History of an Idea
Brasília may be the most holistic attempt to implement an architectural and social utopian ideology in any one location. Conceived as a vision of the future, Brasília was an entirely new, modern organization of a city inscribed onto a largely unsettled landscape in the interior of the country.
The city was not only separated from the rest of the country geographically, but also socially, culturally and economically. It now embodies many contradicting symbols of Brazilian culture, but the city began with the hope of propelling Brazil into modernity.
As far back as middle of the 19th century, there has been a voice for transferring the capital from Rio de Janeiro to the interior of the country. The earliest recorded prophetic advocacy for relocation dates back to 1883 with João Bosco with his vision of the Central Plateau and its potential efficacy for unifying the nation. Later, an array of historical figures advocated for a similar idea, including Tiradentes, the revolutionary of Inconfidencia Mineira in Ouro Preto. In 1891 the idea was formalized in the first Republican Constitution, yet it remained a radical idea and received little attention until the middle of the twentieth century under the administration of Juscelino Kubitschek. Preceding his term, the Brazilian government underwent significant changes that laid the foundations for the ideas Kubitschek would propose.
Socio-Political Atmosphere
Prior to Kubitschek’s election, Getúlio Vargas governed Brazil both as president and dictator. In 1930 he was elected into office, but as Vargas faced the multi-faceted problems of governing an extremely stratified socio-economic population, he sought alternative governing methods, using models of Fascism that dominated European politics at the time. In 1938, Vargas established the “New State”, ruled by dictatorship, using oppression and censorship to establish a nationalist regime. However, as Vargas grew increasingly close to the working classes and unions, the end of his term neared. In 1945, a military coup d'état removed him from office. In 1951, after the short presidential term of Eurico Gaspar Dutra, Vargas was elected president again.
Vargas maneuvered between disparate parties by filling and rearranging his administration with representatives from varying political and social factions. As his inconsistency increased, Vargas’ popularity declined. Eventually, his suspected involvement in the murder of Carlos Lacerda, a liberal who spearheaded a campaign to remove Vargas from office, lost Vargas his remaining support. On August 23 1954, an alliance of Vargas’ adversaries signed a manifesto demanding his resignation. The following morning, Vargas committed suicide, shooting himself in the chest.
In addition to the nationwide social unrest that occurred during this time, the government itself became unstable. Vice President Café Filho took over, until a heart attack required him to leave office. Carlos Luz, head of the Chamber of Deputies, followed until he was removed after only one week in office. Next, Nereu Ramos took over for a short time. Then congress governed for 60 days until, finally, Juscelino Kubitschek was elected (was he elected?) president.
Political Motives
The campaign of Kubitschek was founded on the idea of a new Brazil, one based on growth and change, particularly following the chaos of Vargas’s terms. This intention was embodied in the plan to relocate the capital to the interior of the country, constructing a modern image of Brazil. The idea was met with much skepticism. There were doubts about the economic feasibility of the plan and the ability of the government to implement and realize the idea (particularly within one administrative term). Additionally, questions arose regarding the cultural authenticity of the project given the site’s location on the Central Plateau, a region isolated from the rest of the country and associated with indigenous cultures. Nonetheless, the idea maintained strength among voters and Kubitschek was elected in 1956.
Kubitschek’s political plan summarizing the advantages of relocating the capital and building it anew was referred to as the “Target Program”. At the foundation of the Target Program was the theory of developmentalism. The theory “stressed state-directed industrialization as the means by which underdeveloped countries could achieve rapid economic growth and a more favorable position in the world trade” (Houston, 1989, 18). The Target Program was the basis of Kubitschek’s campaign and served as his primary political agenda during his administration.
The Target Program had several purposes. First, it was an attempt to integrate the national economy. Brazil had never fully developed the interior of the country; it had always been a nation of ports, focused toward the sea-based trade. The relocation of the capital to the middle of Brazil represented an ideological shift in the growth and unity of the nation. It sought to strengthen the national consciousness.
Second, the program suggested that further innovation and research would emerge as a result of the unity of people and professions required to construct the new modern city; in other words, the realization of Brasília would serve as an ideological precedent for development throughout the rest of the nation. By investing in such an advanced mega-project, the nation was supposed to continue into a period of technological advancements in the areas of infrastructure, heavy industry and energy production; endeavors that would better the nation locally as well as bring it into the global market.
