Imaging Detroit

IMAGING DETROIT

CONTENTS
FOREWORD 03
INTRODUCTION/Anya Sirota 08
MODCaR/Jean Louis Farges 16
THE SITE/mos 20
NEIGHBORS 26
WORKING DRAWINGS 28
BUILD! /James Chesnut/Chris Reznich/Allen Gillers 30
THE LIBRARY/Allen Gillers 42
THE GALLERY/Marie Combes/Jean Louis Farges 46
THE FORUM/Mireille Roddier 52
SCREENING ROOM/ Missy Ablin 64
POP UP SNACK BOYS/Allen Gillers 66
IMPRESSIONS/Jayna Zweiman 70
COUNTER-EXPERIMENT/Angela Last 74
STATESIDE/Mercedes Mejia 82
GOING LIVE/Erika Lindsay 86
DDF/Melinda Anderson/Jakki Kirouac 88
OUTSIDE IN/David Buuck 92
NETWORK/Missy Ablin 96
NEW SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM/David Adler 104
OFF THE GRID/Gorham Bird 106
THE TEAM 109
ACKNOLWEDGEMENT110
CREDITS 111

02

forEwOrd
This is the story of Imaging Detroit, a
pop-up agora and open air mediatheque.
It took place in Detroit’s Perrien
Park over the course of 36-hours on
September 21st and 22nd of 2012,
though the preparatory prelude was
launched much earlier that spring
when we received a Research On The
City grant from Taubman College of
Architecture + Urban Planning. The
goal of the research, and by extension
the event, was to study the relationship
between Detroit’s media and material
urbanity.
Now it started from a deceptively
simple premise. The past decade had
witnessed Detroit’s arrival into the
mediatized limelight as a seemingly
limitless source of polemical buzz. Not
surprisingly, images of Detroit went
places. They traveled with unequivocal
transnational oomph, through
documentary and biennale circuits
alike, complicit and instrumental in
all sorts of mimetic narratives. So
why not hijack that representational
energy? Why not project that image
back? And in so doing, why not open
a productive, uninhibited, public
dialogue about the power of images
and their consequences on urbanity.
And let’s do it live.
Step one: we would bring together the
most comprehensive, though invariably
partial, anthology of Detroitcentric
media -- its documentaries,
photography, music videos, and printed
matter. Step two: we would make them
publically available for scrutiny in a
civically-spirited, accessible place. >>

04

ANYA
SIROTA
MIREILLE
RODDIER
JEAN LOUIS
FARGES
>> Next: we would invite a series of
local, national, international discourse
jockeys – thinkers, writers, economists,
activists, artists, policy-makers,
bureaucrats, architects, urbanists,
landscape architects, music aficionados,
academics, and entrepreneurs – to
help initiate the open assessment. The
result would be both an experiment
in fieldwork and a methodological
complot for collecting the broadest and
most inclusive analysis of the material
at stake.
To make this work, we would
need a site – one fuzzy enough not
to ferment associations with the
imagistic sensibilities of ubiquitous
ruination, tactical optimism, unbridled
entrepreneurialism or any of the
other tropes that define Detroit’s
perceived persona. We would side with
the possibilities of a landscape in all
of its coming-un-doneless, porosity
and informality. And we would
insert the temporary infrastructure
necessary to signify and enable
civic accommodation, serendipitous
encounter and conversation. In
material form this would amount to a
screening pavilion, a library, gallery,
forum, suspended ball and food lot.
In the process of making Imaging
Detroit, we were able to explore the
extraordinary networks that have been
established in a city that is anything
but neutral, to meet some of the
critical makers behind the images, as
well as to connect with those featured
in the frame, and to speculate about the
power of representation in a dispersed
urbanity. This book brings together
some of our thoughts and impressions
about our intervention and methods,
which in our view are critical to
engaging research in the city. We hope
that you enjoy it.

06

07

INTRODUCTION
ANYA SIROTA
08
08
Imaging Detroit was an joyful
experiment, research strategy, and
situational encounter that spanned a
number of concentrated months, but
found public and material expression
over the course of a two-day media
festival in a park on Detroit’s Near
East Side.
The project started with two parallel,
but interrelated explorations.
First, we wanted to make sense
of the extraordinary influx of
representations and mediatized
attention that Detroit has recently
garnered. At the same time, we
planned to lay bare the position of
social networks in dispersed urban
environments – with Detroit as
case study. The intersection of the
research would allow us to reflect upon
how images of Detroit are produced,
disseminated and consumed, and to
speculate about the generative power
of representations in the material
environment.
Our gamble with representation
started with the assumption that a city
as dispersed, punctured, and dilated as
Detroit cannot count on serendipitous
social and spatial proximities. Its
urbanity, spread over an extended
territory, would seem antithetical
to the pleasures of chance-comingup-on-ness,
and consequently would
require extensive virtual or tangible
networking, a kind of hyperconnectivity,
to animate the realm
of public happenstance. Understand
Detroit’s networked logics and
operational social systems, and >>

09
Marie Combes/ Serie Les Fugitives

10

>> you gain access to a more
consequential field of intervention – a
seductive and critical idea for any
architect, planner, artist or activist
concerned with engaged work in the
city.
Out of context, there is nothing
particularly disarming about Detroit’s
dispersal. Its inner-city density is no
more dissolved or diffuse than, say,
Atlanta or Denver. In fact, a great
number of American cities, drawing
little alarm or attention, are designed
to sustain densities far thinner than
Detroit. The city’s particularly
challenges are situated firmly in the
realm of the socio-economic, so much
so, that the idea of virtual hyperconnectivity
emerges, quite simply,
as myth. There are unquestionably
infrastructural and virtual hubs.
But, with more than fifty percent
of Detroit’s population living off
grid there is little material access to
media networks – both televised and
interactive – and with the additional
burden of a forty percent illiteracy
rate, even the dissemination of printed
matter proves ultimately illusive.
Paradoxically, Detroit is one of the
most imaged cities on earth. Its
representations – now standards
of the coffee-table-sublime – travel
far beyond the city’s physical
boundaries, responding to a collective
contemporary infatuation with urban
obsolescence, aestheticized decay, and
the abstraction of economic wreckage.
The images of Detroit come invariably
with accompanying narratives, which
whether explicit or inferred, often
move between fantastic extremes.
Some lament the irrecoverable
symbolic loss of capital cache.
Others fetishistically exalt tactical
opportunism. But more than >>

>> a mere delivery system for
melancholy, nostalgia, or DIY gestalt,
these images project complex and
contradictory meanings that precede
any tangible experience of the city
itself. And yet Detroiters often do not
get to see them or comment.
So there’s the rub. To proceed with an
analysis of Detroit’s mediatized image
without local input would serve to
reinscribe the rift between the framer
and the framed, the subject and its
constructed significations. Instead, we
would aim to collapse these binaries
and to enable feedback from multiple
contingencies. This would require a
common ground. A meeting place. An
inclusive cultural infrastructure. And
to that end, we set out to facilitate
an event as anthology and public
agora. For its purposes, we would
collect of all of the documentary
and photographic media produced on
the subject of Detroit over the past
ten years. Then we would access its
symbolic, semantic, and projective
meanings collectively.
Imaging Detroit was, therefore, as
much an event as a research strategy
that aimed to minimize subjective
distanciation, to create a space of
dissensus where the staged disjunction
between representation, discourse
and experience could be exposed.
And I think we may have achieved
this. Bringing together hundreds
of representations of Detroit with
national and international speakers
from a myriad of disciplinary
perspectives, inviting neighborhood
participation, engaging Detroit’s
government and cultural agencies –
we produced interactions, however
uncomfortable, between radically
different contingencies. The
dialogue that emerged was amazing.
Producing Imaging Detroit required
countless decisions. And in conjunction
with media analysis, the evolving
mechanics of the project formed the
very basis of our research.
The texts in this book assemble some
of the people, processes, connections,
mishaps and evaluations that we
have reflected upon since Imaging
Detroit was staged. The collection is
invariable partial. And we believe that
our ongoing research and engagement
with help fill in the blanks.
12

14

15

MODcaR
JEAN LOUIS FARGES
The Metropolitan Observatory for
Digital Culture & Representation
16
To produce Imaging Detroit we
decided to structure a discrete
institutional platform, one which we
called MODCaR – The Metropolitan
Observatory of Digital Culture and
Representation. This approach would
allow us to operate authoritatively but
with a blank slate and without any
symbolic associations.
To align ourselves with an existing
institution would mean to transfer
figurative baggage, to risk alienating
some, affiliating ourselves too closely
with others. It would mean also
plugging into an existing network
and its irrecoverable backstories.
We wanted to trace the project’s
arrival and projected ascendency on
the virtual scene – produce our own
diagnostics and situate ourselves as
research specimens.
Starting an institution would require
a name, preferably an acronym - one
neutral enough to sound official, but
also friendly and approachable. We
settled on MODCaR for its fuzzy
connotations and domain availability.
We designed a website, and wrote a
mission statement:
The Metropolitan Observatory for
Digital Cultural and Representation is a
nomadic research organization predicated
on the idea that urban experience is
conditioned by images. We study how
images of cities are produced, diffused,
and perceived. We understand that
image-making patterns are unstable,
semantically charged, sometimes floating,
and that the representation of place may
precede or surpass aspirations toward
authoritative transcription. Our charge is
to explore visual narratives at the national

and international scale and to render
explicit the complex relationship between
experience, the constructed image, meaning
and the public.
The Observatory’s mission is twofold.
First, we aim to produce and sponsor
events that stimulate dialogue and interest
in urban representation. We believe that
image-making is a powerful tool for
communication and impact; consequently,
we seek to understand the mechanisms of
contemporary media, digital culture, and
networks. In parallel, our goal is to produce
analytical tools for the understanding of
urban representation and in support of
self-organizing, emergent systems.
We also launched a fellowship
program, and selected three fellows
from three distinct disciplines and
geographies. >>
17
Brittany Nicole Gacsy/ MODCaR product design

