Beautiful urbanism, green space and cities

Monu magazine on urbanism

Potentially Beautiful by Sean Burkholder Beyond Kitsch by Dirk Hebel and Deane Simpson Sterile Rotterdam by Melisa Vargas The Anti-Urinator by Supersudaca Beauty and the Sublime by Joost Meuwissen The Revolving Transient by Lukas Reichel Pedaling Hope

by Jen Petersen Microrayons by Bee Flowers Advanced City Camouflage by Cruz Garcia Stripped Bare by Nathalie Aguinaldo The Terrifying Century of Beautiful Urbanism by Bert de Muynck The Secrets behind the Making of a Beautiful City: Jakarta by Ilya Maharika A short Encounter with a Chair by Katerina Pertselaki Beautiful Urbanism by Pierre De Angelis Great Unraveling by Ju-Hyun Kim and Bohyun Kim The City Beautiful by Suzanne Loen A Typology of Mess Punkt by Jeremy Beaudry Big is beautiful by Jarrik Ouburg

BEAUTIFUL

URBANISM #06

We received a record number of high quality contributions for this issue. And even though the concept beauty remains elusive we think our issue is successful in shining some spotlights on the issue. One of the themes from the articles is that beauty in urbanism is what one could call an emergent quality. It rarely is in the object itself. It exists in the way we perceive spaces and objects, our vantage point. It is while wandering though the city, resolving contradictions, when we see things that jolt our imaginations that we experience beauty.

It can be a small detail such as obscure dots on the sidewalk that German civil engineers place all over the city to measure which propel Jeremy Beaudry along daydreaming trajectories as he assembles the dotted pattern of Berlin. Movement plays a central part, be it by bicycle as Jen Petersen describes or in future cable cars that Lukas Reichelt invents. Or within 30 years high resolution and real time aerial photography will open yet another façade of the city to our perception – the view of the roofs as Ju-Hyun Kim and Bohyun Kim predict.

But if it is not all just in our minds then there are some important tools for those who do care about who and what it is that is built and declared beautiful – or left for us to find the beauty in. How much leverage do we really have to imagine or stamp that which is beauti-

ful – if we must resolve ourselves between a complete rejection of the sorts of beauty that seems to have many followers – Disney architecture for example – to a naïve embracing of 30m high cowboy boots? Can we go truly Beyond Kitsch as Dirk Hebel and Diane Simpson suggest?

Does the striving for a generic sense of beauty bear even more serious repercussions as Ilya Maharika argues in his study of Jakarta?

This is just a very small selection of the rich set of reflections on “beautiful urbanism” that this issue offers. Again the response to our topic by far exceeded what we had imagined and hoped for. We wish to thank all those who contributed to this magazine even if their articles could not be included. This issue is the first one to appear in collaboration with a new publisher and we want to thank the University of Kassel and especially Professor Wolfgang Schulze at the Institute for Urban Architectural Studies for generously supporting our previous issues.

Finally we want to dedicate this issue of Monu to Martin Schroeder who deeply cared about cities and their beauty although he would not easily admit to it. We count ourselves among the lucky ones who he inspired with his wit, humor and curiosity.

The Editors Jannuary 2007 Bernd Upmeyer and Thomas Soehl

Potentially Beautiful by Sean Burk Beyond Kitsch by Dirk Hebel and Deane Sim Sterile Rotterdam by Melisa Vargas The Anti-Urinator by Supersudaca Page 22 – Beauty and the Sublime by Joost Meuwissen Pag The Revolving Transient by Lukas R Pedaling Hope by Jen Petersen Page 36 – 39 Microrayons by Bee Flowers Page 40 – 43 Advanced City Camouflage by Cruz Garcia Stripped Bare by Nathalie Aguinald The Terrifying Century of Beautiful Ur The Secrets behind the Making of a Beautiful City: A short Encounter with a Chair by Katerina Pert Beautiful Urbanism by Pierre De Angel Great Unraveling by Ju-Hyun Kim and Bohyu The City Beautiful by Suzanne Loen Page 77 – 79 A Typology of Mess Punkt by Jeremy Beaudry Big is beautiful by Jarrik Ouburg Page 82 – 8 Book Review: Planet of Slums reviewed by Hans F Book Review: Here is Tijuana reviewed by Jason

kholder Page 6 – 10 mpson Page 11 – 18 s Page 19 – 21 – 29 ge 30 – 33 Reichel Page 34 – 35

Page 44 – 45 do Page 46 – 54 rbanism by Bert de Muynck Page 55 – 58 Jakarta by Ilya Maharika Page 59 – 64 tselaki Page 65 – 68 lis Page 69 – 72 un Kim Page 73 – 76 9 Page 80 – 81 84 Frei Page 85 Rebillot Page 86

The City Beautiful

by Suzanne Loen

In our profession we are indeed afraid to speak of beauty in an urban context, whoever dares to speak of it will raise suspicion.

