Thesis Paper

This paper looks at architecture’s influential role on civilization as the icon of humanity, the evolution of motives that inspired us to create architecture, and presents a new metric for architectural inspiration.

Arguments on Motive and the Transition of Reason:

“In my view, it is the task of architecture to make visible how the world touches us. Juhani Pallasmaa”i

Looking back in time we can see through our architecture the world touched us at different points in history. We have always built to fulfill a physical or spiritual need. Though our manifestation of motivation has matured, the underlying motive that ignites our instinctual need to create remains the same. When man constructed shelter for the first time, he created a contradiction of space. Before that, there was only nature, wild and unpredictable. Man-made shelter organized space for the utility of man and for this reason, architecture grew to embody our human identity.

The most extraordinary thing about the prehistoric architectural scene is how quickly it rose above the utilitarian level- how readily human imagination and effort were channeled into monumental architecture, whose construction absorbed enormous energies at a time when the survival on a day-to-day basis was so arduous and uncertain.

The most impressive Neolithic architecture was not built for practical uses. Rather it served- as architecture often would throughout history- less easily definable emotional and spiritual needs, and above all, the realm of symbolism, ritual, and magic. Paradoxically, Neolithic people greatest rational efforts were directed at fulfilling the most irrational drives. That these drives were so powerful is easy enough to understand. Although a degree of security had been achieved in the face of nature, the world remained fearsome and perplexing, especially to a humanity with our same basic needs, feelings and powers of imagination, but dauntingly little knowledge. The nights were haunted

by the ominous world of dreams, so easily confused with reality, blurring into the impenetrable mysteries of death and the afterworld. Capricious, awesome forces of nature alternating caressed and assaulted the fragile Neolithic communities, and nourished and destroyed their crops. In the heavens, the sun was daily reborn and extinguished, while the moon waxed and waned in monthly cycles. Less mysterious only than the yearly cycle of the seasons in which all of nature seemed to pass through a process of rebirth, growth, fruition, and death. (Architecture, 57)ii

The history of architecture chronicles the transition of these motives, which respond to our knowledge of the physical environment. This section contrasts motives for creating architecture with our relative perception of the condition of our environment in history.

Architecture traces the human condition through history, and will show that we have invested our greatest efforts to escape the very thing we are seeking.

Early man lived in constant fear of nature. The condition of his environment was a constant fight for survival and intellect was mans greatest instinct for survival. When primitive man’s intellect allowed him to realize the value of tools, he assigned a sacred importance to the mundane material world that transcended him. Prehistoric man chipped an edge into a stone and upon evaluation; he saw the personal value he had created. He carried it with him from then on; he saw it as a part of himself. Humanity has increasingly worshiped and obsessed over the material world ever since. We live and die for it, fight wars for it, and attach our human emotions to it. Over time, as our knowledge of the world expanded, so did our means of manipulating it.

Clubs and rocks evolved into spears and arrows and were all incredible devices for manipulation. Then there was and shelter, which surpassed all tools in significance by completely dominating space and nature. Shelter was a recent development of humanity; built out of necessity for protection from nature, it also offered a perception of security

that freed the mind and allowed time to pursue knowledge. When the concept of a permanent residence was introduced, the delineation between the ‘sacred’ space organized by man, and the dangerous ‘profane’ space defined nature. A threshold marked the boundary between the two and defined the extent of man’s domination over his environment. The ability to shut out the elements of nature empowered man; it is no wonder that man became so quickly attached to his built environment.

Since the essence of architecture is the enclosure of space in space (e.g., the space within a building or structure and it relationship not only to the immediate exterior surroundings, but to the ethereal space of the cosmos), a demarcation between that which is sacred and that which is profane is fundamental. There must be some point of reference. The connections of these spatial ideas to the sacred and the profane are seen to be important through the history of architecture, from the first primitive hut to the modernism of the twentieth century (Rykwert 1997; Ashraf 2002).iii

The value of land was a new concept born out of the implementation of agriculture. Proximity to resources, and the variable qualities of the land to provide nourishment and protection to permanent residents, redefined our perception of the world. Agriculture laid the foundation for human civilization, allowing for few to feed many and freeing the minds of the many to search for new grand purpose in life besides collecting food. That pursuit possibly began with some of the earliest architecture to emerge, tombs.

