Content P. 7 Preface P. 13 The Open City - Curatorial Statement P. 19 The Biennale and the City P. 25 Open City: Designing Coexistence P. 27 The Forum P. 35 Maakbaarheid ('ma:kba:rɦɛ:it) P. 39 Refuge P. 45 Reciprocity P. 49 Community P. 53 Squat P. 59 Collective P. 63 Open City Event Program P. 65 Open City: Designing Coexistence – The Book P. 67 Parallel Cases//IABR@RDM P. 87 The Free State of Amsterdam P. 99 Urban Century: How the World Becomes a City P. 111 Foaming at the Edge - Open City Master Class P. 113 Partner Program P. 117 Practical Information P. 121 Subsidizers and Partners P. 125 Credits P. 141 Colophon City 3 Preface gation of the favela’s inhabitants. She suggested that we refrain from trying The International Architecture Bien- to sell the idea that architects can turn nale Rotterdam (IABR) is an inter- Paraisópolis into paradise. Of course national urban research biennale I agreed. History has rarely been kind founded in 2001 with the conviction to those who want to build paradise that architecture is a public concern. on earth. So when the 4th IABR raises the issue of how architects and urban Architecture’s major challenge, in planners can concretely contribute to the eyes of the IABR, is to design and the design of coexistence, it has to be realize decent day-to-day living con- done with reserve. ditions for billions of people. With the theme Open City: Designing Coexis- Yet the question needs asking. tence, the 4th edition of the IABR places special emphasis on the social Whether exploding or shrinking, cit- aspect of this challenge: how can ies all over the world often tell tales architects and urban planners make of waste and neglect. Municipalities concrete contributions to diversity, face issues as diverse as dysfunc- vitality, and livability—in short, to the tional infrastructure, crime, terror- sustainability of the urban condition. ism, pollution, migration, inadequate housing, the disconnect between the One of the many projects in which the formal and the informal, and the lack IABR is involved, and that will be ex- of access for all to education, public hibited during the 4th edition in Rot- transport, health care, information, terdam, is situated in the Paraisópolis and markets. Yet, a consistent and in- (Paradise City) favela in the heart of tegrated approach to urban develop- Brazil’s metropolis, São Paulo. With ment rarely is a political priority. relatively affordable and sustainable alterations, the aim of the project is to In the 21st century, cities will, in many provide the inhabitants of Paraisópo- ways, be more important than coun- lis better access to the amenities of tries. Cities are the engines of the the city. world’s economy, but only when they are socially robust and culturally resil- In São Paulo, the IABR closely col- ient, economically viable and ecologi- laborates with SEHAB, the Municipal cally sustainable, as well as diverse, Housing Secretariat. Its director, Elis- safe, and open to the world, can they abete França, took me aside during a be places where more and more of us presentation of the project to a dele- can focus on making better lives for 6 Open City 7 ourselves, as well as for others. nourished in a unique way by the cu- Presenting projects and plans for São rator, Kees Christiaanse, and brought Paulo and New York, for Istanbul and about through the huge effort and en- Moscow, for Addis Ababa, Jakarta, ergy of his team at the ETH Zurich and Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and many the Biennale team in Rotterdam. other cities, the 4th IABR makes the case for a renewed engagement with an open and socially sustainable city. George Brugmans director IABR This edition therefore, presents itself—as did earlier editions—as a platform for contemporary architects, urbanists, and thinkers, who have the ambition to revitalize the notion of what the city is. Starting on 25 September, you are cordially welcome to visit the IABR’s three exhibitions; the lectures, confer- ences, and debates; along with the many other activities that will take place in Rotterdam and Amsterdam, and the programs that will be broad- cast on radio and television by the VPRO. This edition would not have been pos- sible without the support of the Min- istry of Education, Culture and Sci- ence, the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, and the City of Rotterdam; nor without the willingness of our partners—ETH Zurich, NAI, VPRO, the City of Am- sterdam, the Rotterdam Academy of Architecture and Urban Design, and many others—to join us in this quest for the Open City. A quest that was 8 Open City 9 The Open City – Curatorial Statement Twenty-five years after construction started on the city of Almere, Rem In the history of utopias, the reflection Koolhaas retroactively designed a of the ideal society often takes the new city center, known as Dutchtown. form of a city. In this way, we can view This revision is illustrative of the the Open City as a spatial