urbanism the landscape

dix

pen ap ii are accounted for in a historical perspective. are accountedforinahistoricalperspective. Thirdly, time. our of contemporary urbanism approaches and landscape urbanism the up make that Secondly, comparative study with upon. other contemporary positions expanded a through perspective given is urbanism landscape and introduced are landscape of processes and specific James Corner’s surface strategies on urbanist aspects are elaborated on. writings First the concept supplementary Here Landscape. Imaging 1: Chapter to appendix Urbanism theoretical Landscape a The is Appendix Evolution ofPlanningIdeals Contemporary Positions Surface Strategies Performative Processes contents xv vii ix iii iii

’, (Allen responsiveness I promise I and resistance (www.wikipedia.com; www.dictionary.com) www.dictionary.com) (www.wikipedia.com; in introduced. This is inspired from Graham in introduced. Engaging biological and social cycles at different actually derives from the world of (Gausa, p. 476) process cycles (Shane, p. 33) Soil has permeability and plants have height and growth rate – all performative

resistance towards the universality of global tendencies, and that this resistance Shane’s use of the term ‘performative cycles’ as a way of describing the processes the describing of way a as cycles’ ‘performative term the of use Shane’s and their time-frame that design can and between different must scales of engage. cycles, long-term Here and short-term, that he a design differentiates must take into account. as such cycles small-scale where approach, bottom-up more a enables also scales local or time, of span short a for space a transform can fairs street and markets flea clubs and associations can contribute to a design process. Here the potential of the local and comes can into be play, connected to the otherwise dominant global a is approaches bottom-up and top-down combining Shane, According tendencies. performative cycles. way of interconnecting the different of ideas Kvorning’s Jens by supported is view This of a place. He argues that a place, and thereby the design, must contain a In landscape architecture, the surface is not a flat lifeless plane, but rather a thick 2D. thick a as Allen Stan by described behaviour, and characteristics of section 2001, pp. 124 - 125) characteristics that make the surface a living carrier planning of and flows andarchitectural processes.potentials: The spectre wide a connotate may processes term processes, urban processes, social processes and even biological processes. clarify this, the term To PROCESS CYCLES Andreas Ruby

The following is a discussion of the way these processes can become physical space, and how an overall planning must collect these processes. process. Not to be mistaken for simply performance events performance simply for mistaken be to Not process. or interactive devices (although these are also methods of engaging social processes), performativity in this sense is thus lifted to a higher level of understanding. can thus be said to in the actively world and acknowledge processes it and is a perform part of. acknowledges This the approach fact that spaces are living entities in of be always a but finished, be never will and system, greater very moment of being uttered, e.g. the utterance ‘ utterance the e.g. uttered, being of moment very of promising.thus performing the act planning, and architecture of world the to transferred When Standing space. of understanding new a offers definition this in contrast to representative design, performative design does.” The word linguistics as a categorisation for the type of words known as speech acts, utterances that can perform an act in the aims for adaptable and dynamic solutions essence rather fixed and static design. from than interests a of focus the shifts performance “Thus it what but is, something what not is question The effect. to The notion of performativity which this project applies based on is a notion of ecology based on social processes, and physical, local and both global. Performativity in this sense relates to a process-based stance to planning that VE FORMATI PER PROCESSES iv Processes EngagedinDesign of ecological studies are already intertwining, as our biological environments environments biological our as patterns intertwining, of already are importance studies the ecological of and investigations biodiversity. on patches spatial and involve to increasingly are they beginning that find we ecology in studies current at look a take we If (Berrizbeitia, p.117) culture. of representations spatial and visual exclude which models environmental have we and history and art of ideas on based theories Wehave situations. these that we do not have framework sufficient enough to comprehend the complexity of note to interesting is it suburbia, as such landscapes urban even or parks urban in lands, open vast of part as either landscapes, with working When awareness. environmental promote and this reflect to needs view,architecture of point ethical the to humans as relationship environment is our changing, and Secondly,sustainability is key generators. word of the space 21st century. as From an utilized are in planning, as Graham Shane also pointed out, the natural mechanisms of a place and two main arguments support the landscape, use the of characterise this traditionally what type are of processes processes. natural or Firstly,Biological if engaged how whichlandscapeurbanismcallsfor. know- biological and technical in knowledge expert of sort interdisciplinarity,a an necessitates architecture of world the from spring not do that processes of range ‘space-making’ processes, whether biological, urban or social. Activating such the ignore context it is a cannot connected to. Here we space-making will wide look into differentof categories of potential art the as design, to potential great a such pose Processes can be perceived as space happening over time. This is why processes first takealookatthelatteroftwo. us Let design. a in actively engaged be can which processes concrete more also both with regard to overall planning processes and concept for implementation, but These ideas call for a clear understanding of which processes we are dealing with, process cyclesthatlinkacrosssocialandbiologicalfields. comprehensive new shaping thus processes different between connections new of landscape and the significance of global and local connectivity. It also encourages cycle, new meanings emerge regarding the experience of programmes, the nature By perceiving public space and architectural form as performative and as a process importance ofengagingbothlocalandglobal/regionalprocesses. the place can interact and perform at lager scales. His terminology emphasizes the which by means the is which tendencies, global these towards responsiveness of degree a incorporate also must design the Simultaneously, local. the in found is treatment of our own waste and its effects on our environments. Ironically though, though, Ironically environments. our effectson its and waste own our of treatment perhaps even more that biological/natural processes. Here we are dealing with the have especially environment, our and and humans between relationship sustainability the emphasising of environmental potential on focus put also processes These soil. of phytoremediation or disposal process waste treatment, the water waste least name at – sort a of through which they live is a biological biological one. To exemplify such a process, one could also are processes residual Urban static andpre-decidedtoincorporatethedynamicsof thelandscape. too are masterplans traditional that implies clearly This transformation. of process possibilities for self-renewal and variation by accepting the design as a permanent viability, not only biological but also social and survival. cultural, for must be conditions included necessary by ensuring are Continuing in these tracks, a biologist would also teach us that openness and flexibility (Hill, p.100) window into our humanity, simply by teaching us that we are not all there is to life “ providing also while sustainability use biological promoting of means can a as design urban that potential a is it However, account. into taken be also as this, many more processes, their dynamics as and the way they influencesimple each other must as not is situation the course, Of design. urban in grasped be could that strategy design almost an directly itself in presents parameters spatial to linked are corridors thatan ecological of fact support The a and biodiversity environments. of encouragement ourphysical we alter whenever influenced are Hl, . 94) p. (Hill, n hs iw te icpie o dsg and design of disciplines the view, this In (Berrizbeitia, p. 120) p. (Berrizbeitia, Ecological productivity and productivity Ecological (Kvorning) a profound a

