and impoverishment of the workers who continue to commuting, working in the informal market, and consuming its cheap products. It symbolizes both the strength and the deterioration of public space and, therefore, the disjunctive character of Brazilian democracy. [Caldeira refers here to a text she wrote together with James Holston called ‘Democracy, Law, and Violence: Disjunctions of Brazilian Citizenship’, published in “Fault Lines of Democracy in Post-transition Latin America”. Zie literatuurlijst voor beschikbaarheid. JvB]
Contradictory public space
Something very interesting in my opinion is the argument Charles Jencks uses. He thinks that we simply should deal with the process of walling the city, architects should find an aesthetic solution for it, referring to Frank O. Gehry. The fences are good because they prevent conflict. A totally different approach towards this problem has Mike Davis, who sees the fencing as a “destruction of public space,” and also as a consequence of postliberal politics (Reagan – Bush). However, Caldeira is more carefull making the link between politics and the ‘implosion of modern public live’, referring to the process of democratization.
Caldeira sees certain similarities between São Paulo and Los Angeles, such as ‘the garden city model, modernist design and city planning, (…) the fortified enclaves and theme parks (…) the intense fear of crime and the production of stereotypes of dangerous others (...) high rates of crime.’
The last part of this chapter is very strong so I quote is completely:
Caldeira, T.P.R. City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in São Paulo, University of California Press, 2000, p. 297-355.
The modern ideal of public space and the city life
[Caldeira takes a few social theorist and philosophers to explain her idea of public space. What strikes me is the fact that Caldeira uses only very western European or north American scholars. In this part of the chapter there are no south American scholars. What does this mean for the conception of public space in the Latin American city? JvB]
About Jane Jacobs: ‘When public life is absent, the alternative to sharing too much may be sharing nothing, and suspicion and fear of neighbor are the expected outcomes.’
About Iris Marion Young: she ‘defines city life as “the being together of strangers,” whose ideal is “an openness to unassimilated otherness.” Young tries to sketch an ideal image of the city containing in four main virtues: ‘(1) social differentiation without exclusion; (2) multi-use differentiation of social space; (3) eroticism, understood broadly as “an attraction to the other, the pleasure and excitement of being drawn out of one’s secure routine to encounter the novel, strange, and surprising”; and (4) publicity, which refers to public space as being by definition a place open and accessible to anyone and where one always risks encountering those who are different.’ [Interesting writer… JvB]
Caldeira distinguishes two types of social movement: the fist that emphasizes the sameness of the discriminated group (blacks, gay, women) and second, the fact that “universalism” is often the basis for exclusion and that we should focus on, what Young calls, “difference without exclusion.” This second notion is also comparable with the writings of theorist like Claude Leford, Chantal Mouffe, Ernesto Laclau, and Étienne Balibar. The modern city forces confrontation among strangers. ‘Such spaces [public spaces, JvB] promote interactions among people who are forced to confront each other’s anonymity on the basis of citizenship and therefore to acknowledge and respect each other’s rights.’
Garden city and modernism: the lineage of the fortified enclave
According to Caldeira the rise of the condominium in Brazil and United States has its origin in Ebenezer Howard’s Garden City model. This because it had the same idea of living in a green area and it has the principle separated functions. The condominium can also be seen as a variation on Le Corbusier’s Radiant City, that he himself once described as a “vertical garden city”. The condominium follows naturally from modernistic planning, except the walling of the space. [It think this is not true. JvB] What Caldeira is arguing is that in São Paulo the city is build by the bad aspect of modernism, and the good aspects are left aside. This results in a public space that ‘expresses the new intolerance. (…) In the ideal modern city life, “borders are open and undecidable,” suggest Young. Fixed boundaries create nonmodern spaces, an undemocratic space.’ [I do not agree on this. JvB]
The strange relation between democratization and the walls in the city Caldeira reacts as follows: ‘While the political system opened up, the streets were closed, and fear of crime became the talk of the city.’
Street life: Incivility and aggression
Both the rich and the poor neighborhoods are not accessible: Morumbi is a neighborhood for a car, the pavement is bad; the favela has only a few entrances and is not surveyable. Other people privatized their streets by closing them of with gates or other objects.