Motive 1: Housing the dead and the fear of being forgotten.

The sense of loss that prehistoric man must have felt in the death of one of his comrades is a pain few today could possibly relate to. In a small tribe, whose very existence on a daily basis hinged on the cooperation between all of the members, any loss would have carried overwhelming weight. After a death, the tribe was physically weakened, and if a man was killed prematurely, as most probably were, the many years

that had been invested in raising and nurturing the deceased were now a lost investment. Beyond these facets were the deeply disturbing yet imperceptible questions left to the tribe for indefinite contemplation; the body of the dead that was so recently full of energy and personality now showed no regard for the world. If in every aspect the body seemed intact, what then was missing? And where did it go? The body had to be dealt with in order to prevent scavengers from defiling it and before the decay could spread disease. “Ancient burial sites and remnants of ancient artifacts show that even the earliest known humans buried their dead with ceremony.”iv Although the act was ultimately a necessary act for the living, the ritual grew to embody a responsibility to the dead. The fear of death was very possibly the first emotion that inspired monumental architecture. Man’s motive for architecture was to house and worship the dead.

Ancient Egypt (3150B.C. to 31B.C.) boasts the distinction of having produced the first great-recorded civilization, along with Minoans. Egypt more than any other culture, was obsessed with the cult of the dead.

As a monumental style its architecture has never surpassed... in the late fourth millennium there emerged a stable political entity and a rich culture whose essential principles and style of life and art would remain intact during some 3,000 years... At the core of ancient Egypt was the pharaonic monarchy, whose rulers believed themselves incarnations of divinities, and were worshiped in life and even in death. Successive generations of pharaonic family rule defined Egyptian history... It was the visual rather than the material character of the valley that mattered. It provided sites that to the Egyptian architects- driven by limitless building ambitions of monarchy and priesthood- posed a compelling challenge: to create an architecture that would match the scale of the river, mountains, and desert. (Architecture, 62)v

The Great Pyramids truly are one of the wonders of the world, but history shows, they were built in vain. The physical reality of those structures is unmatched, but what they represent to us today is an ignorant and selfish expenditure of influence that was carried

out through colossal efforts of enslaved laborers. Still, they were built, and stand as an icon of humanity (and worshiping the dead).

Motive 2: Housing the gods and the fear of the unknown.

The next great motive for architecture was to house the gods. Perhaps if we could please them they we would not make us suffer. The dead were dead, with or without their tombs, and men were concerned for their own souls. Religious practices are supposed to give meaning to the life’s experiences by offering peace of mind and a sense of spiritual security, providing answers to the unanswerable questions in life. Throughout history religious icons have resided in the center of the city web, in the heart of society. There has always been a spiritual need to seek meaning in life. Religion offered a path to follow for individual salvation.

The actions associated with religion were undistinguishable from other aspects of civilization before religion became a politically empowered. “The word ‘religion’ came about as Europe needed to define the various belief structures around the world and a translation did not even exist in most pre-Columbian, non-European languages.” vi The rituals that came to be defined as religious were simply a way of life.

Established religions often portray an image of perfection to aspire to, and followers attempt to attain eternal peace and happiness through devotion and faith, conversely, failure to adhere to the ultimate truths presented by religion meant death and eternal hellfire. Architecture served as man’s connection to the heavens through which followers demonstrated the magnificence and power of their divinity. The greatest efforts of man were focused on raising temples, cathedrals and mosques. The Ancient Egyptians

fall into this category as well, their pharos were also living gods on earth. In fact, the author could find no culture or civilization in history until very recently that has not held religious or spiritual reverence as a centerpiece of society. Man’s reason for life was to appease god.

During the decline of Roman influence, when the empire split in two, Constantine converted Rome to Christianity. He used religion to reunite the citizens with a common cause. Christianity offered social and moral values, and preached for peace through selflessness. But for all the good that Christianity brought, what was exchanged came at a heavy price. In his new capital of Constantinople, he took the icon that embodied the value and importance of the mutual effort of man, and placed God at the throne. The basilica, design to serve man became a venue for man to serve God. Magnificent architecture no longer symbolized the power of people as it did in Roman Antiquity.

