Accidentally on Purpose

 The present city must be defined as a place of continuous creation. Its stories evade the manifold rationality of strategic urbanism, establishing traditions and histo­ries that are both visible and waiting to be discovered. 

In thinking about the design of current cities or even pockets within a city, why do we keep creating spaces based loosely on the past? The past is a great tool to learn from, but I don't believe that parts we are copying and pasting are reflective of an idea of continuous creation. We give buildings and city blocks identities based on the aesthetic of a past place aka Italian Piazzas, but it stops at just that: the aesthetic. Do we ask ourselves why did the planners and architects of that time create these spaces to look and feel like this? What social and cultural aspects may have played a role in this style? 

Can we take the idea of a conjuncture of accident, desire, and habit that Margaret Crawford touches on in her article and overlay these ideas within the fabric of a city to develop continuous creation? I think that Moriyama House does a great job of showing us how people interact within the conjuncture of accident, desire, and habit. Each in-between space creates flexible interactions from a place where shoes live to the movement of a separated sleeping and showering quarters to the habit of moving furniture around for eating and reading. This idea explored at a larger scale could create new interactions within a city that look at the present needs instead of creating a bad replica of the past.