Cities. And the collective imagination runs through places and architectures, skylines, buildings and squares of the large and small cities of the planet: and this is the problem today.
Indeed, cities need new narratives that fill a vacuum, above all a cultural one. It is necessary to overcome a series of dichotomies: the city of technicians and that of life; that of the big names (both for architecture and for brands) and that of popular traditions; the city of order and the city of disorder; center and suburbs; “fast” urban dynamics and rhythms of rural villages; areas with access to networks (real and virtual) and less advantaged areas.
From these dichotomies the result is a city of deformed shapes: internationalized and standardized stylistic elements, elaborated with the traditional methodologies of the plan, which however float on the lives of the inhabitants and no longer coincide with the rhythms and the variegated applications which the city lives on today.
In an increasingly complex and globalized world, however, it becomes imperative to act through works carried out on a small scale, with elements in proximity to each other wherein human events take place such as cohabitation; access to goods and services by young people, the elderly and those at risk and exchanges of cultures and ever-more diversified stories.
Recorded Mindful of the cultural failure of what was known as traditional urbanism, even if accompanied, in certain experiences of the end of the millennium, by the participatory; and “strategic" urbanism, we now see the Social Urbanism of the case of Medellin.
Here is the;Now Urbanism of the daily action between the “obsolete” objects of the contemporary city; the Tactic Urbanis of the sections of neighborhoods, streets and spaces, according to the needs of the times and of the inhabitants… up to the “Geo-urbanism, which recalls the dialogue between the most disparate disciplines: from geology to the economy.
This is how experiences like URBAM came to life in Medellin.
The underlying message is clear: urban planning needs a common thinking: the defined limits of the discipline and the space of the city are no longer confined and controllable. There is really and structurally a need for synergies: from culture and education to sociability, from engineering to culture and artistic expressions. For urban planning and architecture, then, the challenge is that of an updating of the same nature and of the tools they have used so far.
Perhaps, we need new narratives, capable of giving different interpretations, above all capable of going beyond the aesthetic categories alone; to start thinking about how to integrate structurally the spatial dimension with the temporal one, exceeding the category of the project with that of the process; integrating the tensions and dichotomies that structure space and time between public and private life, formal and informal economies, goods held in common and private goods ... in intersections that impose new dimensions on governance itself.
ACTIVE NETWORKS :
https://www.dialoghinarchitettura.org/