How Public Spaces in Buenos Aires Work For and Against the Governing Bodies and Citizens of Buenos Aires
Thesis: The built environment of Buenos Aires is reflective of the political state of the nation of Argentina at any given point in the city’s history.
Modernity & Neoliberalism (Historical Context for Public Spaces):
Figure 1: Buenos Aires in 1916 (Source: Buenos Aires (Argentina). 1916. Plano De La Ciudad De Buenos Aires, Capital De La
República Argentina Con El Trazado General De Calles. Buenos Aires:
Municipalidad de la Capital, 1916.)
Although Buenos Aires is geographically tucked into an inlet of the Atlantic Ocean on the border of the nation of Argentina, it is still presently considered a global city by modern standards. Some argue that the combination of the relevant presence of foreign corporations from North America and the ever-growing capitalist development have stripped away some of Buenos Aires’ Latin American eclecticism. However, it is important to note that this environment is “not politically innocent,” and that the choice to embrace globalization and the trends that follow was deliberate [1].
While postcolonialism is responsible for much of the modernist elements that can be found in Buenos Aires today, redevelopment through multiple scopes has contributed to the inconsistencies in the city planning. From 1880 to 1887, Torcuato de Alvear was the mayor of Buenos Aires when Buenos Aires was declared the capital of Argentina. Alvear facilitated development that mimicked the Parisian planning trends, namely the Haussmannist principles [2]. Despite the destruction of culturally significant buildings, Alvear created what is now one of the city’s most significant public spaces: the Plaza de Mayo. The wide and spacious boulevards that connect a series of other plazas and parks throughout the city also owe credit to Haussmanist planning. Alvear contributed greatly to the primary tourist attractions of Buenos Aires through the choices of development made in his time as the Mayor. Following Alvear's position, the Avenida de Mayo (1894), the Plaza del Congreso, the Parque, El Teatro Colon (1908), and the Palacio del Congreso were all constructed by his successors, continuing his legacy of Haussmanist principles [2]. Alvear was transparent in his mission to adhere to Haussmanist guidelines where he tore down buildings rather than revitalize them, utilizing French-style architecture, creating iconic buildings and public spaces like parks and plazas [2]. It is said that Alvear’s constituents that advised him throughout his term as Mayor heavily emphasized French planning in their writings to him. Haussmanist principles do align with the more modern concept of neoliberalism, where the initial push to join the primary players of the global markets was attempted with Alvear’s developments in the beginning of the 20th century. This advancement technique is repeated throughout the subsequent development of Buenos Aires.
“If it was to be what every capital was-the representative symbol of its nation-it must conform to this elite perception of "civilized" maturation. Buenos Aires must cease to be a "great village" and reflect the national transformation” [2].
Figure 2: President Perón (President from 1946 - 1955, 1973-1974) and his wife delivered speeches from the Casa Rosada (located in the Plaza de Mayo). Perón sparked a tradition in the Plaza de Mayo, where because of his imprisonment by his own party, he became on icon for the working class. On May 1st and May 25th, families gather in the plaza with his commemoration being part of the tradition. (Source: https://wander-argentina.com/plaza-de-mayo-argentinas-most-famous-square/)
The Function of Public Space in Buenos Aires: How the Government and the People Use Public Spaces to Cater to their Goals
The political shift of privatization at the end of the 19th century of what were formerly public entities had a grand effect on the outcomes of public spaces and the groups that were assigned or accepted to use them [1]. In response to this, Antonio Cartaña published a pamphlet titled 'La Ciudad de Todos' or Everybody’s City that criticized the privatization and commercialization of public spaces that sparked a movement that echoed this opinion. By commercializing space, the planners of Buenos Aires sought to turn public spaces into yet another benefit to the elite upper class, where tourists and themselves could continue contributing to the production of this neoliberal capital. The porteño class was the designed middle class, but seemingly suffered in the economic system that the Argentinian elite facilitated. As the porteño class suffered under these economic policies, the ruling class had to “convince” the porteño class that neoliberalism and globalization was still the best way of performing business by constructing three key spaces: The Puerto Madero Waterfront, the Plaza de Mayo and the Plaza del Congreso.
Figure 3: Current map of Buenos Aires with indicated landmarks
This video features high quality drone footage of the Plaza San Martin. The bird's eye view serves excellently for illustrating the grand boulevards and radial designs that mimic Haussmanist and Parisian-style planning. The city planning also utilizes open, green space with clean landscaping. There is significance in the presence of religious buildings as well.
