The urban image The urban image
StephenRead Anurbanworld
We live in an urban world – where, for almost every one of us today, the way we liveandwhatweexperienceiscapturedwithinwhatwethinkofas‘theurban’.Our liveshavebecomesuspendedandconstitutedwithinfast-moving,connected,and technologicallymediatedworlds.Butattheverymomentthat‘theurban’comesto constituteourwholelives,thetermitself,itseems,losesitsfoundation.Itlosesits opposite–thecountrysideortheperiphery.Thatwhichis‘notcity’,whichis‘outside’ tothe‘inside’ofthecity,andwhichthecityneeds,asthefigureneedstheground, inordertospecifyitsoutlineanditsform,becomessomethingviewedthroughthe windscreenofafast-movingcarorfromthewindowofahigh-speedtrain.Itbecomes asceneryforastillurbanexistence.Pointingouttodaythatourworldisurbanisto pointtotheonlyremainingpoleoftheduality,andtorealizethatwepointonlyata stateofourbeing.Theproblemforusatthispointintimeisnotsomuch,asLefebvre could still proclaim in the last century, a problem of ‘the urban’ as a distinctively differentmodeofexistence,asitissimplyaproblemofexistenceitselfandofour beinginacontemporaryworld.
Theonceparticularqualityof‘theurban’hasbecomeabase-lineexperience,and wecanexpectnoremissionfromthisplainstateofaffairs.Butinshiftingtheangleof ourtakeontheproblem,wecanalsoredefineitinawaywhichpreservesacontinuity withthepastevenwhilenotingadiscontinuity–anon-linearity–atthelevelofour experience.Themodernworldofthe19thand20thcenturieshasgoneassurelyas medievalandearlymodernworlds.Thiscondition–ofstandingatthebeginningof somethingnew,somethingunformedanduncertain–leavesusfeelingrudderless andtryingtofindourbearings;tryingtounderstandandmanagewhatishappening aroundusbyreferringbacktobetter-known,apparentlysurertimes.WhatIhopeto demonstratehereisthatweliveinaworldwhichwasalwaysprovisional–thatas longastherehasbeenchangeinourworldsandinoursurroundings,ourexperience hasalwaysbeenoneofbeingonthebrinkofanunspecifiedoutcome,andwithina successionofeventsbracketedintheframeofanopen‘urban’.
Thesubstanceof‘theurban’
Thepresumed‘shift’totheurbanasauniversalcondition,ashiftLefebvresignaled
attheendofthe‘60s 1 ,wasalso–andthiswasacauseofthecontroversyhisbook
causedthen–ashift,inhisanalysis,awayfromcategoriessuchasthepolitical,the economicorthesocial,understoodassufficientasgeneratorsofanurbancondition and as frames for understanding the city, and towards an analysis which was orderedandlayeredataspatio-temporallevel–aroundamonadologyof‘everyday life’–andwhichwasradicallyheterogeneousorhybridasitconcernedtheseother
copyright:
1 Thisonlinepapermaybecitedorbrieflyquotedinlinewiththeusualacademicconventions. Youmayalsodownloaditforyourownpersonaluse.Thispapermustnotbepublishedelsewhere(e.g.
mailinglists,bulletinboardsetc.)withouttheauthor'sexplicitpermission. mailinglists,bulletinboardsetc.)withouttheauthor'sexplicitpermission.
livingconcatenation,conglomerationandvisceralcross-reference’. 3 The urban world had seemed suddenly to change in substance; from being a
ponderous construction built towards the social end of the overdetermined poles of society and nature 4 , it had become something pulsing, alive, polyrhythmical, contingently eventful, and inexorably spreading and thickening. The ‘black box’ Lefebvre referred to has turned out in the end to be both more forceful and more ordinary,andmorealienandautonomous,thanevenLefebvrehadimagined.Ithas forcedustoreconsiderourconstructionsofabounded‘social’andreviseourideas oftheelementsandsubstancesofsocietiesandcities.Whatthishasmeantfora ‘scienceofthecity’hasalsobeenhighlysignificant:inthefirstplacethe‘moorings’ that had traditionally anchored the city as a human and social construction and object of study, had been called into question. All of a sudden, it seemed, and concomitantly with massive regularizations and compressions that processes of connectivityandmobilityataglobalscalewereinducing,wewerebeingconfronted with the limits of some presuppositions that had been around so long we had forgottentheywerecreaturesofourownmaking.Thecityhadbecomesomething otherthanunambiguously‘social’,somethingmorethanunambiguously‘artifact’and instrumentofourcivicandtechnicaldeliberationsandwills,andsomethingcloserto thatof‘forceofnature’.Ithadbecomeasiteofautonomouscreationandnotsimply ahumanproduct,asimpleeffectofhumanlycreativeaction.Theurbanhad‘become “objective”,thatiscreationandcreator,meaningandgoal.’ 5
To approach ‘the urban’ as ‘objective’, as ‘autonomous creation’ and as ‘force of nature’,istoapproachtheconstitutionoftheworlddifferently.Theorderingapparatus andthinkingproceduresofpreviousanalyseshavebeenturnedontheirheads,and wehavebeguntounderstandthatthecity,initsdynamicorder,islinkedtouniversals which are more concrete and self-propelling and real, less transcendental and differentiatedfromthematerialoftheworld,andlessinclinedtofolloworreflectthe
ordersweusetomakesenseofthesethings. 6
Toapproach‘theurban’inthisway–asagenesisofformoutofafieldof‘moments’ or‘events’ 7 ratherthanassomerepresentativeorreflectiveformconsequenton‘the social’, ‘the economic’ or some other such framing – is to say that we no longer subsumethistermwithinsomesocial‘structure’whoselevelsandconnectionsare guaranteedasifitsintegrationbelongedto‘theorderofthings’.Itistosaythatthe condition of the urban is ‘of the world’, and working on its own terms, rather than beinganissueofourstructuresandrepresentations–butitisalsotosuggestthe possibilitythat‘theurban’hasalwaysbeenofthis‘objective’generativeorder,and that‘theurban’maynotbeaboutonewayoflife,onemodeofsocialorganization overanother,butratheraboutthewayanurbanphenomenonandexperienceofthe socialemergeseverywhere,andeverywheredifferently,outofthewayslifeintersects withsituationinthevery‘moment’orthe‘event’.Itistosaythatamonadologyof everyday life could belong to an imbricated urban ecology – each moment a new
22 wholesubsistingasoneadditionalpartalongsidealltheotherparts.Theprocess 22 wholesubsistingasoneadditionalpartalongsidealltheotherparts.Theprocess
Thisbecomesthenanattempttolocate‘theurban’intheconcreteuniversalofthe situationratherthanwiththeabstractuniversalsofourcategories.Itisanattempt to link the moment of social experience directly with the material and with urban situationandtoassertthattheurbanisfundamentaltotheconstitution,andtoan everydayemergenceofaneverydaysocialinitseverydayappearanceandvisibility.
