Review SINGAPORE SONGLINES REM KOOLHAAS ‘by Ral Karam lah, Chinh Pham Van € Dao Tuan ‘This essay was frst published in 1995, “, M, L, XL" a novel of architecture which organizes material according to size, t- relevant of a connective tissue. Writings are embedded between projects not as cement but as autonomous episodes so that the book can be read in any particular way. The book makes discourse about the conditions under which architecture is now produced, which clearly isa point related to the essay as it narrates on Singapore’ rebirth. This essay was published again in April 2010 by ‘Quodlibet’in Italian, because at one time this debate of what a modern city should look like evolved or yet for- gotten, it comes back to Europe after being through transformations and a product. With an updated prologue which helps us understand the thought ofthe author after some years. Inthe prologue ofthe essay Rem Koolhaas wrote that his motivation (o write these city manifestos, with hoping to write about books for contemporary cities. The essay was an offshoot ofthe re- search he did in Harvard, regarding other cites which eventually led him into studying the waning of Western influence on the formulation of the city, and begin to hypothesize on the nature ofthe non-Western modernities emerging in Africa, the Arab world, and Asia which according to him would define this century. Singapore is a young country, representing an ideo- logical production in its pure form with an erased historical background. Its the outcome of a regime led by Lee Kuan Yew, that has undergone a rigorous western out of control process of modernization. The writer investigates the western theories which the city’s manifesto is based upon, in a round of East-West tension some basic ingredients to the necessary development of acity that is if democracy promotes or erodes social stability. One of the few hardcore actions planned under the Housing Development Board were the ambitious public housing initiated without ample research. A pragmatic approach, in which the inhabitants were forced into an alienation way of living, unconventional to their existing living, traditions, habits and family relationships. In 1963, three experts from UN; American Charles Abrams, Japanese Susumu Kobe, and German Otto Koeni- asberger prepared a report to the government of Singapore which gave their recommendations regarding aright strategy to the general development of the island. They elaborated on the fact it was the first Asian city to endeavor their path on Urban renewal there were three crucial elements that were to be followed; conservation, rehabilitation and rebuilding of the urban fabric. A proposal is given which recommends the possibilty of all aspects of urban life. Instead ofthe concentration of form, there should be other factors involved. Furthermore, it emphasized that it needed a more flexible plan to @ more positive ap- proach. On the contrary the government adopted a more ruthless plan of the case of tabula rasa. Although, inthe development process, Singapore face some mistakes in urban planning. As the author mentions: “Portrait ofa Potemkin Metropolis In that point of view, the author was criticized, but i brings the reader to another objective point of view. ‘The author tries to identify some historical relevance or tries to understand the scenario (newly built ideology) of Singapore in words or references from another field. In the mid-sixties, emerged as a problematic urban situation across the architects of the world signifying the need for urban renewal through the role of Urbanists, and architects all around the world started. For the urbanists, this see- rmingly expands their role yet doubtful ofthe renewals assumptions, as Christopher Alexander wrote about the scenarios of the urban city being merely of glass and concrete boxes. Team X made efforts and debates to humanize the vision of CIAM, through a discourse from non-westerns sources, mainly settlements in Africa. The Metabolist movement in Japan led by ge, Kurokawa, Maki, Isozaki - collectively romanticized the architectural vocabularies through organic, scientific, mechanistic, biological and romance. The frst emerging project by Kenzo Tange which proposed ‘Tokyo's Bay as an extension and counter for the industrialized urban sprawl and its internal regeneration seemingly convincing. In 1960, Fumihiko Maki was invited to attend the Team X conference in France by Smithson’, on the basis with strong links to tradition and vernacularism. His theories discretely warn about the investigation of regional expression in collective scale will become the most important and fascinating issues of architecture and planning, SPUR emerged in 1965, finds itself sandwiched between a population which is docile and inarticulate in matters relating to our environment and a bureaucracy which is proactive and aggressive. This rese- arch group published two documents which presented a collection of data, arguments, analyses, criticism and impact studies. There were a total of three illustrations which depicted the “Asian City of Tomorrow” (SPUR65-67,1967), with the absence of Asian signs, as SPUR comments “Cities area result of evolution. We would want local character and identity to be preserved, but on the other hand, we must not make the mistake of identifying the requirements of modern living and the process of 1 senetsones marcusindustrialization with de-orientation” (SPUR 65-67, 1967). One of the main essence of the city highlighted is density, in ter- ms of the multitude of related activities, which profoundly will be the new aim of emerging Asian cities. Collectively, Rem Koolhaas emphasis on the fact that the new urban forms were discoursed before being produced, unlike in Singapore’s new towns the thoughtless pragmatic approach by HBD were absent in detail and an outburst of the regime's decanted modernism and pronated metabolism. The timeline of the essay from 1965 to 1995, narrates the events that led to the development of a ‘ity that had architectural connections to culture and politics through government and leadership roles. With a keen eye of a journalist, who has extensive experience not only in writing, but also with an in-depth understanding of society, people, and relationships of communities in the urbanism context. He proved that in the urban development process, the role of leaders is very important. The book follows the evolution of organizations that have contributed not only the first brick in Singapore's turban development but also the whole nation development since the early days. That role is realized by a streamlined govern- ‘ment with a visionary and realistic leader. In the formation and promotion of planning projects in Singapore, there was a key individual. ‘The manifesto the government took was tabula rasa approach. This approach destroyed existing physical history and building