MACROCOSMOS:

THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN THE EVOLUTION OF CITIES

The Internet has impacted cities in many ways, changing patterns of human interaction from manufacturing to retail, from journalism to interpersonal communication, on and on; in short it has become the de-facto public realm, substituting much of what we do in the actual world with a simpler more efficient way to do it virtually.  

The Occupy movement seemed at first to invert this trend: it used the Internet to activate civic centers across the US.  But was its ultimate effect the opposite?  Did it instead confirm our fears that the very places that once formed the core of our urban experience have become irrelevant to most of us?  And if so, what would this mean for the future of cities?

Cities evolve in relation to changing conditions, whether they be natural or manmade.  Emerging technologies are a significant force: warfare technology, for instance, spawned walled cities; one walled city, Paris, was transformed by its underground railway; another city shaped by an underground railway, New York, was transformed by the elevator; and a city also shaped by rail, Los Angeles, was utterly transfigured by the automobile.  This is why cities look the way they do: they reflect the technology that is dominant at the time of their greatest economic expansion.

Which does not happen overnight – the reality is that, in the evolution of cities, most of the adaptations occur in small ways, almost invisibly.  Cities are constantly remaking themselves through millions of tiny gestures performed by individual citizens on a daily basis.  In this way, a city lives.  It is what evolutionary biologist Lynn Margulies calls autopoietic in that cities are constantly adjusting themselves to adapt to changing conditions.  In Microcosmos, she writes, “this modulating ‘holisitic’ phenomenon of autopoiesis, of active self-maintenance, is the basis of all known life.”

What would the city of the Internet look like?  Clearly some building types would become irrelevant; certainly others will emerge.  But is this something to fear?  From our perspective, things seem headed in the wrong direction – bookstores closing, diminished civic life, loss of intimacy, deepening alienation – all seem to be attributable to the rise of the internet.  One can imagine a world in which the 1% live in “lifestyle” cities – those devoted to shopping, playing, or cultural activities –  while the 99% live in “drone” cities – those devoted to the support and maintenance of the 1%. 

But the reality is already unfolding before us.  In Megatrends, John Naisbitt predicted a connection between “high tech” and “high touch.”  In cities across America this is happening; a trend is emerging toward embracing authenticity.  Perhaps propelled by the Internet’s ubiquity, there is a new appreciation of the handmade object, the fresh produce of farmer’s markets, a vibrant street culture.  Could it be that the flattening effect of the internet has inspired a desire for something more dimensional?  That the global reach of the world-wide-web has compelled us to become more intensely local?

A third direction would be to design a place specifically with the internet – or any technology – in mind. This is the problem with the city of Irvine, California.  Designed for the car, virtually every decision was guided by the intent to make life as convenient for the driver as possible, from the size and shape of the roads and freeways, to the location and layout of shopping centers, to the design of gated residential communities. 

It may work, for now; but what happens when as-yet-unimagined technologies arrive?  Not only is the structure of the master-planned community fixed, but in Irvine the CC&Rs restrict the ability to make changes.  If this is allowed to continue, Irvine will forever be stuck in a late 20th century, car-centered mentality.

I am convinced that the hope for the future of cities lies in the complete opposite direction – the ability to adapt freely.  Nowhere is this more evident than in the Netherlands.  Because of its relentlessly artificial topography, Dutch cities were forced to adapt to survive – which has made them naturally more open to change, more inclined to welcome new technologies, and why the entire country is such an exciting place to watch as world culture transitions from one technology to the next.