The systems of security are not only for safety reason but also to ‘discipline’ and to ‘discriminate’. ‘The image of the suspect is made up of stereotypes, and therefore systems of screening discriminate especially against the poor and black people. The entrance guards do not bother people with the right class signs, but they give a hard time to everyone else. (…) In a city in which systems of identification and strategies of security are spreading everywhere, the experience of urban life becomes one of social differences, separations, exclusions, and reminders of the limitations of one’s possibilities in the public space. It is, in reality, a city of walls, the opposite of the boundless public space of the modern ideal city. The rich and the middle classes, more and more try to avoid the street and start to do their shopping in enclosed shopping centers and hypermarkets. The street is also very dangerous because of the traffic. Nobody obeys the traffic regulation.
Experiencing the public
Another interesting disjunction in the process of democratization is has to do with the occupation of former elite space (for example the movie theater) by the poor. ‘With fewer obvious signs of differentiation at hand and with more difficulty in asserting their privileges and codes of behavior in the public space, the upper classes turn instead to systems of indentification. Thus, spaces of controlled circulation (such as shopping centers) come to assure that distinction and separation are still possible in public. Signs of social distance are replaced with material walls.’
In this chapter Caldeira names only two public space that are, in her opinion, exceptional in terms that they have a plural public space. The first one is Ibirapuera Park and Praça da Sé.
Praça da Sé
This central square is extensively discussed because it is a very important public space in São Paulo. It contains tree important landmarks, namely the cathedral, the central subway and the “zero mark” of the city, indicated by a stone on top of a compass engraved on the ground. Teresa Caldeira thinks that the space has become more and more a place for the poor people, because of the homeless people, beggars, street vendors, ect. However, still today we see a lot of business man in suits, but also preachers of different kind of Christian movements, musicians and policeman. According to Caldeira the rich start to avoid Praça da Sé, because of its dominance by the poor.
But Praça da Sé has also a very political component. During the military dictatorship this was the only place were demonstrations were held, such as on 25 January 1984 when three hundred thousand congregated in Praça da Sé to demand free elections. ‘Demonstrations were moved to Vale do Anhangabaú on only two occasions, when the square was too small for the expected crowd of one million: the last rally for direct elections in April 1984, and the demonstration for the impeachment of President Collor in September 1992. (…) On the one hand, Praça da Sé symbolizes the political reappropriation of public space by the citizens in the transition to democracy. On the other hand, it represents the detoriation of public space, danger, crime, anxieties about downward mobility, and impoverishment of the workers who continue to commuting, working in the informal market, and consuming its cheap products. It symbolizes both the strength and the deterioration of public space and, therefore, the disjunctive character of Brazilian democracy. [Caldeira refers here to a text she wrote together with James Holston called ‘Democracy, Law, and Violence: Disjunctions of Brazilian Citizenship’, published in “Fault Lines of Democracy in Post-transition Latin America”. Zie literatuurlijst voor beschikbaarheid. JvB]
Contradictory public space
Something very interesting in my opinion is the argument Charles Jencks uses. He thinks that we simply should deal with the process of walling the city, architects should find an aesthetic solution for it, referring to Frank O. Gehry. The fences are good because they prevent conflict. A totally different approach towards this problem has Mike Davis, who sees the fencing as a “destruction of public space,” and also as a consequence of postliberal politics (Reagan – Bush). However, Caldeira is more carefull making the link between politics and the ‘implosion of modern public live’, referring to the process of democratization.
Caldeira sees certain similarities between São Paulo and Los Angeles, such as ‘the garden city model, modernist design and city planning, (…) the fortified enclaves and theme parks (…) the intense fear of crime and the production of stereotypes of dangerous others (...) high rates of crime.’
The last part of this chapter is very strong so I quote is completely:
‘The new urban morphologies of fear give new forms to inequality, keeps groups apart, and inscribe a new sociablity that runs against the ideals of the modern public and democratic freedoms. When some people are denied access to certain areas and when different groups do not interact in public space, then reference to ideals of openness, equality, and freedom as organizing principles for social life are no longer possible, even as fiction. The consequence of the new separateness and restriction of public life are serious: contrary to what Jencks (1993) thinks, defensible architecture and planning may promote confict instead of preventing it, by making explicit the social inequalities and the lack of common ground. In fact, we may argue that the Los Angeles uprising was caused by social segregation rather than by the lack of separation and defenses. If the experiences of separateness expressed in the urban environment become dominant in their societies, people will distance themselves from democracy.’
Caldeira, T.P.R. City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in São Paulo, University of California Press, 2000, p. 297-355.
Centros Educacionais Unificados – CEU
Critique:
[1] Relation to the street or the city fabric is poor
[2] The definition of the public space is a missed opportunity.
[3] No possibility of “appropriation of space”.
[4] To standardized
[5] It does not relate to commercial space.