The word beauty is contaminated because we tend to associate beauty with cosmetic urbanism. Botox, face-lifts, slick pavement and facades with too much make-up. Superficial beauty, with the same thickness of façades and pavement, covers and eventually smothers the very essence of what a real city is. But then what is a real city, real urbanity? In order to define urban beauty, we would first have to define the meaning of urbanity itself. But by analysing urbanity, defining its formula, we start experimenting with its composition, creating a possibly chemical reaction. Urbanity might just blow up in our face. It’s probably safer to start by asking ourselves: What is urbanity, a real city absolutely NOT? A real city is not a planned entity, a real city is not a monumental decor that serves commercial needs. It is not homogeneous, has no fixed boundaries, is not a collection of buildings. I would say a real city is defined by its multitude of contradictions and conflicting interests. A real city is a collage or a quilt of old and contemporary, bit by bit layer by layer. The real city is loud and tranquil, clean and dirty, organized and chaotic, functional and dysfunctional, poor and rich, repetitive and diverse. The very nature of the city and urbanity is found in the combination and confrontation between these contrasts. A real city unites seemingly irreconcilable contradictions. Although this city of contrasts and contradictions is indeed a real city, she is not yet a beautiful city.

Now I arouse suspicion, because what do I need beauty for, I should be quite satisfied by now, having defined urbanity? But why not have beauty too? Everybody loves beauty, wants to be beautiful, wants to have a beautiful lover, beautiful children, clothes. It is in our human nature to long for beauty. Beautiful houses, streets… and cities. The unique thing about urban beauty, and there it differs from the superficial beauty of objects and people, its not a matter of taste, but a matter of experience. Only when citizens (both temporary and permanent) are able to experience urban contradictions, can urban beauty be found. In order to experience the real city we should offer room for free movement through it. When we move through the city on our daily routine or holiday quest, the city confronts us with its contradictions. Moving through the city we experience the multi-layered city in different directions. In the horizontal direction we experience the different urban areas, the businesslike, the commercial, the crowded, the sleepy. In vertical direction we experience the historical layers, the old tracks, scars and a multitude of city reformation projects. In a cyclic direction we experience the

urban life from day into night, season after season. In this experience of ‘the real city’ we immerse ourselves into the complexity and contradictory of what we call urbanity, and there urban beauty might occur. Therefore the word beauty in ‘urban beauty’ is not a static condition but a fluid one, it appears and disappears in different shapes and forms.

Where do we find sublime urban beauty? We find it wherever we are confronted with the most obtrusive urban contradiction. There where we find the contradiction between, open and closed, crowded and silent, hard and soft, hot and cool. To me this experience is most intense when moving in and out of city parks, the very essence of urbanity. There are no parks in the country, and none in the suburbs. The rise of the city park is connected with, and a product of, the rise of the 19th century industrial cities. During this process of urbanization it became obvious that this process was irreversible and unstoppable. The form and characteristics of the industrial city began to take shape and it appeared not be to anyone’s liking. There was no way of escaping the noise, the dirt and the decay. The call for the exact opposite of the industrial city became louder and louder as the surrounding landscape moved further and further away. But a solution came; the city park, a piece of captured arcadic landscape, the perfect escape. There is no better confirmation of urbanity than the city park, the green inverse of the city. The city park exists only by the grace of its enclosure, its exact opposite; the city itself. The infinite horizon, replaced by a wall of city noise, masses of stone and people only strengthens its concepts. The city park becomes a materialized illusion, an oasis in reverse (1).

The Garden City movement followed, driven by the idea of a pastoral illusion, but based on a false interpretation. The exceptional and exclusivity of the green inverse as a ‘place’ was transformed into a green infinity of ‘space’. Therefore garden cities are neither gardens nor cities. The garden city is no city because she robbed the inhabitants of exactly that which is promised with the word ‘city’ in garden city; that is urbanity and contradiction. But there are no contradictions there, no loud and soft, no chaos and order, only this green smothering space.

To illustrate the contemporary success of a 19th century concept and explain the role of city parks in the urban experience, Amsterdam is an interesting example. Although the urbanity of Amsterdam is threatened because of the functioning of the historical centre functions as a static décor for touristy and commercial delights, the city parks within the city ring do function as inverses within the city’s chain of contradictions. Green holes in a landscape of stone they confirm urban life by offering the illusion of an easy escape. Because everybody is passing through and nobody owns the park permanently, the illusion of an escape into nature is even stronger (although some people consider the park as a more permanent domain harming its sense of freedom). These days the famous Amsterdam Vondelpark has become a regional, national and international attraction, with around ten million visitors a year. In the good season people from outside Amsterdam will ‘do a day in Vondelpark’. They don’t go shopping, don’t stroll along the canals, they

go exactly there where urbanity is confirmed in contradiction; to Vondelpark. The enormous success of the Vondelpark as a place for the ultimate experience of urban life is almost becoming a threat to itself.

