rfuller, for clarity, I'm staying that NU is about identity politics projected through form (I take Kunstler and Duany at their word). If that it is the case, then NU repudiates universality and consensus...
Well, is it really NU that is about identity politics, or Kunstler and Duany?
I had to write a very lengthy pro-NU paper this summer, and I had a very similar mindset when I began my research. But the further I got into it, the more I began to see that many of the problems are with the messenger and not the message.
I like NU at its core. I like the ideas and tenets. I just don't think they've been implemented very well so far. I'm also afraid it will never work out in the end (much like modernism).
This paragraph from the CNU runs pretty contrary to any ideas of division or identity politics:
We stand for the restoration of existing urban centers and towns within coherent metropolitan regions, the reconfiguration of sprawling suburbs into communities of real neighborhoods and diverse districts, the conservation of natural environments, and the preservation of our built legacy.
I think that guys like Kunstler are really destroying any perception of legitimacy that the architecture community might have ever had. Kunstler and Duany are spreading the message, but twisting it and imposing their own sick views into the message. Its unfortunate because I think at the core (what Vado posted earlier) there are hardly any of us who would disagree with what the CNU stands for.
As a side note, I watched Kunstler's TED.com talk the other night. It was pretty entertaining. He made some pretty decent points, but over-all he is still a complete nutjob. Its definitely worth the 20 minutes it takes to watch it. I'd say it was possibly better than Starck's (sadly).
kunstler's kind of from left field, but it's hard to extract duany from cnu thinking. they're sort of joined at the hip.
as fidler commented above, one big issue with 'new urbanism' is that it's not urban. it's a throwback to old urban forms but with all of the real urban evolution - complete with its messiness and missteps - edited out. so, whether it's traditional houses or modern, you get a squeaky clean faux urbanism.
eventually, of course, after a few more market downturns and rock-bottom prices in these 'new urban' communities, maybe some of them will become more urbanistically mature. i'll give ours (norton commons in louisville) 20 yrs and it might start to look less like a stageset and more like a real place.
See, this is what happens when NU ideas and projects are broken down, people start saying, 'oh, that thing you hate, that's not real NU! Real NU is about this and this, and this!'
thazz the trick if you are gonna build a new community you go in and pour the foundations and build the roads and then plant the trees. come back in 20 years and put up the houses.
but you also have to consider that many people don't work in a downtown but in those ring around the city suburbs with the office parks. so if they actually did live say downtown like i do, they would just have to reverse commute anyway. the problem is that people go to work. stay home people!
I grew up off of the dreaded I-270 and I still dread it..... and from what I've seen of the Kentlands, it is COMPLETELY just another chunk of the massive suburb
Did anyone else look at that picture of Ave Maria above and think that if you took away the parking lots and put up more houses instead, you'd have the basic layout of many old European towns?
Also I'm with lb.....so much parking, it's absurd.
FRO - I'm guessing that the I-270 corridor was much different when you were growing up.
Actually, my class in grad school took a trip from Alexandria to the Kentlands. It was a rainy day, and I got stuck on the beltway/270 for what seemed like hours. By the time I made it to the Kentlands, not only was it dark, but my class had already taken the tour of the DPZ office and the community - they were no where to be found! I hate you, Kentlands!
I had the same impression of Pinehills in Mass, DCA. What's the point of building a pedestrian friendly new urbanist community a jillion miles from employment centers, when all the residents simply have to leave their 'lil neocon family-friendly paradise every morning, get on the highway and sit in traffic for 2 hours?
architectural flatulence and facebook
rfuller, for clarity, I'm staying that NU is about identity politics projected through form (I take Kunstler and Duany at their word). If that it is the case, then NU repudiates universality and consensus...
Well, is it really NU that is about identity politics, or Kunstler and Duany?
I had to write a very lengthy pro-NU paper this summer, and I had a very similar mindset when I began my research. But the further I got into it, the more I began to see that many of the problems are with the messenger and not the message.
I like NU at its core. I like the ideas and tenets. I just don't think they've been implemented very well so far. I'm also afraid it will never work out in the end (much like modernism).
This paragraph from the CNU runs pretty contrary to any ideas of division or identity politics:
We stand for the restoration of existing urban centers and towns within coherent metropolitan regions, the reconfiguration of sprawling suburbs into communities of real neighborhoods and diverse districts, the conservation of natural environments, and the preservation of our built legacy.
I think that guys like Kunstler are really destroying any perception of legitimacy that the architecture community might have ever had. Kunstler and Duany are spreading the message, but twisting it and imposing their own sick views into the message. Its unfortunate because I think at the core (what Vado posted earlier) there are hardly any of us who would disagree with what the CNU stands for.
As a side note, I watched Kunstler's TED.com talk the other night. It was pretty entertaining. He made some pretty decent points, but over-all he is still a complete nutjob. Its definitely worth the 20 minutes it takes to watch it. I'd say it was possibly better than Starck's (sadly).
kunstler's kind of from left field, but it's hard to extract duany from cnu thinking. they're sort of joined at the hip.
as fidler commented above, one big issue with 'new urbanism' is that it's not urban. it's a throwback to old urban forms but with all of the real urban evolution - complete with its messiness and missteps - edited out. so, whether it's traditional houses or modern, you get a squeaky clean faux urbanism.
eventually, of course, after a few more market downturns and rock-bottom prices in these 'new urban' communities, maybe some of them will become more urbanistically mature. i'll give ours (norton commons in louisville) 20 yrs and it might start to look less like a stageset and more like a real place.
See, this is what happens when NU ideas and projects are broken down, people start saying, 'oh, that thing you hate, that's not real NU! Real NU is about this and this, and this!'
thazz the trick if you are gonna build a new community you go in and pour the foundations and build the roads and then plant the trees. come back in 20 years and put up the houses.
but you also have to consider that many people don't work in a downtown but in those ring around the city suburbs with the office parks. so if they actually did live say downtown like i do, they would just have to reverse commute anyway. the problem is that people go to work. stay home people!
i like the way you're going with this vado. lets call it 'new commutism'.
i could be at home right now doing this.
DCA- hahaha "the dreaded I-270"
I grew up off of the dreaded I-270 and I still dread it..... and from what I've seen of the Kentlands, it is COMPLETELY just another chunk of the massive suburb
Did anyone else look at that picture of Ave Maria above and think that if you took away the parking lots and put up more houses instead, you'd have the basic layout of many old European towns?
Also I'm with lb.....so much parking, it's absurd.
FRO - I'm guessing that the I-270 corridor was much different when you were growing up.
Actually, my class in grad school took a trip from Alexandria to the Kentlands. It was a rainy day, and I got stuck on the beltway/270 for what seemed like hours. By the time I made it to the Kentlands, not only was it dark, but my class had already taken the tour of the DPZ office and the community - they were no where to be found! I hate you, Kentlands!
I had the same impression of Pinehills in Mass, DCA. What's the point of building a pedestrian friendly new urbanist community a jillion miles from employment centers, when all the residents simply have to leave their 'lil neocon family-friendly paradise every morning, get on the highway and sit in traffic for 2 hours?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.