Western European Assimilation II
While political ideology constructed the mythology of Brasília, the modern architecture and planning movement is responsible for its organization. The Congrès Internationaux d´Architecture Moderne (CIAM) was a western European program, a manifesto organized by Le Corbusier that included contributions from dozens of architects. The group met periodically from 1928 to 1959 and pursued various topics all in the pursuit of “architecture as a social art”. The meeting of 1933 focused on The Functional City, which would later take the form of The Athens Charter, published in 1942 by Le Corbusier, the Western European icon of modernity. It outlines the process and intentions of city-building in shaping the modern man. Furthermore, the charter sought to categorize the operations of a city into its primary functions: “housing, work, recreation and leisure.” These ideas would later be assimilated and altered into a uniquely Brazilian form of planning and architecture in the design of Brasília.
Lúcio Costa and Oscar Niemeyer, the city’s planner and architect, respectively, are among the founders of the modern architecture movement in Brazil. They formally collaborated with Le Corbusier on multiple occasions and were affected both by the master himself as well as the CIAM organization and its publications. In 1936, with Le Corbusier acting as consultant, they would design the Ministry of Education and Public Health in Rio de Janeiro, largely considered the official origin point of modern architecture in Brazil. Later in 1947, Niemeyer would visit the United States to assist in the design of the United Nations Headquarters in New York. Though Le Corbusier was not directly involved with the design and construction of Brasília, his ideas are deeply ingrained, perhaps laying the foundation of modernism throughout Brazil.
The fact that Brazil initially assimilated many ideas of modern architecture and planning from the industrialized world is of particular significance. Just as the architecture and planning of colonial towns were imported from Western Europe, so too were the conceptions of modernity (constructivism and similar avant-garde movements also had a significant affect on modernism in Brazil). Thus, two parallel themes frequently emerge when analyzing the evolution of architecture in Brazil.
The first theme concerns the resolution of public and private space and its evolution spanning nearly five centuries, from colonization to the modernist movement to so-called globalization. This discussion is concerned with the history and evolution of architecture and planning in Brazil and the resulting social constructs. Here, it is rendered broadly in the entirety of the research, which includes Ouro Preto and Sao Paulo.
The second theme examines the assimilation of architectural languages and ideas by Brazil from developed countries. It concerns Brazil’s assimilation of foreign cultures and is therefore a sensitive subject. Despite subtle variations, the architecture of colonial Brazil is a direct import of the architecture produced during the 17th century in Portugal and other Western European nations. Modern architecture, on the other hand, is more difficult to attribute to a single nation or set of ideas because of the substantial modification to the original import. In other words, modern architecture of Brazil took on its own form to the extent that it is often considered uniquely Brazilian, despite existing in perpetual reference to its origins. There is much debate as to when assimilation is merely a form of importation as opposed to some form of transculturation or hybridity. Is the assimilating culture simply absorbing, or is it reciprocally affecting the origin? At what point does it take ownership of what was assimilated? Where are the theoretical boundaries of a culture?
The Formal City
Niemeyer and Costa’s organization of the plan of Brasilia reflected several primary intentions. First, they identified key functions of the city and isolated them from one another. For example, they separated zones for work from zones for living. Homogeneity of function and building typology emerge as a result. The second component of the their design concept was to introduce a new physical environment to residential areas that would encourage a sense of neighborhood and community among residents. These self-sufficient neighborhoods (at least in terms of living and commerce) would include all classes of individuals inhabiting the city, thus equalizing the socio-economic stratification of the population. Third, there was to be an abundance of public space – wide-open, unprogrammed space. This organization can be traced back to early modernist and constructivist planning techniques, for example the CIAM agenda and Le Corbusier’s vision of the future. Nevertheless, Brasília is an extreme example of such ideologies. Lastly, the plan would engage private automobile transportation as an organizing element of the city, thus introducing new planning techniques governed by vehicular circulation.
