TD 1
MAGNIFIED MONU Bernd Upmeyer is a Rotterdam-based
German architect and urbanist. He is the founder and the editor-in-chief of MONU, the biannual magazine on urbanism. words Michael McDermott – MONU (Magazine on Urbanism) was born in 2004 in Rotterdam. Can you tell us about the early days of its existence and how it morphed into being a leading exponent of international thinking on urbanism? I am happy to hear that you perceive MONU to be a leading exponent of international thinking on urbanism. Although this development of the magazine was never intended as such, because originally it was created as a way to keep in touch with and keep working on urban topics together with some of my former student colleagues from university. It was very much a tool to keep on challenging and stimulating one another intellectually. That is how everything started in 2003, one year after I graduated as an architect. But as we put a lot of energy, enthusiasm, and passion - especially a passion for criticism, provocation, and radical ideas and thought – into the magazine since the beginning, this seemed to have inspired many people to contribute to it and read the magazine almost from its inception. I believe that people appreciate the magazine’s authenticity too and somehow we must have found enough interesting topics, relevant questions, and fascinating contributors over the period. The fact that the magazine was conceived from the beginning - and continues to be today - as a very open platform for diverse ideas and opinions, to which everybody can contribute, probably helped the magazine to thrive too. – The current edition looks at “affordable urbanism” through the prism of a variety of contributors. Was your thinking about the subject matter affected by the submissions you received and commissioned? Usually the contributions, and especially the interviews that I usually do, to every new MONU issue affect my thinking about each newly chosen subject. That is a great thing, because my own perception is unavoidably limited to a certain extent, as is the perception of everybody, especially as we are diving into new subjects all the time. Therefore, my thinking with regard to the topic of our current MONU issue #32: “Affordable Urbanism”, was affected during the creation of it too. When I created, for example, the open “call for submissions” text for issue #32, at the beginning of November last year, I pointed out some obvious solutions to generate more affordable housing, which are often sought in the construction of more units, the provision of subsidies, or the implementation of rent-controls. However, by that time I was not yet that familiar with the strategy to create more inclusive and affordable cities by allowing people to become only the owner of the bricks and mortar but not of the plot - meaning of the building, but not of the land - referring to countries such as Switzerland, the UK, and the Netherlands, where such a system exists, as was pointed out by Christopher de Vries and Anne Mie Depuydt, two of the contributors to MONU #32. – How will the global pandemic we are currently encountering impact upon our conception of urbanism? What future opportunities and concerns lie ahead as a result of it? Our upcoming MONU issue #33, entitled “Pandemic Urbanism”, that will be released by the middle of October, is currently investigating such questions. I believe that the current coronavirus pandemic might not have that strong an impact on our conception of urbanism or even re-shape and transform cities as some predict - or hope - especially as I expect that a vaccine will be available very soon. I suppose that most of the urban phenomena - maybe apart from an increased “work from home” culture – that are partly still visible in cities due to the pandemic are merely temporary, such as social interactions from balcony to balcony, the use of streets and parking lots for café terraces, the added shelves in apartment blocks where delivery drivers can leave food and other goods, or the new ways of living and new routines of people particularly in the domestic spaces of our cities, where they intensified their activities when it comes to exercising, cleaning, organising, cooking, baking, TV-watching, online communicating, etc. Nevertheless, there might be certain long-term impacts of the pandemic that are particularly related to the economic aspects of cities, which is something that Richard Sennett emphasised too, when I spoke to him a couple of days ago in an interview for the “Pandemic Urbanism” issue. The economic aspects will bring both opportunities, as certain industries will continue flourishing, but also concerns, as many industries will remain being troubled, but this remains to be seen. – How will altered work practices impact upon urbanism? How does one balance financial and social resources for best effect? That people increasingly work from home is one of the few phenomena that, I believe, is going to persist longer to a certain extent, at least for the people that actually have the chance to do so, as many - probably around 40% of the working population, as has been speculated - do not have that opportunity. However, I assume also that many people wish to go back to their offices as soon as they can to profit from easier communication, socialisation with colleagues, stricter daily routines, etc. But I believe that there will be slightly more people working from home after the pandemic than before the pandemic. The impact on cities will be most felt in the reduction of commuters and thus in emptier highways, streets, and public transport, which will help combating climate change. Nevertheless, the increasing amount of home deliveries might soften this positive effect. Another impact an increased working from home culture will have on cities is that, as Beatriz Colomina told me recently in another interview for the “Pandemic Urbanism” issue, many office buildings may remain empty and need to be reused, probably with other functions. But how 48