london

I met with Jorge Fiori, Director of the Housing and Urbanism Programme at the AA (Architectural Association). He shared with me some of his views on the past and future of the involvement of architects in poverty alleviation and the upgrading of informal settlements:

As a reaction against the disastrous spatial determinism of the Modern movement, dialogue related to the ‘improving the lives of slum-dwellers’ has avoided any discussion of the spatial aspects of informal settlements, focussing entirely on the social and policy aspects of upgrading. This move away from discussing the urban and architectonic characteristics of informal settlements and using spatial and design techniques in their development was a result of very real concerns about the damage caused by a previous generation of large scale architectural interventions, usually of the demolish and relocate (or simply demolish) kind. A new generation of architects in the 60s and 70s recognised and celebrated the ingenuity and responsiveness of owner-built settlements.

While Fiori believes strongly in the importance of this movement, he argues that the total exclusion of a spatial understanding has severely limited the scope and success of slum upgrading projects to date. He argues that spatial analysis and tactics of upgrading be intergrated with social and political techniques to achieve a holistic result. He believes his balance has been exemplified by the Favela Bairro project undertaken by the municipal government of Rio de Janeiro since 1994.

Fiori describes the limitations of small scale, specific interventions as being too insular and ingnoring the crucial relationship of the settlement with the city as a whole. He believes that as important as making the city accessible to the residents of the slum is making the slum accessible to the rest of the city.

rotterdam

From the 24th to the 26th of May I attended the 3rd International Architecture Biennale Rotterdam. The central exhibition and conference, Visionary Power: Producing the Contemporary City. The IABR invited 5 teams of theorists and practitioners to interrogate the powers behind the production of cities and the role which can be played by architects. The 5 forces chosen for investigation were Representation (Capital Cities), Capital (Corporate Cities), Tourism (Spectacle Cities), Migration (Informal Cities) and Fear (Hidden Cities).

Underlying the whole project was a recognition of the imminent ‘Urban Majority’ and the urgent need for architects to once again engage critically with the production of space and the needs of society.

While this resulted in some tired calls for a return to grand visions and monumentality (by Elia Zhengalis and others) a progressive movement of agile, critical and subversive practices revealed some genuine developments in the field. Teddy Cruz argued strongly for a practice of urban activism, of architects joining with engaged communities to rethink and rework the city and its institutions. Lieven De Cauter and Michiel Dehaene drew links between refugee internment camps, shanty towns and gated villages to reveal the underbelly of architectural practice based on fear and resulting in a global polarity of camp vs refuge, of total exclusion vs total sterility . Mayor Edi Rama of Tirana showed the diversity of urban and social situations, and the political and spatial tactics needed in his projects such as the mass demolision of kiosks and the painting of stalinist housing blocks pink to reconnect the city to its inhabitants after a decade of ‘revenge against public space’.

A street in the Albanian capital of Tirana, the gaudy paint job sparked national debate, leading the people to re-engage with their public space and eventually a national referendum on colour choice.