|
kake
The answer to1984 is 1776.




Registered: 05/06/99
Posts: 2,782
Loc: The 66th harmonic
|
The Tragedy of Suburbia
#7678190 - 11/25/07 02:29 PM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
An excellent presentation on the effects of neglecting proper civic design in our country (with a good dose of humor).
http://www.glumbert.com/media/suburbia
-------------------- The answer to 1984 is 1776.
Edited by kake (11/25/07 02:38 PM)
|
ChiefGreenLeaf

Registered: 01/11/07
Posts: 1,596
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: kake]
#7679235 - 11/25/07 06:27 PM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
He is so right. I have been thinking the same thing to myself for well over a year now.
|
NiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'


Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
|
|
That was rad, thanks! I'm so glad to hear someone articulate how fucking hideously designed our towns are, and what sorts of changes need to take place. I only hope what this guy is talking about catches on, and catches on fast.
This thread belongs in P&S, imo.
|
ChiefGreenLeaf

Registered: 01/11/07
Posts: 1,596
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: NiamhNyx]
#7681599 - 11/26/07 12:11 PM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
^^^ yay i would agree. mods, could you move it? i think it would get more discussion going.
|
Chazzersize
Pokemon Master



Registered: 11/30/03
Posts: 1,274
Loc: Center Of The World
Last seen: 10 years, 8 months
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: kake]
#7681817 - 11/26/07 01:15 PM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
cp3O?
That little fuck up just invalidated you're entire 20 minute display of verbal diarrhea.
Come on, dude. It's fucking star wars. Most 12 year old girls could tell you who they were.
-------------------- Take off my mask and leave the lies to the liars.
Edited by Chazzersize (11/26/07 01:16 PM)
|
a_guy_named_ai
Stranger

Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: kake]
#7683942 - 11/26/07 11:25 PM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I get the point of his talk although I think that he was saying some things that didn't make sense. But it's hard talking about something like this without having studied it.
I think he's right, the period up ahead is going to be a lot different and will have challenges but it could really be better than it has been if people are smart about it. I also disagree that no alternative fuels are a viable solution. I really think hemp could work. But for it to happen a lot of land would have to be freed up, that is currently being used for raising farm animals. Which people probably won't give up, but meat consumption may decrease. Even if it does work, society still couldn't go on living like it is. Honestly I hope that these refined fuels fall out of major use either way. I think if hemp or any form of combustible fuels replaced fossil fuels it would be bad. This type of culture should not be continued. It'd be great to take advantage of this opportunity when it comes.
If you don't like what you see, look inside. It's really no wonder americas architecture and civic centers etc. are tacky, souless, wasteful, hideous disasters that reflect americas post ww2 industrial journey. It reflects america in my opinion. He kept criticizing it as if it didn't fit americans cultural standards.
But I totally agree we should stop throwing around the word consumer. Besides falsely portraying citizens as something much less ..alive and narrow viewed in terms of society, it helps to continue to promote a self identity largely based on commerce and industry.
Edited by jonathan_206 (11/26/07 11:35 PM)
|
kake
The answer to1984 is 1776.




Registered: 05/06/99
Posts: 2,782
Loc: The 66th harmonic
|
|
<looking out the mall window> Wait... you mean, there's an OUTSIDE?
-------------------- The answer to 1984 is 1776.
|
NiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'


Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
|
|
I don't think we should have to give up viable farm land or eating meat, so that we can grow enough hemp to continue driving as much as we do these days. That's what he meant by viable. Food is way more important than driving. It makes way more sense to live closer to work, design urban areas so that amenities are readily accessible - within walking and biking distance, etc. That's what this guy was talking about. That and making aesthetically appealing environments people can be proud to live in, instead of the kind of shitholes that have been spreading thier plague across the landscape for the last several decades. Who doesn't want to live in an attractive neighbourhood? Building whole town to facilitate cars is ridiculous.
|
NiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'


Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: NiamhNyx]
#7684362 - 11/27/07 01:12 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
HEY MODS: can we get a little MOVE to P&S? This topic deserves more exposure!
|
kake
The answer to1984 is 1776.