>> We structured a virtual gift shop.
And then we began to track. We
tracked traffic on Google. On
Facebook. We came up with strategies
to gain a following on Twitter. As
MODCaR, we were networking,
studying the conventions, grammars
and idiosyncrasies of public and
imagistic communication.
We put out an open call for
participation:
Imaging Detroit is a collective event and
a public assemblage. Between September
21st and 23rd, 2012 the Metropolitan
Observatory for Digital Culture and
Representation will host an unprecedented
open assessment and contemporary
anthology of Detroit as local and global
image. This 48-hour long temporary
screening, exhibition, and performance
venue - in Detroit and on Detroit - will
MODCaR web traffic geolocated/06.12-09.12

serve as a catalyst for the exploration of
the city’s manufactured meanings. Invited
DJ’s (discourse jockeys) will help mix the
discussion for the occasion.
INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE:
We are delighted to extend an invitation
for public participation. Imaging Detroit
casts its call widely. The project seeks to
collect and juxtapose both an anthology of
existing visual documentation on Detroit
and alternative visions that have not been
made public, or are yet to exist. Videos,
films, slides, photographs, and performance
proposals are welcome.
WHY DETROIT? Detroit’s image
is not neutral. Layered, complex, and
charged, it occupies an unparalleled locus
in the global imaginary. And while this
fact is not new, its power is unequivocal,
situating Detroit as a symbolic test site for
the reconfiguration of the collective urban
experience. In this scenario, the cumulative
image precedes the city, conditions our
very perception of it, and suggests that the
self-reflexive embrace of this effect may
have transformative potential. Imaging
Detroit is a platform for the exploration
of the generative competencies of the city
as representation, in all of its dissonance,
hybridity, permissiveness, serendipity,
mutable anatomy, and cultural possibility.
SUBMITTAL GUIDELINES:
Proposals are due on August 3rd, 2012.
Send us a single page with no more than
200 words. Include a title, your media
and scale or length of your work. Indicate
if there are any specific requirements for
staging or viewing the material. We are
accepting projected media in a number of
categories: low-tech short shorts, short,
medium-length, and feature. Content may
include: documentation, direct cinema,
visual anthropology, docufiction, salvage
ethnography, performance, experimental
narrative, agitprop, still photography,
new forms of visualization, other. Please
provide a link to a preview. In your
submission also include your name, contact
information and short bio. Proposals
should be sent to either our postal or
email addresses. Final submissions due on
September 1, 2012.
Imaging Detroit is made possible through
the generous support of a Research on
the City Grant from Taubman College of
Architecture & Urban Planning
Then submissions started to come in…
19

THE SITE
M.O.S. FILTER
Perrien Park, corner of Chene Street
and Warren Avenue, on Detroit’s
Near East Side - here situated within
a collection of impressions selected
from conversations with passersby and
neighbors during the construction of
Imaging Detroit
20

Chene Street used to be bustling. Anything
you wanted could be purchased here. It was
a commercial bloodline in Detroit – really
alive! Some of the older residents say it
could rival Broadway in New York City,
I don’t know if that’s true. But, people
would come here to shop, eat out, listen to
music... now that might be hard to believe.
Near Perrien Park – there is one small
grocery store left where you can buy a slice
of pizza, and it’s amazing that they are
still in business. There is still an economy
here. But it involves everything prohibited,
illegal. It’s a tough environment.
Northeastern High School was located
in the empty lot across the street from
Perrien Park. And when school got out,
all the kids would come hang out in the
park. Now many of them were musicians,
incredible musicians. And many of them
ended up being a part of Motown and
its history. They would play music in the
park, sometimes late into the night. Of
course, Northeastern has been demolished.
Nothing but an empty lot left. But the
graduates from Northeastern still get
together for their yearly reunions here.
There is no building. Just memories. And
that’s maybe enough.
Garvey In The Park Celebration is
something that happens here in Perrien
Park. The event has moved around, but
it does take place here now. Families,
vendors, shoppers, drummers and
musicians come together for an all day
party. There’s spoken word, drumming and
dancing. Vendors are selling food, jewelry,
clothing.
They say that strikes happened here, and
other protests. The neighborhood was
packed, and Perrien Park was a central
place to meet. I think the meat packers held
a really big strike here in the 30’s.
Warren Avenue was an unspoken
boundary. The Polish community lived >>

22
>> to the North. The African American
lived to the South. And Perrien Park
was literally a green zone. A meeting
place – where people could walk their dogs
together, listen to music together. Where
things got blurred. I personally rarely
stepped foot south of Perrien Park. For a
really long time.
The National Guard was camped here in
67. Things were tense.
Sure we use gazebo. We’re hosting a
birthday party here now, we’ve been
coming here for years. There used to be
electricity out here, and we would bring
our barbeque. Now we also bring this
small generator, so we can light the area
after dark.
The city cuts the grass here twice a year. At
the beginning of the season and at the end.
Now that is not often enough, and mid
summer, you literally can’t tell what hiding
in the grass. So often the neighbors come
out and cut it themselves. Make it usable.
Give the dogs a place to run. When the
high school reunions take place, they cut the
grass in preparation for the event.
If you look over across the street at the 26
acre lot where the school used to stand it
looks a lot like this park. The lot is for sale
now and completely open, and its mowed
pretty often. But the activity happens here
in Perrien Park and not across the street.
That’s a funny thing about this piece of
land. It might not be as kept as it once was,
but people still know that it’s public land,
and that has meaning. So they are more
likely to use it, to take care of it, to look
out for it.

23

NEIGHBORS

27

WORKING drawings

BUILD!
JAMES
CHESNUT
CHRISTOPHER
REZNICH
ALLEN
GILLERS
30
Imaging Detroit was a deployable
cultural infrastructure – built off site,
trucked in, and assembled over the
course of several weeks in Perrien
Park.
Our aim was to build big, fast, light
and cheap, to use simple, vernacular
materials and assembly logics, and,
most importantly, to deploy onsite
construction as public interphase
- visible and accessible. Building
as public process would allow us
to create a presence, to render
the project gradually legible and,
however contemporary or alien in
form, contextual through relational
bonds. The resulting support that we
received, both moral and manual, was
moving and critical to the success of
the project.
Building big in this context, was not
conceived solely as an act of pomp >>

31

32

>> or spectacle, it was a tactic
to create a visible indicator of
programmatic emergence on the
expansive six acre site - to have the
structure work as marker and public
invitation. To inflate the scale of the
intervention while working within
a clear budgetary framework, we
planned to supersize a skeletal system
and insert a series of programmatic
pockets. We soon realized that
using metal scaffolding would prove
unfeasible due to the material’s
resale value (a provocation to scrap).
Consequently we turned to stick
frame construction - studs, screws
and plywood sheathing – a ubiquitous
building technique securely outside of
the recycling market.
Using dimensional lumber we
fabricated trusses and walls, connected
the elements with rafters, and
produced four distinct programmatic
spaces. We worked off site to design,
test, and adjust the structure prior to
the final installation. This strategy
of preemptive assembly and deinstallation
enabled us to strategically
tweak the components of the “pop-up”,
insuring that it could, in fact, be raised
quickly and without incident.
To build at a consequential scale, we
developed step by step procedures.
First, we would layout the parts –
plates, sluds, cords and webs; next,
assemble the elements horizontally on
the ground; stand and brace; connect
to constituent components; and finally,
paint the plywood surfaces “hot lips”
pink. The programmed spaces (cinema,
gallery, forum, and library) were, thus,
linked together by a system of trusses,
rendering the overall aggregate
porous, playful, and inclusive.
It was critical to us not to enclose the
program in a series of pavilions, not
produce thresholds, not to segregate
the landscape in any way. The project
was tactically sited in order to ensure
maximum programmatic fluidity,
exchange, accidental encounter, which
much like the organization of the
construction unit itself remained
mutable in scale and charge from
design to realization.
But perhaps the most compelling
thing about working with stick frame
construction is that the materials
and methods so easily plug into
Detroit’s residential fabric. When
Imaging Detroit was deconstructed,
its sheathing and framework
were redistributed to community
organizations for the reconstruction
of porches and sheds. So hints of pink
remain…

