random thoughts on architecture history theory and criticism

urbanisms: a guide

image via the atlantic

new urbanism. pitch: it’s not new. cons: nobody likes duany, particularly after those weird comments about asia.

everyday urbanism. pitch: it’s what you see every day. cons: name not sexy enough, came out in middle of pomo recap, everyone forgot about it.

landscape urbanism. pitch: you guys, landscape architects are urban too. cons: waldheim also not that charismatic.

ecological urbanism pitch: must brand + must sell books. and it’s ecological, baby. cons: how many urbanisms can one school hold?

tactical urbanism. pitch: it’s everyday urbanism with a sexier name and diy attitude! cons: the hipster urbanism, easily appropriated. think street vendors turned into cupcake carts, and occupy actions turned into street yoga.

post-ideological urbanism. pitch: honestly i don’t get it. looks like made-up brand for journal. cons: go read althusser.

planetary urbanism. pitch: it’s at the scale of the planet!! cons: but looking at lefebvre? how does that work? go take the class i guess. 

kickstarter urbanism. pitch: it’s crowdsourced project-ing. cons: popularity-based.

i keed because i love (only some of you guys, obviously). which ones am i missing?


Filed under: ., cities,

i tweet here

i flickr here