Registered: 05/06/99
Posts: 2,782
Loc: The 66th harmonic
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: NiamhNyx]
#7684432 - 11/27/07 01:37 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I thought this topic belongs here because the description is "This forum is dedicated to the healthy aspects of living, and what we can do to raise our quality of life. " It's about physical well-being and raising quality of life. Not so much a philosophy but a study of history and a look forward.
-------------------- The answer to 1984 is 1776.
|
kake
The answer to1984 is 1776.




Registered: 05/06/99
Posts: 2,782
Loc: The 66th harmonic
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: kake]
#7684478 - 11/27/07 02:01 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Also, I thought the best line in the movie was "And you know what the last words of that conversation were... 'FUCK IT' "
-------------------- The answer to 1984 is 1776.
|
NiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'


Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: kake]
#7685512 - 11/27/07 11:09 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Fair enough, I just see more people responding over there.
And that line was hilarious. The guy was pretty funny all around, which was what made his lecture so accessible and pleasurable to watch.
|
AlteredAgain
Visual Alchemist



Registered: 04/27/06
Posts: 11,181
Loc: Solar Circuit
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: kake]
#7685563 - 11/27/07 11:24 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Thanks for the video. The guy spoke out on many things that I've always had in my mind. Concrete deserts.. shopping mall parking lots would make great festival grounds.
--------------------
|
a_guy_named_ai
Stranger

Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: NiamhNyx]
#7686077 - 11/27/07 01:30 PM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
don't think we should have to give up viable farm land or eating meat, so that we can grow enough hemp to continue driving as much as we do these days. That's what he meant by viable. Food is way more important than driving.
It's really not as drastic as you make it sound. First off, it's going to happen whether you like it or not, because when the population gets high enough people will have to reduce their meat take. Especially will nations becoming more industrious like china and india.
But it's not like everyone would absolutely have to stop eating meat altogether, although it's not a bad idea. farm animals take up a lot of resources, they're incredibly innefficient. We only eat a small portion of the crops that are grown here. The rest goes to feeding farm animals. And they also take up a huge amount of space in the midwest.
I've seen it said that if somewhere around 6-10% percent or somewhere around there was freed up for cannabis cultivation it could provide all the fuel in the u.s. I don't know how true that is though, but I think if meat consumption was cut in half, things would be alot better off in other areas and it would be entirely possible to provide a lot more fuel. In fact we'd have more food than ever.
I'm not really for all of that though, not that I'm not for hemp fuel, but I just think we use too much fuel now and too much technology now I wouldn't want it continued.
Quote:
It makes way more sense to live closer to work, design urban areas so that amenities are readily accessible - within walking and biking distance, etc. That's what this guy was talking about. That and making aesthetically appealing environments people can be proud to live in, instead of the kind of shitholes that have been spreading thier plague across the landscape for the last several decades. Who doesn't want to live in an attractive neighbourhood? Building whole town to facilitate cars is ridiculous.
I agree with you, but I am cautious. What you're saying reminds me of what canadian leaders seem to want to do. Move everybody into supercities. I don't want to live like that. It's still a continuation of the same out of balance culture. It's really creepy too.
Edited by jonathan_206 (11/27/07 06:30 PM)
|
NiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'


Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
|
|
My point is that it is ridiculous to try and replace oil with hemp when it makes more sense to just drive less and use solar/wind/geothermal energy for our homes. Building 'green' makes a difference as well. Eating local foods instead of shit shipped halfway across the world helps as well. There are a lot of ways to cut back on petroleum consumption - one of the best is reorganizing the way our communities are designed.
You don't have to live in a giant city to be close to a grocery store, a hardware store, and a couple of cafes. Friends of mine live on a tiny rural island with 4 or 5 stores downtown and they have pretty much everything they need not too far from home. The garden pretty heavily to, so that supplements thier diet in a major way.
I don't know what you are talking about with the canada thing, Canadian cities are still way smaller than american cities for the most part, and we've got a lot of rural communities too. We can take the same small towns we currently live in, and instead of having strip mall after strip mall after factory outlet, we could have smaller amenities more frequently interspersed so that people wouldn't have to drive halfway across town to get each item.
|
PyroBurns
душа кофе


