"gates construct and manifest social relations - in this case , segregation." - Bickford
The manifestation of segregation, as noted in "ghettos" and "CID's" by Bickford, is a result of cultural and social viewpoints. In my opinion, segregation is not "constructed" or derived from our built environment, rather our built environment is constructed to serve the purposes of the culture it houses.
The rich build to keep the poor from taking what they have: greed. Social inequality is seen everywhere in our society and it's polity. The point that it exists within the notion of public spaces cannot be denied and this discussion serves to bring attention to those built inequalities, but thus far Bickford implies that architecture is one of the causes of such segregation. I would argue that this is not true. While I do not have the data and research to back such a counterpoint at this time, I still believe it to be closer to the truth.
In my experience, daily practice of architecture is reactive to the needs and desires of the client; it is not the proactive force that we would like to believe. Could it have this power? Possibly. It has in the past. But the daily practice of our profession does not embody this power or thought process on any level other than a contrived notion to justify someone's creative desire. However, I do believe that the built envirnoment can do just what Bickford suggests, but I do not believe that the majority of the profession embraces this notion. There are individuals and groups of individuals that take architecture to this level of social/cultural/economic responsiblity.
~R
As a side note, I found the beginning of Bickford's discussion disturbing and difficult to relate to given that I am a middle class white suburban male. I have a tendency to focus on the specific items in a discussion and understanding the overall message is sometimes a difficult task. In the end I agree with the authors viewpoint. I just do not agree with some of the specific arguements she uses.
edit 1.04.2007
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
5th floor view at the BAC
m.arch design studio + theory blog at the boston architectural college
semester links
looking out the window
5th floor view at the BAC
Resource + Reference
links spring 2007
About Me
- rbutera
- M.Arch student at the Boston Architectural College. 1994 graduate of The Ohio State University, BS in Arch. Project designer and manager for Meyer+Bates Architects and Planners in Perrysburg, Ohio.
8 comments:
Rick – I agree with you that architecture should not be blamed for the problems of democratic inequality that Bickford discusses, but ONLY when the architecture is applied with the intent to address the issues.
When I read the essay, I interpreted the design influence to include not only architects, but also city planners, legislators, area commissions, voters, etc., but especially developers.
In my blog, I stated that a fix will need to be interdisciplinary in nature to affect any type of real and sustainable solution. I think architects would welcome the challenge to create a democratic environment. That is one of the joys of architecture, problem solving by design. But we can’t do it alone. And we have to recognize were the root of change has to occur. My initial thought is that it has to occur at the level of first development, our zoning regulations.
For example, in my home “edge city” of Westerville we have many different zoning districts. The very nature of this fact contributes to the undemocratic polity that exists here. But if you analyze individual districts, you will find ones that have been planned to address the need for diversity.
The Upton district has been planned to be balanced on many levels; pedestrian and vehicular traffic, commercial and residential, community and collegiate, and government and public. This part of Westerville is most “alive”. It breathes and even speaks. I meet more new people in this part of town that any other. I met a lovely older lady and her two bulldogs just last weekend in fact. But I don’t have these interactions in my own neighborhood. There isn’t the same “feel” for some reason. I suspect because the over-abundance of “gates” so readily visible.
The area where I live is growing rapidly. But the lack of zoning regulation designed to address diversity has created a cesspool waiting for a mosquito infestation. And it doesn’t take long for that to occur. The residential sprawl that is occurring is being driven by developers’ intent to make the highest possible profit, without concern for long term affects. Subsequently, our brand new grade school and middle school are so overcrowded they are bussing newly moved kids to my neighborhood to schools miles away.
I agree, architects are not to blame but we can be part of the solution.
The built environment in which we live is a direct manifestation of our society. I use the word society because I do not believe we truly live in a democratic polity. I believe United States is somewhere in between a democracy and an oligarchy. Also, let us not forget that capitalism has a significant impact on our "gates".
I agree that we as a profession can be a part of the solution - and should be. Starting change at the level of first development makes a lot of sense. Exhibiting good design citizenship is tempered by the all mighty dollar. Changing the framework around which our built environment is constructed is necessary if we are to effect societal change.
~R
Hi Rick,
I do agree with you when the 1st time I read Bickford's essay, I found her writing is a bit disturbing, and difficult to comprehend. But after I learn her Background (Ph.D Political Science) and reading her essay for the 2nd time, I do empathy her strong opinion. Although, some of her point I tend to agree, but some I tend to disagree. In my mind there is no "perfect" solution for this problem, only progression toward a compromise solution. As you said precisely, this is not only our profession responsibility, but also the whole societies are also responsible for the better.
Felix
Greetings from another white (and originally suburban) male. And yes, that position does make it more difficult to enter into the lived experience of others -- partly because it's always hard to really empathize, but also specifically in being from the community with power. As Bickford says on p. 363, "This 'forgetting' is of course only possible for the privileged; it is not as though minority groups can ever block out the dominant culture." Or, to put it more personally, I almost never have to think about the fact that I'm white. I almost never have to think about the fact that I'm male. But women and people of color get reminded of their "other" status on a pretty regular basis. Note, for instance, that eleven of the thirteen students enrolled in this Distance M.Arch program are men (as well as both instructors and all three administrators); two... are NOT. You think that experience might matter? I'll bet so, at least to "them."
Before I came to the BAC, I taught at Duke. A very white, very privileged school with a very black custodial, groundskeeping, and foodservice staff. The staff called Duke "the Plantation," and the students hardly noticed.
There's a term called "liberal guilt," which is used to make fun of white men who worry about race and gender. I don't feel guilty very often, because I haven't done much to make us the way we are. I do, however, feel a responsibility to pitch in and try to change it.
I have a question. Is this an American problem? Is it due to the fact that America is the dominant melting pot for the world? And the stock that started it all was white-anglo saxon society so that everything that gets added eventually cooks down and tastes the same?
I mean..won't this always be a problem. Immigration of some form at some moment of time whether driven by slavery, famine, religious oppression, poverty, etc. will always be adding a new layer of society that doesn't fit into the puzzle. There will always be a group on the outside looking in. Is it possible to create space that is universal in it appeal?
I would agree with you Herb. Being in the majority my opinion carries a greater weight if you will. Do I have a responsibilty to practice good design citizenship? Perhaps. It is not a philosophy or value that I have attributed to architecture and design. Which I suppose is exactly Bickford's point.
Tim, I am not sure if I know the answer to that. I would postulate at a quick glance that the answer is "no". Historically there has always been those that have and have not, ie the Egyptians and Jews. Second class citizens can be found through out history and in every part of the world. The minority and majority. The melting pot is just simply what we are most familiar with.
Tim S. wrote: "Immigration of some form at some moment of time whether driven by slavery, famine, religious oppression, poverty, etc. will always be adding a new layer of society that doesn't fit into the puzzle. There will always be a group on the outside looking in."
I agree. And here's something I've wondered about quite a lot. The Scandinavian countries are interesting examples of near-socialist planning, in which taxes are extraordinarily high on the wealthiest members, housing and health care and education are excellent AND affordable, and the crime rate is quite low. But I have this nagging feeling that it works in those countries because almost all of their residents are ethnically Norwegian or Swedish or Danish; if they were to have massive immigration from South Asia or the Middle East or Africa, I think that there might be some of the same kinds of defensiveness and retrenchment that we experience here. I hope I'm wrong about that, but I fear that I'm not...
Post a Comment