The promise of the automobile as a liberating technological force is at the core of the organization of the design of Brasília, as it has been to the modernization of nearly every city in the world. In Brasília, the functions of the city are organized in reference to its streets.
The fundamental gesture in the plan of Brasília is the intersection of two primary axes. This formal gesture has significant historical roots in city building, particularly prevalent in ancient Roman practices. Establishing the location of a new city was a ceremonial rite performed by a priest. The priest, or Augur, would inscribe a symbol into the sky above - a circle divided into four quadrants – determined by the setting and rising of the sun (defining east and west) and the location of a polar star (defining north and south). This symbol, called the templum was the device by which the Augur would observe Nature – the path of the sun and stars, flight patterns of birds, behavior of animals, weather and other “natural” phenomena. The templum represented the union between heaven and earth; it was both a marriage and a birth. As the Augur intuited meaning from ritual he learned of the proper location of the city and projected this information onto the earth. Following the auguration, the templum symbol would also be used to determine the center of the city and its surrounding layout. Thus, the myth is not only manifest through the ceremonial act of founding the city, but also in its survey and construction. Here, the myth is transformed into an instrument of science.
It is clear that these techniques were not employed in establishing the location of Brasília and that the city bares no resemble to the organization of Rome. However, the significance of myth and meaning embodied in the gesture of the two axes crossing is no less significant in the founding of Brasília than in the ancient occidental city. In both cases, the symbol is a powerful mythological construction used to consecrate physical space. In other words, the appearance of Brasília’s organization was intended to symbolize the progress outlined by President Kubitschek.
The diagram of the city, of Plano Piloto as it is called, is an enormous cross with one axis arced slightly upward and away from the center. It is inscribed into the Central Plateau, a geographically isolated tabula rasa. There are two axes: the east-west (E-W) axis and the north-south (N-S) axis. The N-S axis is also known as the monumental axis, the center of which is an immense void, bordered by buildings of various programmatic function. These include the seat of the national government, ministries, a cathedral, the entertainment sector, the commercial sector, the hotel sector, the military sector, and the sports sector. The municipal plaza, radio and TV tower, and the local bus station are located in the center of the axis. Major roads line either side of the axis, producing a definitive edge to the central axis. The E-W major axis intersects the monumental axis at the local bus station, the literal and symbolic center of transportation for the Federal District.
Superquadra
Various types of residential buildings are located along the primary E-W axis. These dwelling types conceived of in the original plan of Brasília share the idea of “collective dwelling”. Nearly two-thirds of Plano Piloto consists of a particular dwelling type known as the superquadra. This organization includes residential apartment blocks with room for small schools and the occasional convenience stand. Located between the superquadras are alternating patterns of different programs. One block, referred to as the Local Commercial Sector includes public buildings (such as libraries), local supermarket (with discounts for those who live in the adjacent superquadra), retail, and a gas station. The other may include a church, a park, movie theater, sports field (for futebol) and perhaps a social club. These different blocks alternate between the superquadras, thus giving access to all these facilities via either edge of the block – one group of facilities to the east and the other to the west.
The apartment blocks are probably the most well known aspect of dwelling associated with Brasília. There are approximately 8 to 11 blocks per superquadra, and categorized into two types in two different neighborhoods. First, there are six-story apartment blocks elevated above the ground plane with a series of columns, or pilotis. These typically hold 36 apartment units and two service cores that include vertical circulation. The other type is a three-story apartment block resting above grade. The former type is more common and simply represents the modernist ideals embodied in Plano Piloto. However, this section of the plan does not represent the entirety of Brasília (including the surrounding satellite towns that were partially planned and conceived of as part of the entire Federal District). This sample is used solely for the purpose of understanding the extent to which the modernist vision is pursued in the plan. Notes regarding other housing typologies and developments will be given attention in subsequent observations of present-day Brasília.
