Urban Morphology: A Dichotomy Between Conservation and Transformation

8/3/2019 Urban Morphology: A Dichotomy Between Conservation and Transformation

1/45

UrbanMorphologyADichotomyBetweenConservation&

Transformation

WordCount:10,596Words

FaridaFarag

Adissertationsubmittedinpartialfulfillmentoftherequirementsforthe

MScBuildingandUrbanDesigninDevelopment

5thofSeptember2011

DevelopmentPlanningUnit

UniversityCollegeLondon


2/45

DPU DISSERTATION REPORT

DECLARATION OF OWNERSHIP AND COPYRIGHT FORM

All students MUST complete one copy of this form to cover the MSc dissertation report.

Please print, sign and date the form and submit it with your dissertation to the

Administration Office in the DPU building. If you fail to submit this statement duly signed

and dated, your dissertation cannot be accepted for marking.

1. DECLARATION OF COPYRIGHT

I confirm that I have read and understood the guidelines on plagiarism produced by DPUand UCL, that I understand the meaning of plagiarism as defined in those guidelines, andthat I may be penalised for submitting work that has been plagiarised.

Unless not technically possible and with the prior agreement of the Course Director formy MSc programme, the dissertation report must be submitted electronically throughTurnitinUK. I understand that the dissertation cannot be assessed unless both a hardcopy and an electronic version of the work are submitted by the deadline stipulated.

I declare that all material is entirely my own work except where explicitly, clearly andindividually indicated and that all sources used in its preparation and all quotations areclearly cited using a recognised system for referencing and citation.

Should this statement prove to be untrue, I recognise the right of the Board of Examinersto recommend disciplinary action in line with UCL's regulations.

2. COPYRIGHT

The copyright of the dissertation report remains with me as its author. However, I

understand that a copy may be given to my funders (if requested and if appropriate),alongside limited feedback on my academic performance.

I also understand that a copy may also be deposited in the UCL E-prints public accessrepository and copies may be made available to future students for reference.

Please write your initials in the box if you DO NOT want this report to be made availablepublicly either electronically or in hard copy.

YOUR NAME: Farida Farag

MSC PROGRAMME: Building and Urban Design in Development

SIGNATURE:

DATE: 5th of September 2011


3/45

BuildingandUrbanDesigninDevelopment/DevelopmentPlanningUnit/UniversityCollegeLondon

iii

TableofContent

ListofFigures iv

Acknowledgements v

Abstract vi

1.0 Introduction 7

2.0 UnderstandingUrbanForm 9

2.1 UrbanFormasSpatialText 9

2.2 BodyandSpaceExperience 12

3.0 BetweenConservationandTransformation 15

3.1 Power:HowItManifests 16

3.2 LandasCommodity 18

3.3 HeritageasCommodity 18

3.4 IdentityasCommodity 19

3.5 TimeasMorphogenetic 20

3.6 Conclusion 24

4.0 CaseofContestedCairo 26

4.1 PeriodofColonialism 28

4.2 PeriodofSocialism 30

4.3 PeriodofNeoliberalism 34

5.0 Conclusion 38

ReferencesandBibliography 40


4/45


iv

ListofFigures

Figure1:Land-useofBirminghamin1995oftheEdwardianfringebelt. 12

Figure2:ViewnorthtowardsthecitycenterofBirminghamacrosspart 22

oftheEdwardianfringebelt.

Figure3:IsmailsCairo1869-1870,viewofthenewcitywestofoldcity. 28

Figure4:ContrastbetweenCairoandParisHausmannianTownPlans. 29

Figure5:Cairoin1993,withIsmailscityinthecenter,showingexpansions 30

andcityboundariesofsuccessivegenerations.

Figure6:MugamaainTahrirSquare. 31

Figure7:GreaterCairo,showingnewsettlementsandnewcitiesexpanding 34

intoperipherallocations.

Figure8:HousingEstatein6thofOctoberCity. 35


5/45


v

Acknowledgements

This has been a great challenging

experience, which wouldnt have been

possible if it werent for the people that

havesupportedmethroughoutthisyear.

IwouldliketothankalltheDPUassociates

for this great opportunity and valuable

experience. Special thanks to Dr. Camillo

Boano for his great support and valuable

feedback during this dissertation and

throughoutthisentireyear.

Iwould also like to thank my parents and

my brother for their continuous love,

supportandinspiration.Iwouldntbehere

ifitwerentforthem.

Lastbutnotleast,Iwouldliketothankmy

BUDD colleagues who have become my

familythispastyear.Iamgratefulforallthe

good and stressful times we have shared

both in London and in Bangkok.


6/45


vi

Abstract

The urban realm isa powerful educational

technique and space for investing with

cultural ideology.Howeverit isa spacefor

socio-spatial conflict pushing cities against

organic growth creating gaps and

fragmentations in the understanding of

space. This paper will discuss the use of

urban morphology as a method to

contextualizing the complexity of urban

form to illustrate how physical, social and

symbolicconfigurationsdevelopedthrough

time. It will illustrate how this historico-

geographicapproachcanhighlightgrowing

tensions, anddrive conservation initiatives

promoting socio-spatial integration and

cultural identity. The case of Cairo will be

used contrasting three different time

periods to illustrate how these tensions

manifested inurban space throughhistory

andcontributed to a growing socio-spatial

divideandfragmentednationalidentity.


7/45


7

Introduction

If a place can be defined as relational,

historicalandconcernedwithidentity,then

a space which cannot be defined as

relational or historical, or concerned with

identity will be a non-place (Auge, 1996

citedinDovey,1999,p.50).

The urban realm is a product of layers of

successive generations leaving traces

embeddedin theurbanfabric.As itframes

theconstructofmeaning,whichwereadas

spatial text (Dovey, 1999), it acts as a

documentholdinghistoricvalueofacertain

society in geography and time. Those

palimpsests are important for a wider

understanding of urban space, as it

representstheprocessoftheproductionof

space driven by social patterns in history.

Blautexplainsspaceasarelationbetween

events or an aspect of events, and thus

bound to time and process (cited in

Madanipour,1996,p.6).However, towhat

degree are these processes considered in

urban development? As some undergo

partial or complete redevelopment, urban

heritage is subject for removal, loss or

distortion, as other forces govern urban

change. Alexander further describes

modern development as destruction with

change,asitdoesnotconsiderthecreation

ofwholenessandrathercreatesincoherent

townscape elements leading to chaos

(1987).Thismodeofdevelopmentdisplaces

peoplefromsocialspaceintoahierarchical

social structure, treating past and existing

townscapes as wastage. The urban realm

therefore becomes a location for socio-

spatial conflict over the use, function and

meaningofspace,wherethenewmeaningis the absence of meaning based on

experience (Castells 2003a, 2003b).

Consequently, a huge gap emerges that

hinderstheunderstandingofspace.

Lefebvre highlights the importance of a

dynamic view of urban space to address

urban change by integrating a time

dimension into the process of spatial

change, rather than only focusing on a

particularplaceora singlemoment inthis

process (Lefebvre, 1991 cited in

Madanipour,2006,p.174).Asthisoffersa

holistic understanding of space, it defines

space in terms of its historic process. The

followingchapterswillconsiderahistorico-

geographical approach underlying the

importance of integrating time to a socio-

spatialprocess.AccordingtoMadanipour,it

is integrating time and process that


8/45


8

unleashesthegapsandfragmentationsthat

hindertheunderstandingofspace(1996).

As cities are seen as organisms, urban

morphologyisthestudyofthemutationof

form over t ime. It is the study of the

evolutionary process of the urban realm,

where social patterns develop form and

constructmeaningthatsdeeplyembedded

in cultural tradition (Moudon, 1997). It

contextualizes the complexity of urban

form, while highlighting the growingtensions that molded todays cities. In

additiontobeingusedasatooltoexplore

the descriptive and analytical realm of

urban form, it provides insight into the

normative realm for a cohesive and

continuous city that builds upon its own

successionsrather than recreating rootless

urbanspaces(Vance,1990).Thisframework

acts as a basis of conservation initiatives,

where future development uses past as a

reference point to emphasize the

psychological need to belong in time and

space, while enhancing the interaction

between body and space for socially and

culturally integrative townscapes. Finally,

this paper will use contrasting cases to

il lustrate how these growing tensions

manifest in the urban form, creating gaps

andfragmentationsinurbanspace.