Thecity‘fromabove’
The concrete universals that open a new and visible urban-social experience in situareagatheringtogetherofheterogeneouselementsinfieldsofmovementand
encounter. 9 But this is a gathering just as emphatically from fields of movements and connections which are for the most part entirely invisible to us at the level of everyday experience. The contemporary urban world, in its pervasively creeping connectivity, drawing together what we imagine to be far, spreads a veil over its workings as it spreads its influence over us. We absorb it uncritically, falling like innocentsfor,andtakingasgiven,thealreadythereandmaterialized,whichisitself the immediate evidence that we are connected to a world of whose workings we knownexttonothing.Thepathwaystotheglobalfromthelocalareforthemostpart hidden to us, revealed only in more regularized and regulated forms; mass travel andtourism,phonesandfaxesandtheinternet.Theglobalmeanwhileappearsin thelocal,broughttousalongmultipleinflected,regulated,unregulated,controlled, uncontrolled,andvariablyaccessiblepathways.
Webegininsituationratherthanin‘thesocial’anditwouldbeamistaketoimagine thatwhatisgatheredtothislocalisinsomewaynecessarily‘for’thesocial.Itwill infactbeoneoftheprinciplepointsmadeherethatsituationinitsgenerativeand openindeterminacy,istoahugeextentsimplyfound,beforeitisappropriatedand transformed–thatourworldisinthefirstplace,andoutoftheprocesseswhichmake it,agiven,andthatthereisthenaprocessofsocialtranslationandremaking.
ThedoubtsLefebvrestartedtoarticulaterevolvedinthefirstinstancearoundaloss of a direct ‘linearity’ between the urban world and the social, but drew out also a moregeneralprobleminunderstandingtherelationofknowledgetoacomplexand non-linearandvariablytransparentworld.Thecityasitismanifesttous,initssimple visibility,oftenreveals,inahighlychargedandintricatelyfoldedlocal,littlemorethan ourownprojectionsontoitssurfaces.Itisoneofthewondersofthecitythatitcan meansomanythingstosomanypeople.Thisisoneofitsgreatstrengths,andasign ofitsopenness,buttheseprojections,takenindividuallyorcollectively,arealousy startingpointforanalysis.
Thecityisoneofthemostcompellinglyvisiblemanifestationsofcontemporarylife.It isthereasonweknowsomethingischanging–butitistheevidence,nottheanalysis. Theimageandthevisualoftoday’scityidentifiesaparticularlycontemporaryformof modernity,differenttothatofNewYorkofthe1960sorBerlinofthe1920sorParisof the1890s.Itrepresentsmodernityinitsvisibility,whileitconstitutesinitsinvisibilities andindeterminaciesthepotentialityoftheendlesslyopenofbecoming.Itispartof theverypossibilityofthenew.Itispartoftheenablingpowerofthecitythatthereis alwayssomethingopenandunexpected,evenviolentandalien,abouttheimagewe areconfrontedwith.Thecityisnottailormadeforus;itisnotmadetofitatall,isless thanperfectlyhospitable.Itseemsinfactoftentobegearedbettertoalifeatanother speedandscale,asifforanotherraceofpeople,faster,bigger,strongerthanweare. Itisoftenencounteredasexotic,unfamiliar,uncanny,whileatthesametimeitframes
33 themostordinaryandeverydayoflives.Itisinthistensionbetweenthefamiliarand theunfamiliar,themundaneandextraordinary,thatitframesalsotherepresentations
wemakeindiversemediaofwhoweareandwhatwewouldliketobe.Weexploitthis tensiontoopenwaystotheglamorous,thenovelandtheforbidden.Thecitybecomes morethanthebackground;itbecomessubjectandcharacteralsointhousandsof movies,musicvideos,advertisingandfashionfeaturesandstoriesofcontemporary life.Itabsorbsliveswhileoftentransformingthemintherepresentationswemakeof them;blessingthemwithahalo,sometimesinsubstantialanddelusory,ofnovelty,of thecontemporary,ofthemoment,ofnow.
