High modernism (also known as high modernity) is a form of modernity, characterized by an unfaltering confidence in science and technology as means to reorder the social and natural world.[1][2] The high modernist movement was particularly prevalent during the Cold War, especially in the late 1950s and 1960s.
High modernity is distinguished by the following characteristics:[3]
Strong confidence in the potential for scientific and technological progress, including a reliance on the expertise of scientists, engineers, bureaucrats and other intellectuals.
Attempts to master nature (including human nature) to meet human needs.
An emphasis on rendering complex environments or concepts (such as old cities or social dynamics) legible, most often through spatial ordering (for example, city planning on a grid).
Disregard for historical, geographical and social context in development.
Modernity relates to the modern era and the aesthetic qualities of modernism; however, modernity refers specifically to the social conditions and relations that arise out of the modern period, usually as a result of capitalism and industrialization. Thus, modernity can be understood as the state of society during and following the process of modernization.
Modernity and high modernity are concerned with human progress and the potential of human intervention to bring about positive change in the structure of society; however, high modernity's visions of societal change rely on the expertise of intellectuals and scientific innovation, making high modernity a more elitist project than its predecessor.[4]
Both concepts operate on an ambiguous understanding of what the final stage of societal progress will entail. While modernity is retrospective in its prescriptions for the future and promotes organic growth, high modernity advocates a complete transformation of existing conditions and the creation of a blank slate.[5] This break from the historical and geographical contexts of places often results in the application of standardized models to a variety of locations, often with socially disruptive consequences (see examples below).
Modernity and modernization are associated with capitalist and industrial development, and emphasize the increased movement of goods, people, capital and information (see Globalization). This emphasis on economic freedom and capitalism is accompanied by the decline of traditional forms of society and the rise of the nation-state.[6] In contrast, high modernism transcends traditional political ideological divisions in its reordering of society towards a utopian ideal as such ideal societies are highly subjective across the political spectrum.[7] Furthermore, projects characteristic of high modernity are best enacted under conditions of authoritarian and technocratic rule, as populations are more easily controlled and changed.[8]
Historical precedents
Despite its name, high modernism is not an exclusively modern phenomenon. One of the first manifestations of high modernism appeared in urban planning. In the 5th century BC, the Greek philosopher Hippodamus proposed the grid plan in urban planning, and implemented the grid plan in construction of Piraeus (the port of Athens), which has remained largely unchanged to this day.
Notably, our main source on Hippodamus is Aristotle, who criticized his grid plan in Politics II.8. Thus, criticism of high modernism also has a long history.
The Industrial Revolution was a major impetus of high modernism. In industrial production, standardization is necessary for economies of scale, and standardization necessarily increases legibility and homogenizes local context. The drive to standardization can be seen in Henry Ford's quote concerning consumer choice of Ford Model T: "You can have any color you want so long as it's black."
Although the brutality of the Qin regime contributed to its rapid collapse, the outcomes of its unification projects remained largely intact throughout history. The unification of philosophy remained intact too, but with Confucianism replacing Legalism.
The grid plan is a common motif in Chinese and Japanese capitals, which is visible in the maps of Chang'an, Beijing, and Heian-kyō.
Modernization and development
Standardized legal names
Throughout most of human history, the act of naming is a local and informal affair. For example, the local names of geographical features depend critically on how they appear to the local people. The towns of Durham and Guilford in the state of Connecticut are connected by a road, which those who live in Durham call the “Guilford Road,” while those living in Guilford call it the “Durham Road.” The same informality and a focus on use over uniformity characterizes personal naming. For example, around the year 1700 in England, a mere eight given names accounted for nearly ninety percent of the total male population [John, Edward, William, Henry, Charles, James, Richard, Robert]. This did not pose a problem to local people, who would add informal by-names for disambiguation (“John-the-miller,” “John-the shepherd”). Furthermore, a personal name can change over time, as a person takes on new traits and loses old traits. It could also be different in different contexts, such as with nicknames, stage names, etc.
