3 – 2016

Antwerp

Between our research trip at the end of September 2015 and going to print with this issue things have happened that have changed Europe: the attacks in Paris on November 13th and the growing flood of refugees. Since then we know that armed conflicts are no longer external. They are part of our neighbourhoods, not only at the gates but also in the heart of our cities – the exponents of internationalised conflicts live among us. Recently, therefore, the focus has been on the famed European city of the 19th century, the centre of Paris, the immigrant districts in Molenbeek in Brussels — or Borgerhout in Antwerp. The current phenomenon of mass migration strengthens us in our argument for the mixed city, which Paola Viganà and Bernardo Secchi in their proposals for the development of Antwerp have also called the “porous city”. The aspect of a fundamental openness and permeability of an urban structure that is linked with this term has today become even more topical. Urban development and architecture make a central contribution to creating a social mix in the population that provides a basis for peaceful coexistence: in the banlieue just as much as in the core city. Antwerp’s approaches to acupuncture in the city’s most dense urban area, the labyrinthine Borgerhout in the eastern part of the core city, or increasing density between windy high-rise blocks in the left bank banlieue in the west, offer a key to stabilising social relationships and providing residents with opportunities to participate in their city and its culture. With an incomparable impartiality the current architectural scene in Flanders has accepted the contemporary circumstances of building and has shaped them into fruitful concepts. Positions such as that of Bovenbouw (already presented in wbw 3 – 2013) are an important motivation for this issue and a formidable position for updating the realism debate, also— and in particular—here in Switzerland.