Puerto Madero Waterfont
Figure 4: Panoramic View of the Puerto Madero Waterfront
Culturally coined the “Manhattan of Buenos Aires,” in the 1990s, the Puerto Madero, underwent revitalization under Madero’s presidency. Surprisingly enough, the city held a “National Ideas Contest,” to decide what the future of the space could potentially hold and once this potential was presented to investors, money poured in and the reconstruction was thrown into full force [1]. The general aesthetic of the buildings are considered a “reinvention of a sanitized industrial past,” appealing to a romanticism of the industrial revolution era, as well as repurposing the warehouses that would otherwise serve as an eyesore near the water. The project also had to reconcile the previously failed attempt to revitalize this space be President Alfonsin in 1986. As Guano provocatively asks, “How would porteño flaneuses and flaneurs resist the fascination of Puerto Madero's display of a First World affluence that only few enjoy, but that, as President Menem kept promising, would one day trickle down to the whole population?” [1].
Soon, Puerto Madero became a place of frivoldad (frivolity), where any respective member of the upper class would go to display their wealth and mingle with others at their class level. “As Wilson (1991:68) observed, it is ‘only by becoming part of the spectacle [that] you can truly exist in the city.’” This quote explains that in the reconstruction of many of the city’s spaces, the requirement to be able to contribute to the neoliberal capitalist economy is prioritized, leaving little room for low and working class people to participate in the public space that Buenos Aires has laid claim to. Relating back to our argument group thesis, the built environment and public spaces, exemplified by the Puerto Madero, exhibit the Argentine government’s goal of becoming a primary actor in the global trading game. By creating public spaces that act as displays of wealth for both tourists and their own citizens, the planning sells the desire for contribution to the neoliberal market.
This video includes a series of photos and reconstructed renderings of what buildings occupied the Waterfront before the demolition in 1998. The video is in Spanish, but the images are also valuable. The tone of the video clearly advocates for the Puerto Madero in the state before the re-development.
Figure 5: Puerto Madero at Night
Plaza de Mayo
Figure 6 : View of the Plaza de Mayo with a frontal view of the Casa Rosada
It is important to note that not all public spaces in Buenos Aires deliberately cater to the neoliberal agenda. While the city can generally be described as European or Western with high-rise, 21st century structures, there also exist many informal settlements that can be considered unplanned, some of them unnamed [3]. Due to lack of investment in areas where people of lower incomes reside, various unplanned, informal development has taken place as the governing bodies have made these groups of people responsible for their own amenities. Additionally, with the politically tumultuous state of the Argentinian government, these same groups of people needed places to stage protests and revolutionary acts. Thus: the birth of the plaza in Buenos Aires.
One of the most famous public spaces in Buenos Aires began as a planned location, but as its role transformed, it eventually became a defining space for the city of Buenos Aires. Initially planned bye Juan de Garay in 1580, the location of what the Plaza de Victoria (now, Plaza de Mayo), was slightly abnormal, as the plaza was not located in the city center, but rather closer to the ports (See Figure 3)[4]. Between 1580 and 1800, there seems to be a gap in the literature as to how exactly this plaza developed. All we know is that by 1800, William McCann was describing that plaza as culturally advanced with “beautiful piazzas, for the most part flagged with lozenge-shaped pieces of black and white marble; and under the well-formed arches [are] shops tastefully ornamented,” signaling that the plaza had become a visually appealing, multi-use, central space [4]. In the mid-late 1800s, the Plaza de Victoria was also described as serving nationalistic agendas, “adorned with our national flag and great branches of weeping willows,” also containing a monument of Manuel Belgrano, the man who designed the Argentinian flag [4]. The Cabildo cathedral situated close is also indicative of the way that the plaza transforms throughout Buenos Aires’ history, enduring multiple renovations, “facelifts,” and other modifications to match the changes in the surrounding environments [4]. It wasn’t until the mid-twentieth century that the plaza became a politically significant location, where it earned its final name, the Plaza de Mayo.
During the years of “The Dirty War,” in the 1970s and 1980s, public space, for all intensive purposes, disappeared during the rule of a violent military dictatorship [5]. A modest group of mothers began protesting in the Plaza de Mayo, reclaiming an important space for the city. However, according to Rosenthal, the decision to use of the plaza as a location for the protest was likely a coincidence (2000). This small act of activism that began with 14 women transformed into a symbolic declaration of resistance to military rule [5]. With the Plaza de Mayo as an example, we can conclude that there is a correlation between the “place of spectacle and fear in the urban environment” as well as “the symbolic space of the city” (Rosenthall, 2000).
