Conclusion

Conclusion

“Utopia”: the word was coined by Sir Thomas More in 1516 when he started questioning the possibility of a perfect world where society would suffer no wars or insecurities, a

place where everyone would prosper and fulfil both individual and collective ambitions.

Yet such a perfect society can only exist with the creation of perfect built infrastructure,

which possibly explains why architects have often fantasized on megastructures and how

to “order” this dreamed society. Therefore, utopianism as a method has been deeply

embedded in architects because they are obliged to bring about a social change through

their design.

Utopia has a bad reputation of being contrasting to the reality or the practical world. But

it’s a thriving medium in the field of visual arts. But ironically visual arts have always been

the main source for inspiration for science discoveries. Its highly relevant and is based on

calculative synthesis of our societies, and the direction it is headed towards.

Utopia isn’t a blueprint; it is a way of life. One cannot achieve a utopia or design one, but

strive to achieve it, and in this process a better version of the society is formed. Designers

who went beyond the conventional methods of representation or design process are

highly celebrated for their out of the box interventions, despite their controversial

technicalities, and impractical approach they still resonate a sense of forwardness in their

thinking. This becomes an attempt to break out from the standardized notions of design.

If we as designers are able to generate a relevant narrative for our dynamic societies we

are in short aware and prepared for what we may be exposed to in near future. A radical

approach to problems enables greater possibilities towards solutions.

Resilient approach in utopianism

The term utopia as much as it means to be idealistic, may also be conceived as something

as unrealistic. Architecture is a patronage of equal balance between technical and creative

approach to any problem. What happens to be a utopian ideology, as a creative outlook

may be lost in the translation process of construction in real time and become

unfavourable or at least unimpactful. All types of utopianisms, regardless of how they

are categorized, share a common denominator. They are all alternative constructs

challenging established settings and situations perceived either as problematic or

insufficient and must be considered further. All are triggered by such reflective queries. A framework that can sustain the experimental ideology that follows the utopianism 16

concept will be the ideal outcome.

What maybe be utopia today may not be the same tomorrow. That creates a nostalgia of

concepts that were to be a part of our future. For this reason, a scheme pictured by an

architect through their conceptual design or narrative maybe utopian but the resultant-

built form may never become an operational utopia.

“Can a single building be the embodiment of Utopia? Maybe, but only if it is also the

physical manifestation of, and frame for, a community of agreement. So, for example, whereas, an operational Fourier Phalanstère17 would be a building-based utopia, the vast

majority of public housing projects, wherever they might be found, would not be. The key

difference between usual public housing schemes and a Phalanstère has more to do with

the social organization of the communal living it houses than with the specific architectural

form it takes; although whatever its form, it must be shaped around the social forms it is

meant to house. Thus, a conventional public housing scheme might take a form similar to a Phalanstère, but that alone would not make it utopian” (2011, Imagining and Making the World: Reconsidering Architecture and Utopia, Peter Lang AG, Bern, 187).

There are two types of utopian dimensions, one that completely destroys the existing

reality and strives to create this imaginary state which are aggressive materialization of

completely new large-scale interventions, while the other is when the existing realities

are used to build the ideal manifestation. Another way to explain this would be whole

from the parts and parts to the whole approach. The first one strives to transform

completely the city with its new ways and the approach strives to constructs the whole

16 the belief in or pursuit of a state in which everything is perfect, typically regarded as unrealistic or idealistic. 17 Charles Fourier developed a compelling utopian project called the Phalanstery in 1808, a community body composed of three hundred households coming from diverse economic and social backgrounds. The phalanstery, inhabited by a community called the Phalanx, gathered in one single monumental building the different activities that regulated modern society. Seeking an egalitarian and cooperative society, goods produced by the workers were put in common and redistributed equally to the families rewarded according to the three forms of property, capital, labour, talent.

before the parts. The second one is through the production of interdependent parts of

the building, with provision of existing parts or construction of newer parts. This level of

aggressiveness of a utopian ideal determines whether an idea of literally destroying the

existing make-up to replace it with the new and alternative, or one playing within the

existing realities to transform them from within predominates the utopian imaginary. One

example of the detached utopian architectural intervention from the existing urban

imagery is Acrosanti located in between the Arizona dessert by Paolo Soleri which

reimagines living in city that is more ecological.

What becomes the framework for developing the wholes, are from experimentation in

architecture. They may be at different scales and in different forms, but strive to create a

broad ideal manifestation of ideas. In this dissertation an attempt will be made to develop

these parts to the whole approach. Where parts are design manifestations by designers

that strive to achieve a progressive future.