Wednesday, April 6, 2016 9:30 am
-
9:30 am
EDT (GMT -04:00)
Of
the
thesis
entitled: Ideologies
of Medellín’s
Miracle:
A
critique
of
architecture’s
new
utopia
Abstract:
Once
considered
the
most
violent
city
in
the
world,
the
city
of Medellín,
Colombia
has
more
recently
received
global
notoriety
as
a
model
of architecture
and
urban
planning
for
social
development.
This
notoriety originates
with
the
city’s
Social
Urbanism
programme (2004–2011):
a developmental
model
positioned
on
ideas
of
social
inclusion
through territorial,
aesthetic,
and
symbolic
strategies
of
transformation.
During
the administrative
terms
of
Sergio
Fajardo
and
Alonso
Salazar
(both
members
of
the new
Left
party Cultura Ciudadana)
an
impressive
number
of aesthetic
buildings
and
public
spaces
were
built
in
informal
communities
across the
urban
periphery,
in
a
political
climate
praised
for
its
inclusive strategies
of
development.
“The
most
beautiful
for
the
most
humble,”
was Fajardo’s famous
adage.
Since this period, Medellín has continued to receive significant notoriety. Medellín was named “Innovative City of the Year” by the Wall Street Journal and CitiBank in 2013, and was host to UN- Habitat’s World Urban Forum 7 (2014) entitled “Urban Equity in Development.” However, development in the city has recently departed from the Social Urbanism model, transitioning from small scale architecture and public space as points of community intervention, to the implementation of large-scale urban development projects that bear significant resemblance to more conventional Neoliberal models of urban restructuring. At the same time, evidence of chronic violence and forced displacement are raising questions about what current development might hide about everyday realities in its production of a new Global city.
Many critics concerned with this new direction identify a break in priorities and strategies between the administrative era of the Cultura Ciudadana and the current administration; however, a more critical investigation into the actors and stakeholders involved in Medellín’s recovery process reveal the way by which today’s development might actually be a logical and intended outcome of the success of Social Urbanism. This analysis requires a broadening of the political and historical analysis, to investigate the dynamics of local power that extend through the 20th century. It also requires a critical investigation of Social Urbanism as a programme that, while perhaps possessing some transformative and dignifying agency at the local scale, was treated as an iconic spatial “object” that produced a very specific meaning for the city both locally and globally through aesthetic strategies.
Founded on Henri Lefebvre’s idea of social space as being actively produced, the thesis investigates to what degree Social Urbanism could be seen as a socially-transformative and political project based on the actors involved and the distribution (or centralization) of power in its recovery process. By framing the city’s urban development as the product of a much longer transformation – articulated by underlying social, political, and economic conditions of production – it seeks a more critical understanding of the way Social Urbanism’s urban spaces have actually affected everyday life in the city.
Since this period, Medellín has continued to receive significant notoriety. Medellín was named “Innovative City of the Year” by the Wall Street Journal and CitiBank in 2013, and was host to UN- Habitat’s World Urban Forum 7 (2014) entitled “Urban Equity in Development.” However, development in the city has recently departed from the Social Urbanism model, transitioning from small scale architecture and public space as points of community intervention, to the implementation of large-scale urban development projects that bear significant resemblance to more conventional Neoliberal models of urban restructuring. At the same time, evidence of chronic violence and forced displacement are raising questions about what current development might hide about everyday realities in its production of a new Global city.
Many critics concerned with this new direction identify a break in priorities and strategies between the administrative era of the Cultura Ciudadana and the current administration; however, a more critical investigation into the actors and stakeholders involved in Medellín’s recovery process reveal the way by which today’s development might actually be a logical and intended outcome of the success of Social Urbanism. This analysis requires a broadening of the political and historical analysis, to investigate the dynamics of local power that extend through the 20th century. It also requires a critical investigation of Social Urbanism as a programme that, while perhaps possessing some transformative and dignifying agency at the local scale, was treated as an iconic spatial “object” that produced a very specific meaning for the city both locally and globally through aesthetic strategies.
Founded on Henri Lefebvre’s idea of social space as being actively produced, the thesis investigates to what degree Social Urbanism could be seen as a socially-transformative and political project based on the actors involved and the distribution (or centralization) of power in its recovery process. By framing the city’s urban development as the product of a much longer transformation – articulated by underlying social, political, and economic conditions of production – it seeks a more critical understanding of the way Social Urbanism’s urban spaces have actually affected everyday life in the city.
The
examining
committee
is
as
follows:
Supervisor:
Committee Members:
Adrian Blackwell, University of Waterloo
Lola Sheppard, University of Waterloo
Rick
Haldenby,
University of
Waterloo
External Reader:
Sue Ruddick, University of Toronto
The
committee
has
been
approved
as
authorized
by
the
Graduate
Studies
Committee.
The
Defence
Examination
will
take
place:
Wednesday
April
6,
2016
9:30AM
ARC
Loft
A
copy
of
the
thesis
is
available
for
perusal
in
ARC
2106A.