Research question and topic

What forms of space appropriation are visible in the Plano Piloto and in what way can the construct of planned, produced space create urbanity?
How is space appropriation and urbanity happening in selected places?
These questions arose when the research about Brasília and its core, the Plano Piloto, started. One of the first difficulties encountered during the research process was the eurocentric perspective held by the student researchers regarding the construct of a ‘city’. This had to constantly be kept in mind, since it would otherwise have compromised a neutral research process.

Theory

The concept of urbanity is diverse and hard to define; a definition based solely on the size of a city (number of citizens & footprint) is not enough (Wirth 2020). Urbanity can be translated as a cognitive construct; the collective identity of a place and lifestyles that evolve from it, regardless of whether a city is defined by administrative standards, or it being just a rural community.
Given this context, the city of Brasília stands out as it is a planned city, the new capital of a rising state, and a promise to society of better days to come (Stierli 2013). However, the Brasília of today struggles with uncontrolled growth and spatial segregation, which makes it almost impossible to live a life without a car due to the planning being based on the separation of social functions (Bezerra et al. 2017). The aspiration to build a modern capital with new forms of community living and social integration failed, as nowadays many citizens live in satellite cities up to 50 km away from the city centre, the so-called Plano Piloto (Cafrune 2016). In contrast to the city development of Brasília, Brazil was one of the first countries to legitimate the Right to the City in a national law, the Estatuto da Cidade (Mengay and Pricelius 2011), which was issued to stand against spatial and social segregation.
The urban aspect of a collective identity of a place stands out in Brasília, not only within Brazil, but globally. People came from all over the country to settle in this new city in the middle of the cerrado, a dry plateau in the backcountry, with almost no pre-existing infrastructure. It was designed by Oscar Niemeyer as a symbol of modern times, to show the evolving modern Brazilian society. Now, two generations later, one might expect to encounter a version of Brasília as a thriving and inspiring capital, much more than just the administrative heart of a huge country. However, old metropolitan centres like São Paulo or Rio de Janeiro still define the typical charisma of the Brazilian city. This does not mean it does not exist in Brasília, but one has to look more closely, and to always keep in mind the history of Brasília and how society there has formed since the independence of Brazil (see About Brasília).

Results and interpretation with theoretical reference

The architect Oscar Niemeyer and Lúcio Costa, the urban planner behind the construction of Brasília wanted to build an icon of modernity to manifest the evolving Brazilian society of the modern era. The planning of Brasília was based on the separation of social functions, which at the time was considered to be the most modern way of living. The modern society - as Niemeyer perceived it - was based on access to modern technology, which at that time meant to be able to use automobiles without limitation (see About Brasília). The segregation of the Brazilian society of today is based on the limited access to functions because of limited means, which can be seen in the use of public transport by lower income groups and the domination of the informal sector in the Rodoviária (central bus / metro station) in contrast to the Conjunto Nacional (shopping mall) (see Mobility in Brasília). With the change of global societies through increased environmental awareness and the breakup of social norms and values all over the world, Brasília seems like a remnant of the modern times of acceleration (Williams 2007). The transition to the postmodern era needs yet to be implemented but is bound by the planning of Niemeyer/Costa. One could say that Brasília as an icon of modernity does not serve the already existing postmodern society of contemporary Brazil anymore and only fortifies the growing segregation within its society (Kaiser 1987, Wehrhahn 1998, Struck 2017).
Due to the decentralization of the city by the separation of functions, it is difficult to identify an actual core of the city within the Plano Piloto. During the research progress, it was decided to envisage the core of Brasília to be the tricentre, consisting of the Rodoviária, the Edifício Conic (a cultural, shopping and service centre) and the Conjunto Nacional, and to subsequently compare this tricentre with the Vila Planalto neighbourhood. The following results are based on the interpreted findings resulting from the application of several different methods used in the fieldwork.