Monday, September 14, 2009
City of Walls: Summary Chapter 7. FORTIFIED ENCLAVES: BUILDING UP WALLS AND CREATING A NEW PRIVATE ORDER
Brazil is not the only country with a lot of condominiums, in the USA it is also a quit common phenomenon. Nevertheless, there are some differences. In the USA the condominiums are not so often gated compared to Brazil, only twenty percent of them. In São Paulo the condominium are still more urban than suburban. [A tendency that is probably changing right know. I don’t have hard proof for it but when I see all these parcels on google earth it is plausible that the suburban condominium becomes more popular. I have to look at it. JvB] Another aspect that is different from the USA is that the houses are not patterned because the elite sees patterned houses as something for the working class. The house is a expression of you personality and needs a ‘individualized appearance.’ ‘Condominiums are never called “communities,” and they are never advertised as a type of housing that could enhance the value of doing things together. In fact, residents seem to resent deeply this idea of community.’
The famous condominium Alphaville ‘covered an urbanized area of 13 square kilometer and had a fixed population of around twenty thousand inhabitants. Its office center housed 360 enterprises, and commercial area had 600 enterprises. On average, 75,000 non residents passed through it daily. In 1989, 55.4 percent of the tax revenues of the city of Barueri came from Alphaville. Security is one of the main elements in its advertising and an obsession of all involved with it. Each residential area, office center, and commercial center hires its own security force to maintain internal order, and there is a common security force to take care of the public spaces (the avenues and even the highway connecting to São Paulo).
The condominiums provide all possible services you can image, like nannies, hairdresser, gardening, libraries, shops, ect. These services are done by poor people who often live in favelas close by. ‘The upper class fear contact and contamination by the poor, but they conitinue to depend on their low-class servants.
A lot of problems inside the condominium are caused by the children of the people who live there. They vandalize collective equipment, use drugs and drive without license. Especially the car accidents are a problem. Between March 1989 and January 1991, the police registered 646 car accidents occurred inside the residential areas, that is, inside the walls and on the private streets to which only residents and their visitors have access. The majority of accidents were caused by teenagers, the majority of victims were either children or teenagers playing in the streets (only one of the people who died was over eighteen).’
The problems with children in Alphaville is thought to be solved by ‘more love and attention, stronger families, and more controle. (…) To discuss the question in terms of public order or public responsibility is unheard-of. [This reminds me of what Hannah Arendt argues about the household and the political. JvB]
Teresa Caldeira sees the privatization of the public space as a new phenomenon. Brazilian society has always been unequal but the creation of private islands has grown stronger. Very interesting is that see things that the retreat of the elite from the public sphere is actually a retreat form the process of democratization. The reason for this is because the working classes, ‘through their social movements, were for the first time participating effectively in political life. There is a parallel to make with the US where the ‘flight to the suburbs in the 1960s and 1970s and to gated communities in the 1990s may be related to the expansion of citizenship rights of the black population and the incorporation into American society of an increased number of immigrants. In Europe, the increase of racism and of new patterns of segregation seem to be similarly associated with the expansion of citizenship rights to immigrants.
By giving a lot of examples of advertisement Caldeira shows that the concept of the condominium and the feeling of being unsafe is really something that is exploited by the real estate market.
People living in a closed and secured place do not see this as a negative thing. They also see their way of living as a form of ‘freedom’. [I think this is a very strange contradictory thing. JvB] ‘Interestingly, the people (…) never use arguments of privacy, individuality, or intimacy to justify their preferences. Morumbi residents seem to fear the spread of evil more than they value individualism.’ However, for the people who live in houses in Moóca this seems to be different. ‘The transformation of the house in a prison adds to the feeling of restriction and loss associated with the economic crisis and anguish about the social decay. The closed door is a strong metaphor.
But, the walls, fences, bars have also another function: “aesthetics of security”, as Caldeira calls it. The elements of security have become symbols of status. Security has also become part of the design of the house. ‘By the early 1990s the new “architecture of security” was making its way into the newspaper articles. This architecture creates explicit means of keeping away undesirables, especially the homeless.’
Caldeira, T.P.R. City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in São Paulo, University of California Press, 2000, p. 256-296.
The famous condominium Alphaville ‘covered an urbanized area of 13 square kilometer and had a fixed population of around twenty thousand inhabitants. Its office center housed 360 enterprises, and commercial area had 600 enterprises. On average, 75,000 non residents passed through it daily. In 1989, 55.4 percent of the tax revenues of the city of Barueri came from Alphaville. Security is one of the main elements in its advertising and an obsession of all involved with it. Each residential area, office center, and commercial center hires its own security force to maintain internal order, and there is a common security force to take care of the public spaces (the avenues and even the highway connecting to São Paulo).