34

35

36

37

11'11-1/2" 12'0-1/2" 14'10-1/4"
38'10-1/4"
37'1-7/16"
17'1-7/16"
20'0"
10'9-1/8"
16'1-11/16"
22'5-3/16"
28'4-1/8"
32'1-15/16"
8'8-13/16"
18'1-13/16"
23'0-3/16"
36'2"
8'5-11/16"
9'5-5/8"
4'10-1/8"
8'11"
9'5-5/16"
12'3-3/16"
14'1-15/16"
9'5-1/16"
5'5-1/2"
2'9-7/16"
16'8-1/2"
17'4-3/16"
9'1-3/4"
16'3-1/2"
7'6-15/16"
63 bev
54 bev
90.00¬
2'0-3/4"
1'3-15/16"
2'7-5/16"
8'6-1/8"
5'7-11/16"
6'3-1/2"
3'0-7/16"
7'5-15/16"
6'10-11/16"
5'0-15/16"
6'6-15/16"
4'11-3/4"
2'0-7/8"
51 bev
54 bev
62 bev
60 bev
55 bev
39 bev
63 bev
57 bev
54 bev
61 bev
71 bev
55 bev
18.01°
29.33°
75.55°
32.08°
46.53°
17.60°
32.05°
32.08°
46.53°
17.60°
32.05°
14.45°
33.98°
29.72°
4.65°
51.99°
4.26°
3'2-1/16"
62.04°
7.06°
65.56°
49.12°
16.44°
42.06°
24.59°
3.74°
40.53°
17.03°
90.00°
44.26°
61.30°
1'3-1/8"
5-1/16"
5-7/16"
3'1-3/16"
8'5-13/16"
10'7-15/16"
10'11-3/4"
7'1-5/16"
10'0-13/16"
10'0-13/16"
9'7-3/16"
5'3-3/8"
11-1/2"
2'5-3/8"
1'0-3/4"
10'8-7/8"
7'4-1/2"
10'6-15/16"
5'9-7/8"
7'8-1/4"
6'4"
23'6"
5'8-9/16"
4'10-13/16"
11'0-1/4"
9-9/16"
5-1/2"
5'7-13/16"
4'10-1/2"
2'1-11/16"
4-7/16"
13'7-5/8"
11'7-5/8"
9'7-5/8"
7'1-7/16"
4'3-15/16"
1'7-15/16"
1-15/16"
6'5-7/16"
3'11-1/4"
3'9-13/16"
1'0-3/4"
1-5/8"
11'3"
5'10-13/16"
11'1-3/16"
16'5-5/16"
10'3-15/16"
10'8-15/16"
10'11-3/4"
6'10-13/16"
4'10-13/16"
6'3-1/8"
2'5-1/16"
1'7-15/16"
10'9-1/2"
7'10-3/16"
15'6-15/16"
8'0-7/8"
2'10-13/16"
7'7-3/4"
10'1-7/16"
8'10-11/16"
10-13/16"
10'10-11/16"
2'3-3/16"
11'9-1/2"
10'10-5/16"
5'10"
15'9-1/8"
13'10-3/8"
7'11-7/8"
5'7-5/16"
9'0-5/8"
3'3-3/4"
10'3-3/8"
8'6-1/8"
5'5-7/16"
2'4-3/4"
3'11-1/8"
18'5-5/8"
4'3-7/8"
5'4-1/4"
9'10-1/4"
9'8-15/16"
8'3-5/8"
5'2-1/16"
6'10-1/4"
13'5-9/16"
22'3"
8'10"
5'6-3/4
7'9-3/8"
7'7-3/4"
6'11-3/16"
10'9-15/16"
8'10-9/16"
2'0"
2'0"
1'11-1/4"
44.27°
6.92°
6.92°
38.04°
38.04°
38.04°
30.62°
21.35°
45.04°
6.92°
6.92°
38.04°
21.35°
21.35°
30.62°
17.54°
27.42°
27.42°
45.04°
45.04°
22.79°
40.90°
18.94°
57.72°
35.53°
35.53°
18.94
18.94°
45.73°
1'2-7/16"
2'6-1/2"
3'10-9/16"
5'2-5/8"
6'6-11/16"
7'10-3/4"
9'2-13/16"
10'6-7/8"
10'2-1/4"
21'10-1/2"
12'2-3/4"
9'10-9/16"
2'6-7/8"
16'9-11/16"
1'10-3/8"
2'0-7/8"
2'0-7/8"
1'10-5/8"
31'4-3/4"
2'5-5/8"
2'11-1/8"
9'7-11/16"
9'1-3/16"
8'3-5/8"
5'6-1/8"
2'8-5/8"
3'0-1/8"
2'8-3/8"
4'5-7/16"
3'11-11/16"
7'7-13/16"
9'11-1/8"
7'6-1/2"
5'1-7/8"
2'9-5/16"
1'2-3/4"
8-7/8"
2'9-7/16"
2'7-13/16"
2'6-1/4"
2'4-5/8"
2'2-7/16"
11'4-1/4"
7'8"
7'6-11/16"
16'10-9/16"
32'7-1/4"
22'0-3/8"
9'6-1/2"
1'6-1/16"
4'5-13/16"
7'5-9/16"
10'5-5/16"
6'4-7/16"
5'10-11/16"
5'4-15/16"
0-11/16"
1'8-7/16"
8'0-1/2"
3'11-7/8"
3'11-7/8"
3'11-7/8"
2'0-1/4"
10-15/16"
2'11-5/8" 2'0-11/16"
2'3-3/16"
2'5-1/16" 2'11-5/16" 2'9-3/16" 2'9-3/16" 2'9-3/16" 3'2-5/8"
2'10-3/4"
1'8-7/16"
3'4-3/16"
7-5/8"
3'11-3/8"
8-5/16"
4'11-3/16"
11'11-3/4"
9'5-7/8"
14'4-11/16"
2'0"
2'0-11/16"
2'10-7/8"
4-3/16"
1'1-13/16"
7-7/16"
2'2-3/16"
1'2-7/16" 6-5/8"
8'9-3/16"
4'9-3/8"
6'5-5/16"
5'8-7/8"
1'0"
10'4"
6'5-3/4"
2'7-7/16"
3'5-3/16"
6'8-5/16"
3'5-11/16"
4'10-1/16"
1'11-5/8" 3'2-3/4"
7'5-3/8"
4'11-1/2"
4'7-11/16"
3'0-3/8"
3'8-3/4"
62.86°
46.73°
61.95°
90.00°
61.95°
90.00°
11.37°
43.27°
90.00°
48.35°
90.00°
15.28°
.00°
7
90.00°
15.28°
90.00°
43.25°
15.28°
90.00°
80.70°
90.00°
13.30°
90.00°
13.30°
90.00°
90.00°
43.69°
13.38°
90.00°
90.00°
90.10°
38.31°
90.00°
90.00°
3.79°
90.00°
59.93°
90.00°
13.38°
60.02°
62.86°
46.39°
48.88°
90.00°
33.01°
33.01°
90.00°
43.45°
90.00°
30.07°
42.40°
90.00°
43.45°
90.18°
90.18°
90.00°
5.42°
34.39°
90.00°
9.11°
90.00°
42.06°
42.62°
20.92°
13.57°
90.00°
13.57°
90.00°
8.38°
4
42.23°
90.00°
37.35°
90.00°
13.57°
28.89°
89.99°
30.74°
35.95°
15.42°
36.03°
45.69°
28.89°
16.75°
37.26
8.38°
47.26°
26.74°
42.74°
20.52°
5.20°
26.74°
42.06°
42.06°
P5
P4
Wing/roof Bracing
Library
LW3
LW2
LW1
P2
P1
CW3
CW4