9/45


9

Understanding

UrbanFormDuring the life of any society in fixed

geographical location its past and present

experiences thoughts actions and behavior

patterns and aspirations accumulate to

formthe distinctiveheritageofits spiritual

possessions. It influences its actions as a

particular society in a particular place or

region constituting an important historical

factor(Conzen2004,p.39).

According to M.R.G Conzen, layers of

different periods in time turn townscapes

intopalimpsestsofpastsocietiesthathave

left their morphological record embedded

in urban form. However, these urban

documents are constantly replaced by

modernizing efforts and thus lose

interpretation through time (2004). As he

explains the importance of reading

heritage, his attempts to study urban

spacesandtheforcesthatcontributedtoits

production are based on this historico-

geographical approach to physical form,

where his main focus of his analysis is

morphogenetic,highlighting majorphysical

and social transformations over time

(Conzen,1981a).This approach focuseson

contextualizing the process of formative

growth, successions, transformations,

cycles, decays, catastrophes, and shifting

functions (Kropf, 2001). Conzen further

highlights that a formative process cannot

be adequately investigated without

considering the town plan,building fabric,

and land-use patterns, as they form a

holistic understanding of urban growth

(2004). In addition, these townscape

aspects highlight the contrast between

plannedandunplannedgrowth,establishabodyandspacerelationship that enhances

well-being, reflect the genius loci, and

finally illustrate social patterns in space as

they manifest in the urban realm and

govern social behavior (2004). This

approach therefore aims to find physical

and spatial cues from thebuilt townscape

to explore physical, social and symbolic

configurations over time, which will be

exploredinthefollowingsections.

UrbanFormasSpatialText

According to Conzen, the character of theplace created as a product of time and

people is reflected upon the town and

forms layers of historical eras or

palimpsests of successive generations

(2004; Larkham,2005). Urbanmorphology


10/45


10

focuses most of its analysis on direct

observation of the urban realm through

analyzing existing geographical town plan,

existingbuilding fabric, and landutilization

patterns in a hierarchical sense, which

Conzen originated in his study of British

Cities (2004). These townscape aspects

contributetoa widerunderstandingof the

complexity of urban form. By tracing the

interaction between these elements and

social patterns, this section aims to

illustrate how spatial configurationsdevelopthroughtime.

First, the importance of the existing

geographicaltownplan,thatsdistinctform

the intendedtownplan,is tohighlight the

complexityandlimitationsthataplanned

town plan brings to organic growth

(Whitehand, 1981). It focuses on four

complexelements:thesite,thestreetsand

theirstreetsystem,theplotsandtheirplot

pattern, and the building arrangement

withinthesepatterns.Theseaspectsarethe

basis of Conzens morphological study, as

they are subject to direct observation.

Someelementsaregroupedintoplanunits

ortissuesformingacohesivewhole,due

totheircommonprocessoftransformation

in common time periods (Moudon, 1997).

Thishoweversuggeststhataholisticgrowth

isreliantonthedevelopmentofplanunits

ratherthan individual elementsthatcreate

incoherent spaces. Looking at Conzens

townscape features highlights the

contrasting difference between a planned

andun-planned processes that formedthe

physical, social and symbolic realm of the

townscape.Thiscontrast thereforeaims to

understand the forces that pushed the

urban realm into certain directions of

change through time, as each period

adapted to conditions based on its

formativegrowth.

Second,thebuildingfabricrendersbuilding

patterns of townscapes, which set the

character of the place and represent

national heritage. These building types

reflect age, economicand social historyof

the urban community and represent the

established culture that had evolved

through many years and after many

geographical layers. It is the geographical

result of changes caused by functional

processes in the towns history and

represents a distinct aspect of dynamic

morphology (Conzen 1981b, p.62).

Thereby, urban fabric is a productof time

and social interaction with the

environment, as it develops according to

desired social functions. Kropf introduces

the concept of phylogenetic change as

involving the evolution of function as a


11/45


11

result of human interaction with their

environmentandtheirresponsetodifferent

stimulus in their surroundings (2001). The

typological process Kropf describes

illustrates how people are responsible for

changeof functionalneeds,which leads to

change of form, as form follows function

(Madanipour,1996).Ineachmorphogenetic

period, the functions and roles of the city

are adapted from one model to another.

Forexampleinamedievalmodel,theform

of the city adapted towards that specificframework and generated building types

that served specific social functions. A

building type implies that it carries a

common shared conception repeatedly

followingaparticularformthatisculturally

and traditionally driven (Kropf,2001). This

form is then replicated throughouthistory

and adjusted as a response to previous

interactions between body and space.

Therefore,buildingstodayareanevolution

of an earlier form that was readjusted

according to developing functions, which

are products of culturally imbedded

interactions(Dovey,1999),reflectingsocial

culturalidentity.Thus,studyingthebuilding

fabricaimstoexplorethesymbolicmeaning

thats reflected in urban structure as a

product of social and geographical

conditionsleadingtocurrentform.

The third townscape aspect is land use

patterns,which investigates change inuse

of space patterns on different scales, as

they influence townscapes in relation to

land value. The analysis isalsodevoted to

studying land use patterns, geographical

and economic conditions that are

responsibleforthecreationofurbanfringe

belts or fixation lines (Whitehand, 1987).

Fringebeltsareaproductofslowprocessof

town stretching related to land values,

topographical or geographical obstacles tohousing development, or a decline in

construction. These extensions allocated

new land use zones for industrial,

residential or commercial use, which

represented former peripheral urban uses

(Conzen 1981b; Whitehand, 1987, 2005).

Whitehanddevotedmuchofhisresearchto

the formation of fr inge belts and the

disconnect they fabricate in the urban

realmbringingseverephysicallimitationsto

current urban growth, as they enclose or

border later development separating old

fromnew.


12/45


12

Figure 1:Land-useof Birmingham in1995ofthe

Edwardianfringebelt.ByWhitehand2004

This spatial disconnect emerges from

changing social patternsthat demandnew

land-use patterns following functional

growth. Therefore space is governed by

social patterns, while urban form is

governedbyfunctionalpurposeembedded

inculturaltradition.

BodyandSpaceExperience

As previously mentioned, the relationship

between urban form and people is the

social experience that constructs symbolic

meaning and value to the urban realm.

Urbanform isa socialmirror,whichhelps

to constitute and transform social reality

(Lefebvre,1971citedinDovey,1999,p.46).

Therefore urban form has powerful

symbolic meaning, as it strengthens the

relationship between people and their

environments and evokes deep feeling

(Alexander, 1987). However, the loss of a

historical association and a fragmentation

of form and time can produce a lost,

replaced, or distorted understanding of

space (Dovey, 1999). Urban morphology

studiestheevolutionofformthroughtime,to contextualize social and symbolic

configuration. As the use of urban

morphology justifies authenticity of urban

formandaspectsthatenhancesocialwell-

being, it highlights the importance of

history in the urban realm. Whitehand

definesthehistoricaltownscapeasholding

practical, intellectual, and aesthetic values

(1987),whichreliesonthebodyandspace

relationship.

First,thephysicalformhaspracticalutility.

It is used to give people a sense of

orientation,asidentifyinglocalitiesdepends

onourmentalmapandcapacitytofunction

spatially. Urban form frames everyday life

guidingbehavioranduseofspace.Without

theabilitytoformamentalmapofaplace,

it is easy to feel disconnected and lost

(Lynch,1960).AsKevinLynchhasdescribed ,


13/45


13

urban forms are not only combinations of

materials,volumes,colorsandheights,they

are uses, flows, perceptions, mental

associations, systems of representations

whose significance changes with time,

cultures, and social groups (1960 cited in

Castells,2003,p.25).Hedescribesthebasic

elements of the city as paths, edges,

districts, nodes, and landmarks (1960),

which is a base for a constructed mental

map of a certain city that makes it more

legible and permeable, since the sense oforientationdependsgreatlyonthecapacity

torecognizeandidentifylocalities.Ithelps

enhance understanding of space, as it

emerges from action (Dovey 1999).

However an individual needs to feel that

they belong not only in space but also in

time, where looking back in to the past

better informs looking forward (Larkham,

1996). Urban form therefore serves the

needtoknowcityspastasreferencepoint

(Lowenthal,1985),ashistoricaltownscapes

provide symbols of stability and a visual

confirmationofthepast.

Second, the physical form has intellectual

value.Itfunctionsasahistoricaldocument,

apalimpseston whichsuccessivehistorical

periods have left their trace of

morphological record (Conzen, 2004).

