Settlements form because it's easier and more fulfilling to work in groups than it is to do everything yourself, and if you're working in a group, it helps to live in proximity.
I actually like the idea of master planning a city up front so that it can be beautiful, and I liked the aesthetic concept of the line in that regard. That said, the only way to achieve the end result is to anchor large businesses in from the start—it’s like you said, the economy needs to be there first—and that can be really hard to achieve with something like this (and a government like that!). Nusantara still struggles with that too.
I do think that theoretically it would be possible to masterplan around an economy to achieve something prosperous and beautiful. But they have to happen simultaneously and grow as the economy does…..
This one is a little more polemical than my average, but I think what I’m trying to get at is something like a continuum. On one end, it’s it’s like playing with legos; everything in it’s place and to it’s purpose (including the people). Just pure engineering. On the other, it’s all emergent stuff, struggling to resolve itself into order and not dissolve into chaos.
I think a well functioning city is something that falls somewhere in the middle of the two extremes, which is what I was trying to get at with the gardening metaphor. Even inside of that, there’s degrees of difference Like, bonsai is still highly cultivated compared to other forms of … not sure if gardening is still the right word here, but hopeully you get what I mean.
Oh totally! You make many good points. Cities happen around economies more than they are masterplanned to be beautiful. There’s a desire for the latter and it’s understandable why—the urban sprawl is often ugly! The question is: Can we achieve something in between? Can we build around economies but masterplan them to be beautiful?
Settlements form because it's easier and more fulfilling to work in groups than it is to do everything yourself, and if you're working in a group, it helps to live in proximity.
I actually like the idea of master planning a city up front so that it can be beautiful, and I liked the aesthetic concept of the line in that regard. That said, the only way to achieve the end result is to anchor large businesses in from the start—it’s like you said, the economy needs to be there first—and that can be really hard to achieve with something like this (and a government like that!). Nusantara still struggles with that too.
I do think that theoretically it would be possible to masterplan around an economy to achieve something prosperous and beautiful. But they have to happen simultaneously and grow as the economy does…..
This one is a little more polemical than my average, but I think what I’m trying to get at is something like a continuum. On one end, it’s it’s like playing with legos; everything in it’s place and to it’s purpose (including the people). Just pure engineering. On the other, it’s all emergent stuff, struggling to resolve itself into order and not dissolve into chaos.
I think a well functioning city is something that falls somewhere in the middle of the two extremes, which is what I was trying to get at with the gardening metaphor. Even inside of that, there’s degrees of difference Like, bonsai is still highly cultivated compared to other forms of … not sure if gardening is still the right word here, but hopeully you get what I mean.
Oh totally! You make many good points. Cities happen around economies more than they are masterplanned to be beautiful. There’s a desire for the latter and it’s understandable why—the urban sprawl is often ugly! The question is: Can we achieve something in between? Can we build around economies but masterplan them to be beautiful?