Friday, December 08, 2006

Which way, Venice?

Fancy a romantic weekend break? Then choose for Venice! Romantic gondola trips down the Grande Canal, lovely little coffee shops for a quick espresso and the most amazing historical buildings. Venice really has it all!

Or how about the architectural experience: To appreciate the grandeur of the beautiful churches littered throughout the city (at least one on each original island), and the Square of Saint Marc, the Doge’s Palace, the campaniles reaching to the sky, demarcating the open spaces of the city. What magnificence, what splendour!

There are many reasons why visitors come to Venice.

I came for the architecture, the city structure and naturally, a dose of Italy. Wandering about Venice gives a feeling of having entered another time. The romantic canals, denoting the underlying historical islands that constitute the city, lined with age-old buildings showing the wear and tear of centuries. The (conscious?) lack of upkeep lays visible the historical depth of the built form of the city, and the feeling of experiencing another time stays with me yet. However, after a while in this wonderfully different cityscape of bridges, canals, courtyards and small churches, I realize that others like me are everywhere… more tourists, all over, shooting away with their cameras (just like me!) in order to preserve the experiences they are taking away from their stay in the city of Venice. They are not following me, and yet they are everywhere.

Although I am sure that the Venetians are thankful for the constant influx of foreign currency into their economy, as well as the job opportunities this creates, it does create a situation of discord. People actually live in this city too. So, what does it mean for the city?

Venice is a city frozen in its tracks, presenting to tourists the historical values and beauties and at the same time supporting the lives of modern people in modern times. Perhaps it is a bit schizophrenic! The financially important tourist economy demands a preservation of the historical values (the main attractor) which means that the city cannot physically develop itself into a modern city. Its value lies in retaining the environment the way it is now, so that everyone can taste a slice of the old city. Really, it is a Disneyland of Venice - an institutionalised history, which, for the right price, is always accessible and consumable.

It is, however, also a (somewhat functioning) inhabited city. People live and work here.

Mainland visitors leave their vehicles at the large parking island by the road connection over the lagoon, passing to softer modes of transport: walking or boating. The fact that the islands of the city are car-free ensures that the pedestrians are having a field day (especially those that are not handicapped or have difficulties walking…).

Venice has several faces. The grand façade, illustrated by the storytelling of the Doge’s Palace, and other representative buildings constructed to induce awe in visitors. The age-old homes and workshops with cracked facades in variety of earthy tints. The Biennales of all varieties of arts.

Although I find great inspiration in the visibility of the layers of times in the city structure and the buildings, bridges etc., I have a disconcerting feeling. Is it right to “freeze” a city at a certain point in time, in order to make history readily available? At earlier times people made do with books and images. Is the spatial experience necessary? Does it convey more than simply the physical environs? The culture of the habitation is lost in the whirlwind of global tourists passing through canals and over bridges, and the few remaining Venetians have become not only custodians of the heritage of the city, but also themselves installations in the museum that is Venice.

Are we not robbing the world of the chance to see another Venice - a modern Venice, which might hold as much, or maybe even more value and quality as the historic city does?

This infatuation and obsession with historical monuments that are canonised onto the “things you must see before you die”-list, is rather an expression of a society that is in a standstill; hesitating to look ahead. I guess finding that balance between appreciating historical examples and developing and pushing forth new ideas is not to be kidded with…

I am split. Maybe it's because of my being a Libra.

No comments: