Frank Lloyd Wright once commented that he could design a house that would cause a married couple to divorce within a matter of weeks. By the same logic it is possible to create buildings and cities so badly as to cause a culture to disintegrate socially and come unhinged from nature.
We claim to love our children, and I believe that most of us do. But we have, sheep like, acquiesced in the design of a society that dilutes the expression of genuine love. The result is a growing mistrust of our children that easily turns to fear and dislike. In a recent survey, for example, only one-third of adults believed that today's young people "will eventually make this country a better place". Instead, we find them "rude" and "irresponsible." And often they are.
We find them overly materialistic and unconcerned about politics, values, and improving society. Not infrequently they are verbally and physically violent, fully adapted to a society that is saturated with drugs and violence. Why are the very children that we profess to cherish becoming less than likable and sometimes less than human? Without intending to do so, we have created a society that cannot love its children, indeed one in which the expression of real love is increasingly difficult.
"No society that loved its children would create places like the typical shopping mall."
No society that loved its children would put them in front of television for 4 hours each day. No society that loved its children would make more parking spaces and less cycling paths. No society that loved its children would think that stopping for its children crossing roads was a problem. No society that loved its children would throw garbage on streets that their children play in. No society that loved its children would build more shopping malls than high schools. No society that loved its children would leave behind such a legacy of ugliness( poverty/abuse/neglect) and biotic impoverishment.
Of course we do all of these things in the belief that they are the necessary price of creating a better world for our children. But at some level the children understand that such arguments are phoney. This awareness explains what often appears to be their unfocused anger. Our children often mirror the larger incivility and rudeness that we inflict on them. They mirror the larger self-indulgence of a society organized around machines, instant gratification, and excessive individualism. They understand intuitively that the real curriculum is not what's taught in schools, but what's written on the face of the land.
It is remarkable, in fact, that they are not angrier.
How do we design a ‘childhood’’ for our children?
The starting point is the child itself and its need for joy, safety, play, and the opportunity to safely explore the wider world. Childhood is the "point of intersection between biology and cosmology, where the structuring of our worldviews and our philosophies of human purpose takes place." It is this ‘scripting’ that enables societies to have a nostalgia for the future. Conversely, the child's sense of connection to the world can be damaged by impoverished surroundings and also by too much affluence. It can be destroyed, in other words, when ugliness, both human and ecological, becomes the norm.
Increasingly, our children imitate the values they perceive in us with characteristic juvenile exaggeration and wonder why we get upset by this display of ‘ignorance’ and ‘arrogance’.
Assuming that we can muster the good sense to solve the problem, what would/should we do?
A city organized for the convenience of the automobile and trivial consumption tells young people more about our real values than anything taught in school. Worse, it deflects and distorts their intelligence at a critical point in life.
It is possible, however, to organize cities to teach usefulness, social responsibility, ecological skill, the values of good work, and the higher possibilities of adulthood.
Design, in this larger sense, is not simply the making of things but rather a striving for wholeness. At its best, responsible design is the ultimate manifestation of love--a gift of life, harmony, and beauty to our children and to ‘childhood’. When these responses from the city and with its citizens are made ‘visible’ for all its stakeholders to see and learn from, then the message that we transfer, helps to transform.
Aims of ‘aProCh’ and its Partners / partnerships…
‘aProCh’ believes in the ‘design’ for and the ‘nurturing’ of ‘childhood’.
These initiatives are not only the city’s responsibility but can be made visible with partnerships between business’s / citizen volunteers and institutes which foster social responsibility ( such as CEPT / IIM / NID…)
We claim to love our children, and I believe that most of us do. But we have, sheep like, acquiesced in the design of a society that dilutes the expression of genuine love. The result is a growing mistrust of our children that easily turns to fear and dislike. In a recent survey, for example, only one-third of adults believed that today's young people "will eventually make this country a better place". Instead, we find them "rude" and "irresponsible." And often they are.
We find them overly materialistic and unconcerned about politics, values, and improving society. Not infrequently they are verbally and physically violent, fully adapted to a society that is saturated with drugs and violence. Why are the very children that we profess to cherish becoming less than likable and sometimes less than human? Without intending to do so, we have created a society that cannot love its children, indeed one in which the expression of real love is increasingly difficult.
"No society that loved its children would create places like the typical shopping mall."
No society that loved its children would put them in front of television for 4 hours each day. No society that loved its children would make more parking spaces and less cycling paths. No society that loved its children would think that stopping for its children crossing roads was a problem. No society that loved its children would throw garbage on streets that their children play in. No society that loved its children would build more shopping malls than high schools. No society that loved its children would leave behind such a legacy of ugliness( poverty/abuse/neglect) and biotic impoverishment.
Of course we do all of these things in the belief that they are the necessary price of creating a better world for our children. But at some level the children understand that such arguments are phoney. This awareness explains what often appears to be their unfocused anger. Our children often mirror the larger incivility and rudeness that we inflict on them. They mirror the larger self-indulgence of a society organized around machines, instant gratification, and excessive individualism. They understand intuitively that the real curriculum is not what's taught in schools, but what's written on the face of the land.