With modern state-building, the problem of illegible naming became acute. Consequently, a common naming system of Patronymic surname was promoted at the expense of informal local naming systems. Whereas in Europe, patronymy was the exception in 14th century, it became the norm in 19th century. This process reached its logical conclusion with the national identification number, which allows unique identification of any citizen across their entire lifespan. It is purely a naming system for the state administration, completely devoid of any personal or local meaning.[10]
The main proponent of architectural modernism, Le Corbusier, designed the Unité d'habitation residential housing principle, and implemented it first in La Cité Radieuse, Marseille, completed in 1952. With 337 apartments of 23 different layouts, over 12 stories, all suspended on large pilotis, it remains popular and in use to this day. In 2016, it was added to the UNESCOWorld Heritage List for its importance to the development of modernist architecture.[11]
Kin Ming Estate, completed in 2003 in Tseung Kwan O, consists of 10 housing blocks of New Harmony I design, housing about 22,000 people.
Modernist housing has been implemented extensively in the form of high-rise apartment buildings in Asian cities with high urban densities. Two illustrative examples are Hong Kong and Singapore. In Hong Kong in the year 2020, 2.1 million residents were in public housing, which is 28% of the total population. In terms of households, 0.8 million households were in public housing, which is 43% of all households.[12][13]
In Singapore, public housing is administered by the Housing and Development Board, first formed in 1960. While its original mission was to build cheap flats for the poor,[14] it later expanded its mission to plan and develop public housing for all Singapore residents.[15] In the year 2020, 78.7% residents live in public housing, decreasing from a high of 88.0% in 2000. There was a concurrent rise in residents living private condominiums and other kinds of apartments, from 6.5% to 16.0%. The rest 5% live in "landed properties", a proportion that remained stable since 2000.[16]
For many critics of high modernism, the Pruitt–Igoe housing project illustrated both the essential unlivability of Bauhaus-inspired box architecture, and the hubris of central planning. Its demolition on July 15, 1972, was the day “modern architecture died”, according to Charles Jencks.
Despite its origin in the west, modernist housing projects have met with far less success in Western countries. The most iconic failure is the Pruitt–Igoe housing project, a housing complex of 33 buildings, of 11 stories each, first occupied in 1954. Living conditions rapidly deteriorated, and it was demolished in 1972. It came to become a symbol of the failures of urban renewal, public-policy planning and public housing. Some,[17] such as the architectural historian Charles Jencks,[18] and journalist Tom Wolfe,[19] argued that it demonstrated the error of architectural modernism itself.
These claims are problematized both by the long-term functioning of modernist housing projects outside of the United States, as well as by multiple counter-narratives developed within, such as explaining that the tenant selection process selected people unprepared for urban living,[20] or that the geometry of design precluded the direct surveillance for preventing crime.[21] The legacy of Pruitt–Igoe remains contested, both between architects concerning the benefits and faults of architectural modernism, and between general political observers concerning the benefits and faults of public housing, or high modernism in general.[22][23]
Development in the Soviet Union
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (February 2022)
Despite the strong association of modernization with Western society, high modernism also found purchase in the Soviet Party, under Nikita Khrushchev. Following the death of Joseph Stalin, Khrushchev retooled Soviet policy to include most of the ideas of Western high modernity with socialist undertones, emphasizing the role of science in providing progress without exploitation or social inequity.[24] It social sphere it went further as to aspirations to reconstruct the whole human society and formation of New Soviet Man.[25] Both the Soviet Union and the United States viewed the modernization of the developing world as a way to expand their respective spheres of influence and create new economic markets; however, it was the Soviet Union and other autocratic regimes during this period that adopted high modernism as the optimal vision to bring about modernization.
In the Soviet Union, high modernism manifested in both architectural and social reforms aimed at creating a highly rationalized, efficient society aligned with socialist ideals. Khrushchev promoted extensive urban housing projects,[26] standardizing designs to streamline production and rapidly address housing shortages. This led to the rise of "Khrushchyovka" apartments—simple, prefabricated buildings meant to provide functional, affordable housing for the masses. In addition, the Soviet government undertook ambitious infrastructure projects like hydroelectric dams,[27] scientific research facilities, and expansive transport networks, aiming to underscore the transformative potential of socialist modernity. The state's approach to high modernism prioritized not only economic development but also the cultivation of a collective Soviet identity, rooted in principles of scientific progress, collectivism, and a classless society.[28]
Development in the third world
Geographer Peter J. Taylor argues that high modernism is predicated upon a false optimism in the transformative power of science and technology contributed to confusion in the modernization process, especially in the case of third world countries striving to develop according to Western principles of modernization.[29]
Following the successes of the Marshall Plan in Europe, economists turned their attention towards development in the Third World in the aftermath of the Second World War.[30] Contemporary development theory stressed the necessity of capital accumulation and modernization in order for underdeveloped countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America to 'catch up' to the developed Western nations.[31] Post-World War II development schemes were problematized by a focus on economy (ignoring the political, social and institutional impediments to growth), as well as its assumption that conditions in developing countries were the same as those in Europe that experienced success under the Marshall Plan.[32] Modernization theory built upon previous ideas of sociocultural evolution from the previous century, constructing a global hierarchy based on economic development.[33] In this worldview, Western countries were the most developed, while the rest of the world (particularly countries that had just experienced decolonization) still possessed traditional, pre-modern economies. In order to advance beyond this traditional state, the third world would therefore need to emulate developed Western countries, through optimistic social engineering endeavours.[34]
The overwhelming enthusiasm for the power of science and technology to manage the human and natural world encouraged regimes to attempt monumental development projects that would rapidly catapult developing countries into Western-style development.[35] High modernism emphasized spatial order as rational design; by standardizing, simplifying and ordering physical space, otherwise complex concepts or entities could be made legible and more easily controlled, including economies.
