The City of To-Morrow and Its Planning by Le Corbusier - Book Report/Review Example

Le Corbusiers the of to-morrow and its planning Introduction Le Corbusiers the of to-morrow and its planning is a textthat focuses on the concept of reason as the major influence behind the path that man takes, with a view that man is not informed by the sense of feelings and instincts, but rather by the targeted goal that needs to be achieved (Le Corbusier 11). In this respect, the essence of architectural planning is not to give man an easy way out in establishing buildings, towns and settlements, but to provide the sense of sustainability and comfort. Thus, man predicts the results in advance, and then works towards achieving such results, based on the previous experiences that he has had (Le Corbusier 12). The cultural context of this text, as developed by Le Corbusier, is the many international travels he had taken, just to study the nature of architecture in different world cities, while studying the motivations behind the establishment of such structures. Most especially, the cultural context of the architectural and planning philosophy of Le Corbusier is his visit to the Charterhouse of the Valley of Ema in Italy, where he observed the setting of the Charterhouse building, which translated to the beautiful and peaceful life of the monks situated there (Steyn, 85). This experience informed his architectural and planning designs for the rest of his career. Thus, through experiences from travelling, studying and working in different cities of the world, Le Corbusiers emerged as one of the pioneers of the concept of modern architecture, and the founding father of the modernist movement in planning and architecture, which provided for the reconciliation of architectural designs with technological advancement, to meet the needs of the modern society (Frampton, 27). However, his modernist and contemporary architectural and planning design philosophy, drawn from his wide travels to modern cities as well as the Charterhouse experience, led to his propagation of a new urban architectural dispensation. Therefore, Le Corbusier has been criticized for disregarding history (Steyn, 83). Thus, this discussion seeks to interrogate the logic of this text by Le Corbusier, with a view to provide valid substantiation, that despite the numerous criticisms, the Le Corbusier’s urban architectural ideas are applicable in addressing the modern housing needs. Discussion According to Le Corbusiers text, the City of to-morrow and its planning, “man walks in a straight line because he has a goal and knows where he is going” (Le Corbusier 11). This is opposed to the path taken by a pack of donkeys, which is that of applying zigzag move, to achieve the path of less resistance. In this respect, Le Corbusier observes that unfortunately, rather than the architectural and the planning designs of larger cities such as Paris being informed by the need to avoid difficulties, they should be informed by the modern housing sustainability needs (Le Corbusier 12). In this respect, it has now become difficult and almost impossible to expand such cities, despite the increasing need for housing more populations within the cities, due to the growth of urbanization and modernity, which sees many people streaming into the cities consistently (Le Corbusier 16). The difficulty of navigating the streams which was the basis of establishing such towns, as well as the difficultly in navigating the road and the accessibility infrastructure has rendered the expansion of such cities impossible (Le Corbusier 16). Thus, this difficulty emanated from the failure of the architectural and planning designers of such cities to take the man’s way that is straight but demanding and with much strain, rather opting to take the pack-donkeys way, which is curvilinear, yet with fewer obstacles (Le Corbusier 11). Therefore, the curvilinear path that was taken historically has become a major hindrance to the modern cities development and expansion. Therefore, this failure to take the human reasoning and objective while establishing the cities has resulted to the paralyzing nature of the curvilinear choice. It is this difficulty currently experienced by such cities that require that they should perceive the rectilinear mode of architectural planning of American cities with admiration (Le Corbusier 16). This is because, such cities were planned and designed with reason as the major factor, while predicting the outcome and the future needs that were fundamentally informed by sustainability. Thus, the failure to apply action, reaction and self-mastery of the social needs has resulted in the ruin of the traditional major cities, where they have been overcome by the modern cities, which were planned and designed based on the incorporation of the future social needs Le Corbusier (Le Corbusier 18). Le Corbusiers text, the City of to-morrow and its planning, faults the traditional mode of developing cities since it has failed to provide sustainability. However, he has been criticized for applying a more revolutionary than evolutionary approach, which has henceforth negated the historical context of architecture and planning design (Woodruff, 210). Thus, according to critics, Le Corbusiers approach is therefore impractical, considering that it is based on the principle of pulling down the entire city as it was established by the traditional architectural model, and replace the same with an entirely different modernist architectural design, which will then cater for the sustainability of the city and its future social needs (Woodruff, 210). The Le Corbusier approach has attracted much criticism over the history and it is also the subject of much scrutiny even close to a century from when it was first launched (Dunnett, 1). In fact, it has even become less influential over time, owing to some of the limitations associated with the approach, such as its inapplicability to resolving the problems facing the traditional architectural messes, which have resulted in the congestion of the current major cities in the world. Nevertheless, while his approach is radical and almost devoid of historical considerations, he has been instrumental in advocating for the establishment of modern architecture and design plans that centers on “geometric plots that are set at wide intervals with geometric streets”, which will then be surrounded by parks (Woodruff, 210). This is a conceivable and practical modernistic approach to planning for the future development of urban areas, considering that it is a plan that will afford sustainability. The essence of this modernist approach is that it will be very instrumental in decongesting cities and modern urban developments, since it will ensure the sustainability of future expansion of such urban settings. Therefore, the Le Corbusier debate has refused to die, due to its practical approach to the modern urban developments, and the developments focused on the future sustainability. In this respect, the approach is once again being re-examined in