It is remarkable, in fact, that they are not angrier.
How do we design a ‘childhood’’ for our children?
The starting point is the child itself and its need for joy, safety, play, and the opportunity to safely explore the wider world. Childhood is the "point of intersection between biology and cosmology, where the structuring of our worldviews and our philosophies of human purpose takes place." It is this ‘scripting’ that enables societies to have a nostalgia for the future. Conversely, the child's sense of connection to the world can be damaged by impoverished surroundings and also by too much affluence. It can be destroyed, in other words, when ugliness, both human and ecological, becomes the norm.
Increasingly, our children imitate the values they perceive in us with characteristic juvenile exaggeration and wonder why we get upset by this display of ‘ignorance’ and ‘arrogance’.
Assuming that we can muster the good sense to solve the problem, what would/should we do?
A city organized for the convenience of the automobile and trivial consumption tells young people more about our real values than anything taught in school. Worse, it deflects and distorts their intelligence at a critical point in life.
It is possible, however, to organize cities to teach usefulness, social responsibility, ecological skill, the values of good work, and the higher possibilities of adulthood.
Design, in this larger sense, is not simply the making of things but rather a striving for wholeness. At its best, responsible design is the ultimate manifestation of love--a gift of life, harmony, and beauty to our children and to ‘childhood’. When these responses from the city and with its citizens are made ‘visible’ for all its stakeholders to see and learn from, then the message that we transfer, helps to transform.
Aims of ‘aProCh’ and its Partners / partnerships…
‘aProCh’ believes in the ‘design’ for and the ‘nurturing’ of ‘childhood’.
These initiatives are not only the city’s responsibility but can be made visible with partnerships between business’s / citizen volunteers and institutes which foster social responsibility ( such as CEPT / IIM / NID…)
9 comments:
Yes we are with you Kiran.... Let the idea flow and crystalize... Today's young children are tomorrow's torch bearers... They are citizens right away...Then why can't they have that is rightful.
Nikita Desai
Didn't really find any contact details on your blog or you profile. Nice read, though - please let us know if you would like to discuss further on this issue of how we can take this forward.
ph: 98798 05972
there are always several ways to adress - and mutliple ways to arrive at solutions. but i firmly believe that it is difficult to work top down. to get fossils in government to inititate action or argument as we all know is improbable. it may well be done bottom up. initiate children and create the environment for them to grow up they way they can, freely and organically. maybe riverside should redefine - from school to environment, to township to politic and then hopefully a society. write to me - anando@prospectam.com. be good.
cities are built by people. aProCH is truly an innovative project that has great creative potential to awaken and impact both bottom up and top down response of the city towards children-inspiring national and international attention- as the future belongs to the children.A future that boldy demands that every protagonist is listened to and dialogued with in giving shape,design and identity to the city they are rooted in.
Wishing the protagonist great encounters with the city in their meaningful initiatives supported and mediated by none others than NID IIMA CEPT
partners -fascinating partnership ! Hope you will make a documentary on children's encounters with the city as their playground.After all talking about the city also means expressing and saying something about ourselves. With you in spirit from Singapore. vashima@mac.com
Nice work! One very interesting parallel would be Bogota City (Colombia)'s very concrete steps (pun intended) towards making a city responsive to children, right down to transportation and urban design thinking. Another example would be Curitiba City in Brazil (see http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=1258). You should Google for Enrique Penalosa, the former Mayor of Bogota and his ideas to involve children in city-building, and email Clara Irazabal, professor of planning at the University of Southern California (http://www.usc.edu/schools/sppd/faculty/detail.php?id=17) for more information on Curitiba (she's recently published a book on Curitiba and Portland). She might (might) be able to put you on to specific projects or people to do with children in the city. Enrique Penalosa came to Ahmedabad, invited by EPC, with a very inspiring logic to making the city accessible to kids. Worth following up on his websites and writing.
Children, Poverty, Global Warming... each issue is vying for our attention, claiming greater urgency and relevance than the other. What we need to realize is that these are all inter-related in a web and not separate from each other. The culture - material and spiritual - that we inherit, create and leave behind is in our hands, and starting with ourselves does not usually take massive resources or major policy shifts. As Gandhi said, "Be the change you want to see."
Oh, I forgot to add: if we find that our hands are (metaphorically) tied, we have to fight!
Hello mam. aProCh is a nice idea to spread awareness about this issue. We are with you, go ahead. I am a fan of you since the LEAD INDIA campaign. DONT ASK FOR THE CHANGE, BE THE CHANGE.
Hii
Thanks for your post...I especially agree with you on the point that the aim of Design is not to keep on adding new products or tools...it really is our duty to empower people, communities to think, imagine and implement, to sustain and nurture...
All the Best for your endeavours
Post a Comment