During the first half of the twentieth century, Brazil was a primarily agricultural nation that was economically reliant on the United States. Beginning in the 1950s, Brazilian elites sought to reinvent Brazil's economy through import substitution industrialization. The modernization of the Brazilian economy was also accompanied by grand designs to improve education, culture, health care, transportation systems, community organization, property distribution, and administration in order to spark a new sense of national agency in the population.[36]
Part of this grand vision for Brazil's future was the relocation of the nation's capital from the coastal Rio de Janeiro to a new inland site named Brasília. Essentially located in the wilderness, Brasília was to be a “single-function, strictly administrative capital,” says political scientist and anthropologist James C. Scott.[37] Here, long-considered plans for a new capital were finally able to come to fruition thanks to global enthusiasm for the potential of technology. Brasília's massive scale, rational design and cultural offerings, all built from the ground up in the forests of Brazil made it the ultimate manifestation of high modernity.[38] The project's chief architect, Oscar Niemeyer, was strongly influenced by Soviet high modernism in his prescriptions for the new capital as the Soviet Union began to slowly open up to the rest of the world in a new period of internationalism.[39] Despite the cultural and ideological differences of the two countries, both shared common ground in their determination to modernize, strong state authority and a strong belief in the doctrine of high modernity.[40]
The new Brazilian capital was completed in under four years and was presented to the world upon its completion in 1960 as the epitome of urban modernism.[41] The city was planned as a manifestation of Brazil's future as a modern, industrialized power, creating a completely new city that would then create a new society.[42] Based on the master plans of the Congrès International d’Architecture Moderne (CIAM), Brasília's urban space was oriented around mobility, uniformity and functionality, achieved through the elimination of corridor streets (seen as the source of disease and criminality) and the creation of indistinguishable residence sectors based on occupation, known as ‘’superquadra’’.[43]
Total state control of development was critical to the creation of utopian high modernist cities by the CIAM, as it prevented conflict between the planned ideal society and the incoherence of imposing this model on existing conditions.[44]
Following the completion of the city, it became apparent that Brasília’s high modernist design had overlooked the complexities of urban space and had overestimated the ability of functional, rational design to improve socio-political order. Planners’ focus on orienting mobility in the city around automobile traffic had eliminated the street as a place for public gathering; the removal of street corners in favour of cul-de-sacs and open space (punctuated by monumental sculptural and architectural forms like the Cathedral of Brasília and the National Congress Building) discouraged pedestrian traffic, traditional social networking and organic growth of public space.[45] The organization of Brasília's settlement similarly restricted social space by collectivizing residents according to their occupation in the ‘’superquadra’’, transforming the private sphere of the home into a space where the individual was ‘symbolically minimized.’ [46] While these ‘’superquadra’’ featured their own educational, entertainment, recreational and retail facilities to meet any perceivable need of the city’s residents, these perceived needs were based on European models from CIAM and architect Le Corbusier. Furthermore, the aesthetic monotony and scale of the city’s built environment created feelings of isolation, forced conformity and disorientation among residents; there also existed a stark contrast between the wealthier residents living in the centre of the city and the poorer residents situated along the city’s margins.[47]
State reliance on high modernity to control human populations during the Cold War was not limited to the US. In Canada, the construction of the Distant Early Warning Line increased Euro-Canadian activity in the north, disrupting the traditional lifestyle of local Inuit populations and the arctic landscape in the process.[48] Prime Minister John Diefenbaker's promise to build "a nation in the [north]... patterned on our way of life" resulted in towns and houses patterned on southern Canadian models that ignored the cultural and geographical context of the Arctic.[49]