Urban form invites interpretation through

everydayinteraction,andthereforeshapes

a multi layered interpretive image by

different groups in society. It also

strengthens the experiential value, which

signifies the importance of the interaction

between society and space (Larkham,

2010).Itplacessocietyonatimelineofan

evolving societal history, by means of a

strong visual experience of the mixture of

differentperiodstylesnarratingthehistory

of the place. The physical artifacts of

history teach observers about landscapes,people,eventsandvaluesofthepast,giving

substance to theculturalmemory (Lewis,

1975 cited in Larkham,). It also invites

interpretation where written records of

past historical events are lacking (Conzen,

2004). Furthermore, historical townscapes

are important to society as a wider

emotional experience,as itstabilizesgroup

identities through preserving the physical

form with its culturally educative value.

Although urban form holds different

meaning for different groups of people,

the meaning of architecture is both

individualandcollective,asitsuggeststhat

thebuiltenvironmentcanbeimportantfor

stabilizinggroupidentities(Hubbard1993,

p.366).

Third,thephysicalformhasaestheticvalue.

Cullen describes the city as a dramatic


14/45


14

event in the environment, a gathering of

people who create a collective surplus of

enjoymentandagatheringofbuildingsthat

cancollectively give visualpleasure (1971

cited inMadanipour, 1996,p.47). Features

suchaschurchesandcastlesstimulateand

have a powerfulvisual impact. Thequality

of the environment and its attraction in

character,alsodefinedas theGeniusLoci,

offers a psychological sense of well-being

(Larkham, 2010). Conzen highlighted the

importance of capturing the citys geniusloci and its unique mnemonic powers as

cultural palimpsests, which are embedded

in the urban fabric as a product of the

successes and failures of past societies

(2004).

Urbanmorphologyisanapproachtostudy

thedevelopmentofformthroughtimeasa

productofsocialpatterns.Itcontextualizes

thecomplexityofurbanformthroughdirect

observation of townscape aspects,

contrasting the planned and un-planned

configurations as they take place in urban

space.Theurbanrealmisthereforeseenas

amanuscriptthatconsistsofphysical,social

and symbolic configurations evolving

through time. Through the interaction

betweenbodyandspace,symbolicmeaning

is constructedas a product ofpalimpsests

or historic layers in the urban realm

confirming cultural belonging to a wider

society placed on a historical timeline. As

some studies suggest that the

strengthening and experiential values of

urban form can persist in the absence of

form (Larkham, 2010), the lack of a direct

relationship between form and people

disturbs social balance and disconnects

urban form from its powerful symbolic

meaning. Therefore the body and space

relationisresponsiblefortheproductionof

meaning,which is influencedas this urbanform is altered. As meaning varies from

those thatare unique to individuals,those

that are shared between similar socio-

cultural backgrounds, and those that are

sharedglobally(RapoportcitedinHubbard,

1993),peopleassignfunctionsandsymbolic

meaning through human agreement

(Madanipour, 2003), as well as through

social conflict (Castells, 2003a). According

to Castells, urban design is the symbolic

attempttoexpressthecitysurbanmeaning

in theurban fabric,however urban realms

are contestedwith themultiplicityofaims

reflectingaconflictintheuse,functionand

meaningofspace.Thefollowingsectionwill

exploretheconflictsemergingthroughthis

multiplicity as they manifest in the built

form, affecting the body and space

relationship.


15/45


15

Between

Conservation&Transformation

Thebasicdimensioninurbanchangeisthe

conflictive debate between social classes

and historical actors over the meaning of

urban, the significance of spatial forms in

the social structure, and the context

hierarchy, and destiny of cities in

relationship to the entire social structure

(Castells2003a,p.1)

According to Castells, urban design is the

symbolic attempt to express meaning in

urban form based on a collective shared

conception of the collective urban

experience. However, he further argues

that cities are shaped through social

conflicts with destructive implications on

the physical fabric, social patterns and

symbolic value.Theyareconflictsoverthe

definition ofuse,function andmeaningof

space arising from the variety of different

needs,interests,andgoalsinacity(2003a).

Conflicts over the understanding of space

and its function are mediated into the

urban fabric, asurban form frames spaces

based on contextual interests of the

dominant class. The urban fabric is

thereforeinconstantredefinitionashuman

action towards a specific mode of

developmentexpresses the interestof the

particular agents of change (Castells,

2003b). However, according to Alexander,

citiesgroworganicallytowardsacreationof

wholeness (1987), where development

shouldbe incontinuationofpast societies,

responding to the existing anatomyof the

urban realm to generate new extensions

(Strike,1994).Asurbanmorphologystudiestheanatomyofurbanform,ithighlightsthe

gaps and fragmentations createdas urban

tensionsdrivecitiesagainstorganicgrowth.

Amid the urban design pressure between

conservationandtransformation, themain

socialconflictisbetweenlandandproperty

exploitation for capital gain versus art,

aesthetic and historical appreciation

(Larkham, 1996). However in contested

space,urbanfabricreflects themeaningof

the dominant class holding prominent

powertoimpacttheforcesofurbanchange

anddesigndecisions,whereacapitalmode

ofproductionbecomes dominant(Castells,

2003b). Consequently, land, heritage and

identity are commodified, which according

to Karl Marx, is a process of placing a

natural or labored good in the economic

realm to satisfy human wants for the

exchange value of its use (Shultz, 1993).


16/45


16

These are objectified and treated as

commodities transforming the significance

of their use, function and meaning. The

followingsectionswillillustratethisprocess

as its manifested in the urban realm,

transforming townscape aspects into

commodities, and governing the direction

ofurbangrowth.

Power:HowItManifests

As built forms have practical value in

providing a sense of orientation through

constructing amentalmap,it also controls

social behavior and use of space. Dovey

analyzes here the built form as it frames

places as a means to mediate, construct

and reproduce power, where frame is a

context ratherthana tool forrepresenting

spatial text. This suggests that form is

produced to serve a certain interest

controlled by people with power, which

Doveyremarksastheinterestofpeoplein

empowermentandfreedom,theinterestof

the state in social order, and the private

corporate interest in stimulatingconsumption (1999, pp.1). He considers

forms of power manifested in the built

form,suchasforce,coercion,manipulation,

seduction, and authority, which alter and

mediate social behavior in their use of

spaceandunderstandingofits implication.

Oneformofpowerisforce,asitdeprives

part of society from choice. This form is

mediated throughthe conceptof enclaves,

walls, fences, or security cameras, which

implies that some underprivileged are

excludedfromuseofthatspace,asitplaces

them under conditions of surveillance

(1999).Theuseofspaceisthereforelimited

and controlled as spatial boundaries

segregate to wall some people in while

keepingothersout(UN-Habitat2001,citedinSingermannand Amar, 2006,p.11).This

form of power over justifies superiority

overcontrolledsubjects,forcingcompliance

inurbanandsocialspace.

Coercion is a threat of force through

intimidation,wherepowerismanifestedin

peoples conceptionofurbanform(Dovey,

1999).Howeveritisanindirectforce,asit

leadspeopleto voluntarilycomplythrough

symbolicspatialorder.Inthebuiltformitis

manifestedthroughspatialdominationand

intimidation,where form isexaggerated in

scale belittling surrounding forms (1999).

The symbolic meaning is manipulated to

legitimize intimidation andconductcertain

behavioralpatterns.Publicmonumentsare

commonly used to impose social order, as

they hold powerful symbolism

communicated through their historic and


17/45


17

aesthetic value.On theother hand, urban

form induces another form of

organizational spaces, which today is

enforcedbyzoninglaws, land-usepatterns

and building codes. It mediates space

allowing for certain programmed action,

while excluding others (Dovey, 1999).

Certain activities can be conducted in

certain types of spaces such as areas

dedicated to economic activity. Thereby

exchange value is gained through use of

thatprogrammedspace.

Manipulation is another form of power

thatreliesontheignoranceofparticipants,

where they are forced into a behavioral

structure in the urban realm resembling

free choice (Dovey, 1999). People are

disconnected from the public realm and

socialspace,howeverunawareoftheforce

behind this fragmentation. As Larkham

highlightsthepsychologicalneedtobelong

somewhereinspaceandtime(1996,p.6),

Dovey further traces the manipulation of

the sense of orientation and history as a

force to maintain ignorance and insure

compliance. Asmanipulativeforce controls

behavior through social displacement,

seduction manipulates and transforms

peoples interests and self-identity (1999).

