このブログを検索

2021年12月7日火曜日

Shuji Funo:Tokyo:Paradise of Speculators and Builders

 Shuji FunoTokyoParadise of Speculators and Buildersin Peter J.M. Nas(ed.)“Directors of Urban Change in Asia ”Routledge Advances in AsiaPacific StudiesRoutledge2005


13

Tokyo

A speculator and builders’ paradise

Shuji Funo

 

Introduction

From its origin as a small castle town[1] until the end of the Edo Era (1603-1868), urbanization in Tokyo (formerly know as Edo) seems to have followed an orthogenetic process. The Tokugawa Shogunate closed Japan to foreign countries with the exception of the port of Deshima at Nagasaki (opened to only the Dutch) from 1641 to 1853.[2] Japan continued to stay at the periphery of European World Economy, though the silver from Iwami Ginzan (silver mine) exported through Deshima did make a small contribution. Japan accepted no immigrants from outside during this so-called sakoku (seclusion) era.  It is, therefore, a unique example of urbanization within the formation of the Modern World System.

In the mid-seventeenth century, Tokyo’s population reached one million - matching London and Paris - although its huge urban village form did not resemble its European counterparts. Japanese society gradually opened to the world since 1853. Imperial rule was restored in 1868, and Edo was renamed Tokyo, meaning Eastern Kyoto (Capital), as the new capital of Japan in 1869. Tokyo today is a mega city.[3] The city has transformed from a huge village to a global capital centre over the past 150 years.

Edo[4] was established as the Shogun’s capital, even though Kyoto (where the Emperor resided) remained the formal capital of Japan. The Tokugawa Bakufu Shogunate controlled all of Japan, including Kyoto. It is obvious that the directors of Edo were the Shoguns, who introduced control systems for both land and people in the early Edo period. Political authority in Japan was divided amongst a centralized and bureaucratised military regime and some 250 bureaucratised feudal domains called Han. Daimyōs, the governors of the Han, were obliged to visit Edo with levies for the Shogun once a year (sankin kōtai system). They were classified according to their degree of loyalty, and were given land and goods based on the Shogun’s evaluation of their accomplishments.

All building lots[5] were arranged hierarchically around the Edo castle in the centre. Edo’s spiral pattern of moats and roads, as if the centric power of Shogun absorbed the power of people, is very unique. Daimyōs more faithful to the Shogun received larger residential sites nearer to Edo castle. Edo was a highly controlled city where residential quarters among classes (Hudai Daimyōs (insiders), Tozama Daimyōs (outsiders), hatamoto/gokenin (antrustion/inmate), chōnin (townspeople)) were strictly segregated according to hierarchy of Edo society (Si Nou Kou Shō (samurai (knight)-farmers-craftsman-merchant) system).


Figure 1. Diagram of Edo spatial structure (After M. Naito 1967).

 

Following the Meiji Restoration, the Emperor moved from Kyoto to Tokyo, which at last became the capital of Japan both nominally and actually. The Emperors, however, did not become the directors of Tokyo. The New Meiji Government took the initiative in restructuring Edo as a modern capital comparable to European capitals such as London and Paris. The central government invited and hired foreign engineers to create the new face of the city before reaching the same level of industrialization in western countries. The modernization of Tokyo in a Western image was the prime objective.

The directors of Tokyo were the Meiji Governors, who were advised by western architects and urban planners and promoted modern city planning. From the Meiji Restoration onward, Japan continued to import concepts and systems of urban planning from the west, including Baron G.E. Haussemann’s grand projects of Paris in late nineteenth century; the Nazi national land planning during the Second World War; the Greater London Plan after the Second World War; and the German B (Bebauungs)-Plan of the early 1980s.

Also important for Tokyo were the disasters – wars and earthquakes – that changed the city dramatically. The ‘scrap and build’ process was a real driving force of Tokyo’s transformation. The directors of urban change, especially after the 1960s, were speculators and builders. Twice destroyed in the twentieth century (by earthquake in 1923 and aerial bombardment in 1945), Tokyo emerged as a speculator and builders’ paradise, a true global city, in the 1980s. Today, Tokyo is comprised of over 12 million inhabitants and one-fourth of the Japanese population lives in the greater metropolitan area.[6] The mega-city seems to be awaiting another catastrophe unless measures to change its over-centralization are taken.

Notwithstanding all the changes, there is one invariant area, which Roland Barthes (1915-80)[7] called ‘void’ or ‘vacant’, in the centre of Tokyo. That is the Emperor’s palace complex, where Edo castle was once located. It is remarkable that this mega-city has been able to preserve a large natural precinct in its centre for over 400 years.

 

Dreams of occidentalists: Towards a Western-style capital

Due to the drastic change of social system by Meiji Restoration, Tokyo’s population dropped from one million to about 600,000. One of the most urgent tasks of Meiji New Government was to remodel Edo into a modern capital. In 1869, Japan’s first railway was opened and the first steam locomotive started running in 1872 between from Shimbashi to Yokohama. In 1885, a cabinet system of government was adopted and Japan established a modern nation-state political system, drafting the Constitution of the Japanese Empire in 1889.

Two projects are symbolic of modern urban planning[8] in Tokyo. One is the Ginza renga gai (Ginza Brick Quarter) project (187277), and the other is the Hibiya Kanchō Shūtyū Keikaku (Governmental Offices Concentration project) (188687) at Kasumigaseki.

The Ginza district, where many merchants and craftsmen had gathered in the Edo period, was becoming a new centre of Western civilization because of its location near Tsukiji (a protected settlement for foreigners) to the east and Shinbashi (connected to Yokohama’s international port) to the south. The Ginza renga gai project was launched to refashion the entire Ginza district in red brick after the great fire of 1872. Brick was adopted not only for fire protection, but also to create a showpiece with a European flavour.

 The directors of this project were Shigenobu Ohkuma[9] (18381922), the Minister of Finance, and Kaoru Inoue[10] (18351915), the Deputy Minister. Together with many other bureaucrats, they lived in the Ginza area and were key proponents of Western civilization. English architect Thomas James Waters[11] with his brother Albert Waters were invited to prepare plans for the area. Construction took nearly a decade and the project was completed in 1877. 2,855 buildings were made, one third of which were two-storey brick buildings with colonnade and balconies. The streets were lined with maples, willows and gaslights, creating the first commercial street with a European atmosphere in Japan. Georgian-style streetscape were transferred to the Far East and suddenly emerged in the central part of Tokyo in this manner. The project, however, was not welcomed by residents. Newspapers at that time criticised the project as unsuitable for Japanese climate and claimed that this planning would encourage beriberi outbreaks. Almost all trees withered and died. The brick structures were soon abandoned because of frequent earthquakes in Japan.

Figure . Ginza Brick Quarter Project 1872.

 

Most of the daimyō land plots in the vicinity of the new Imperial Palace (Edo castle) were claimed by various agencies of new government as sites for offices. The project to build Central Business District for government offices was launched after the Cabinet System was adopted in 1885.

The Director who proposed the project was again Kaoru Inoue, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and an enthusiastic occidentalist. First, he designated an English architect Josiah Condor,[12] the father of modern Japanese architecture and designer of the Rokumeikan (an elaborate hotel and a symbol of Western Civilization in 1883) to make plans for new office blocks, which were never implemented. Later, Herman Ende (a professor of the Bau-akademie and a technical adivisor of O.E.L.F. von Bismarck, the first Prime Minister of Deutsches Reich and Willhelm Böckman[13] from Germany) were invited to plan and design this Central District of Tokyo. They prepared a master plan which included a central Assembly Hall far bigger than that of the German Empire (built four years before), based on baroque urban planning concepts.

The project was not implemented because of financial concerns raised by James Hobrecht, a civil engineer responsible for the Berlin Plan in 1862. Hobrecht had carried out many projects in Moscow, Cairo, and Alexandria in addition to Berlin, and was the most famous of foreign engineers invited to Japan during Meiji Era. Ende edited the project and only two buildings were constructed on the site (half of which is now Hibiya Park), the first example of a western public park in Tokyo.

Amidst the planning of the flamboyant projects like Ginza Brick Quarter, the Hibiya Governmental Offices Concentration Projects and Mitsubishi Londontown projects,[14] various strategies called Shikukaisei (urban block improvement) to reform Tokyo were discussed. In 1880, the governor of Tokyo Michiyuki Matsuda(183982) published the first Shikukaisei program. Akimasa Yoshikawa (18411920), the next governor, followed up the program supported by the Ministry of Interior. The major concern of Yoshikawa’s program was to revitalize and develop transportation networks that could be the base of modern industries via an international port (although Matsuda’s plan laid more stress on commercial development). The Capital of the Great Japanese Empire or a Metropolis for modern capitalism, that was the issue.

