The Army of Progress

One of the difficulties planning has faced over it's history is the task of appeasement. Planning is a field that touches almost everyone in their day to day lives and as such can be very contentious. Because it is never possible to please everyone the question becomes do we support the majority, or do we impose what we think is the right course of action? Haussmann, the man who transformed Paris, is often idolized today as a visionary for his great plan, however in his time it was widely unpopular and essentially forced upon the citizens by their monarch Napoleon III. If history has vindicated his decision regarding Paris then can we as planners take a similar standpoint today, or are the days of "Great Plans" over, replaced by incremental improvements subject to the approval of the people.

Paul Davidoff was one of those who advocated for planners to take a populist approach. He felt that the masses where being overlooked by the planner, that industry and transportation took precedence over people. These ideas have merit, formulated during the sixties, it is easy to see the problems in the system of the time. But is that a perspective best left in the past, as a necessary, but transitory shake-up of the industry. Today the people are consulted more than ever about every detail of planning issues yet the majority only ever voice their opinions after the fact. Ultimately both methods will work, one city can be a riot of conflicting ideas and implementations and another a utopian uniformity and both can be great cities. The decision, therefore, rests very much upon the shoulders of the planner. Will they advocate for the populace, citing that the city is for the people of today and the planners purpose is to create as directed. Or will they act the part of the vilified but pragmatic, looking only at the future and the legacy of their plan long after the current generation have turned to dust.

I find myself leaning more towards the role of villain in theory, but more of a centrist approach in practice. The planner must plan for the future, that is their role. But since the future is so murky, and the great sweeps of human history so hard to predict, the people of today must be used as the foundation, the cornerstone of any plan. Only a plan with the broad support of the people will be implemented, and only a plan that caters for the future will be deemed relevant tomorrow. Planning is an ever evolving task, even the greatest, most visionary plan will eventually become outdated and discarded. The planner must accept that their work will be changed, modified and distorted by later generations of planners who consider it outdated and naive, but that doesn't mean that the future can be ignored or that we shouldn't aim as high as possible.