The newly constructed towns of Frobisher Bay and Inuvik were ambitiously designed by federal officials to overcome the previously 'uninhabitable' arctic environment and rapidly incorporate the Inuit into the modern age;[50] however, the disregard for the local conditions and opinions of northerners resulted in spatial segregation of Inuit and military personnel in the two towns. In pursuit of a modernized, self-sufficient northern settlement, state-led projects to stabilize the nomadic Inuit in towns disrupted native resource-based economies and contributed to spatial segregation, social inequity, health problems and cultural dislocation.[51]
Cultural critic Bram Dijkstra criticizes "high modernism" as an austere, abstract, and anti-humanist vision of modernism:
Much of the post-WWII high modernism in America and the rest of the western world is antihumanist, hostile to notions of community, of any form of humanism. It becomes about the lack of meaning, the need to create our own significance out of nothing. The highest level of significance, that of the elite, becomes abstraction. So the concept of the evolutionary elite arises again, deliberately excluding those who 'haven't evolved.'[52]
High modernism is exemplified in the writings of Clement Greenberg, who described an opposition between "avant-garde" art and "kitsch" in his essay Avant-Garde and Kitsch.[53] Composer Milton Babbitt's well-known essay "Who Cares if You Listen" describes "efficiency", an increase in "the number of functions associated with each component", "a high degree of contextuality and autonomy", and an "extension of the methods of other musics" as being among the traits possessed by contemporaryserious music,[54] though the words "modernism" and "modernist" do not occur in the article, and "modern" occurs only in a quotation with reference to Beethoven and Tchaikovsky.
The term "high modernism" as used in literary criticism generally lacks the pejorative connotations it has in other contexts. High literary modernism, on the contrary, is generally used to describe a subgenre of literary modernism, and generally encompasses works published between the end of the First World War and the beginning of the Second.[55] Regardless of the specific year it was produced, high modernism is characterized primarily by a complete and unambiguous embrace of what Andreas Huyssen calls the "Great Divide".[56] That is, it believes that there is a clear distinction between capital-A Art and mass culture, and it places itself firmly on the side of Art and in opposition to popular or mass culture. (Postmodernism, according to Huyssen, may be defined precisely by its rejection of this distinction.)
Brasília is the federal capital of Brazil and seat of government of the Federal District, located in the Brazilian highlands in the country's Central-West region. It was founded by President Juscelino Kubitschek on 21 April 1960, to replace Rio de Janeiro as the national capital. Brasília is Brazil's third-most populous city after São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. Among major Latin American cities, it has the highest GDP per capita.
Charles-Édouard Jeanneret, known as Le Corbusier, was a Swiss-French architect, designer, painter, urban planner and writer, who was one of the pioneers of what is now regarded as modern architecture. He was born in Switzerland to French speaking Swiss parents, and acquired French nationality by naturalization on 19 September 1930. His career spanned five decades, in which he designed buildings in Europe, Japan, India, as well as North and South America. He considered that "the roots of modern architecture are to be found in Viollet-le-Duc".
Postmodernism is a term used to refer to a variety of artistic, cultural, and philosophical movements that claim to mark a break from modernism. They have in common the conviction that it is no longer possible to rely upon previous ways of depicting the world. Still, there is disagreement among experts about its more precise meaning even within narrow contexts.
The International Style is a major architectural style and movement that began in western Europe in the 1920s and dominated modern architecture until the 1970s. It is defined by strict adherence to functional and utilitarian designs and construction methods, typically expressed through minimalism. The style is characterized by modular and rectilinear forms, flat surfaces devoid of ornamentation and decoration, open and airy interiors that blend with the exterior, and the use of glass, steel, and concrete.
Modern architecture, also called modernist architecture, was an architectural movement and style that was prominent in the 20th century, between the earlier Art Deco and later postmodern movements. Modern architecture was based upon new and innovative technologies of construction ; the principle functionalism ; an embrace of minimalism; and a rejection of ornament.
Urban planning in the Soviet Bloc countries during the Cold War era was dictated by ideological, political, social as well as economic motives. Unlike the urban development in the Western countries, Soviet-style planning often called for the complete redesigning of cities.
