Japanese houses and buildings were typically built with 25 to 30 year useful lives. It should come as little surprise that once unoccupied the structures, unmaintained, begin to deteriorate rapidly --and just as well.
Life is impermanent, so should buildings.
What they should institute, barring the messiness of property rights, etc. Is, given japan's family registries, etc. is identify owners figure out if they'll fix it, if not, demolish. Instead of spending billions concretizing the coasts and building roads to nowhere use those resources to cull crumbling buildings.
The one about the neighbor keeping up the property next door is very stereotypical --wish more of the world were that way. Yes, it's to no effect other than sensibilities, but without them there is no society.
That seems to be some very silly reasoning. Should we build our roads and bridges to be impermanent, because life is? I'm not arguing with your first sentence, about it not being surprising that unmaintained structures tend to deteriorate.
Infrastructure is not permanent. 'We' don't build roads and bridges to last, governments might run a cost-benefit analysis or a net present value and build a project out to where it makes sense given time money and interest. Bridges need repair, asphalt cracks and wears, re-bar rusts and compromises concrete from the inside, infrastructure depreciates. The ancient world, some of those things, are built to last--- because they're made from solid stone and such.
It's not so silly when your culture is situated right on the Pacific "Ring of Fire" as is the case for Japan. In times past, you wanted to make your houses light, so that if there is an earthquake, less stuff falls on you and your family.
Imagine what it would be like if the entire culture was constantly metaphorically whispering to you from the moment of your birth about the temporary nature of life? Sorry, but while you can tell yourself you're doing it, you can't actually do it -- your imagination isn't that good! (Otherwise, there would be far fewer systemic social problems.)
In Japan, there is no distinction between high and low art. (This is absolutely related to the rest of this comment!)
> Imagine what it would be like if the entire culture was constantly metaphorically whispering to you from the moment of your birth about the temporary nature of life?
Are you implying that people think the world ends when they die? If I'm going to do useful work, why not do useful work that will help out people even after I'm dead? Right now I'm living in a building that was built in the 1880s. I'm happy that they built it to last.
Then what were you trying to say? How or why have the Japanese built temples, shrines, and castles that that have lasted thousands of years if they are constantly told how transient life is?
I say that because society changes and as I changes our needs change. We used to need gigantic factory mills, now we don't. We used to want intertwined road networks, now we're rethinking that. We may want to build subway lines where we didn't imagine we'd need them,at the same time we want to shutter stations we no longer need.
She we start out from living with parents or guardians a studio suffices, then onto bigger dwellings, then we retrench as we become older.
Ps. Not to mention natural disasters and climate change, either modern or historic ala Maya or Saharan changes, for example.
Not so sure. Like hosting an AWS cloud, you want some more-or-less permanent hosts and some as-needed instances. Housing can certainly benefit from some well-built century houses that get moved in and out of as generations age. And during a rapid expansion etc, then some temporary.
How about a program where foreign artists and craftsmen are allowed to sped a summer (or a quarter) in a suburban Japanese house in exchange for fixing it up?
Perhaps airfares could be subsidized or discounted through government or corporate programs?
Or, how about something akin to AirBNB for municipalities around the world to offer quarterly or half-year leases in exchange for maintenance and light renovation?
Aren't the homes likely to be even less attractive to foreigners [normally eligible for Japanese visas] than to the Japanese people that have abandoned them?
The way Japanese houses are made, it is cheaper to rebuild than to refurbish.
The most expensive part of a Japanese house is the concrete foundation, and this is reused sometimes. The rest of the house is just cheap wood and plastic (yes, many times, the exterior wall is just plastic that imitates bricks or stone).
Also, the new houses are build according to the updated anti-seismic regulations so, obviously, people always prefer living there.
18 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 50.4 ms ] threadLife is impermanent, so should buildings.
What they should institute, barring the messiness of property rights, etc. Is, given japan's family registries, etc. is identify owners figure out if they'll fix it, if not, demolish. Instead of spending billions concretizing the coasts and building roads to nowhere use those resources to cull crumbling buildings.
The one about the neighbor keeping up the property next door is very stereotypical --wish more of the world were that way. Yes, it's to no effect other than sensibilities, but without them there is no society.
That seems to be some very silly reasoning. Should we build our roads and bridges to be impermanent, because life is? I'm not arguing with your first sentence, about it not being surprising that unmaintained structures tend to deteriorate.
It's not so silly when your culture is situated right on the Pacific "Ring of Fire" as is the case for Japan. In times past, you wanted to make your houses light, so that if there is an earthquake, less stuff falls on you and your family.
Imagine what it would be like if the entire culture was constantly metaphorically whispering to you from the moment of your birth about the temporary nature of life? Sorry, but while you can tell yourself you're doing it, you can't actually do it -- your imagination isn't that good! (Otherwise, there would be far fewer systemic social problems.)
In Japan, there is no distinction between high and low art. (This is absolutely related to the rest of this comment!)
Are you implying that people think the world ends when they die? If I'm going to do useful work, why not do useful work that will help out people even after I'm dead? Right now I'm living in a building that was built in the 1880s. I'm happy that they built it to last.
Non-sequitur!
Ps. Not to mention natural disasters and climate change, either modern or historic ala Maya or Saharan changes, for example.
So, yes, design with impermanence in mind.
Perhaps airfares could be subsidized or discounted through government or corporate programs?
Or, how about something akin to AirBNB for municipalities around the world to offer quarterly or half-year leases in exchange for maintenance and light renovation?
Hence the proposal to market them to non-mainstream foreigners, like artists looking for inexpensive retreats.
The most expensive part of a Japanese house is the concrete foundation, and this is reused sometimes. The rest of the house is just cheap wood and plastic (yes, many times, the exterior wall is just plastic that imitates bricks or stone).
Also, the new houses are build according to the updated anti-seismic regulations so, obviously, people always prefer living there.