The featured image is from a private collection of documentary photography tracking the eviction/demolition process of the C.J. Peete Public Housing Developments in New Orleans, LA. The demolition of this housing development is part of a larger revitalization plan that embraces the development of "mixed"-income housing to replace areas of concentrated poverty.
Currently, it is estimated that the homeless population in New Orleans has been unofficially estimated at 13,000. Roughly 5,000 units of public housing have been slated for demolition as a result of being labeled "blighted" or "distressed."
To learn more, click on the following links:
This question of "How do we preserve people?" follows the previous two questions regarding "How do we design cities?" and "How are we planning buildings?" The wordplay is an attempt to deconstruct the traditional paramaters of planning and preservation, extending the lens of focus beyond that of the preservation of cultural tradition of 'buildings' themselves to a fundamental respect and appreciation of humanity devoid of race or socio-economic class.
The questions that arise:
"How is blight defined, evaluated, and justifed?"
"Is this more than simply a redevelopment strategy?"
"What happens to the people immediately affected by displacement?"
"Where do people go?"
"Where are we in this picture?"
9 comments:
are these "chalk-talks" going to remain so impartial? as guerilla art goes this is pretty blasé. you've got this juicy hangar steak but you serving it with weak sauce, "mixed-income" developments are the devil's hand-maiden and I don't know if you're cool with that or not. that said this is terrific!! about time you us academic circle-jerks started posing the hard questions
I can appreciate that within these 'dialogues' beteewn the stairs and the student body there un-abahedly seems to be a torn soul(s). I assume that your presenting and conceptualizing a departmental synergy between ideologies that at times must seem diametrically opposed.
Are you postulating a new student? A sort of urban guru? A type of student which break the molds of professional boundaries?
i think it is great to be confronted with this great series- but in many ways i have to go back to what kid cadaver says. How do you actualize this project? It may challenge us as we emerge from the depths of the cafe, but as tight as it looks, how do you keep it from being at best a cross-departmental circle jerk?
i am a preservationist and i have to say that i am somewhat offended by the last of these presentations. by challenging us to take up the issue of 'preserving people' are you incinuating that we are in part liable for the post-katrina demolition due to misplaced priorities? that if we cared about preserving housing projects with as much energy as we invest in preserving monumental architecture maybe these homes could have been saved?
its seems you might be able to 'preserve people' if you could remove greed and self-interest - but we are all above that. (we dont actually attend an elitist institution which creates and reinforces socio-economic barriers. one which isnt participating in an expansion program which will destroy homes in similar manner. are we blind?)
it looks great, and your stuff is definately provocative. but- can we really be the solution when we are part of the problem?
Anon 3:51, you make a really good point. I think we NEED to be solution if we are part of the problem. The Manhattanville expansion needs to be talked about more in this school. Have any of the departments actually made a statement or tried to do anything about it? Isn't it our responsibility?
Initially I found the first question to be open-ended, ambiguous,and generic. Also, since I didn't realize there was a website associated with this project. I guess I just took it to be some random advertising for some upcoming conference. But then I never heard of any conference.
I just didn't get the point..
However, I have overheard several discussions amongst people from the different departments talking about the questions posed, and it seems as if people are a bit unclear as how to really address these questions.
Which now has me thinking...why is it that the departments in the school are so compartmentalized. What is the history behind this division?
Pretty interesting.
I think this is a good start. I think it has gotten some people's attention. But, what do we do with these questions. In the realm of academia it's far too easy and safe to pose these questions.
What do we do with this?
What next?
How do we preserve "people" and "profit"? Can we preserve "people" and induce creativity? Are there incentives to preserving people we never see except for television...honestly? How do we compel anyone to give half of two-shits? Are these questions for architects and planners? or for policy-makers? which schools maintain the largest political think-tanks? I know U.of Chicago is one, John Hopkins another big one too. Are academics ambivalent, apathetic? or merely ambitious? would one rather be recognized as the foremost "Proust" scholar or actually get involved with this world that is nose-diving into madness? How did Gore emerge from being a clapboard pres. candidate stand-in, to this cool guy who makes movies and runs end-user short-form dialogue via current tv? and how do we convince the others to get busy the same way?
Post a Comment