Gabby Henrie Ben Small Utopian Urbanism in the Anthropocene

Our session will focus on the history of urban utopianism as well as current utopian endeavors—dissecting the ways in which different epistemic communities have sought to build a better future in the city. 

Utopianism, particularly as it is embodied in the modernist urbanism of Le Corbusier, Bel Geddes, and City Beautiful planners, has come under heavy intellectual fire in recent decades. Critics rightfully argue that these spatially-fixed utopias impose an oppressive authoritarianism, as they superimpose technocratic values upon a mosaic of varying concerns, struggles and interests within the city. In response to some of the more devastating social impacts of modernist city planning (e.g, slum clearance, segregation, white flight), post-modern urbanism brought a call for more inclusive, participatory planning efforts based on the local dynamics of particular places, cultures and histories. 

However, some thinkers argue that the abandonment of utopianism for a “new realism” in the urban realm signals a decreased ability to look beyond what is and envision a better future that tackles urban issues at their root (Harvey 2000; Pinder 2002). Faced with a sense that “there is no alternative” to the modern urban paradigm, personal insulation and escape from urban ills become more appropriate goals than radical social change—giving way to the rise of fortress architecture, exburban enclaves, and the privatization of public space seen at the end of the 20th century. 

How can we reconcile these tensions to create a utopian urbanism that maintains both optimism and substantive criticism? That is fundamentally forward thinking while remaining grounded in past and present dynamics? In this session, we hope to address these questions by more fully tracing the shifting meanings of utopia and the subsequent changes in the urban built environment. In doing so, we hope to develop a framework in which current utopian projects (particularly those related to the slippery goal of sustainability, such as Masdar City, Konzo Techno City, and arguably Portland, OR) can be meaningfully discussed and understood. 

Utopian Urbanism in the Anthropocene Presentation

Focus Questions

  1. How has 20th century urbanism contributed to the establishment of the anthropocene?
  2. Historically, what have been the causes and consequences of utopian approaches to urban planning? Who has had the power to define these utopias, and who were the intended beneficiaries? 
  3. How and why have attitudes toward urban utopianism shifted over time? To what effect? 

  4. What are the current utopian trends in urban planning and architecture, and how should we approach them?

Panelists

  • Thad Miller: Assistant Professor of Urban Studies and Planning Fellow, Institute for Sustainable Solutions, Portland State University.

Dr. Miller is interested in how we, the anthropos, organize policies, technologies and institutions to advance visions of sustainability. In his research, Dr. Miller collaborates with students, community partners, and interdisciplinary researchers to explore how different communities define sustainability, articulate their vision for the future, and implement policies and strategies to achieve that vision.

  • Yonn Dierwechter: Associate Professor of Urban Studies, University of Washington at Tacoma 

Professor Dierwechter completed his PhD at the London School of Economics. His research interests focus on urban and political geography, especially critical geographies of comparative regional planning practices. Dr. Dierwechter has published on topics covering state/space relationships and the theoretical and policy links between urban growth management, sustainability and political regionalism. He has expertise in South Africa, the USA and Europe.

  • Ben Small & Gabby Henrie

Ben and Gabby are both rising Senior Environmental Studies majors at Lewis & Clark College. Ben’s academic interests include architectonic responses to de-industrialization; utopianism in the context of the built environment and bioregionalism; and impermanence and spatial flexibility in sculptural forms. Gabby’s interests lie somewhere at the confluence of urban studies, political economy and geography. She’s particularly interested in how political and economic ideologies become incarnate in the built environment, and to what effect on the communities that live there. 

 

Annotated Bibliography

  • Campbell, Scott. 1996. “Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities?: Urban Planning and the Contradictions of Sustainable Development.” Journal of the American Planning Association 62, no. 3: 296–312. doi:10.1080/01944369608975696. 

This article explores the “planner’s triangle” formed by the three guiding principles of urban planning; “economy, environmental protection, and social equity.” At the heart of this triangle, is true “sustainability.” But the author complicates current notions of sustainability and calls upon planners to redefine what we mean when we say we want to build “sustainable cities.” Campbell says the notion of sustainability should not be confined to a dichotomy of good/bad, sustainable/unsustainable. Campbell argues that the idea of sustainability should be broadened, and planners shouldn’t rush to condemn “American society as corrupt” for not meeting sustainability goals. This article is relevant to our session because the author addresses current planning practices that will eventually shape the very environments humans build for themselves America and challenges driving principles of modern development such as “sustainability.”

