Trying to figure out what the meaning of the apparent popularity of the “T-Tree” reburbia entry is. It is currently right behind the New Urbanist submission “Urban Sprawl Repair Kit”, both of which have over twice as many votes as any of the other finalists. “Urban Sprawl Repair Kit”‘s popularity doesn’t surprise me, as it is the only (a) New Urbanist and (b) traditionalist submission amongst the finalists and both of those -isms have huge constituencies. I don’t think its explained by the reference to Habitat 67, as I don’t think Safdie’s posse is that big. Maybe its the duck-like concept (building = tree, windows = leaves, etc.)? Or the omission of cars, parking lots, and roads? Can anyone help me?
-
recent posts
- mud and oil
- dredgefest california
- prosthetic landscapes in a time of acceleration
- Excavations, Shockwaves, and Limits
- on landscape science
- sea ice small multiples
- the dredge underground
- the five thousand pound life: land
- suburban futures
- pilot projects
- landmarks
- territorial reclamation
- landscape information modeling
- mesosphere excavations
- semipile
-
recent comments
- rholmes: Thanks for your comments, all. Brian: I look forward to your further thoughts on my first two points. Where...
- Michael: A little late to the party but here nonetheless. Needless to say I’m quite sympathetic to the pursuit...
- building nothing out of something: 30;] home // hide asides // links // index.archive // contact us // teaching //...
- Brian: well, there are few things more gratifying than producing something that people I admire and draw from engage...
- Brett: So it seems it would be great if the new Places interface could include a comment forum to give the authors...
- Ryan Lee Waldron, PE: I don’t think Landscape Architecture should be renamed landscape science, just as I...
- Alan Wiig: For whatever reason, when reading this commentary I thought of John McPhee’s book The Pine Barrens,...
- Julian Raxworthy: Interesting discussion Rob, and great to be referred to and introduced to your blog. Reading this...
- Thoughts on Everything under the Sun or I am a guilty Secularist: 30;] h/t m.ammoth.us […]
- Anchorite: If NM fails to meet its water obligations to TX they don’t pay a simple penalty, a federal judge...
-
monthly archives
-
category archives
-
tags
anthropocene architectural-criticism architecture army-corps-of-engineers atchafalaya china climate-change competitions dredge dredge-research-collaborative ecological-urbanism-at-gsd economics flood-control geology glacier-island-storm hacking-infrastructure hydrology infrastructural-vernacular infrastructure internet iphone kazys-varnelis landscape landscape-architecture landscape-futures landscape-infrastructures landscape-urbanism los angeles louisiana mississippi-river networked-urbanism new-urbanism new york city photography post-industrial re-industrial reading-the-infrastructural-city readings soft-systems suburbia technology transportation urbanism video-games waste
Apologies..I’m at a complete loss as well. The Safdie posse theory is pretty amazing even if it isn’t as huge as the New Urbanist gang.
Just as interesting is that T-Tree and Urban Sprawl Repair Kit are advocating typologies almost totally at odds with each other. I think you’re right that the latter is cleaning up with the new urbanist crowd, and given a choice between these two, it’s the one I’d choose: at least it engages the suburbs. T-tree doesn’t at all, it’s probably more apt as an entry into the evolo-arch skyscraper competition. I’d guess this means the rest of the voters are of the ‘scrap the suburbs and start over’ mentality, and this is their favored option; it’s ironic that the chosen replacement of the suburbs (which for all their problems have proven to be a resilient, successful model) is a child of the long-discredited towers-in-a-park typology. I mean, of all the utopian schemata out there, at least choose one which hasn’t already proven itself to be a failure.
Yeah, I was thinking that on my bike ride this evening: that it probably reflects a preference for some kind of intense density amongst another group of voters.
The results of the poll are obviously run up by a zombie botnet controlled by the Slavic hacking masterminds of Adil Azhiyev and Ivan Kudryavtsev. This botnet is known by the seemingly innocuously but sinister name “Light+Space.” They really want $1,000 prize.
Of course, I’m only half kidding, half stereotyping.
If they come from behind on the last day to beat the repair kit, we’ll know you’re right, Andrew.
I think the number of votes can be explained by the competition devolving into an ideological battle. The new urbanist entry was going to have supporters no matter what, so at some point the T-Tree was chosen (perhaps, because at the time it had the second most votes?) to be the competing project. A vote for the Tree is not so much a vote FOR it, as it is a vote AGAINST the Repair Kit. It’s unfortunate because there were many better projects in the running, but if there was to be any hope in defeating those backwards-thinking, fascist new urbanists, we had to pick a candidate; The C-3 Initiative wasn’t going to Nader us.
Or maybe I’m just too cynical and there really are that many people who thought the T-Tree was great. I doubt it, though.
“Or maybe I’m just too cynical and there really are that many people who thought the T-Tree was great.”
I think there really are; though I would argue I’m the one more at risk of being too cynical here.
It’s funny, I have plenty of criticisms of New Urbanists and I thought the T-Tree was astoundingly silly. (Maybe not as silly as some of the concepts, but still.)