Superstudio’s Seventh City (”Continuous Conveyor Belt City”) moves with its 8 million inhabitants. In front of the city is a factory that builds the new districts, and behind it, another factory that destructs the older ones. It is an image of the american suburb: its main characteristic is not to sprawl, but to move. Continuously, new suburbs are built, and old suburbs are abandoned (see Detroit).
This movement is older than the suburb itself: the US have a long tradition of ghost cities, aimed at a semi-nomadic population and left in place after use.
These ghost towns sometimes become attractions for tourists, such as the cities of the Gold Rush. The crisis has accelerated the process.
For sure, all the vacant developments will not become touristic attractions.
We propose to use the other ones for great popular parties, during which the houses will be set to fire one by one. This new ritual is inspired by the Detroit “Devil’s Nights” and european tradtional festivals.
This destruction-consumation is to become a huge potlatch.
Let the suburbs die. There is nothing left to do with the territories consumed by residential sprawl.
this is great! too bad that we can not vote for it!
Burn motha faka , BURN ~
Honest to god. As an urban designer and planner who considers himself a responsible member of the community, I have to say… win. Epic win.
Just think of all those toxins released to the atmosphere!
This one is actually pretty good. Reminds me of Pleasure Island in Pinocchio!
It could actually work if the houses were dismantled and materials recycled as much as possible…after letting people have their fun with sledge hammers.
Hmmm…I understand the catharsis but this comes across as calculatingly populist. The reality is that a bonfire nihilism doesn’t solve the problems of a new poverty class. And aren’t architects and planners creators of these very conditions in cahoots with developers? We’re just as culpable in wasting land and resources, and this form of “protest” is stupid and childish. I wish we’d all grow up, having wrecked as much havoc on suburbs and cities earning filthy lucre from the banksters and predator lenders as craven sycophants and now pretending we’re leading the revolution/storming the Bastille. A large serving of humble pie is in order.
in response to Architortured… no we are not just as culpable, as for the most part we are NOT involved. The majority of suburbs are done WITHOUT both architects and planners. Instead of paying someone to actually design these developments they take their plans to Consulting Firms which are able to take “napkin sketches” and convert them directly to CD’s … no design phase. Yes there is a registered architect who must sign off, but equating this to being culpable is about the same as saying that the electrical engineer is equally culpable. Each of them are in a pigeon hold, driven by market demands and ruled over by developers to produce only that which is necessary to meet code.
What is of more interest in your question I believe is the disciplinary question of what makes an architect. Who is the legitimating agency who ratifies someone’s ability in architecture who would still sign off on these developments. Is it possible that architecture must differentiate itself from building science and create 2 different agency’s of legitimation?
Its a bit late, but thank you for this. As fun as this little brainstorm of a competition has been to observe, most of it makes me mildly ill (especially when a persons response to a good joke on us all is ‘calulatingly polulist’, ass). Out of all the wonderfully wishfull thinking in the competition, you win.