Another notable example is Valencia and it’s Jardí del Túria in Valencia, Spain. The park is located on the former bed of the river Turia. Due to flooding the river was relocated and no longer runs through the city centre. Irrespective of whether you like the design of the park, dominated by buildings designed by the city’s architect Calatrava, the concept of this park is simply sublime. It’s sublimity lies in the parks two main conditions. First, the longitudinal shape and direction of the park, a simple fact because it is an old riverbed, enhances the experience of urban contradictions. As it moves through the park it laces up, like a thread, urban contradiction. The second condition is the change of perspective. The riverbed is below the city level. Being in the park not only means a mental escape from urbanity but also a physical one. Creating an even stronger sense of escapism. Peacefully passing below the old bridges, while over your head the urban traffic roars. I have never experienced an urban contradiction more beautiful then this one. From the lower level of the park city life on the quay walls seems funny and like another world. Now imagine the contrast of the citizens moving over the bridges. Seeing people down there in the park there just strolling, sitting around doing nothing actually, while they themselves are busy with everyday life. It reminds me of a game children like to play on country borders; one step and you’re in, one step and you’re out. Because paradise is only paradise when you’re free to leave as you please.

City parks, being the very affirmation of urbanity, play a crucial and indispensable part in the urban physical and mental texture of the city. They fulfill a symbolic role, just like cathedrals were once and sometimes still are the consolidation of religious power of a city, the green cathedral consolidates the cultural power of its city.

Cities grow, crumble, shrink and rise again without any visible planning or cohesion, because that’s what real cities do. It is impossible to control or direct this process and to create urban beauty itself without running the risk creating exactly the opposite. It should however be possible to create certain conditions where the experience of urban beauty might occur. These conditions should, like the Jardí del Túria in Valencia, uncover the urban contradiction to create both a longing for the escape from urbanity to its green inverse and back again.

Rotterdam based architect Suzanne Loen (founder of SL_architect, studio for research design and urban ecology) strives for urban beauty in any shape and form as longs as it’s green, but fears green guerilla might be the only solution.…

(1) In ‘The Enclosed Garden. History and Development of the Hortus Concluses and its reintroduction into Present-day Urban Landscape’ (Rob Aben and Saskia de Wit, Rotterdam 1998) the writers use the term oases and it’s revers the ‘lichtung’. The lichting being emptiness, an open space in the forest through it’s physical absence.

Monu #6 Beautiful Urbanism Jannuary 2007 www.monu.org

Editors Thomas Soehl and Bernd Upmeyer

Contact Monu - magazine on urbanism Delftsestraat 27 NL 3013 AE Rotterdam T 0031 (0)10 2400172 T 0031 (0) 6 28276899 E editors@monu.org E info@boardboard.nl

Europe Distribution Idea Books Nieuwe Herengracht 11 NL 1011 RK Amsterdam T 0031 (0)20 6226154 F 0031 (0)20 6209299 idea@ideabooks.nl

USA Distribution Ubiquity Distributors 607 Degraw St., Brooklyn, N.Y., 11217, USA T 001 718 875 5491 F 001 718 875 8047 E info@ubiquitymags.com

Printing Optima Grafische Communicatie Pearl Buckplaats 37 Postbus 84115 NL 3009 CC Rotterdam T 0031 (0)10 2201149 F 0031 (0)10 4566354 E account@ogc.nl

Publisher Veenman Publishers Sevillaweg 140 NL 3047 AL Rotterdam T 0031 (0)10 245 3333 F 0031 (0)10 245 3344 E info@veenmanpublishers.com

Order address monu@boardboard.nl

Editorial Advisory Board Thomas Sieverts Professor Emeritus of Urban Planning, Technical University of Darmstadt Joost Meuwissen Professor of Urban Design and Theory, Academy of Fine Arts Vienna Wolfgang Schulze Professor of Urban and Architecural Design at University of Kassel Dr. Michael Koch Professor of Urban Planning at University Hamburg-Harburg Dr. Detlev Ipsen Professor of Urban Sociology at the University of Kassel Michael Thompson Professor of Political Science at William Patterson University, NJ Editor Logos Journal

Call for submissions>> for Monu #7 2nd rate Urbanism London, Tokyo, New York, Berlin, Moscow, Bejing, Johannesburg Rio or New Delhi… we all know the names on the A-list of cities and love to study and compare them. They are big, beautiful, dynamic, full of extremes and there is always a good story to be told. But who really lives in those places? A very small share of the world’s population in the end. The vast majority of people, whether rich or poor live someplace else. The majority of urban life is at home in places we don’t know. It is the places that are described as 1.5hr outside of New York or between Munich and Hamburg. 2nd rate cities that boast no particular qualities, with the dubious exception that they sometimes boast the record for “the place with the tallest church tower built between 1780 and 1795.” Or once in a while one of these 2nd rate cities becomes famous because a ruthless dictator was born there – think Tikrit in Irak or Braunau in Austria.

In the upcoming 7th issue of Monu we want to explore 2nd rate urbanism. What is the character and quality of this seemingly generic urban life? What motivates people to live and work there? How does life differ in those C-list places from that in the big bright cities? What of politics, economy and culture? What role do these places play for the urban landscape in different countries?

To these and any other questions that you can think of, we invite your insights and analysis.

We look forward to your writing and photography, speculation and sophisticated analysis -whether roughly outlined and collaged or beautifully written and arranged.

The next issue will appear in the summer of 2007. Contributions or questions should be sent to editors@monu.org by the end of May.