9'5-5/16"
35'9-1/4"
14'0" 9'9-1/4" 12'0"
18'0"
15'11-11/16"
7'8-3/16"
15'11-3/4"
19'10-13/16"
9'7-11/16"
4'5-9/16"
24'11-5/8"
29'4-7/16"
33'11-11/16"
3'0-3/4"
4'4-5/8"
15'1-3/4"
3'11-1/8"
7'11-7/8"
9'4-3/4"
7'10-1/8"
8'6-5/8"
4'7-11/16"
7'5-1/16"
12'0-13/16"
9'8-3/8"
3-13/16"
5'10-15/16"
1'1-1/2"
2'1-5/8"
8'3-3/4"
1'9-15/16"
5'3-3/8"
6'0-1/8"
20'8"
18'10-7/8"
20'0"
1'6-1/4"
2'9-3/8"
4'5-5/16"
2'9-5/8"
8'5-1/8"
21'6-9/16"
9'7-5/8" 16'0-3/8"
4'3"
6'9-1/8"
11'2-1/16"
14'9-1/4"
2'10-5/8"
2'4-5/16"
4'9"
9'3-7/16"
17'11-1/4"
44'2-13/16"
15'5"
11-5/8"
4'0"
4'0"
2'10-1/16"
9'9-11/16"
14'5-5/16"
12'9-3/16"
11'1"
9'4-13/16"
7'8-11/16"
6'0-1/2"
4'4-5/16"
2'8-3/16"
17'0-7/16"
2'2-3/16"
4'4-13/16"
2'7-1/8"
5'9-3/4"
4'3-3/4"
1'8-3/8"
14'2-5/8"
13'9-3/8"
5'0-9/16"
8'8-1/4"
18'7-1/4"
24'8"
31'3-15/16"
4'6-15/16"
4-13/16"
11'4-5/8"
20'10-7/8"
22'0"
11'9-1/4"
12'2-1/2"
20'0"
12'2-7/8"
44'5-3/8"
3-1/16"
14'1-9/16"
28'0"
13'2-3/8"
23'4-7/16"
7'4"
1'9-15/16"
18'6-1/2"
9'11-5/16"
1'8-15/16"
3'6-15/16"
2'11-5/8"
1'0-13/16"
4'10-13/16"
6'11-15/16"
3'11-15
5'1-5/16"
5'0-3/8"
2'8-11/16"
5'9-13/16"
5'11-3/16"
1'4"
2'4-3/4"
27'7-9/16"
21'6"
28'0-5/8"
11'0-3/8"
2'5-1/8"
8'0"
7'4-1/16"
24'2-1/8"
8'1-3/8"
7'11-1/2"
26'10-3/16"
19'6-11/16"
11'3-3/8"
6'6-11/16"
1'7-5/8"
4'9-7/16"
2'5-1/8"
6'3-3/16"
37'6-9/16"
5'9-5/16"
6'7-1/16"
3'7-11/16"
10'4-1/8"
9'6-3/8"
6'11-3/16"
5'10-13/16"
6'7-1/2"
10'10"
5'9-1/4"
5'7-11/16"
9'8-1/16"
6'9-1/2"
5'10-9/16"
9'8-3/16"
8'5-1/2"
5'0"
3'6-3/8"
6'11-7/8"
14'6-1/8"
14'11-5/8"
12'7-15/16"
12'0-5/8" 16'0"
16'0"
16'0"
5'6-9/16"
16'0" 15'5-5/8"
31'5-5/8"
6'11-3/16" 14'6-13/16"
21'6"
4'1-5/16"
8'5-1/16"
11'6-11/16"
9'10-9/16"
8'3-1/16"
6'6-1/4"
7'4-11/16"
9'10-7/8"
11'0-5/8"
9'11-1/4"
9'8-9/16"
5'10-11/16"
8'11-7/8"
6'6-1/16"
4'7-3/16"
15'11-5/8"
5'5-15/16"
4'0-1/4"
4'6-1/8" 5'7-3/4"
3'6-11/16"
4'6-1/8"
1'7-1/16"
3'10-7/16"
2'4-15/16"
4'8-3/8"
4'9-3/16"
3'11-1/16"
0"
3'11-1/16"
22'8-7/8"
21'2"
14'4-13/16"
7'6-1/16"
17'9-1/8"
56.02°
74.27°
31.40°
47.13°
32.05°
16.32°
47.13°
16.32°
15.73°
32.05°
31.40°
18.81°
29.70°
40 degree bevel rip
49. 8°
90. 0°
2.79°
90. 0°
49. 8°
40.12°
22.79°
60.15°
36.89°
72.19°
69.02°
12.90°
33.88°
4.16°
16.82°
11.63°
32.61°
90.00°
33.41°
35.61°
71.71°
78.57°
25.99°
37.78°
37.42°
49.22°
25.99°
37.42°
48.96°
7.70°
30.67°
25.99°
90.00°
45.00°
45.00°
90.00°
21.01°
45.02°
6.50°
43.34°
16.44°
90.00°
90.00°
45.00°
45.00°
23.99°
21.01°
23.99°
7.55°
45.00°
90.00°
40.51°
89.98°
4.52°
44.98°
44.86°
45.00°
14.53°
45.00°
19.37°
1.66°
44.79°
23.97°
45.00°
45.00°
21.03°
21.03°
29.90°
14
29.93°
35.69°
35.82°
89.05°
34.87°
10.58°
45.00°
34.51°
44.98°
34.53°
45.00°
10.47°
34.53°
90.00°
45.00°
10.47°
34.53°
90.00°
55.47°
2'4-7/8"
15'2-7/8"
4'8-3/16"
2'4-7/16"
2'4-1/2"
4'11-11/16"
4'5-5/8"
7'5-3/4"
19'5-7/8"
18'3-5/16"
10'8-1/16"
14'1-3/8"
6'11-3/16"
10'6-3/8"
23'0-3/4"
1'8-5/8"
5'0-3/8"
9'6-1/2"
5'5-5/8"
4'7-1/16"
23'11-1/16"
5'1-3/4"
6'11-5/8"
6'2-3/4"
4'2-1/8"
4'7-7/8"
Angle = 35.83
8'2-3/16"
10'5-15/16"
12'9-5/8"
12'9-3/8"
1'8"
2'0"
2'0"
2'8-3/4"
2'0"
49.13°
16.16°
16.16°
10.20°
10.20°
33.26°
46.54°
31.53°
42.31°
25.37°
18.70°
9.48°
90.00°
9.21°
54.43°
63.64°
63.64°
54.43°
26.36°
54.43°
40.88°
1.34°
41.98°
46.69°
1'10-1/8"
10'1-1/2"
10-1/2" 2'0-3/16"
9'9
9'6-1
9'4-1
9'1-1
16'8-3/4"
9'3-1/4"
23'4-15/16"
8'5-15/16"
1'10-11/16"
2'8-3/4"
1'2-1/4"
3'11-3/16"
1'4-5/16"
2'0"
1'1-1/8
"
13'3-7/16"
6'5-3/16" 13'2-3/8"
32'11-7/8"
9'8-3/8"
13'11-1/2"
10'3-3/8"
3'6"
17'11-3/16"
1'6-3/8"
7'2-3/8"
12'6-1/16"
12'9-1/8"
14'4-7/8"
14'0-1/4"
2'10-7/8"
5'11-13/16"
9'0-13/16"
5'0-9/16"
10'6-1/2"
15'3-3/16"
7'2-9/16"
15'3-7/16"
1'4-7/8"
1'0-1/8"
7'3-7/16"
5'2-13/16"
13'4-5/16"
60.02°
57.12°
42.89°
90.00°
6.92°
90.00°
37.33°
90.00°
68.54°
90.00°
90.00°
90.00°
14.54°
54.03°
14.54°
90.00°
21.46°
39.34°
47.11°
48.26°
54.03°
90.00°
24.18°
18.68°
23.37°
47.95°
18.68°
23.37°
23.37°
43.25°
43.25°
47.14°
47.14°
47.14°
18'9-5/8"
18'7-1/4"
13'2-9/16"
15'4-3/4"
15'6-1/16"
17'7-3/4"
31'7"
4'1-15/16"
40'7-1/8"
21 Degree Angle
20'0"
9'10-3/16"
2'3- 1/16"
13'9-7/8"
6'5-3/4"
13'8-3/8"
20'0"
1'9-5/16"
6'6-1/16"
12'5-7/8"
14.70°
90. 0°
46.20°
21.13°
15.64°
46.20°
90. 0°
5. 6°
15.67°
15.64°
46.20°
28.16°
46.20°
90.00°
2.20°
46.20°
2
P8
P6
Corner Assembly
P4-6
C Cap
P7
P3
CW 1

the sign
JAMES CHESNUT
40
When planning a media festival on
a six acre park, where do you begin?
How do you announce the project
without seeming invasive? How do you
render the coming attraction visible
without disturbing the informal uses
and layered emergent programs on
a complex site populated by various
discrete groups? How do you use
the site to both bypass and engage
mediatization?
In the case of Imaging Detroit, we
started with a sign - a ten foot high,
sixty foot long stud and plywood
structure designed to indicate that
something new was in the works. The
sign, produced through an anamorphic
projection of Imaging Detroit’s
letters onto the oblique surfaces of a
triangulated truss, was positioned at
the intersection of Warren Avenue and
Chene Street. The sign’s privileged
vantage point both emphasized the
entrance to the park and when askew
created a graphic sense of motion for
passing pedestrians and vehicles.
The sign went up six weeks before
the event itself, presenting us with
our first opportunity for public
engagement with local residents,
passers-by, police officers, religious
leaders, and news organization. Many
were concerned about the risk of
putting up a sign so far in advance of
the event itself, warning that in a park
as generally overlooked as Perrien,
securing durability, no matter how
ephemeral, would be a difficult task.
The park showed signs of ordinary
neglect – broken street lights, cut

wires, tall grasses. From neighbors,
we learned that typically the park was
landscaped twice a season, but that
often times local residents would help
with the intermittent maintenance
themselves. We learned, too, that
Perrien Park was an asset to its
neighborhood and used frequently by
the local residents.
Almost immediately after the sign was
installed on site, the park witnessed
the arrival of regular maintenance
crews. Grass was cut regularly,
and the garbage removed. Some
residents attribute this to the event
and the presence of the sign. The sign
remained in its original condition on
maintained landscape for nearly six
weeks until just days before the event.

42

THE LIBRARY
The curatorial project for Imaging
Detroit’s librarians was to showcase
as broad a range of printed material
as possible, including both widely
distributed and self-published titles
that figure Detroit as protagonist or
visual luminary. The assembled genres
were similarly wide-ranging: historical,
projective, photographic, architectural,
speculative, comic, personal,
anonymous etc. Formats extended
from local self-published pamphlets to
high-end foreign art presses.
The Library also featured work that
has had limited public exposure:
reports from academic studies
and conference proceedings,
artists’ monographs, journals, etc.
Carefully Curated works were
combined throughout the library’s
shelves with the freely submitted
and donated, thereby adding an
overlay of the untamed with the
manicured. The content of the
library is a curated combination
of eminence, inconspicuousness,
notoriety, opportunism, activism, and
self-reflection.
The ultimate collection offered a
kaleidoscopic vision of Detroit – past,
present and future – at Perrien Park’s
northeastern entrance. For many
visitors, this vision acted as the event’s
threshold, and allowed visitors to
peruse the varied titles individually
before joining the collective
ALLEN GILLERS

45

the GALLERY
46

Marie Combes/ Serie Les Fugitives

48

49
Marie Combes/ Serie Les Fugitives

50

51
MODCaR’s Simple Guide to the Picturesque/ Jean Louis Farges

THE FORUM
MIREILLE RODDIER
52
Producing the Imaging Detroit
anthology involved screening
hundreds of contemporary
documentary works, each with a
storyline that, aside from a few notable
ones, asserted itself as an authoritative
portrayal of Detroit. Some of them
were even produced purely to counter
previously propagated depictions.
From the collection of films, a handful
of predominant narratives emerged,
loosely organized around six different
themes: Culture Now!, Productive
Pastoral, Reboot, Post-America, Do-
It-Together and Pride, respectively
centered around: the role of the
arts in the economy of the city, the
surplus of vacant land as a resource,
Detroit as the ideal “platform for
entrepreneurial explosion,” Detroit
as world-headquarters of ruin porn,
self-organized community building,
and lastly, Detroiters’ incomparable
spirit of resilience and pride.
These themes became the basis for
six different collections of screenings,
which were edited into 35-minute
segments of shorts, trailers and
excerpts. The intention was not only
to make these representations public
and accessible to Detroiters, but more
importantly to run them by the local
public and receive its feedback and
commentaries. By explicitly projecting
the representations of Detroit in the
city, a strange mise-en-abyme was
staged which enabled the possibility
to frame the artifice of the narrative
constructs themselves. The margins
for either credence or suspended >>

