Syt's Pictorial Collection of Stuff and Things (image heavy)

[Sheilbh]

Tbh, those pics look not unlike what some East German cities looked like in the 80s. E.g. Rostock in 1989: https://www.spiegel.de/geschichte/rostock-1989-schonungslose-fotos-der-altstadt-a-959131.html#fotostrecke-67358921-0001-0002-0000-000000112300

That makes sense I can't remember how they did the comparison but basically the only areas with a comparable rate of deindustrialisation as British cities are former Eastern Bloc hubs.

In terms of striking images in Glasgow there was the Red Road Estate built in the 60s as part of slum clearance programs and to provide new, bright, healthy living for residents of Glasgow:


Things didn't turn out that way. They ended up being a huge sink estate with racial tensions, gangs fighting over territory and massive amounts of heroin - in Glasgow (as in Liverpool, where I was never allowed to buy anything from an ice cream van), ice cream vans were used to deal heroin as well as shift stolen goods etc so it was known as the ice cream wars.

They finally ended up being demolished in 2015 as pretty much impossible to save (the demolition was botched so it took longer than expected). But just before:



Glasgow's really extreme though - I've said before that Scotland has the highest rate of drug deaths in Europe by a significant distance and has something approaching North American levels. Within Scotland, Glasgow has the highest rate. There are parts of Glasgow where life expectancy is in the 50s, while on average in the UK it's around the early 80s (a little lower in Scotland).

It's had the standard bits and pieces regeneration - so there's a good (and very established university), great arts centres and schools (including the Rennie Mackintosh icon which burned down), it was a finalist to host Eurovision, it's been European capital of culture, with Liverpool it was Gotham in the latest Batman film (there are a lot of overlaps with Liverpool) and it's got a growing services sector. It's a really interesting (and fun) place to visit and it is generally really attractive (I was going to say pretty but it's not, even the nice building are more grand and imposing and moody than pretty), and in a beautiful setting too. But there is still incredible poverty and deprivation and of everywhere I've been to in the UK (and Europe to be honest) it's the one with the most visible social problems with drugs and alcohol - again on the comparison of drug death rates, I believe Glasgow's is higher than the US.

[Syt]

I can see where they got some of the ideas of Mega-City One in the Judge Dredd comics.

[Sheilbh]

I can see where they got some of the ideas of Mega-City One in the Judge Dredd comics.

Yeah and Ballard too.

And they're still inspring as settings for people - there's a debut novel that got well reviewed (which I will read) set in the condemned towers called The Voids. Skippinng over the channel I also absolutely loved Gagarine which I think touched on similar stuff on a banlieue block being condemned for demolition:

I feel like there's probably a dissertation in high-rises in post-war Euro-imagination The solution to and cause of all society's ills

[Josquius]

It's interesting how they worked in some countries but not in others.

In Switzerland and the Netherlands for instance they don't seem to be half the issue they are in france and the UK.

Of course the core problem remains cars.

[Richard Hakluyt]

In the Uk we tried to ram impoverished families into the blocks, they didn't like them. They worked perfectly well for singles, bohemians etc etc and yuppies once they got tarted up and got a concierge. The failure was not the buildings, more that they were allocated to the wrong sort of households.

[Josquius]

In the Uk we tried to ram impoverished families into the blocks, they didn't like them. They worked perfectly well for singles, bohemians etc etc and yuppies once they got tarted up and got a concierge. The failure was not the buildings, more that they were allocated to the wrong sort of households.

Though a lot of our buildings were shit too. Lots of build errors, corrupt contracts, constantly breaking lifts, asbestos and so on.
But many blame this on the entire concept of a tower block rather than those particular ones being crap.

[Sheilbh]

It's interesting how they worked in some countries but not in others.

In Switzerland and the Netherlands for instance they don't seem to be half the issue they are in france and the UK.

Of course the core problem remains cars.

Although, while I think that's important of what factors make/made them work - and as RH points out a key for a high rise now in the UK is for it to survive long enough to get listed, filled up with hipsters who can afford mid-century modern originals who can then sell it through The Modern House (e.g. https://www.themodernhouse.com/sales-list/trellick-tower-v/).

