In my second semester, I’m taking a course called Urban and
Regional Planning, taught by Professor Christian Dimmer. As part of the course,
there was a field trip to Harajuku, Aoyama and Shibuya, a central part of
Tokyo. Taking advantage of Waseda’s location in one of the world’s most global
cities, we were able to spend an afternoon wandering around the streets in the
Omotesando and Harajuku areas. One of the things I particularly enjoyed learning
about was how the area came to be how it is today, and the trends that places
experience contributing to the gentrification of an area. Harajuku, and
Takeshita-dori in particular, are popular among teenagers and are iconic when
imagining ‘cool Tokyo’.
As a side note, here is a video about 'Cool Japan', and while the emphasis in this video portraying Tokyo is on
sport (it being an Olympic bid promotional video), I think that the images and
contrasts within the scenes portrayed are interesting from an urban studies
perspective.
Omotesando is known for being the place where the first
modern high rise buildings were built following the 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake
which flattened much of Tokyo, but these have now been replaced by Omotesando
Hills, a large shopping mall with an interesting design but nevertheless
covering up most of what remains of the single apartment block which was left
as a sort of momentum.
Until 15-20 years ago, governments provided infrastructural
investments to get industry to locate in certain areas, and to invest and
improve parts of cities, but recently there has been a shift towards cultural
production. As Professor Dimmer pointed out, Harajuku is a really interesting
place where you can see how cultural production has occurred quite naturally.
Areas like Harajuku were and are being promoted for nation branding, as ‘cool
Japan’, through the image of creativity, art, and design. Creative events,
interesting buildings, and new brands helped change the atmosphere and create a
centre of gravity, causing ‘trendy’ people and businesses to cluster in the
area, many hoping to capitalise on this perception of trendiness.
Map of Harajuku area, 29/04/15
This map was pointed out by Professor Dimmer, and shows how quickly the area is changing, because it is a normal map which can be found all over the city, but the white stickers indicate the shops and are stuck on top, as the shops are changing so quickly that the ward can't keep creating a whole new map.
This positive urban dynamic, allows an area to flourish. Another example where
this has taken place is Bilbao, with the Guggenheim museum (Guggenheim Museum Bilbao). One of the
buildings that struck me the most on the excursion was the Prada building in
Aoyama, built by the Swiss architectural firm Herzog & de Meuron in 2003.
Prada Building, Aoyama, 29/04/15
Prof.
Dimmer referred to it as a ‘challenge shop’, partly because it was built in a
former mostly residential area which in turn changed dramatically due to the
placement of the fashion flagship store.
Lastly, we had an interesting discussion about public space
and how it is used. There is a park called Miyashita-koen, one of the only
remaining public spaces in the busy ward of Shibuya, and has come to be well
known for its importance in being the starting point for rallies and
demonstrations. One of the first instances of social media being used in a
peaceful protest was here, when the district government tried to phase out the
150 homeless people living in the park. Large futsal courts were built in the
early 2000s, and the rhetoric surrounding these courts was to encourage people
to do sports and provide these facilities in a public space, but it could be
argued that local politicians also had in mind a way to design out homeless people.
After these courts were constructed, only 60 homeless people remained, and
there is still a negative perception surrounding the people living here.
Public space and its uses should be about balancing the
different claims of different groups of people, for example when we visited on
a Wednesday afternoon there were young children being taught a dance routine,
people actively using the futsal courts, a group of students practicing their
instruments, a few young families and couples, and a few homeless people
resting. These claims of different user groups manifest themselves in public
spaces like this and cause conflict. Another area of the park was turned into a
skate park in order to provide a space for skaters away from the streets where
they could be a nuisance to other pedestrians, but this facility also requires
you to pay an entrance fee. This seems like a win-win for the park developers
and the local government, as the skaters are off the streets and there is also
an income coming from them.
The conflict came to a head in 2008 when a deal was made
with Nike Japan to build these new sports facilities in exchange for the naming
rights to the park, which many people opposed as the idea of a public space
with a branded name could be seen not to make any sense. Many artists and demonstrators
‘occupied’ the area and there was a large media presence on this movement. Is there
such thing as an urban commons? It seems that there is no simple truth when it
comes to public space, as the sports facilities allowed new users to enjoy the
park but led to the exclusion of others.
The latest development of the park is that a very similar
language is being used to the previous construction of the sports facilities to
develop it again in time for the Tokyo 2020 Olympics. Michael Penn and Jasper Tolma’s article in the
Japan Times discusses the current situation of Miyashita Park, and concludes
that ‘the ward’s goal for developing the park in time for 2020 is looking
increasingly ambitious’, given the huge divide in residents opinions and other
legal obstacles.
No comments:
Post a Comment