54

>> disbelief were removed, as
the images reflected back from
international filmmakers and global
productions were confronted with the
reality of the instant, the city, and its
subjects. The Detroit public, which had
been actively invited over the course of
the previous months, was as essential
to the forum as the films projected. If
Detroit has served as a mirror to the
filmmakers wanting confirmation of
the narratives they projected upon it,
the public reflected those projections
right back into questions, activating
the site into a choreographed moment
of truth.
Between the films and the public,
thirty-two experts were invited
to mediate and orchestrate
the conversation. As the third
indispensable component of the forum,
the Discourse-Jockeys engaged the
conversation through the relation
between their own expertise and the
constructed images discussed. The
six original and over-generalizing
narratives de-multiplied into thirtytwo
points of view, refining nuances
in the differing attitudes. Each of the
six screening sessions was followed
by a conversation led by five or six of
the carefully curated DJ’s. Each panel
maximized the potential for face-toface
dialogues that rarely find form
in physical space, let alone in public
space. Engaged in the discussion were
theorists and practitioners, insiders
and outsiders, elected officials and
anarchists, moneymakers and Marxist
critics, Detroiters and foreigners,
media moguls and iconoclasts, cultural
producers and neo-Luddites. Debate
ensued, sometimes between DJs,
sometimes between a DJ and a public
participant, and tensions undeniably
manifested in unedited tonal and facial
expressions.
Staging the spatial relations between
the films, the public and the DJs, the
pop-up architecture of the event
attempted to instigate the paradoxical
nature of the forum. Public
microphones, as well as a multitude of
yellow MDF-capped Sonotube seats
of varying heights were scattered
through out the freshly cut grass,
inviting the public and the DJs to
informally seat and exchange ideas
and point of views, free of imposed
hierarchal structure. >>

>> Television screens were mounted
on a wall that functioned as both
the focus of attention during the
screenings and an informational
backdrop during the conversational
sessions. The forum was also framed
by the “barnacle wall”, which filtered
the afternoon light, producing a
simultaneously grand yet incredibly
modest environment for a set of
sessions that showed no trace of
paradoxical deficiencies: between
Detroit as its subject, its object, and its
site, the forum reified the very space
of Derridean différance, existing both
as signifier and signified, occurring
after the films yet before the cameras,
producing synthesis as data.
As architects, our attempt was to
activate to the best of our abilities, a
space of democracy—a space that, in
the words of Chantal Mouffe, cannot
consist of pure consensus but must
include dissent and disagreement: an
agonistic public space. “In a pluralist
democracy, such disagreements
should be considered legitimate and
indeed welcome,” she writes. “They
provide different forms of citizenship
identification and are the stuff of
democratic politics.” 1 For Jacques
Rancière, the space of dissensus is
more precisely located between two
types of pedagogies, ethical immediacy
and representational mediation. It’s
positioned in the conflict, as he writes,
between sense and sense, “between
a sensory presentation and a way of
making sense of it, or between several
sensory regimes and/or ‘bodies’.” 2
The intentions behind the design of
the forum as an event-space, were
precisely to enhance the possibilities of
this dissensus, through the conjunction
of the three processes that, according
to Rancière, define the paradigm of a
critical art when enacted concurently:
“first, the production of a sensory
form of ‘strangeness’; second, the
development of an awareness of the
reason for that strangeness and third, a
mobilization of individuals as a result
of that awareness.” 3 The strangeness
was certainly by design, was inevitably
experienced, awkwardly acknowledged
and intensively discussed. As for
the outcome of its mobilization, it’s
too early to tell, but the seeds were
planted.
____
1
Chantal Mouffe, “For an Agonistic Public Sphere” in
Okwui Enwezor ed., Democracy Unrealized (Ostifildern-
Ruit, Germany: Hatje Cantz Publishers, 2002): 89.
2
Jacques Rancière, “The Paradoxes of Political Art,” in
Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics (Continuum, 2010): 137.

57

60

61

“
What we all need to be working
on is a larger agenda, which isn’t
about how to market Detroit. We
should be thinking about how to
transfer the knowledge that has
been produced here, which might
actually be unique.
”
-- Miguel Robles-Duran
62

63

64

the SCREENING ROOM
MISSY ABLIN
Of documentaries produced in the past
decade featuring a city-as-protagonist
Detroit is a contendor for if not
the star of the decade. Seeking to
anthologize Detroit’s diffuse celebrity
we began its curatorial process with
a list of over 100 documentaries,
films, and music videos. The initial
inventory would provide non-stop
screening for a week. And our
progamming was scheduled to run
for two days. To narrow things down,
we spent weeks screening material
accessible and contacting filmmakers
for works not available in the public
domain. We aimed to collect a range
of contemporary works - diverse
in format and content - in order
to produce a pluralistic, collective,
nuanced and timely portrayal of a
heterogeneous city. To this end we
cast a wide call for submission of both
new and existing work, unedited or
highly polished. Submissions came in
from New York, Turkey, Melbourne
and other dispersed locations.
They came from folks who found
our call for submission on Bustler,
Facebook, Twitter and from chance
meetings with filmmakers working in
Detroit. Without a budget allocated
for screening fees, our ultimate
compilation of fifty some films came
from those willing to donate to the
dialogue. The Screening Room ran
continuously for 25hours:15minutes:45
seconds, projecting back onto Detroit
the images and narratives created
65
about it. Free and open for all to watch
and discuss.

66
Ji Hye Kim/San Street

pop up snack boys
ALLEN GILLERS
Everyone loves food. For Imaging
Detroit MODCaR partnered with
Mark’s Carts to bring tasty treats to
Perrien Park. The perfect compliment
to our ephemeral urbanity, food carts
were parked on the Grandy Street
edge of the site offering a wide range
of epicurean delights. Meat lovers,
Vegetarians and Vegans alike, everyone
had a chance to join in a communal
meal.
To make the food accessible to
everyone, the Pop-up Snack boys
spontaneously emerged, trays in
hand, passing out generous samples
throughout the day. The Snack Boys’
main objective was to avoid lines
of any kind, and to offer a friendly
alternative to other common methods
of food distribution. Neither soup
kitchen, nor formal affair; it was simply
an inclusive continuation of the public
dialogue over food.

“
“
The celebratory discourse threatens to
allow those outside of the city to be like,
“well there’s even less reasons now to
allocate tax resources, look they’re doing
fine, didn’t you see all of these amazing
inspiring videos?
”
-- DAVID BUUCK
68

69

70

JAYNA
ZWEIMAN
impressions from a Los
Angeles media consultant
on the outside working in
My main charge at Imaging Detroit
was to create and use social media and
communication strategies to bring
people to a park that only its neighbors
knew for an unusual event that was
dependent on participation.
It was a multilateral effort of creating
digital places and spaces, organizing
dozens of hours of films and
discourse jockey- led programming,
and physically designing and building
Imaging Detroit that brought
hundreds of people together one
drizzly September weekend.
The combination and play between
different ways of approaching and
reaching people was evident in the
diversity of participants. From moving
back and forth between pavilions some
of the people I met were neighbors,
a fireman, a DJ from Camaroon, a
professor from New York, a person >>
71

72
>> who lives at the Packard plant, a
teamster, and someone with a goal of
turning open land in Detroit into a fish
farm.
Every so often, a person driving a car
along Warren Avenue would slow
down and shout out to me, “Hey,
What is this?” We would talk, and
sometimes, she would join.
Imaging Detroit was an alternate
ephemeral reality. The new physical
environment Imaging Detroit
created was an architecture that was
typologically hard to place. Because
it wasn’t a bus stop, a gas station, a
library, there was no clear precedent of
how exactly to move through it, how
to be in it. Because of its freshness,
there was more possibility for people
to meet, watch, relax, talk, and listen.
Networks of academics, filmmakers,
business people, community leaders,
neighbors, students, unemployed folks,
musicians, designers, and architects
converged in one spot. It involved
building relationships and spaces to
culminate in a weekend of interactions
in Perrien Park. Imaging Detroit
became a node.