.”  These dialogues can be Public space is where humans (Brændgaard, p. 18) (Mitchell, p. 104) The first approach argues that public spaces (Mitchell, pp. 105 - 106) but also of the world in which we live. protected by the threat of anarchy. The third approach puts focus on the ideal of the of ideal the on focus puts approach third The anarchy. of threat the by protected market, where public space historically always has been structured in accordance yet which spaces, consumer-driven involves market the Ironically, market. the with again gives rise to spaces of exclusion as seen in the mall phenomenon. Mitchell dialectical as seen be should spaces public light, this in that argue Deusen Van and spaces where the pressures between control and appropriation They are therefore negotiated. put focus on the fact that publicness cannot only be the of administration encouraged and implementation the though also but itself, design through design. These are the aspects through which the public are trace allowed upon the space and can participate to in shaping it themselves, and leave where the their space own public democratic A interact. and other each confront space the of processes thus becomes a space of learning and tolerance, not only of other human beings, with other people, similar or dissimilar to ourselves, with our environment and urban and environment our with ourselves, to dissimilar or similar people, other with landscape or perhaps with direct tendencies anarchy indicate itself. that However, such open public space is in fact threatened by an increasing privatisation, control and surveillance of the spaces. Such a public space is no longer democratic, as it is not accessible to all. Richard and Mitchell Don competition, Park Downsview the assessing article an In Van Deusen present three normative visions of public space design in and relation use. to their can only flourish if they are openor to demonstrators seek their to subversion, own transform the e.g. use activists where of The the second approach space counter argues for this political by claiming agendas. be must they that Therefore residents company. other’s each need in bask to to together come to allowed be are confronted with the unknown, a place where we are engaged into dialogue a from form of which we cannot escape. emocratic Urban Environment A Democratic Engaging processes, whether material or immaterial, natural combined or system leads cultural, us into to the a realm in which they what type meet: of public public space can spaces. truly engage But a variation and the unpredictability of processes on the terms of our democracy? In other words – democratic public spaces? how do we design According to Iris Marion Young, public spaces should and a place to be encounter differences. open and accessible residual processes, the This environment. confrontation should occur in the public more private sphere of thespace, but also has potential in the home. Programmes especially become interesting when seeing their potential as layers dynamic are too these processes, other like Just hybrids. creating of way a as and as they breathe in and out consumption. The event character of some programmes, having a very short time over time, varying can activities long-term whereas excitement, and in hype create to used be can both span, timeframes and space and ownership of a place.help encourage a feeling of belonging urban residual processes and opening the potential of their interaction with other processes, especially social processes, is a in the our cities and the part they play debates surrounding world. rest of the way of provoking Activating awareness first. and two the from deal great a differ which processes, social have we Lastly these immaterial and abstract social processes in a design can be working achieved with by programmes. Social processes can never be directly predicted, but controlled through thoughtful and or deliberate programming, an attempt can be in certain directions. made to guide these social processes One such direction would be to secure open and accessible public spaces, which diverse programming can help ensure – programmes that of people invite into the same different space. Programming can types also be used to encourage the confrontation between social processes, the human, and the biological and urban these are processes often hidden away from the public eye, a process to be found be to process a eye, public the from away hidden often processes are these latent in the functions of the city, but never actively confronted. Activating these vi businesses orauthorities,theplanmaynevercometolife. citizens, from responsibility and interest invoking or design the administrating of through means the as and vital which an open-ended planning extremely can successfully be implemented. Without as a means seen is management agent This and in activated and considered are around thedesign. – public and private both – group interest and stakeholders where management’, ‘agent of sort a entail together processes these Engaging state. the of and municipality the of power the forces, market the planning. Economic participatory and political processes imply the or programmes forces that reign in interest a planning process: public through as such not aspects through here but before, materialize as processes Social role. prominent a play still but grasp, to difficult be may that processes immaterial quite negotiations, all – again of process planning processes social also and processes political and economic play: into brought are overall processes the of range new whole at a design, a of administration look and implementation to out zooming When Processes oflanning vii - - -

Land division, allocation, The surface strategies hence strategies surface The (Corner, 2003, pp. 60) (Corner, .” (Corner, 2003, p. 60) p. 2003, (Corner, ” ace strategies ace This means that demarcation and infrastructure have to be embedded with embedded be to have infrastructure and demarcation that means This

