R O U N DTA B L E A R T I C L E
#006
LIVE-INCOMMON DOMAIN OF URBAN CULTURE
The project aims to envision opportunities of architectural platforms through collective researches and designs conducted in Asian metropolises. Perception of public in Asia is heretofore complementary to common in comparison to westerns, in the sense of its tolerance of controllability from the authorities. And private as well, more or less, a given consciousness from the western modernization, overwritten on the common of Asia. Today, we evidently find indications and the importance of the common is arising in our cities:
increasing movements to generate more flexible and humanoriented lifestyles, by overcoming contradiction between the public and the private. It is a strong challenge against old and rigid systems. The project will explore tangible city structure to intangible city culture. As the project develops, we think it may have ambiguous conclusion such as reaching to a turning points where this desirable movements fall into capitalistic money game or caught by nostalgic group dynamics.
LIVE-IN-COMMON:
DOMAIN OF URBAN CULTURE INTRODUCTION Common comes from the sense of togetherness, which is different from the typical meaning of publicness bounded by the legal framework on possession. Regardless of being inherited h i s to r i c a l l y o r j u s t c r e a t e d spontaneously, their complexity, flexibility and intimacy do not necessarily contradict private domains. It could be stated that future urban culture is generated in the common spaces, crossing the domains of the private and the public. Consequence to this premise, let’s strive to test the strength of the common. A street can be a common space. A living room could be, if you want. Then, how about your bedroom? And your bathroom? Indeed, no chance at all?
4 | ROUNDTABLE
FICTION :
“We live in a world ruled by fictions of every kind – mass merchandizing, advertising, politics conducted as a branch of advertising, the instant trans imagery, the increasing blurring and intermingling of identities within the rea free or original imaginative response to experience by the television screen. W in particular it is less and less necessary for him to invent the fictional conte writer’s task is to invent the reality” Koolhaas and Mau, S,M,L,XL, p.492.
slation of science and technology into popular alm of consumer goods, the pre-empting of any We live inside an enormous novel. For the writer ent of his novel. The fiction is already there. The
CHAPTERS What indicates ‘common or commonness’ in our cities today? How are they created? or in what context can we identify ‘common / common-ness’ to public/private space controlled by mass-capital and authorities? And what shapes or determines the meaning of tangibility and intangibility of common /or/ common space?
1. <Fiction> : Scope / Narration of finding tangible/intangible perceptions of ‘common / common-ness’ in an eye of a one and many (individual and public).
We believe reorganizing today’s urban ecology of ‘common’ space will advance our narration and understandings of ‘common / common-ness’. We are opting to find proper domain for “common / common-ness” by demonstrating and articulating our investigation in 3 different fields;
3. <Reorganization> : Act of design through deconstructing and reorganizing fundamental architectural elements to create playground for all commons.
2. <Adaptation> : Simulation of speculations which characterizes identity and programs of ‘common / common-ness’.
Compositions of our narratives will develop ecology of ‘common /common-ness’ into form of architectural fictions. It is maybe artificial or it may be formless. It is maybe superficial or it is maybe profound figure. But it will be in search of possible representations of ‘common / common-ness’ of urbanspace and urban-culture of today and tomorrow.
LIVE-IN-COMMON | 5
LIVE-IN-COMMON: DOMAIN OF URBAN CULTURE ROUNDTABLE | The project aims to envision opportunities of architectural platforms through collective researches and designs conducted in Asian metropolises. Perception of public in Asia is heretofore complementary to common in comparison to westerns, in the sense of its tolerance of controllability from the authorities. And private as well, more or less, a given consciousness from the western modernization, overwritten on the common of Asia. Today, we evidently find indications and the importance of the common is arising in our cities: increasing movements to generate more flexible and human-oriented lifestyles, by overcoming contradiction between the public and the private. It is a strong challenge against old and rigid systems. The project will explore tangible city structure to intangible city culture. As the project develops, we think it may have ambiguous conclusion such as reaching to a turning points where this desirable movements fall into capitalistic money game or caught by nostalgic group dynamics.
6 | ROUNDTABLE
ADAPTATION
ADAPTATION| Simulation of speculations which characterizes identity and programs of ‘common / common-ness’.
FICTION | 7
01
Adaptation This section aims to pioneer an advanced method in design and computation. It will take the next six months following an interdisciplinary, casestudy focused approach to design fostering collaboration with end-users. It examines architecture and urbanism related to ‘common or commonness’ space through
8 | ROUNDTABLE
the lens of climate ‘Adaptation.’ The action section consists of two threads. The first thread is about developing a framework, once the theoretical framework model is set-up, it needs to operate actively. The second thread is concerned with managing the operational methodology.
The case study in Bangkok will evaluate the technical feasibility of the approach in practice to address previous questions. Bangkok is a megacity with a population of 9.6 million in 2018. Extensive population growth has reduced the number and size of the areas
that serve as flood retention (e.g., agricultural farmland). Uncontrolled, and most of all, water insensitive urban growth changed their function into residential and retail areas. With an ever decreasing infiltration and storage capacity, flooding becomes more frequent and severe Yokohari et al., 2008 .
02
03
The questions arise, ‘What kind of common or commonality space for humans and nature in Bangkok?’. Tools for urban planners and decision-makers to identify, evaluate and prioritize potential adaptive responses are becoming increasingly importantKwadijk et al., 2010; Haasnoot
. There is still a gap in understanding adaptation actions’ effectiveness: the costs are upfront, but the benefits are remote and uncertain. This lack of understanding complicates identifying when, where, and how a city has to adapt.
et al., 2013; Buurman and Babovic, 2016
In the following chapters, the individual components/ elements of the urban ecology are covered more in-depth. They consist of 1) Green infrastructure park and open space. 2) Blue infrastructure retention pond and canal . 3) Gray infrastructure Tollway/over path and footpath . And 4) Brown infrastructure backside of the street in the high land price property - waste area .
01& 02
IMAGE open market at the evening time transforms to serve for workers at Krung Thep Maha Nakhon District
03
DIAGRAM Relation between components for Adaptive Ecology
FICTION | 9
Except where otherwise noted, contents on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.
Any copy of this document issued by the publisher as a digital / paperback is published/distributed/sold subject to the condition that is shall not by way of trade or otherwise be lent, resold, hired out of otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including these words being imposed on a subsequent purchaser. copyright ⓒ 2020, theWorkshop All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any other information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing form the publisher.
서울특별시 강남구 도곡로 219 (우노빌딩) 4층
219 Dogok-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea (06231) O. +82.(0)70.7765.1186 | E. theWorkshop.kr@gmail.com
10 | R O U N D T A B L E
Participants / Contributors
Hiroki Muto & Associates
LIVE-IN-COMMON | 11