73

COUNTER-experiment detroit
ANGELA LAST
Mutable Matter, Metropolitan
Observatory of
Digital Culture and Representation
Fellow 2012
74
‘So, what brings you to this place of
Post-Fordism?’ Somewhat confusingly,
I was asked this question not in
Detroit, but at a Jamaican food stall in
Hulme, Manchester. Having literally
just returned from Detroit, this felt
like an odd reprise – as did seeing
the ruined entrails of the Hulme
Hippodrome where my band was
performing at a fundraiser for Youth
Village. It seemed like an apt place to
write something on a very different
festival, Imaging Detroit, which
was put on at Detroit’s Perrien Park
byMODCaR, a ‘coalition of builders,
writers, designers, photographers,
teachers, filmmakers, landscapers,
graphic designers and students’
founded by architects Mireille Roddier,
Anya Sirota and Jean Louis Farges
and sponsored by the University
of Michigan’s Taubman College of
Architecture and Urban Planning
(TCAUP). Having lost my notes
somewhere in the dark while fiddling
with the film projector, I have to
reconstruct things from memory. (I
hope I do get the chance to listen back
to all of the panels, although there
were many irretrievable informal
conversations going on in the park,
between and amongst Detroiters and
visitors.)
For those who have not read my earlier
posts, I participated in the Imaging
Detroitfestival as a MODCaR fellow,
contributing a short ‘illustrated
podcast’ called ‘Sounds Like Detroit’.
The festival aimed to draw attention
to – and discuss – what could be
described as a ‘representation war’
over the city. So far, the people at
MODCaR have unearthed over 150
documentaries on the birthplace of

Fordism, most of them produced in
the last few years: by activists, artist,
film-makers from inside and outside
Detroit, and, more recently, by big
corporations.
About fifty of those films were debated
by the Imaging Detroit audience
and so called ‘discourse jockeys’
(moderators/discussants) under the
six most prominent film themes:
Culture Now!, Productive Pastoral,
Reboot, Post-America, Do-it-together
and Pride. Since these representations
continue to affect Detroiters in a
myriad of ways, the discussions often
became very agitated and emotional.
Due to my inability to give a summary
of the entire event, I will focus on
the term that most stuck with me:
experimentation – a term that is
currently proliferating in academic
and activist circles, an empassioned
example being Doreen Massey’s recent
call for experimentation at the‘Maps
for an Island Planet’ event.
Detroit has often been described as
a socio-economic experiment. Its
mythical chief experimenter, Henry
Ford, has become associated with the
proliferation of a new mass production
system, technological innovation,
intrusive worker control (through
the company’s own ‘Sociological
Department’), encouragement of
working class property ownership
and the staging of Ford’s own
version of industrial history in the
Greenfield model village. Detroit’s
infrastructure, characterized by
isolated neighborhoods (dis)connected
by freeways, counts as a combined
experiment in car culture promotion
and racial segregation.
At Imaging Detroit, experimentation
featured strongly as a theme in
both panels and films. While some
people saw themselves as victims of
capitalist/corporate/white American
experimentation, others asserted the
role of the experimenter. Those that
regarded themselves as experimented
on often voiced hope for an influx
of either large or small businesses
in order to normalise the city. The
experimenters, on the other hand,
made clear that Detroiters were not
powerless guinea pigs, but in fact
leading the way in matters such as civil
rights, workers rights and alternative
imaginaries against corporate America.
Obviously, no neat separation between
75
experimenters and experimented
could be traced, as people frequently
felt part of both positions: as victims
of a ‘shock doctrine’ approach to >> >>

>> public services (to use the words
of activist Shea Howell who, I think
also suggested that ‘those people who
keep arguing for less government
involvement in their lives should all
move to Detroit!’), and as people who
are honing tactics against and beyond
it.
So why Detroit? Coming across to me
from the different and differing voices
during the festival was a sense that it
is exactly this history of inequality
and aggressive advertisement of
individualist consumer culture
that serves as a provocation to try
something else. Audrey Hunter, an
interviewee in the film ‘Détroit, un
rêve en ruine’, gave an example of the
inspiration that many black activists
in the city draw on: the tension
between the concepts they associate
with ‘African’ and ‘American’. For
experimenters such as her, the African
symbolises the ‘we/us/our whereas
the American signifies ‘I/me/mine’:
‘As long as you keep functioning
as an individual, we can’t even take
advantage of the blight to take control
of our community, to build what it is
that we won’t build.’
This image was occasionally
evoked against the perceived media
stereotype of Detroit as being ‘full of
enterprising young white people and…
then there are these ‘soulful’ black
people’ (discourse jockey Cornelius
Harris). The question of control, or
rather the struggle over control of
representations of the city, was crucial
to many debates.
This struggle, to me, was particularly
made present through the series
Detroit: Overdrive: loud, fast and
ultra-high definition (the biggest file
size in the whole programme), this
adrenaline-inducing documentary
comes as slick and corporate as it
gets. Sponsored by General Motors
and aired by the Discovery Channel’s
ironically titled Planet Green, this
documentary is clearly produced as a
counter-narrative to both economic
blight and alternative economics. It is
interesting that, while many ‘blight’
stories seem intended mostly as
cautionary fables for audiences outside
of the city, Detroit: Overdrive sought
to inspire both inside and outside.
Advertised in downtown Detroit on
huge billboards, the posters claimed:
‘This is your story – we are just telling
it!’ And what is the story? Detroit as
the continued seat of All-American
commerce and innovation, now
turning out products such as Kid
Rock’s ‘Badass’ beer and Motor City
themed designer jeans. >>

77

78

>> This strategy, to quote ‘discourse
jockey’ and photographer Noah
Stephens, can be summarised as:
‘Gentrify the popular imagination
of Detroit.’ This may raise alarm
bells with people in cities such as
London where gentrification has very
negative associations with misguided
development, rarely benefitting those
it claims to support, e.g. Docklandslike
social segregation or higher rents
forcing out the original population,
something which, according to local
film-maker Oren Goldenberg, is
already happening in some parts
of Detroit. In the case of Detroit:
Overdrive, and documentaries in this
vein, it felt as if the over-the-top, big
budget representation of innovation
as a driver of prosperity had been
wheeled out as a piece of heavy
artillery against the ramshackle army
of comparatively lo-fi images of
ridicule, doom and utopian visions
(although, it has to be said, some low
budget ‘gentrification’ attempts also
exist). Like the media wars during
the American presidential elections,
the struggle for the supremacy of
visions appears to be in full swing:
whose vision will take hold of the
popular imagination? Will alternative
experiments stand a chance against the
corporate PR machine? And what do
these experiments consist of ?
The latter question seems to be the
most difficult, as it became evident
from listening to all of the panels.
There was a feeling that people from
outside Detroit were attracted to the
city precisely for this experimentation,
but often just ‘parachuted in, talking
and doing nothing’ (audience
comment). In the first panel, the
suggestion was made for Detroiters
to network with other ‘experimental
spaces’ in the world, to learn from one
another’s unique strategies against
common problems, and to disseminate
this knowledge (e.g. discourse jockey
Miguel Robles-Duran). Here, Sabine
Gruffat’s film ‘I have always been a
dreamer’, an unlikely comparison (at
first glance) of Detroit andDubai,
provided food for thought. In this
sense, Imaging Detroit did feel
like a moment of learning and
experimentation, albeit on a small
scale. How much experimentation
took place and will take place by its
participants? This is difficult to track
and perhaps an irrelevant question.
What seems, on the other hand, more
relevant, is that Detroit, as a place of
exchanging and working on visions is,
indeed, ‘open for business’.

80

“
if only the people who
really don’t want
government in their lives
would come here, they’d
find out what its like, and
could resettle the city.
”
- Margi Dewar

STATESIDE
MERCEDES MEJIA
Michigan National Public Radio
Film festival
shines spotlight
on Detroit
82
People are making a lot of movies
about Detroit these days. More than
60 of those films will be screened this
weekend at an outdoor film festival in
Detroit’s Perrien Park.
Organizers hope to spark conversation
about how Detroit is seen by
Michiganders, and the rest of the
world.
25 hours, 15 minutes and 45 seconds
of film, documentaries and music
videos - all about Detroit.
“It’s kind of wild how many [films]
have been made in the last 3 or 4
years...I wasn’t aware it was on
this scale,” said filmmaker Nicole
Macdonald.
She was born and raised in Detroit.
Her documentary A City to Yourself will
be in the festival.
A lot of the films are what you’d
expect. There are stories of
abandonment, stories about crime, but
there are also films about Detroit’s
pride, and there’s some of the bizarre
side of the city.
The film festival is all of these images
put together in one place.
Anya Sirota is an Assistant Professor
of Architecture and Urban Planning at
the University of Michigan. And she’s
one of the festival’s organizers.
“We’ve sort of made a cocktail, but
we don’t know what it’s going to taste
like,” Sirota said.
She says the event is kind of like a
neighborhood block party, with some
movies, food and music. But, instead
of DJ’s - they’ll have discourse jockeys
- who move around the crowd getting

conversation going about the images
people are seeing.
“We’ve put in some ingredients we’ve
invited some people, they all have
different perspectives. We don’t know
what the result in conversation is
going to be,” Sirota said.
This whole idea started because
international filmmakers from Paris
and London where coming in to make
movies about the city, but Detroiters
weren’t getting to see them.
“Detroit is such a mirror that reflects
back what one wants to see,” said
Mireille Roddier, an Associate
Professor of Architecture at the
University of Michigan.
“And in that sense the productions
that come from California are so very
optimistic. Reflections that come >>
83

Christopher McNamara of Thinkbox

...international filmmakers from Paris
and London were coming in to make
movies about the city, but Detroiters
weren’t getting to see them...
>> from Europe are obsessed with
the fall of capitalism in the most
predictable way. The reflections that
come from Detroiters are very much
about pride,” she said.
But the festival organizers are not
just going to watch the movies. As
architects and urban designers, they’re
going mine those films for data. They
want to know who’s making those
images, what parts of the city are
represented most, and what kind of
city do those movies reflect.
James Chesnut is an architecture
graduate student at the University of
Michigan.
“We want the community to see
how their city has been represented
through both locals and international
voices and faces,” he said. He’s also my
partner, by the way.
Like the other organizers of the
festival he doesn’t know if residents
are going to show up. But there is at
least one local who’ll be there. Ralph
Laviolette lives near Detroit’s eastside.
He says movies about Detroit matter.
“I think what they see and what they
take pictures of are reality. And this
is just the way it is….But a lot of us,
don’t want to accept the truth,” said
Laviolette.
The film festival, Imaging Detroit runs
Friday through Saturday in Detroit’s
Perrien Park.
//BROADCAST SEPTEMBER 20, 2012

GOING LIVE!
ERIKA LINDSAY & MARTY KEETER
86
Digital Planet enabled Imaging
Detroit to go live by providing an
interactive video feed, internet
interface and by supplying digital
access to Perrien Park, a site typically
off the network map.
First, the park was wired. An open
Wi-Fi network was available for access
by all, and a closed network was set
up for project volunteers. This on
site participants to upload images
and texts to social media over the
span of the project. Next, two digital
cameras were perched high in the tree
canopies, enabling virtual visitors to
access and even fight for control over
what the camera focused on. Users
logged in from all over the world
and down the street to play a remote
part in the event by monitoring the
activity on site. Having the ability
to share a controllable video feed on
Imaging Detroit’s not only animated
the website, but engaged far flung
participation and demonstrated how
far-reaching this project became.
Finally, a Tweet-Station was set up to
engage all that came to the park; those
that may not have had network access
were able to become part of the digital
discourse, sparking further dialogue.

