The Coming Apocalyspe (Dada IIIb)
Much of the current talk about communities in a post-oil age seems driven by an anti-suburb sentiment (eg. "The End of Suburbia"). Added to this we should look at Kuntsler's attack on modern skyscrapers, and a general artistic question "Where are the people?"
Kunstler discusses the difficulty in maintaining structures larger than 5 stories. In his vision of the future, cities will be scaled back dramatically, with people living near water sources (which will be revitalized as a mode of transportation).
Throughout his lecture, he showed many photos of buildings that have received architect awards, presumably for their aesthetic and creative design. However, his images weren't of the entire buildings, they were only at the 1st couple stories - hence, most were images of solid brick walls along a dirty sidewalk. "Who would want to walk down this street?" he would ask. These buildings did nothing for the people next to them; no shops with street entrances, no windows or chairs set up outside. No contribution to the city.
Reflecting on this, it occurred to me how difficult it is to see a skyline if you live in the city. I remember my first visit to Chicago, looking out of my parent's car, straight up at the tall buildings. Who benefits from modern buildings elegant and diverse tops? People outside of the City!
So, if you live in the city, you must walk past these gigantic buildings with little immediate benefits; you have the common problems of cities such as noise/pollution/loss of identity. Because many people have left the city, there is an increased poverty, leading towards crime. And why have people left the city? Because of increased crime! And they get a great view of the city!
Where will you live?
//End of Post//
posted by Cody @ 4:24 PM
2 Comments:
Fact is, skyscrapers are some of the most energy-efficient structures per inhabitant anywhere in the world. It's not an inherent flaw in the skyscraper that there aren't enough street-level entrances on the ground floor. And the streets aren't dirty BECAUSE of the skyscrapers, they're dirty because the people who live in them or around them don't care enough to keep the streets clean; or, the public sanitation workers are not doing their job.
Interesting point, Paul. I'll direct you to this post which supports your view. I'm still searching for specific data, though. Secondly, although Starts and Fits describes Kunstler as "Dead Wrong," Kunstler has pointed out that high rises didn't become common until cheap oil was available. If we're looking at energy, we must consider the issues of congested traffic created by a high inhabitant/building ratio. Will the same ratio overwhelm street-level businesses?
I think there are other issues to contend with when dealing with skyscrapers. Christopher Alexander, in "A Pattern Language" discusses the psychological problems with living in tall buildings (Pattern 21). Concerning sanitation, the point I'm making is there is a viscious cycle where people leave cities with tall building, because it is possible, and because they are dirty and unattractive. This then removes resources (i.e. money) from city governments which could have been used to beautify the streets.
Post a Comment
<< Home