After stirring the ‘dirt’ on Charles Waldheim’s supposed usurping the Urban Design agenda at Harvard and the resulting flurry around the antagonism between New Urbanism and Landscape Urbanism see my earlier post The battle of the “- ism’s” & the “-ology’s”, here is rejoiner from Andres Duanny BY DAMIAN HOLMES of LAND Reader
“Andres Duany has written a new article, New Urbanism | The Case for Looking Beyond Style for the Metropolis Magazine that seeks to set the record straight about New Urbanism (NU) as it is defined by the Avant-Garde Establishment (AGE). An interesting article that seeks to try an explain away the ‘over simplification’ on NU.
Taking on the “avant-garde establishment,” Andrés Duany attempts to set the record straight. (Note to the avant-garde: feel free to respond.)
Within the Avant-Garde Establishment (AGE), the New Urbanism has been defined by a strategy to willfully mischaracterize it. The few live debates have consisted of dreary factual corrections by the New Urbanist side. Now Metropolis provides the opportunity to establish the actual record:
Read more on LAND Reader