The directors of this effort were Ministry of Interior headed by Aritomo Yamagata[15] (18381922) and newly rising entrepreneurs like Eiichi Shibusawa (18401931) who founded the first national bank in 1877. The first legislation in Japan to facilitate city planning, Tokyo Shikukaisei Jorei, was enforced in 1888. It was a 16-point initiative that created a city planning board and set in motion various improvements to infrastructure, especially in the downtown area. The greatest attention was given to road construction. The model was the Great Reform of Paris by Baron Georges-Eugene Haussemann (180991). However, because of cholera outbreaks, special attention was given to the water supply and sewage removal, and consequently, road network reform was interrupted.[16]

The fruits that Tokyo Shikukaisei accomplished until 1916 were enlargement of streets for trams, establishment of water supply and sewage treatment and installation of Hibiya Park. Most of sites of the Daimyō’s residences and temples were converted for newly needed facilities.

 

Dreams of nationalists or colonists: Towards an ideal city

The Industrial Revolution in Japan started in the 1880s and Tokyo absorbed a huge migratory population from rural areas. The population reached nearly two million at the beginning of twentieth century. Three famous slum areas called hinminkutu (caves of the poor people) appeared within Tokyo from the 1890s onward. During the Taisho Era (191226), the number of wage earners increased in the Japanese cities, and an increasing proportion of citizens came to lead consumer lifestyles. The Japanese economy was already involved in the world economy in 1920s. The population of Tokyo had reached 3.7 million in 1920.

Tokyo had become so large that Tokyo shi (municipal government) could not manage the urban and housing problems. Therefore, legislation was established to control and regulate the urban expansion. The Toshi Keikaku Hou (Town Planning Act) was adopted in 1919 along with Shigaichi Kenchikubutu Hou, the first Municipal Area Building Law in Japan. The word toshi keikaku, or urban planning, was used for the first time in late 1920s. The emphasis continued to be on infrastructure development in order to establish modern industry. These acts and building codes adopted a Zoning System to delineate Fire-protection Zones and to identify districts within the city for special uses. It also provided for land readjustment such as the straightening of roads and property lines in suburban areas expected to transform from farms to houses. The concepts and methods of land readjustment were taken from Adiches[17] Law of Germany.

Japanese architects opened their eyes to urban issues in the latter part of Meiji Era, but could not yet afford to carry out urban projects.  A typical example is Shigeyoshi Fukuda (18871971), a city architect and engineer who launched the ‘New Tokyo’ Plan in 1918. He estimated that the population of Tokyo would be 6.76 million after 50 years (1961) and that its area would grow 3.6 times, assuming a density of 250 persons/hectare. His ‘New Tokyo’ Plan was based on this individual idea and remained unrealised.

    The idea of ‘Garden City’ was introduced to Japan in 1907 via a book titled ‘Denen Toshi’.[18] This was published by Ministry of Interior technocrats who wanted to enliven rural regions. However, the theory and true aim of the ‘Garden City’ was not understood in Japan. The naming of ‘Denen Toshi’ caught the interest of entrepreneurs as they developed suburbs into residential quarters.  The ‘Denen Toshi’ company was established by Eiichi Shibusawa in 1918 and developed 3 settlements, one of which is called Denen Chofu (today one of the richest areas in Tokyo).

In September 1923, the Great Kantō Earthquake[19] struck Tokyo and resulting fires burned down the city centre. It reduced 60 percent of Tokyo to ashes, reverting it physically to the beginning of Meiji restoration. This might be said to be the first true opportunity to change Tokyo, since the resulting reconstruction projects were actually based on the first comprehensive reform proposals.

 Shimpei Gotō[20] (18571929), mayor of Tokyo (192023), was appointed to lead the reconstruction and drew up plans. He was a national figure with experience as an administrator in Taiwan (Formosa), Manchuria (North Eastern China), and had played a leading role to draft Toshi Keikaku Hou (Town Planning Act 1919). Gotō established the Tokyo Institute for Municipal Research soon after he had become mayor in 1920, inviting Charles Austin Beard[21] (18741948) as a principal advisor and proposing a master plan for the city even prior to the emergency. His plan included new street lines and wider streets, reorganization of the rail network, improvements to water and sewer systems, and creation of open spaces.

Gotō is often considered as the father of modern urban planning in Japan. Only few elements of the master plan, however, were actually accomplished, because of its cost and the opposition of powerful landowners. Land acquisition was a major issue of urban planning from the beginning.

The Dōjunkai (Foundation for Restoration after the Great Kantō earthquake), was established with donations from foreign countries, and became the first body supplying public housing in Japan. It began to build collective houses as well as detached and semi-detached houses. It also initiated slums upgrading projects and carried out land readjustments.

The Showa Era (192689) has difficult beginnings because of the Great Earthquake and the World Economic Crisis (1929). In addition Japan was heading for war (193145). Wartime planning, however, created new changes in Tokyo as new transportation systems were introduced. In 1927 Japan’s first subway line opened, in 1931 Tokyo Airport was completed in Haneda, and in 1941 the Port of Tokyo was opened. In 1932, the outline of Tokyo was expanded by combining adjacent 82 towns and villages into what was called Dai Tokyo[22] (Greater Tokyo). By 1935, the number of people living in Tokyo had reached 6.36 million, comparable to the populations of New York and London. In 1943, the dual administrative system of Tokyo-fu and Tokyo-shi was abolished, and were consolidated to form Tokyo Metropolis. The Metropolitan administrative system was thus established, and a governor was appointed.

In 1941, the Pacific War broke out. Ironically, the only realized examples of Japanese modern urban planning took place in its colonies in Taiwan, Manchuria and the Korean Peninsula. The Datong City Plan and Dalian Plan in China were famous Japanese colonial projects. Japanese architects considered the colony as an experimental field to realize ideals of modern architecture and city planning. Colonial urban planning reminds us that top to bottom urban planning requires political power and will to realize it. The power of the state as a whole was director to implement colonial urban planning. Japanese architects and planners were indebted to Nazi planning concepts during this period.

Figure . Datong City Plan, China, 1939.

 

A central government committee proposed the ‘Tokyo Green Belt Plan’ in 1939. The plan included a green belt encircling Tokyo for protection of scenic spots and also for air defence, but never materialized due to the lack of time and financial resources. Here the director was war itself.

In the final phase of the Second World War, Tokyo was bombed 102 times, including the heaviest air raid on 10 March 1945, in which many citizens lost property or were killed.

Dreams of futurists: Towards an international metropolis

The war came to an end on 15 August 1945, when Japan’ acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration. Much of Tokyo had been in ruins by the bombings and by October 1945, the population had fallen to 3.49 million, half its level in 1940. Tokyo again reverted to tabula rasa.

 


Figure. Tokyo Ruins by Bombing 1945.

 

 The shortage[23] of dwelling units, lost and needed for families coming back from colonies outside was estimated at 4.2 million at the conclusion of the war. Building shelters and managing daily life was very hard.  It took few years to commence the reconstruction plan. Eiyo Ishikawa[24](18931955), the Tokyo government’s chief planner, had already prepared a ‘War Damage Rehabilitation Plan’ during the war, adopting a symmetrical radial and ring-road network with spaced green belts, and identifying of land uses through zoning. It was too idealistic to be implemented. This concept of symmetrical radial and ring-road network with spaced green belts, however, had continued to the influential model until Kenzo Tange (1913) proposed the linear model in 1960. Dai Tokyo Tiku Keikaku (Greater Tokyo Regional Planning Model) of 1940 was also based on this concept such as those of S. Fukuda’s plan and S. Gotō’s plan.

From the end of the War onward, the director was GHQ of the American Occupation Forces until Japan’s return to international community via the San Francisco peace treaty in 1951. One year after the war, the Special City Planning Law was enacted and large-scale reconstruction plans were made by architects and planners for several cities. In May 1947, the Constitution of Japan, based on the doctrine of democratic sovereignty and the Local Government Act was promulgated. The first Governor of Tokyo was elected under the new system. In 1949, Tokyo Metropolis started the 23-ku system. The Capital Construction Law was passed in 1950. This law established the Capital Construction Committee; a national organization devoted to the goal of Tokyo’s reconstruction, and created the Emergency Five-Year Capital Construction Plan. However, due to severe economic conditions, it was impossible to effectively realize these plans and problems were left for the next generation to solve. Land readjustment projects were planned in many districts of Tokyo but decision-making was overly time consuming. Competitions for reconstruction programs were held, but the ruined economy did not permit their implementation.

The real reconstruction started with the outbreak of Korean War (195053), and special procurement demand arising from the War. The Japanese economy steadily recovered during the 1950s and post-war economic reconstruction was completed roughly ten years later. A Capital Region Development Plan was seriously considered in order to control the excessive population concentration. To this end, a Capital Region Development Law[25] was enacted in 1956 to replace the Capital Construction Law of 1950. This co-centric radial plan was modelled after the Greater London Plan(1944) by Sir Patrick Abercrombie(18791957), and was based on the idea of strong controls. Laws were promoting the construction of industrial satellite cities and restricting factory locations in existing urbanized. Earlier in 1955, the Japan Housing Corporation[26] had been established as a semi-public organization to carry out large-scale housing construction and housing site development in metropolitan areas. Their activities ushered a new era in town construction in Japan. New towns intended for middle-income level families were built one after another in the suburbs.[27] It should be noted that new towns created in Japan were very different from the self-contained new towns of England, which both provided work, places and housing. This was the inevitable result of the conditions prevailing in Japan at the time.

