Once Upon a Time in Brasilia, 1960
A planned a.k.a. contextual utopia
Most people (outside Brazil) would guess Rio de Janeiro (or Sao Paulo) is the capital of Brazil, only few would guess and know it is actually Brasilia. Perhaps not surprising since the city had less than 60 years since it’s foundation to work on its fame and reputation.
From 1763 until 1960 the capital of Brazil was indeed Rio de Janeiro. Between 1808 and 1820 Rio de Janeiro even functioned as capital of Portugal, making it the only European capital outside Europe ever. This was a consequence of the Napoleonic war in Europe which made the Portuguese Royal family and some 10.000 Lisbon noblemen flee the country and cross the ocean to embark in Rio de Janeiro.
It made the southeast coast thrive even more and naturally it became the most populous, wealthy and powerful area in Brazil. But, Brazil was (and is) also one of the largest countries in the world, especially in terms of land area. In other words, it represents far more than the tiny bit of southeast coastal area. This growing awareness led to an increasing concern and desire to have a more central capital in order to better connect the strong local identities dispersed over 8,5 million square kilometers.
And so it happened that in the 50ties the upheaval led to ambitious plans to design the perfect city located in the ‘center’ of Brazil. Architects Lucio Costa and Oscar Niemeyer had the great task and honor to design ‘Brasilia’. They were heavily inspired by the modernist architect Le Corbusier, a grandmaster in urban planning who was dedicated to create better living conditions for residents in crowded cities.
Eventually, in 1960, Brasilia was founded and with it yet another utopian-intended city! Most of the original designs, affected by the wisdom, zeitgeist and technological advancements of the day, were constructed between 1956 and 1960. One can twist about the beauty of things. Brasilia definitely possesses some great buildings, beautiful parks and (in bird-eye-view) has astonishing sights. On another note it is highly questionable whether the intended ideals during the design and planning phase resulted in a perfect and utopian city anno 2019?
From an architects point of view the context and space people live in are of primary concern to install a perfect, utopian and happy civilization. Nonetheless, without daring to admit we are unable to capture future knowledge and advancements in architecture, without building resilient to change cities and without daring to let nature lead design. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t say planned cities like Brasilia are ‘failed’ experiments or plans, not at all. But they are firstly based on present-day systems and secondly and more importantly they didn’t include the human happiness as a starting point but rather and predominantly economic and governing values. In Asia, primarily China, the advent of planned cities is very prevalent with many examples from recent decades. Most of these cities are built around economic and industrial drivers as a starting point. Some might include the sociological aspect to prove or most probably pretend it is a people-centered design or plan (calling it socio-economic). In reality it seems that people come second (if not third) though.
And although most present-day metropolis might have been the consequence of uncontrollable and organic growth and (un)fortunate incidents and events over a longer period of time. The story of Brasilia is not exceptional, in fact, the principle of planned cities (or new towns) whereby a planned urban community is created in a rural or undeveloped area and designed to be self-sufficient with its own housing, education, commerce and recreation has been an ongoing practice since the first civilizations sprouted from the earth.
Whether it be one of the earliest known civilizations of the Sumerian in Mesopotamia and the remarkably sophisticated engineering and urban planning of civilizations in the Indus Valley a few thousand years B.C.. Whether it be the astonishing metropoles such as Rome, Constantinople (now Istanbul) or Baghdad built and founded in the first millennium empires. Whether it be the thoroughly laid out (trade) capitals emerging in the age of discovery and the establishment of the New World such as St. Petersburg (in Russia), Amsterdam (in Netherlands), New Amsterdam (now New York in the US) and Washington D.C. (1791 in US). Or whether it be one of the many thoroughly designed and planned capitals in the last century such as Brasilia, Canberra (1913 in Australia), Islamabad (in Pakistan), New Delhi (1911 in India) or Abuja (1980 in Nigeria). The creation of new towns and planned cities has been of all times.
It appears that all urban planning and architecture are prone to some extent of utopianism. Whether it be Nova Huta, Levittown, Kaliflower, Paris, St. Petersburg, Carolina or even the city you live in, who doesn’t want to be an utopia. And let’s face it, do you really belief that the people responsible for building and growing a city do it without having an ideal future scenario in mind? The key question is, with which ideals did policy makers, planners, architects or whomever involved build their Utopia’s: money, power, aesthetics, fame, happiness, ecology, nature, work, living, leisure….?
These ideals and drivers determine among others the blossoming and blooming or in contrast the downfall and deterioration of places. But one thing they all have in common, nobody can ever predicted the (organic) development, growth or decline of a place and the ultimate result or end of it. Therefore, planning as well as visions have an expiry date by definition, only by admitting this and taking this aspect into account a “plan” or “vision” might be more resilient and sustainable to anticipate inevitable change.
One place which started with a great prophetic ‘vision’ which actually manifested itself, was unexpectedly interrupted to yet become a place nobody could ever imagine. Read about it in the next story!