These surface strategies permit the creation of more or less coherent fields working with stimulating the processes working on site. This indicates the move third layer of adaptability seems to be incorporated in the second layer. third layer of adaptability seems to be incorporated in the second layer. This view is supported by an analysis of Corner’s surface paper by strategies Rune Bach, in who a argues that Ph.D. the third layer of adaptability needs to be incorporated infrastructure. in and the demarcation demarcation to and relation infrastructure in layer adaptability because and the permeability third introduces layer 8) p. (Bach, absorbing of capable be to needs demarcation such, As adaptation. of possibility the new programmes over time, meaning that demarcation is the creation of surfaces which can adapt to different in uses incorporated in be time to without has adaptation neglecting that the Acknowledging overall structure demarcation. in embedded challenging highly are strategies surface the demarcation, and infrastructures both constantly tool operational an as form take will plan the as planning conventional to Corner thus engages an open-endedness and the possibility of adaptation in his three surface strategies, which is a way dynamic of of the contemporary The city. quotation also incorporating points at the understanding and working with the of infrastructures as a broader definition than just roads and pathways, and thus implies a seems perception strategy surface second the view of this In site. a on infrastructures operates which processes as being both material work at flows and processes and of several of engagement the to due itself in dynamic immaterial on the site. The processes and flows are thus orchestrated into new somehow matrices of flows interrelationships and with processes the encompass to potential infrastructures of of stirring concept new the relationships unfolding on the site. By separates the second layer from the traditional perception of infrastructure, as the organizing fields that establish horizontal matrices function as infrastructures new conditions for future development, these adapts, moves and decomposes the demarcation and infrastructure over time. This time. over infrastructure and demarcation the decomposes and moves adapts, means that Corner’s third layer embeds elements which both secure architectonical frame and an allows for transformation and overall adaptation over time. The main distinction in comparison to conventional planning thus lies in the fact the that surface strategies incorporate and activate a possibility of structural adaptation plan which has in direct impact on the the design. In other words, the surface strategies accommodate mutual relationships between overall the the compromising without three programmatically vary strategies, can with project a that result the architectonical concept. Corner expresses potential of the surface strategies “ in the following quotation: that allow an almost infinite range of varied and flexible arrangements. As vast permutation, affiliation and adaptation and affiliation permutation, work with preparation of a given site and simultaneously work with incorporating the ability of adaptation to future demands. The two first layers,to demarcation conventional physical planning, and infrastructure, i.e. the and traditional the can establishment creation of be directly of infrastructures building related to plots supply layer adaptation, the however, building presents an plots. extra The dimension third in comparison conventional approach to planning, with as it incorporates a ecological and processual the dimension which calls for more dynamic can and therefore be seen flexibleas the conceptual layer planning.which embeds the Themost important third layer aspect of landscape urbanism. Likewise, it is also this third layer that inserts the layer third the because layers, other two the in dynamics and processes of notions These layers are only brieflydemarcation and the construction of describedsurfaces constitute the first act in staking out Corner.by “ ground; the second is to future establish for allow services to permeability and ensuring is pathways third the across and programmes; the future support surface to

temporary city as a horizontal surface constructed in three andlayers: demarcation, infrastructure, adaptation. An interesting conception in landscape work of urbanism way a is as suggested strategies, Cor surface three ner’s His city. contemporary the in planning open-ended with ing three surface strategies refer to his perception of the con f sur viii rmss httesraesrtge aedsge t bobcags vr time over basis. without comprisingtheunderlyingarchitectonicandconceptual changes absorb to designed are strategies surface the surface that premises three the that concludes the on project urbanism landscape a of preparation the for qualified are strategies Bach projects, open-ended of consolidation in planning open-ended with nature of the working three layers mutual of relationships. In spite capable of the criticism be of the lacking to seem strategies surface the adaptation, of ability reduced with fixed too or design their in “loose” too being either of risk at are strategies surface Corners by inspired projects though Even degree ofconsolidation. where perspective the design slowly consolidates or on time a small scale, such as park wide design, with a low a with scale large very a on either operating when transform. This point to the probability that surface strategies are most appropriate consolidated, the more it freezes the frame of the project and its ability to is adapt project and a more The projects. the of consolidation the with problems experience might strategies surface Corner’s by inspired projects that argued be thus can It parameters. unknown many too proposes that framework a loose too creating of danger the at however.points risk, Bach a Rune pose also strategies surface The influencing theplan. the establishment of new interrelationships of mapped potentials, which constantly conventional planning tools by reversing them to dynamic structures that work with each in potentials stimulating on elaboration refreshing a forth bring strategies surface with Corner’s the Here stage. actively works plan a Such erasure to revitalisation. construction, or to conditions, existing from site a of stages processual the of each acknowledge which plans fluid more towards masterplans static from (Bach, p.9) (Bach, p.10) ix - and the

iating the multi-dimensional

new pragmatism (Graham 2001, p. 8) y , which are presented below. below. , which are presented (Graham 2001)

