Archive for the ‘Saskia Sassen’ Category

Liane Lefaivre interviews Saskia Sassen

Tuesday, October 3rd, 2006

Liane Lefaivre: What was your role in the Biennale? The theme of the main exhibition of Richard Burdett’s at the Arsenale was global cities, an area of expertise which your work pioneered in so many ways.

Saskia Sassen: Several of us (Ricky Burdett, Richard Sennett, the whole Urban Age tribe) met frequently for intense discussions about what it meant to do a Architecture Biennale on cities. The challenges is how to connect architecture with cities as key places for major new social, political, environmental challenges. Further, and I relaly cared about this, how do you bring “art” (film, photography, sculpture, and the foundational meaning of the artistic as a non-paradigmatic way of seeing, of “theoria”) into a discussion on cities.

I also had my own idiosyncratic take on it all. Beyond the generic issue of cities and why architects and designers should be focusing on them, there was a politco-technical question about global cities and architecture. As I say in the Biennale catalogue essay, architecture and engineering have played critical roles in reshaping vast stretches of global cities into platforms for the new economy. Two features become legible in this process. One of them is that. What is usually interpreted today as the homogenizing of the built environment of cities is partly a mis-interpretation. The new hyperspace for global firms and the new transnational professionals is actually a kind of infrastructure for global business, rather than being about cities. In that sense I speak of architecture as “inhabited infrastructure”. Secondly, in building that platform for global capital, architecgture and engineering, urban planning become political, whether they want it or not. Why? Because that platform reprsents and expanded terrain, that you can measure in kilometers in all these cities. That expanded terrain inevitably wil mean the displacement of others –low-profit firms and low-income households are the most dramatic cases. In this process, the city moves from a civic space to a politicized space. Politics is wired into urban space.

Liane Lefaivre: Sounds like this is an attempt to, if you’ll pardon the term, “urbanize architecture.” And, frankly, to architectural ears it sounds very foreign. It strikes me that you too would have trouble figuring out what a lot of architects have to say about the city. Urbanists and architects are apparently both talking about the city, but in totally different terms. I think this is what is so interesting about this Biennale. It is jumpstarting a discussion that was cut off about 30 years ago.

MAKING PUBLIC INTERVENTIONS IN TODAY’S MASSIVE CITIES

Saturday, September 9th, 2006

The enormity of the urban experience, the overwhelming presence of massive architectures and dense infrastructures, as well as the irresistible utility logics that organize much of the investments in today’s cities, have produced displacement and estrangement among many individuals and whole communities. Such conditions unsettle older notions and experiences of the city generally and public space in particular.  While the monumentalized public spaces of European cities remain vibrant sites for rituals and routines, for demonstrations and festivals, increasingly the overall sense is of a shift from civic to politicized urban space, with fragmentations along multiple differences.

At the same time, these cities contain a diversity of under-used spaces, often characterised more by memory than current meaning. These spaces are part of the interiority of a city, yet lie outside of its organising utility-driven logics and spatial frames. They are “terrains vagues” that allow many residents to connect to the rapidly transforming cities in which they live, and to bypass subjectively the massive infrastructures that have come to dominate more and more spaces in their cities. Jumping at these terrains vagues in order to maximize real estate development would be a mistake from this perspective. Keeping some of this openness, might, further, make sense in terms of factoring future options at a time when utility logics change so quickly and often violently–excess of high rise office buildings being one of the great examples.

This opens up a salient dilemma about the current urban condition in ways that take it beyond the fairly transparent notions of high-tech architecture, virtual spaces, simulacra, theme parks. All of the latter matter, but they are fragments of an incomplete puzzle. There is a type of urban condition that dwells between the reality of massive structures and the reality of semi-abandoned places. I think it is central to the experience of the urban, and it makes legible transitions and unsettlements of specific spatio-temporal configurations. Architecture and urban design can also function as critical artistic practices that allow us to capture something more elusive than what is represented by notions such as the theme-parking of cities.Saskia Sassen’s new books are Territory, Authority, Rights: From Medieval to Global Assemblages (Princeton 2006); and a third edition of Cities in a World Economy (Sage 2006).