At some point the motive of religion, defined by the religious authorities, departed serving the individual soul in exchange for power and control, they no longer offered the personal spiritual salvation that was the reason for religion’s conception in the first place. Established religions like Christianity gained great wealth and power through political and social influence. The Christians spread their image of ultimate truth across the globe, but at the same time separatist movements were rising against the authority of the church at the very doorsteps of the basilicas. They sought freedom from an oppressive regime that no longer fulfilled their individual spiritual needs. Separatist settlers came to the New World to regain a personal connection with god, a pursuit apparent in the founding documents of the United States of America illustrate the value the authors placed religion; but the wealthiest and most powerful nation in the world has never matched the

religious architecture of Europe. Much to the contrary, churches have found homes in strip malls, living rooms, and wherever individual spirituality can be pursued.

The aspiration for a perfect truth was abandoned when the scope of diversity in religion and life was realized. “With the Enlightenment religion lost its attachment to nationality, but rather than being a universal social attitude, it was now a personal feeling, or emotion.”vii Religion is an individual experience, which can be celebrated mutually, but is no longer a political ambition to spread universal truth. Life is too diverse to define perfection; relative truths have become accepted as the only ultimate truth.

St. Paul’s Cathedral, the Parthenon and the Mayan pyramids are all build of religious motives and devoted to a god. No longer are our great icons built out of fear or the unknown; the Bird’s Nest stadium built for the 2008 summer Olympics in China exemplifies our current motive.

Motive 3: Housing man’s ego and a stage for human expression.

The Ancient Greeks influence the world in a way few civilizations in a way that few civilizations can compare. Western philosophy was born in ancient Greece and Greek architecture embodied the philosophical nature of the people. The word philosophy is actually of Greek origin literally translated as “the love of wisdom.”viii This wisdom was best shared, in the eyes of the Greeks, in amphitheaters, and in public gathering spaces. The Agora was the center of social interaction in Greece. Temples were always present in the city-states, but the Greeks knew, the public and social atmospheres were the places where things were accomplished. The public plaza held an equally central location in the city as the temples to the gods. Rome followed in the

footsteps of Greece, barrowing from them aspects of culture, religion, technology, and architecture. The design of the built environment reflected social values, celebrating man and the accomplishments of men. The Golden Ages of the Greece and Rome have become the model and inspiration for modern western civilization. On Antiquity:

...[They] lived like gods without sorrow of heart, remote and free from toil and grief: miserable age rested not on them; but with legs and arms never failing they made merry with feasting beyond the reach of all devils. When they died, it was as though they were overcome with sleep, and they had all good things; for the fruitful earth unforced bare them fruit abundantly and without stint. They dwelt in ease and peace upon their lands with many good things, rich in flocks and loved by the blessed gods.ix

The agora inspired the Roman basilica, both celebrated man and supported the love for wisdom. The value of placing people as the central aspect of a civilization saw the rise of the two of the greatest civilizations the world has ever known.

The Condition of our Modern Environment

In modern times, we have exposed much of the physical and mental insecurity that plagued the mind of early man. Fear of the unknown has been supplanted by knowledge, and the devotion to god(s) has been refocused on the man and his accomplishments. The faith that fueled the construction of the great pyramids, and similar monolithic tombs of the past has been all but abandoned. Perhaps sometime soon the rituals based in faith will receive similar recognition to the tiny gravestones that help us to remember the dead; shrines to a dogma whose life has been spent.

Fallacious architecture flaunting the ego of man has become our greatest effort in architecture. The centers of our cities are stadiums, theaters, museums and libraries. Our greatest efforts in architecture are built to celebrate and display the magnificence of man.

The economy has taken center-stage, and at the cost of our architecture first, but potentially at the cost of our entire physical environment.

A new sense of awareness has grown in our society. The Information Age has given society the ability to share ideas so quickly and expansively that the geographic disposition of the world’s minds has been effectively eliminated, affording us unbelievably broad perspective to act upon in our lives. With a catalogue of humanity’s observations and documentation of the universe at our fingertips the condition of our environment has been redefined to a confused state of everywhere and nowhere. The Internet has replaced the plaza, the mall, and the park as the center of public interaction and commerce. Forums such as Google, Facebook, and YouTube are vast functioning gobal communities; Facebook in particular has just reached 500 million netizens, and would be the 3nd largest country in the world based on population. We cannot foresee the consequences of living our lives in the virtual world, but the first generation of children are growing up in a world with instant gratification for information whose experience of the world will be a very different reality from those who knew the world before the internet.