I just think - not to go full Foucault - they're an incredibly productive site of discourse and imagination in post-war Europe. They're modernising Europe and letting us skip straight from rubble and bomb sites to the future; and they're remedying old social ills (slums) and new ones as Europe becomes an immigration continent and rapidly urbanises (shantytowns in the 50s and 60s). They destroy pre-existing working class communities and atomise individual households; they're the site of new multi-cultural community identities. They're urban but also not - they're islands of isolation not integrated with the streets/city around them. They're high tech but riddled with asbestos and energy inefficient, but (in an age of climate change) perhaps have too much embedded carbon to ever justify demolishing). There's Judge Dredd, JG Ballard, La Haine, Gagarine (a whole string of banlieue films arguable - District 13 also springs to mind), Red Road (by Andrea Arnold), A Short Film About Love - and that's just Britain and France

Now I think about I think there's a genuine argument that the high rise is to post-war European culture what the suburbs are to North America - I imagine there's a whole other stream in former Eastern Bloc countries too (again areas where it feels like the high rise "works").

What's interesting is I think it's never had the simple interpretation of being a desirable type of living. I kept thinking tthis watching Succession - those aspirational, insanely lavish New York apartments. That high rise life as luxury is just not a thing that I think we have an image of in Europe, I don't think. Where it exists - like in High Rise there is also unease and the uncanny. That life of penthouse style high rise living is defined by the co-existing presence of social, moral, technical decay.

[HVC]

It's interesting how they worked in some countries but not in others.

In Switzerland and the Netherlands for instance they don't seem to be half the issue they are in france and the UK.

Of course the core problem remains cars.

Swiss have more cars then you, and netherlands not that much less per capita, so can't really blame them

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_vehicles_per_capita

Like sheilbh said, I think it's A matter of isolation. Not only from from from the city itself but often places like this built on mass are also isolated from amenities and jobs. Happens in NA too. Whole sections built to house tons of people without giving thought to what people actually need.

Here at least Hipsters go to them because they can't afford much else, but they're not end game, it's transitional. They won't/don't want to stay there forever and raise families.

[Josquius]

Although, while I think that's important of what factors make/made them work - and as RH points out a key for a high rise now in the UK is for it to survive long enough to get listed, filled up with hipsters who can afford mid-century modern originals who can then sell it through The Modern House (e.g. https://www.themodernhouse.com/sales-list/trellick-tower-v/).
 

Ish. There's limits here. The tower blocks near me are never going to be filled with hipsters. Some are being knocked down right now (well. From 9 on Monday). They're too remote and in undesirable areas with nothing going on.
Even some closer to the centre blocks remain pretty shit as the surrounding area just has that reputation and the mentioned construction issues.
I think the hipsters in flats thing is very much more an exception than the norm. An insight into Londons  (and by extension the UK as a whole in a different way) messed up situation.

A big problem I see is they were built at just the wrong time when people had some idea of the future but not enough experience to really get how it'd work in practice, when the traditional industries where going through a bit of a boom period despite their ultimate demise being not too far away.

It's interesting how they worked in some countries but not in others.

In Switzerland and the Netherlands for instance they don't seem to be half the issue they are in france and the UK.

Of course the core problem remains cars.

Swiss have more cars then you, and netherlands not that much less per capita, so can't really blame them

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_vehicles_per_capita

Not a particularly relevant measure here. 60 years ahead of time and it only slightly indicates the overall development philosophy.

Also worth considering where those cars are. In Switzerland they aren't where the tower blocks are.

Like sheilbh said, I think it's A matter of isolation.Not only from from from the city itself but often places like this built on mass are also isolated from amenities and jobs. Happens in NA too. Whole sections built to house tons of people without giving thought to what people actually need.

So basically yes. Cars are to blame.

[HVC]

Like sheilbh said, I think it's A matter of isolation.Not only from from from the city itself but often places like this built on mass are also isolated from amenities and jobs. Happens in NA too. Whole sections built to house tons of people without giving thought to what people actually need.