The condominiums provide all possible services you can image, like nannies, hairdresser, gardening, libraries, shops, ect. These services are done by poor people who often live in favelas close by. ‘The upper class fear contact and contamination by the poor, but they conitinue to depend on their low-class servants.
A lot of problems inside the condominium are caused by the children of the people who live there. They vandalize collective equipment, use drugs and drive without license. Especially the car accidents are a problem. Between March 1989 and January 1991, the police registered 646 car accidents occurred inside the residential areas, that is, inside the walls and on the private streets to which only residents and their visitors have access. The majority of accidents were caused by teenagers, the majority of victims were either children or teenagers playing in the streets (only one of the people who died was over eighteen).’
The problems with children in Alphaville is thought to be solved by ‘more love and attention, stronger families, and more controle. (…) To discuss the question in terms of public order or public responsibility is unheard-of. [This reminds me of what Hannah Arendt argues about the household and the political. JvB]
Teresa Caldeira sees the privatization of the public space as a new phenomenon. Brazilian society has always been unequal but the creation of private islands has grown stronger. Very interesting is that see things that the retreat of the elite from the public sphere is actually a retreat form the process of democratization. The reason for this is because the working classes, ‘through their social movements, were for the first time participating effectively in political life. There is a parallel to make with the US where the ‘flight to the suburbs in the 1960s and 1970s and to gated communities in the 1990s may be related to the expansion of citizenship rights of the black population and the incorporation into American society of an increased number of immigrants. In Europe, the increase of racism and of new patterns of segregation seem to be similarly associated with the expansion of citizenship rights to immigrants.
By giving a lot of examples of advertisement Caldeira shows that the concept of the condominium and the feeling of being unsafe is really something that is exploited by the real estate market.
People living in a closed and secured place do not see this as a negative thing. They also see their way of living as a form of ‘freedom’. [I think this is a very strange contradictory thing. JvB] ‘Interestingly, the people (…) never use arguments of privacy, individuality, or intimacy to justify their preferences. Morumbi residents seem to fear the spread of evil more than they value individualism.’ However, for the people who live in houses in Moóca this seems to be different. ‘The transformation of the house in a prison adds to the feeling of restriction and loss associated with the economic crisis and anguish about the social decay. The closed door is a strong metaphor.
But, the walls, fences, bars have also another function: “aesthetics of security”, as Caldeira calls it. The elements of security have become symbols of status. Security has also become part of the design of the house. ‘By the early 1990s the new “architecture of security” was making its way into the newspaper articles. This architecture creates explicit means of keeping away undesirables, especially the homeless.’
Caldeira, T.P.R. City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in São Paulo, University of California Press, 2000, p. 256-296.
About Gated Communities and Inequality: Santana do Parnaíba
Santana do Parnaíba is a suburban neighborhood in the northwest of São Paulo. It has a fast growing population and the highest average income of the whole metropolitan region: 9.8MS.
Theresa Caldeira writes as follows about it:
‘Santana do Parnaíba exemplifies what one might call a new suburbanization of São Paulo. Its growth has been neither the traditional expansion of the poor and industrial areas nor the American suburban outgrowth of the 1950s and 1960s, but a new type of suburbanization of the 1980s and 1990s that brings together residence and tertiary activities. Santana do Parnaíba has not had the same economic performance as its adjacent municipalities, Barueri and Cajamar, but it shows more clearly how the area is becoming a new middle- and upper-class enclave. It was the municipality with the highest annual rate of population growth in the 1980s (12.79 percent) and the highest income. Ninety percent of the population increase during the 1980s was due to migration, and it had the highest percentage of growth due to migreation in the metropolitan region: 245 percent. The immigrants were mainly wealthy residents. As the rich settle into areas that have been rural and extremely poor, they create situations of dramatic social inequality, attested to by the fact that the GINI coefficient in Santana do Parnaíba is 0.7102, the highest if the metropolitan region.’ [1]
Caldeira adds in a footnote:
‘In 1980, only 1.5 percent of the economically active population of Santana do Parnaíba made more than 20 MS, whereas 53.7 percent made less than 2 MS. (…) The GINI coefficient for the city of São Paulo is 0.5857 and for the metropolitan region 0.5748.’ [2]
[1] Caldeira, T.P.R. City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in São Paulo, University of California Press, 2000, p. 253.
[2] Ibid., p. 409, 410.
