Jonatham Lethem, autore della "Fortezza della Solitudine", opera letteraria in cui la fiction abbraccia le vicende storiche legate al drammatico sconvolgimento sociale e demografico del quartiere di Brooklyn, a New York, (vedi alla voce: Gentrification), ha scritto di recente una lettera pubblica sul giornale online Slate a Frank "Bilbao" Gehry, accusando l’architetto di aver realizzato - per quanto ancora sulla carta - un piano fuori-scala, fuori-sede, fuori-di-testa di ben 16 (!) torri, in grado di stravolgere la qualità della vita nel quartiere newyorkese, - vale a dire quella che ancora fragilmente permane -.

Lungi dal voler perpetuare una trita polemica, riciclante tratti stereotipati e retorici già in precedenza giunti alle orecchie del profeta dell’architettura contemporanea, la lettera si indirizza presto verso una dura argomentazione in sette punti ben circostanziati, corrispondenti ad altrettante domande non ancora soddisfatte dalle risposte del destinatario.

Per la lettura completa dell’affascinante J’accuse, premessa di una prolungata azione sul campo, rimando a Slate. Qui mi limiterò a evidenziarne i tratti salienti, dando un assaggio di come si scrive un moderno pamphlet:

PREMESSA: "Your presence is intended to appease cultural tastemakers who might otherwise, correctly, recognize this atrocious plan for what it is, just as the notion of a basketball arena itself is a Trojan horse for the real plan: building a skyline suitable to some Sunbelt boomtown. I’ve been struggling to understand how someone of your sensibilities can have drifted into such an unfortunate alliance, with such potentially disastrous results. And so, I’d like to address you as one artist to another. Really, as one citizen to another. Here are some things I’d hope you’ll consider before this project advances any further."

1. FUORI SCALA:  "Guess what? It’s a huge mistake—emphasis on the huge."

2. DISONESTA’  DEI PROMOTORI RISPETTO AI CITTADINI: "Let me begin with the now-legendary brochure that Brooklynites found in their mailboxes two months ago; evidence of bad faith couldn’t be more vivid."

3. REPUTAZIONE PESSIMA DELL’ARCHITETTO-PARTNER: (già realizzatore a Brooklyn): "After all, it’s these dim, soul-crushing buildings that created such distrust in Brooklynites in the first place."

4. UNA POLITICA SENZA VINCITORI NE’ VINTI: "We’re simply dead-set against the present calamity-in-progress to which you’ve mortgaged your credibility."

5. 100% PRIVATO, 0% PUBBLICO: "In fact, in the present scheme, publicly owned resources—i.e., the demapped streets and an active rail yard—are here being converted into private property: commonwealth in reverse."

6. DISPREZZO PER IL CONTESTO: "Your proposal would both dwarf and block sight of the (Saving Banks) tower, the rough equivalent of erecting a new World Trade Center within a block or two of the Chrysler Building."

7. EGO TRIP: "When unveiling the latest, you explained the appearance of the spearhead tower, which you’ve named "Miss Brooklyn" (spurring the inevitable quip, We’ll miss it, all right). (…) Anyway, is Miss Brooklyn really good enough—as opposed to merely big enough—to be your ego trip? To my unschooled eye, these buildings have emerged pre-botched by compromise, swollen with expediency and profit-seeking."
CONCLUSIONE: "At a public seminar sponsored by the New York Times this January, you found yourself faced by surprise questions from an audience including Brooklynites who, denied any proper public venue by the Ratner process, wanted to know how you felt about resistance to the project. The tone of your remark that day suggests you were weighing the question honestly: "If I think it got out of whack with my own principles, I’d walk away." I can only hope that what was once perhaps just a seed has grown. For I’m positive that is exactly what you should do, Mr. Gehry. Walk away."

Via: Urban Cartography