Regional and Urban Design Committee

Back to discussion forums
Expand all | Collapse all

Cities, Architecture and Corporate Power

  • 1.  Cities, Architecture and Corporate Power

    Posted 03-13-2015 04:50 PM
    This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: College of Fellows and Regional and Urban Design Committee .
    -------------------------------------------

    Do Cities Need Sugar Daddies? 

    The triangle of power, cities and architecture may be best illustrated by Cosimo de Medici. Son of Florentine banker who bested his competitor, Cosimo had so much wealth that he was able to direct the Florentine political system. He soon looked beyond money and politics, and attempted an impossible architectural feat: covering the gigantic dome of Florence, which had remained uncovered for quite some time. Success meant construction of the largest span of roof ever attempted.  When Cosimo engaged the architect Bruneleschi and the dome was built, the accomplishment led his home-town to flourish, laying the cornerstone for what would eventually be known as the Renaissance.
    Cosimo Medici 
    There are many examples of cities that flourish when powerful interests take hold. The German Hanse, a trade-guild, brought success to a whole series of German port cities. John W. Garret brought wealth and power to Baltimore when he started his B&O Railroad empire here, and he built a number of memorable structures that still bring Baltimore glory.
    But history also shows that such patronage has a flip side. Under the Medici the Republican form of government practiced in Florence was warped into one of nearly absolute power, where the Medici became duchesses and made even the Pope a puppet of their regime.
    Industrialization made corporate power the standard model, with big corporations having an almost complete and feudal hold on entire towns and cities, small (Bethlehem, PA and Bethlehem Steel), large (Detroit with the "Big Three") and in between (Pittsburgh and Carnegie Steel). From growing up in a town dominated by one employer, I know: When the corporation sneezes, the town gets a fever.
    And today? Did full corporate power come to an end in an era of distributed power, with citizens in control whether they are employed by the company or not? Corporate monopolies must surely be a thing of the past in the age of "Occupy," petitions, referenda, propositions, recalls, market disruption, and internet shit-storms, right?
    Or are the new-age IT giants of Microsoft, Google, Apple, Amazon or Facebook the new Medici, now on a global scale? Are cities in these days of public poverty more than ever dependent on bankers, insurance companies, corporations and big developers? Many would argue that big money still pulls all the strings, especially in cities where all politics are supposedly local. As proof they point to the huge divisions between glamour and misery which are especially evident and glaring in the big cities where average life expectancy of populations can vary by 20 years over just a few miles.

    What made me consider these questions is the emergence of a new power house in Baltimore after decades of losing out on headquartering Fortune 500 firms. A strong voice is emerging from semi-hiding in Baltimore, making quite strong statements that were all over the press last week.


    Read article

    -------------------------------------------
    Klaus Philipsen FAIA
    Archplan Inc. Philipsen Architects
    Baltimore MD
    -------------------------------------------
    24.04.30 RUDC AIAU


  • 2.  RE: Cities, Architecture and Corporate Power

    Posted 03-16-2015 09:19 PM
    I'm trying to figure what you are thinking about Klaus, along the lines of "social development" by a company like under Armour? If the responsibility to relieve entrenched poverty comes with the entrepreneur and developer, you're saying that only a heavily armored political force can bring about desired change. It may be more desirable to take public funds and fix the infrastructure, so show me the money. Industry and that includes Google and Apple bring boom to economies that stretch across the world. That any locality has to put up with it (?), provide labor, and skilled employees, and leadership and, materials, and services, and create other opportunities, well the whole darn works to the industry, and thus there's a kind of synergy that's created between the city and the industry. It isn't setting out to "correct" or "untrench"  or "equalize" or "planning with the people" its proper social impact on Baltimore, or on a world market for that matter, in a world that needs more help than Baltimore, generally. What does making gym clothing have to do with.........it? 

    Call it  "sugar daddyism" or Machiavellian. I call it the human condition. The I phone wasn't invented to correct social injustice, but it has probably had a larger effect in connecting people around the world to understand justice, and equality, and understanding, than all that social engineers ever planned. Thank god and human passion for creating new cities based on ingenuity and hard work, without a preconceived notion of how it was supposed to look.. I'll put up with the egos of real genius for the enrichment of life they have brought, and the riches they bring indirectly to improve the human condition.   

    Allen E Neyman
    Rockville, MD
    -------------------------------------------


    Original Message
    24.04.30 RUDC AIAU