Haussmanns Urban Transformers as Creative Destruction - Dissertation Example

 Haussmann’s Urban Transformers as Creative Destruction Creative destruction is a process in which something new is generated, and there is a dismissal of the existing idea or way of doing things. It reconnoiters the process of industrial mutation that continually revolutionizes the existing structures from within, while wisely and incessantly destroying the old one. It is important to look at the extent to which the destruction gives way to creativity. In addition, it is worth highlighting why it should be worth taking creative destruction approach to bring about a change predecessor (Hermansen Cordua 2010, p. 5). This paper critically explores the creative destruction approach taken by Georges Eugene Haussmann and if it impacted positively on the lives of the people of Paris. This paper’s primary focus is on Georges Eugène Haussmann (1809-1891). The paper analyzes his apprehension with the totality of urban space and the inclusiveness. Taking account of the expansiveness of scale of proposals, Georges Eugène Haussmann can be ranked as one of the creative figures of modernist urban planning. Georges Eugène Haussmann was a French prefect of the Seine and worked under Napoleon III. In the course of his administration, 400 miles of pavement, 71 miles of new roads, and 320 miles of more sewers were added in Paris (Pizzi & Weiss-Sussex, 2011, p.19). Housing, bridges, and other public buildings were erected. George Eugene Haussmann was appointed as a member of the Académie des Beaux-Arts in 1867 and in which later in his memories, he stated that he was chosen for qualifications as a ‘’demolition artist.’’ The moment Baron Haussmann came into office as ‘Prefect of the Department of Seine’ in 1853, in the seventh month immediately after the declaration of the second revolution in the region. He was at once given a directive to remake Paris, according to plan. At this time, Paris was still bustling with the same economic, political and social challenges which weighed in substantially to the 1848 revolution predecessor (chapman & chapman 1957, p. 34). Recovery economically from one of the initial full-fledged predicaments of capitalist over-accumulation was obstructed by many barriers. Through critical view and analysis of the city of Paris in this era, there was no link between capital and labor. However, strong tie artisan group in the city still founded the fragmented and an active political force. Locally, the national market undermined the rationalization of urban space. Paris was held down by a repression of 18th-century models of social customs enclosed in a medieval structure of physical infrastructure. Before Georges Eugène Haussmann came into office, Paris was not admirable. This could be the reason he was considered the most influential prefect compared to his predecessor. Before him the city center was the overcrowded, dangerous, unhealthy and dark predecessor (chapman & chapman 1957, p. 34). The city’s population density in most neighborhoods was high. In these conditions, various diseases spread very quickly such as cholera. Through critical analysis, there was an urgent need to stop the spread of these health hazards and therefore develop the city. Traffic movement was another major challenge. Carts, wagons, and carriages could barely move through most streets. Moreover, Paris being confined hindered its transformation and growth to an organized urban center. The city was in chaos, and this is what led Napoleon III to assign George Haussmann the task of leading in rebuilding the city. The center of Paris city was as well a cradle of discontent and revolution. Seven armed revolts and uprisings had happened in the center of Paris between 1830 and 1848. This was witnessed especially around the Hotel de Ville, the Faubourg Saint-Antoine, and Montagne Saint-Genevieve (Ferguson 1997, p. 12). The residents of these localities had taken up pavement stones and blocked their narrow streets with barricades, and had to be removed by the military officers. At this time Paris markets were established in narrow streets, portraying their filthiness, causing continuing disorders and spreading infection. Before Georges Eugène Haussmann came into office, there was little to be desired. There were protests in the city of Paris that the government had invested in so many utilities instead of investing in public works. Under the Authority of Napoleon III, General Georges Eugène Haussmann was in charge of tearing up streets of Paris and razing whole localities. Before the general, the city of Paris was fundamentally one big construction site. To change this, Napoleon III and his consultants, implemented wide-ranging measures. The most important was probably the initiation of a modern credit system. The importance was defined by the ability to change conservative banking system integrated by Rothschild hence allowing developers and small investors to enter the market predecessor (Saalman 1971, p. 90). This state directed speculation plan, and state-funded public works to absorb surpluses of labor and capital also enticed large and middle developers into the market and altered the city into a landscape of permanent change. Necessity is always the mother of invention, and this is what lingered in the mind of the transformers to enhance creative destruction to make the decisive alteration. Georges Eugène Haussmann being the man in charge of the changes to be made in the Medieval Paris, he took total control of the demolishing process. In the course of his administration, 400 miles of pavement, 71 miles of new roads, and 320 miles of more sewers were added in Paris. Housing, bridges, and other public buildings were erected (Hazan, 2011, p.111). During his tenure in office, he also added 20,000 gas lamps to the city of Paris and took meticulous caution to ensure the streets and the architecture stayed elegantly harmonious