4 ms·

Corbusier and his acolytes were almost singly responsible for the many urban planning (and related social justice) atrocities of the mid century, especially in

Corbusier and his acolytes were almost singly responsible for the many urban planning (and related social justice) atrocities of the mid century, especially in the US. If you’re interested in the more recent counter-movement trying to roll back some of these mistakes, see the Charter for the New Urbanism: https://www.cnu.org/who-we-are/charter-new-urbanism https://www.cnu.org/who-we-are/charter-new-urbanism

betaby 3y ago
Atrocities are those plywood 'houses' and whole urban sprawl in USA and Canada. They have enormous environmental cost, in contrast of those ideas of Corbusier. And even then, you suburban cardboard bungalow inside is Corbusier, just think a second about that.
- glompers 3y ago
  I suppose I see the axes quite differently! If a city is going to be there, there are going to be a bunch of costs; but I don't want built space to be constrained and crummy for people by being either (A) favela/bidonville/slum decrepit and pest-riddled (if versatile) (B) manicured like a plywood subdivision to maximize resale value, at the expense of freedom to add on and be playful, cf Daniel Pinkwater's classic book "The Big Orange Splot" (C) homogenized by high design prefabricators "because people don't mind having identical phones if the phones are cheap but good, so, people won't mind having identical homes on that basis either" (D) unwalkably sited (E) arrayed in vertical cul-de-sac residential stalks with no personal private space to sculpt at ground level or (F) mass-customized for them by AR/VR&cement-extrusion-robot-rental prefabricators and perhaps well-meaning building code officials who will find it much safer to pre-warranty the strength of such homes than try to verify the safety of people's own manually cobbled-together creations I'd rather suggest that the downsides of B thru F can be avoided if (A) were pursued in the absence of economically, legally and politically marginal conditions that usually are its handmaiden and raison d'etre. A neighborhood where everyone is well-housed but often inclined to iterate their physical surroundings and contribute to greater building skills and greater building beauty would be a pretty interesting environment in which to raise a family...
rahen 3y ago
He's also responsible for a lot of urban atrocities in the former soviet countries, with endless rows of commieblocks lined up on extremely wide avenues / urban highways. At least it can accommodate some form of mass transit, but it's even more anti-individualistic, soulless, and dehumanized than the US sprawl. In both cases, those mistakes were the result of central planning. Most of them were fixed with the Aalborg charter, which reverted from central planning to a more organic, spontaneous growth with a bit of regulatory oversight.

betaby 3y ago

Atrocities are those plywood 'houses' and whole urban sprawl in USA and Canada. They have enormous environmental cost, in contrast of those ideas of Corbusier. And even then, you suburban cardboard bungalow inside is Corbusier, just think a second about that.

glompers 3y ago
I suppose I see the axes quite differently! If a city is going to be there, there are going to be a bunch of costs; but I don't want built space to be constrained and crummy for people by being either (A) favela/bidonville/slum decrepit and pest-riddled (if versatile) (B) manicured like a plywood subdivision to maximize resale value, at the expense of freedom to add on and be playful, cf Daniel Pinkwater's classic book "The Big Orange Splot" (C) homogenized by high design prefabricators "because people don't mind having identical phones if the phones are cheap but good, so, people won't mind having identical homes on that basis either" (D) unwalkably sited (E) arrayed in vertical cul-de-sac residential stalks with no personal private space to sculpt at ground level or (F) mass-customized for them by AR/VR&cement-extrusion-robot-rental prefabricators and perhaps well-meaning building code officials who will find it much safer to pre-warranty the strength of such homes than try to verify the safety of people's own manually cobbled-together creations I'd rather suggest that the downsides of B thru F can be avoided if (A) were pursued in the absence of economically, legally and politically marginal conditions that usually are its handmaiden and raison d'etre. A neighborhood where everyone is well-housed but often inclined to iterate their physical surroundings and contribute to greater building skills and greater building beauty would be a pretty interesting environment in which to raise a family...

rahen 3y ago

He's also responsible for a lot of urban atrocities in the former soviet countries, with endless rows of commieblocks lined up on extremely wide avenues / urban highways. At least it can accommodate some form of mass transit, but it's even more anti-individualistic, soulless, and dehumanized than the US sprawl. In both cases, those mistakes were the result of central planning. Most of them were fixed with the Aalborg charter, which reverted from central planning to a more organic, spontaneous growth with a bit of regulatory oversight.