Yet the most cliched question comes to mind – what would the city look like in fifty or hundred years. Would it be the future glam-town sketched by the candy-bar film Love Story 2050 (I haven’t seen the film, the trailer was sufficient)? Or a true-to-life depiction of bleak futures painted by many a sci-fi storyteller (such as Asimov in his ‘The Caves of Steel’, or even Bladerunner), a marked (walled) division is seen between ever growing ’slum communities’ and China-like SEZs (Special Economic Zones – such as Schenzen) with access-denied written everywhere?

A year ago, I saw a remarkable exhibition in Tate Modern (London) called Global Cities:

Global Cities looks at the changing faces of ten dynamic international cities: Cairo, Istanbul, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles, Mexico City, Mumbai, São Paulo, Shanghai and Tokyo.

Exploring each city through five thematic lenses – speed, size, density, diversity and form – the exhibition draws on data originally assembled for the 10th International Architecture Exhibition at the 2006 Venice Biennale. This unique show presents existing films, videos and photographs by more than 20 artists and architects to offer subjective and intimate interpretations of urban conditions in all ten cities.

One of the art installations was 3D stalagmite-like sculptures that mapped the wealth distribution in each of the above cities. Of all, Mumbai had a few spikes that towered above and beyond any of the others, making the vast difference in wealth distribution even more apparent.

But is the ‘flatness’ desirable? I wonder. In his rapidly growing photo portfolio, my photographer friend Matti tries to capture what a friend called, the ‘post-apocalyptic Mumbai series’. Through a combination of retouched HDR photography done through in duotones, he captures the essence of its madness, the chaos that is impossible in economically ‘flat’ zones.

More on his flickr page here. Ok, time for a stroll.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

“A Bank of America employee misinterpreted a faulty fax about a bank promotion as a bomb threat Wednesday, leading authorities to evacuate more than a dozen neighboring businesses.

“It was an internal communication designed only for our employees,” Anguilla said. The fax was sent to the bank’s branches in parts of New England as well as New York and New Jersey.”

Raises a bunch of questions. Would it be seen as a threat, if there was no fear of terrorism in the US? Does waging a war reduce or increase that fear? In a “free country” (and we can get into a rhetorical discussion on what a “free country” means), this would probably be just frowned upon, laughed at and then trashed or pasted on the wall as a joke.

And if there is a constant undertone of fear, what’s the way to mitigate it? A recent film I made on Mumbai bombings for Current TV, I realized that despite an attack a year, there is really no fear in the city (though there is a sense of resignation to destiny). Would love to see an article that dives deeper into the psyche.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.