The Internet has redefined nearly every aspect of civilized human life by introducing globally diverse recourses and influences within local geographic populations, but it also threatens to distance humanity further from nature. The Internet is placeless, and although fast and efficient, the loss of physical human interaction alienates us, It limits our senses to that which can be seen on a screen or played over speakers. In the digital world there is no day or night, no weather or seasons, no smells. Individuality in online communities is diminished as well, confined to blurbs of text and pictures so

devoid of expression that they hardly classify as social at all. Tone-of-voice, posture, body language, and context all speak louder than words but are unrepresented in the digital world. The virtual reality that we have created is consuming our lives. Every day more of the world turns to a life online, promoting a further removal of nature from the built environment. Without the knowledge of how the condition of our digital environment will effect civilization in the physical world. We are flying blindly into the future with a limited knowledge while becoming increasingly deficient of ‘physical world experience’?

Our standard built environment consists of vinyl tile covering the floors and layers of paint covering walls and ceilings. We inhabit square boxes; our reality is our movements within and around square rooms in square houses, to office cubicles, with an occasional stop into a big box store. We work and play transfixed on our rectangular computer and television screens. The environment is sterile; nature has been removed and replaced by innovations of man; e.g. even in detriment to the environment, nature’s cleanup crew of ants has been replaced with ammonia and Clorox bleach. Surely, after millions of years of evolution, and tens of thousands of years of building; this is not our ultimate environment. We are so disconnected from nature that for many, the greatest influence may very well amount to as little as a desktop image of palm trees. Our population is exploding and we are taking over the planet like a wildfire. Our motive for building, as well as our icons of humanity should express our connection to and appreciation for nature. After thousands of years dedicating our efforts in unfounded dogmas it is time we base our actions upon something that is physical, and something that is alive.

Arguments For a New Motive: A celebrated respect for nature. These quotes best embody the understanding that should be underlying in our pursuit of architecture.

...All most lovely forms and thoughts are directly taken from natural objects; because I would fain be allowed to assume also the converse of this, namely, that forms which are not taken form natural objects must be ugly.

-John Ruskinx

The task of buildings is usually seen solely in terms of functional performance, physical comfort and aesthetic values. Yet, the role of architecture extends far beyond the material, physical and measurable conditions, and even aesthetic pleasure, into the mental and existential sphere of life. Buildings do not merely provide physical shelter and protection; they are also a mental mediation between the world and our consciousness; architectural structures essentially structure and articulate existential space. As the French philosopher Gaston Bachelard appropriately states: “[The house] is an instrument with which to confront the cosmos”.

In addition to housing our fragile bodies, architecture settles and inhabits our restless minds, memories and dreams. In short, architectural constructions organize and structure our experiences, beliefs and fantasies of the world; they project distinct frames of perception and experience, and provide specific horizons of understanding and meaning. In addition to articulating space, man- made structures also concretise the passage of time, they represent cultural hierarchies, and give a visible presence to human institutions. These are truly monumental tasks for architecture that are rarely understood as architecture is seen merely as utility or aestheticization.xi

By placing icons of nature as the centers of our cities, our homes and hopefully in the hearts of humanity maybe we can begin to offer something to the world rather than taking from it.

We are now at a crucial point in our history: faced with the opportunity to supplant our knowledge with our culture to promote the preservation and progression of humanity, or lose everything we have accomplished as we degrade our environment and

ourselves to the point of our own extinction. Our intellect that we deemed transcended has encouraged us to invest our efforts into countless applications though as we approach a complete independence from the natural word to our mechanical world we are beginning to understand that our definitions of profane and mundane are essentially important to our existence. Through our architecture we have the opportunity to implement cultural reverence in nature that becomes engrained as a condition of the environment of those to come.

During blackouts across the east coast of the United States in 2003, a grandmother emerged from her apartment and gazed up at the Milky Way for the first time in her life. She had never left the city, or even set foot off a man made or maintained surface. She had never climbed a mountain or walked through a cornfield. This is not what the Constitution of the United States intended as “the pursuit of happiness.” A lack of natural influence kept that woman from nature her whole life, she spent her existence instead, in the company of the television, consuming food from the shelves of the grocer and ditching the refuse in a seemingly bottomless steel can at the bottom of her apartment stairs.

