m of care – jan 20

continuation of m of care – jan 6david graeber and david wengrow‘s dawn of everything (book) ch 8 (emphasis on architecture)

notes/quotes:

steve: prompt on cities.. core group of environs who believe urban society is direction humans need to go to promote environ sustain.. that they offer efficiency of scale for distribution of resources.. as i read this ch i was thinking of that.. made me think .. what is it that constitutes a city and are they the sorts of places those efficiencies can be implemented.. made me question how to really think of a city.. is it just population?other point in my mind.. cities in text often formed in opposition to those around them.. their argument about dialectic or creative refusal.. made me think long/hard about actual viability of cities as environs understand cities.. so may be problem is that environs could be relying on an essential misunderstanding of what constitutes a city.. made me question everything i’ve assumed about transition from country side to city.. ie: urban complexity.. and assume once city is made there is no going back.. this ch.. says.. there’s always a way to go back.. no essentialist notions to cities.. dg: ‘we could remake society in a diff way’.. i never expected the sophistication in egal societies.. they did good job of going back to first principles and disrupting assumptions.. ie: we’re better now.. possible to change.. happened in past

nika: i grew up in industrial society in soviet union.. ie: till 60s farmers didn’t have a passport.. lot of privileges for people in big cities.. now.. don’t need this separation when talking about cities and farmers.. so we really can produce food/everything in the city.. my understanding.. better for environ to live in big cities.. more costly to live in outskirts.. so i envision city.. would feel safe/sustainable.. if a lot of people arrange in a tech way w green energy et al.. what i see now going on .. people moving into city in big numbers.. from villages.. mostly refuges.. people deprived of land.. and they have miserable life in cities.. and rich people are buying (2nd home) outside of city to get away to clean air et al.. on ie: of if keep density of manhattan.. grow food on roof et al.. then leave rest to the earth

simona: i’m not sure.. i remember a movie.. ‘a fire seen by far’.. about life in african village.. slowly destroyed by arrival of c.. and ended w a fire of the forest.. and people selling idols at market of big city.. the replacement of people in big towns by now is a result of destruction of environ and land grabbing.. same things that make extinguish are ones that push people into towns..

in chat: the movie is “And then there was light”

simona: when we talk of cities.. my model is itlalian commons.. but what happens when empire collapses.. here in bologna we have the palace.. king captured at war.. i know this book is about anthro and archeo.. but at times astonished at lack of ref to history.. to the commons that applied very same kind of complexity ad self reg.. that they witnessed in towns/cities.. and by their ignoring the loads of hospitality that are so important.. i would have liked if they relied a bit more on archeao traces in present day traditions.. traditions never dies.. ie: the hospitality of my grandmother.. people were sure of connections (places to stay) very far from home

steve: i like that pt about the commons and destruction of commons over time.. and this demo shift from countryside to city.. because land increasingly commodified.. destruction of commons and hospitality is piece of archeo past.. social characteristic that made the 3rd (2nd) freedom.. that you can leave.. is increasingly dissolving because commons destroyed as people moving into cities.. so this ironic movement that injustice forcing people into cities.. but .. as nika offered. cities are offering these efficiencies.. i get feelings that d&d suggest cities will always be with us.. but.. who gets to imagine that city and how..

has to be all of us.. new.. everyday..

ido nahari: (steve asked how he pronounces his name.. and he said he forgot.. from hebrew.. but germans and italians .. lots of interesting ways people have used).. threw unmaking cities.. made again.. jerusalem.. ways unmade thru calamities and catastrophes.. able to be modled yet again in diff shapes.. by ideologies and imaginations and reinterp of those cities.. for most cities.. they exist in physical space.. but also in collective unconsciousness simultaneously.. those two processes make/unmake

ie: city sketchup

ido: the necessity to re represent the city to the city.. city as misconceptions over time.. so any time ie: in jerusalem.. have to reimagine.. unbelievable calamity and oxymoron.. when thru commercial means et al.. we can see it in museums .. in folk tales.. super interesting topic

rob: architect is a market place and something we’re able to build.. something we’ve not had before.. tech.. we can try to keep our planet alive.. and we know what is necessary to do.. but now question is .. what do we like to have