(www.metropolitanstudies.de/fi leadmin/fi lestorage/Network_City_Series_Stand_02-20-07.pdf) (www.metropolitanstudies.de/fi

contemporary city. contemporary Instead city. the urban sphere, as suggested by Jürgen Habermas, expression ‘network city’ is therefore a term in this project given to the tendency to tendency the to given project this in term a therefore is city’ ‘network expression collect these writings and theories under one title. The main focus of the network city is telecommunications, on networked capitals, infrastructures energy, – water transport, and streets and – urban regions, and contemporary that urbanism thus emerges make as a complex and up cities dynamic sociotechnical process, the contemporary city ecosystems of competing networks. is therefore viewed as This prompts an additional layer of understanding to the urban realm, signalizing that the contemporary world is composed through numerous points and lines with hierarchal value, defined by the According number to of links in the global system. this position, the traditional perception of the urban realm as composed the to of applies longer solely no spaces, public and parks streets, buildings, forms, physical The network city position should be viewed as an understanding of the contemporary the of understanding an as viewed be should position city network The urban condition rather than Ann a and Sassen Saskia concrete Graham, Stephen as such planning theorists of range a method. by unfolded This understanding is Markusen, who all seek redefine our perception of cities and urban regions in the age of globalisation, network society and virtual technologies. The position represents thus a greater discussion not only relevant proposes for architects it and as planners, but investors, and politicians economists, geographers, sociologists, also a whole new understanding of our cities in all aspects. With regard to architecture and planning, many contemporary projects indirectly to different degrees, grasp although not this advocating a understanding network city stance directly. The Network Cit