In the 1960s Japan entered a period of high-level economic growth. In 1962, the population of Tokyo broke the 10 million mark. In 1964, the Olympic games were held in Tokyo and the super express bullet train (shinkansen) opened, forming the basis for Tokyo’s current prosperity. The 1964 Tokyo Olympics transformed Tokyo’s landscape radically by virtue of the Metropolitan highway (Shuto Kōsoku) and other facilities like the Yoyogi National Gymnasium designed by a world famous architect, K. Tange. Tokyo began to change from horizontal city to vertical city since mid-1960s.

Figure 5. Tokyo Plan 1960, Kenzo Tange.

 

From late 1950s to early 1960s, Japanese architects raised hands to be the ‘directors’ as if they could lead the directions of Japanese cities. K. Tange proposed the ‘Tokyo Plan 1960’ following Kiyonori Kikutake’s (1928) ‘City on the Sea’ (1958) and ‘Tower City’ (1959). The ‘Tokyo Plan 1960,’ which insisted on a linear structure rather than a radial system, intended to change structure of Tokyo radically, but was only pie in the sky. Many architects, including Noriaki Kurokawa (1934-) (‘Rurban City’, ‘Spiral City’) and Fumihiko Maki (1928) (‘Group Form’), who had belonged to the Metabolism Group launched ideal projects for the future city. Arata Isozaki (1931) proposed a project called ‘The City in the Air’.

Prominent urban projects by star architects were proposed for a period of two or three years in the beginning of the 1960s. Realization was of no concern and the proposals lacked procedural and financial considerations. However, one image of the future city was temporarily realized at the sites of ‘Expo ’70’. Another rare case, K. Kikutake’s ‘City on the Sea’ (1958), was realized as ‘Aqua polis’ in 1975.



Figure  Aqua Polis, Okinawa, Kiyonori Kikutake 1975.

 

On the other hand, rapid expansion of urbanized areas, shortage of housing, increased land-use prices and confusion in land ownership became apparent in metropolitan areas. Solving these problems became an extremely urgent policy issue. Planning in Tokyo began to move in new direction from mid-1960s, because little was done to create better living environments at that time, and citizens still suffered from severe water shortages and air pollution. Minobe Ryokichi[28] (190484), a professor who criticized urban policy from a socialist-communist perspective, was elected as governor in 1967. He made an appeal to recover clean rivers and blue skies and promised to work toward a more healthful Tokyo. The ‘Town Planning Law’ was revised in 1968 long after the first version of 1919.

 

The Post-Modern City Tokyo at its Zenith

By the beginning of the 1970s, the excesses of high-level economic growth became apparent through environmental problems such as air, river, and noise pollution. At the same time, the Energy Crisis of 1973 brought the period of high-level economic growth to a halt. Saving energy and resources became a real issue to avoid catastrophe. Development shifted from outward urban expansion towards the fuller development of already urbanized areas. Urban planning and housing paradigms shifted from large-scale development to small-scale projects, from new construction to urban renewal, from high-rise flats to low-middle rise town houses, and from quantity of dwelling units to quality of life. This situation Tokyo stood resembles that of the end of the 20th century.

Japan’s stable growth period, however, was followed by a ‘bubble economy’. In 1980s, Tokyo enjoyed rapid economic growth again via its increasing internationalisation and the emergence of information society. Tokyo became one of the world’s most vital and attractive major cities, boasting advanced technology, information, culture and fashion, as well as a high level of public safety.

Suzuki Shunichi occupied the seat of governor after Minobe in 1979, serving four terms until 1995. He called his vision for the city ‘My Town Tokyo’. His administration put together a series of three comprehensive plans in 1982, 1986 and 1990. The biggest difference from the previous administration was their emphasis on the Central Business District and other major commercial districts, where construction of large, showy projects was intended to advance Tokyo as an international business centre and metropolis. New Tokyo City Hall[29] located in Shinjuku designed by K. Tange (an intimate friend of the governor S. Suzuki from 1960s) is the symbol of Tokyo’s zenith.

The urban issues Tokyo faced in the mid-1980s were quite different from those it had faced in the past. The city had reached its limits for horizontal expansion. The ‘Tokyo Problem’ and ‘Tokyo Reform’ became pressing issues for debate. Scholars and critics discussed the negative effects of Tokyo’s political, economic and cultural dominance, as well as possibilities for relocating the Japanese capital.

Tokyo’s status as one of the world’s financial centres attracted an unprecedented influx of foreign businessmen and workers in the 1980s. The resulting demand for centrally located office space and 24-hour facilities sparked a speculative building rush that dramatically transformed the cityscape. Western architects with post-modern designs were invited to give Tokyo a fashionable facelift, befitting its status as a global city.



Figure . Post Modern Building Shinjuku 2ban Kan, designed by Minoru Takeyama 1978.

 

Further urban development necessitated the search for new frontiers. The first frontier identified was the unused public land in the city centre. Investors snapped up downtown properties, while large real estate companies launched re-development projects. Many of these destroyed the fabric of existing downtown communities. The second frontier was the sky. Tokyo still had more space in the air than New York. The project called ‘Manhattan Project’, revived after a long hiatus, started to renew Marunouchi area (the former Mitsubishi London town), the Central Business District around Tokyo Station. The third frontier was the under the ground, the so-called geo front. A project to create an underground city with 500,000 inhabitants was seriously proposed. The fourth and final frontier was the Tokyo waterfront, hitherto the home to dockyards and factories. Factories of heavy industries moved out according to the change of industrial structure. The tertiary industries evidently became the key industries of Tokyo in the 1980s.

New technologies, production systems, and building materials shaped Tokyo’s urban transformation. Since 1960s sealed aluminium sash systems have been de rigueur, meaning that all dwelling units are now air-conditioned. So-called intelligent office buildings came into fashion in the 1980s. Domed, climate-controlled stadiums allow baseball games to be played in the midst of storms. The daily lives of Tokyo’s citizens have become completely divorced from nature. Most space in Tokyo is artificially controlled by computer. Electronic conglomerates enjoying symbiotic relations with the government are prominent players in this development process, as are the large construction companies, which still wield considerable political power. Tokyo is a temporary metropolis that is constantly changing within this reiterative ‘scrap and build’ process, the city is losing its historical memory.



Figure . Great Hanshin Earthquake.

  

Never ending Tokyo projects: Scrap and build process

At the beginning of the 1990s the bubble economy collapsed and Suzuki-era ended in 1995. The waterfront became a principal issue in the gubernatorial election of 1995. How to redevelop the waterfront had become the major topic of early 1990s. Under the title ‘Urban Frontier’, the ‘World City Exposition Tokyo ‘96’ directed expansion towards Tokyo Bay. To hold exposition and equip infrastructures for the development after is a well-worn device in Japan.

A promise to electors to halt waterfront development led to the election of Yukio Aoshima, better known as a TV comedian, as Governor. His abandonment of the ‘World City Exposition Tokyo ’96 - Urban Frontier’ symbolized the end of the ‘bubble economy’ and its infinite expansion. It is also very symbolic that the Great Hanshin Earthquake[30] in the same year revealed the weakness of Japan’s tradition of urban planning.

Standing at the dawn of a new historical starting phase at the beginning of the 21st century, Tokyo still suffers from financial difficulties created by the ‘bubble economy’. The paradigm of urban planning is shifting again. Instead of large-scale projects here is greater interest in creating communities and enriching the people’s immediate environment, and a greater interest in creating an urban culture. ‘Sustainable City’ or ‘Compact City’ is becoming a new slogan, replacing the ‘Expanding City’ or ‘Mega-City’.

Looking back at this overview of the history of urban planning in Tokyo, several general trends are evident.

Lack of originality: Concepts and systems of urban planning have always been imported from western countries, such as Baron Haussemann’s grand project of Paris, Nazi ideas on national land planning, the Greater London plan, and the German B-plan. It is not a bad idea to learn from other systems, but they do not necessarily work well in different context. Ideas and methods need to be rooted in the realities of Japan.

Absence of subjectivity and the passiveness of people: In Japan, it is not clear who is planning and designing the city. The local government is controlled by the central government and cannot decide on any matter related to urban planning. In addition, there is no system for participation and advocacy.

Weakness of urban planning finance: There are no special funds allocated for urban planning. They depend on the annual budgets. Policies may easily be changed by the mayor, who may be replaced in the next election. Unstable planning boards are also problematic. Officials in local government change from one board to another frequently. Professionals in urban planning are needed on urban planning boards.

Immaturity of public consciousness to limit the power of private urban planning: Japan is said to be the freest country in the world for the design of buildings. This is because of the loose relation between the Building Code and the Urban Planning Law (block regulations). The cityscape is chaotic, as a result of architects responsible for this situation enjoy the freedom.

The ‘scrap and build’ urban process: For half a century after the war the ‘scrap and build’ process has been repeated. Urban planning has neglected the urban historical heritage. The resulting poor quality urban stock remains a big problem.