i don’t think we know what to do (ie: hari rat park law).. which we won’t know what we would like to have until that happens.. till we get out of sea world et al

rob: ie: to nika.. building a city of england.. is possible.. everything is possible.. we have to build like the question before.. is our imaginary city now.. big cities.. lot of energy.. everything possible now.. from materials/knowledge .. to understand what we need for future.. and what we like and what we don’t like.. ie: roads et al

clive (w nika): interesting.. very diff city than in past.. so how do we envisage a city that is positive rather than negative thing.. big part of that is that whole system is f’d.. that honesty of what a city could become is interesting.. could use everything that isn’t the cities.. rather than thinking of ideologies.. thinking about problems w/o ideologies

? – what we need to do is let go of problems.. ie: they could all be irrelevant if we got out of sea world

nika: ideologies probably big part of that.. ie: downtown and production of life.. stories in this ch about that.. i loved how city described.. archi.. ie: no center.. no heroes.. constructed thru equal house code.. i would love to hear people talking about practicalities of cities they found interesting.. ie: pirates.. build cities very diff..

niekie: i think first think of city.. i think of big debt we have to pay.. a lot of power/hierarchy in center.. everybody can brainstorm.. formalizations around the city.. ie: soc sec numbers; how much money city makes; et al.. then a lot of people can latch onto that and if you fall down.. get into poverty/mental health.. but even the bottom is calculated.. still have number/name.. but if look down on city. sewer/ground.. and some don’t have the ss numbers.. so not recognized by law.. so don’t have the rights.. so people not above the bottom line.. so i think cities today cast a big shadow over 100s of millions of those living in an informal econ.. necessary to bring change

and.. that’s how they can live in an informal econ.. like the dan ie .. if seen/large.. gets B’d..

kelig: i was wondering .. on heroes to replace egal structures.. i think d&d saying go back to imagination to regain what you lost..

kenneth cardena: cities begin in the mind.. start of ch.. gets to heart of poverty of imagination today as to what cities are.. our diet of imagery is very poor.. it’s junk food.. ie: now captured of people like elon musk.. an impoverished imagination.. how might we feed our imaginations.. what may constitute a richer diets of inspiration.. for me.. a lot has come from fiction.. ie: le guin’s always coming home.. on the geometry of the circle .. in her case it was a spiral.. ie: most cultivated crop in america is lawn grass.. finding natural to transform from lawn into a garden.. so one source archeo/anthro.. what would constitute a rich imagination diet

just getting people in spaces of permission where they have nothing to prove.. ie: no judgment

isabelle: yeah to going back to sci fi.. ie: david’s omellas.. so just bringing people in from many diff fields.. to expand creativity.. doesn’t have to be reinventing wheel..

clive: also.. that fear of failure element.. where failure is tantamount to a sin.. take away that fear of failure and you emancipate people.. t

that’s huge..

take away fear of failure need: spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove.. aka: anything sans judgment

either via letting go enough.. or like iwan baan ness.. neglected poor areas.. in the shadows..

michael: idea of city w center that is empty.. a big common area.. empty.. today in cities.. land is made into property.. usufructus.. diff rights to land.. common land w various rights but no one per say owns it.. that’s a key thing.. where now we have a single.. land is owned by someone.. so commons destroyed.. in a slum.. land isn’t owned.. t.. there’s a diff type of architectures.. becomes a very dynamic environ.. sometimes from if not enough resources.. but..

yeah that.. huge

iwan baan ness.. slum as spaces of permission

self-organizing et al

michael: book on city today.. ie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcosanti this small demonstration city is built on density. in the same way many slum architectures create very vibrant city communities. Contrast this to Phoenix with no development plan and cheap land so it always extends into urban sprawl shopping mall type city. Phoenix is described as the least ecologically sound city in the world in the book ‘bird on fire’ Paolo Soleri was the leading architect in Arcosanti.. also .. by debbie shaw’s ‘post human urbanism’.. opposing colonial humanism.. there’s an imagination of the city..

