It is so inspiring that the writer divides global cities to two categaries which are invisible city and generic city. An invisible city reminds me of a japanese animation movie, directed by Miyazaki Hayao, called “Castle in the sky” which is so mapping to the definition of an invisible city that it don’t have an unambiguous image to the public. It’s kind of like a myth that nobody ever go up there, and can imagine what it have or looks like. It’s unreal compared to the generic city.
An generic city is always transforming its features, and therefore easy to lose its indentity or unique culture. To me, I may regonize it as a transcendence of the city itself, because most changes is beneficial to the citizens no matter in the aspect of economic or living quality. Why can’t a city changes that everything is changing in every second. The earth is revolving around the sun. Our human body is creating new molecules. Our motion, hair, age is always changing. It may be argued that it had lost its historical meaning or identity. From the pespective of this point, are we better go back to the ancient time that there’s no skyscrapers, no cars and we become tribal people? It’s definitely not, historical staff can be remembered by museum, photographs or even movies. I believe that out identity will only be erased or affected by ourselves. It’s ourselves that define who we are and dicide who we want to be. Maybe when we start to realize what we have gained instead of what we have lost, there will be less discrimination againts everything.
Xiao Difei,3035687950
Abbas borrowed Calvino’s novel, Invisible Cities, to explain his idea of the exorbitant city. “[T]he city projects a specific kind of eroticism” (Abbas, 145) which you have rightfully described as myth-like; it is a “phantasmagoric” multi-faceted city (Abbas, 143) which cannot be fully represented. On the basis of how Abbas defined the exorbitant city and generic city, it is great that you have responded through your own example of Miyazaki’s Howl’s Moving Castle which the discussion on conservation and preservation of culture. Similar ideas were examined in L2 with another Abbas’ text on the culture of disappearance. Culture can be reinterpreted in multiple ways – construction method, incremental city development, materiality etc. In your opinion, is the preservation of images enough? Is there a way that allows for culture / identity and growth to co-exist?