Spiro Kostof the more attractive metaphorical constructions currently present in urban theory, if not (yet) a the more attractive metaphorical constructions currently present in urban theory, new paradigm.” Beauregard “If the city is to survive, process must have the final word. In the end the urban truth is in the flow.” “As an adjective, the term “network” is quite successful in negot ity of the city….. The innumerable parts of the city…. are recognized connected to and then making it one of a larger whole – the network. Such a rhetorical move has theoretical power, new pragmatism, the comparative study will subsequently examine each design media and planning. position philosophy, in relation to three themes: into contemporary approaches and a means of unfolding the theory of landscape contemporary approaches. urbanism in relation to other After the following presentation of the network city and network city These positions overlapping although and trends, planning certain describe are categorises on certain areas or almost non-comparative on conceptualised others, it is thought that to these categorisations can offer an insight realm. obtain To a comprehension of the similarities and differences between the approaches, landscape urbanism is outlined as a distinct study position with through two a other positions: comparative Landscape Landscape urbanism, together with similar contemporary approaches, represents a new attitude towards planning the in reflected world contemporary the in architecture and acknowledgement of the rising complexity of the urban y contemporar positions  know as urban space. urban as know traditionally we what of disintegration a – zones local powerless increasingly and fragmented of number huge a leaves This power. of concentrations and density high of areas scale large as defined are often most which cities, ‘global so-called Sasssen’s created, been has nodes interconnected of network global ACastells. processes have likewise been shown by authors such as Saskia Sassen and The fact that globalisation Manuel and social and spatial fragmentation are complementary powerful technologiesandsocialpractices. logistics spaces, of the city with an amazing manufacturing ease through subtle and invisible but they nonetheless highly be worlds social surrounding the from themselves remove zones, airport or hubs, enclaves these how describes Graham urbanism. splintering a – elsewhere connections their of power the by themselves defining scale, local the of neglect in global the to connecting meaning, its lose to extent. certain a to them around spaces immediate the from delinking also while flows, connecting their to due right own their in mini-cities as emerge to seem logistics air and sea the or – hubs the especially points – of the are network city. here He pinpoints that leading interest distribution hubs for special road, rail, of Graham, to According also but world, architectural the networkcity.issues whichmayseemthreatenedbythetendenciesof in importance great of issues geography, and identity,of issues place to city, given network is the attention of discussions the In urban of ‘landscapes’ processes. that different the interdisciplinarity between an co-dependency – the urbanism acknowledges and technology of sociology planning, sociology,geography, on draws that interdisciplinarity an for calls which systems, the social and technical make-up of mobility systems like the internet and transport This perspective brings architecture and urbanism together with issues surrounding condition. urban contemporary the shape to interweave technology and power space, place, how understand to order in lives and spaces urban the mediate and connect that systems virtual and physical these of architectures the at looking simultaneously while spaces, city the of character changing ever the consider therefore must city roadscapes. motorised of ‘autocity’ the or communication of electronic of energy, ‘cybercity’ the waste, and water the ‘electropolis’ of ‘hydropolis’ many the as Graham by through exemplified are landscapes constituted different as processes other and co-evolve with urban development and urban urban space. these superimposed and interconnecting infrastructural ‘landscapes’, which rely on each describes Graham infrastructure. net/books/networkcity/proposal) physical any through as much as media through being this of, constituted is it that dialogue and assembly the as understood be should newspaper or a blog, a city enables ideas, opinions, attitudes, and messages to messages and attitudes, opinions, ideas, enables city a blog, a or a newspaper like Just information. of transmission the in in is fundamental as media viewed and sense media, this or system communications as seen here are cities The global digitalnetworks. of part are also materiality sited are which entities local where networks, local and 46) p. (Sassen importance… strategic major and renewed with a emerge these neutralized, entailed being than has digital’ ‘the and city.the or environment built the of neutralisation a not but transformation, “ globalisation that emphasises Sassen need ofplace. Here it is important to notice that the virtual networks are not replacing the physical can bethecentreandmargin. resulting in a much more fluid and fractured urban form, where the urban periphery architectures, network and urban between relationship the in embedded scales all at are deconcentration and concentration between activities tension The valued established. lower are where places, decentralised the are spaces slippery the and innovation and research control, of centres valued high the are places Sticky Ann Markusen describes this tendency through the terms sticky and slippery business centre. spaces. secondary own their generating hereby core, city global the from removed farther and farther grow response in areas outlying the while congested, and expensive increasingly becomes it grows, centre business downtown contradictions. As own In fact she stresses the importance of seeing the links between global between links the seeing of importance the stresses she fact In (Graham 2002,p.120) (Graham 2004, p. 165) p. 2004, (Graham (http://varnelis.net/books/networkcity/proposal) (GUST 2002, p. 19) p. 2002, (GUST This is a tendency where physical place begins place physical where tendency a is This Simultaneously, the global city spawns its spawns city global the Simultaneously, (Graham 2001, p. 8) p. 2001, (Graham (Graham 2004,pp.180–181) (Graham 2002,p.111-112) Planning the contemporary the Planning (Graham 2001, p. 8) (http://varnelis. Rather These ” xi ) are is (Nielsen; Mortensen, (Nielsen; (http://varnelis.net/books/networkcity/proposal) ’ ’ derives from the classical pragmatism formulated by ’ ’ as William James formulates it. The pragmatic approach ) and the empiricism’s interests for proven facts (what new pragmatism (Kleis, p.7; Nielsen, p. 14) should be Things in the making wait for the architects’ completion of utopia. The most important business for the be) only is valid if it has consequences – if it real. not view makes pragmatic a a from is it difference. effect, If any have an not does theory idea or a pp. 123 - 124) This understanding of the world becomes relevant in the contemporary world unpredictability of and why architects constant such changeability, as Robert Venturi and Denise Scott Brown already in the 1970’s bring this way of thinking within into architecture. life With their studies in Learning from Las Vegas they are some of the first architects who operate within the field of pragmatism. While the critique of modernism often resulted in historical architecture and centralised pre-modern cities with basis on ideals and principles, Venturi and Scott point Brown in the took specificstarting solution based on individual desires and needs of the users. (Nielsen) Both are positive for the pragmatic ideas formalised by Charles Sanders Peirce, especially because it is anti-ideological, and states that the ’world’ cannot The term ‘ It century. nineteenth late the in Peirce Sanders Charles philosopher American the came to fruition in the early twentieth-century philosophies of William James and John Dewey. Their attempts to reconcile the rationalism’s interests (what for principle fundamental for the contemporary way of thinking within pragmatism. The epistemology of pragmatism settles understanding with as metaphysical ideals something concerning observations, as that the approach challenges can the assumption operation that be knowledge are and acknowledged two ideologies and theories of the independently future by instead focusing on what is here and now; separated of spheres. ‘ Accordingly, pragmatism should things (how knowledge about theory a invalidates that principle fundamental a contains problems as form parameters, which leads problem. to new solutions on each specific One of the main actual an became advocates pragmatism 1990’s, the from of projects and theories a his with Along new pragmatism approach is Rem Koolhaas. new within architectural pragmatism ‘paradigm’ is discussions. not However, to be method a and approach an more but style, architectural particular a as understood Rem Koolhaas has been of perceiving and operating within the contemporary city. an inspiration to many architects and theorists over the have years been and his modified thoughts into many different planningnew for inspiration an as Koolhaas Rem of projects many approaches.uses he as these, of one James Corner is projects and thoughts. new pragmatism The essence of new pragmatism is its anti-ideological approach to the world that states a necessity for pragmatism starting New transformation. a with starting and on further the moving before conditions realities and understanding the existing thus differs from other tendencies by embracing the reality with all the layers that this involves. It searches for solutions grounded in the reality and needs that exist at this moment instead of creating a society based on new ideologies and ideals. By not only focusing on the specific buildingincorporating the context in sitewhich to build, the world complexity and composition, specific or materials but also pragmatic solutions often settle with acknowledges that it is no longer possible to plan the city on the premises that the standard conventions and ideas. city It will follow the plan. New pragmatism thus operates with analysis of the underlying areas also seems to centre in the global cities. The globalisation not neglected the importance of has, the perfect local dimension. The network is the a however, structure in to important equally are two The exists. order global and local both which seen dimensions, local for need the prove Investigations system. the of functioning comfortable. feel they where neighbourhoods in settle to tend people that facts the in Factors such as education possibilities, people work, between occurs often communication history virtual Simultaneously, of matters. types the place and housing located at close distance, which further proves that the network city operates on both the global and the local scale. spread rapidly. Additionally, investigations also reveal that physical face-to-face meetings still matter in terms of business, and therefore the global metropolitan xii ade te iutos ht cu i te otmoay cagal ct. The city. changeable contemporary, the in occur that situations the handles The diagram is thus the architect’s tool - an operational method which pragmatically known conditions. already of presentation graphic passive, a just than rather tool operational active, an as function can that something as pragmatism new within meaning new a gets thus ‘diagram’ term The design. specific a to relation in parameters form become they diagrams in these describing By data. pure and facts quantities, numbers, of New pragmatists diagnose the existing conditions and operationalise the collection given fieldsimplybyframingtheissuesdifferently. a in latent positivist possibilities new or reveals truth planner pragmatic of the instead, assumption methodology; no is There act. progressive predictable a and functions permanent with territory constant a as city the predicts instead but city not cognitive modernistic approach which seems to be condemned to failure as it does the replace hereby methods city.These the of changeability the for open point, are and starting their as city existing the methods, diagnostic with take, strategies “ as the term of definition Rajchman’s on based are pragmatism new within methods The ecological andmentalconstruction by social, active an also society but construction physical active an longer the no is architecture of development in role active designing the physical more framework for the a unpredictable needs of the gets society. Hereby architecture where pragmatism of category new a in discourse architectural places Rajchman Thus p. 212) nor program neither can we making’ the in ‘Things that called – once project. James William what About future a to relation a supposes It experiment. as with “things in making”. experiment “ and articulate can realm we urban which forces the as within but unpredictable, operate as that forces described the Rajchman concerning tendencies. as pragmatism these new incorporate to seeks pragmatism new pragmatism, but as pragmatism responds statically to alteration and unpredictability, future. unpredictable 213) - 212 and dynamic a with conditions new the embrace could longer no pragmatism classical the that realisation the on based but ideas pragmatic classical the in roots with notion a as pragmatism’ ‘new term the formulate to first the 1997 in was Rajchman John philosopher American The into aposition. architectural discourse. With his within ‘paradigm’theoretical actual works an became the pragmatism started pragmatic that approach Brown term Scott the and was Venturi by re-actualised developed 1990’s the in Koolhaas Rem until not was It more is it promising. artistically but accept; would modernists the that architect the for humble role more a is this that state They this. improve immediately to how and – is architects should be not to worry about what should be, but instead of what already unpredictability; a plan that visualizes the real world as dynamic and constantly and producing newunpredictableopportunities. dynamic as world real and the transformation visualizes that for plan space a unpredictability; with but predetermined, or programmed not city, contemporary the of layers complex the all with working plan, open an is diagram diagnose New pragmatism primarily operates within the same field as the classical the as field same the within operates primarily pragmatism New a pragmatism of diagram and diagnosis and diagram of pragmatism a the city – it does not take starting point in the actual conditions of the (Nielsen) (Rajchman, pp.215-217) It is about forces that we can’t predict, with which we can only