Butthereareproblemswiththispervasiveandexpressivevisibilityasawaytothe knowingofanythingsubstantialaboutthecity.Partofthisrelatestooursituationas participantsinthemiddleofaprocesswearenotinapositiontoseeinanytotality. Our vision of the city is obscured by the overflow, the noise and excess, of what existsinourimmediatefieldofview;wehavenowayofseeingthebigpicturewhile theclamorofthesmallonedominatesourperceptions.Itisaparadox,becauseof coursethewholeisinthemonad;theproblemisthatthewholeoverflowsitsbasic nature,andbesidesthatwedon’tknowinanyimmediatewaybywhichpathwaysthe wholegottobethere.Aveilofinvisibilityhasbeendrawnoverbothsubstanceand means.
Continuityandbecomingvisible
Theimageofthecityandofurbanlifeofourphotographsandofourfilmsexistsinthe timeframeoftheunitaryeventandmoment,andtheslicesofrealityofthephotograph ortheframesofafilminterruptthesuccessionofoneeventintoanother.Wecan decomposerealityintoslices,asinaCATscan,butthereisnot,norshouldthere be,anyexpectationthatbythismeansweexposethewayurbanrealityisbroughtto life.Wedon’tanymorebringthecitytolife,orrevealitslifeforce,bydissectionthan wedothatofabodyontheslab.Injoiningwiththisproblematicofthetimeoflife, wejointheargumentBergsonhadwithBachelardandDeleuzewithBadiouoverthe
relativeprimacyofcontinuityovertheevent. 10 Incontrasttoanemphasisonthings oreventsasentitiesthatcanbedisengagedfromtheirsuccession,itiscentralto theideasofbothBergsonandDeleuze,andalsoWhitehead 11 ,thatthereisarealm ofcontinuitywhichexistsasacreativeintegratorandlife-givertothediscontinuous realmofeventsandthingsweseearoundus.Realtimeisforthemanengineofa vitalsuccessionratherthanasimplescaleinasuccessionofevents.
In order to approach this continuity and its full implications, we have to throw off someofourpreoccupationwith,andourpreconceptionsoftheunitaryevent,and indeedoftheatomisticanddivisibleasabasisofexistence.Inordertodothisweare luckyenoughtohaverecoursetothespectaculardisclosuresofelectromagnetism andquantumphysics,whichinspiredmuchofthisdiscussioninthefirstplace,and whichsuddenlyacenturyandmoreagoofferedupsomeverydifferentandforthen, counterintuitivewaysofapproachingquestionsofexistence.JoelKovelreferstoa ‘plasmaofbeing’asagroundingofexistencethatisnotobjectifiable;aprimordial continuumthatunderliesallknowingandallknowledgeofobjects.Themostsurprising andmostunfamiliarpartofthisideaisthatitsuggeststhatidentityandidentifiability, something we in our common-sense presumptions regard as fundamental to all existence, is founded not on ever smaller underlying identifiable units, as Leibniz forexamplebelieved,butratheronafundamentallycontinuous(andfundamentally dynamic)substrate.‘Intheuniverseasawholethereisnorealseparationbetween things;thereareonly,sofarasthemostadvancedsciencecantellus,plasmatic
quantumfields;onesingle,endlesslyperturbed,endlesslybecomingbody.’ 12 Events emerge out of this continuous substrate as eruptions in the field – events
whichtakeonidentity‘forus’butare‘inthemselves’partofafundamentallyindivisible underlyingcontinuity(acontinuitywhichisneverthelessactivatedalwaysandentirely
inthelocal) 13 andremainconnectedtothiscontinuitywhichisthesourceoftheir inthelocal) 13 andremainconnectedtothiscontinuitywhichisthesourceoftheir
A different being, an extra-terrestrial say, observing the processes of our planet and its urbanization from a different perspective, would see pattern erupting on the surface of the earth; pattern like a growth, apparently the result of underlying organic order. We, immersed in this growth, as part of the hybrid symbiotic stuff whichconstitutestheseemergingpatterns,donotseeanysuchemergencedirectly, or,whileweareimmersedwithinthisprocessandrestrictedtoourperspectiveof theeverydaylocal,eventhepossibilityofsuchanorder.Atthesametimesuchan order,emergentatascalebeyondourdirectobservationandexperience,willreturn toaffectandreconstructourworlds.Itwillalsoreturninrathercounterintuitiveand hiddenways,tointegrateandstructureourexperienceoftheworld.Onecouldsay thateveryemergenceimpliesa‘convergence’–anentirelyidenticalprocesswhose differenceistheperspectivefromwhichitisexperienced. 14 Wehavelearnedfrom thesciencesofcomplexitytobecomfortablewiththeideathatlarge-scalepatterns orpropertiesmayemergefrom,withoutbeingreducibleto,complexmicro-dynamics atasmallerscale.WhatIamtalkingabouthereismorelikethiskindofcomplexity inreverse,wheretheminuteandtheminutelydetailedandcomplexemergesoutof simplerlargerscaledprocessesandspatialorders,aseffectswithin–likeasortof
‘fractalspace-filling’ 15 –ofamuchlargerbody. It is for this reason that the products of direct visual imaginations, narrative or
painterly,cinematicorphotographic,inpartitioningtheflowoflifeandexperience, will always miss an essential aspect of urban experience – which has to do with