Theresa Caldeira writes as follows about it:
‘Santana do Parnaíba exemplifies what one might call a new suburbanization of São Paulo. Its growth has been neither the traditional expansion of the poor and industrial areas nor the American suburban outgrowth of the 1950s and 1960s, but a new type of suburbanization of the 1980s and 1990s that brings together residence and tertiary activities. Santana do Parnaíba has not had the same economic performance as its adjacent municipalities, Barueri and Cajamar, but it shows more clearly how the area is becoming a new middle- and upper-class enclave. It was the municipality with the highest annual rate of population growth in the 1980s (12.79 percent) and the highest income. Ninety percent of the population increase during the 1980s was due to migration, and it had the highest percentage of growth due to migreation in the metropolitan region: 245 percent. The immigrants were mainly wealthy residents. As the rich settle into areas that have been rural and extremely poor, they create situations of dramatic social inequality, attested to by the fact that the GINI coefficient in Santana do Parnaíba is 0.7102, the highest if the metropolitan region.’ [1]
Caldeira adds in a footnote:
‘In 1980, only 1.5 percent of the economically active population of Santana do Parnaíba made more than 20 MS, whereas 53.7 percent made less than 2 MS. (…) The GINI coefficient for the city of São Paulo is 0.5857 and for the metropolitan region 0.5748.’ [2]
[1] Caldeira, T.P.R. City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in São Paulo, University of California Press, 2000, p. 253.
[2] Ibid., p. 409, 410.
Interim Set-up Research
Introduction: The absence of public architecture in the autoconstructed city of São Paulo
A very brief history of São Paulo: The rise of a tropical metropolis.
Center – Periphery: a dual city
Violence, Fear and Segregation: building a fortress.
Democratization and Citizenship: the ambiguous project
Public Space: a theoretical enquiry
Architecture and its Limits
A very brief history of São Paulo: The rise of a tropical metropolis.
Center – Periphery: a dual city
Violence, Fear and Segregation: building a fortress.
Democratization and Citizenship: the ambiguous project
Public Space: a theoretical enquiry
Architecture and its Limits
Saturday, September 12, 2009
São Paulo: The appearance of the dual city
Summary from:
Luiz Recamán, ‘High-speed urbanization’ in: Elisabetta Andreoli, Adrian Forty (ed.), Brazil’s Modern Architecture, Phaidon Press Limited, London, 2004, p. 134-138.
Luiz Recamán has been an architect since 1983. Having gained a PhD in Philosophy, he now teaches Aesthetics at the São Carlos School of Engineering of the University of São Paulo (USP) and has published articles in various journals.
The process of segregation finds its origin in the abolishment of slavery, according to Luiz Recamán. The former slaves were of no use anymore to the landowners, and in there eyes also unsuited for paid employment. These people started to move to the city hoping to find work there. At the same moment however the Brazilian government actively encourage people in Europe to come to Brazil to do the jobs that has been done by the slaves. The black population had therefore no official role in society and also no place to live. Form this was the moment that the illegal settlement at the periphery of the city started to appear. Although these settlements were illegal, they were tolerated. Luiz Recamán sees this as the birth of the ‘dual society, in which pre-modern social relations, inherited from the colonial structure, were updated but not fundamentally changed, to fulfill new roles in modernization.’ Poor people from the periphery became the small service providers of the rich. The autoconstructed neighborhoods in the periphery never became official parts of the city and therefore lacked public services.
While at the moment the Brazils population as a whole is decreasing, the number of people who started to live in a favela grew. In São Paulo there was a growth of 4,6 percent - in the district of Guarulhos they grew with the enormous amount of 112 percent. The migration to the autoconstructed periphery during the 90s coincided with the implosion of the rental marked. ‘Between 1994 and 1998, the number of families living in favelas in the city of São Paulo grew with 47 percent. ‘The ‘Map of Social Exclusion’, which indicates differences in the quality of life in São Paulo’s districts, shows an emptying of the regulated, legal areas of the city towards the unregulated outskirts. Between 1991 and 1996 there was an increase of 470,000 inhabitants in the 53 districts where the quality of life was deemed to have worsened, while within the 37 districts where the quality of life had improved, there was a decrease of 260,000 inhabitants.
Luiz Recamán distinguishes two different dynamics that caused the contemporary spatial and social layout of the city: ‘economic gain and social segregation.’