 

The politically powerful construction industry was one of the drivers of rapid post-war economic growth. Relying heavily on the ‘scrap and build’ method, concrete and steel transformed the Japanese landscape. In the late 1960s, construction accounted for over 20 percent of GDP. High growth gave way to a period of stable but lower growth in the wake of the 1973 Energy Crisis; heavy industries lost ground to light science and technology industries. The focus of urban development shifted again from outward expansion to the full development of already urbanized areas. Money generated by the speculative bubble of the 1980s transformed Tokyo into a global city, wired to the dynamic movements of the world capitalist economy.

The glory days of Tokyo with the ‘bubble economy’ had gone and Tokyo suffered from economic stagnation and post-bubble debt.

Nevertheless, a curious phenomenon appeared. Along the Tokyo waterfront many new office buildings and flats were built. The number of high-rise flats newly built in 2002 [31] is said to be unprecedented. This construction was driven by the speculative activities of real-estate agents and investors as before. The rumour of ‘The 2003 Problem’[32] companies move to the waterfront, leaving older inner-city office buildings unoccupied-spread. The oversupply was obvious and predictable, but the individual realtors and developers continue to pursue their own short-term interests, even as they know they will later suffer.

The central government has tried to influence the fluctuating annual number of dwelling units built by reforming tax incentives. The current slogans of the central government are ‘Restructuring’ and ‘Urban Rebirth’. The central government has established a special board called ‘Urban Rebirth’ and has opted to deregulate building codes and urban planning laws to stimulate building activity. Local governments can now rezone areas and make decisions on the restructuring of districts. Most local governments, however, are suffering from financial constraints and lack of funds to realize new projects. Though policymakers believe promoting building activity through deregulation is the only way to economic recovery, the idea is actually ill conceived.

What is actually happening, however, is the hollowing out of the inner city. Ishihara Shintaro, governor of Tokyo Metropolitan Municipality, has declared sixteen policy goals, the first of which is to ‘Create an urban city that facilitates a balance of jobs and residences’. It consists of two strategies: ‘Promotion of inner city residence’ and ‘Fundamental reform of the Metropolitan housing system’. The former includes bringing workplaces and residential areas together in the suburban Tama area. The results have been disappointing.

 

FIGURE HERE

Figure 17. Priority Areas for Redevelopment in Central Tokyo 2004 (TMG).

 

Conclusion

Nobody controls a global city like Tokyo; nobody knows who is behind the constant change. Something invisible, which we might call the World Capitalist System, guides the transformation of the Japanese capital.

Tokyo has its natural limits. The city cannot grow indefinitely. What is first needed is decentralization and reorganization of the land based on the ecological balance in the region. The municipal government should strengthen the autonomy of urban community for risk management. Water, food and other daily necessities are needed in the neighbourhood units in case of disaster.

It is obvious that the city needs powerful leadership and the participation of citizens to implement new ideas. Unfortunately, while formal procedures for citizen involvement have been proposed, they do not function effectively. People are reluctant to participate when their private concerns are not affected. Though blackouts and drought already threaten the metropolitan area in summer, the current system of production and consumption of spaces, however, is controlled by profit margins rather than social or ecological responsibility. If the current trends remain unchanged, Tokyo awaits catastrophe, and another reconstruction.

 

References

Barthes R. (1970) L'empire des signes, Paris, : Skira.

Cybriwsky, R. (1998) Tokyo: The Shogun’s City at the Twenty-First Century, New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Fujimori, Terunobu (1982) Meiji no Tokyo Keikaku (Urban planning of Tokyo in the Meiji era), Tokyo: Iwanamishoten. [Japanese]

Funo, Shuji (1998) Toshi to Gekijou (City and theatre), Tokyo: Shokokusya. [Japanese]

--  (2003) ‘The declining capital’, in IIAS Newsletter, 31 July, Leiden: IIAS.

Goodman, G.K. (2000) Japan and the Dutch 1600-1853, Richmond:  Curzon.

Ishida, Yorifusa (1987) Nihon Kindai Toshi Keikaku no Hyakunen (The hundred years of modern urban planning in Japan), Tokyo: Zichitai Kenkyu-sha. [Japanese]

Ishida, Yorifusa (1992) Mikan no Tokyo Keikaku (The unaccomplished Tokyo projects), Tokyo:  Tikumashobou. [Japanese]

Jinnai, Hidenobu (1995) Tokyo a Spatial Anthropology: Translated by Kimiko Nishimura, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Karan, P.P. and Stapleton, K. (ed. ) (1997) The Japanese City, Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.

Koshizawa, Akira (1991) Tokyo no Toshikeikaku (Urban planning of Tokyo), Tokyo:Iwanamishoten. [Japanese]

Naito, Akira (1967) Edo to Edo Jou (Edo and Edo castle), Tokyo: Kasimasyuppankai. (Japanese)

Sassen, S. (1991) The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Seidensticker, E. (1980) Low City, High City: Tokyo from Edo to the Earthquake, Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle.

Seidensticker, E. (1990) Tokyo Rising: The City Since the Great Earthquake, New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Tamai, Tetsuo (1986) Edo: Ushinawareta Toshikuukan wo yomu (Reading urban spaces lost), Tokyo: Heibonsha. [Japanese]

Tokyo to (Tokyo Metropolitan Government) (1989) Tokyo to no Toshi Keikaku Hyakunen (100 Years of urban planning in Tokyo), Tokyo: Tokyo to. [Japanese]

Watanabe, Shunichi (1993) Toshikeikaku no Tanjou (The birth of urban planning), TokyoKasiwashobou. [Japanese]

 

 

 

Notes



[1] Archaeological evidence indicates that human settlement in the Kanto Plain dates back to prehistory. The origin of the city goes back to the foundation of a small castle called Edo in 1457, which was built by a feudal lord named Dokan Ohta, and was part of a small castle town before the end of sixteenth century.

[2] Many books and papers were written in Japanese in terms of the relationship between Japan and the Netherlands (see Goodman 2000).

[3] The population of Tokyo Metropolitan Government has grown to 12.17 million (as of 1 October  2001), 9.5 percent of Japan’s total population and the largest of the 47 prefectures. In contrast, Tokyo’s land area (2,187.0 square kilometers or 0.6 percent of the total area of Japan) is the third smallest of the prefectures. The population density is 5,565 persons per square kilometer, by far the densest prefecture in Japan. The 23-ku areas are home to 8.21 million persons, the Tama area to 3.94 million, and the Islands to 27,000. Tokyo has 5.518 million households, and the average household comprises 2.2 persons.

[4] Tokugawa Ieyasu (15421616) occupied the town in 1590 and made it the central governmental city, establishing a military government, the Tokugawa Bakufu (Shogunate) at Edo, in 1603. The Edo era lasted for nearly 260 years until imperial rule was restored (the Meiji Restoration) in 1868.

[5] According to reliable records, Edo consisted of about 300 neighbourhood units in the Kanei Period (1624–44), which increased up to 933 units in 1713, and 1678 units in 1745. The estimated population was 350,000 in 1695 and 500,000 in 1721. It is the point for later discussion that Edo was a special governmental city where half of the inhabitants belonged to the Bushi class (nobility) who formally resided in the country. So the total number of inhabitants in Edo was over one million at the end of the eighteenth century, beyond those of London and Paris. It is said that Edo (in terms of population) was the largest city – or a huge urban village – in the world in early-nineteenth century.

[6] The Greater Tokyo Metropolitan Area is made up of Tokyo and the three neighboring prefectures of Saitama, Kanagawa and Chiba. Approximately 26.3 percent of Japan’s total population lives in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area. Tokyo is a vast self-governing unit consisting of 23 ku (wards), 26 cities, 5 towns, and 8 villages, and is divided into two major areas – the 23 ku area and Tama area. The total areas of all 23 ku cover about 621 square kilometers. The Tama Area is adjacent to the 23-ku areas. The daytime population, broken down by area, shows 11.191 million in the 23-ku area, 3.348 million in the Tama Area, and 32,000 persons in the islands.

[7] See Barthes (1970).

[8] Y. Ishida (1987) divides the development of modern urban planning in Japan into following stages. (i) Introduction of European urban reform (186887), (ii) The Tokyo Urban Improvement Ordinance period (Shikukaisei Jorei) (18801918), (iii) The period establishing the urban planning system (191035), (iv) Wartime period (193145), (v) Reconstruction period (194554), (vi) Urban development (195568), (vii) Establishing new urban planning system (196885), (viii) Anti-planning during the ‘bubble economy’ (198293). If I add the period after Y. Ishida, (ix) Community design after the ‘bubble economy’ (1995)

[9] Born in Saga Han of Kyushu island. Politician. The Prime Mister (1898.610). One of the leaders of Meiji Restoration. The founder of Waseda University.

[10] Born in Thoshu Han. Politician. The Mister of Foreign Affairs (188588).

[11] Thomas James Waters is known as an engineer who had worked in Shanghai before coming to Japan. The detail of his career is not known.