Public Space
The plan of Brasília represents a shift in thinking about urban form and hierarchy. The disorganization of urban life in the pre-industrial city was argued by many, including Le Corbusier, as the source of social stratification (or at least the point of treatment) and thus the inequalities associated with differences in wealth, class and race. Disorganization could be alleviated through the ordering of society. It was thought that, through the principles of modern architecture and planning, the social problems born of pre-industrial urbanity might be solved. Principles of Western European Modernism include the equalization of society, improved health through increased exposure to daylight and fresh air, and the embrace of industrial technologies. Ironically, Brazil adopted the aesthetic of modern architecture and its promises, but the properties of modernity were in direct contrast to the state of the country; there had never been a substantial bourgeoisie class for the people to rise against, Brazil’s climate can be characterized as having an over-abundance of light and air, and the country had never fully industrialized. Nevertheless, the vision of modernism was adopted in an effort to propel the nation into the future. The plan relied heavily on materiality (the plasticity and the low-skilled labor required of concrete) and specific formal techniques in an attempt to order society.
The apartment blocks within the superquadra are physically separated from the ground plane, elevated above a platform the size of the building above. The space underneath the residences is unprogrammed; it is intended as free and open to the public for circulation, light, air and nature. There are no other functions of the city within the block, no overlapping programs, no activation of the void – only the monuments. At times, the buildings are composed in a way that begins to suggest an exterior space, but programmatically function solely as parking.
As is seen in Ouro Preto and similar colonial settlements, the grouping of buildings suggests an outdoor room, a public space within which various functions of the city and forms of communication take place. The private realm gives programmatic and physical definition to the public; the solid mass of buildings defines the void for congregation. In Brasília, this relationship is inverted - each programmed function is objectified and isolated into its own structure, for example within the superquadra. The plan subverts pre-industrial organization, such as the function of street corners and plazas, and favors models of modernity instead. In other words, old forms of communication are no longer completely valid in the new cityscape, and neither are all the traditional symbols of culture and society.
In pre-industrial society, the significant void represented the public realm and the instance of architectural object, such as one of the many churches in Ouro Preto, was a symbol of power and authority. Again, this system is overturned. In the modern city, all buildings are monuments. The distinction between types of structures is therefore dependent on the individual design or form of the buildings that sometimes relies solely on details or architectural nuances. As the broader functions of the city are also separated, the location of a structure within the ordered plan of the city is also an indication of its function.
Thus, Western European, pre-industrial systems of city organization are never employed in Brasília. And it is this complete inversion, to the point of abstraction, which makes it useful in studying the socio-cultural transformations that occurred in Brazil over time.
Topics for Further Investigation
There are many social and cultural issues surrounding Brasília. Debate regarding these issues has taken the form of various articles, essays and books. James Holston’s publication, The Modern City, provided a much-needed exposure to the history of the city. It is unfortunately one of the only meticulously crafted critiques published in English, and though it offers a great deal, it solicits further debate. The following topics are proposals for continuing exploration.
Brasília is a commuter city. Public and/or private transportation is necessary for work, some shopping and some recreation, all because of the programmatic segregation of the city. This includes residents within the city and particularly those in the outlying satellite towns that commute to their jobs; this necessity applies to all socio-economic classes. As with many modern cities, this dependency on transportation creates traffic problems and an increased need for public transportation and further changes in transportation infrastructure. As a result, there is a need for a re-evaluation of the sustainable aspects of the city, how to further integrate public infrastructure to the greater region and what options the city has for transformations in the future. In a general sense, Brasília faces the same questions of development that any vehicular-based city in the world faces. The rigidity of Brasília’s design makes it difficult to physically alter the city. The mythical presence of Niemeyer and Costa is ubiquitous. These ghosts not only take the form of a collective cultural identity for Brasilienses, but also in the preservation and protection of the city.
In this regard, the phenomenon of "UNESCO-ification" is somewhat relevant. The United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) “functions as a laboratory of ideas and a standard-setter to forge universal agreements on emerging ethical issues.” Among its many altruistic missions is the “Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage.” The World Heritage List identifies structures and landscapes that demand preservation and/or protection; the city of Brasília was added to this list in 1987. The term UNESCO-ification refers to the process and affects of UNESCO classification. In short, it discloses a debate from which arises the argument that some methods of preservation and protection of cultural artifacts, specifically architecture, that may solidify the subject’s original value and/or meaning, unintentionally precluding its ability to redefine itself. In the context of Brasília, this refers to preservation policies set forth by the Brazilian government (not UNESCO as they are actually an organization that informs and assists in their suggested preservation efforts, and operates through local organizations). This debate extends even further into the realm of academic institutions.