a new one. This phenomenon has a limitation, of time. When an object is created out of tabula rasa, it loses its authenticity but when its prolonged time after its creation to another time in the future, doesrit consider it as lost authenticity, but new authenticity. The word becomes redundant or losses its meaning. The problem identified by the writer in this case is that it will always remain in this constant state of a repetition, an endless state of renewal. Which lead it to be a Potemkin metropolis. The writer compares the short process of this development as a “Songline” for Singapore, also in an ironic way that in order fora city to organically develop it needs some ingredients, such as language, identity, sense of self which cannot be separated from that particular place. Singapore is a new style, which can be interpreted in this modern age as generic or a product of global capitalism. His particular curiosity was that in reference to western cities based and shaped on manifestos, the rapid modern Asian cities developed at an unprecedented rate, it was clea that in the conceptualization ofthe city, the west was no longer in charge. The changes took place in the political systems which seemed unnatural from the western democracy, which is one of the conditions essential for the city. The essay investigates the aftereffects of this system of non-democratic origin and an inventory of aspects such as mass housing, statistics, cultural ran racial manipulation that leads to offending, the sentimental values of what a city should be, which have been artificially integrated into the ecology of our cities. Koolhas compares the experiments on Singapore to the ones similar to contemporary European cities, which survived what did not work in the West but provided fruitful and prosperous for the Asian city which attracted corporations and expects by its solid rule of laws and absence of corruption, Rem Koolhaas sums up by presenting a postscript of the growth as one of the most ideological urban condition now a poised to spread across Asia. The successful attributes from a sparkle ofits organization to laundering of its past claims itself an experiment for China, which could lift its present morose condition. In Singapore, their future is being prepared to create new many offshoots of Singapore across the mainland leading its model to be the imprint ‘of China's modernization. A seemingly defensive response by Tang Weng Hong emerges as a reply to both Willam Gibson ‘and Rem Koolhaas for their criticism of Singapore asa fake, manufactured and unauthentic city. The ttles and sub-titles of the essay resonate and emerge as the main points ofthe focus the debate. The article suggests Singapore as a theme park with harsh penalties, a weak administration hiding behind the facades of meaningless buildings. Koolhaas does not clearly define the principles of authenticity but suggests the lack ofa physical manifestation and emergence from history as reflected in its built environment particularly lacks identity. In 1998, reflecting upon a response after the Singapore Tourism Board announ- ced to build a plan to revitalize the Chinatown, an American expatriate, Melanie Francis wrote that a community grows from the individual and collective efforts of it inhabitants, rather than an engineered theme park. In this case both the writers have ‘grounds for their accusations, nonetheless, authorities were trying to re-create some form of identity, but these seem as futile, ‘As Rem Koolhaas enlists the conditions from which Singapore emerged were very fragile, thus if we question the authors that the given conditions which meant only to either survive or be authentic. What could have been chosen? The writer does not clearly agree or disagree but gives a response by quoting Charles Correa, which identified the situation for young Singapore and its current outcome, that’s what bothers other authors are narrating upon. As Charles Correa writes in “Quest for Identi ty”: What is identity? Firstly iti a process [which] may be likened to the trail let by civilization as it moves through history [..J. Secondly, being a process, identity cannot be fabricated. We develop our identity by tackling what we perceive to be our real problems. Identity vs authenticity. The erasure of history, which Koolhaas sees happening in Singapore, is also an erasure of identity: rapid urbanization, industrialization, and large-scale resettlement have the effect of wiping out “the trail left by civilization as it moves through history"(Correa, 10) The Singapore government could have retained the slums and the horri- bly crowded living conditions in the shophouses of Chinatown to preserve its historical charm and its authenticity but which ‘government worthy of itself would let her people suffer to preserve such authenticity? The way Singapore has developed, from an impoverished and insecure island to a busting city, is a response to the need for survival. Although this response has led to ‘a constant modification and upgrading of Singaporés built environment, resulting in an erasure of history and identity in the sense implied by Koolhaas, there has not been a total erasure. For this response to the need for survival is what makes Singa- pore history unique and is what gives its identity and authenticity. "We develop our identity by tackling what we perceive to be ‘our real problems”. And nothing could be more real than the problem of survival eae recastBiblography: KOOLHAAS Rem, Architecture and Complexity - Part 6, AA School of Architecture, London, 21s KOOLHAAS Rem, The Generic City, The Monaceli Press Ine, New York, 1995 - JENCKS Chaties, Netopia: the Singapore paradox and the style of Generic Individualism Emap Publishing Limited, London, 2016 ALATAS Masturl, Examining Rem Koolhaas’ prologue to Singapore Songlines, Quarterly Literary Review Singapore, Sogapore, 2010 KOOLHAAS Rem, Singapore Songlines, Quodlbet, 2010 TANGE Kenzo, A plan for Tokyo 1960, ArchEyes, Madrid, 2016 - XI Qiu, Fuoiiko Maki and His Theory of Collective Form: A Study on Its Practical and Peda- _gegical Implications, Al Theses and Dissertations (ETDs), Washington, 2013, GIBSON Witla, Disneyland with the Death Penalty, Wired, New York, 1993 - LECLAIR Benjamin - Paquet and Andrew Wade, Retracing Singapore Songlines Through Orchard Road, The Pols Blog, Hamburg, 2011 SEOW Janice, Rem Koolhaas on the Current Urban Condition, Indesignlive, Singapore, 2016 = MALCOLM Lynne and Olivia Wills, Songlines the Indigenous memory code, ABC, North Queensland, 2016 CATWIN Bruce, The Songline, Frankin Press, Macclesfield, 1987 - CHUAN, KS. and Singapore Planning and Urban Research Group, SPUR 65-67, SPUR, Singa- pore, 1967 Singapore Planning and Urban Research Group, SPUR 68-71, SPUR, Singapore, 1971 “CORREA C, Quest for Identity (Asia), 1983 KOOLHASS Rem, 8, ML, XL, Random House Lee Us, 2002 13 SOREN AEDS