Making urbanity comprehensible is not easy. The concept of the city within the city according to Ungers and Kolhaas (1977) - describes a polycentric form of organisation, an ‘archipelago‘ of differences so to speak, which favours urbanity. According to this understanding, today's cities cannot be understood as a whole, but as a complex structure with many different ‘islands’ which all have different characters. Urbanity thus meets in condensed form in the ‘islands’. If we apply this concept to Brasília, we can identify various such ‘islands’. Firstly, the area around the Rodoviária, the Edifício Conic, and the Conjunto Nacional can be identified as a special place for urbanity. In addition, the Vila Planalto neighbourhood is of great relevance considering its history as a former residential area of construction workers. It is known as one of the most diverse neighbourhoods in Brasília. This refers to the income differences, the diversity of the residents, as well as that of the architecture. Urbanity is often associated with diversity, so Vila Planalto is an appealing neighbourhood for research. Through the method of strollology/walking (see methods chapter), this impression was consolidated. Important aspects of urbanity are human presence and interaction, green spaces and consumption opportunities, as well as the influence and diversity of subcultures (see diagram). Attributes that were mentioned during the fieldwork in connection with urbanity were ‘dense/full‘ or ‘diverse/different‘. At the same time, however, Vila Planalto was also described as ‘familiar, upper-class, and chic‘ as well as ‘quiet, stress-free, and pleasant‘ (see diagram). This discrepancy shows how different the perceptions of the neighbourhood are. In the map, some photos which were taken during the walks are shown and explained in a wider context.
In summary, Vila Planalto is one of the rare places where the inhabitants successfully fought the planning by the government. Within the ‘island’ of Vila Planalto, individualism, participation, space appropriation, and subculture are quite visible, which indicates a vivid urban life. Although different perceptions such as emptiness or ‘chicness’ underline the diversity and complexity of the area. In contrast to other ‘islands’ in Brasília, Vila Planalto more closely follows the Western image of a neighbourhood as well as the understanding of urbanity including different architectural structures, restaurants, and life in public spaces. One could argue that it is the counterweight to the strictly planned area of the Plano Piloto, which is also geographically very close to all central functions.

The Edifício Conic (methods: interview, mapping, walks) was once a place where urbanity was shaped by strolling. Until the late 1980s, it was home to several small theatres, restaurants, pubs, cafés, etc. According to Lúcio Costa, it was designed to have a sort of “Mediterranean atmosphere” where the public could spend evenings as a community. However, due to lack of financial investment, the sense of place changed, with sex work settling in vacant spaces. Today, restaurants or snack shops and a bar are visible in a few places. Otherwise, the place is dominated by vacancy, retail, party offices, churches, and private clinics. In addition, events such as concerts take place from time to time (Rossi 2022). However, the Edifício Conic and its surroundings present a security risk, especially in the evenings, which is in contrast with the semi-public Conjunto National which is guarded by security guards, and subject to strict opening hours. The Edifício Conic and its surroundings stand out in the tricentre because of its subcultural character, which can be seen in the numerous graffities and murals.

Picture 1: Graffiti and murals on walls inside the Edifício Conic, 12.04.2022, source: own picture


Picture 2: Graffiti and murals on walls inside the Edifício Conic, 23.04.2022, source: own picture

Methods and limitations of the methods

In order to approach the question of spatial perception and use in regard to urbanity, a 'strollology method' was used: specifically, the 'continuous stop walking method' based on Schultz and van Etteger (2017). Strolls were conducted in the area of Vila Planalto (see route on map). This area was chosen because of its relevance to urbanity, which was highlighted in the literature and in interviews with experts. The method was carried out on 25.04.2022 with five students. The first walk (from 10 a.m.) was carried out continuously and documented by writing down impressions and experiences afterwards. Then (from 12 p.m.), the same route was walked again. This time however, breaks were taken at regular intervals to let the surroundings take effect and to facilitate the documentation of the experience via photos and notes. These data were then evaluated with qualitative analyses, visualised, and summarised. Some of them are shown on the map and in the diagrams above. The difficulty within this method was the framing such as the time of day or weather conditions, and also the Eurocentric view on urbanity of the European students, and the limitations stemming from individual concentration spans. Therefore, the role of subjectivity must be kept in mind, even though guiding questions were given to mitigate this aspect. For further research, walks on different days and times as well as more non-European participants are recommended, in order to expand the data.

The results for the tricentre are based on a mix of methods consisting of observations at the Rodoviária, mapping of the ground floor level of the Rodoviária as well as the ground floor level of the Edifício Conic, and an interview with Taína Rossi about the significance of the Edifício Conic. In addition, walks took place in both the Edifício Conic and the Conjunto Nacional to gather further impressions.

At the Rodoviária, a total of four covert, non-participatory observations (Thierbach and Petschick 2014) were made on two days (Saturday, 23.04.22 and Tuesday, 26.04.22) in the morning (from 10 a.m.) and afternoon (from 1:30 p.m.) for 60 minutes each. They were carried out by four people observing each time. For this, the students had an observation sheet with set categories. Some of the criteria are: characteristics of people, subcultural expression, appropriation of space, interaction. Supporting videos (on saturday at the section D; on tuesday at the section B) were taken showing the frequency of visitors (difference between morning and afternoon) as well as the presence of the informal sector.

Videos

References