translation unpredictability of urban develop- of an open society. ment, particularly for changes in the Randstad (conurbation of Western The Meerpaal in Dronten, the Nether- Holland) as a spatial reflection of an lands, is an attempt by architect Frank “un-clotted” to a “re-clotted” soci- van Klingeren to “un-clot” society. ety. Instead of a peaceful suburbia of The building, which opened in 1967, 50,000 inhabitants, in which the mid- consisted of one huge space within dle class could live in houses with which activities took place without gardens, Almere developed into an visual and acoustic separation. The archipelago of 200,000 people with Meerpaal became a symbol for the ethnically dominated neighborhoods “makeable society,” characterized by and streets with prostitution. In this openness, transparency, and tole- way, the city became an inseparable rance. The makeable society became part of the hierarchic Randstad, from a paradigm for social democracy, for “bundled de-concentration” to “car- an open society. The spatial model pet” metropolis, a patchwork of iden- was the Netherlands, depicted as one tities. large space in which the multi-cultural society could develop in openness, This condition is simultaneously thre- transparency, and tolerance, without atening and promising. The threat visual and acoustic separation. stems from spatial and social segre- gation that could produce a “city as a This vision did not materialize. The tree,” an archipelago ultimately lea- diverse social identities did not result ding to a gated community, impeding in a multicolored chaos, but rather in cultural exchange and innovation. It a coexistence of communities based is promising because interaction in on differences, as elsewhere in the an Open City takes place from within world. The compartmentalization of the community. The Randstad does the built-up area increased, resulting not have any no-go zones. Social in- in mono-functional areas with limited tercourse afforded by transportation contacts, to which—although not systems and social networking is ex- formally restricted—accessibility was tensive. In this way, as an Open City it reserved for certain groups. can function if the mobility of people, 12 Open City 13 goods and ideas between communi- the surroundings. Patrolled supply ding of the work of Jane Jacobs(*). ties is guaranteed. routes provision Jewish enclaves, like The structure of the Open City func- water pipes whose contents must be tions as an operating system in which Global networks can shape transnatio- prevented from leaking. At the same city life can nestle. A complex net- nal communities, whereby mutual ties time, Palestinians manage to maintain work of public spaces, physical and within a community are stronger than functioning transnational networks, electronic, is the most important those with the city in which it finds despite impenetrable barriers. component of this operating system, itself. In cities such as Istanbul, Jakarta, and where exchanges among people, São Paolo, where there are few statu- ideas and goods can take place. In Rotterdam, for example, this is the tes and a viscous political structure, The Open City is therefore not a case with immigrants. Whole streets social differences are reflected in the utopia or a clear-cut reality, but rather of Turkish families originate from a spatial planning. In the absence of a a situation, a balance between open single region in Anatolia, with parallel public sector, people develop their and closed between integration and communities in Cologne and Berlin. own cities—the wealthy in luxurious de-integration, between control and enclaves, the poor in gececondus, “laissez-faire.” This, too, is simultaneously promi- kampongs, and favelas. sing and threatening. It is promising because migration movements foster Despite the inequality, lack of pu- Kees Christiaanse coexistence and cultural exchange. blic transportation and the wearing curator 4th IABR It is threatening because large diffe- down of the ecosystem, these cities rences between isolated communities bubble with life and show numerous * In 1961, urban writer and activist Jane Jacobs could lead to losing interest in the complementary symbioses between published her best-known book, The Death community as a whole, in the Open segregated city areas. The “potential and Life of Great American Cities. It remains one of the most influential commentaries on City. These communities thrive on high difference” on both sides of the gated- urban development and city planning. quality transnational mobility while, at community wall is broken by improvi- the same time, making it possible to sed spatial structures that lift the bar- misuse the Open City, as international riers and enter into micro-economic terrorism demonstrates. relations. Even in conflict situations, under The Open City must not be under- difficult circumstances, one can find stood simply as an appealing 19th-cen- pieces of the Open City.