Reflecting The New

Markus Miessen in conversation with Crimson.

Based in Rotterdam, Crimson consists of six architectural historians who conduct research into contemporary urban environments. One of their studies focuses on New Towns, and Portscapes asked them to share their views on the extension of the Port of Rotterdam and its significance to the city. What policy strategy might the City of Rotterdam pursue to make the port a part of the city again?

MM Your practice could be described as hybrid: you call yourself architectural historians, challenging notions of the contemporary city, while at the same time you are studying notions of the New Town through a global research project. Can you please tell me about the New Town Institute?

Crimson The International New Town Institute is a new knowledge institute based in Almere. We conduct research into the past, present and future of new cities worldwide. We work in cooperation with universities, scholars and designers internationally. Our focus is on the regeneration of ‘old’ New Towns, mainly from the postwar period, and the conceptualization of ‘new’ New Towns, mainly outside Europe: in China, India and the Middle East.

MM What constitutes a New Town?

Crimson There are many definitions of what a New Town actually is; our definition is simple: a New Town is a master-planned city, a city that was designed from scratch with a certain level of autonomy both economically and politically.

MM How can one trace the idea of the New Town historically? How do you generally feel about universalistic planning models?

Crimson The past is full of cities planned based on universalistic principles. Using a model-like approach is tempting, because of the immense ambitions it implies and, at the same time, the inevitable and immense risk involved. The bold statement and manifesto attract us, like it did generations of modernist architects and planners before us. Nevertheless, we have concluded that universal models – not only the modernist ones – are destined to fail. In our work we have always followed a contextual and highly specific approach, for example, the WiMBY! project, the regeneration project we undertook for the new town of Hoogvliet. It was erected and developed as part of the Rotterdam port complex, which eventually became the leading global port during the 1950s and 1960s.

MM You state that “in new towns everything is possible”. Walking through cities such as Almere, one is rather surprised about such a statement. How can the Port of Rotterdam Authority learn from such examples?

Crimson Obviously not everything is possible in New Towns, but the lure of these cities to both designers and residents is the inherent promise of possibility they offer.

MM Since the 1990s, the Netherlands has attempted to export an image of Modern Dutch architecture, which was, at least until recently, very successful. For how much longer will this strategy work?

Crimson The government has run out of money to support the strategy and a lot of the grants were given without critical questioning of the content that was being produced.

MM In my last conversation for Portscapes, writer Shumon Basar argued that the generic question should be avoided at all possible costs. Is there such a person as the prototypical Rotterdammer?

Crimson We feel the six members of Crimson together represent the typical Rotterdammer, in all our different incarnations.

MM Do you have a vision for improving the quality of the landscape in the port of Rotterdam?

Crimson We would argue that the ‘vision’ question should be avoided at all possible costs..

MM Should the port of Rotterdam be understood as more than a mere port?

Crimson Absolutely. The port is the reason of existence for 90% of the urban substance of Rotterdam and its reason; the tragedy, however, is that not even 10% of the inhabitants of this urban substance are employed by or even economically tied to the port. The hardware of Rotterdam is that of a port city – its economic and social software and orgware is that of a postindustrial city.

MM Airports are often understood as points of entry to a country or political territory, such as the EU. How could a maritime port be understood in this context?

Crimson Of course ports are also points of entry to political territories; and yes, the EU would seem the right scale to define the port of Rotterdam in such a way. But there are a number of fascinating things about ports: they do not move humans around; instead, they move stuff. They are increasingly post-human and therefore invisible to the rest of the territory. However, they do move about invisible humans, such as illegal immigrants. There is nostalgia for the old-fashioned ‘human’ harbor as a place for illegality and informality. This illegality is premature, since ports like that of Rotterdam, Naples, Shanghai and Los Angeles are still thoroughfares for massive amounts of slaves, counterfeits, and contraband – just as they always have been and probably always will be.

MM What are the effects of the financial crisis on global cargo in terms of the planning of new infrastructures dealing with these consignments?

Crimson The most obvious result is the beautiful sight of boats glowing in the dark, off the coast of beach resorts like Scheveningen and Hoek van Holland, waiting for weeks until they get commissioned to go somewhere. Another long-term effect could be that of a great shakeout, with an opportunity for the largest ports to kill off the competition because they will be capable of withstanding greater losses for a longer time than their slightly smaller neighbors. A further result of the crisis could be the growth in scale and centralization. However, this will have very little impact on the regional economy, because the crisis also contributes to a further increase in efficiency.

MM How can a co-existence of content and production be fostered in a place like this?

Crimson Production is the content.

MM When we think of a contemporary monument for the Port of Rotterdam beyond the physical and self-referential, what does it need?

Crimson The question of the contemporary monument is irrelevant, since the port is an environment without people to look at the monument, and on a scale that would make any monumental gesture prohibitively large and expensive. For example: the coastline of the new expansion of the port of Rotterdam will be lined with wind turbines with a height of 200 meters each, and will accommodate container ships 500 meters long.
Building landmarks or monuments will be about creating sublime moments of intimacy and precision for neo-romantic wanderers.

MM What is the role of the contemporary architect in an infrastructural project of such a scale?

Crimson Enormous amounts of money and space – as well as many opportunities – are wasted because the current port is too often the result of the accumulation of specialists’ solutions for isolated problems. Architects are – or should be – generalists and go beyond just answering the question. If they get involved at an earlier stage, in teams with all the specialists, they will be able to present the port with ideas, spaces and structures that would never arise out of the technocratic attitude that currently dominates. Even starting from the seemingly superficial question of the image or the esthetics of the port could be a way for architects to get their foot in the door, and show that they can combine, rethink, connect and conceptualize. If, however, they insist on their role as esthetic specialists or opportunists just out to get and keep the job, they will find themselves left behind.

MM You often provide strategic advice and prepare policy proposals. If you were asked to put forward a single policy towards the development of the port, what would it be?

Crimson There is now an unspoken agreement between the city and the port that the city leaves the port to its own devices, while the port does not try to influence the debates and policies of the city too much. This is not a sustainable relationship; the only hope for the Greater Rotterdam Area is a renewed relationship between its residents and the direct and indirect economies of the port. The city is incapable of formulating – let alone creating – this relationship; the port will have to create the common ground where this relationship can be fostered. That will require education, a new spatial structure knitting together the isolated zones of port and city, and a rezoning of the port so that the more labor-intensive or knowledge-intensive businesses will be integrated with the urban networks.

Markus Miessen is a London and Berlin-based architect, researcher, educator and writer. Miessen has contributed to (and edited) diverse international publications in the academic, scientific and popular culture field. In 2009 he was PhD candidate at the Centre for Research Architecture at Goldsmiths, London, investigating conflict and non-consensus-based forms of participation as a form of alternative spatial practice. In the same year he was a visiting professor at the Berlage Institute, Rotterdam.