the global villagePosted: 12/26/2011 | |
i’ve been reading and writing a bit on humans (as individuals and as societies) and their interaction with space. it brings me back to an idea. an object. the boundaries that i create for myself, while defining myself as an individual, surely gives me more leeway in terms of creative and spiritual (or rather philosophical) pursuits. but, like we jotted down in chai kadai today, it is a sense of community that i actually long for. living in a city, it is the hardest to find. bringing back the individual into the community, is extremely important. i think rummaging through literature on biology, sociology, anthropology, art, theatre, engineering, architecture, philosophy, psychology, history, and maybe anything else that might pop up, would open a few doors for me. for today, the notebook opens with city planning:
i studied this in school, environmental studies – an extremely comprehensive major. our teacher, suchitra akka, had actually compiled material from various sources on a variety of issues that are of critical importance: planning, development, ecology, law, philosophy, agriculture, and many more. we had entire books, pages xeroxed from hundreds of journals, downloaded material from everywhere on the internet, and a lot of field study. technically, today i am just trying to recollect, and there was this one bit on city planning (on different zone models) that popped into my head, and i think it was piece by miller. this article was mostly just images, but was trying to assess, as far as how the world has already been developed, what could be the most suited model of a city that supports social and environmental equality, a urban heart based on sustainability. he saw the city as a reflection of the anatomy of the society that created it and lives in it. he also takes into account that cities are ever-breeding living beings. he picked (if i remember correctly) three city zone models — concentric, sector and multiple nuclei.
one of the earliest was created by ernest burgess in 1924 — concentric zone model. the image reminds me of a similar image my economics teacher, kumar anna, used to explain david ricardo’s theory on rent and value. burgess superimposed the city of chicago with his theories on human ecology to find this model. as i read more, i actually figured that burgess’ model was very much based on the bid rent theory. pleasant surprise, economics actually didn’t fly over my head!
homer hoyt, proposed the sector zone model in 1939. i like his name. 🙂 i have to go sweep the house and cook now. so i am going to leave you with the images of the sector zone and the multiple nuclei zone models. they are pretty self-explanatory, so i have to say goodbye (for now).