In the centre of São Paulo there are at the moment a lot of empty buildings. The reason is that a lot of business, shopping, luxery housing culture and leisure has moved to the south-west of the city where the land is cheaper. Investment produces higher rates of return here than in the city center. [A consequence of this that the empty buildings in the center are squatted by the poor, a phenomenon that is called cortiços in Brazil. The precarious situation people live in are grinding; in many case families live in very small spaces, sharing sanitary facilities with a lot of people. These people pay a lot of rent and have no rights at all because the occupation is in many cases illegal. JvB]
‘At the same time, increasing violence, the result of a massive degree of social exclusion, pushes the wealthy inside their homes.’ Recamán sees the deterioration of the public spaces as a result of the overvaluation of the private sphere. Another aspect in this is that the private investors are not interested in public space.
[The other chapter can also be interesting: they are all written by Brazilian scholars.]
Luiz Recamán, ‘High-speed urbanization’ in: Elisabetta Andreoli, Adrian Forty (ed.), Brazil’s Modern Architecture, Phaidon Press Limited, London, 2004, p. 134-138.
Luiz Recamán has been an architect since 1983. Having gained a PhD in Philosophy, he now teaches Aesthetics at the São Carlos School of Engineering of the University of São Paulo (USP) and has published articles in various journals.
The process of segregation finds its origin in the abolishment of slavery, according to Luiz Recamán. The former slaves were of no use anymore to the landowners, and in there eyes also unsuited for paid employment. These people started to move to the city hoping to find work there. At the same moment however the Brazilian government actively encourage people in Europe to come to Brazil to do the jobs that has been done by the slaves. The black population had therefore no official role in society and also no place to live. Form this was the moment that the illegal settlement at the periphery of the city started to appear. Although these settlements were illegal, they were tolerated. Luiz Recamán sees this as the birth of the ‘dual society, in which pre-modern social relations, inherited from the colonial structure, were updated but not fundamentally changed, to fulfill new roles in modernization.’ Poor people from the periphery became the small service providers of the rich. The autoconstructed neighborhoods in the periphery never became official parts of the city and therefore lacked public services.
While at the moment the Brazils population as a whole is decreasing, the number of people who started to live in a favela grew. In São Paulo there was a growth of 4,6 percent - in the district of Guarulhos they grew with the enormous amount of 112 percent. The migration to the autoconstructed periphery during the 90s coincided with the implosion of the rental marked. ‘Between 1994 and 1998, the number of families living in favelas in the city of São Paulo grew with 47 percent. ‘The ‘Map of Social Exclusion’, which indicates differences in the quality of life in São Paulo’s districts, shows an emptying of the regulated, legal areas of the city towards the unregulated outskirts. Between 1991 and 1996 there was an increase of 470,000 inhabitants in the 53 districts where the quality of life was deemed to have worsened, while within the 37 districts where the quality of life had improved, there was a decrease of 260,000 inhabitants.
Luiz Recamán distinguishes two different dynamics that caused the contemporary spatial and social layout of the city: ‘economic gain and social segregation.’
In the centre of São Paulo there are at the moment a lot of empty buildings. The reason is that a lot of business, shopping, luxery housing culture and leisure has moved to the south-west of the city where the land is cheaper. Investment produces higher rates of return here than in the city center. [A consequence of this that the empty buildings in the center are squatted by the poor, a phenomenon that is called cortiços in Brazil. The precarious situation people live in are grinding; in many case families live in very small spaces, sharing sanitary facilities with a lot of people. These people pay a lot of rent and have no rights at all because the occupation is in many cases illegal. JvB]
‘At the same time, increasing violence, the result of a massive degree of social exclusion, pushes the wealthy inside their homes.’ Recamán sees the deterioration of the public spaces as a result of the overvaluation of the private sphere. Another aspect in this is that the private investors are not interested in public space.
[The other chapter can also be interesting: they are all written by Brazilian scholars.]
Friday, September 11, 2009
I like this guy: Bruce Mau
Very nice project by Bruce Mau: An Incomplete Manifesto for Growth.
I especially like #2: Good is a known quantity. Good is what we all agree on. Growth is not necessarily good. Growth is an exploration of unlit recesses that may or may not yield to our research. As long as you stick to good you'll never have real growth.
I especially like #2: Good is a known quantity. Good is what we all agree on. Growth is not necessarily good. Growth is an exploration of unlit recesses that may or may not yield to our research. As long as you stick to good you'll never have real growth.