”. (Rajchman, p. 212) p. (Rajchman, Nesn Rjha, pp. Rajchman, (Nielsen, New pragmatic New ”. (Rajchman, xiii , albeit in a ecology y The Network city approach concentrates around the dynamics of material and networks. The landscape urbanism approach seems to expand this definition of an of definition this expand to seems approach urbanism landscape The networks. ecosystem by perceiving the world as a thick living mat of accumulated patches and layered systems, thus including the of ‘networks’ biology and nature into their perception. Here they recognises operate Pragmatism with the New term cultural. ‘processes’ to signify or this, natural and these physical, or social be can processes city, contemporary the of dynamics and layers operative different of complexity the philosophy. their describe to ecology term exact the use not does approach the but However, its notions can be elaborated influential layers with regard to especially programmes. into an ecological system of different approaches three These the which different in aspect ecologies the is are which media, also design linked the i.e. to architecture, their perception of landscape and seem to vary the most. Landscape urbanism views the world as constitute an which absorbing factors, ecological the the different layers, surface, of immaterial some and containing material just flowsare of and lines the contemporary and points the that signalizing city, Of importance the contemporary here city. is especially the merging of nature and culture into one coherent system that are interdependent of each other. design media ecological Seemingly, all three approaches evolve around the notion of variation of ways. The Network City approach describes the world as an ecosystem of competing favour of viewing the contemporary city as a place of change, unpredictability and potentials. dichotomies traditional with away do to try all they as similar are approaches Their parameters. in their world perception, although evolving around different dynamics the acknowledging the on focus great puts approaches city network The Globalisation system. combined a into these merging and flows local and global of therefore becomes a key concept here. New pragmatism concentrates around the dynamics of the layers constituting the as also but network, overall an of part as them defining only not city, contemporary programmatic quite a around revolves often This play. into set be to pieces possible organisation, programmatic through defines almost is architecture where approach and thus architecture and programmes merge. In regard to their perception of the complexity world, of all the three contemporary approaches city as recognizes a the system of and interrelated dynamic do forces away with the previous periphery, city-countryside dualistic or urban-suburban. conceptions They all of merge these the concepts in world into centre- ve study comparati y of world complexit philosoph media to an ecological media and from static to dynamic open-ended planning, and a discussion of these approaches the of themes each that potentials the on light cast will supplement eachholds and how they can other. pragmatism are revealed, indicating a new attitude towards towards attitude new a indicating revealed, are pragmatism attempts the in dynamically and processually more working to integrate the complexity of the contemporary Thus city. in all three approaches we witness a shift from a dualistic figure-ground a from complexity, world of that to philosophy In this comparison the approaches of landscape urbanism, network city and new distinctions between the three xiv n badn srtge ad tep t ln lcl rgams o lbl market global to programmes local link to attempt identity and strong on strategies focus branding put and typically therefore will city network intact. the society planning, network In the keeping of importance the indicating network, parts the global of the and local the between connection the and flows involves which planning urban or architecture an with lines, and points of constituted networks, of oriented process towards attitude an planning - present again in also slightly different approaches ways. The three network city the represents the integration Thus participatory processes. proposal, but also procedures that must be undergone on the way, e.g. political and design a on focused organizer,only or not informer is development the of goal the an as act to also is architect the If itself. in architect the of role the questions also not only encourages interdisciplinary teams and drawing on expert knowledge, but longer be viewed as the sole discipline of creating the physical shape of cities. This architect acting as a heroic master and designer of fixed masterplans and should no in order to incorporate the complexity of the world. Planning is no longer about the interdisciplinarity of importance the on focus put all They entails. this process the and planning of art the on views their have also approaches three all result, a As planning from thedualisticviewofnatureversuscity. away moves all and once which landscape, of concept total a into elaborated are city the and architecture landscape, of views traditional the way this In changes. ability to absorb changes over time, both programmatic, infrastructural and natural by it boosts even the with landscape as city and contemporary the define to a landscape of lens cities the using as as dynamic landscape and complex views as just urbanism process landscape dynamic approaches, other the in to But pragmatism. contrary new and city sense network broad the in a play at in dynamics which the integrates urbanism, and landscape between bridge joining thus layers, accumulated of landscape a thus is architecture urbanism, landscape For to life. brought is diagram the which through media the becomes which architecture, the of shape physical the of generator the is layers differentof influenced composition The constructed. is that diagram a or diagram, identity a and thus is space Architecture generator. a with as viewed architecture here is to landscape and analogous nature, diagrammatic its as landscape acknowledges pragmatism New where landscape fabric, urban the on neither presentspointsorlinesintheglobalnetwork. influence its and globalisation the to on due focus is probably which here, present be to seem even landscape, not The does network. however, overall the in points as seen be can architecture Here flows. immaterial and material and programme embedded of hubs is architecture as focus, in they are signalize the flowsnetwork and the hubs ofthe the contemporary city.of For thelines network city,and points the where networks, immaterial of thedesign. may change over time. For landscape urbanism, change is thus an intentional part which design, the on effect an have processes different the where incorporated, are unpredictable. This involves the design proposal having a degree of adaptability even further by engaging natural ecology and biological processes, which for a fact this taking perhaps open-ended, of sort a with operates also urbanism Landscape ofourcities. collisions andhybrids,thusworkingwiththeunpredictability programmatic futures, new creating of aim the with potentials existing stimulate to New pragmatism works processually by using statistical and empirical facts actively network. global the to place the linking thereby economy, experience the for catalyst a as tendencies as a means of connecting the two scales, e.g. by using local potentials xv

