Art AND Science.

http://www.magicfountain.net/images/LOGO.png

Parlez-Vous Francais?
No, I do not speak french.
And no, we are not talking about the Australian dance trio.

We are talking about the extremely topsy-turvy history of planning issues since the 1930's, and how over time, they have transformed dramatically.

When reading 'Practitioners and the art of Planning' by Eugenie Ladner Birch this week, there was a prominent conflict of art versus science.

When people think of the word 'Science' they begin to think of what is matter of fact, knowledge, systematic and simply what makes the world go round.

Art has an extremely broad definition and can be interpreted in many different ways.  When examining art, people tend to be subjective rather than objective.  Peoples views can differ depending simply on the way that they view the world surrounding them.  Art brings together the aesthetic value of cities, creates vibrancy and a realm of unique thought and expression.

Planning has changed and adapted accordingly throughout the past 80 years, complying with changes in social, environmental and economic issues.  Planning is ultimately able to adapt to the new and changing challenges that face our world today and prepare for the uncertain future.

It is evident from the constant upgrading and changing of the famous 'Green Book' (featured in the reading) that planning issues are constantly changing, evolving and revolutionising.

So, is urban planning a science or an art?

I believe it is a combination of both elements.

Lets face it, they compliment each other. The science involves the rational questions; Who? Where? When? And art answers the What? and Why?

The science lays the foundations and the art creates and explores the ideas and thoughts, to ideally create something extraordinary and beautiful.

The stars are the art of the sky.
The icing is the art of the cake.
The glitter is the art of the glue.
Urban planners are the art (creators) of our world.