7 ms·

Contrary to what the article says, Haussmann isn’t really a controversial figure in France and much of what makes Paris one of the most beautiful and visited ci

by cm2187 7y ago

Contrary to what the article says, Haussmann isn’t really a controversial figure in France and much of what makes Paris one of the most beautiful and visited cities in the world is thanks to the architecture he imposed, something that few, if any, modern urbanist can claim.

BenderV 7y ago
Today (because we forgot the cost), but not back in the day.
- masklinn 7y ago
  > Today (because we forgot the cost) Or because we think it was worth it, in the end.
  - thecleaner 7y ago
    > Or because we think it was worth it, in the end. This. I mean if the people put up with the problems caused by the new construction, I believe they deserve credit for being pro-civilization. Not the "oh no, look their old world is gone" nonsense. Surely nobody rebuilt the city for garnering sympathy.
    - masklinn 7y ago
      > I mean if the people put up with the problems caused by the new construction TBF the people who were affected by them were just shoved out of the city center.
    - phillc73 7y ago
      I understood a completely different point from the article. The old mediaeval city was destroyed to essentially disenfranchise the working poor. No longer would they have strong defensive positions in small winding streets during revolution, they were also displaced from the city centre to make space for the wealthy and elite. Money and power weren't working towards a pro-civilisation agenda. They were working in their own self interest against the struggling masses.
      - shoo 7y ago
        This kind of thing is described in Scott's book "seeing like a state". The state takes steps to modify the environment and society to make it more legible to management by a central bureaucracy, to further the aims of the state. For example, the state knocks down existing dwellings to build more roads so it is easier for the army to rapidly mobilize and crush unrest. The state begins to require all subjects to have a last name, where the people themselves have no real need of one, in order to better identify individuals for more effective taxation. It's worth a read, both for the appreciation of how it plays out in the world, and also as a source of interesting analogies for how other regimes, such as large hierarchical organisations, will embark on grand projects to attempt to make the surrounding environment more legible and tractable to centralised control and governance.
      - Nasrudith 7y ago
        To be frank those defensible streets themselves were an older agenda back when one of the functions of city was defensibility - in the service of the same elite. They were always for the purpose. While there are rightful aspects to complain about the displacement sanitation and boulevards were good things even if their motives were ulterior.
    - coldtea 7y ago
      >Not the "oh no, look their old world is gone" nonsense. Taking for granted that that is nonsense, is the same error, a blind belief that any novelty is better than what it replaces. There were political motivations behind the change (and impact on the population at the time) not just some noble march towards better. To give a simple example, bulldozing down Venice to build some Mall-ridden monstrosity that looks like 20000 other places in the world, would not be better in any way, and people would be right to lament about that "old world" being gone. (Of course many moderns, especially Americans having no history, live in a perpetual now, and can't put things into perspective. They judge all things like mobile phone models, the newer the better).
  - raverbashing 7y ago
    Pretty much. Every change comes with a lot of whining, even if they would be a massive improvement (example: replacing the imperial system)
hrktb 7y ago
Would it be self-fulfilling if we disagreed on him being controversial ? Perhaps an aspect of it Parisian's Paris and tourist's Paris is fundamentally different, and the current leadership is more or less trying to undo a lot of what Haussman stood for to make Paris friendlier to live for Parisians. Whole blocks are closed cars to bring back shops and 'village' like environment. Modern residential neighbourhoods are rebuilt with lacy paths, cul de sacs, pedestrian/car cohabitation, closer concentration of housing. A lot of what Haussmann did was beneficial from a health perspective, but we know we can solve these issues in other ways, an I don't think most planners would do it the way Haussmann did if they had the choice to go back in time.
- harperlee 7y ago
  When thinking in historical times you should put yourself in that moment of time. Of course if someone travels back in time with current knowledge will do things in different ways than Haussmann - they know whats going to happen, they know about things Haussmann didn’t.
  - hrktb 7y ago
    It's not just historic fantasy though, there was opposition to his way, but they didn't have the political clout nor could oppose centering the cities around cars. It's not just Haussmann either, most countries had that tension around letting cars dominate or not (there was an excellent 99pi episode about these tensions [0]), it just happened that one side massively won benefiting from economics, politics and power distribution. [0] https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-modern-moloch/ https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-modern...
    - irishsultan 7y ago
      I think you need better evidence for this tension than an episode that's talking about a different country half a century later (the time difference is especially important, because the changes to Paris took place at a time when cars were still being invented, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benz_Patent-Motorwagen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benz_Patent-Motorwagen "widely regarded as the world's first production automobile" was patented in 1885, 15 years after the initial development according to Haussmans plans stopped)
coldtea 7y ago
>Haussmann isn’t really a controversial figure in France Today, when the change has settled down, and nobody lives that remembers before him, no. At his time, and for a while, he was.