In architecture, functionalism is the principle that buildings should be designed based solely on their purpose and function. An international functionalist architecture movement emerged in the wake of World War I, as part of the wave of Modernism. Its ideas were largely inspired by a desire to build a new and better world for the people, as broadly and strongly expressed by the social and political movements of Europe after the extremely devastating world war. In this respect, functionalist architecture is often linked with the ideas of socialism and modern humanism.
Lúcio Marçal Ferreira Ribeiro Lima Costa was a Brazilian architect and urban planner, best known for his plan for Brasília.
Stalinist architecture, mostly known in the former Eastern Bloc as Stalinist style or socialist classicism, is the architecture of the Soviet Union under the leadership of Joseph Stalin, between 1933 and 1955. Stalinist architecture is associated with the Socialist realism school of art and architecture.
Constructivist architecture was a constructivist style of modern architecture that flourished in the Soviet Union in the 1920s and early 1930s. Abstract and austere, the movement aimed to reflect modern industrial society and urban space, while rejecting decorative stylization in favor of the industrial assemblage of materials. Designs combined advanced technology and engineering with an avowedly communist social purpose. Although it was divided into several competing factions, the movement produced many pioneering projects and finished buildings, before falling out of favor around 1932. It has left marked effects on later developments in architecture.
The Gustavo Capanema Palace, also known architecturally as the Ministry of Education and Health Building, is a government office building in the Centro district of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. As the first modernist project in Brazil, it is historically important to the architectural development of Modernism in Brazil and has been placed on Brazil's UNESCO tentative list.
The OSA Group was an architectural association in the Soviet Union, which was active from 1925 to 1930 and considered the first group of constructivist architects. It published the journal SA. It published material by Soviet and overseas contributors. However this led to them being attacked as a 'Western' group and some individuals as being 'bourgeois'. After the closure of the group, their modernist approach to architecture and town planning was eliminated in the Soviet Union by 1934, in favour of social realism.
The groups of people who have settled or controlled the territory of modern-day North Macedonia have influenced the country in many ways, one of the most visible being architecture. These groups of people include the Paionians, Illyrians, Ancient Macedonians, Romans, Byzantines, Bulgarians, Serbs, Ottomans, Yugoslavs, and ethnic Macedonians.
Architecture is the art and technique of designing and building, as distinguished from the skills associated with construction. It is both the process and the product of sketching, conceiving, planning, designing, and constructing buildings or other structures. The term comes from Latin architectura; from Ancient Greek ἀρχιτέκτων (arkhitéktōn) 'architect'; from ἀρχι- (arkhi-) 'chief' and τέκτων (téktōn) 'creator'. Architectural works, in the material form of buildings, are often perceived as cultural symbols and as works of art. Historical civilisations are often identified with their surviving architectural achievements.
acceptera (1931) is a Swedish modern architecture manifesto written by architects Gunnar Asplund, Wolter Gahn, Sven Markelius, Eskil Sundahl, Uno Åhrén, and art historian Gregor Paulsson. Claiming that Swedish “building-art” (byggnadskonst) has failed to keep pace with the revolutionary social and technological change sweeping Europe in the early 20th century, the authors argue that the production of housing and consumer goods must embrace a functionalist orientation in order to meet the particular cultural and material needs of both modern society and the modern individual. Combining social analysis with an iconoclastic critique of contemporary architecture and handicraft, acceptera ardently calls upon its readers not to shrink back from modernity, but rather to “accept the reality that exists—only in that way have we any prospect of mastering it, taking it in hand, and altering it to create a culture that offers an adaptable tool for life.”
Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed is a book by James C. Scott critical of a system of beliefs he calls high modernism, that centers on governments' overconfidence in the ability to design and operate society in accordance with purported scientific laws.
urbanlab is a Yerevan-based independent urban think-do-share lab, aimed to promote democratization of urban landscape toward sustainable development in its broader understanding.