the UK, owing to the projected massive demand for housing in the UK’s major cities particularly in the South East, which is raising more fear for countryside encroachment (Dunnett, 1). The only problem associated with this radical revolutionary approach advocated for by Le Corbusier is that; it can only apply for the modern urban developments that are being established, but can do little to help resolve the problem already facing the traditional developments, which are now the current modern and major cities in the world (Hickman, 33). This is because, the Le Corbusier approach advocates for measures that are impractical, which would entail the effective pulling down of such cities, to redesign and reconstruct them afresh, based on the modern geometric design (Woodruff, 211). The urban architectural mode proposed by Le Corbusier is essential for the modern urban development consideration. This is due to the fact that the city of three million model proposed the development of a high-density modern development approach, that may not consist of skyscrapers, but with a seven-story building limit, which offers high population concentration at the heart of the cities, surrounded by a green-belt of low-density suburbs, which can later be upgraded into high-density zones too, depending on the future social demands (Dunnett, 1). However, this approach was later abandoned, and instead another approach advocated by linear industrial city model, which advocated for 20-storey slab blocks that would comprise of residential accommodation and sources of domestic supply patched together, and then streets horizontally cutting across the blocks (Dunnett, 2). Both of these models are essential models for consideration in the modern architectural designs, owing to their potentiality in resolving the congestion problem in major cities, while also averting the uncontrolled expansion of the cities laterally, to encroach on the countryside (Dunnett, 7). Nevertheless, this approach to modern development has also been associated with the major problem of monotonous and single-zoning urban development, which is mostly car-development centered, as opposed to other social needs driven (Steyn, 83). Thus, while the Le Corbusier’s approach to modern urban development is instrumental in resolving the potential congestion problem in major cities, it falls short of meeting the essential needs of aesthetic considerations, as well as remaining boring and regimental (Steyn, 83). Thus, the Le Corbusier’s approach to modern urban development would fall short of one major objective of the urban city developments, which is to make such urban developments major travelers’ destinations, through incorporation of modernistic architectural design plans that are diverse and multi-faceted, affording the visitors marvel urban features (Jacobs, 34). Further criticisms that have emerged regarding Le Corbusier’s approach to modern development include the fact that he was observed as an advocate of the separation of the rich from the poor communities (Jacobs, 22). In this respect, Le Corbusier has been accused of developing models that would enhance high-density living at the heart of the major cities, and then have such cities surrounded by a greenbelt of suburbs (Dunnett, 1). This advocacy is simply perceived to be an advocacy for separation, where the rich and well-to-do communities are isolated to live at the heart of the major urban developments, where the linear architectural design affords them close proximity to domestic supplies, while the poor are isolated to live in the suburbs, where such design of proximity to supplies is not emphasized (Mumford, 61). The effect of this advocacy, the critics observe, would be the disintegration of the social systems in the urban regions, through breaking the integral social tie between the rich and the poor communities, caused by the separation approach (Mumford, 62). The advocacy for the separation of the residential, the industrial and the commercial areas of the urban developments as advocated by Le Corbusier’s approach is yet another source of criticism. The models have been accused of isolating communities, killing innovation and creating unnatural urban spaces, due to lack of meaningful integration and diversity of the three sets of urban settings (Jacobs, 151). Nevertheless, it is observable that the advocacy for the separation of different urban development setting, such that the industrial and commercial settings are separated from the residential settings is highly advantageous, especially in the modern urban settings. This is because, the separation of the settings as advocated by Le Corbusier’s models approach to urban development were informed by the challenges of dirtiness and overcrowding, which are risk factors to more social and health problems for the urban communities (Mumford, 59). The current negative health implications of urban settings on the urban population, which is associated with industrial pollution and automobile emissions is a major indication of the foresightedness of Le Corbusier, who was able to predict the occurrence of such problems almost a century ago (Jacobs, 147). Further, it is through Le Corbusier’s models that the credibility to automobiles as a major influence of the urban development planning was first felt, and there is no doubt that his projections regarding how the automobiles play an essential role in urban planning has been authenticated in the post-modern architectural designing (Hickman, 77). The most important of the concept of automobile centered design for urban centers is the concept of freeways in urban spaces, which has been instrumental in decongesting traffic in major modern cities globally (Steyn, 102). Further, the Le Corbusier approach remains instrumental for the modern urban development architecture and planning, because it provided for the connection of the high-density area within the heart of the modern cities, to the suburb locales, allowing for future development of such regions as overflows for the high-density cities (Steyn, 97). This concept has proved most instrumental in the post-modern urban development, due to the high social demand for housing in urban regions. Works Cited Dunnette, James. Le Corbusier and the city without streets. New York: Spon Press, 1987. 1-26. Print. Frampton, Kenneth. Le Corbusier. London: Thames and Hudson, 2001. Print. Hickman, Miranda B. The Geometry of Modernism. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2005. Print. Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House, 1993. Le Corbusier. The City of Tomorrow and its Planning. London: John Rodker, 1929. 11-12, 16-18. Print. Mumford, Lewis (4 February 1950). "The Sky Line: Civic Virtue". The New Yorker 25 (50): 58–63. Steyn, Gerald. “Le Corbusier’s town-planning ideas and the ideas of history.” SAJAH, ISSN 27, 1(2012): 83-106. Print. Woodruff, Clinton R. “The City of To-Morrow and Its Planning by Le Corbusier”. Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science 149, 1: (1930): 210-211. Print. Read More