Urban meaning is fabricated into an

imagineddesire,thusreflectingadistorted

image of society thats driven by power

holders.Theperceptionofaesthetics,which

is subjective and offers a sense of well-

being (Larkham, 2010), however is

manipulated into a fabricated perceived

imagethatisdisconnectedfromreality.

Finally, force of authority is associated

with institutional societal structure, which

legitimacy is associated with its duty to

servepublicinterestinreturnofrecognition

and unquestioned compliance (Dovey,1999).Asbuiltformsymbolizesstability,the

meanings it carries through institutionally

embedded symbols are validated and

justified as symbols of social structure.

According toBarnes, they have the power

toaffirmviolenceandwealthasthebase

of powerat the same timeas they affirm

friendship and solidarity (1988 cited in

Dovey,1999,pp.12).

All these different forms of power

manifested in urban realm remove the

possibility of resistance by society, and

according toLefebvreare concealedunder

the guise of innocence and transparency.

Use of space is framed, constructing

illusionsof freedomhidden throughspatial

representations(1991citedinDovey,1999,

p.46). Ignorance is maintained, while

identity in social space is manipulated in


18/45


18

accordancetothepowerfulfewasthemold

todayscities.

Astheurbantensionsunfold,adichotomy

exists between conserving the past as

intrinsic value and the need for

development(Nasser,2003).Thefollowing

sections will illustrate these tensions, as

urban design reflects the interests of the

dominant class, where financial interests

dominateoverculturalvalues(Singermann,

2009).

LandasCommodity

Commodifyinglandistheprocessofcapital

accumulationandprofitingfromthesaleof

land (Vance, 1990). Rising land values

driven by economic forces limits

possibilitiesforconservation,asarguments

over maintenance costs of historical

buildingsareclaimedtobeexceedinglyhigh

while having no profitable capital gain.

Therefore wholesale destruction takes

place by modern planners overlooking

cultural, historical and developmental

influences(Conzen,2004).Plotsaredivided

into construction zones and planning

sectors owing to land consolidation, thus

losing urban forms structuring role and

relationshipwithcorrespondingopenspace

and street system (Levy, 1999). With

growing densities in cities, new space is

designated or programmed for specific

function, where the exchange value of

space is the return on the allocation of

residential and commercial use areas.

Through the use of global trends, such as

housing enclaves, shopping malls, and

corporate towers, places integrate in a

global property market (Dovey, 1999).

Public spaces, which Madanipour (1996)

justifiesaspromotingunityaspeoplecarryoutcommonactivities in a common social

space, is replaced by vast open spaces

reserved for neweconomicbases, such as

shoppingmalls,businessparksandparking

lots. Streets are also transformed into

highways, contributing to the

despatialization of activities in the public

spherereducingculturalsignificanceofthe

social space to a programmed spatial

functionforspecializedbehavior.

HeritageasCommodity

The processof landexploitation for capitalgain is driven by forces of globalization,

wherelandisdisplacedintheglobalmarket

to establish a universal identity thats

recognized globally. As heritage is defined

as history processed through mythology,


19/45


19

ideology, nationalism, local pride, or

romantic ides, it isalso processed through

plain marketing into a commodity

(Schouten, 1995 cited in Larkham, 1996,

p.14). This process of heritage

commodificationortourismisaprocessof

city promotion and legitimization.

According toHarvey,authenticity of space

islegitimizedandaccentuatedasitsplaced

intheglobalcommodityculture(1996).He

furtherdiscussesthatthe imageof thecity

becomes an important aspect in thecompetitive global space. The identity and

heritage of place is thus exploited and

treated as brand-new infrastructureto

convey a completely different image that

appeals to a wide range of better-off

potential visitors and investors

(Madanipour 2006, p.181). Thereby,

identity isobjectifiedfor thepurposeofits

exchange value.Ouf further argues that in

response to this global attention to

historically significant spaces, urban

designers direct their efforts to create

tourist attractions (2001), rather than

locallyinducedspaces.Asheritageisplaced

inaglobalrealm,onalocallevelresidents

are displaced and expelled from social

space,whichbecomesreservedfortourists.

Therefore preferred national imagery is

accentuated, as the spirit of the place or

genius loci is focused on tourist corridors.

Madanipour argues that the image of city

becomes a means of product

differentiation, as cities compete globally.

Thereby urban space is stripped of its

emotionalandculturalvalue,andtreatedas

acommodity(1996,2006),ratherthanasa

collective possession, as global cultural

industriesdominate(Nasser,2003).

IdentityasCommodity

Madanipourarguesthatdesign isa signof

socialstatusandaesthetic taste (2006). As

heritage becomes a global icon, a

conservation pattern towards elite

architecture emerges representing biased

nationalidentity.Therefore,theresarising

stigmaofthesubjectivityoftheperception

of space with the accusation of elitism in

the conservation initiatives (Hayden,1995;

Hubbard, 1993; Nasser, 2003; Larkham,

1996;Vance, 1990). Thepractice ofurban

conservationwasinitiallyledbyintellectual

elitesocieties,who havesufficient amount

ofcapital to investandthus designate the

elite portion of architectural past, such asmansions and rich buildings designed by

famousarchitects.Thereforetheconserved

townscape acts as a representation of

dominant class national identity and

focuses on individualbuildings rather than


20/45


20

area-based. This landmark policy distorts

the real past, exaggerates affluence and

grandeur, and denigrates the present

(Ganz, 1975 cited in Hayden, 1995, p.69).

Thisonlyallows for the urban to reflect a

preferred historical imagery that is not

necessarily tied to a collective cultural

identity,butcreatesmoretensionbetween

dissenting groups and their conflicting

ideologies(Hubbard,1993;Larkham,1996).

Thequestionofwhoseheritageisthatof

numerous critiques, as it is anobjectivicationof the socialmind (Conzen,

2004) and therefore socially constructed.

The notion of heritage is responsible for

symbolizing anything inherited from the

past forming layers in the urban realm to

create the sense of place and represent

urban identity. However, with the

domination of the ruling class heavy

influencing the decision-making process,

local cultures are displaced and therefore

losetheirlocalidentitiesasurbanformfails

torepresentobscuregroups,usuallyfroma

lower social and income class (Larkham,

1996;Nasser,2003).

TensionsasMorphogenetic

Tounderstandthegapsandfragmentations

in theurban realm that haveaccumulated

overtime,thecontinuoustransformationin

relation to historically distinct periods is

examinedthrougheachtownscapeelement

anditsinteractionwitheachother,aswell

aswith society. This is alsodefined asthe

study of morphogenetics. The aim of this

studyintroducedbyConzenistoinvestigate

the evolution of each townscape aspect,

signifyingurban growth through time, and

comparing their evolution in parallel to

contrasting time periods. In his study of

British cities, Conzen suggested a divisioninto three morphogenetic periods defined

by major shifts in urban patterns, altering

the morphology or organic evolution of

space.Asthesedivisionswerelargelybased

on evolutionary patterns of western

societies(2004),thisgreatshiftinthewest

acted as global forces subsequently

affecting third-world developing countries

with a concentrationof elitesanddecision

makers finding new significance in a

globalizingworld(Madanipour,2006).Large

Middle Eastern cities for example, are

pushedtowardspatternsof modernization

(Singerman, 2009) keeping up with

international pressures, suchas capitalized

economiesandtrade.Thefollowingsection

will illustratehow Conzensmorphogenetic

periodstookshapebasedontheagentsand

forcesofchange.


21/45


22/45


22

religious institutions, community centers

and industries contributed to the

continuous rapid expansion of the urban

fringe belt around the older townwith its

wall as its ancient fixation line (Conzen,

1981a). These zones, according to

Whitehand, are characterized by scattered

anddisconnectedpatcheswithlimitedroad

network going through the fringe belt.

Therefore, it is often forming a spatial

boundarybetweenhistoricallydistinctareas

and relatively modern town plans, whilecompletely neglecting the original plan of

thecity(1987).

Figure 2: View north towards the city center of

Birmingham across part of the Edwardian fringe

belt.CalthropeEstate1985.ByWhitehand2004

Alexander explains this as part of an

incoherent and fragmented planned

development with a superficial order. He

further explains that this type of

development hinders a holistic and

continuous urban growth (1987). The

changeor expansionofuses andfunctions

of cities governed mobility of the people,

whether their migration is inward to the

city to increase proximity to industries or

outward as a form of urban extension or

geographical integration. Conzendescribed

this as an increase from small to large

territorial units intending to diversify

functional purposes in the metropolitan

area (Conzen, 2004). With this horizontal

expansion of the city in use and function,new residential units are established as

high-income classes settle away from the

center, contributing to a growing socio-

spatial gap. However inother cases, some

peripheralunitsarereservedforrelocating

low-incomegroups,whileelitesreclaimthe

city through urban regeneration and

gentrification (Madanipour, 2003) towards

a capitalist mode of production and

commodification of the city (Castells,

2003b).

