‘The
transformation of the rues renovate the dilapidation and mess, but it, in the
meanwhile, destroy the districts which could reflect Paris culture and the
civil societies.’
Today, people praise Haussman for his
contribution to the complete new look of Paris. They enjoy the boulevards, neat
street, magnificent architectures and give most of the credit to the
‘Haussmannization’. However, it seems most people forgot the cost of that huge
renovation, the dark side of that project. But it is the dark side of that
reconstruction that should be remembered and become cautionary to the
contemporary urban modernization process.
Haussmann started his tenure after the Napoleon III became the emperor of the Second Empire (Van
Zanten, 1994). Napoleon appointed Haussmann to rebuild old shabby Paris which
was formed from medieval time. From Haussmann assumed office in 1853 to his
ouster in 1870, it is the period which is known as ‘the period of
Haussmannization’. Haussmann planned the new Paris on imperial orders, he paid
attention to the geometrical ideas but abandoned humanistic spirit. He divide
the new Paris into 20 arrondissements, rebuild the roads through the principles
of perfectly straight and exceeding board. This transformation renovate the
dilapidation and mess, but it, in the meanwhile, destroy old
Paris and in place of its beauty and charm imposed dull uniformity and its civil
societies (Jordan, D. P., 1992). Haussmann beautified and purified Paris,
he built up new large squares, theatres, monuments, railway stations and
government buildings in neo-classicism style. He also renewed sewer and water
supply systems comprehensively. But another side of this beautification has
always been ignored, Haussmann has expelled and demolished the residents their
dwellings in Paris, and built up new, fancy but expensive housings which they could
not afford to live (Nichols, 2015). His transformation to Paris was somehow
based on the sacrifice of the lower societies.
Napoleon III and Haussmann’s
project progressed smoothly was because nothing but the citizens’ desire of
rebuilding Paris. However, Napoleon was not trying to ‘transform’ Paris, he was
trying to rebuild Paris after demolish it. Many architectures with high
historical values has been demolished, civil societies based on commune has
been destroyed. All the old parts of the city were all ready to be destroyed in
order to build new squares and municipal facilities.
Due to their reckless transformation to
Paris, they have used much more money that the empire could afford at that
time. Haussmann wrote in one of his memoires that they planned to use about 2.5
billion franc during 1851 to 1869. But the actual number was far more than
their plan. They have put heavy debts to their empire and even the successive
French Third Republic needed to dispose those debts.
The Haussmann's renovation of Paris is a
successful but unsuccessful precedent of urban modernization. He excessively
encouraged materialism and utilitarianism but forgot about humanity. Overall,
his project was using Instrumental Reason to destroy the humanist rationality
on the behalf of urban modernism. And this is one of the reasons that he did
not success at last.
Camillo Sitte, an influential Austrian
city planner, was well known as the founder of romantic "picturesque"
urbanism (Moravánszky, 2006). Sitte paid a lot attention on the aesthetics of
the urban space rather than the aesthetic of a single architecture. His famous
book City Planning According to Artistic Principles
(1965) has demonstrated his rethinking about the 19th century’s end
urbanism. He studied the urban spaces where the citizens loved, and he found
out they did not to be the grand palaces or large-scale squares. What citizens
loved is the well-proportioned, corresponding, picturesque urban spaces. Therefore,
he proposed a free design, a city where architectures were distributed
harmoniously, a space where surrounded by squares and streets. Therefore, many
of the Sitte’s city planning are highly irregular and informal but they still
made people appreciate the beauty of the city.
Sitte’s plan ideas were exactly the
opposite of Haussmann’s, he was the first person analyze urban planning through
the aspects of space and humanity. He has left the later generations profound
influence on the pursuing of cultural and arrangement of space.
However, Sitte is not perfect likewise.
His extreme praise of the medieval narrow, winding space led him neglected the hygiene
and ventilation issues. He, somehow, simply treated urban planning as an
artistic matter. This view was obviously lack of objectivity and
practicability. Even so, his ideas were still considered as the ‘textbook’ of
urban planning. His values about the harmonious humanistic spirit contained in
the harmonious space was worth spreading. His ideas worth great value to the
contemporary city planner and help to remind them to be sane during the process
of urban modernism.
References:
Moravánszky, Á. (2006). Camillo Sitte:
Romantic or Realist? the Picturesque City Reconsidered. East Central Europe, 33(1),
293-308. doi:10.1163/187633006x00141
Nichols, D. (2015). Haussmann, Sitte and
Streetscapes. Speech, University of Melbourne.
Jordan, D. P. (1992). Baron Haussmann and
modern Paris. American Scholar, 61(1), 99.
Sitte, C. (1965). City planning according
to artistic principles. New York: Random House.
Van Zanten, D. (1994). Building Paris.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment