The reading talks about different imaginary mobile cities proposed in science fiction movies, including James Blish’s Cities in Flight, , Ron Herron’s Walking City, Peter Cook’s Instant City, Alastair Reynolds’ distributed city Swarm and etc.
I found it interesting when reading the description of Archigram group, where Ron Herron belonged. Carl Abbott wrote that their practices “supplant their elders who had been shaped by depression, war and post-war austerity”, and are integrated in the context of avant-garde emerging in many aspects of the British society.
Those unconstrained imagination of urban space showcases the recovery of human inventiveness from suppression and conservativeness they experienced under world war and survival threat. Moreover, those brilliant innovators also include their thought about class division, financial and social hierarchy, modern consumption and entertainment culture in their works. Social Darwinism seems to rise along with upheaval in technology and industrial manufacturing. Philip Reeve even depicted the “hunt” of cities in Mortal Engines (2001), that London flees from huge “predator cities”.
The precious legacies these sci-fis left to us are not limited to their boldly-imagined blueprints of future movable cities, but also their deep contemplation over social problems emerging in modern context.
— Shen Ao 3035637424
A great synthesis and response to Abbott’s text. I appreciate that you noted the historical background which drives the creativity in Archigram’s work and Sci-fi cities. While many Japanese post-war film makers focused on destruction of cities by monsters and emergence of superheroes as peace makers / keepers; sci-fi’s migratory moving cities presented an alternative realism through films and literature, a breath of fresh air like the Archigram in the architecture world. Migratory cities perhaps in Abbotts view has a foot in the past and eyes on the future.