”, analogous to (Tietz, pp. 66 – 67) (Tietz, y As such modernism brought forth a machines for living in (www.dac.dk; Tietz, pp. 66 – 67) Tietz, (www.dac.dk; (Tietz, (Tietz, pp. 66 – 67) movement. New Urbanism is an urban planning movement new urbanism

towns or neighbourhoods in the U.S. are currently planned or under construction. values and the historical city, aiming at outlining principles for eventful design. the beautiful and A concrete example of post-modernistic planning, which is still applied the today, is that arose in the 1980’s in America. The movement is a reaction to the problems surrounding urban sprawl, suburban development and traffic congestion by using communities, walkable human-scale create to principles architectural and planning celebrating the slowness of the old historical cities, creating an from environment the far dynamic and complex Also reality. known contemporary as the for approach traditional planning a suggest neighbourhood therefore urbanists new design, housing of range diverse a with communities friendly pedestrian on focuses that city and jobs, thereby encouraging mixed use. Many new residential communities in America are beginning to follow new urbanist principles and more than 600 new green areas were drawn into the city as common areas that could offer fresh air and sunlight to the citizens. planning tradition in Denmark with the functional demarcation of urban functions within the city and landscape. However, towards its end modernism was strongly criticised for focusing only on the large scale and technological rationality while neglecting local identity, public spaces and social relations. It was claimed that no real urbanism could grow from of functions mixed and vitality the for longing a sparked which planning modernistic the historical city and its components. As a reaction to modernism, modernistic planning the and post-modern the movement lack of was Instead experience post-modernism a and proposes rejection aesthetic an within of architectural the stance city. based on traditional thought that building should function as cars “ which he saw as machines were for rejecting historical styles traveling and tradition as in. a basis design These as for technology architectural and functions form modernistic materials, and of requirements the architects adopting instead beauty where aesthetic”, “machine a adopted also thereby Modernism parameters. was found in the design that worked according to its function. In Danish zoning the in seen are which planning, machines, efficient as cities design to sought planners modernism equalled functionalism principles and and standardised dwelling rationalism typologies resulting and from mass production. The modernist city plans aimed at separating functions in the city and creating a hierarchical traffic system that could separatelarge instead – landscape the differentfrom the demarcated clearly be longer transportationno would city The types. Modernism was a trend of thought which embraced change and the new, therefore new, the and change embraced which thought of trend a was Modernism instead and form architectural for basis a as tradition and styles historical rejecting adopting the requirements of parameters. Architects materials, and designers such as functions Le Corbusier, Walter Gropius and and technology Corbusier Le life. urban everyday into ideas modernist brought Rohe der van Mies as design Contemporar From the Modern to the