  • Cugurullo, Federico. 2013. “How to Build a Sandcastle: An Analysis of the Genesis and Development of Masdar City.” Journal of Urban Technology 20, no. 1: 23–37. doi:10.1080/10630732.2012.735105.

Using Masdar City as a case study, this article explores the recent phenomena of national governments approving the construction of new master-planned “eco-cities.” This is an important phenomena to understand as the majority of the world’s population moves to cities. The article dives further into the complexities of the eco-city phenomenon through critiquing how sustainability ideology is understood and applied in planning contexts. This article is relevant to our session as it situates more abstract notions of “sustainability” and utopian urban planning into a development happening today, which if built will almost certainly become a monument of 21st century notions of sustainability. 

  • Forsyth, Ann, and Katherine Crewe. 2009. “A Typology of Comprehensive Designed Communities Since the Second World War.” Landscape Journal 28, no. 1: 56–78.

This paper classifies comprehensively designed cities and neighborhoods since the second world war. These places are rare, but exemplify dominant trends in the intellectual field of urban development. This article is important to our session because it highlights designed communities that have popped into existence in the last 60 years. This article sets a historical foundation to our session and provides a framework for analyzing/interpreting designed communities.

  • Harvey, D. 2000. Spaces of Hope. Berkeley: University of California Press. 

In Spaces of Hope, Harvey undertakes an analysis of various utopian projects which have sought to address the uneven geographic development of late-capitalism, as well as the rejection of utopian thought in the late 20th century. Perhaps this work’s most valuable contribution to our session lies in its differentiation between spatial utopias, which focus mainly on the construction of a perfected built environment, and temporal utopias based on ideal social structures and movements. Harvey maintains that each of these approaches to utopian thought is incomplete without the other, and that we need to develop a new “dialectical utopianism” which takes into account both spatial and socio-historical dynamics. Interestingly, he suggests neoliberalism as a dialectial utopian project that has experienced some degree of success.

  • Hedrén, Johan, and Björn-Ola Linnér. 2009. “Utopian Thought and the Politics of Sustainable Development.” Futures 41, no. 4: 210–219. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2008.09.004.

This article contends that utopian thought is essential for the development of sustainable global order. The article focuses mainly on politics and argues that utopian notions of sustainable development must shift from codified Western conventions to more fluid and dynamic approaches. Using this new approach “utopian thought can provide transformative power” so that politics and policies may meet contemporary challenges. This article is relevant to our session because it looks at the current state of policies and presents an argument for utopian policy decisions which would then shape and be reflected in the built environment.

  • Pinder, D. 2002. “In defence of utopian urbanism: imagining cities after the ‘end of utopia.’” Human Geography 84, no. 3-4: 229–241. doi:10.1111/j.0435-3684.2002.00126.x

This article reviews much of the literature surrounding urban utopianism and the “death” of utopian thought in the late 20th century. Pinder discusses the crisis of modernist urbanism and the post-1989 sentiment that “there is no alternative” to the current paradigm, analyzing the repercussions these ideas have had in urbanist thought. His conclusion, in which he details the disruptive potential of utopian thought may prove a valuable perspective in our session.  

  • Steffen, Will, Jacques Grinevald, Paul Crutzen, and John McNeill. 2011. “The Anthropocene: Conceptual and Historical Perspectives.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 369, no. 1938: 842–867.

This is a seminal piece of literature that makes a case for recognition of the geological epoch known as the “Anthropocene.” This article claims that industrial development in the 1800s marks the logical beginning of the Anthropocene. The authors then track the development of the epoch throughout recent history and demonstrate how global anthropogenic changes to the entire earth are irrevocably locked in geological history. This article is relevant to our session as it contextualizes the Anthropocene and provides a solid intellectual foundation upon which to discuss the development of the built environment in the context of our current geological epoch.