theintegrationorconvergenceofwholeworlds 16 ,andnotjustwiththeimaginative constructionorreconstructionofthoseaspectsofitthatappearatthescalesofthat apparitionorinthetimeframeofthenarrative.Thisistosaythatthereisanother partofurbanexperience,apartthatcomesfrombeyondexperience;apartthatis tiedtoadirectinvolvementwithrealsuccessionsattheleadingedgeofbecoming. Thisisabecomingthatisopen,aswesawbefore,butisneverthelessframedwithin a‘convergent’and‘whole’urban–anditisbymeansofthisconvergencethatthe frameholdstogetherforus.Thisisanissueofformandofacorporealknowingand intelligibility;itisanissueofthe‘fleshoftheworld’,ofthestatusofthecityas‘body’,
andof‘knowingbeforeknowing’. 17 Actualurbanexperienceencountersthegenuinely novel,theunthoughtandsurprising.Butitencountersitthroughandalongsidethe ‘urbanalien’thatisaproductofalargercoherencethatweencounterreal-timeinthe urbancontinuitythatrevealsitsform. 18
Extendingvisibility
Wecan,anddo,developimaginativeunderstandingsofthe‘extra-experiential’‘urban alien’patternscontributingtosuchexperiential‘wholes’.Wecanbegintounderstand the orders supporting (and driving) the ‘fractal space-filling’ we encounter on the ground.Ourvisibilityandourimaginativeunderstandingsareaidedbytechnological meansincludingsatelliteandaerialphotography,orbysimulationsordiagramsof the matrices of the world’s ‘technological skins’ of connectivity. Again by means
55 of our imaginations – this time of eco-systems which deliver complexly ordered ‘objective’ ‘founds’ and ‘givens’ rather than socially or subjectively ‘constructed’
worldstothedirectexperienceofparticipantsinthosesystems–wecanimagine how effects generated outside of the scales of our direct experience nonetheless verysubstantiallycontributetotheconstitutionoftheworldinwhichweperceiveand act.Thisaspect–ofthefoundandthealready-constructedofourexperientialurban worlds – is one which we tend to overlook when we emphasize the artifactural or ‘socially-constructed’natureofthecityanditsspace.Itisoneweoverlookanyway givenourparticularperspectiveandnatural-enoughbiastothescaleweknowbest. Theurbanecologyofwhichweareapartisaproductinlargemeasureofprocesses outsideoftheimmediatelyvisibleordiscernibleofeverydaylives;wecantoallintents andpurposesregarditmoreaccuratelyasasocially-found‘natural’order,produced verysubstantiallysomewhereelseandencounteredasasomewhataliengivenand foundintheworldofoureverydayexperience.
Theveracityofthisperspective,whenheldupagainstthatofthenaivelyimagined ‘socialcity’–understoodassomethinghand-madebyandforus–issomethingthat isbecomingeverclearertoday,inthehard-edgedrealitiesofincreasinglypervasive globalandmetropolitanurbanprocesses.Butsuchapositiononcestated,returns thequestionbackthroughurbanhistory,seekingfortheoriginsofsuchastateof affairs,andfailingtodefinitivelyfindthem.Itispossible,indeedprobableIbelieve, thatthecityhasalwaystendedtobeinthefirstinstancesomethinggivenandfound, notmadetomeasure;acreationofprocessestakingplaceoutsideofthescalesof ourimmediatelivesandourimmediatevisualandperceptualfields–andbeyondthe powersofourimmediateagencyorvolition.Thecityhasinalllikelihoodalwaysbeen somethingmorelikeaneruptionoutofafieldofmuchwiderscope,andourdifficulty inunderstandingthenatureoftheurban,andourpropensityformisunderstanding it,hasprobablyalwayshadtodowiththefactthatitwasafactorofprocesseswhich were larger than us and our immediate lives – more widely distributed, material, dynamic and spatial – less the product of humanly or socially scaled and located social, cultural, or economic ‘structures’. This is to say that the urban world has alwaysbeenafoundworld,deliveredtoussubstantially‘fromabove’throughlayers
ofregulatingandsystematizingnetworksandinfrastructures. 19 Theseinfrastructures formandcontrolwhattheydistribute.Theygatherthingstothemselves,andtheir systematizingpowerhasasmuchtodowiththe‘agencies’ofthecomplexnetworks themselvesastheyhavetodowiththe‘agents’whousethem.
Themovementofhumanandsocialappropriationofanenvironmentnot‘madeto measure’, has been one counter to this production of the given – a movement of creativeremaking,ofmakingagain,thatwhichisalreadymade.Itisalsobetween thesetwoprocessesthattheopennessofoururbanworldismaintained–similar ‘givensandfounds’canbevariablyinterpretedandremadetovariableends.Itisin thecomplexandunpredictablespacebetweenthesetwoprocesses,thatwehave in fact influenced the way the city is continually becoming visible and social, and continuallybecomingdifferent.
Theemergenceofurbanidentity
Itisoneofthemostbasicerrorsofurbanthinkingthatthecityemergesfromwithin,a productof‘swarming’processesatthelevelofexperienceandeverydaylife.Thecity ismoreandmoreevidentlynotsimplyaformwhichspreadsoutfromwithin;growing fromtheinside,asapatterninthelandscape.Ratheritemergesforthemostpart aslocal‘thickenings’ofpre-existentformsofadynamicallyconstitutedwholewhose scopeexceedsbyordersofmagnitudethethingweinthepast(andstilltoooften today)holdasbeingthecity.Aspathsandtrailspre-existthefirstsettlementasan
objectinthelandscape 20 ,soalsothe‘object’citytodayexistsinthefirstinstance asthickeningsofthewispytracesofstuffpassingthrough–andthisthickening,like anyconcrescence,isaworkofalchemy;ofthetransformationofonekindofenergy intoanother.