87
Devon Mudd/Digital Planet

DETROIT DESIGN FESTIVAL
MELINDA ANDERSON & JAQUELIN KIROUAC
Annually the Detroit Creative Corridor
Center sponsors the Detroit Design
Festival. Imaging Detroit was one of
66 projects featured in DDF2012.
We spoke with Melinda Anderson and
Jaquelin Kirouac of DC3 about DDF
and its impact on the cultural landscape
of the city
88
Q: Tell us a little bit about what the
Detroit Design Festival is.
MELINDA ANDERSON: DDF
is a design experience that takes
place over five days in Detroit and
it happens throughout a number of
neighborhoods. This year we featured
66 events from so many different
design avenues. The festival was
created to highlight the design talent
that we have here in Detroit, and we
feel that this is really important. Other
cities have these festivals, and thought
why don’t we have one. So DDF was
our answer to that question.
Q: Is there a level of optimization? Is
there an ideal scale for the festival? Or,
is every year different?
MA: We think about it as quality
verses quantity. And we find that in
the last few years it’s been a little
overwhelming for people – the
volume of featured events. And so
what we did purposely this year – is
we scaled down the festival to really
increase the quality, and to encourage
collaborations, and meaningful
collisions. So like Imaging Detroit in
its work with the community and its
partnerships – we really wanted to
encourage that kind of collaboration,
to foster it.
Q: Tell us about the feedback that you
have received and how it’s informing
the way you are planning next year’s
event.
MA: A lot of the feedback has
been about how people feel that
the Detroit Design Festival is so
scattered throughout the city. And

so we attempted to have nights that
focused on clustering. We did try to
dictate where these events could be,
but we can’t control all of them. We
did focus on creating a density, and
we are planning on encouraging more
proximity in the future. But we are
also going to continue letting it grow
organically. I feel like sometimes some
of the best events and surprises were
in neighborhoods that we would never
have thought of. So it’s going to be a
mixture. You know, it’s partly curated,
partly crowd sourced. And I think that
we are going to try to keep it around
60-ish events.
JAQUELIN KIROUAC: You know, we
are working with the landscape of the
city, and there are areas where things
are little scattered in the city – and
we don’t have what you would call a
clear ‘design district’ or area where
everyone is located. So for example,
if we had really tried to cluster the
neighborhoods, if we had been really
staunch and strict about that, then
projects like Imaging Detroit would
never have been able to be part of it
because the project was off the beaten
path. But that was part of its charm.
I think that it’s great that there are so
many festivals – in Hart Plaza and in
Midtown and in other neighborhoods
– but it is important to highlight some
areas that maybe do get overlooked. I
thought it was great that
Imaging Detroit was exploring new
territories somewhere a little bit
different and somewhere that was a
little bit of a challenge to find >>
89

>> for those who are not familiar
with the area. And so I think that
in addition to making it a user
friendly experience, where people
feel comfortable and safe, and can go
knowing what to expect, it is cool to be
able to push some of the boundaries,
and tp have people leave their comfort
zone to go somewhere new.
MA: I think also, another part of
the feedback was about our ability to
curate experiences, and to give people
navigational tools… so that instead
of people feeling overwhelmed, we
are going to offer suggestions, almost
adventures for people next year to
90
make it easier for them to access the
festival.
Q: How do you track the volume of
people attending the event?
MA: Jackki was really instrumental
in getting things on Facebook – to
start tracking and asking questions
through those platforms. Getting
feedback from planners on their
attendance, and sometimes,
guessing, too. We do want to do
a better job of tracking, but it’s
a little tough because it’s not all
contained in one area.
Q: Is there an estimate on how many
people attended the Detroit Design
Festival this year?
MA: Our estimates are about 12 to
15nthousand this year. Last year
we had 10 thousand. But having a
better tracking system is key.
JK: It’s important to think about
how formal we want to get with the
question of tracking. Some of the
events, like Imaging Detroit, for
example, or Lincoln Street Art Park
are difficult to track. How many people
drove by and saw your sign, or walked
and interacted with it when you were
still building? So there are things that
you stumble upon, or are surprised
with. Lincoln Street Art Park had a
sensory experience where you really
could have gone there anytime. So
should we have a volunteer stationed
there to count people with a clicker?
Maybe. Maybe not. Some of the events
lend themselves to having someone at
the door counting and reporting back
specific numbers. But, yes, some of it
is open.
Q: What are the tangible benefits
from the event outside of the week of
programming?

MA: Some of the exciting things
that people reported to us were that
through DDF people were able to
gain a lot of new partners, to make
connections. We also heard that DDF
gave them an outlet to present new
projects, and that they’re starting
to think about DDF for next year,
considering how they can improve
things. To me the goal of is to provide
a platform to showcase work that’s
happening through the city. And I
think that DDF really does that. I’m
really proud of work that emerges.
People talk about the festival and its
tangible benefits. Some design galleries
having experienced more sales during
this time, some have reported new
fans, and just the people to people
interaction is key.
Q: Do you think that the mission of
DC3 or the design festival has adjusted
itself based on the iterations?
MA: I think that we have always been
clear in what DDF is, and have allowed
it to grow organically. It is very
shaped by the city. I feel our festival
is different from what could see in
Design Philadelphia or The London
Design Festival. So we really try to
stay true to that and true to Detroit.
91

OUTSIDE IN
DAVID BUUCK
Over the course of the two day
festival, David Buuck, poet,
urbanist, performance writer, and
MODCaR fellow conducted field
research. These are some of his
notes. David lives in Oakland,
California.
92
Responses to field research questions:
What annoys you about what outsiders
think of Detroit?
People who make money off of
Detroit without that money staying
or returning here. “The Ruins
of Detroit.” That it’s scary. The
propagations of fear. The “just get
your act together” attitude and
“give us some cars”. 90% aren’t at
the table. Access & distributions of
representations. Gap between Detroit
proper and the suburbs. Why does
it take a Super Bowl to get people
to come in. If the city shuts down,
outsiders are like, “oh well.” Why
bother bailing out. People are more
interesting than buildings. Ruin porn.
How would you like to see Detroit
represented to outsiders?
Come see all of it before you judge
or make opinions. It’s no different
from any other city; everyone has
similar struggles. Realize that it’s
always changing. Acknowledge the
scale and the richness of the culture.
Open-source radio, free wifi, etc. —
give free access to other voices. Get
neighborhoods involved. Should be
represented better than this. Pride
in auto industry —came back, like
Kid Rock says. More. Show me some
people. Real Detroiters.

93

What does a defeated
class do? Reclaim
the future
start with food
& thicker chains
be open
to tweaking
who mowed
the lawn
off and popping
people power
— Detroit : September 2012
David Buuck

NETWORK
MISSY ABLIN
we tweeted @Invincible, who
eventually followed us; we tweeted
@BreezeeOne and were thrilled
when she tweeted back...
In an effort to connect with the social
network of Detroit, MODCaR joined
Facebook. Slowly we made friends.
People ‘liked’ us from nearby, Detroit,
Ypsilanti, New York, and from afar
Japan, Algeria, Chile and more. To
increase our reach we began ‘liking’
organizations spanning Detroit’s
film and arts communities, civic
and regional pages, film festivals
throughout Michigan as well as a
range of national and international
pages with whom we wanted to
connect. Liking pages allowed us to
post calls for participation, festival
updates and stimulating imagery to
create a digital buzz in Detroit for
Imaging Detroit. We posted calls
for submission on all of our newly
liked pages. People ‘liked’ our calls
for submission. Those who ‘liked’
MODCaR, ‘liked’ and ‘shared’ the
imagery and video we posted to our
page. Our reach peaked when we
created an event page extending an
open invitation to Imaging Detroit,
268 confirmed they were ‘going.’
In total, we ‘liked’ 211 Detroit
Organizations and Businesses. We
‘liked’ 37 European organizations and
30 blogs without national boundaries.
That’s 75% in Detroit, 25% outside

printed material was distributed to local
businesses, door to door, and kept on hand on
construction site in order to interface with public

