Authoritarian Arcologies?

[roseembolism]

Arcologies are constantly popping up in the literature of Science Fiction, and there's something about huge, "cities in a building that just seems to appeal to the fannish sensibility.  I've always wondered why.  Well, apart form they're being spectacular, if impractical applications of extreme architecture.




But there's always been something monolithic and extravagant about arcologies that seems to hint at a sort of utopian monomania. In fact, the notion of an entire city in a single, pre-planned building implies a sort of top-down authoritarianism, as opposed to the organic growth that a normal city has.

So oddly enough, it was no surprise to find out that Soleri grew up in fascist Italy.  And multiple critiques  of Arcosanti, Soleri's perpetually-in-construction seed arcology by a former resident, has detailed a structure that denies dissent and critical discussion.  Aside from Dr. Neutopia, sociologist Paul Ray has reported on the lack of workers rights and freedom in Arcosanti.  The needs of the individuals in the community are subjugated to the vision of Soleri, which is odd, considering that Arcologies are supposed to be a better way to live. 

Certainly there seems no element of human scale in Soleri's designs, no scope for individual contributions.  It is also too easy to imagine a place like Hexahedron (above), being divided into the elite in the top half, and the workers in the lower section; the design seems all to  useful for restricting flow of people and items.  Critics like Neutopia have compared the management structure at Arcosanti, to that of China: "based on the age old authoritarian, patriarchal model of command and control of the masses."  Perhaps that's a reason why China seems to be leading the race to build a functioning arcology, and not just their need for low-ecological impact housing.

The larger question here, is whether this is merely a problem with Soleri's particular vision, or whether authoritarian governmental structures go hand-in hand with the idea of arcologies.  And if so, what does it say about the science fiction culture's fascination with the idea?

Comments

[mithriltabby]

Arcology thinking stands in opposition to the “a man’s home is his castle” principle. That can take the form of centralized authority, or of “we’re all in this together” cooperation.

I think part of it is that arcologies are an example of the classic “if this goes on” trope in science fiction. We keep building bigger buildings in our cities, and building bigger cities, so it’s natural to ask where that will lead us. Arcologies are one of the tourist attractions along that path, then the ecumenopolis (like Trantor), and then on to the megastructures...

[palecur.livejournal.com]

That can take the form of centralized authority, or of “we’re all in this together” cooperation.

Other than PR window dressing, I'm not sure those are distinct concepts.

[mithriltabby]

The former is imposed; the latter requires consensus. It is easy for the latter case to degenerate into the former, particularly when the administrators lose sight of “we’re fucked if we don’t pull together on this” and start thinking more in terms of “this is my chance to make it big”.

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

A big determinant is going to be the robustness of the checks and balances, and other feedback systems. One problem with Utopians and visionary architects is they often don't see the need for such.

[mithriltabby]

Too true. The visionaries often get caught up in the physical engineering and neglect the social engineering required. Alastair Reynolds has some interesting ideas on the latter end with his Demarchist and Conjoiner societies.

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

See Radiant City from Mr. X. It has wonderful architecture. Pity it drives the inhabitants insane...

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

I was thinking about that myself, though Radient City isn't properly an Arcology.

And this points out another problem with an arcology; the problems will be greater than with a regular city if the contractors are found to be incompetent or corrupt. Imagine getting it completed, to find incompetent construction in the base.

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

Please write this story.

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

Well, that has given me some ideas. And maybe my recent dealing with the plumbing has put me in the mood to write it.

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

Carlos Yu had an alternate history in which the target on 9/11 was the arcology in Oath of Fealty. The evacuation of the building didn't go as well as the ones at the WTC.

[mindstalk.livejournal.com]

this (http://groups.google.ca/group/soc.history.what-if/browse_thread/thread/20f9c6729f6c65e1/23c0fe37a0ad5a7b?#23c0fe37a0ad5a7b)

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

Arcologies are also an extension of the "mixed use" theory of urban design, which uses (among other places) Santana Row as an example. It's also combined with an "ecocity" ideal of sustainable urbanism that reduces the impact on the surrounding area, by reducing the footprint of the city to the point where cars aren't needed. Arcologists talk a lot about "urban sprawl", as if it were a disease.

The end result of course is a place with very high population densities. How pleasant that would be to live in is anybody's guess.

[mithriltabby]

I usually hear “suburban sprawl” from environmentalists, and they make a number of good points about sustainability, habitat destruction, water usage, and so on. Las Vegas is going to be an interesting case study in water management in a few decades.

I suspect the key to high population densities is going multilevel. There’s only such much street-level crowding people can handle, but if you go with multiple levels with high ceilings, lots of light wells, and good air circulation, you could probably make it fairly pleasant.

One of the big caveats, though, is that we don’t really have a lot of experience in building structures for the long term. In a regular city, you can knock down buildings when the cost of maintenance gets too high for the value you derive from the building, and build something more efficient in its place. How do you do that to an arcology?

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

Funny you should ask that question, because my next post is going to think about that.

[mindstalk.livejournal.com]

One possibility is building just a big enclosure, then building buildings inside of that. Done in a different order is "roofing over a city".

[mithriltabby]

At that point one might just treat it as a different kind of exercise in urban planning: put as many services as possible under the streets (water, power, data, subways, package delivery, earth-tube heat exchangers) and then you just hook up your foundations up when you build or renovate a building. Porous concrete to allow water to get into the aquifers instead of exiting via storm drains, lots of city parks and green roofs to provide extra cooling and avoid the urban heat island effect.

[heron61.livejournal.com]

Well said. I vastly prefer the model of cooperation & consensus to either centralized authority or individual autonomy, and I suspect that we're likely to see more of the individual autonomy model begin replaced by one or the other. Suburban & exurb-focused (shudder) futurists notwithstanding, it definitely looks like the future of the human species is in cities, and as cities get larger we may not end up with arcologies (I suspect that we won't) but social models based on individual autonomy work poorly in cities with 10s of millions of inhabitants, especially since it looks fairly clear that LA will not be the model of such cities.

[mithriltabby]

The term “social contract” may come into vogue when we get into enough of a resource crunch that autonomy is overly expensive and we want to avoid authoritarianism. Come up with a well-defined set of responsibilities and make it clear that once you’ve met yours, everything else is up to you.