Architects, Politics and the Compromise during Brazilian Dictatorship
Fragement from On Architectural Linguistics (1974) that explains Lina Bo Bardi's opinion about the realtion between architecture and politics:
I am preparing a talk for the congress of the Brazilian Industrial Design Association, where I've been invited to opnen the event. The argument is as follows: noting can be done, there is no valid operation beyond that of a well-defined political structure. A political structure that is founded on social justice. Otherwise industrial design becomes styling at the service of the evident organizations, and architecture too (architecture "in itself" doesn't exist) becomes a gratuitous exercise. Of course this is an extreme argument, there are middle roads. But they are always roads of exessive compromise, which "compromise" the results. Operative praxis depents essentially on a political structure." [1]
I want to know more about the Brazilian political situation of that particular time. In 1974, a year after the oil crisis, Brazil faced serious economic problems, however, it was also the year that Ernesto Geisel became president. He is now seen as a more moderate persident, allowing allowed exiled citizens to return, restoring habeas corpus, repealed the extraordinary powers decreed by the Fifth Institutional Act. The Fith Institutional Act 'gave the president the power to dismiss the National Congress, strip politicians of their offices of power, and institutionalize repressive methods of rule.'[2] This law was installed by former president Arthur da Costa e Silva in 1968, after massive protest that broke out because of the death of a student in a confrontation with the police.
Lina Bo Bardi, who faced the war in Italy when see was young, and grow up in a fascist, militaristic Italy ruled by Mussolini must have been very disappointed to see the political development in Brazil during the 60s and 70s. Another aspect to take in consideration is the fact that Bo Bardi, like many influential architects at that time such as Vilanova Artigas, Oscar Niemeyer, Sérgio Ferra and Ridrigo Lefèvre were confirmed communist. Bo Bardi was already involved in the Italian communist party during the war in Italy. Architects like Sérgio Ferra and Ridrigo Lefèvre even spent a year in prison because of terrorist actions. [3] Despite the fact that I understand the attitude of the intellectuals at that time, it had a rather negative consequence. The result was that they were never really involved in significant public projects, like large social housing projects or buildings for the government. This becomes especially clear when we go through the build work of Vilanova Artigas, that contains dozens of avant-garde villa’s for the elite, showing only a few public buildings and social housing projects. However, it is unjust to simply blame the architect for this, probably the lack of commissions due to the bad investment climate plays an important role. At the same time I think that with the uncompromising attitude (like Bo Bardi proclaims in the quote above, or the involvement in terrorist actions) the architects put themselves out of action, having no influence in the public realm.
I have to admit that I am not sure about the accusing I am doing here. Probably the critical attitude was much more justified than I can overseen from my comfortable position in “Paradise Holland”.
[1] Lina Bo Bardi, 'Architectural Linguistics' (1974), 2G: Lina Bo Bardi: Build work, no. 23,24, 2002, p.220.
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artur_da_Costa_e_Silva
[3] Richard J. Williams, Brazil: Modern architectures in history, Reaction Books, (2009) London, p.182.
I am preparing a talk for the congress of the Brazilian Industrial Design Association, where I've been invited to opnen the event. The argument is as follows: noting can be done, there is no valid operation beyond that of a well-defined political structure. A political structure that is founded on social justice. Otherwise industrial design becomes styling at the service of the evident organizations, and architecture too (architecture "in itself" doesn't exist) becomes a gratuitous exercise. Of course this is an extreme argument, there are middle roads. But they are always roads of exessive compromise, which "compromise" the results. Operative praxis depents essentially on a political structure." [1]
I want to know more about the Brazilian political situation of that particular time. In 1974, a year after the oil crisis, Brazil faced serious economic problems, however, it was also the year that Ernesto Geisel became president. He is now seen as a more moderate persident, allowing allowed exiled citizens to return, restoring habeas corpus, repealed the extraordinary powers decreed by the Fifth Institutional Act. The Fith Institutional Act 'gave the president the power to dismiss the National Congress, strip politicians of their offices of power, and institutionalize repressive methods of rule.'[2] This law was installed by former president Arthur da Costa e Silva in 1968, after massive protest that broke out because of the death of a student in a confrontation with the police.
Lina Bo Bardi, who faced the war in Italy when see was young, and grow up in a fascist, militaristic Italy ruled by Mussolini must have been very disappointed to see the political development in Brazil during the 60s and 70s. Another aspect to take in consideration is the fact that Bo Bardi, like many influential architects at that time such as Vilanova Artigas, Oscar Niemeyer, Sérgio Ferra and Ridrigo Lefèvre were confirmed communist. Bo Bardi was already involved in the Italian communist party during the war in Italy. Architects like Sérgio Ferra and Ridrigo Lefèvre even spent a year in prison because of terrorist actions. [3] Despite the fact that I understand the attitude of the intellectuals at that time, it had a rather negative consequence. The result was that they were never really involved in significant public projects, like large social housing projects or buildings for the government. This becomes especially clear when we go through the build work of Vilanova Artigas, that contains dozens of avant-garde villa’s for the elite, showing only a few public buildings and social housing projects. However, it is unjust to simply blame the architect for this, probably the lack of commissions due to the bad investment climate plays an important role. At the same time I think that with the uncompromising attitude (like Bo Bardi proclaims in the quote above, or the involvement in terrorist actions) the architects put themselves out of action, having no influence in the public realm.