Modern urbanist ideas were first conceived and applied in Iran beginning in 1952. During the British boycott of Iranian oil of 1952, the Iranian government looked inward for income by investing in infrastructural and agricultural projects. It is during this period that the Bank Sakhtemani was established to create capital and funding for infrastructure projects throughout Iran, including urban development. In 1952, the Iranian parliament approved the purchase of lands outside the Tehran city limits by Sakhtemani Bank for development into towns. Bank Sakhtemani collaborated with The Association of Iranian Architect Diploma (AIAD) to prepare master plans for these projects. The first of these projects were Kuy-e-Narmak, TehranPars, and Nazi-Abad. The AIAD attempted to integrate ideas from modernist conferences such as the Union Internationale Des Architectes (UIA) and Congrès Internationaux D'architecture Modern (CIAM), with vernacular Persian architecture, hence practicing a vernacular modernism. Decades onward, these neighborhoods still maintain their underlying structure which organized them and makes them identifiable even though social and economic factors of the society have changed.
The Modernist City: An Anthropological Critique of Brasilia is a book by anthropologist James Holston published by the University of Chicago Press in 1989.
Tropical Modernism, or Tropical Modern is a style of architecture that merges modernist architecture principles with tropical vernacular traditions, emerging in the mid-20th century. This movement responded to the unique climatic and cultural conditions of tropical regions, primarily in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Pacific Islands. Pioneering architects like Geoffrey Bawa in Sri Lanka, and Charles Correa in India balanced modern architectural techniques with traditional building practices of their respective regions. Tropical Modernism's legacy continues to influence contemporary architectural practices, especially in the quest for sustainable design solutions in tropical climates.
References
↑ James C. Scott, Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1999), p. 4.
↑ Volker H. Schmidt, "Multiple Modernities or Varieties of Modernity?" Current Sociology 54, no. 77 (2006): p. 80; Taylor, p. 39.
↑ Tobias Rupprecht, "Socialist High Modernity and Global Stagnation: A Shared History of Brazil and the Soviet Union During the Cold War," Journal of Global History 6, no. 3 (2011): p. 522; Scott, pp. 88-89.
↑ Department of Statistics, Ministry of Trade & Industry, Republic of Singapore (September 2021). "Population Trends, 2021, ISSN 2591-8028"(PDF). Singapore Department of Statistics. Archived(PDF) from the original on 19 Jan 2022. Retrieved 2022-02-04.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
↑ Lwazi Siyabonga Lushaba, Development as Modernity, Modernity As Development (Dakar, Senegal: Counsel for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa, 2009), pp. 2-4; Kimber Charles Pearce, ‘’Rostow, Kennedy, and the Rhetoric of Foreign Aid’’ (East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, 2001), p. 29.
↑ Walt Whitman Rostow, “The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto (1960),” in ‘’From Modernization to Globalization: Perspectives on Development and Social Change’’, ed. J. Timmons Roberts and Amy Hite (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, Ltd., 2000), pp. 100-101.
↑ Schneider notes in his evaluation of James Scott’s analysis of villagization in Tanzania that development failures in this period were not always attributable to ‘’high’’ modernism. In the case of Tanzanian villagization, modernization projects were driven by policy makers acting on their own hubris as creators of a modern state, rather than as proponents of scientific rationality. Schneider, pp. 32-33
↑ Anthropologist Tanya Li notes that in addition to the well-known “high modern, state-driven projects of rural and urban planning,” regimes also conducted modernization initiatives through less conspicuous methods of education and technologies of management (including maps, censuses and surnames). James Holston, “The Spirit of Brasília: Modernity as Experiment and Risk,” in ‘’City/Art: The Urban Scene in Latin America,’’ ed. Rebecca E. Biron (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2009), p. 92; Tanya Li, “Beyond the ‘State’ and Failed Schemes,” ‘’American Anthropologist’’ New Series 107, no. 3 (2005): p. 386; Rupprecht, pp. 507-508
↑ Matthew Farish and P. Whitney Lackenbauer, "High Modernism in the Arctic: Planning Frobisher Bay and Inuvik," Journal of Historical Geography 35 (2009): p. 520.
↑ Peter C. Dawson, "Seeing Like an Inuit Family: The Relationship Between House Form and Culture in Northern Canada," Études/Inuit/Studies 30, no. 2 (2006): 120; Farish and Lackenbauer, pp. 518, 535, 538.
↑ Farish and Lackenbauer note that while Canada did not possess an authoritarian government to enforce high modernist planning, the limited political agency of native northerners in the early years of the Cold War allowed the Canadian government and military to administer their plans in a similar manner to authoritarian regimes. Farish and Lackenbauer, pp. 517, 521.
↑ Dawson, p. 117; Farish and Lackenbauer, pp. 537–539.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
