These two opposed narratives share their skepticism against the transformative possibilities of architecture in its engagement with both the discursive and the physical space of the contemporary commons. It could either detach itself from reality in search of “the inherent nature of the architectural object” (Peter Eisenman), giving up, as Tafuri put it, “every dream of social function, every utopian residue”. Or if it chose to engage with the real world-as suggested by figures like Robert Venturi, Denise Scott Brown, or Rem Koolhaas-, it had to remain uncritically submissive, seizing the opportunities that opened within capitalist societies, but “deferring the judgment” over their social dysfunction. The discipline that emerged from these ruins was forced into two distinct positions that denied architecture’s ability to be a transformative force in society. It then sees them propelled into global significance during the postwar to slowly fall into decadence until its collapse in the late 1970s with the emergence of postmodernism. The most accepted narrative about modern architecture’s dreams of social transformation imagines them born out of the ideals of 19th-century social experiments and the boldness of early twentieth-century avant-garde. See: Mary Louise Pratt, “Arts of the Contact Zone,” Profession (1991): 33-40 Mary Louise Pratt, Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation (Routledge, 2007) Joseph Harris, “Negotiating the Contact Zone”, Journal of Basic Writing (1995): 27-42 Martin Radermacher, Devotional Fitness: An Analysis of Contemporary Christian Dieting and Fitness Programs. The term is used here to describe the virtual space of cultural exchange that manifests through urban image.
The term, however, has been used outside of its original spatial concept to describe connections between identity groups that are interacting outside a specific space. Mary Louise Pratt used the term “contact zones” to describe those spaces where “cultures, meet, clash and grapple with each other, often in contexts of highly asymmetrical relations of power. Investigating how Sorkin’s localized urban solutions virtually intervene with the ruthless, speedy urbanization process valorized by the party-state, this research uncovers and explicates the potential of coincidental affinities between foreign urban ideals and local cultural conventions, with Sorkin’s work in China as an inspirational case that achieves both local and universal applicability in global urban studies. Tracing clues of indigenous spatial forms that are adopted, transformed, and re-applied in Sorkin’s urban designs for China, I particularly investigate how traditional ways of life and self-emergent urban forms in China, including danwei (work-unit), hutong, and lilong, coincidentally run parallel to Sorkin’s urban ideals for locality, diversity, sustainability, and spatial justice.
I then discuss the “transitional” Chinese cities, both driven by global capital and indigenous socio-cultural forces, as a test field for Sorkin to experiment his urban ideals. I first introduce Sorkin’s radically socialist, left-winged urban theories which claimed “the end(s) of urban design” and critiqued the existing urban spaces dominated by global capital and consumerism. This study sees unbuilt proposal images beyond “failed” projects, and argues for the significance of these images as intermediaries between theory and reality in Sorkin’s genre for their capability of visually incorporating site-specific specificities. Although most of them remain on paper, these urban images function as intermediaries between theory and reality in their capability of visually incorporating unique local conditions with broad social arguments. This research frames foreign urban design projects as a virtual contact zone, where designers/theorists’ own background and ideals engage with the local socio-cultural context through hypothetical images that envision ideal conditions, and thus catalyze new urban solutions with both universality and situatedness. Since 2010, more than half of the Michael Sorkin Studio’s projects are based in China, including new city planning, river basin planning, infrastructure management, and massive residential complex designs. This research looks into Michael Sorkin’s urban images not only as vehicles of his universal guidelines for urban designs, but more critically as localized and situated instruments for social and environmental justice that manifest a coincidental parallel between China’s indigenous cultural psyche and Sorkin’s urban ideals.
0 kommentar(er)
