Thinking organic, acting civic: The paradox of planning for Cities in Evolution
Thinking organic, acting civic: The paradox of planning for Cities in Evolution
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.06.002
复制
发表时间：
2017-10
影响因子：
9.1
通讯作者：
M. Batty;S. Marshall
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Batty;S. Marshall
帕特里克·格迪斯（Patrick Geddes）在英国城市规划运动的早期，运用以达尔文（1859）的进化论为核心的生物学原理，阐述了城市的发展和设计。他关于社会进化、地方社区设计的想法，以及他反复呼吁通过区域调查和规划来全面理解，为20世纪中期的许多实际规划奠定了基础，无论是关于城市的雏形理论还是规划的实践。但格迪斯有一个比城市规划本身更广泛的议程。他追求一种超越达尔文主义的人生哲学，有时几乎接近精神哲学。然而，他的个人方法和他对自己形式思维的限制意味着，他从来没有能够以一种后人容易理解和建立的方式建立起他的大图景。他给我们留下了诱人的想法，令人回味的短语，以及规划和建设社区的实用哲学，这些理念确实不仅仅是历史上的一个注脚而幸存下来。在本文中，我们确定了现代规划的关键悖论，即试图干预具有巨大复杂性，不断增长和演变的系统，而不是以任何自上而下的方式设计。我们通过格迪斯自己的职业和生活来说明这个悖论，这种自下而上和自上而下之间的紧张关系一直是最突出的。然后，我们概述了他对20世纪中后期的实践规划师和关键知识分子的影响——阿伯克龙比和芒福德，雅各布斯和亚历山大。我们把格迪斯的影响历史带到当代，当复杂性科学专注于不断发展的系统，现在渗透到我们的思想中，提出了各种方法，我们可以通过格迪斯的论点和原则的镜头，以新的眼光来审视过去100年的规划历史
Patrick Geddes articulated the growth and design of cities in the early years of the town planning movement in Britain using biological principles of which Darwin’s (1859) theory of evolution was central. His ideas about social evolution, the design of local communities, and his repeated calls for comprehensive understanding through regional survey and plan laid the groundwork for much practical planning in the mid 20th century, both with respect to an embryonic theory of cities and the practice of planning. But Geddes had a much wider agenda that town planningper se. He sought after a philosophy of life that went well beyond Darwinism verging almost on the spiritual at times. Yet his personal approach and the limits he imposed on his formal thinking meant that he was never able to establish his big picture in a way that later generations could easily grasp and build upon. He left us with enticing ideas, evocative phrases, and a practical philosophy of doing planning and building communities that has indeed survived as something more than a footnote in history. In this essay, we identify the key paradox of modern planning which seeks to intervene in systems that have enormous complexity, growing and evolving rather than being designed in any top-down fashion. We illustrate this paradox through Geddes’ own career and life in which this tension between bottom up and top down was always to the forefront. We then sketch his influence on practicing planners and key intellectuals of the mid to late 20th century—Abercrombie and Mumford, Jacobs and Alexander. We bring this history of Geddes’ influence up to contemporary times when the complexity sciences with all their focus on evolving systems, now permeate our thinking, suggesting various ways in which we might examine the history of the planning in the last 100 years in a new light through the lens of Geddes’ arguments and principles