simona: very large social units.. always in a sense imaginary.. like now.. we feel connected even if not in same room.. made me think that we are always imagining other people .. even when f-2-f.. always doing this interp labor.. and reacting.. a convo is always also a matter of imagination.. this is the same thing we do when we imagine collectivities on a large scale.. brings me to festivals/carnivals.. essential point of cities self org

interpretive labor

simona: i don’t like venice carnival.. so into commercial past.. preparing for a carnival is a group exercise.. ie: belong to town if you belong to community that works on charity.. not just about turning power upside down.. but about reinventing.. 3rd freedom.. what resurged.. was theatre/masquerading.. inventing another life for ourselves.. when you make theatre.. when you put on a mask.. you are another person.. and you are reinventing yourself.. together w others.. i think this is another archeo traditions we have that resurge as soon as there is not a power that destroys them.. and even despite this power.. only thing able to destroy this creative/reinvention is this commodification..

ido: if carnival always in motion.. needs to redo where/how set.. a form of shortcuts where people could assume power for what it is.. a status of make believe.. ie: movie.. paris is burning.. how queer/lgbt people in nyc had mirroring power to lawyers/drs.. et al.. only way they could do that was by performance/dance.. creating imitation of sources of power.. to kenneth’s point.. i was in london.. doing masters.. unbelievable to see city center as a barren land.. if center is creativity.. it was actually in the margins.. what made the city pulse.. because unreg’s unscrutinized as city center.. not defined by movements.. but forms of kinship constantly shape/reform and are basis for those spaces.. something the city center in most cities no longer consists of .. regarding rekindling imagination.. cultural shock moving from berlin to london.. econ structure.. ways to nourish imagination have become increasingly difficult.. ie: spontaneous interaction have been standardized.. people don’t have spaces that would cater to subjectivities.. only seen worthwhile if imagination could be commodified/monetized.. that is the tragedy of imagination today.. that it only has worth in this singular form.. t

huge

clive: that also speaks about pointless choice.. the commodification of things that aren’t even choices.. denied choices they actually want.. that’s why closing down cities.. forcing people to think about choices.. ie: extinction rebellion.. occupy.. force experiments in way you rethink cities.. people to realize.. choices we’re offered are not choices.. t

spinach or rock ness and why decision making is unmooring us law and why we need to org around legit needs

nika: then creative class .. creative because have to package these (non) choices.. also about carnival to reinvent social structure every year.. also as simona was saying.. most people in big cities don’t know a lot of people.. so structure already exists by default.. also about refugee cities.. because illegal/temp.. don’t have defined structures.. so actually have normal human things.. people changing/interacting.. sad to say that.. i don’t want to live there.. not nice to praise this framework.. but it looks like this is our hope.. this is people who are getting to roots of what city could be.. t

huge

again iwan baan ness

nika: we’re already having most developed cities are cities of refugees.. bigger econ than formal econ that’s calculated.. ie: refugee camps.. future of humanity in a way.. i would think about good things of refugee cities and make rest livable.. ie: s africa, lagas, living in poor conditions no electricity et al

refugee camps

clive: communalism rather than communism.. can have all the positive transactions that are totally free.. and totally un valued.. we’re constantly pushing important shit to bottom..

clive: on proletkult..

proletkult et al

nika: on living collectiviely

simona put into chat: ‘Humans tend to live simultaneously with the 150-odd people they know personally, and inside imaginary structures shared by perhaps millions or even billions of other humans. Sometimes, as in the case of modern nations, these are imagined as being based on kin ties; sometimes they are not.6 In this, at least, modern foragers are no different from modern city dwellers or ancient hunter-gatherers. We all have the capacity to feel bound to people we will probably never meet; to take part in a macro-society which exists most of the time as ‘virtual reality’, a world of possible relationships with its own rules, roles and structures that are held in the mind and recalled through the cognitive work of image-making and ritual. Foragers may sometimes exist in small groups, but they do not – and probably have not ever – lived in small-scale societies…None of which is to say that scale – in the sense of absolute population size – makes no difference at all. What it means is that these things do not necessarily matter.’

steve: next group feb 3.. ch 9

________

new municipal agenda.. murray bookchin

________

_______

_______

_______

museum of care meetings

museum of care

_______