[12] Josiah Condor from England is respected as the father of the Japanese modern architects. He was invited to Japan at the request of Ministry of Technology (kouburyo) in 1877 and taught the first generation of students at Kobudaigakko (Institute of Technology) and designed a considerable number of buildings.

[13] Herman Ende was 57 years old at that time. Willhelm Böckman was Ende’s colleague of Ende & Beckmann Atelier. Richard Seel, Hermann Muthesius, Heinrich Mänz, Adolf Steghmüller, Oskara Emil Leopold Tietze were hired as architects according to Böckman’s recommendation.

[14] London town, which is located immediately south of the Imperial Palace and now called Marunouchi facing to Tokyo Central Station, was a creation of a private, family-owned business called Mitsubishi headed by Iwasaki.

[15] Born in Chōsyū han. Politician. The Prime Mister (1889.1291.4).

[16] In terms of the urban planning in the Meiji-era (18681911), see T. Fujimori (1982), which is still the best material.

[17] The name of Mayor of Frankfurt am Main

[18] The word ‘Denen Toshi’ is used as the Japanese word translated from ‘garden city’, but means ‘rural city’ or ‘country town’ if the word is literally translated into English.

[19] 104,619 People, most of which had lived in the densely built up area, died or were missing and 300,000 houses were destroyed as a result of this disaster.

[20] Born in Mito han. Politician. Colonial Officer in Taiwan(1898. The first director of Mantetu (Manshu railroad company) in Manchuria (1906). The Postmaster and (1908). Minister of The Ministry of Interior (1916). The Minister of Foreign Affairs (1918). Mayor of Tokyo (1920).

[21] An American scholar on public administration, finance and politics who had started a similar institute in New York.

[22] The area is 55260 ha, which is 6 times of that of Tokyo-shi. Dai Tokyo was consisted of 35 ku (ward), the area of which is the same as the present 23-ku (wards) area.

[23] The number of dwelling units exceeded the number of households in 1968. It took about a quater century to recover the shortage of dwelling units.

[24] Civil engineer who graduated from Tokyo Imperial University. Engineer of Ministry of Interior. Director of Construction board of Tokyo shi. Professor of Waseda University.

[25] It soon became clear that the Capital Region Development Plan was unrealistic in its underestimation of industrial and population concentration pressures in the metropolis. In particular, the idea of green belts was totally ineffective in the face of the sprawl into suburbs during 1960s. As a result, a re-evaluation of the plan became necessary. The Capital Region Development Law was revised in 1965, and the second Capital Region Development Master Plan was established in 1968.

[26] The cooperation was disorganized in 2004 according to restructuring of governmental organization.

[27] The New Residential Built-up Area Development Law and the Law for Infrastructure Development of New Cities are notable as measures that dealt realistically with metropolitan development.

[28] He was a popular two-term governor until 1979. His ideas reoriented Tokyo city planning, but almost brought it to bankruptcy.

[29] The former Tokyo City Hall demolished had been located in Marunouchi Central District. The movement of city hall to the west, the former sub-centre Shinjuku shows the movement of centre of gravity of the city.

[30] In the early morning on January 17, 1995, the Great Hanshin Earthquake occurred. The building collapsed killed over 6,000 people, flying objects (furniture) and the fires. About 300,000 people have lost their houses and were compelled to live in the temporary shelters until the end of August 1995 when the emergency houses were barely completed.

[31] The population movement between Tokyo and other prefectures in 2000 shows that 444,000 persons moved into Tokyo while 391,000 moved out, a total movement of 835,000 and a net population increase of 37,000. Regarding total movement, the trend of depopulation has prevailed since 1967, with the exception of 1985. In 1997, there was a net population increase for the first time in 12 years, and 2000 again showed a net increase. Looking at the total movement between Tokyo and the three adjacent prefectures (Saitama, Chiba and Kanagawa prefectures), 208,000 came into Tokyo with 205,000 moving out, representing a total movement of 413,000 persons or 47.6 percent of the total, a net population decline of 3,000. Concerning natural population movement, births numbered 101,000 and deaths numbered 84,000 for a net increase of 17,000 during 2000. The degree of net increases has declined yearly since 1972, with the exception of 1994 and 1996.

[32] See Funo (2003).

2021年12月6日月曜日

青井哲人 群衆と祭典の空間 戦時下の神社境内: 歴史の渦の中で 日本の近代建築 空白の10年!?・・・建築の1940年代、ひろば、2001年6月号

 歴史の渦の中で  日本の近代建築 空白の10年!?・・・建築の1940年代、ひろば、2001年6月号

群衆と祭典の空間 戦時下の神社境内


青井哲人(あおい・あきひと)

●都市生活の戦時体制

 『写真週報』という雑誌がある。1938年、内閣情報部により創刊され、1940年以降はこれを改組した内閣情報局が出していた。言論・マスコミの統制にあたった機関だ。要するに『写真週報』は、戦時下の国家が国民に提供した情宣グラフ誌だった。

 誌面を埋める記事と写真を眺めていると、そこには一種の遠近法ともいうべき構図が透けて見えてくる。まず、はるか彼方の戦線の光景。1944年といえば、3月に開始されたインパール作戦が7月に中止。すでに守勢に転じていた南方戦線も次々に米軍勝利に帰し、10月のレイテ沖開戦以降は米軍の本土直接攻撃と日本の絶望的抗戦という段階に突入する。にもかかかわらず『写真週報』は戦争を楽天的に伝えるほかなかった。それに対し、日常生活に直接かかわる記事が誌面をつくる一方の基調となっている。残飯を使った食用豚の飼育とか、芋の栽培方法などなど。

 しかし、223日付『毎日新聞』の「竹槍では間に合わぬ、飛行機だ」という記事に東条首相が激怒するといったお寒い状況にあって、国民一人一人のなかに日常と戦線とが直結しているのだという疑いなき「実感」をつくり出すのは難しかっただろう。だから、総動員体制を支えるこの「実感」をつくる何かが、遠近両極のあいだに位置づけられねばならなかった。それは、膨大な数の兵士や群衆を集めておこなわれる集団的儀礼、あるいは大衆祭典ともいうべき行事の数々だったろう。様々な訓練、集会、出征壮行会、国家的祭日など。『写真週報』の一枚一枚の写真はどこかコミカルな調子すら帯びているが、こうした遠近法に気づくと戦慄を覚える。では、建築や都市の状況はどうだったか。

 日常の極には、むろん住宅がある。たとえば燈火管制の問題。夜間に室内の光が漏れぬよう、縁側に雨戸をはめ、欄間にも何らかの覆いをするよう指導された(図3)。空襲警報発令時の行動マニュアルのなかには、障子や襖をすべて取り外す、とする項目がある。家族の避難行動をスムースにするためだ(図4)。これらはいずれも日本住宅の特徴を反映していて興味深い。

 一方には深刻な住宅不足があった。低コストの規格化住宅を大量に供給することが内外地にわたる共通の課題となり、その方法的特質は終戦後の住宅供給にもそのままつながっていく。

 他方、最前線はともかくとして、内外の要地には軍需工場や格納庫などの構造物が大量につくられ、女子や学徒も動員された。国民徴用令は1944年から朝鮮にも適用されている。37年からの鉄鋼使用の制限は都市景観を木造バラックに塗り替えていったが、軍需施設でもその大架構を木造トラスに頼らざるをえなくなった。44年には、建物疎開と称して、延焼防止の空地創出のために都市内の建物が強制的に撤去されはじめるが(これが戦後の大幅員街路になる)、その古材を使って木造架構をつくり、そのうえに土を被せて地下工場とする、などという何とも頼りない提案すら見られる(図5)。

 こうした住宅供給や工場建設、都市防災などが、建築学者の専らの研究課題となった。研究の多くには極端な視界の狭さと高度な技術主義とが共存していた★1

 そして、日常と戦争とを媒介する大衆祭典。明治以降整備されてきた公園や運動場が、群衆の劇場と化した。学園紛争を経験した世代の人々がいうように、空間とは、あるいはその規模とは、たしかに怖ろしいものなのかもしれない。

●戦時期の神社造営

 群衆を集める機能を担ったもうひとつの空間に、神社の境内がある(図1)。明治政府によって、神社はあらゆる宗教に超脱した国家祭祀としての地位を占め、国の管理下に置かれていた。しかし、大衆の身体に直接働きかけるという意味での実効的な機能を、国家が神社に期待していくようになるのは戦時期になってからであるといってよい。日本の総建設量が下降しはじめる頃から、神社の建設量はむしろ増大しはじめる。1937年は日中開戦の年でもあり、この頃から膨大な数の参列者を集めた神社祭典が活発化し、むしろ日常化していくのだが、それにふさわしい空間的しつらえをもった神社が、この頃から内外地で大量につくられるようになるのである。筆者が資料をもとに追跡した台湾・朝鮮では、両者をあわせた数で、37年から45年までの神社創建数は68。これは植民統治期全体の総数の実に45パーセントに及ぶ。さらに、それ以前につくられた神社の社殿や境内も、この頃からの機能的要請に応えられるよう、大々的に改築や整備がなされていくから、神社の建設量は戦中期に極度に肥大化したことになる★2。内地でも神社造営の活発化は同様であり、こうして戦中期に創建ないし改築整備された神社境内が、戦後に受け継がれるのである。

