Interface

I am a deeply intuitive thinker and I will often pursue disparate topics which seem (to me) deeply connected in some way, but without being able to articulate just how, rather trusting that it will somehow become clear in the pursuit. One such interface of topic for me is theology and architecture (or, urbanism, depending on how you define your terms). Little enough has been done on this (that I have seen), and what has been done isn't always fully satisfactory. I was musing on just this disconnect this morning prior to sitting in on my usual Friday lecture on Architecture and the Practical Imagination. In the moments prior to the lecture, I formulated the following:

What is architecture for? What are buildings for?
What they are for - apart from discrete functions - is the human.
What is man (humanity) for?
This in turn implies a whole host of (theo-)anthropological questions.
If the human is a graced gift of God, and is intended to glorify God to God's glory, and this is expressed ineluctably socially, namely through self-giving love and holiness, then architecture is (in part) the consideration of the space and conditions (physical, social, conventional) in which people may be ready for this glorifying or hindered and discouraged from it.

So far so good, but how to make sense of this in philosophical and architectural-theoretical terms?

And then during the lecture the professor said at one point that 'architecture is about the structure of relatedness.' Suddenly it all fell together for me, and I felt justified my intuitions (or at least as if I will be justified down the road; I haven't sent myself on a fool's errand.). If architecture is, literally but also figuratively, about the structure of relatedness, then it considers both the way that space shapes us as humans, and also the way to shape space for human flourishing. In this way, it becomes a precondition for all genuine human sociality, which is itself created by the Lord and which is intended to glorify the Lord and will be (ultimately) to the glory of the Lord. So architecture ends up being a very elemental consideration in sociality.

In all, a very good day in Cambridge.

The Death and Life of a Great Urban Thinker

Some sad news today, Jane Jacobs died. (As reported in the Globe and Mail, and -- surprisingly -- Wikipedia itself. How spooky is it that an encyclopedia updates its entry on the day you die? Ah well, vive l'internet!)

Jane Jacobs was a major, intractable critic of modern urban planning. Her best known book was The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Here's what Wikipedia says about it:

The Death and Life of Great American Cities is her single most influential book, and quite possibly the most influential American book on urban planning. Widely read by both planning professionals and the general public, the book is a strong critique of the urban renewal policies of the 1950s which, she claimed, destroyed communities and created isolated, unnatural urban spaces. Jacobs advocated dense, mixed-use neighborhoods and frequently cited New York City's Greenwich Village as an example of a vibrant urban community.
...
Above and beyond the practical lessons in city design and planning that "Death and The Life" offers, the theoretical underpinnings of the work profoundly challenge the
entire modern mindset. Jane Jacob rigorously adheres to inductive, nearly scientific, reasoning. Moreover, she is open to anecdotal evidence coming to bear on what has been induced from harder data. The paradigm that she embodies and represents is one of common sense, practical realism, and above all induction from fact. This paradigm is new, refreshing and empowering.

(In fact, Jacobs is nothing if not Aristotelian in her approach; very interesting from this perspective, I think.)

It is a book that anyone who loves cities and cares about what happens to them should read; it is also a book for anyone who loves people or society and cares what happens to them, which after all is the same thing. It has been immensely influential, a 'canonical classic' if every there were one, for New Urbanism.

(I have just learned that the UK (rough) equivalent to New Urbanism is Urban Renaissance.)

(I first read about Jacobs' passing on The Gutter, which provides ill-mannered commentary on architecture and architects. I read it every day.)