The third is the period of transportation

technology, which took a very important

role in urban formation characterized by

high density and residential segregation.

This period is also characterized by the

despatialization ofsocialactivitiesand lack

ofengagementwithpubliccollectivespace.

Original form got little attention in design


23/45


23

decisionsofmoderndevelopmentandthus

lost any historical association. The

modernist planner favored vast open

spaces for flexible use in contrast to

historicallycreatedpublicspacesofthecity.

Modern development tackled the element

of public space separate from

correspondingbuiltformorstreetscapeand

therefore created unused spaces that had

little or no connection with others in the

city(Madanipour,2003).Levy(1999)called

thisthefreeingofthegroundrevolution,wherethenewurbanelementsareentirely

autonomous,ratherthandevelopedasplan

units or tissues of a cohesive whole.

Constructed space no longer corresponds

to the plot. There is no longer a clear

relationbetweenonebuildingandanother,

andbetweenbuildingsandstreetsoropen

spaces. Elements are freed form all

relationshipsbetween themandtheurban

fabric (Levy 1999, p.83). Thereby, urban

spacesbecameincoherentandnotpartofa

whole. With the rise of the capitalist city

and the extension of urban areas, density

has dramatically increased specifically in

central areas of the city. New peripheral

residential locations, created as a form of

urban extension separating rich and poor

residentialareas,wasfollowedbytheneed

for better connectivity and fast

transportation.Thisledtotheconstruction

of highways and motorways that would

avoid these densely central spaces. The

relationship between street and physical

form has therefore disappeared as streets

lacked any connectivity with urban form

and social interaction (Madanipour,1996).

In contrast to the earlier morphogenetic

periods, where streets were designed as

shared communal spaces, today they have

become reserved for a simple space for

movement, killing the street as public

space(Levy1999,p.83).

While in earlier periods the relationship

between those elements established a

holistic meaning and value of the urban

fabric, this period created a disconnect

between thebodyand space relationship,

hindering any construct of symbolic

meaning to take place. This resulted in a

redefinition of the relationship between

public and private space, bringing severe

social consequences such as segregation,

congregation and junction (Vance, 1990).

Specializedactivitiesthatusedtobecarried

outin publicopen spacesavailable forthe

general public have become exclusive toa

limited clientele in a restricted area of

specialization (Vance, 1990) defined by

zoning laws, which according to

Madanipour, deteriorate the relationship

betweentownscapefeatures.Thereforethe


24/45


24

availabilityofspace issubjecttoa complex

set of rules and conditions,wherea large

numberofpeoplemaynotbeabletouseor

access particular space (1996, 2003).

Moreover, public spaces have been

transformed into elevated walkways,

podiums, or car parks catering for private

businesses and shopping malls, while

destructing therelationshipbetweenopen

spaces, urban forms and people

(Madanipour 1996, Levy 1999).

Consequently,theformofthecitychangedovertimeaccordingevolvingsocialpatterns

pushedbyparticularagendas.

Conclusion

Eachmorphogeneticperiodischaracterized

by its major shifts in social patters that

redefinedtheuse,functionandmeaningof

urban space through time. Space has

transformed from a social function

promoting group stability and collective

unity to a fragmented hierarchical social

structure. As Castells defines the city as

space for social conflicts and struggle, hedescribes spatial form as expressing the

interest and identity of thedominant class

(2003a), who force a certain mode of

development or patterns of human action

in the urban realm. The patterns

established through the morphogenetic

studyoftownscapesdemonstratedhowthe

shifts from one morphogenetic period to

the other are led by a strong financial

interest through urban growth. Financial

interests therefore dominate over culture

and heritage, which contributes to the

divide in social existence. The outcomeof

this dominating capitalistic mode is a

comprehensive redevelopment plan that

treats urban heritage as wastage of past

societies, rather than using an adaptiveapproach to reshape the existing urban

fabric (Larkham, 1996). This process lacks

considerationanda clearunderstandingof

whatsalready thereanddeepenstheloss

of connection with cultural identity and

origin,creatingplacelessandrootlessurban

areas. If a place can be defined as

relational, historical and concerned with

identity, then a space which cannot be

defined as relational or historical, or

concernedwithidentitywillbeanon-place

(Auge,1996citedinDovey,1999,p.50).

Asurbanformisapowerfulmeanstoinvest

with social meaning and promote

collectivity, it is also means to manifest

power to control and manipulate social

patterns in use function and meaning of

space. According to Dovey, social

interaction,orlackof,iscrucialforpractices


25/45


25

of force. Therefore as the organization of

spaceandtimepromotessocialinteraction,

thelossofsenseoforientationandhistory

can be conductive to coercive control

(1999). However, this suggests that

assimilation to historical orientation

advocates collectivity and thus can be a

powerfultoolforresistance.Thisillustrates

thaturbanmorphologycanturnitsbackto

whatever internal power struggles are

taking place within geography and

transcend the adolescent strifes plaguingcity planning, architecture, realestate and

construction (Moudon 1997, p. 8). A

normative-prescriptive realm of urban

morphology therefore aims to drive

integrative townscape approaches, which

enhancetherelationshipbetweenformand

people, while using past as a reference

pointforfuturedevelopmentspromotinga

historic orientation. This suggests that

urban morphology can be a basis for

conservation approaches (Whitehand,

2007;Hubbard,1993),whichfocusesonthe

body,spaceandtimerelationshipthataim

tocreatea cohesive sociallyand culturally

integrativetownscape.

The following sections will illustrate these

concepts through contrasting different

distinct historical periods of Cairo, Egypt.

ThepurposeofusingCairoasacasestudyis

to demonstrate how these conflicts

manifest intheurbanrealm,particularly in

the context of a developing country thats

heavilyinfluencedbyglobalforces.Thiswill

illustrate the importance of understanding

urban space before attempting to

transform it, while highlighting the gaps

created through history contributing to a

growingsocio-spatialdivide.


26/45


26

TheCaseof

ContestedCairoUrban form generally tends to legitimize

theregimewhichproducesit(Dovey1999,

p.85).

Egypt has experienced a great number of

powershiftsinthepastcenturies,whichare

a product of different contrasting political

agendas. All thesepower shifts have used

urban formasa means tomanifestpower

and ideology by framing social space in

situations,wherecomplianceisguaranteed.

Consequently, over the years this popular

approachcompletelyalteredsocialpatterns

in space as well as damaged national

identity. Cairo is a city with multiple

identities, but also is a city that lacks a

collective image. Its form references

different eras, and different historical

periods,howeverholdsadistortedsymbolic

meaning as a result of an approach that

only focusedon thenormative-prescriptive

realmof townscapemanagement. Aseach

historical period sought to reconstruct the

imageofthecityledbyeconomic,political

andsocial forces (Singermann, 2009), past

was considered wastage, while the

definitionof aCairoenbecameambiguous.

Egypts late neoliberal government, which

was broughtdownonFebruary 11th 2011,

continuously used force and manipulation

for the benefit of the elites, framing

indigenous groups in situations of

desperation (Armburs, 2011). Today in an

unsettled dispute over which direction

Egypts fate is going, it is certain that a

rehabilitationofnational identity canbea

toolforresistance(Dovey,1999).

As Morphogenetic periods are defined by

periods of major transformation in town

plan,building fabricandland-usepatterns,

Cairos morphogenetic periodsaredefined

by these townscape transformations that

are specific to Colonial, socialist, and neo-

liberal movements. These periods

conducted major physical, social and

symbolictransformationsthroughtimethat

have kept Cairos identity in constant

redefinition. With the use of these

townscape aspects as vehicles for urban

transformationtowardscertaininterestsof

the dominant class, symbolic meaning is

lost through time leading to a

fragmentation in society and space in the

urbanrealm.

Thissectionwillillustratehowahistoriccity

center was lost due to power shifts over


27/45


27

time that modifiedthemorphology of the

city and reflected national identity. As

forcesofpowerandglobalcapitalmanifest

in the urban realm, the public becomes

displacedfromCairossocialspace.