●群衆の空間、国民的イベント

 1940年代の建築家の足跡としては、わずかの実作の他にコンペや計画案の提示がある。丹下健三がデヴューを飾った「大東亜建設記念営造計画」も、神明造風の建物の前に膨大な数の大衆を集めるもので、それが戦後の広島の計画にもつながる。また当時建築家たちの創作意欲の数少ないはけ口となった各地の忠霊塔の場合も★3、あまり論じられないが、垂直のモニュメントの前には茫漠たる地面が拡がっていた。参列した兵士や大衆は塔を見つめただろうが、それは自分と同じようにその場を埋める無数の人々の頭越しにであった(図6)。

 もちろん神社でも、時局の影響は避けられず、資材や人夫に大きな不足が生じていた。しかし、そうした状況はむしろ大衆を巻き込む理由にすら転化された。この時期の神社造営では、日本国政府や各植民地総督府、あるいは地方庁などが国庫や地方費から総工費のいくらかを補助し、残りについては大々的に寄付を募るのが一般的だった。工事も、土地造成などに大衆の「勤労奉仕」が投入され、学校や役所もその組織的動員に協力した。こうしたプロセスそのものが、国ぐるみの、あるいは地方をあげての大イベントであったし、新聞もこうした勤労奉仕を美談として報じた。

●官僚技術者のモダニズム

 1944年時点でも、史上最大級といってよい神社造営事業が進行中だった。この点では国内より植民地の方が華々しく、創建では扶余神宮(朝鮮扶余)、関東神宮(関東州旅順)、改築では台湾神社(台湾台北)などが筆頭にあげられよう。これら三社はいずれも国家神道体制下の最高の格付にあたる官幣大社であったが、これにつぐ社格の造営事業はさらに多かった。三社のうち関東神宮は4410月に盛大な鎮座祭を挙行しているが、他の二社は完成にいたらず終戦を迎える。

 ここでは台湾神社の場合をみておく。この神社は元来、日本が初の海外植民地として台湾を獲得した際、その全島の守護神社として1901(明治34)年に創建されたものである。設計は平安神宮(1893年)の時と同じ伊東忠太と木子清敬(指導)のコンビで、武田五一も共同設計者であった。台北市街をのぞむ丘陵地の稜線上に、奥行き方向に細長い敷地をとり、これに伊勢神宮風の社殿が配置された。しかし1930年代も半ばを迎える頃になって改築計画が浮上する。境内は隣接する谷筋のなだらかで広い傾斜地へと移され、創建時とは全く異なる、横の拡がりをもった敷地がとられた。そこに大きな外部空間を組み込んだ新しいタイプの社殿および境内がつくられる。残念ながらその全体を示す写真がないが、すでに内地で1940(昭和15)年に竣工していた近江神宮(滋賀県)や橿原神宮(奈良県)がほぼ同様の空間構成を持つので参考に掲げよう(図7・8)。先にあげた関東神宮や扶余神宮も、大きくは同じ型に属す。

 台湾神社改築の工事は、日本人・台湾人民衆の勤労奉仕を大量に動員して、1944年秋までにほぼ完成をみる。ところが、遷座祭を数日後に控えて、旅客機の墜落により社殿を焼いてしまう。このニュースは内地にも伝えられたが、翌日の『朝日新聞』をみてもその扱いはまことに小さい。不吉な徴として忌避されたに違いない。

 ついに竣工することのなかった二代目台湾神社の設計は、台湾総督府の技術者たちによって行われた。伊東忠太の名も、創建時設計者への敬意からか、いちおう顧問格に並んでいる。しかし、実質的な指導者だったのは、神祇院(情報局設置と同じ1940年に、内務省から外局として独立)の造営課長、角南隆(1887-1980)だった。角南と彼の傘下の組織的コネクションがつくり出した神社については、その特質を論じたことがある★4

 まず機能主義。祭典にかかわる人々の動作がスムースに演出され、かつ膨大な参列者が祭典の成り行きの一切を見守れるよう、社殿と境内の空間構成が検討された。神社はいわば劇場として捉え直されたのである。この明確な目標の下で、プランの標準型とバリエーションが開発されていった。なお、戦時期には各府県や植民地で一斉に護国神社が整備されたが、これは神話上の神でも天皇・皇族でもなく、膨大な数の戦没者、つまり一般民衆を神として祀る神社であり、遺族や兵士など均質な群衆を数千人のオーダーで集めることが必要な施設であった。この護国神社には、「コ」字型平面で群衆を抱え込む、一種の標準プランが用意されていた(図1)。

 しかし一方で、神社は建てられる場所から自然に生え出たようなものであるべきだとする一種の自然(じねん)の論理を、角南は繰り返し主張した。実際には、地域の建築的特徴が調査・採取され、設計に積極的に採用された。

 角南の思想にあっては、こうした論理は海外にもまったく同じように延長されるべきものであった。プランは地域に左右されないが、たとえば満洲ならば鎮守の森など不要で、土の壁で囲まれた閉鎖的で構築的な社殿をたちあげ、防寒の設備を施し、凍り付いてしまう手水のかわりに清めの香を焚くのがよい、というのが角南の考えだった。実際には保守的な政府や軍部の賛同を得るのは容易でなかったようだが、朝鮮江原道に、社殿様式をことごとく朝鮮建築風とし、床にオンドルを用いたという江原神社(1942、図2)がつくられ、これは、扶余神宮(前出)など後続の神社の実験台として想定されていた。

 戦時下にこうした思想が官僚機構の内部に確立され、しかも実現に移されていたことは実に興味深い。これは従来ほとんど知られてこなかった事実と言ってよいが、40年代論のみならず、日本の近代建築史全体にとっても重い意味を持つのではないか。

 1944年といえば、浜口隆一のデヴュー論文「日本国民建築様式の問題」が発表された年でもある。浜口はこの論文のなかで、ウィーン学派の始祖アロイス・リーグルなどを参照しながら、西洋の構築的な建築のあり方から、日本本来の行為的な建築のあり方へと我々の「建築意欲」をシフトすべきだとした。人々の行為が自ずと規定し生成させていく空間。角南らの神社は、「行為的空間」に通ずる志向性を持ちながら、モニュメンタルな形式性を同時に求め、しかも具体的な建築がたちあがるプロセスには地域の特性があずかって力を発揮するべきだと考えた。機能性と形式性と、そして地域によって姿を変える驚くべき柔軟性。そのすべてを肯定する角南ら技術官僚たちの方法は、前川国男の「苦渋」をらくに飛び越えて新しく、強靱であり、むしろ若き丹下健三のそれに近かった。

●何が遺されたか

 さて、国家神道体制そのものは、GHQによって間もなく解体される。しかし表向き野に下った角南も神社界との結びつきを維持し、官民にわたる戦中期の彼のコネクションもほぼそのまま戦後に生き続ける。護国神社のプランも、戦没者の遺族という社会的集団が残る以上、そのコンセプトを改める必要はなく、むしろ戦後復興期には同じ方向で洗練すらされていく。

 一方、旧植民地に遺された神社境内はどうなったか。ごく一部の例外をのぞき、建築はやはり失われている。しかし、雛壇状の地形や石段、燈篭などが残るケースは意外に多く、脱植民地下の地域環境のなかで場所の機能や意味を転じている。それは、「植民地とは何だったのか」という問題に対する人類学的あるいは社会学的なアプローチの素材たりうる。いずれ機会をあらためてレポートしてみたい。

1 日本建築学会編『建築学の概観(19411945)』(日本学術振興会、1955)などが参考になる。

2 植民地の神社造営については、青井哲人『神社造営よりみた日本植民地の環境変容に関する研究-台湾・朝鮮を事例として-』(京都大学博士論文・私家版、2000年)を参照。

3 忠霊塔については、井上章一『アート・キッチュ・ジャパネスク』(青土社、1987)の検討を参照されたい。忠霊塔では設計競技そのものが国民的イベントとしてファッショ的宣伝効果を持ったことが指摘されている。また、本稿の冒頭にふれた戦時体制と建築のかかわりについても同書は示唆するところ多い。

            なお、少なくとも現時点では同書を踏まえずに40年代論を考えることは不可能だろう。ありうべき40年代論は、井上の帝冠様式-キッチュ論を抱え込んだうえで日本様式論を発展させるか、従来のような視野の狭い「建築家の軌跡」的史観を離れて40年代的テーマを多角的に掘り下げるしかないだろう。神社の問題は、その双方に接続する批評的なテーマたりうるように思われる。

4 青井哲人「角南隆-技術官僚の神域」(『建築文化』20001月号)

1 日本建築学会編『建築学の概観(19411945)』(日本学術振興会、1955)などが参考になる。

2 植民地の神社造営については、青井哲人『神社造営よりみた日本植民地の環境変容に関する研究-台湾・朝鮮を事例として-』(京都大学博士論文・私家版、2000年)を参照。

