Tokyo x Manhattan: A conversation on urbanity and capitalism

Blade runner was such an excellent pairing with this weeks readings as it was a visual portrayal of so many of the topics discussed. To me, what is especially amazing about this film is that it offers us a glimpse of a future metropolis that is closely tied to our own reality. While it was set in future Las Angeles, its cityscape was like if you took the extreme horizontal density of Tokyo and combined it with the vertical congestion of Manhattan. It is so interesting to think of the vast historical differences that created these two very different urban conditions and what could create the existence of a metropolis that resembles both.

The ground level of the metropolis was very much resemblant of the streets of Tokyo and the functional "shamelessness" of  the "da-me" architecture discussed in Made in Tokyo. Scenes where Deckard is immersed in the street life, like the one early on when he is eating noodles at a bar or later when he retires the first replicant, you as the viewer are given the chance to empathize with the cities inhabitants and begin to imagine what everyday life could be like in this city. The signage architecture on the street level tells the story of the cities inhabitants and reveals the "pluralism of need" explained in Learning from Pop. What stood out to me was the gritty condition of the street scape with aspects like exposed wires, piles of trash, and random lit fires. In Learning from pop there is a quote from John Galbraith who talks about what citizens would really view as improvements to their urban communities and in this case I think the city planners of this city could use his advice.

I felt that the movie captured the idea of the "environmental units" discussed in that reading very well. This term describes a sort of amalgamation of multiple buildings and functions. An urban condition where buildings can no longer be "specifically classified as architecture, or as civil engineering, city, or landscape". The relationship between interior and exterior spaces becomes blurred and architecture turns into something that becomes more a of a larger, more connected urban infrastructure. This also is similar to Koolhaas's concept of the "Bastion" as a new kind of interior city, however most of the film still shows a thriving street scape full of activity. Some of the scenes that take place in interior environments like the police headquarters, JF's dwelling, or the two fight/chase scenes give you a feeling that you are just in this interior space of the city itself and it could extend on for however deep the story takes you. 

My last thought has to do with the quote from Culture of congestion which talks about the self fulfilling prophecy of the elevator and vertical high rises, "the further it travels upward, the more undesirable the circumstances it leaves behind". In this city I imagine that the wealthier class which we do not really interact with very much in the film live here, at the tops of the city. The inequality aspect of Capitalism is portrayed again with the large autonomous pyramid like buildings that rise above the cities masses and serve as palaces for people and organizations like the Tyrell company. I think of places like billionaires row near central park as a perfect real world example of this, although the street conditions below might not be as "undesirable" as portrayed in this film.