28/45


28

PeriodofColonialTraditions

According to Conzen the first

morphogenetic period is the phase of

continuous colonial traditions, which gave

thecitymostofitsimagethroughinvesting

in its townplan. Itismarkedby themajor

shiftinCairosidentityandglobalimage.In

the 1870s Khedive Ismail took power and

wasinspiredbyallhistraveling toEurope,

specifically Paris to attend the 1867

exhibition. There he was greeted by

Hausmann, who designed the new

urbanization plans of Paris between1850s

to1870s(Raymond,2001).Uponhisreturn

for the inauguration of the Suez Canal,

Cairo was expecting an international

audience to attend the celebrations. Prior

tothisperiod,Cairohadnotseenanymajor

urban developments for decades and was

considered trapped in a traditional non-

modern time thats associated with

disorder and chaos (Singermann, 2009).

Therefore Ismail realized the need for a

new face to the city and sought to re-

imagine a city that reflects a modern era

withanidentitycompetingwithglobalcitiesin response to international movements,

such as the American City Beautiful

movement of the 1890s. Inspired by

international intervention andseeing huge

economicgrowthinEgyptduetothecotton

Figure3:IsmailsCairo1869-1870,viewofthenew

citywestofoldcity.ByRaymond2001

boom, Ismail was able to commission

Frencharchitects toreplicatethe layoutof

Paris and to develop the citys first urban

plan giving it a western and European

association, which was also called

Haussmannization.

The processofHausmannizationsought to

establisha newspatialorganization,which

in contrast totheold citywould projecta

newurbanidentity.Itfocusedon thetown

plan and was built on the foundations of

displaying order in townscape patterns.


29/45


29

Straight lines and geometric grids were

usedinstreetscapesthatconnectedtovast

opensquaresandboulevardsunitingthem

with apartmentblocks, towhich Deboulet

arguedasbeingassociatedwithmodernity,

holding power to symbolize discipline,

organizationandprogressbymost colonial

and post-colonial urban planners (cited in

Singermann, 2009). This newmodern plan

wasbuiltinavacantzonenorthwestofold

Cairoduetothelackofconstructiontimeto

adopt the Hausmannian model in the oldcity (Raymond, 2001),as thefocuswason

the fast construction of a new dynamic

identity. However according to Sanders

manyold buildings got destroyed in order

to widen streets and implement the new

townscape(citedinSingermann,2009).

Thisstrategywasnottodevelopthecity in

continuationoftheoldcitybutwouldgive

the city a faade of urban respectability

(Raymond 2009, p. 314). Thereby this

transformationinitiativewaspushedbythe

conception that the urban realm is

reflectiveof its peoplesidentity,as design

isasignofsocialstatusandaesthetictaste

(Madanipour, 2006). This plan used the

power of seduction in urban form, which

steeredtheconstructionofpeoplesdesires

and self-identity (Dovey, 1999).

Figure 4: Contrast between Cairo and Paris

Hausmannian Town Plans. By Zaazaa 2009

It influenced users of space as it shaped

theirimaginedinterests.AsIsmailsagenda

was completely driven by the need for

development and a reconstruction of

national identity, he sought to accentuate

socialinteractioninthepublicrealm,which

theHausmannplansoffered.

Thearchitecturalvehicleinthisperiodisthe

complete redevelopment through master

planning, generating new townscape

elements in urban structure and street

patterns.Theurban formandarchitectural

language shifted in order to restore

reflectedcollectiveurbanidentityandsocial

patterns. However, his town plan

overshadowedtheoldcitybythedominantstreetscapes and public squares. The old

cityadoptedadeeperimageofdisorderas

it became overruled by the

commodificationofeliteidentity.


30/45


30

PeriodofSocialism

Thisperiodsharessimilarcharacteristicsof

the colonial morphogenetic period, as it

focused on image constructing with huge

shift in national identity and image of the

city. The international intervention of

downtownCairocametoanendfollowinga

number of events, such as the national

economicdebtcrisis,theBritishoccupation,

and finally the rise of the socialist

movement. The urban landscape directly

precedingthe1952revolutionwasseenas

a symbolof elitism, where downtownwas

anareaofclassandbourgeoisieassociated

withawesternworld,towhichthemajority

of Egypts population were not invited to

participate. Cairo therefore slowly became

a capital of socialist restructuring in the

yearsoftheNasserrevolutionof1952-1973

(Raymond, 2001; Singermann, 2009). In

response to these interests, the Soviet

Union sought Egypt as a potential alley in

the late 40s and formed relationships

targeting middle class citizens, since they

became victims of the elites capitalization

interests and grew more interested incommunistic ideologies (Ginat, 1993).

Socialism became very popular among the

low andmiddle-income class,which eased

therapidtransformationofthecitysurban

fabricandthe manipulationof its identity.

Figure 5: Cairo in 1993, with Ismails city in the

center,showingexpansionsandcityboundariesof

successive generations. By Raymond 2001

Nassers era ismarkedbya heavy interest

in post-colonial nationalism followed by

state interventionandactive social policy

resulting in the nationalization of the

concessionary companies and of public

utilities, the construction of low-income

housing, and the freezing of rents

(Raymond 2001, p.348). His period also

marks the beginning of the second

morphogenetic period with major central

density increases followed by a housing


31/45


31

crisesthatseparatedzonesbasedonsocio-

economicstatus.

The alterations that took place in Cairos

downtown, earlier the capitalof European

identity, focused on transformation in the

building fabric,whichsets the characterof

the place and reflects national heritage

(Conzen, 2004). Those are the elements,

which Nasser sought to reconstruct

reflectingafabricatedeconomic,socialand

cultural history based on socialistideologies. Furthermore, his approach to

this transformation was redefining the

relationship between urban form and

people in use, function and meaning of

space. The firstmajor contribution to this

periodisinCairosdowntownIsmailsquare,

which was renamed Tahrir or Liberation

square symbolizing liberation from foreign

occupation. The square was given the

Mugamaa, a building block that was

believedtobeagiftfromtheSovietUnion

prior to the revolution (Williams, 2009).

Although it was completed before the

revolution, the building holds a collective

symbol of Nassers era today (Raymond,

2001).ThepurposeoftheMugamaa,Arabic

forbringingtogether,istocentralizeallof

state functions inonebuilding symbolizing

the high centrality of Egypts bureaucratic

system. This fourteen-story soviet inspired

block,whichreferencedasimplifiedIslamic

style(Zaazaa,2009),holdsmunicipaloffices

foraround18,000employeesandarounda

dozen ministries (Williams, 2009). The

centrality of functions legitimizes authority

andconnectsitsexistencetoservingpublic

interest, therefore enforcing sense of fear

and threat, as well as solidarity (Dovey,

1999).

Figure6:MugamaainTahrirSquare.ByMohamed

HossamEddin2011

Further alteration to the building fabric

were his concrete blocks, housing

ministries, national enterprise and civil

servants (Zaazaa, 2009), which referenced

soviet architecture. To makeway for such

intervention, many downtown buildings

were subject to demolition. Despite their

potential for reuse, the act itself of

demolishing an old ideology was a


32/45


32

necessarysymbolicact(Golia,2004citedin

Zaazaa,2009).

Hisapproachwastotransformthebuilding

fabric,whichcontributestothecharacterof

place.Hesoughttoachieveacharacterthat

would overrule Ismails constructed town

planbyaddingspatiallydominatingbuilding

blocks. Rather than transforming existing

town plan, he focused on transforming its

symbolic meaning from elitist to post-

colonial nationalist. The built form thusbecame prime role as ideology, which

people call culture (Dovey, 1999). The

spread of socialist ideologies transforming

the built form is a response to forces of

coercion, where compliance is assured

through domination or intimidation of

urban form altering spatial behavior and

relationship between body and space

(Dovey, 1999). Built in downtown Cairo

amid Ismails modern urban plan, the

Mogamaa completely changed the

morphology of the area, altering behavior

and flow around the area. Its presence in

such a central location increased density

and traffic flow towards the center, as

peopleallaroundEgyptneededtovisitthe

Mugamaa for official reasons, such as

processing most legal documents. As the

Mugamaa frames everyday functions and

behaviors,itsignifiesthreatofforcedueto

its exaggerated scale anddominantspatial

andcentral location,whichDovey explains

as belitt ling the human subject as it

signifies the power necessary to its

production(1999,p.10).Thenatureofthis

fourteen-story soviet block dominates

downtownCairoasitbelittlesIsmailsCairo

andwesternidentity,forcingsubjectsunder

the cover of voluntarism to comply with

socialistidentity.Theuseofformthatalters

thedynamicsofthespaceisalsoanactto

constantlyremindpeopleof the symbolofauthority, which implies unquestioned

recognition and compliance (Dovey, 1999)

through constructing a physical icon or

landmark with a distinct symbolic

configuration.Thereplicationofthissoviet

concrete block design affirms socialist

ideologies, where institutional and non-

institutionalbuildingsholduniformsymbols

ofauthority.

