As described in the article, the concept of the migratory city has appeared in many science fiction novels and films. Generally speaking, these cities have spawned movable features from ordinary immovable cities, mostly due to environmental destruction, resource depletion, severe pollution and inevitable natural disasters. These fictional and cinematic settings are not just about environmental protection and the sustainable use of resources, but also include other elements such as energy, social class, and humanity. The concept of these mobile cities is not a figment of the imagination, they are also based on real cities. In The Scar, the city Armada

Continue readingReading Response: Carl Abbott

In Abbott’s article, migratory cities in science fiction are able to ‘fly, walk, crawl, roll, creep and float’ under future advanced technologies. These cities have the ability to break down geographical boundaries and maintain high mobility, and a concept of urban dystopia inside these cities often exists. Fictional examples include the eternally-moving train in Snowpiercer to face the man-made ice age, self-sustained movable robots depicted in Walking City,high-tech ships shown in Battlestar Galactica etc. In my opinion, these migratory cities stimulate the imagination about what our future looks like by providing a visualization of a fictional world. We can imagine

Continue readingReading Response: Carl Abbott

Our traditional notion is that cities are static. I am using the word ‘traditional’ here, but the notion is by no means outdated. I do not think that Tokyo is moving, nor do I believe that there are any plans for its migration. Despite this, there are many movies that portray migratory cities. For example, in Snowpiercer, a city is presented in the form of a constantly moving train. As far as I know, this is because the movie depicts a world (presumably in the future) where environmental problems have forced people to live in a train that collects energy

Continue reading[Reading Response: Carl Abbott]

Abbott’s reading depicts how movies echos with society. For instance, the idea of a moving city seems unrealistic, but is built for very realistic reasons in movies. Such as the rising sea level in Flood(2009), ice age due to human-engineered failure in Snowpiercer(2013). These environmental and social crises are inspired by real-life issues such as global warming, then exaggerated through movies to act as a warning to society. But why setting in a movable city instead of a normal one? In my opinion, the limited space in them makes movies more likely to criticize the seamy side of society and

Continue readingReading Response: Carl Abbott

Movable city refers to moving, machine-like cities. The cities tried to produce and sustain on its own and the people there as well. One of the forms of these cities is a train on a trail. These movable cities usually plotted on dystopian contest, like environmental crisis and mass destruction etc. Fictional cities are self-sustaining and fragile. For example, the train city in Snowpiercer cannot live without the engine in front of the train.  So, the city may depend on certain object a lot.Also, dystopian meanings like extreme social stratification and monopoly of power can be added into these contexts

Continue readingReading Response: Carl Abbott