The story of the city is therefore one of the eruption of identifiable stuff out of a plasmic and non-differentiable substrate. In fact, the ‘non-place’ discussed in the
‘anthropology of modernity’ 21 is composed of the antecedent, the unformed stuff, of the place it misses. Jane Jacobs’ obsidian traders tracing pathways over the Anatolianplateau 22 ,HanseaticcogsplyingtheBalticsea-routes,thesilktradersand thespice-ladencaravansthreadingtheirwaysthroughthemountainpassesbetween thenearandfareast,allthewaythroughtothe20tonneOshkoshthunderingdown a transcontinental motorway – all are antecedent to the identifiable location we recognizeinactualurbanplaces.
Weneedtogetbacktothesubstanceofthisthingwecallcity,inordertoconsider again what this architecture we inhabit is made of and how it conditions us and oureverydaylives.Fortoolongwehavelookedatitthroughnotionsofexistence informedbyeverydayvisibilityandtheimmediateactualityofthematerialstuffthat surroundsus.Wepresumetooquicklythata‘logic’ofourimaginedordersunderpins whathappensinoururbanworld;weimaginethattheworldmakesitselfaccordingto linearlawsofaccumulation–lawswhichdonotintheendhavethepowertorepresent thisthingoritsprocessofbecoming.Wecantoday,whenthefactforcesitselfon us, begin to see the city for something closer to what it is – something radically open,integralwithwhatappearstoustobeitsoutside,integralwithacontinuitythat gathersaheterogeneousvisibleworldtoplace.
Thecityissomethingconstructedwithindynamicswhichtakeplaceverysubstantially beyondwhatwetaketobeitsborders,andwhichbecomesitselfaccordingtoitsown laws.Thisviewcontradictsthoseofthegreaturbanistsofthemodernisthumanist city;Geddes,MumfordandWirthunderstoodthecityasbeingorganicinthesense thatitcouldbeconceivedashavingintegrityasaspatiallyboundedandsocialentity
–asbeingasocio-spatialsystemwithitsownvitalinternaldynamic. 23 Inthisview Iamoutliningthecityis‘machinic’inthesenseDeleuze&Guattariusetheterm, wherethedynamicsofthe‘organic’areconceived‘notintermsoforgans,organisms andspecies,andtheirfunctions,butintermsoftheaffectiverelationshipsbetween heterogeneousbodies...‘[A]“body”canbeanything–ananimal,abodyofsounds, amindoranidea,asocialbodyorcollective...[T]hismeansthatevolutionspeaks in fact of an involution, that is the dissolution of forms and the indeterminacy of
functions,aswellasthefreeingoftimesandspeeds.’ 24 Iwouldgofurtherheretosay thatthisinvolutionmanifestsitselfasaprogressivegenerativefoldingorpleatingor ‘space-filling’ateverfinerscalesaswezoominfromtheultimatescaleofthecity whichisgivenbythe(ultimatelyglobal)limitsofitsconnectiveandcommunicative networksandinfrastructures. 25
ItbecomesquestionablewhetherthecitycouldeverhavebeenorganicinMumford’s sense. If in the past it was possible, and perhaps this was so as a rather crude approximation,toconceivethecityasacontainedsocio-spatialsystem,todaythere canbenodoubtthecityanditspartsarepointsofarticulationinvariouslyscaled circuitsandthattheirprocessesareconstrainedandorderedforthemostpartbythe networksandinfrastructureswhichconstituteandconveythemratherthanbyany boundinglimits.
Thespeculativemodelwhichishereproposed,presumesfirstlytherefore,asJane Jacobs has already done, that a ‘virtual’ first city pre-existed its actualization on theNeolithicAnatolianplain,andthatthis‘virtuality’consistedinthelong-distance tradingroutesthatcriss-crossedthesub-continent.Theideathatcitiesemerge,or justhappenatthelevelatwhichweencounterthem;thatatsomestageinhistory
7 7 a population just found themselves to be urban or becoming urban, and that at later stages in history populations found themselves becoming urban in new and 7 7 a population just found themselves to be urban or becoming urban, and that at later stages in history populations found themselves becoming urban in new and
Ifwejustrunthislineofthinking–thatwemayrequireaphenomenalexpressionof somesocialformtoexistintheconcretebeforewearecapableofabstractingfrom ittoitssocial‘structure’–itmaybepossibletoarguethatcities(andperhapsother settlementforms)precededandweretheimpulseformuchthatwetodayregardas social,andforourexpectationsofwhatsociallifeisandcanbe.Developedsocial formsmaybeacreativeadditionto,abuildingupon,amatrixofencounterthatis urban.Thiscouldbeastoryofsocialbecomingatthesametimeasitisoneofurban evolution/involution.
Thiscannotontheotherhandsimplybeastoryofcitiesevolvingcontinuouslyin time–otherwiseitwouldnotexplainLondonorNewYorkorHongKongashubsina globalfinancialnetworkintheformwefindthemtoday;itcouldnotexplainBilbaoor ManchesterorLille,reinventedfromoutoftheirindustrialpastsashubsinnetworks oftourism.Insteaditattemptstoexplaincitiesasdiscontinuousinthesensethatthey arecontinuouslynew;reinventedandreconstructedonthebackofnetworkswhich arethemselvesinacontinualprocessofconstruction,revisionandreconstruction. Whatweareseeingincitiestodayarethetransformationsascitiesadjusttoshifting patternsof‘virtuality’.Andthesevirtualitiescanbeveryconcrete,veryreal,builtas infrastructures;activatingtheconcrescencesor‘alchemicbecomings’ofthecityas anobject.Whatweexperienceisnotadeathofthecity,norforthatmattera‘new’ citybuiltonprinciplesentirelydifferenttothoseofcitiesofthepast;wearefacing ratherateachturninhistoryarevisionofthetranslationsandtransductionsofurban substanceonthebackofchangingsubstratesofcontinuities.Whenweunderstand thiswewillbecomingtotermswiththeprovisionalanddependentandderivedthing thevisiblecityhasalwaysbeen.