Onasmallerscale,Nassersoughttoreverse

the symbolic meaning that Ismail

constructed by distorting its image and

significance. His aimwasnot to transform

the faade or layout of Ismails

Hausmannizationplans,butusedtenureas

vehicle to transform the relationship

between form and people. Rent-control

lawswerepassedonallexistingrentalunits

freezingrentat the1947level,whichwere


33/45


33

again stabilized and intensified inNassers

era for all existing and new units. The

purposewas achieving greater social and

economic equity, which led to the

redistributionofwealthandmajorchanges

in the countrys social stratification

(Arandel & Batran 1999, p.4), where

physical and symbolic significance were

eliminated. These reforms protected

tenants from rising rents and eviction,

however led to the deterioration of the

building fabric as maintenance costexceeded rent paid by tenants (Raymond,

2001).Astenantsgainedinheritancerights,

landlords were unable to attend to their

buildingsandthusleftbuildingsindecaying

conditions while some destined to

completecollapse(2001).

The relationshipbetween formandpeople

therefore completely shifted, as sense of

ownership and pride was lost along with

livingconditions.Thebuiltformshapedthe

perception and cognition of the subjects,

manipulating their desires to overrule

Ismailsconstructedsymbolicmeaningfora

more socially justurban structure. Ismails

town plan was subject to distortion as

seduction forces were used in the

recreationofmeaningtoexistingbuiltform

holding significant implications for self-

identity (Dovey, 1999). Reflected social

status therefore was equalized between

Nassers and Ismails building fabric.

Downtown no longer was the stage of

certain behaviors or codes of dress, for

better or worst, it has lost any signs of

alienationand ithas been fully integrated.

Greater Cairo has lost its center (Zaazaa,

2009). This intervention striped Ismails

downtownoutofitshistoricalmeaningand

symbolicvalue,whilediscreditingtheneed

forconservationinitiativesforthishistorical

townplan.Thearchitecturalvehicleforthisintervention is therefore the manipulation

of the building fabric, as well as the

relationship between form and people,

which achieved a dramatic shift in identity

and meaning of space. Ismails Cairo was

nothingbut a lost identity with lost urban

behaviors following the disappearance of

Cairoscitycenter(Zaazaa,2009).


34/45


34

PeriodofNeoliberalism

Thismorphogeneticperiodismarkedbyan

increaseinpopulationandcontinuedurban

extension into peripheral locations in

response to economic and socio-political

forces. Consequently to the decaying

conditionsofdowntownshousingunitsand

infrastructure, new rental stock in Cairos

centerdramaticallydeclined.Inthesecond

half of the twentieth century downtown

was increasingly becoming lower class

district (Zaazaa, 2009), drivingmiddle and

high-income class residents away into

peripheral locations. The city expanded

outwards serving class-segregated

communities, drawing unevenlydeveloped

zones in Cairos urban realm (El Shakry,

2006).Therebypublicsectorgainedcontrol

over housing distribution, targeting

differentsocio-economicclassesseparately.

Thisperiodwas led by Anwar Sadatwhen

heopenedEgyptup to foreign capitaland

global market in the 1970s. This mode of

capitalization was intensified in the

followingdecadestopresenttimereducing

public services and subsidies throughoutthe country while changinglaws toattract

foreign capital (Singermann, 2009).

According to David Harvey, this form of

neoliberal polit ical economic practice

generated institutional frameworks that

Figure 7:GreaterCairo, showing newsettlements

and new cities expanding into

peripheral locations. By Raymond 2001

supported free trade, free market and

private property rights. Those were

guaranteed functioning through state

intervention (2007). In response to thesestructural adjustments, entrepreneurs,

public contractors and state authorities

redefined their alliance, while public

resources were reallocated for thebenefit

of the elites (Armburst, 2011). As

developers gained credit advantages,

entrepreneurs purchased overvalued land

at a low price to develop luxury housing

communities in desert land (Denis, 2006).

Therefore this era in Egyptian history

markedtheshiftfromsocialwelfaremode


35/45


35

of regulation to a neoliberal mode of

regulation(ElShakry,2006).

The outward expansion pushed by

economic forces into thecitysperipheries

creatednewfunctionalpurposes andland-

usepatternsforthedesertedland,whichin

Whitehands terms is characterizedas the

process of fringe belt formation. In

responsetotopographicalandgeographical

obstacles to housing development, new

land-use units were sought in the citysperipheries, creating a residential zone

encircling original city and separating old

fromnew,aswellasrichfrompoor(1987).

Figure8:HousingEstate in6th

ofOctoberCity.By

Evergreen2008

Those new settlements adopted the

Americanmodelofhousingenclaves,which

displayed modernity, order and

organizationalvalues.However,aninduced

formofdespatializationemergedaspublic

space was reduced to luxury shopping

malls, or streets as spaces for highway

transportation. These urban types are a

response to historical conditions of

capitalism mediating a globally

constructedandexploitedsenseofplaceto

justifyformandpower(Dovey1999,p.44).

A global imagewas therefore sought. This

model demonstrated an Egyptianized

American dream (Singermann, 2009),

reflecting a modern townscape, by which

this global trend of housing enclaves to

wall some in and keep others out (UN-

Habitat 2001, cited in Singermann andAmar,2006,p.11)legitimizedsuperiorityof

newoverold,andrichoverpoor.

This hierarchical spatial division is not just

defined by income groups but by college

degree,wherefamiliesaredeclinedhousing

rights despite being able to afford units

(Shakry, 2006). Therefore uneducated

families are forced to stay in poor living

standards, as their identity is defined by

their intellectual value. Cairo once more

became a dual city, characterized by two

distinct identities, imposing residential

segregation between the elite and

indigenousinhabitants(Singermann,2009).

In a neoliberal society, the urban

experience is limited and controlled

throughpoliciesrestraininguseofspaceby

indigenous citizens, while manifesting


36/45


36

symbolic power in the urban realm to

prevent any form of resistance. Public

spaces hold political significance

symbolizing power of the state, however

Madanipourfurtherargues thatit isalsoa

space for challenging authority through

demonstrations and revolutions (2003). As

thestateviewsthegeneralpublicasthreat

that has to be dealt with and contained

(Elsheshtawy 2006, p.297), the use of

manipulationasformofcoercionenforces

compliant behavior in the urban realm.However, according to Dovey, it relies on

theignoranceofthesubjectconcealingthe

intent of the ruling class and decision-

makers. The architectural vehicle in this

current period is the despatialization of

locals from the public realm andhistorical

context. The fragmentation of space and

time,thelossofasenseoforientationand

history can be conductive to coercive

control(Dovey1999,p.11).

Asthestruggleforpublicspaceintensifies,

developers are consumed with the

production of elite spaces or tourist

attractions, where financial interest

predominatesoverculturalvalues(Ibrahim

2009,p.258).Thisprocessisdefinedasthe

quartering of urban space, where public

space is reserved to attract tourists or

global investors for an economic goal of

establishing a global city image

(Elsheshtawy,2006).Howeveras spacesof

significance become means for

accumulating capital, they become

inaccessible to locals and therefore

culturallyremovedanddisplacedintoglobal

realms (Singermann, 2009). The state and

developers intent isto replacethesymbol

of poverty and illiteracy to a symbol of a

world-classhistoricalcity,whileeliminating

the threat of the marginalized public.

Deboulet argues that local developerssuperficially quantify people, as their

social and historical identities are

disregarded, as well as their relationship

with the built formand how they interact

withit(2009).Localsareremovedfromthe

cultural realm, the relationship between

bodyandspaceisdestructed,andhistorical

monuments characterized by elite

architecture are restored and reserved to

servetourists.Therebythedefinitionofthe

local public becomes ambivalent, as

economic, political and social forces

despatialize the marginalized and strip

them off their historical orientation.