Registered: 10/14/07
Posts: 4,343
|
|
I agree that America is fucking ugly most of the time. Just drive around here in Ohio and you'll want to blow your brains out. It looks like someone just dropped a bunch of cruddy boxes everywhere.
-------------------- Remember to cut your nails regularly.
|
a_guy_named_ai
Stranger

Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: NiamhNyx]
#7688961 - 11/28/07 12:52 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I don't know what you are talking about with the canada thing, Canadian cities are still way smaller than american cities for the most part, and we've got a lot of rural communities too. We can take the same small towns we currently live in, and instead of having strip mall after strip mall after factory outlet, we could have smaller amenities more frequently interspersed so that people wouldn't have to drive halfway across town to get each item.
Yeah, I know canada has a lot of rural space. What you were saying wasn't bad, It just reminded me of it. A while ago I was reading this atlas at the library and it was talking about how canda would be in the future. I actually have the page here, I photocopied it for research purposes. It's from:
" The Canadian atlas : our nation, environment and people. Montreal : Reader's Digest Association (Canada) ; Ottawa, Ont. : Canadian Geographic ; Vancouver, B.C. : Douglas & McIntyre, 2004. "
It shows a picture of this twin tower mega city that's out on this island.
Quote:
left: towers massed on a man made island: a visionary model of a 21st century high density urban center from famed archtect arthur erikson.
It's really creepy. I wish I could find a picture of it.
Quote:
How will we live and work?
- In 2050, there will be fewer building starts, and more recycling of existing structures. Older buildings will be massively retrofitted with the latest technological innovations. New homes and workplaces will be smarter, built for energy efficiency nd ease of maintqenance. They will be constructed with self reparing "intelligent materials" capable of responding to enviromental changes. Home and business energy requirements will be supplied by wind and solar power, or by fuel cell or photovactiv devices.
Urban sprawl, already infringing on canadas first rate farmland, will be halted by mid century. A general awareness of the enviromental impact and expense of building and maintaining highways and other infrastructures may diminism the appeal of the suburban, communting lifestyle. By 2050, many people may have returned to the cities, where urban spaces will be more extensively redeveloped for business and residential purposes. In city cores moreover, there will be a high proportion of people living on their own, particularly young singles, widows, and widowers.
- The city bound flow will increase urban densities. Today more than 12 million canadians live and work in toronto, montreal, vancouver, and the edmonton-calgary corridor. Within 50 years, 8 to 10 million more will be concentrated in these centres.
By 2050, all homes will have an entertainment centre, which combines interactive television, telephone, and computing capacity. Household robots will be commonplace. Garages will house small, quiet, nonpolluting battery powered vehicles with ceramic engines and recycles plastic bodies. For the most part, products will be created from recycled materials. At least half of all products will be purchased through the use of a computer.
In 2050, canadians will be better educated, constantly renewing skills to keep up with rapid changes in information and technology. Technological advanges will enable most people to work at home. Retirement will be an outmoded concept. Many seniors will opt to work as long as thier health, and their desire to do so, holds out.
- The 2050 economy may be driven by the knowledge-intensive jobs (design work, for example) administration, education, social work, tourism, leisure, and the cultural field. Only a few will work in the primary sector (farms, fisheries, forests, and mines). Automation will mean small staffs in the manufacturing sector, which will produce high quality goods that will be inexpensive. Some experts say most manufacturing may be sent "offshore"- a trend increasingly apparent in today's global economy. Whether some manufacturing is retained here or goes abroad will depend on comparitive production costs.
I think it's really the new age liberal nwo nutjobs like ted terner who would like to implement this kind of stuff. There's word going around that we're treading the open wilds of nature too much and so we need to concentrate in cities, and also for other reasons.
Edited by jonathan_206 (11/28/07 01:00 AM)
|
NiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'


Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
|
|
Well, is it really so irrational? Sprawl has got to stop right now. I don't want to see any more of Canada's vast wildnerness threatened so that everyone can have thier tacky little palace driving distance from the walmart. Living in a small apartment in the city isn't so bad, if all amenities are closeby and there are distinct, smaller neighbourhoods that function like smaller localized communities. Canada has got to stop sprawling. I'd be horrified to see us lose our wildnerness the way the US has. The population is expanding, and this needs to be dealt with appropriately, with minimal ecological strain. This means we have to seriously reconsider how we do a lot of things.
The source you've quoted is just an estimate though, it's hard to say exactly how things will turn out. Some of the guesses in there are kind of silly and farfetched. I doubt people will buy most things online, people like leaving the house and having a complete sensory experience. When was this written? During the dotcom boom? I also find some of those estimates creepy, but not the curtailment of sprawl- that is a great idea.
|
a_guy_named_ai
Stranger

Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: NiamhNyx]
#7694910 - 11/29/07 01:43 PM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I don't have a problem dealing with urban sprawl either, but for everyone to have to live in these "high-density urban centers" is creepy. Urban sprawl should be addressed by addressing the root problem, which is our culture and way of life.
It just worries me to think of a day when those in power will have coerced the general populace to give up so much freedom. But I believe it's entirely possible.
|
Land_Crab
NeuroticPsychonaut


Registered: 08/29/04
Posts: 2,194
Loc: U.S.
|
Re: The Tragedy of Suburbia [Re: kake]
#7701395 - 11/30/07 11:45 PM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
One of his slides really got me:

^This is a school. Even though the pic quality is poor, it's hard not to recognize the problem here. There's a prison in my area that looks less oppressive. His point about not referring to ourselves as "consumers" is interesting, but I only agree if he's saying we are more than consumers, because our whole lives as members of this society are structured according to production and consumption. It's no coincidence that the United States is by far the most powerful (and indebted) economy in the world, and also the youngest.
The point is we were still just settling during (our) Industrial Revolution, which brought production and consumption to a MASSIVE scale--as well as generating the single technology around which all of our cities are structured, which of course is the automobile. So, unlike areas which were urbanized hundreds (see: Europe) and even thousands (see: China) of years before electricity, steel-reinforced concrete, air conditioning, central heating, plumbing, cars, supermarkets, superhighways, traffic jams, etc -- our unstoppable engine of "progress" was not hindered by having to incorporate preexisting architecture. Nope, the main obstacle was nature, (and still is, in more ways than one.) So in the interest of function we went ahead and implemented the contemporary strategy of destroying it whenever it gets in the way, which does tend to happen when the population goes from 75 million to 275 million in a single century.
When one becomes accustomed to their environment (and has not had the inclination or the opportunity to travel), the long-term psychological impacts of the aesthetics of their native area are not obvious--though no less real. I was thinking about this during my 9-mile morning commute, which takes an average of nearly an hour on the freeway. The solution they're working on is of course to add a fifth lane, which will be nice because in light traffic the same route takes about 10 minutes. Of course, they had to cut down a lovely grove of very tall eucalyptus trees which used to provide shade and a nice, dense buffer for a relative of mine who happens to work right next to that side of the freeway. Now she will face a gigantic concrete wall every time she goes in to work, or outside, and the wall will be a hundred feet closer to the little building she works in. A better long-term solution instead of adding a lane would have been to improve our piss-poor public transportation system, because we're going to need yet another lane on the other side of the freeway in the next 5-15 years. A train would be nice... and expensive -- but unlike the cost of a train, the cost of stress induced by repeated exposure to an oppressive environment cannot be measured in dollars.
Edited by Land_Crab (11/30/07 11:53 PM)
|
|