New agency : re-imagining the divisive formality of Jerusalem's urban boundaries

Architecture is still, rather stubbornly, a discipline preoccupied with a mythological

formulation of what architects have to offer the world - a world increasingly rife with

fear, conflict, and violence. Whether they are grand visions for new urban districts,

skyscrapers pushing the boundaries of visual stability, or sustainable designs for lowcost

housing, architects are struggling to transcend their considerably introverted,

artificially-autonomous realm of practice, research, and critical discourse.

The role of the architect as active agent of social change has long since been

established and continues to evolve; new forms of architectural agency continue to

emerge. Humanitarian crises, urban conflict zones, and environmental issues are

readily addressed with written commentary, edited compendiums, and dedicated think

tanks. I wonder: is this all architecture has to offer an increasingly complex, rapidly

evolving world fraught with friction and strife? Might our seemingly disparate and

uncoordinated attempts at critique and insight be reworked, given more tooth if you

will, in such a way as to provocatively confront?

I wish to propose an extension of agency in architecture with a markedly overt,

almost aggressive re-orientation in which the current boundaries of the discipline

are effectively blurred and, more importantly, surpassed in order to actively address

the real contingencies of an urban border condition. How can architecture, with its

isolated paradigm and highly specialized speculative tools, be re-purposed to offer a

new perspective on an extremely complex and politically charged situation? Might a

new degree of architectural agency be possible?