and symmetrical. In cases where the street lights never all equal in height due to uneven ground, some of the lamp posts would be shaved down or given stilts to ensure they all matched (Ferguson 1997, p. 19). To be able to fulfill his plan, he put in place a sophisticated hierarchical state of territorial administration, with him being at the top helped by his close acquaintances that were spread over the different districts. He as well employed people who were very loyal to him and also talented to help in planning, engineering, and building. The employment became probably the most radical urban makeover in all history. Slums were cleared in the city center; there was the expulsion of the ‘dangerous classes’ to improve good circulation capacity and military forces, as well as people within the city. To interconnect railway stations, the center of the city and the periphery with recreational facilities, commerce, and industry was developed. In addition, there were some constructions undertaken 90 miles of grand boulevards and revolutionized water and sewage flows (Mcculloch, 2009, p. 40). He deployed a completely new view urban space. Instead of working with a collection of autonomous previous plans, he was largely concerned with the absolute urban area, paying exceptional attention to details. He, for instance, monitored the street furnishings designs such as kiosks and gas lamps closely. He opened up the congested neighborhoods for free fresh air circulation and light during daylight. The newly installed lighting using gas turned the boulevards into pumping veins at night thereby making the city’s public life continue to take place (Saalman, 1971, p. 20). Haussmann also aligned asymmetries to create a symmetrical effect on the urban scale. In this regard, he displaced a dome on the commerce tribunal and placed it into the sightline where the Boulevard de Sebastopol was newly built. Haussmann not only had a desire to change individual buildings, but also wanted to create its architectural style and therefore create a whole new city. With all this Haussmann’s desire to beautify the city did not end, with completion of the original projects, he put in place new ones which included annexing the city. In this regard, he put the city into massive debt. He went ahead to make wider streets and this considerably eased the traffic in the city as well as improving the public health since the city was highly populated. Critically analyzing Haussmann’s rebuilding of Paris, we can realize that he used already existing blueprints in most of his work. Specific analysis points at the roads and streets since he did not have the technical skills of urban planning (Waldheim, 2006, p. 43). He had a vision that was actualized through the many infrastructural changes that were put in place in Paris. His taste esthetically is also not debatable since his entire plans were characterized maintenance of the existing beauty of the city (Hazan, 2011, p.111). For instance, along the new roads, he provided that the rows of chestnut trees are formerly living was not interfered with (Foster & Kaplan, 2001, p.14). Although ambitious to create a new Paris, the current architecture of the city proved to be a great enemy of him when laying out his new plans. Furthermore, was faced with a challenge, since his respect for the old monuments outweighed his need to unify the city, therefore, river seine acted as a barrier that separated Paris into two. This also meant that the roads that he once had the ambition of being a link of the riverbanks did not succeed. Though he did not actualize his initial plan, the roads remain to be useful to the people of Paris because they lead to the city center from various train stations. They also result in the many monuments found throughout the city (Kirkland, 2013, p. 56). The architectural designs clearly show that Haussmann did not fail to his plan to beautify Paris. He simply destroyed the old to create a new, which to him, was a savior to those who lived in Paris. Although his work was criticized later because of the way he overspent money and even led Paris into so much debt, his work remains as a legacy in the hearts of many for the positive change he created in the city. It is in order to take note that as it appears, critically looking at today’s Paris, there is many changes that are there thanks to Haussmann. Therefore, his destructive approach of rebuilding Paris brought about many creative ideas which were implemented to bring about an admirable state of the art city. The new roads networks also altered the standard shape of blocks (Ferguson, 1997, p. 11). It has been found previously that several urban road networks incline to intersect at right angles, dividing up the space or portion ever more finely into rectangular or square blocks like the crack channels of ceramic glazes. That is what Paris city looked like before the 1850s. However, the original boulevards sliced wieldy through this grid, creating a wider variety of block figure, especially elongated rectangles and triangles. So whether the Second Empire reorganizations and creative destruction transformed the face of the city of Paris is a subtle question. Critically speaking, some of the changes over the ninetieth Century, such as massive street density and rose in intersections, might have happened due to the ever rising in population anyway (Ferguson, 1997, p. 63). In critical argument, Haussmann stamped a “non-natural” geometry of the city’s evolving network. It is worth noting that General Georges Eugène Haussmann’s plans were criticized both at his time and by architects who came after him. However, it looks as though he did a perfect job, making the city center less crowded in a way that Parisians still benefit from today. The Haussmann's transformations to the city of Paris improved the quality of life of people in the capital, and that remains to be one of his great legacy and attachment to