98

>> Detroit. While making an earnest
effort to connect digitally with Detroit,
our webpage saw visitors more
frequent from London than Detroit
proper. From Paris than the greater
Detroit metropolitan region.
MODCaR also joined Twitter, a more
challenging communication platform.
On Twitter we tweeted at people and
institutions. We mentioned them in
tweets. We retweeted their tweets.
We slowly established a following.
Twitter’s network logic proved more
idiosyncratic, its language more
demanding, and its conventions more
opaque. We got a hang of it eventually.
We tweeted at Invincible who
eventually followed us. We tweeted at
Breezee One and were thrilled when
she tweeted back. And so it went.
We were terrifically pleased with the
fan base that we were able to build
and with the connections that we
made. At the same time, it is worth
noting that an estimated 60% of the
population in the city of Detroit does
not have access to the internet, and
a significant number of people live
without any connection to the grid.
What’s more, an illiteracy rate of 47%
creates an important barrier to printed
communication. This is to say, in
parallel with our virtual network, we
were challenged to develop strategies
for connecting in unique conditions
of Detroit’s material realm. We
discovered that locally, nothing trumps
consistent presence and accessibility.
In Detroit, many networks, or at least
the important ones, are still built face
to face and over time.
99

Lada Adamic/ ImagingDetroit Facebook network visualization

101

102

103

MODCAR and ‘the new
spirit OF Capitalism’
DAVID ADLER
invited discourse jockey, economics writer and critic
104
In their book, “The New Spirit of
Capitalism,” the French economic
sociologists Luc Boltanski and Eve
Chiapello argue capitalism has entered
a 3rd phase characterized by a network
based form of organization made up
of autonomous agents. They argue
that capitalism has now “abandoned
the Fordist hierarchal work structure
of the 1970s,” characteristic of
2nd phase capitalism. Boltanski and
Chiapello’s analysis, though written
for a French audience, has applications
to understanding contemporary
management science, artistic practice,
and urban planning. As they write,
“we are witnessing the formation of a
new city where the tests that matter
involve loosening or strengthening
connections in a network world.” And
central to this new city, and the
network world, is the project.

Imaging Detroit was similarly cross
disciplinary, involving films about
Detroit, commented on by discourse
jockeys from around the world.
Moreover, it took place in the epicenter
of the Fordist model, and in a city
still reeling from its demise. The
abandoned massive Packard plant was
only a short drive away from Perrien
Park.
Discourse jockeys at Imaging Detroit
were obsessed with finding a way
forward for Detroit, but Imaging
Detroit itself is the way forward –
though seemingly a short lived project,
this is precisely the new projective city
described by Boltanski and Chiappelo.
As they write, “When they engage in a
project everyone concerned knows
that that the understanding which
they are about to contribute is to
last for a limited amount of time…
It is precisely because the project is in
transient form that it is adjusted
to the network world. By multiplying
connections and proliferating links, the
succession of projects has the effect of
extended networks… The extension
of the network is life itself whereas
any halt to its extension is comparable
to death.” 1
Imaging Detroit was more than a
structure, and forum: it was a creative
solution for a city trapped in post-
Fordist despair. Everyone involved
in the project helped build new
networks, something people living in
Detroit often lack. According to the
Boltranski and Chiapello framework,
the definition of a successful project
is one that gives rise to new projects.
This will be true for MODCaR and I
look forward to its next iteration.
105
1
Boltanski, Luc and Chiapello, Eve, “The
New Spirit of Capitalism”, Verso, 2007, pp
110-111.

off the grid
GORHAM BIRD
106
When event infrastructure is well
planned, executed, synthesized – it is
rendered invisible – folded seamlessly
into the programmatic flow of things,
a non-issue. The inverse is also true.
One oversight, one glitch and the
scenography can come undone,
conspicuously foregrounding the
mechanics of the project rather than
the alluring content.
Designing the Imaging Detroit’s popup
agora and ephemeral mediatheque
required planning - lots of it - and a
good deal of strategic groundwork in
order to make the project’s intended
uncanny intersections materially
plausible, their staging unperceivable.
As temporary as it was, Imaging
Detroit was a complex physical
insertion in the public realm of a city
manifestly in want of basic shared
amenities and services. To operate we
would require space, energy, sanitation,
security, equipment, food, and other
fundamentals for a large scale
collective gathering in the open. Would
the event borrow from an existing
public system and impoverished
tax base; stay clear of the city’s
infrastructure and services, and run
our own autonomous, private system;
or, at least conceptually, fuel our own’s
surplus back into the city’s? From
our very first discussions, we had
consciously promised ourselves that
we would not extract capital out of
Detroit. The reality combined all three
scenarios, but our attitude matched
the latter. By infrastructure, we
understand here all shared amenities—
physical, energy, service-based: all

of the mechanisms without which
there would not have been an event,
yet which operated backstage, as
inconspicuously (if not as quietly) as
possible.
We are incredibly grateful to the City
of Detroit for allowing us to install in
Perrien Park. John Langs of Project
Green House and Chris Brown, City
Manager were critical to the launch
and fruition of the project, and we
are so thankful for their help in
processing the paperwork and securing
permission. The pavilions were made
possible through the generous support
of a Research On The City Grant from
the Taubman College of Architecture
and Urban Planning.
We brought electricity to the park
using 5 generators, which ran for 36
hours straight, powering televisions,
projectors, computers, webcam, and
audio systems, as well as lighting
the site with spots and disco ball.
Thaddeus Lindsay kindly lent us his
generator when one of our failed, and
helped keep ours running.
The basic services were brought to
the site from vendors who provided
temporary garbage and recycling cans,
as well as portable toilets.
The event was staffed with three
security officers at all times. We made
sure that the security staff was local
to the area in order to command
confidence and accessibility.
Mark’s carts provided food trucks,
which were accommodated on site’s
existing hardscape. The vendors
operated tirelessly throughout the
event, bringing warm food to an area
where there is a dearth of available
retail.
The park was wired by Devin Mudd
of Digital Planet and Doral Goforth
of CIISC in Lansing, providing us
with a twitter station, free wifi, public
broadcasting capabilities, and video
feed.
In the picnic area, spool table were
donated by Pete Murray.
107

108

TEAM
Imaging Detroit was a collaborative
and exploratory project made possible
by the assembly of an extraordinary
team of staff, students and alumni
from the Taubman College of
Architecture and Urban Planning. The
ambition and scale of the research and
programming required the formation
of distinct units of expertise, and
although the units were shape-shifting,
certain critical affiliations emerged.
The following is a rough breakdown
of the constituent groups who worked
tirelessly with volunteer experts and
consultants to make Imaging Detroit a
reality.
Design Build Unit: James Chesnut/
Christopher Reznich/ Allen Gillers/
Lauren Bebry
Technical Guru: Tom Bray
The Rhizomatics: Erika Lindsay/
Marty Keeter
Film Curation: Missy Ablin/Erika
Lindsay
Public Image: Allen Gillers
Librarians: Allen Gillers/Virginia
Black
Event Manager: Brittany Gacsy
Safety: Gorham Bird
Research: Will Martin
Graphics: Tony Pins
Web Design: Anais Farges
Volunteers: Nate Doud/Jennifer
Komorowski/Danielle McDonough
Pop Up Snack Boys: Nate
Oppenheim/Matthew Story/Max
Obata/Angela Last/Allen Gillers

THANK YOU
Alan and Cynthia Reavis Berkshire
Monica Ponce de Leon
John Langs
Chris Brown
Milton Curry
Tom Bray
Marie Combes
Angela Last
Devin Mudd
Doral Goforth
Marty Keeter
Mercedes Mejia
Ji Hye Kim
Thaddeus Lindsay
Melinda Anderson
Jakki Kirouac
Joe Geiger
Pastor Steve Upshur
Celeste Layne
Ritchie Harrison
Lynnetta Shaw
Shalena Garrett
Brandon Walley
Noah Stevens
David Adler
Asenath Andrews
Vince Carducci
Cezanne Charles
Oren Goldenberg
Margi Dewar
Craig Wilkins
Romain Blanquart
David Buuck
Khalilah Gaston
Mitch McEwen
John Patrick Leary
Shea Howell
Nora Mandray
Nicole MacDonald
Andrew Herscher
Cornelius Harris
Sabine Gruffat
Dan Pitera
Miguel Robles-Duran
Sultan Sharrief
Christopher McNamara
Marshalle Montgomery
Jerry Paffendorf
Harvey Ovshinsky
Christophe Ponceau
Gary Wozniak
George Steinmetz
Anais Farges
Patrick Renaud
Patrick Beauce
Nathan Doud
Todd Osborn
Rob Theakston
Steve Roy
Ritchie Wohlfeil

credits
Info Graphic for page 18: Missy Ablin
Project Drawings for pages: 28 & 29: Brittany Nicole Gacsy
Construction Documents for page 38 & 39: James Chesnut
Pamphlet Design on page 98: Allen Gillers
Network diagram for page 100 & 101: Lada Adamic
Photos : Anthony Pins p. 6, 7
Brittany Nicole Gacsy p. 17, 43, 54, 71, 74-75, 78, 97
Erika Lindsay p. 37, 84
Jean Louis Farges p. 9, 13-15, 20, 23, 26, 30-33, 35-36, 41, 43-47, 50, 51, 58, 66-69, 80, 87, 90-91,
105-106
Lauren Bebry p. 2, 4, 36, 42-43, 57, 62, 63, 71, 73, 82-83
Marie Combes p. 48-49
Mercedes Mejia cover, p. 1, 10, 27, 56, 62, 64-65, 70, 77, 93, 102-103
Missy Ablin p. 34, 60, 61
Christopher Reznich p. 53
James Chesnut p. 94
Directed: Anya Sirota, Mireille Roddier, Jean Louis Farges
www.modcar.org

112

113

A TAUBMAN COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE & URBAN PLANNING RESEARCH ON THE CITY PROJECT
MODCaR