The urban centers of the world today expected to hold 80% of a human population of 9 billion people by the year 2050. It would be tragedy for these people to live their lives devoid of a physical manifestation of nature at the center of their cities and at the hearth of their homes. They must not grow up without the influence of nature visible and revered. If they are unaware of their connection to nature, they will never take responsibility for it. The scope of our intellect has earned us a spot in the driver’s seat of the condition of our environment but we will all crash and burn if we don’t maintain our

connection to nature. Would it be too novel an idea to give a kid a strawberry plant instead of a toy car? Nature has been around for a couple billion years, and it has a model for the environment that transcends what man is currently capable of. If we find our influence in nature, the resulting experience of architecture created speaks not only for the utility of man, but also for the utility of nature.

Implementing, for example, a courtyard garden at the center of our dwellings would, from an economical stance, reduce the energy invested in growing the produce elsewhere and transporting it, but the quality of space that surrounds a garden carries an intangible appeal. The value of nature as the centerpiece of the home impresses a high cultural value constraint on the mundane world. If nothing else, the simple presence of growing things instills a subliminal connection between the dirt on the ground and the food on the shelves.

The model of nature’s structure and geometry is fractal, defined by equal and similarly complex geometry at many scales. From the smallest cell in the body to the complex biology of a human being, a strong congruency is present in the organization of structures that deliver the necessities of life and dispose of our waste. Fractal geometry, if applied to the model of our cities and our homes, can be scaled to suit the individual or the collective whole using the same geometry.

While businesses, dwellings and warehouses have grown vertically in the city, agriculture is the only aspect of our lives that has moved out. The increasing urban population of the world can take the concept of nature as the hearth, by designating vertical gardens as architectural centerpieces of the cityscape. The economical benefits of growing produce where it is consumed are apparent, and further ecological benefit

resides in the efficiency of hydroponic growing in water conservation and the absence of pesticides and fugicides released into the environment. Also present is the intangible benefit people will gain as a result of the physical presence nature working for humanity within the urban mesh of the city. If it is the task of architecture to make visible how the world touches us, it will be the task of the icons of nature to make visible how nature touches us for urban dwellers.

Like the Example of the Eiffel Tower, here, the statue of libery, and the icon of America is shrouded in nature.

The task of buildings is usually seen solely in terms of functional performance, physical comfort and aesthetic values. Yet, the role of architecture extends far beyond the material, physical and measurable

conditions, and even aesthetic pleasure, into the mental and existential sphere of life. Buildings do not merely provide physical shelter and protection; they are also a mental mediation between the world and our consciousness; architectural structures essentially structure and articulate existential space. As the French philosopher Gaston Bachelard appropriately states: “[The house] is an instrument with which to confront the cosmos”. In addition to housing our fragile bodies, architecture settles and inhabits our restless minds, memories and dreams. In short, architectural constructions organize and structure our experiences, beliefs and fantasies of the world; they project distinct frames of perception and experience, and provide specific horizons of understanding and meaning. In addition to articulating space, manmade structures also concretize the passage of time, they represent cultural hierarchies, and give a visible presence to human institutions. These are truly monumental tasks for architecture that are rarely understood as architecture is seen merely as utility or aestheticization. xi

By placing icons of nature as the centers of our cities, our homes and hopefully in the hearts of humanity maybe we can begin to offer something to the world rather than taking from it.

i Pollasmaa, Juhani (1), The Eyes of the Skin (46)

ii Trachtenberg, M., and Hyman, I. Architecture: From Prehistory to Postmodernity (57)

iii Smith, Jack. Ise as Icon; from Rykwert 1997; Ashraf 2002

iv Smith, Jack. Ise as Icon (17)

v Trachtenberg, M., and Hyman, I. Architecture: From Prehistory to Postmodernity (62)

vi Daniel Dubuisson. The Western Construction of Religion (90)

vii Fitzgerald 2007, (268)

viii Definition of Philosophy ix Hesiod, around the 8th century BC, in his compilation of the mythological tradition (the poem Works and

Days, ll. 109-126)

x Ruskin, John, The Seven Lamps of Architecture: The Lamp of Beauty (147) xi Pollasmaa, Juhani (2), from a lecture titled Sustainable School Buildings

A New Metric for Architecture

iconecology

i-con : noun
A person or thing regarded as a symbol of something.

e-col-o-gy: noun

1 the branch of biology that deals with the relations of organisms to one another and to their physical surroundings.
• (also human ecology) the study of the interaction of people with their environment.
2 (also Ecology) the political movement that seeks to protect the environment, esp. from pollution.