3 忠霊塔については、井上章一『アート・キッチュ・ジャパネスク』(青土社、1987)の検討を参照されたい。忠霊塔では設計競技そのものが国民的イベントとしてファッショ的宣伝効果を持ったことが指摘されている。また、本稿の冒頭にふれた戦時体制と建築のかかわりについても同書は示唆するところ多い。

            なお、少なくとも現時点では同書を踏まえずに40年代論を考えることは不可能だろう。ありうべき40年代論は、井上の帝冠様式-キッチュ論を抱え込んだうえで日本様式論を発展させるか、従来のような視野の狭い「建築家の軌跡」的史観を離れて40年代的テーマを多角的に掘り下げるしかないだろう。神社の問題は、その双方に接続する批評的なテーマたりうるように思われる。

4 青井哲人「角南隆-技術官僚の神域」(『建築文化』20001月号)

図版キャプション

図1 台湾護国神社の例祭

『台湾日日新報』より

図2 江原神社の神門・手水舎

『朝鮮と建築』より。木部を朱塗りとし、朝鮮瓦を葺いた。社務所にはオンドルが採用されたという。

図3 灯火管制マニュアルの一例

『写真週報』より

図4 空襲警報発令時の行動マニュアルの一例

『写真週報』より

図5 建物疎開古材を使った地下工場建設の提案

『写真週報』より。この後屋根を葺いてから、土を被せて地下工場とする。

図6 新京忠霊塔の大祭

『満洲の記録』(集英社、1995)より。満映フィルムの映像。茫漠たる空間を膨大な数の群衆が埋め尽くしている。

図7 近江神宮の境内平面図(一部)

『官幣大社近江神宮御造営写真帖』(1944)より。

図8 橿原神宮の境内


青井哲人

1970年生まれ。’92年、京都大学工学部建築学科卒業。95年、同大学院建築学専攻博士課程中退。神戸芸術工科大学助手を経て、現在日本学術振興会特別研究員、近畿大学・京都造形芸術大学・神戸芸術工科大学非常勤講師。

共著:「アジア建築研究」(村松伸監修、INAX出版)など。

論文:「神社造営よりみた日本植民地の環境変容に関する研究」(京都大学博士学位論文・私家版)など。

2021年12月5日日曜日

山田脇太 孤高の建築家あるいは虚構の建築家 - 白井晟一の視界 1941年 白井晟一 嶋中山荘

歴史の渦の中で  日本の近代建築 空白の10年!?・・・建築の1940年代、ひろば、2001年3月 

孤高の建築家あるいは虚構の建築家 白井晟一の視界

1941年  白井晟一  嶋中山荘

 山田協太

1.曖昧な建築

嶋中山荘は軽井沢に中央公論社社長、嶋中雄作の別荘として建てられた。一面白の壁面を持ち上に茅葺屋根をのせた平屋寄棟造のつつましい作品であり、かわいらしい民家のように見える。しかし時は1941年。白壁はモダニズムをあらわす当時の先端だったことをふまえるならば、それがどうして茅葺民家風の造形とつながるというのだろうか。

内部のプランニングを見るとき、その困惑はいっそう増すことになる。民家型の外観とは裏腹に内部は和風の構成をとるでもなく、かといってモダニズムの直線を強調するプランニングでもない。洋室と和室がまさに詰め込まれたといった風情で配されている。各室は同じ縮尺とは思えないほど大きさがいびつで、室と室の境界はことごとくゆがめられている。ユーティリティーは北側の突起部に収まらずだらしなく主屋まで広がっているし、第一、木構造だというのに柱の立つラインが不明瞭である。嶋中山荘はモダニズムの建築ではないし、いわゆる日本の様式と呼べるようなものでもない。見ていてすっきりしないとらえどころのない建物である。茅葺と壁面の曲線を見て一番しっくりくるのはむしろ表現主義かもしれない。しかし、嶋中山荘では全体として単純な形態をとっているが各室が外観に表出することはなく、表現主義の主要な傾向ともいえる、内部の各要素を外観にそのまま表出させようとする意図は微塵も感じられない。嶋中山荘の持つ曖昧さは表現主義といってもうまく説明できない。嶋中山荘をとらえる鍵は一体どこに求められるのだろうか。その手がかりを戦前の白井の作歴に求めてみたい。

 

2.白井の住宅に遍在するもの

白井が初めて建築に携わったのは1935年、義兄近藤浩一路の住宅設計においてであった。当時白井は建築の本格的な修練を積んでいなかったため、住宅の設計は近藤の知りあいの建築家平尾敏也の支援のもと進められた。学生時代から、哲学や運動を通して政治と現実が結びつく場を求めてきた白井にとって、平尾を通じての建築との出会いは決定的なものとなった。以後、白井の建設現場への執着には驚くべきものがあり、建設の際に決まって現地にとどまり、現場の工事から建築を徹底的に学びとるという作業を繰返した。

平尾が英国式住宅の専門家であったため、その補佐を得て西洋式住宅として河村邸を完成させた白井は、二作目の歡歸荘(1937)でも西洋様式を基本とした建築に取り組んでいる。この住宅では奇妙なことに、小さなヴォリュームのなかに東側から順にレンガ造、木造の上から白壁塗り、木と白壁のハーフティンバーという3つの異なる様式が並列するかたちで結合されている。プランは1階が主に和室、2階が洋室であり、外観にあらわれる三つの様式は室の性格とは無関係に決められている。さらに和室がレンガ造の部分にあったり、1つの室が異なる様式にまたがるなどしており、内部と外観は連動していないことがわかる。細部に至っては奇妙な点を挙げればきりがないが、極めつけは北壁面にくりぬかれた、上部の屋根を変形させるほど巨大なアーチ窓であり、ここにいたって歡歸荘はもはや何の様式とは呼べないものとなっている。

振り返って河村邸について当時の雑誌※1を読んでみると「今迄の洋館とか日本館とか茶室とか云ふ純粋さはなく共「近藤浩一路氏を中心とした生活の家」として完全なものであると信じる。」と述べられており、玄関はレンガ造、主屋の他の部分は木造に白い大壁、それに木と白壁によるハーフティンバー造というふうに、この住宅もで何の様式というのではなくさまざまなつくりが折衷されていた。内部には障子が使われている部分や一部和室があるなど、こうした「日本館」的なものも「茶室」の手法も、「台所に於て朝食等簡単なる食堂に兼用さる」といった当時の文化的生活の場面を手がかりに「浩一路氏を中心とした生活」を主眼として組みあげられていた。

続く近藤浩一路旧邸(1940)で白井は一転して日本的な様式を採用する。しかし純粋に伝統的な日本の様式を採用するのではなく(そもそも純粋な日本の様式というもの自体疑わしいが)、大壁による大きな壁面やガラスの一枚板を用いた開口部の簡略化などに見られる簡明さの追求、構成要素の単純化はむしろ吉田の新興数寄屋の試み※2に近いといえる。そして全体が数寄屋風の外観をとりつつ内部には洋間が包摂されている。こうした日本様式とモダニズムを混ぜ合わせる試みは関根邸(1941)でも踏襲された。

1941年、嶋中山荘と同時期の清沢山荘では施主の要望が強く、思うように仕事ができたかは疑問だが、白井は大胆にも建物外観の東半分が構成主義的な雰囲気を持つ日本様式の漆喰真壁で西半分が彩色されたアメリカ風の板張壁という住宅をつくっている。構造的には分裂したまま、棟のずれにも頓着せずに白井はいとも簡単に2つの様式をつぎはぎしてみせる。プランを見ると、和風の外観を持つ部分の内部に板張りの書斎があるなどやはりここでも内部と外観とは一致していないのである。

こうした流れのなかで嶋中山荘はつくられたわけだが、今までの実作を振り返ると白井の住宅には共通して3つの特徴がみられる。1つには、白井は建築の内部と外観の関連に無頓着であるということ。2つ目は内部にしろ外観にしろ時代に関わらず様式というものの一貫性を重要視していないということ。そして最後に、建物はそれが使用された文脈を無視した、断片化した様式のつぎはぎからなるように見えるということである。

 