At the University of Brasília (UnB), there is a conservative front of educators that heavily cautions against architectural interventions involving the evolution of any works born of the hands of Costa and especially Niemeyer, and perhaps rightly so. Yet, at what point do the ideologies of preservation collapse and allow the inevitable evolution of place? A similar debate can be found concerning the new IIT Student Center in Chicago, Ill designed by the Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA), in the midst of the IIT campus designed by Mies Van Der Rohe. When are pressures great enough to allow the introduction of a new layer of history upon another? At what point does the student have an opportunity to address his master? The topic here is simply about the ability of a historical place to assume new identities, especially when pressures such as population growth and cultural transformations demand re-evaluation. At what point does Brasília deserve socio-political evolution; at what point does it demand it?
Another critique has focused on the original unfamiliarity residents felt with the nature of public and private spaces in the city, and the different patterns of everyday life. Holston describes this phenomenon in great length and with much analytical skill, however his description as well as others’ often fail to investigate the function of time in the relationship between a city and its inhabitants despite its design. In other words, in formal critiques and articles, there is rarely the contemplation of the inevitability of new generations that will be born within and live their entire lives knowing the city. Numerous residents of Brasília I spoke with expressed a sense of belonging to the city and its patterns of modern living. All of these people lived in Plano Piloto and belong somewhere within the middle-class and they all lived in different areas of the city. Though obviously these few people do not represent the entirety of Brasília, they do unveil the reality that Brasília is no longer a new city. It has a history, it has stories and its cultural myths are changing.
Small forces changing the city appear everywhere. People have learned to appropriate space to define their needs and to generate new dynamic, public spaces. As is well known, Brasília possesses an over-abundance of open space. The monumental axis is an enormous void that can provoke agoraphobic sensations in any every visitor to the city, yet it is filled with local youths nearly every day to play sports. Vendors take advantage of public spaces intensified by quotidian events. For example, bus and metro stops and open parking lots that function as transfers for commuters are, incongruently, as densely packed as the base of the TV Tower, a significant tourist destination. People sell food, drink and other goods using spaces defined by buildings, trees and any objects that exist the landscape. There is persistent proof of the demand for public space, and all the while in a form unfamiliar to designers, simply because it is not designed.
These types of appropriations are not a pattern specific to Brasília. These types of situational activities are prevalent in cities throughout the world. They are born of a minimal necessity and initially bare characteristics of temporality, but over time, and out of ritual they often become parts of the city. How then, do designers face such phenomena? How can designers protect the public event? And finally, though we see it in all its varying and complex forms, its transformations through history and refusal to completely dissolve, one can still inquire as to what the meaning of public space is in contemporary society, in the global city?
Pre-Industrial City – Modern City - Contemporary City
Brazil’s multi-faceted webs of social, political, economic and cultural conditions link directly to formations of its cities and architecture. Brazil’s colonization produced forms of space, such as within Ouro Preto, that possess a set of characteristics born out of socio-cultural values imported from Western Europe. These characteristics are physical, as they define a particular scale and use of space, and they are symbolic, as they represent the structure of the society within which they were created. In the country’s modernization, we see another historical process of change. A set of ideologies dominated by order, progress and hope generated a city with its own set of characteristics. Physically, Brasília was organized in relation to its functions and resulted in unfamiliar and untested definitions of public and private space, between the collective and the individual. Ouro Preto and Brasília have provided interesting studies for understanding the westward expansion of civilization in the last 500 years.
Today, cities face even greater questions in the presence of contemporary globalization. Sao Paulo, Brazil is South America’s largest city and faces many of the socio-cultural issues tied to its multiple phases of globalization, up to present day. Throughout its history, the population has become increasingly segregated and a collective sense of fear of violence has prevailed in both the collective psyche and the media. These perceptions and their realities have transformed the city at both urban and architectural scales. A comparative study of the different phases of Brazil’s globalization is important not solely to illuminate the country’s past, but are increasingly relevant as socio-cultural patterns of development found in Sao Paulo are similar to others of cities throughout the world.