Throughout history civilizations have dovoted their efforts to many icons. The great icons of Egypt were built for the dead. The Great icons of the Greeks and the Romans were devoted to the gods. In modern times our great icons are devoted to man and has acheivements. Museums filled with our creativity, libraries filled with our knowledge, and stadiums filled with our egos. Throughout history humanity has defined itself increasingly further from nature. Not more that 12,000 years ago nature was all there was. It was not until the city, and agriculture, that any contrast ever existed of nature. Perhaps that contrast exists only in the eyes of humanity? Slowly, then more quickly, we drove out nature. In the city, everything grew up, literally; offices and buisinesses, parcking garages and warehouses all sprouted up like weeds and squeezed out every square inch of nature. Agriculture moves to the country and was defined as the contrast of the city. In reality, modern farmong is as mechanized and technologically dependant as wall street, Yet the concept of rural in the most common perception, sees farmlife and nature as one. It is our common misconception that wheat feilds and lush forests belong in the same image. Our farming practices are desroying nature at the same rate as the cities; they are one in the same and we call them civilization. A new dichotomy must emerge and it deserves all of the devotion that we have dedicated to our previous icons. As we begin to understand our connection to the world, and we begin to push the limits of the ecological stresses we are impressing on planet earth, the new icon that must emerge must be the icon of nature.

In Paris, France, the great icon of the magnificent city is the Eiffel Tower. Constructed in 1889, the tower is an iron latticework of industrial innovation. It is the most visited paid site in the world with milions of visitors ascending it each year. This new metric for architecture proposes that a icon such as the eiffel tower be converted into a green tower. The hearth of the city raised above all being that which provides the sustinance of the city. Nature Celebrated. This metric is to be implemented at manty scales, where nature resides as the hearth of the house as well, and we can only hope that such adoration and care be taken to heart by future generations whol will grow up in a world that values the only thing that really matters, our existence.


Strategies for metric:

-Implant ecological icons into the center of our cities, our homes, and our hearts.

We've Done This Already... Let's Do It Again!

The Architects Farm, by Meredith Tenhoor, briefly references the history of architecture in agriculture. As noted in the text, the engagement is largely undocumented. Architects have in fact toiled with the concept of implementing restructured agricultural practices to improve efficiency, quality, and the overall special quality of the urban environment for hundreds of years. Sustainability is synonymous with architecture today as we face population challenges, environmental concerns, and a looming energy crisis but the high tech vertical agricultural machine envisioned by today’s architects is just another iteration of an idea that has been visited over and over again. My impression is that we will continue to conceptualize and indefinitely redesign until we define humanities relationship to nature, or there is of course the potential that nature rejects human civilization… The self defeating attempt to define the urban and rural, and their relationship to each other will continue until we perceive them both as human civilization, contrasted only by nature. They were born together as explained in Jane Jacob’s, Economy of Cities, and they are growing less indistinguishable by our modern cultural perceptions. The machine dominates the rural environment and the virtual world has brought the modern world into the homes of the countryside. The so-called urban environment must begin to sustain itself as we expect a global population of 9 billion by 2050 of which 80% is projected to live in cities and ‘urban’ areas. Cities will have to grow food further blurring the rural/urban contrast. In the sixties and seventies, Greek architect Constantinos Doxiadus developed a plan to restructure the production of food between two “essential” distinctions: traditional farming and mechanized farming would feed the country. Tenhoor describes the flaw in his thinking simply, “Doxiadis didn’t understand that the two methods were irreconcilable [in function](178).” There is no delineation between rural and urban, together they are called human civilization; the contrast exists between civilization and nature. The consequences of failing to understand that relationship has been under consideration of architects too; “One thing is certain. Mechanism comes to a halt before living substance. A new outlook must prevail if nature is to be mastered rather than degraded (177).” -Siegfried Giedion, architectural historian. If by mastered, he means completely understood, I completely agree.

Rural America Through a Demographic Lens, by David Brown and William Kandel

Rural America: An image, a community, or just a number? Does it have anything to do with Agriculture, or, is the term simply ‘not urban?’ What does this classification really say about the people it attempts to define? ‘Rural America Through a Demographic Lens’ reads like a codebook for rurality. It recognizes social consistencies, outline’s public perceptions, and provides official definition(s) of the term. The original contrast of the dichotomy was based on, “somewhat abstract characteristics considered critical for making such distinctions, using terms such as social solidarity, rationality, and community connectedness.” Early concepts of rural areas were thought to be characterized by stable, integrated, and inflexible economic and social aspects. They were contrasted by “the socially fluid, impersonal, and compartmentalized social relations of urban areas.” That is a pretty vague definition to carry any weight as a description for anything, yet at the date of this publication 80% of America is called just that, Here is a good example from the book on the rural:

How is “rural” defined in U.S. federal statistics? Although different states may construct their own classifications, such as those used for categorizing school districts, highways, and counties, the production of a universal definition of rural is a national responsibility. This is because federal statistical analysis requires comparability across state lines, and universalistic standards are required for program administration and the geographic targeting of federal assistance. Two official definitions predominate currently. The first consists of all nonmetropolitan counties as specified by the Office of Management and Budget (2000). The second consists of rural areas, or the residual territory that follows from the Census Bureau’s delineation of urban areas (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2002). Both terms are defined as residual counties or territory left behind after metropolitan counties or urban areas have been defined according to minimum population and geographic thresholds.

So… it really is the, ‘not city part’ of the country.

We wish to emphasize to the reader that throughout this volume, the authors frequently use the terms “nonmetro” or “nonmetropolitan” and “rural” interchangeably.3 However, unless otherwise specified, use of the term “rural” in this volume always refers to OMB-defined nonmetropolitan counties and not to Census-defined rural areas. We apply this convention so that we may have some flexibility with the language.

“The urban/nonmetro dichotomy?” What a joke. There is no urban or rural, no dichotomy; they are the same thing and we call it civilization. There isn’t any philosophical, political, or cultural congruencies among the places classified as rural. The terms are used for land classification by the census bureau. They are otherwise arbitrary classifications.

Stinkin' Linkages

Understanding the Urban-Rural Interface, by Kenneth Lynch, outlines the linkages and flows between the urban and the rural. Outlined are the effects of a bias for one or the other; the ultimate goal always aimed towards economic growth and development. Especially in developing countries, the gap seems to grow the largest. The introduction to this book defines its purpose to promote, “reuniting the urban and the rural areas in the study of development across the world (intro, first sentence).” After reading the article, I would like to encourage reuniting the two in a physical sense rather than just for study purposes. The truth that is emerging about the urban-rural relationship is that; it does not exist except on paper. Much like the democratic and republican parties in politics, they define the left and right sides of a scale yet most people place themselves right in the middle. China is used as an example of how developing countries use the loose classification to extort the agricultural communities. They taxed them in produce (30%!) to gain capital, which they invested in the cities and finance heavy industry, while at the same time confining the so-called rural community to the fields. Basically, an imaginary line was drawn across the land that grouped people into one of two classifications; people on the side called rural received heavy taxes and house arrest. They were stripped of their rights (relative to urban inhabitants) and enslaved by their own government to act as pawns for the industrial development of the country¬. The Urban-Rural relationship is a manufactured method of discrimination and a tool of the government for exploitation.

Moving On Then...

Moving Beyond the Urban-Rural Dichotomy, by Tony Champion and Graeme Hugo, addresses the changing state of our perception and interaction with the world. The introduction reads:

“There is an increasing appreciation in the social senses that context is important in understanding social, economic, cultural, political, and demographic processes. An important element in context is the type of place in which people live and work (intro 1).”

The authors are talking about the existential qualities of our individual environments and how they influence our perceptions and ultimately our actions. Context is important to social sciences because it defines the parameters that have influence in any space. Our personal environments have ultimate influence over our lives. Finnish architect, Johaani Pallasmaa, describes the role of architecture in defining our reality.