Consequently,astheinterrelationbetween

spaceandtimemediatessocialinteraction,

coercive control manipulates marginalized

groups to live as atoms, wholly in the

public realm,undersurveillance, but as far


37/45


37

as possible without social relationships

(Barned,1988citedinDovey,1999,p.11).

Consequently, this urban extension

completelychangedthemorphologyofthe

entire city, as it was not created in

continuation of the old original city and

therefore created disconnected patches in

theurbanrealm.The relationshipbetween

new towns and Cairos center becomes

foreign with a fragmented collective

identity. The major transformations inCairos urban realm sought to correct

previousimageandidentityasthestruggle

for power and contrasting ideologies is

reinforced in the urban realm (Raymon,

2001).Ineachmorphogeneticperiodasthe

city grew in scale, tensions on different

levels governed the scale and direction of

the urban landscape (Larkham, 2005).

These forces shaped citys based on their

contextual interests through manipulating

townscape aspects. In colonial Cairo, the

transformation of the general town plan

sought to establish a western identity

through its geometric shapes, reflecting

order andmodernity to its citizens. It was

identified by its public squares and wide

open streets to enhance the social

experience.However,socialistCairosought

toreversewesternidentitytowardsapost-

colonial nationalistic identity. The use of

urban form and the manipulation of the

buildingfabric withinthe establishedtown

plan was a means to enforce power over

the colonialtownscapebymanipulating its

constructedsymbolic meaningbelittling its

existence and value. As neoliberal Cairo

took over, the main interest was capital

accumulation and the global market. The

manipulation of land-use pattern was the

approach to establishing new overvalued

land at low prices, belittling the old town.

The fate of downtown Cairo is adeteriorated district associated with poor

living conditions and run-down urban

realm. Cairos urban fabric therefore

becomes multi-center fragmented with

zones accommodating contrasting

economically divided groups of Cairos

social space (Zaazaa, 2009). The notion of

collectivity becomes undefined, while the

notion of public or Cairoen remains

ambivalent.


38/45


39/45


39

that is completely stripped our of Cairos

social space, contributing to a deepening

divide between contrasting identities. As

different zones are dedicated to different

socialgroups,thequestionofwhoandwhat

an average Cairoen represents remains

ambiguous. Consequently, with the

displacement of the nodes of social

interaction, the urban fabric becomes an

exclusiveurban space (Madanipour, 2006),

governed by segregation policies limiting

use of space according to social groupmembership. A few questions remain,

namely how can this multiplicity of

identities be stabilized, and how can

integrativetownscapesbeinitiated?

Accordingtothepreviousanalysisonurban

morphology, it can be concluded that

socially integrative townscapes can be

achieved through strengthening the

relationship between body and space,

which is responsible for establishing the

practical, intellectual and aesthetic

attributesoftheurbanrealm that enhance

psychologicalwell-being(Whitehand,1987;

Larkham, 1996). Furthermore, an

integrative townscape can be achievedby

treating the past as a reference point for

futuredevelopment,whichstrengthensthe

orientation of space and time (Lowenthal,

1985; Larkham, 1996). By placing heritage

intheurbanrealm,publichistorycanbea

means to increasingsocial interaction. The

bond betweenplace and identity can thus

be manifested, creating a sense of

belongingandcollectivityinalargersociety

(Hubbard,1993).Followingthisbody,space

and time triad, Singermann describes a

conservation approach should be a tool

towards engaging the wider public in a

process of evaluating values behind the

constructionoftheurbanfabric,aswellas

the meaning that was assigned by pastsocieties who actively engaged with them

through history(2009).Whileconservation

canbeatooltoalienatepeoplefromurban

space,anintegrativetownscapecanonlybe

achievedwhenpeoplewithdifferentlevels

of power, stations in life, and perspective

share the public and private spaces ofthe

city(2009,p.30).


40/45


40

References

Alexander,C.,1987.ANewTheoryofUrbanDesign.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress

Arandel,C.andBatranM.,1999.TheinformalHousingDevelopmentProcessinEgypt.London:

UniversityCollegeLondon

Armburst,W.,2011.TheRevolutionAgainstNeoliberalism. Jadaliyya,[online].Availableat:

.[Accessed1

August2011].

Castells,M.,2003a.TheProcessofUrbanSocialChange.InA.Cuthbert,ed.2003. DesigningCities:

CriticalReadingsinUrbanDesign.Oxford:Blackwell,pp.23-27.

Castells,M.,2003b.TheNewHistoricalRelationshipbetweenSpaceandSociety.InA.Cuthbert,ed.

2003.DesigningCities:CriticalReadingsinUrbanDesign.Oxford:Blackwell.pp.59-68.

Conzen,M.R.G.,1981a.ThePlanAnalysisofanEnglishCentre.InJ.Whitehand,ed. TheUrban

Landscape:HistoricalDevelopmentandManagement.London:AcademicPress.pp.25-54.

Conzen,M.R.G.,1981b.HistoricalTownscapesinBritain:AProbleminAppliedGeography.InJ.

Whitehand,ed.TheUrbanLandscape:HistoricalDevelopmentandManagement.London:Academic

Press.pp.55-74.

Conzen,M.R.G.,2004.ThinkingaboutUrbanForm:PapersonUrbanMorphology,1932-1998 .Bern:

VerlagPeterLang.

Cullen,G.,1971.TheConciseTownscape.London:ArchitecturalPress.


41/45


41

Denis,E.,2006.CaioasNeoliberalCapital?.InD.Singermann,&P.Amar,eds.2006. CairoCosmopolitan.

Cairo:AmericanUniversityinCairoPress,pp.47-72.

Dovey,K.,1999.FramingPlaces:MediatingPowerinBuiltForm.London:Routledge

ElShakry,O.,2006.CairoasCapitalofSocialistRevolution?.InD.Singermann,&P.Amar,eds.2006.

CairoCosmopolitan.Cairo:AmericanUniversityinCairoPress,pp.73-98.

Elsheshtawy,Y.,2006.UrbanTransformations:SocialControlatAl-RifaiMosqueandSultanHasan

Square.InD.Singermann,&P.Amar,eds.2006. CairoCosmopolitan.Cairo:AmericanUniversityinCairo

Press,pp.295-312.

Ginat,R.,1993.SovietUnionandEgypt,1945-1955. London:FrankCass&Co.Ltd.

Harvey,D.,1996.Justice,NatureandtheGeographyofDifference. Oxford:Blackwell

Harvey,D.,2007.ABriefHistoryofNeoliberalism.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress

Hayden,D.,1995.UrbanLandscapeasPublicHistory.InA.Cuthbert,ed.2003. DesigningCities:Critical

ReadingsinUrbanDesign.Oxford:Blackwell,pp.69-75.

Hubbard,P.,1993.TheValueofConservation:ACriticalReviewofBehaviouralResearch. TheTown

PlanningReview,64(4),pp.359-373.

Ibrahim,K.,2009.ExtractFromaDiary.InD.Singermann,ed.2009. CairoContested.Cairo:American

UniversityinCairoPress,pp.235-268.

Kropf,K.,2001.ConceptionsofChangeintheBuiltEnvironment. UrbanMorphology,5(1),pp.29-42.

Larkham.P.,1996.Conservationandthecity.London:Routledge.

Larkham.P.,2005.UnderstandingUrbanForm?. UrbanDesign,93,pp.22-24.


42/45


42

Larkham.P.,andJivn,G.,2010.SenseofPlace,AuthenticityandCharacter:ACommentary. Journalof

UrbanDesign,8(1),pp.67-81.

Levy,A.,1999.UrbanMorphologyandtheproblemofthemodernurbanfabric:somequestionsfor

research.UrbanMorphology,3(2),pp.79-85.

Lowenthal,D.,1985.ThePastisaForeignCountry.

Lynch,K.,1960.TheImageoftheCity.Cambridge:MITPress.

Madanipour,A.,1996.DesignofUrbanSpace.NewYork:JohnWiley&Sons.

Madanipour,A.,2003.WhyaretheDesignandDevelopmentofPublicSpacesSignificantforCities?.In

A.Cuthbert,ed.2003.DesigningCities:CriticalReadingsinUrbanDesign.Oxford:Blackwell,pp.139-151.

Madanipour,A.,2006.RolesandChallengesofUrbanDesign. JournalofUrbanDesign,11(2),pp.173-

193.

Moudon,A.,1997.UrbanMorphologyasanemerginginterdisciplinaryfield. UrbanMorphology,1,

pp.3-1

Documents

Urban Morphology: A Dichotomy Between Conservation and Transformation