3.生活世界全体としての建築

しかし嶋中山荘を読み解くにはまだ手がかりが不足している。鍵は1956年に書かれた「豆腐」※3という文章にある。

その中で白井は、「かく「用」は「常」と善において一体となることを示唆する」と言う。

ここで「用」とは「体系をもって直接生活にとけている」ものであり、「常」とは「日々の生活」を指し、「善」は「永続性のある普遍な」原理といいかえることができる。多少乱暴にいうと、日々の生活に永続性のある普遍的な原理が見いだされるときにはじめて生活の中に直接とけている完全な体系=「用」が実現されるということである。「用」は美も機能も、論理もすべてをその体系の中に含みこむという。「用」とは生活世界全体を構成する体系そのものである。そして白井が「地方の建築」※4において「建築すなわち生活なのだから」というとき、それは直ちに、建築は日々の生活の中から普遍的な原理=「善」をすくい取ることによって生活世界全体を構成する体系=「用」となりうる、ということを意味する。そしてまた、「善」は頭ではとらえられず、「理性は不可欠でありながら、しかもつねに不十分」であり、「用」とはわずかに「経験と習慣を超え」たところにある「生活意志」にあらわれるのであるならば、いかにして建築を生活の中に直接とけている完全な体系=「用」たらしめることができるのだろうか。白井はそのことについてはっきりと述べてはいないが、白井が建築に取り組む姿勢、そこに顕著な現場への執拗なこだわりを見るにつけ、建築が「用」に到達できるとすればそれは「融通無碍の原型」たる日々の生活の現場から「生に順応する尺度」たる生活意志の幻影をすくい取りそれが普遍的原理に至る強度を持ちうるものであるのかを繰り返し試し続けるしかないように思われる。そして白井は言う「概念から逆算されるコンパス・モデュロールと異なり生活の意志は作為をかりず、「用」の中から純粋な均衡を生む」と。以上の観点を総合すると、これまでの住宅に共通して見られる3つの特徴の意味、白井の目指していたことが明確に理解される。白井が目指していたのは建築を生活世界全体を構成する体系=「用」と一体化させることであり、そのために有効なのは生活の中で「用」とかみ合う手段なのであって、様式を現実に照らすことなく演繹的に適用することは全く無意味なことであった。であるから白井の建築ではさまざまな様式が通常では考えられないような仕方で、易々とつなぎ合わされたわけである。白井は断片化された手段のつぎはぎによって建築のあらたな姿をつくり出そうとしていた。建築と「用」との同一化を成し遂げるために様式を一旦分解した後、有効と思われる手法のみを生活に即して統合しなおすことは白井にとって必然の過程であった。そして生活世界全体の体系化を使命とする建築にとって、外観(それは構造から導かれるものであり構造は内部を拘束する)とは生活世界たる建築をアプリオリに規定する無意味なものでしかなく、互いに「矛盾する両方の要求」をつなぎ合わせなければならない建築にとって内部と外観が一致することにいったいどのような整合性があるというのだろうか。

 

4.「用」への挑戦

嶋中山荘はそのような白井の建築観の一つの帰着点といえる。あらゆる活動に統制が加えられ先行きのわからない日々の中で、意を決して白井はモダニズムを民家風の容貌に託すことによりこれと日本的なものとの統合を果たし、建築による生活の全的体系化に挑んだのではないか。見方によっては、清沢山荘では和と洋の形式が水平に並置されたのに対し嶋中山荘においてはそれが垂直に積み重ねられていたといえるかもしれない。モダニズムの多くの建築家がプランニングの率直な表出による内部と外観の一致、直線によるプランニングのシャープさを追い求めていたのに対し、嶋中山荘における「箱形」、「白い壁」、「連続窓」といった表層的な要素だけが全く異なる文脈で民家の形態につぎはぎされ、サッシュの太さなどディティールの甘さも白で塗り隠せば大丈夫といわんばかりの造形を目のあたりにすると、思わず白井はどの程度モダニズムというものを理解していたのだろうかと愕然としてしまうが、歡歸荘で3種の西洋様式を平然と繋ぎあわせ、清沢山荘では日本の様式と西洋の様式を並置してみせる白井にとって、多少のディティールの甘さや文脈の無視など一体なんだというのであろうか。

嶋中山荘では外観はかつてないほど統一された形態を示し、一方プランニングも洋室、和室をはじめ、室同士の接続部が極端に肥大化することによって、相互の融着を果たしている。そして、それぞれの室が白井の思い入れに連動するかのように肥大化あるいは縮小化し、通常あり得ないような比率を見せながら相互の結合を促進し、内部を移行する者に一つの物語を感じさせる予感をはらむとき、そこからは白井が嶋中山荘にかけた明確な意志、「用」の無垢な原型である日々の生活=「常」の中から「用」の幻影を見いだすことによって生活世界を体系化しようとする決意が伝わってくる。白井は生活の中から普遍性を持って体系化された物語を紡ぎだそうとしていた。

しかし、一なる形態として明確な形を保ち続ける原理が内在していない限り、生活からすくいだされた幻影を詰め込むことによって肥大化あるいは縮小する室同士が融着してできる系では、それぞれの室は互いに自律性をもって変動し、全体としてはもはや制御不能に変形・膨張を繰返す他ない。形態を決定しているのは外形という枠をあたえる、民家風茅葺屋根と白い壁による外在の恣意的原理であり、白井は自身が育て上げた系を建築として現実の世界に定位するにあたって窮極において外からの原理に頼らざるを得なかったのである。嶋中山荘は内部からの膨張力と、それを封じ込める外部からの拘束力との衝突の上に生み出された、一つの統一された系としては成立し得ていないアンビバレントな存在である。嶋中山荘で白井に突きつけられたことは内部と外観の統一が図られない限り普遍的「用」には達し得ないということであり、白井は未だ内在的な統合の原理を持ち得ておらず、結局は自身が拒絶していると思っていた概念的な規定に頼って建築を形づくっていたということである。嶋中山荘は時代にせかされた、あまりに早産な子供であったのかもしれない。白井の試みは脆くも砕かれたのであるが、内部から膨張する生活世界は外観という建築を外から規定する最後の表皮にまで肉薄し、白井は嶋中山荘での矛盾によって自身に不足していた系全体を形成する普遍的な原理である、「善」たりうる内在的な秩序としての構成(構造を含み空間全体を組み立てる体系。モデュールと言い換えることもできるだろう。)を発見するのである。ここにおいて構成はアプリオリなものではなく生活世界全体とつながった内在的で普遍的な構成手法となった。戦後の白井の帰趨は『布野修司建築論集Ⅲ 国家・様式・テクノロジー』※5に詳しいが、戦後白井はまるで自由な手足を得たかのように、一連の住宅を通して構成を「善」として生活世界全体の体系たる「用」を検証・探求してゆく。「華道と建築 日本建築の伝統」※6において建築の構成自体を強調し、「日本の建築の仕事は構成そのものに美的効果を内在させることであり…」付け加えたものである装飾の意味と役割を要求していないと表明することによってその端緒を見せ、「試作小住宅」※7において自身が手がけた建築を、「この構造・衣裳を一体とする「システム」」と言いあらわすとき、1950年代前半の一連の小住宅で構成による「善」の獲得を確信した白井にもはや迷いはない。嶋中山荘は白井にとって重要な転換点であり、白井はその相矛盾する不安定な静寂の中で、外的規定によって建築を形成するという、自身に内面化された偽りの「善」を暴き、不完全な「用」を償却したのである。嶋中山荘には、白井の未だ自覚し得ない「用」の姿が眠っていた。

 

5.「用」は実現されたのか

白井は構成を手に入れることによって各要素を自覚的に結合して体系化する手法、いうなれば物語を建築に持ち込む手法を見いだした。そのような手法が建築界で一般化するのはポストモダンを待たねばならなかったことを考えるならば、白井と教条主義的なモダニズムを追求する当時の建築界の間に距離が生じるのはいわば必然であったといえる。白井が孤高の建築家と呼ばれる所以である。

しかしそれは白井が「用」に達し得たということとは別の話である。確かに戦後白井がつくり出す建築は破綻なく整っているが、同時に表現に切実さがなくなり、時に意図することが目につき付加的な操作と感じられる危ういものではなかったか。戦後‘孤高’という位置に据えられた、白井の「用」に対する姿勢には油断がなかったといえるのか。自覚的な体系化と「用」は紙一重であるが、恣意的な操作は「用」とは相容れないものである。そして「用」の理論によるならば、自覚的操作は生活世界に育まれたものであることによってのみ恣意性から脱し得るはずである。後の白井が生活世界から離れて日本的特質、伝統的なるもの、あるいは純粋・本質・根茎に対する探求の色を強めてゆくとき、それは果たして「用」へ向かっての表現の成熟であったのか、それとも恣意的な観念性に凝り固まってゆく自壊の過程であったのか。そこでは窮極において、戦後の白井とポストモダンの建築家とを隔てる違いは存在するのだろうか。これらの疑問は非常に興味深いものであり、その考察はまたの機会に試みたい。

  

※1『建築知識』(19365月号)近藤浩一路氏邸

※2数寄屋における近代的な簡明性の獲得を目標とした吉田は1935年に書かれた論文「近代数寄屋住宅と明朗性」で大壁を採用することによる構造と表現の分離を主張し、構造としての柱は壁のなかに隠し表現はもっぱら表の壁面でおこなう近代数寄屋の道を開いた。

※3「豆腐」『リビング・デザイン』(195610月号)

※4「地方の建築」『新建築』(19538月号)

※51998年、布野修司著。戦後の白井晟一、丹下健三、西山夘三、前川國男ら著名な建築家の動きを追うとともに、運動としての昭和建築の全貌を明らかにしようとする。自身の建築論をまとめた3部構成からなる著作の最終部。

※6「華道と建築 日本建築の伝統」(19525月)国学院大学華道学術講座における講演

※7「試作小住宅」『新建築』(19538月号)