Thetechnologyofthepath
Individualstoriesofcaravansandtheirmasters,theshipfleetsandtheircaptains and crews, are largely lost, along with the details of their hardships and their achievementsandfailures.Whatdoesremainarethetrailstheywore,thestringsof provisioningpostsandtradingstopsandportstheyestablished.Wehearlittleofthe detailsofthecomplexoverlappingarrangementsandagreementswhichunderwrite theexchangesincommodities,financeandotherformalandinformal,legitimateand illegitimatebusiness,nottomentionthecountlessmovementsandexchangesmade forreasonsofpersonalattachmentorgain.Whatwedosee,andwhatdoremain,are themoresystematizedflightandtrainschedules,theseasonsandcalendars–and therouteswhichdrawtogetherintoonemovementalltheindividualstorieslostin everywayexceptasanotherpairoflightsinamovingstreamonthefreeway,another passengerinaqueueattheticketofficeorthecheck-in,anotherpedestrianinthe movingtideonthepavementoftheshoppingstreet–orasaparticularsequenceof pulsesintheterabytesofdatatransmitteddownopticalcables. 26
Before the city as we know it therefore, before the visible located city, comes a mobilization: a mobilization of material, data and populations; of mobile mass, massesandmessagesthatisadistributiontoallcorners.Theindividualandhisor herstoriesarelost,anonymous,inthismobilecrowd.Thisanonymouspopulation anditsmovementisthevirtual,antecedenttothelocationorplacethatisreallya relay,apassingonoftheflow.
8 Virtualorantecedentcentralityfindsitsmostvisibleexpressiontodayinthefreeway network–anevenlydistributednetofpuremovementactivity.Flyingovertheurban 8 Virtualorantecedentcentralityfindsitsmostvisibleexpressiontodayinthefreeway network–anevenlydistributednetofpuremovementactivity.Flyingovertheurban
Buttherearemultiplevirtualcentralitiesexistingatdifferentscalesandindifferent modesinthecityatthesametime–eachcomprisingwebsgatheringmovements into anonymous and distributed mobilizations. Infrastructural webs stratify these mobilizations into layers of different ‘resonance’. Time enters this realm of pure quantities as speed or vibration. The impulse of these distributed networks is to distribute, but they also distribute themselves as well as the material they are distributing, as they seek to cover every part of the surface they are involved in integrating. A metropolitan freeway network will seek to cover and integrate the metropolitansurface,anurbanboulevardnetworkwillseektocoverandintegratea functionalurbansurface,andaglobaltelecommunicationsnetworkwillseektocover andintegratetheglobalsurface.Theseinfrastructuresarebuilt,theyarecostlyand subjecttoconstraintsofeconomy.Inthesamewaythesoapbubbleeconomizesby distributingtensionsandenergyevenlyoveritssurface,theseinfrastructurestend, otherthingsbeingequal,todistributeevenlyoverthesurfaceavailabletothem. 28
Urbanplace–aspointofarticulationonmultiplestratifiedmovementnets–becomes alsoaplaceofcombinationandoftranslationandtransduction;oftheconversion of matter or energy of one sort into another. The urban we know, in its complex andactualizedform,emergesatthepointwherevirtualcentralitiesoverlap,allowing livestoadhere,toinhere,tobecomeentrainedandsituated,inpointsoflayeredand mutually supportive and dependant connectivity. It is the point where multifarious centralitiescometogether;itisnotacomingtogetherinonescale,onespeed,one timeandonespace,ratherthecomingtogetherisofavarietyoftimesandspaces in a process of combination that creates a complex, rich, and active individuated compound out of multiple preindividuated centralities of purer spaces and times. Thereisaconcrescence,analchemy,arealcreativemoment,whichtakesplacein theseoverlapsbetweenvirtualcentralities,activatingsituatedconditions,enabling individuation;actualizingthecentralitieswerecognizeassuchinrealurbanplaces.
Remaking,relaying,transforming
Locusorplaceisalsothepointatwhichtheindividualandhisorherstoriescomes backintofocus,andtheactualizationofurbanplaceisalsoitsbecomingassetting
forembeddedstoriesofindividualeverydaylives.The‘non-place’ 29 ,the‘concretely preindividuated’simplisticallyaccessibleplaceswemoreoftenthannotmaketoday, cannotholdreallivesandstories.Itlacksthe‘thickness’or‘density’ofsituation,in afabricofconnectivity,asarelayinmultiplevirtualities.Locusneedslayeringand overlapwithrespecttoitspositionwithininfrastructures;alayeringthatwillallowit tosupportmultiply-folded,complicated,implicated,interaction.Emplacedlivesare locatedwithinonlysomewhatsystematizingmultiscalarcircuitssharedwithmultiple others.
We note this sedimentation of the visible actual urban out of multiple distributed virtualcentralitiesinthevarietyandparticularityofactualizedformsandcentralities inthecity.Theglobalcityemergeswithitsskylineofskyscrapersatthepointwhere globaltravelroutes,communicationsnetworks,andthemultipleotherinfrastructures We note this sedimentation of the visible actual urban out of multiple distributed virtualcentralitiesinthevarietyandparticularityofactualizedformsandcentralities inthecity.Theglobalcityemergeswithitsskylineofskyscrapersatthepointwhere globaltravelroutes,communicationsnetworks,andthemultipleotherinfrastructures
simultaneous condition of increasing ‘criticality’ 30 of the world. This criticality is a workofmaintenanceandextensionandrefinement,ofapreparationoftheground, butalsojustoftheevolutionofthecityasweseeitnow,thattakesinmuchofhuman history.Muchofthecontemporarydiscussionofglobalizationmissestheextentto which the global is in the first event produced and sustained from the local, and thewayinwhichthisglobal,evenwhenitisseentoarrive‘fromabove’,hastobe appropriated,redrawnandreinventedinthelocalconditioninwhichitlands.
