Practicing Utopia: An Intellectual History of the New Town Movement

by Rosemary Wakeman

The typical town springs up around a natural resource—a river, an ocean, an exceptionally deep harbor—or in proximity to a larger, already thriving town. Not so with “new towns,” which are created by decree rather than out of necessity and are often intended to break from the tendencies of past development. New towns aren’t a new thing—ancient Phoenicians named their colonies Qart Hadasht , or New City—but these utopian developments saw a resurgence in the twentieth century.

In Practicing Utopia , Rosemary Wakeman gives us a sweeping view of the new town movement as a global phenomenon. From Tapiola in Finland to Islamabad in Pakistan, Cergy-Pontoise in France to Irvine in California, Wakeman unspools a masterly account of the golden age of new towns, exploring their utopian qualities and investigating what these towns can tell us about contemporary modernization and urban planning. She presents the new town movement as something truly global, defying a Cold War East-West dichotomy or the north-south polarization of rich and poor countries. Wherever these new towns were located, whatever their size, whether famous or forgotten, they shared a utopian lineage and conception that, in each case, reveals how residents and planners imagined their ideal urban future.

392 pages, Hardcover

First published April 5, 2016

About the author

Rosemary Wakeman is Professor of History and Coordinator of University Urban Initiatives at Fordham University.

Reviews

[Anna · Rating 3 out of 5]

It seems as though ‘Practicing Utopia’ should have been a quicker and easier read, given my interest in the topic. It took me back to my undergrad studies – my final year dissertation was a comparison between the utopian aspirations of 19th and 21st century model towns in the UK. To be clear, this is an academic book and reads accordingly. It’s very interesting, but not a quick or particularly accessible read. Although the material overlaps in several places with Owen Hatherley’s oeuvre, it has none of his verve and asperity. Somewhat ominously, the tone reminded me of my PhD thesis. I found it very thought-provoking and well worth reading, although I do wish that every time I read a book more slowly than my usual breakneck pace I didn’t immediately become paranoid that my brain was deteriorating.

The greatest strength of the book, in my view, is its emphasis on international comparisons. The export of New Town rhetoric and practise is carefully documented. In India, this was closely linked to decolonisation; elsewhere, it was also associated with bulwarks against communism. And yet the USSR had their own New Town visions, which were based in techno-utopianism just as emphatically as those of the West. The geographical breadth here does require some sacrifice of depth. While the intellectual roots of planning practise were explored, there wasn’t a detailed analysis of the theories in play. Systems theory is a complicated and multidimensional beast; it was unclear how exactly the various New Town planners understood it. The narrative is grounded in the disciplines of spatial planning and architecture. It explores the philosophical underpinnings of New Town design, but is lighter on experience of living in them.

As an aside, ‘Practicing Utopia’ reminded me of how much I wish there was an alternate universe sci-fi novel in which the Iron Curtain never fell, because the Soviet Union created an AI that could resolve some of the contradictions of the communist economy. I feel like Warren Ellis, Paul Mason, and/or Ken McLeod could do something great with that concept. (If someone has, please tell me.) The illustrations of arcology also reminded me of sci-fi novels I have known.

All the way through I found myself comparing the 1960s ethos of technology-led urban social improvement with the current discourse on so-called Smart Cities. (Which I hear regularly as I share an office with someone whose PhD is about them.) Looking at the two together really exposes how ideologically naive the Smart City concept is. Whereas in the 1960s it was understood that technology and urban design were intended to achieve specific ideological aims, the Smart City is a magically self-organising place where technology promotes that mysterious chimera ‘efficiency’. The role of government is elided, connectivity is assumed to remove market failures, and the control of said technology by massive corporations is simply ignored. In reality, the Smart City is an obviously dystopian space of ubiquitous surveillance and oppressive consumerism. Those who own and control what makes the city ‘smart’ use it to make profits. Yet if you take Smart City rhetoric at face value, for example the ‘physical internet’ concept, it amounts to reinventing automated communism. Late capitalism can be exhaustingly recursive. I should add that this is a personal tangent and the book only mentions Smart Cities briefly in the conclusions.

I would like to give this book more than three stars, however it was more effort to read than it should have been given my intense interest. Although the content was fascinating, it could have been structured and presented in a more accessible and digestible fashion. One must expect a certain density with academic books. For more about New Towns, I recommend Owen Hatherley’s Landscapes of Communism: A History Through Buildings for an entertaining walking tour of Soviet architecture. The Guardian also has a good series of long articles on cities and urban spatial planning here. On the other hand, I don’t recommend going to Milton Keynes, which is a visually illegible soulless place for robots. While I am fascinated by New Towns, I definitely wouldn’t want to live in one.

[Özge Günaydın · Rating 2 out of 5]

Gelecekte nasıl bir şehir planlaması bekliyor bizleri acaba? Hangi ütopyanın ütopik köleleri olacağız. IBM in tasarladığı akıllı binaların içinde ve akıllı ofislerimizde doğayı resimlerden görerek mi torunlarımıza anlatacağız. Bu gidişle yeni şehirler ve yeni kölelik sistemleriyle baş başa olacağız

[Ozgur Senogul · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good work for understanding the transformation in conceiving of urbanisation in 20th. century. I was expecting more detail about the frictions in design approaches during the Cold War, however, to see there were similarities rather than frictions is shocking even in United States, especially until 1960's.
The book titles about the 'cyber' notion on urbanisation, but i can not get such kind of contemporary approach. May be, more data can be added to the book on today's urban design, if there is any. Because in my opinion, the academic and ideological urban design died after cold war, and capitalism rules all the dynamics of urbanisation.