response to tijn's comment
Q: s your city projecting future, past or a timeline in
between? Think it is great to read a kind of timeline along the citybut not sure if previous/current masters should have such a prominent
role within the structure of each of the city blocks
A: The city is in the future but because each bay is constructed as a whole, they can have a utopian / visionary sense of completion which is confined to the square.
as a result the city becomes a kind of register of lost utopian ideals, a perpetual experiment where ideas can be tested without compromise in the micro-city scale and learned from.
The reason for these architects prominence (corb, zaha etc) is simply that each of these microcity proposals are easily recognizable and therefore communicate the idea of seperate futuristic visions. I am using historical examples so that the point is clearer to the audience. I also don't want to get into the design exercise of making my own utopian vision. My design in essence is the city itself, its crawling nature, and its relationship with time and the natural forces which act in and upon the metropolis - resources, consumption culture, class organizatons, market economies, changing ideologies, creation/destruction, and expansion/adaptation through time.
The design illustrates a scenario with works with our selfish nature as metropolitans, we will go at great lengths to continue living our lifestyles, the design uses this nature as a propellor, avoiding the inevitable death trap of the stationary city.
Leave a comment