I have to admit that I am not sure about the accusing I am doing here. Probably the critical attitude was much more justified than I can overseen from my comfortable position in “Paradise Holland”.
[1] Lina Bo Bardi, 'Architectural Linguistics' (1974), 2G: Lina Bo Bardi: Build work, no. 23,24, 2002, p.220.
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artur_da_Costa_e_Silva
[3] Richard J. Williams, Brazil: Modern architectures in history, Reaction Books, (2009) London, p.182.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Sonsbeek pavilion: a soft wall
Aldo van Eycks Sonsbeek pavilion is a very powerful spatial organization because of its capacity of specifying space and providing possibilities at the same time. It can be seen as a continues space, despite the limitations. The walls do not separate but they divide, they order instead of segregate. They provide rather than delimitate. These walls make you wander, they do not enclose you; these walls paradoxically ‘open up’ a spatial arrangement. What we have here is not a solid wall, but a soft wall.
Stereotyping Brazil
The Dutch quality newspaper Trouw reported two messages about Brazil last Saterday. The first one was titled: ”also the garbage man should just drive through the favela”, about the lacking of public services in São Paulo’s favelas, the other one reported that Rio de Janeiro is the happiest city in the world, according to research done by business magazine Forbes.
Interesting is that both reports are about stereotyping in different way: in the case of the favela about segregation between the favela and the rest of the city. These neighborhoods are stigmatized my the media, says sociologist and UN-reporter Raquel Rolnik. ‘In the favela happen a thousand things. But the reports about these neighborhoods are always about the violence. Because of this the impression emerges that it is correct to eliminate everybody.’ Police violence is a big problem in Brazil.
The other report, about Rio de Janeiro as the most happy city in the world, is also based on meaningless stereotypes. The main reason why people consider Rio as the most happy city is because of its carnaval: ‘it’s a classic image people have of Rio, and it’s an image of happiness’, says Simon Anholt, researcher for the fourth biggest market research company: GfK Custom Research North America.
In this message no single word about violence, favelas, street people. Maybe you just forget about all these aspects if you sell statics for potential consumers. And if you have to sell newspapers: good news is no news.
Interesting is that both reports are about stereotyping in different way: in the case of the favela about segregation between the favela and the rest of the city. These neighborhoods are stigmatized my the media, says sociologist and UN-reporter Raquel Rolnik. ‘In the favela happen a thousand things. But the reports about these neighborhoods are always about the violence. Because of this the impression emerges that it is correct to eliminate everybody.’ Police violence is a big problem in Brazil.
The other report, about Rio de Janeiro as the most happy city in the world, is also based on meaningless stereotypes. The main reason why people consider Rio as the most happy city is because of its carnaval: ‘it’s a classic image people have of Rio, and it’s an image of happiness’, says Simon Anholt, researcher for the fourth biggest market research company: GfK Custom Research North America.
In this message no single word about violence, favelas, street people. Maybe you just forget about all these aspects if you sell statics for potential consumers. And if you have to sell newspapers: good news is no news.
Monday, September 7, 2009
Wesites Rio de Janeiro
http://www.globalenvision.org/2009/06/25/rio-de-janeiro-deforestation-plan
ook goed om te checken is Carlos Luis Toledo, deze architect werkt in Rocihna aan projecten in de favela
ook goed om te checken is Carlos Luis Toledo, deze architect werkt in Rocihna aan projecten in de favela
Docu about favela Dona Martha in Rio de Janeiro
'Cocaine: Leo and Ze' (2004) documentary about a favela in Rio that has to deal with a lot of drugs related crime. The movie is directed by the British filmmaker Agnus MacQueen. The favela where the movie whas shot is named Dona Martha and is one of the favela's that is walled recently by the by Rio's authorities.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0845974/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/06/brazil-rio-slum-barrier
http://observers.france24.com/en/content/20090608-rio-shantytowns-walled-eco-borders-favelas
Saturday, September 5, 2009
sketch (under construction)
The urban toolbox - elements that can go along with the wall, possible to implement in my different places.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