BrunoLatourindiscussingthe‘visibilisation’ofthecityofParisintroduceshisnotion ofthe‘oligopticon’:
So,‘localizingtheglobal’meanstolookattheplacewhereyouseethewhole notasapanopticon,butasanoligopticon...[T]heoperationisverysimple: therearecentersofcommand,therearerooms,insidewhichParisasawholeis visualized,butit’salocalroom,it’snotabigroom.Parisitselfisneverbig,there isnoplacewhereParisasacityexists,it’salwayslocalizedatsomepointwhere some of the engineers or urban planners, or specialists are actually making Parisasawholevisible....‘[O]ligopticon’meansseeingalittle,verywell,but justalittle.AndthevisibilityofacityliketheoneI’vestudiedhere,ismadenot inapanopticon,notthroughthissortofexcessiveparanoiaofcompletevisual spaceasdemonstratedinthefamousexampleofaprison,wheretheprisoners arecompletelyvisibletothegazeofthesurveillancemanager.Theoligopticon actuallydescribesmuchbetterthethreadycharacterofthewholebeingbuilt in a city, where you never have actually a whole which is not connected to a small place where the information is gathered. [...] I must remind you that informationisneveractuallyproduced,whatwemeanbyinformationisalways transformation....[T]hemapisnottheterritory,amodelisnotthehouse-and wheneverwetalkaboutinformationweforgetthepriceofputtingitintoform, andthewordinformationweshouldneverforget,meansputtingsomethinginto aform,andtheformisverymaterial. 31
Thisisastory,morethananythingelse,abouturbanplaceandsituation,andabout howsituationisestablishedasacreationoftheurbanandthenasare-creation.It isastoryofthenecessarily(andpositivelyopen)‘hybrid’and‘alien’ofthaturban andthewayitgeneratesandproducesan‘extra-human’and‘extra-social’given;an ‘unthoughtbyus’,thatwehavealwaysappropriated,andcontinuetoappropriateand remaketoourownends.Iwouldspeculativelyproposethatwehave,forthemost partalwaysconstructedandstructuredoursocialworldsaroundandbymeansof theseworkingsandreworkingsoftheurban.
In all the talk today about situating practices, we need should not to forget that situationitselfisalwayssomethingfoundandremade,givenandconstructed;much
10 more than a scenery or a background, it is also an agent and participant in the patternsandvisibilitiesofourliving.Ourresearch 32 attemptstouncoverthevariable 10 more than a scenery or a background, it is also an agent and participant in the patternsandvisibilitiesofourliving.Ourresearch 32 attemptstouncoverthevariable
Wedonotneedtoknowthecityinitsdetailsinordertoexperienceitassomewhat coherent–wedonotneedtoknowthemultifariousstoriesofthecityinordertoknow thecitywellenoughpersonally.Thecitychoreographsthosestoriesalongsideours inwayswhichmakeussocially‘knowingbeforeknowing’creaturesatthelevelofthe urbaneveryday.Itdoesthishoweverallthetimewhilehidingfromourviewmuch ofthemeansituses.Itispartoftheenormouscontributionofthecitytoindividual lives that it is available to enable and inform their stories – as a participant, as a choreographer.Butweneedtoget‘onterms’withthischoreographer;takeitonatits ownscalesofworkinginordertoanalyzeandunderstandhowitdoesthis.Thecity asanexperienceisnotobservedorexperienced‘fromtheoutside’;weareimmersed withinitandweexperienceitsenablingandconstrainingvirtualitieswithinacontinuity ofexperience,directly.Thesevirtualitiesareabsolutelyrealandabsolutelypartofour everydayexperience.Asanobjectofstudyhowever,weneedtounderstandhowthe cityweseeemerging,seenfroman‘extra-human’,‘extra-terrestrial’perspective,isa somewhataliengiven,withinwhichourexperienceneverthelessconvergesinways whichprofoundlyformandinformusasthehumanandsocialcreaturesweare.
Notes
1 HenriLefebvre,TheUrbanRevolution,trans.RobertBononno(Minneapolis:Universityof MinnesotaPress,2003).
2 See:GregoryJ.Seigworth&MichaelE.Gardiner,‘Rethinkingeverydaylife’,in:Cultural Studies,vol.18,no.2/3,2004,pp.139-159.
3 ibid.,p.141. 4 The‘constitutionalsettlement’ofLatour.See:BrunoLatour,WeHaveNeverBeenModern,
trans.CatherinePorter(CambridgeMass:HarvardUniversityPress,1993). 5 Lefebvre,op.cit.,p.28.Thelayersof‘therural’and‘theindustrial’haveturnedouttolack
thepower,evenas‘floatingsignifiers’,overurbanizationprocessesthatLefebvregranted thematthetimeofwritingandfromhisparticularideologicalpositioninthe1960s.
6 Latour,op.cit. 7 ‘Moments’arefromHenriLefebvre,CritiqueofEverydayLife,Vol.II,trans.JohnMoore
(London:Verso,1992).‘Events’arefromA.N.Whitehead,ProcessandReality(NewYork: Macmillan,1979).
8 ThisisaratherWhiteheadianreadingofmomentsandtimethoughitappearstoalsobe implicitinLefebvre.SeeCharlesHartshorneon‘Whitehead’snovelintuition’in:GeorgeL.
