“The future ain’t what it used to be”

— Yogi Berra

Urban planning and architecture, by the constraints of their enterprise, are two

practices influenced by both the desired ideal and practical reality; and are forced to

navigate between the two. This dialogue between the ideal and reality is a trait shared

by our traditional notions of Art. All three also share a vocabulary of “projects” and

“works” and “public”.

The 5 Villes Nouvelles around Paris were conceived in a grand urbanist plan, and thus

are to every extent possible an embodiment of an urban planning and architectural ideal.

This ideal is most readily recognised in the maquette, many of which still exist on display

in the cities today.

In the context of urbanist ideal, a maquette could be considered an artwork. If

the maquette represents a work of public art, it becomes meta art, art about art.

Or, if the maquette is the original, the full scale construction is the

reproduction. In the Villes Nouvelles, the maquette stands as an indicator of the future

passed, the ideal of the past, and a reminder of another, potential future.

In the enterprise of Urbanism, the maquette is the stage for the display of the ideal. The details of a

city are a telling and meaningful environment shaped by city inhabitants, organic growth,

and time. The scale of this detail is often larger than the entire original maquette, entirely

overpowering the scale of the ideal.

The superficially unflattering details of urban decay are not only a sign of dilapidation,

but an evidence that the city is alive: its presence shows that reality has taken over and

that the city is dictating life of its own.

Share this Story