“For the mothers, going to the Plaza meant overcoming fear” [5].
Figure 7: A policeman pictured with a mother during an act of Protest at the Plaza
Figure 8: Madres de la Plaza de Mayo Association in 2006 completing their final march stating that the enemy is no longer their government.
Plaza del Congreso
Figure 9: Spatial layout of the Plaza del Congreso
Plaza Del Congreso: The Plaza del Congreso is part of a larger open space that connects two other plazas to it; the Plaza Lorea and the Plaza Mariano Moreno. The congress building sits adjacent to the open spaces, similar to the Mall in Washington D.C., where open green space overlaps with governmental and monumental structures.Various monuments dedicated to political figures of Argentina are situated throughout the spaces.
The Plaza del Congreso also shares a politically active history with the Plaza de Mayo. The teachers’ union CTERA (Confederación de Trabajadores de la Educación de la República Argentina) set up a tent structure named ‘La carpa de la dignidad (the tent of dignity)’ in the plaza [6]. The purpose was to protest the educational reform enacted by the International Monetary Fund at the conclusion of Menem’s presidency in 1997 through a public hunger strike [6]. In a short period of time, the tent had gained publicity and transformed into a more permanent “political landmark” [6]. The juxtaposition of the protest within the Congressional Plaza represents opposition to the state. This is a particularly interesting role for the plaza to play, one that both serves the state and defies it. In this way, public space can serve both the governmental bodies and the people at the same time.
What We can Conclude about Public Spaces in Buenos Aires
As it seems, based on the three aforementioned locations, public space in Buenos Aires serves those who choose to use it. Given that the design of plazas are intended for gathering, the space can be virtually used for any purpose. Relating back to the thesis, the gathering in the space changes based on the political situation. In the Plaza de Mayo and Plaza del Congreso, the space was used for defiant and rebellious protest during times of political instability and change. Whereas during Perón’s presidency, many gathered in support of the state. In the case of the Puerto Madero, we have seen the state’s intentions exhibited in the public space, where privatization and neoliberalism led to a stage for display of wealth. Regardless of the state of politics, it is clear that the politics are reflected in the public space.
Future Planning & Environmentalism
The Urban Environmental Plan (Plan Urbano Ambiental, PUA) of Buenos Aires is exemplary for determining the bounds of sustainability in the context of neoliberal development [7]. Centner also focuses on Puerto Madero in his assessment, stating that Puerto Madero is “debatably the most symbolically important Argentine site of physical transformation during neoliberal times” [7]. According to the PUA, sustainable development combines the changing of urban-design, economic advancement, social justice, integrity and respect of cultural characteristics while also aiming to improve the quality of life on the grounds that without deliberately acting against environmental destruction, “future generations” will be at risk of the opposing consequences [7]. The plan is not a direct attack on existing aspects of planning that forces the respective bodies to drastically change their habits to meet the plan’s goals. Therefore, it does not directly address environmental catastrophes adequately, which is not to say that there exists a plan that does. However, this article explicitly states that future planning should be holding the potential destruction of climate change in high regard in its priorities.
References
[1] Guano, Emanuela. 2002."Spectacles of modernity: transnational imagination and local hegemonies in neoliberal Buenos Aires." Cultural Anthropology 17, (2): 181-209.
[2] Needell, J. 1995. Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires: Public Space and Public Consciousness in Fin-de-Siècle Latin America. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 37 (3), 519-540.
[3] Mantho, Robert. 2015. The Urban Section, First Edition. London: Routledge.
[4] Wilson, Jason. 1999. Buenos Aires: A Cultural and Literary Companion. Vol. 1. Cities of Imagination. Signal Books.
[5] Rosenthal, Anton. 2000. Spectacle, Fear, and Protest: A Guide to the History of Urban Public Space in Latin America. Social Science History, 24 (1), 33-73.
[6] Guano, E. (2002). Ruining the President’s spectacle: theatricality and telepolitics in the Buenos Aires public sphere. Journal of Visual Culture, 1(3), 303–323.
[7] Centner, Ryan. 2009. Conflictive sustainability landscapes: the neoliberal quagmire of urban environmental planning in Buenos Aires, Local Environment, 14: (2) 173-192.
Image Sources:
Figure 1: Buenos Aires (Argentina). 1916. Plano De La Ciudad De Buenos Aires, Capital De LaRepública Argentina Con El Trazado General De Calles. Buenos Aires: Municipalidad de la Capital, 1916.