Kline(ed.),AlfredNorthWhitehead:EssaysonhisPhilosophy(EnglewoodCliffs:Prentice- Hall,1963).
9 See:EdwardCasey,‘Howtogetfromspacetoplaceinafairlyshortstretchoftime’,in:Feld S.&K.H.Basso(eds),SensesofPlace(SantaFe:SchoolofAmericanResearchPress,
1996). 10 See Chapter 3 of: Keith Ansell-Pearson, Philosophy and the Adventure of the Virtual:
Bergsonandthetimeoflife(London:Routledge,2002). 11 CertainlyinHartshorne’sreadingofWhitehead.
12 JoelKovel,HistoryandSpirit:AnInquiryintothePhilosophyofLiberation(Boston:Beacon Press,1991).
13 ThisistheproblematicwhichLatouraddressesinhiswork(discussedlater)andisone which links us conceptually with the idea of fields developed in physics in the late 19th
andearly20thcenturies.Seealso:PeterPesic,SeeingDouble(Cambridge:MITPress, 2003).
14 See: Jack Cohen and Ian Stewart, The Collapse of Chaos (New York: Viking, 1994), p.222.
15 Mike Batty, author of Fractal Cities (co-authored with Paul Longley, Academic Press, London, 1994) pointed out this point about ‘fractal space-filling’ to me in conversation
(December2004). 16 Thewholeworldwearetalkingabouthereisnotthemanagerialistsystemormachineof
multipleorganizedconnectionsholdingawholetogetherasaglobalorglobalregionalor metropolitan‘clockwork’.Rather,aswillbearguedintherestofthepaper,itisthewhole thatisintegratedbythewaythatmultitudinousuncoordinatedactionsaresortedandthen recombinedbyadynamicprocesswhichdifferentiatesmodesandscalesbymeansoftheir timesor‘rhythms’.
17 The ‘flesh of the world’ is from M. Merleau-Ponty; ‘knowing before knowing’ is from M. Heidegger.
18 Puttingpaidtothemostnaiveformsofsocialconstruction. 19 BrunoLatour,‘Thepoliticsofexplanation;analternative’,in:S.Woolgar(ed.),Knowledge
andReflexivity(London:Sage,1988). 20 Seemy‘Abriefhistoryofflightstotheperipheryandothermovementmatters’,in:Read&
Pinilla(eds),VisualizingtheInvisible(Amsterdam:TechnePress,2006). 21 See:MarcAugé,Non-places:IntroductiontoanAnthropologyofSupermodernity,trans.
JohnHowe(London:Verso,1995). 22 Jane Jacobs, The Economy of Cities (New York: Vintage Books, 1970). The proposal I
ammakingisaspeculationbuiltonaspeculation,whoseveracity,Iwouldargue,istobe determinedinitsproductivityasamodelforthinking,ratherthaninitsliteralapplicabilityto
12 everysettlementformineveryhistoricalcircumstance.Theremayhavebeenothertypes of settlement in the course of history – villages perhaps, towns even, of variable size – 12 everysettlementformineveryhistoricalcircumstance.Theremayhavebeenothertypes of settlement in the course of history – villages perhaps, towns even, of variable size –
23 Seeforexample:LewisMumford,TheCultureofCities(NewYork:Harvest,1970). 24 See:KeithAnsell-Pearson,ViroidLife(London:Routledge,1997). 25 Themodelpresentedherebeginstobecomesuggestiveasregardstheideaof‘omnicausal’
systems(whenthewholedeterminesthebehaviourofitsparts)asopposedtothosewhich are‘particausal’.See:G.E.Mikhailovsky,‘Biologicaltime,itsorganization,hierarchyand presentationbycomplexvalues’,in:A.P.Levich(ed.),OnTheWayToUnderstandingThe TimePhenomenon:TheConstructionsOfTimeInNaturalScience(PartI),(London:World ScientificPublishing,1993).Thereisapotentiallyrichlineofinvestigationherewhichgoes intothepurported‘negentropic’propertiesofomnicausalsystems.
26 SeethemovieKoyaanisqatsi(1983),directedbyGodfreyReggio. 27 Thisengineisagainnotthatofasystem–ofatechnocraticmovement-connectivemachine
–butaspartofa‘machine’effectingtranslationandtransformation,andtheactualization ofurbanvirtualityorpotential.This‘engine’producesatthemomentofitsencounterwith another‘concretevirtualities’,creatinga‘thickness’ofpresenttimes(Mikhailovsky).Thisis apointwhichwillbedevelopedelsewhere.Seeforafirststep:Read&Bruyns,‘TheUrban Machine’ in: Read & Pinilla (eds), Visualizing the Invisible (Amsterdam: Techne Press, 2006).
28 Thisassertionneedssomequalificationofcoursebecauseatcertainmomentsinhistory allroadsdidleadtoRomeorLondonorParisorwherever.Neverthelesstodayinthetime
ofNegriandHardt’sEmpire,itseemsthatthisstatementisbecomingmoreratherthanless true.
29 Augé,op.cit. 30 Criticality is a notion taken from science in which a material undergoing phase change
transmitsthisconditionlocally.Seealso:Pesic(2003). 31 ThequotationistakenfromatranscriptionofBrunoLatour’slecture,26November,2001,
atTheBerlageInstitute,Rotterdam;transcribedbyAkselÇoruh.Tomyknowledge,atthe timeofwriting,anotheroutlineoftheideaoftheoligopticonbyitsauthordoesnotexistin theEnglishlanguage.
32 InSpacelab.See:www.spacelab.tudelft.nl.
13