his people. Disease epidemics were minimized; traffic movements enhanced and new buildings were better constructed and more functional than their predecessors (Mead & Baltard 2012, p.90). His creative destruction by a fact left a lasting impression. The end of "pure Haussmann’s" can be tracked to urban laws of 1882 and 1884 that stopped the uniformity of the classical Paris Street. By allowing staggered facades and the original creativity for roof-level architecture or construction, the latter would develop much after the 1902 regulations later liberalized restrictions. It is clear that this point to the fact that Georges Eugène Haussmann had a lasting impression. The impression was projected to the residents of Paris only but also to the architects who came after him (Foster & Kaplan 2001, p.11). Contrary to the myths and critics that surround Georges Eugène Haussmann, the truth is unequivocal. He was an individual who defined the vision for the city of Paris and looked for the political ways to implement the visions of the people. He did this passionately, and that is why he is still rated very highly by the residents of Paris. During his tenure in office, Georges also added 20,000 gas lamps to the city of Paris. In addition, he took meticulous caution to ensure the streets and the architecture stayed elegantly harmonious and symmetrical (Kirkland 2013, p. 64). In cases where the street lamps never all equal in height due to uneven ground, some of the lamp posts would be shaved down or given stilts to ensure they all matched. Architects have for years adopted this set of architectural planning and strategies in improving the city outlook (chapman & chapman, 1957, p. 14). The regime that came after Georges Eugène Haussmann criticized his contribution in Paris designers and preferred adopting new models, but it did not take the time before the new models were replaced with his ideas. These new models and designs were quickly brought into question by the 1970s. The period is viewed as a period of reflecting on a de-emphasis of the Haussmann heritage and legacy in architect. In addition, the period was also characterized a new elevation of the multifunctional street was supplemented by limitations of the building designs. This was achieved in particular quarters by an attempt to revive the architectural consistency of the Second Empire street-block. Furthermore, the Parisian residents now have a favorable opinion of the Haussmann legacy, to the point that certain suburban town. For instance, Puteaux and Issy-les-Moulineaux have constructed new quarters that even by their identity claim which was "Quartier Haussmannian". Haussmanian heritage this further confirms the role he played while at office and the effectiveness of his creative destruction (Sramek 2013, p.124). Through critical thinking and analyzing a conclusion can be drawn about the state of the city of Paris today and the modernity of it. It is a fact that the destruction gave way to creativity to a large degree (Papayanis, 2004, p. 36). It is also essential to point out that destruction was worth the cause since, through it, something more creative was developed in its place. Under the Authority of Napoleon III, General Georges Eugène Haussmann was in charge of tearing up streets of Paris and razing whole localities. Before that, the city of Paris was fundamentally one big construction site (Rice, 2001, p.18). To change this, Napoleon III and his consultants, implemented a wide range of measures. All these clearly show that the city of Paris was never admirable. General Georges Eugène Haussmann brought a lot of substantial changes and creativities that he introduced that gave the City its current stature. Closely related to this was the fact that General Georges Eugène Haussmann left a lot to be desired. As Prefect of the Department of Seine, he left a lasting impression to Paris’ residents and other architects that came after his era. This could be the reason he was considered the most influential prefect compared to his predecessor (Nolan & Croson, 1995, p. 95). References Top of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form CHAPMAN, J. M., & CHAPMAN, B. (1957). The life and times of Baron Haussmann: Paris in the Second Empire. London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson. FERGUSON, P. P. (1997). Paris as revolution: writing the nineteenth-century city. Berkeley, University of California Press. FOSTER, R. N., & KAPLAN, S. (2001). Creative destruction: from 'built to last'to 'built to perform'. London [u.a.], Financial Times Prentice Hall. HAZAN, E. (2011). The Invention of Paris a history in footsteps. London, Verso. http://www.contentreserve.com/TitleInfo.asp?ID={498A2C19-7D68-426A-A9A3-CD0836587EB2}&Format=410. HERMANSEN CORDUA, C. (2010). Manifestoes and transformations in the early modernist city. Farnham [u.a.], Ashgate. KIRKLAND, S. (2013). Paris reborn: Napoléon III, Baron Haussmann, and the quest to build a modern city. MCCULLOCH, J. (2009). Paris secrets: architecture, interiors, quartiers, corners. Mulgrave, Vic, Images Pub. MEAD, C. C., & BALTARD, V. (2012). Making modern Paris: Victor Baltard's Central Markets and the urban practice of architecture. University Park, PA, Pennsylvania State University Press. NOLAN, R. L., & CROSON, D. C. (1995). Creative destruction: a six-stage process for transforming the organization. Boston, Mass, Harvard Business School Press. PAPAYANIS, N. (2004). Planning Paris before Haussmann. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press. PIZZI, K., & WEISS-SUSSEX, G. (2011). The cultural identities of European cities. Bern, Peter Lang. RICE, S. (1999). Parisian views. Cambridge, Mass, MIT. SAALMAN, H. (1971). Haussmann: Paris transformed. New York, G. Braziller. SRAMEK, P. (2013). Piercing time: Paris after Marville and Atget 1865-2012. WALDHEIM, C. (2006). The landscape urbanism reader. New York, Princeton Architectural Press. Read More