So basically yes. Cars are to blame.

Here lack of cars caused a lot the problems in those areas. No parking spots or garages were built lol. They figured the poors wouldn't be able to afford cars anyway.

[Josquius]

Like sheilbh said, I think it's A matter of isolation.Not only from from from the city itself but often places like this built on mass are also isolated from amenities and jobs. Happens in NA too. Whole sections built to house tons of people without giving thought to what people actually need.

So basically yes. Cars are to blame.

Here lack of cars caused a lot the problems in those areas. No parking spots or garages were built lol. They figured the poors wouldn't be able to afford cars anyway.

Yes. Yet society changed without them dictating that cars were no longer a luxury and for people living in such remote areas you now had to have a car.

[Sheilbh]

Ish. There's limits here. The tower blocks near me are never going to be filled with hipsters. Some are being knocked down right now (well. From 9 on Monday). They're too remote and in undesirable areas with nothing going on.
Even some closer to the centre blocks remain pretty shit as the surrounding area just has that reputation and the mentioned construction issues.
I think the hipsters in flats thing is very much more an exception than the norm. An insight into Londons  (and by extension the UK as a whole in a different way) messed up situation.

A big problem I see is they were built at just the wrong time when people had some idea of the future but not enough experience to really get how it'd work in practice, when the traditional industries where going through a bit of a boom period despite their ultimate demise being not too far away.

I'm not so sure. I remember when crazy house prices and wild rents were a London thing. Then they became a London and the South-East, then London, Leeds, Sheffield, Manchester, Bristol, the Central Belt and the South-East - and now where we are.

There's refurbishments of once "sink" estates that were scheduled for demolition going on all over the country - Park Hill in Sheffield springs to mind (https://www.urbansplash.co.uk/regeneration/projects/park-hill). This is good and better than demolishing them. But there is an irony in the block (Attack on the Block - another cultural representation!) achieving success by becoming a coveted status symbol for the middle class, as opposed to the universalist ideals that motivated so much of their constructiton - slum clearance, emplyting the shanty towns/bidonvilles, homes for all. They become what Unite d'Habitation is now or they get levelled.

Perhaps that's just a reflection on our society and economics though.

[Josquius]

[quote author=Josqu
I'm not so sure. I remember when crazy house prices and wild rents were a London thing. Then they became a London and the South-East, then London, Leeds, Sheffield, Manchester, Bristol, the Central Belt and the South-East - and now where we are.

There's refurbishments of once "sink" estates that were scheduled for demolition going on all over the country - Park Hill in Sheffield springs to mind

Sure. Here too.
The mentioned demolitions though are the focal point of the plans to redevelop walker - something that has already been creeping in around the edges.
There's talk of similar in Gateshead too, a hefty redevelopment around the town centre... With knocking down a bunch of old tower blocks being noted as a key starting point for it.

This is good and better than demolishing them. But there is an irony in the block (Attack on the Block - another cultural representation!) achieving success by becoming a coveted status symbol for the middle class, as opposed to the universalist ideals that motivated so much of their constructiton - slum clearance, emplyting the shanty towns/bidonvilles, homes for all. They become what Unite d'Habitation is now or they get levelled.

I dunno. These Walker towers... They're really pretty awful. And so misplaced standing out high above a sea of regular houses, a decrepit shopping precinct and a really quite lovely old church.
In terms of the environment on paper absolutely it'd be great if they could figure out a way to reuse them. But they're just so mismatched for the area that I couldn't see it working even if they did manage to get them up to yuppie standards.

[Jacob]

Easy to make it fit into the neighbourhood - build more towers and midrise budings; just make sure to account for amenities and shopping too.

[Josquius]

Easy to make it fit into the neighbourhood - build more towers and midrise budings; just make sure to account for amenities and shopping too.

Easy from a sim city perspective.
Politically in reality far from it.
That's a tonne of extra work all for the sake of some buildings that are very unpopular. The objections of more of the same being built would be huge and it'd take forever to get anything built.
Not to mention evicting people from happy family homes vs. A few hold outs who not entirely inaccurately have been stereotyped as drug addicts.