The task of buildings is usually seen solely in terms of functional performance, physical comfort and aesthetic values. Yet, the role of architecture extends far beyond the material, physical and measurable conditions, and even aesthetic pleasure, into the mental and existential sphere of life. Buildings do not merely provide physical shelter and protection; they are also a mental mediation between the world and our consciousness; architectural structures essentially structure and articulate existential space. As the French philosopher Gaston Bachelard appropriately states: “[The house] is an instrument with which to confront the cosmos”. -Juhani Pallasmaa, Architect, Professor (Helsinki)

Regional and geographical contexts provide various parameters by which to design, but the context that architecture creates, that experience can be orchestrated to express anything. That has been the power of architecture through the ages. A new environment has been created though, and it threatens to undermine what little connection we still feel with nature.

It began with the Industrial Revolution. Mass production of goods began to remove the unique aspects that give our live contrast to each other. Then mass implementation of ideas, e.g. the assembly line which further blurred our individual experiences. Mass Production of cars gave everyone the same transportation environment, sub developments offered identical houses to live identical lives in. With the rise of the digital age came the Internet; the ultimate tool in streamlining the individual experiences in life to a collective life experience. We see the same exact images, hear the same sounds and songs, we view the same exact videos on near identical screens while we drink identical cups of coffee and munch on the same McDonald’s cheeseburgers. Yes, we have already moved past the urban-rural dichotomy…

The environmental quality (or lack thereof) of the internet is placeless. There is no context; no day or night, wind or weather, seasons, smells, textures. If context is important, what will be the consequences of raising the next generation in a world without it?

Friedrich Engels: The Great Towns

In an except from, The Great Towns, Friedrich Engels expresses his insights about the physical separation of classes in the city. Using Manchester as an example, Engels rips into the aristocracy. He raises the point that members of the of the upper class, who traditionally live in the country and commute into town, "take the shortest roads through the middle of all the laboring districts to their places of business without ever seeing that they are in the midst of the grim and misery that lurks to the right and left." The highways are gilded passageways, like the blinders fitted on racehorses shielding the wealthy from any sense of moral obligation. Further, the businesses and storefronts lining the financial and business districts serve a similar unspoken purpose of, "sufficing to conceal from the eyes of the wealthy men and women of strong stomachs and weak nerves the misery and grime which form the compliment of their wealth." Engels uses no restraint in his use of words like grime, filth, foul, slime, and offal, to describe his experience of what lay behind the buffer of storefronts that conceal the slums that exist in such close proximity for the purpose of serving the wealthy. Engels accuses the aristocracy of maintaining an, 'out of sight, out of mind,' mentality. When the filth and decay of the working-class quarter is exposed, it is quickly concealed under the "cloak of charity." The state of the slums is described as, "impossible for a human being in any degree civilized to live in," the environments is deemed, "injurious to health."  Critisism falls on the aristocracy, for their 'inhumane' neglect of the working class that affords them a padded life; that they are blissfully unaware of the atrocity that exists conveniently out of sight. The excerpt ends abruptly with a lengthy and unsavory description of the conditions of the slums, which left me with the perception, "Okay, so... Manchester sucks? Or at least it did at the time of this publication (over one hundred years ago), so what." The same story is said to exist in similar fashion around the world. I could not help but question whether it was the aristocracy that concealed the poor, or whether the poor too, wished to separate themselves from the aristocracy. Exposure to the wealthy might be degrading and depressing. Another statement I question is Engel's definition of the wealthy as "the happier class." Happiness is not defined by money or social class. Social boundaries of class are not defined by happiness and in fact, I am not opposed to a level of separation between the classes; they function differently and have unique standards of success and failure based on culturally deriven value constraints. I view their separation in the same respect as the segregation of ethnic communities for cultural reasons. The people who live in ethnically defined neiborhoods tend to do so because they feel cultural connection to the community. The main issue that this paper impressed on me is that such a terrible environments exist in the presence of such wealth. It is not in human nature to consciously promote baseless suffering of others by doing nothing. What concerns me is the measures taken by the wealthy, outlined in the excerpt, to conceal the filth thus allowing the wealthy to promote the suffering of the poor unconsciously.