by cm2187 7y ago

BenderV 7y ago

Today (because we forgot the cost), but not back in the day.

masklinn 7y ago
> Today (because we forgot the cost) Or because we think it was worth it, in the end.
- thecleaner 7y ago
  > Or because we think it was worth it, in the end. This. I mean if the people put up with the problems caused by the new construction, I believe they deserve credit for being pro-civilization. Not the "oh no, look their old world is gone" nonsense. Surely nobody rebuilt the city for garnering sympathy.
  - masklinn 7y ago
    > I mean if the people put up with the problems caused by the new construction TBF the people who were affected by them were just shoved out of the city center.
  - phillc73 7y ago
    I understood a completely different point from the article. The old mediaeval city was destroyed to essentially disenfranchise the working poor. No longer would they have strong defensive positions in small winding streets during revolution, they were also displaced from the city centre to make space for the wealthy and elite. Money and power weren't working towards a pro-civilisation agenda. They were working in their own self interest against the struggling masses.
    - shoo 7y ago
      This kind of thing is described in Scott's book "seeing like a state". The state takes steps to modify the environment and society to make it more legible to management by a central bureaucracy, to further the aims of the state. For example, the state knocks down existing dwellings to build more roads so it is easier for the army to rapidly mobilize and crush unrest. The state begins to require all subjects to have a last name, where the people themselves have no real need of one, in order to better identify individuals for more effective taxation. It's worth a read, both for the appreciation of how it plays out in the world, and also as a source of interesting analogies for how other regimes, such as large hierarchical organisations, will embark on grand projects to attempt to make the surrounding environment more legible and tractable to centralised control and governance.
    - Nasrudith 7y ago
      To be frank those defensible streets themselves were an older agenda back when one of the functions of city was defensibility - in the service of the same elite. They were always for the purpose. While there are rightful aspects to complain about the displacement sanitation and boulevards were good things even if their motives were ulterior.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >Not the "oh no, look their old world is gone" nonsense. Taking for granted that that is nonsense, is the same error, a blind belief that any novelty is better than what it replaces. There were political motivations behind the change (and impact on the population at the time) not just some noble march towards better. To give a simple example, bulldozing down Venice to build some Mall-ridden monstrosity that looks like 20000 other places in the world, would not be better in any way, and people would be right to lament about that "old world" being gone. (Of course many moderns, especially Americans having no history, live in a perpetual now, and can't put things into perspective. They judge all things like mobile phone models, the newer the better).
- raverbashing 7y ago
  Pretty much. Every change comes with a lot of whining, even if they would be a massive improvement (example: replacing the imperial system)

hrktb 7y ago

Would it be self-fulfilling if we disagreed on him being controversial ? Perhaps an aspect of it Parisian's Paris and tourist's Paris is fundamentally different, and the current leadership is more or less trying to undo a lot of what Haussman stood for to make Paris friendlier to live for Parisians. Whole blocks are closed cars to bring back shops and 'village' like environment. Modern residential neighbourhoods are rebuilt with lacy paths, cul de sacs, pedestrian/car cohabitation, closer concentration of housing. A lot of what Haussmann did was beneficial from a health perspective, but we know we can solve these issues in other ways, an I don't think most planners would do it the way Haussmann did if they had the choice to go back in time.

harperlee 7y ago
When thinking in historical times you should put yourself in that moment of time. Of course if someone travels back in time with current knowledge will do things in different ways than Haussmann - they know whats going to happen, they know about things Haussmann didn’t.
- hrktb 7y ago
  It's not just historic fantasy though, there was opposition to his way, but they didn't have the political clout nor could oppose centering the cities around cars. It's not just Haussmann either, most countries had that tension around letting cars dominate or not (there was an excellent 99pi episode about these tensions [0]), it just happened that one side massively won benefiting from economics, politics and power distribution. [0] https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-modern-moloch/ https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-modern...
  - irishsultan 7y ago
    I think you need better evidence for this tension than an episode that's talking about a different country half a century later (the time difference is especially important, because the changes to Paris took place at a time when cars were still being invented, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benz_Patent-Motorwagen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benz_Patent-Motorwagen "widely regarded as the world's first production automobile" was patented in 1885, 15 years after the initial development according to Haussmans plans stopped)

coldtea 7y ago

>Haussmann isn’t really a controversial figure in France Today, when the change has settled down, and nobody lives that remembers before him, no. At his time, and for a while, he was.