perspective on into the insight an give approaches cotemporary to modernism evolution of planning how contemporary planning ideals spring from modernism ideals from itself, and although they seem to contrast on many points, understandings.they also share certain arrival of new approaches is often based in a critique of past of critique a in based often is approaches new of arrival landscape of practice and perception the Here approaches. urbanism stands historical A evolved. in has it which from approaches planning great contrast to the modernistic of planning ideals Landscape urbanism, approaches, is as a progression approaches with from and may preceding at planning other times against seem these like past approaches, an contemporary due opposition to the fact that the olution olution ev xvi itself manyofthequalitiescity.cease, the indeed The oldantithesiswill now country, willtaketo (andthis)leadsustosuppose alsothatthecountry fresh air,areas andmanyofthecharacteristics,greenness, ofwhatis p. vii) present anewandentirelydifferentphaseofhumandistribution in thesentence“ as 1902bytheEnglishwriterH.G.Wells inhisbook Anticipations, signalized predictedasearly The emergenceofthesemi-urbanphenomenonwasinfact – theriseoflandscapeurbanism. wayofthinking becomes thebasisforabrieflookintoriseofthisorganic Hisaccounthere be seenasearlyversionsoflandscapeurbanistprinciples. Waldheim accountstheearlyemergenceofan‘organicurbanism’ whichcan Through apresentationoftwoprojectsfromthe1930’s and40’s, Charles URBANISM THE RISEOFLANDSCAPE ways, dynamic and of positionssuchaslandscapeurbanism. processual more in working resulting in a new ‘urbanism by of our time’. This paradigm shift marks the emergence city contemporary the dualistic of its and modernism with break to perception of the world, and planning tendencies begin began to integrate the complexity truly planning did 1990’s and not response architectural 1980’sthe until Not perceptions. world or questions planning greater to answering purely a as described be can post-modernism Thus transport andsupportsthesinglefamilyhousingmarket. for automobile the on relies still it as sustainable all at not is urbanism new view, this In disguise. under sprawl - styles traditional superficial with up dressed sprawl space. Environmentalist claim that new urbanism is nothing more than conventional sprawl due to the fact that most of the planned projects are built on previously open this However, resort ambition. to the classical city urbanist is also criticised new by many for simply the being another type on of influence great had has who Krier, Leon by promoted as model city “European” traditional the for search a and ideals New urbanism can be seen as a post-modernist movement in its rejection of modernist applies manyofthesameprinciples. TaastrupHøje of development urban the where context, Danish a in recognised be also can notions urbanist New tourists. of masses by year each visited are and famous internationally become have towns these of Both Florida. in located both Disney’sand Seaside Celebration, are neighbourhoods urbanist new of Examples portending the future decentralization of cities by dissolving the fundamental thefundamental portending thefuturedecentralization ofcitiesbydissolving cityandin in proposinganewapproach totheplanningofcontemporary regionalism. Wright’s veryforesighted projectswere hence andHilberseimer’s with asuburbanized between cityandnatureirrelevant, andwasthusreplaced landscape. distinction The dissolutionoffigureinto field renderedtheclassical squaresetc.into of thetraditionalurbanfigurebyreversingbuildings, avenues, and dissolution and culture.Bothprojectsproposedaradicaldecentralization nature opposed These projectsadvocatedadissolutionofthedichotomy that urbanism. that wastocomeandthepresent-dayinterestinlandscape very different architects,bothforetellthedecentralizationof American urbanform Broadacre Cityand apart by adecade The NewRegionalPatternwereproduced towards anorganicurbanformappropriatetotheNorth American context.While for themidsectionofNorth America. BothWright aimed andHilberseimer urbanism an organic Pattern (1945-49),wereaheadoftheirtimebyadvocating NewRegional Wright´s Broadacrecity(1934-35)andLudwig Hilberseimer’s In thesameway, century, twotheoreticalprojects fromthemid20th FrankLloyd created acleardistinctionbetweencountryandcity. compact and highly prediction isprophesiedinatimewheremostcitieswerestill that this isremarkable the exactconditionofcontemporaryurbanstructures.It of moreorlesspopulous merelyaquestion boundary lineswillaltogetherdisappear;itbecome,indeed, Hecontinues“ these coming cities will not be, old sense, cities at all; they will these comingcitieswillnotbe,oldsense,atall;they the citywilldiffuseitselfuntilithastakenupconsiderable .” (Sieverts 2003,p.vii) (www.cnu.org) HereWells isveryclosetodescribing (www.wikipedia.dk) .” (Sieverts 2003, xvii (Waldheim 2007, pp. 302 - 303) (Waldheim (Waldheim 2007, p. 293) (Waldheim (Waldheim 2007, p. 301 - 302) 2007, p. 301 (Waldheim (Waldheim 2007, pp. 302) 2007, pp. (Waldheim urbanism, significantly in processual ways of thinking which we see in contemporary urbanism. Neither Broadacre City nor New Regional Pattern incorporated the pace of social, cultural or technological change that are and the projects do not have the ability to characteristic of the contemporary city, Another aspect is the absence of ecological thinking, absorb changes over time. which only is dealt with in a simple and diagrammatic way. The two projects shed light on the contemporary practice of landscape urbanism, where it is clear that they have helped towards shaping a new perception of They have in this aspect formed the practice by initiating a landscape landscape. approach to the planning of the contemporary city. land, and according to Hilberseimer, the public landscape is generated through land, and according to Hilberseimer, Each of the two projectsoccupied and programmed parklands. points towards of landscape urbanismthe contemporary approach and practice as they inflect and the public realmlocal conditions such as individual dwelling of infrastructures natural world. toward a set of relationships with the reveal the significance and Hilberseimer of both Wright Additionally, diagrams and aerial views representations such as maps, plans, as tools to across urbanized areasunderstand large-scale relationships tools which are – discipline with now highly used in the landscape urbanism of decoding the aim light on planometric aspectsproject sites. Here the diagram casts of multiple imperceptible relationships media, hereby visualizing normally scale and across systems. between ecological and infrastructural projects are still limited in their resemblance both to landscape However, Both Broadacre City and the New Regional Pattern offer new ways of responding and the New Regional Pattern offer Both Broadacre City economic of the industrialized city with its to the negative impact social injustice, a meaningful conditions, by advocating pathologies and unhealthy relationship Characteristic of both food and civic life. projects are between work, family, architecture as the medium for structuringthe reduced role of the conditions and engineered infrastructuralbetween extant natural environments systems, in the organic orderingwhich redefined the role of landscape public of and private Wright and Hilberseimer interpreted to The definition of landscape is by space. or an environmentalinvolve more than just a beautiful picture issue. Introducing it able to work across a broad concept of landscape makes scales, rendering environments and the relationship between larger regional conditions social public life is evident in visible. Especially the conception of the interpretation of agricultural is the productive for Wright landscape, where the public landscape distinctions between city and countryside, village and farmland city and countryside, village and distinctions between and “urbanism the third term of landscape urbanism. and landscape” into