Paris, origin of urban modernism

ABSTRACT

The significant change in urban space in Paris during the Second French Empire is an example of modern urban and architectural planning. Paris was modernized by a powerful planning entity, represented by the state, as well as a clear goal and consistent plan to realize the city beautification plan. The modernization process of Paris was a high-level movement that created a new urban culture through physical urban space planning, which is a combination of ‘urbanism’, meaning French urban planning, and ‘modernism’, meaning urban art movement. The modernization of Paris is defined by the concept of ‘urban modernism’. The urban modernism of Paris is a movement with strong norms aimed at city beautification that has sustainable characteristics in urban space planning. Consequently, urban modernism remains the basis of modern and future Paris city planning and plays an important role in maintaining the unique urban cultural identity of Paris.

KEYWORDS:

• Urban modernism
• Paris urban planning in the second French empire (1852–1870)
• urban and architectural planning
• urban culture

1. Introduction: urban planning and city culture

Cities are the foundation for the development of human civilization, and the importance of cities in modern society is increasing. Today, cities are more than merely places to provide food, clothing, and shelter for citizens; as centers of economic activity, many people reside in cities. In 2003, there were three billion people living in cities, amounting to the world population in 1960 (Satterthwaite, 2005, p. 1). Spatial planning is conducted based on the implications for members of society; as such, urban spaces where many citizens coexist include both private and public spaces (Krieger, 2021).

Urban spaces are planned and built based on the nature of public affairs for the majority of citizens (Friedmann, 1987, p. 5). Cities created using plans were called a modern city. In the mid-nineteenth century, urban modernization began in earnest in major Western European countries. Urban modernization first brought about a major physical change in urban space due to modern urban planning and building construction. Subsequently, a new urban culture was formed as urban spaces that were completely different from past cities were established. These modern urban spaces have changed, and the resulting new urban culture has brought about the emergence and development of many cities.

From the perspective of urban planning and subsequent urban culture, the urban modernization of Paris, France, which was conducted during the Second Empire (1852–1870), has a high status in urban history (Fainstein, 2005). This demonstrates that the urban modernization process of Paris during the Second Empire was the origin of modern urban planning theory and history (Benevolo, 1967), and that a new urban culture developed through the Paris modernization process (Jordan, 2015; Roy, 2006). In particular, the modernization of Paris gave birth to a new human model called ‘flâneur’ and an urban culture of materialism (Guy, 1992; Hanssen, 2006; Kramer & Short, 2011). On the other hand, the spatial planning of Paris, led by the powerful planners of Emperor Napoleon III and Georges-Eugène Haussmann (Prefect of the Seine) (Gaillard, 1997), created problems of bureaucracy and privatization of urban space (Lefevre, 1974; Levy Valensi & Terni, 2022). Most importantly, the modern urban planning of Paris during the Second Empire differed from the existing concept of urban planning in that it reached the level of ‘esthétiques’ beyond economics and urban hygiene. This means that urban planning was sublimated into a complex art movement in the sense that changes in urban space were recognized as ‘an art of cities’ (Harvey, 1989, p. 25).

As a complex urban cultural movement, the modern urban planning of Paris is called ‘Haussmannization’ (Marcus, 2001; Rodgers, 2012), a neologism derived from the Prefect of the Seine, Haussmann, and has influenced the modernization of other cities (Ekman, 2015). The modernization of Paris presented a global vision of the city, as urban planning was ‘modelization’ and was exported to other cities (Konove, 2020; Tamborrino, 1994). This modernization process was a high-level urban cultural movement that created a new urban culture through physical urban space planning, defined as ‘urban modernism’, which is a combination of ‘urbanism’, meaning urban planning in France and ‘modernism’, meaning modern urban art movement (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Definition of the urban modernism for Paris, the capital of France. Diagrammed by the author, 2023.

The etymology of urbanism began in 1867 when the Spanish engineer, urban planner, architect, judge, and economist Ildefons Cerdà used the Spanish word ‘urbanización’. In France, large public buildings began to be constructed in the late nineteenth century, and the term ‘urbanism’ was first used in 1910. Following World War I and II, urbanism terms were used in earnest through urban reconstruction projects (Choay, 1969, p. 7). The French dictionary Larousse defines urbanism as ‘the totality of art, science and technology across society that adjusts the space for humanity to coexist’. In France, urbanism is defined as ‘urban (city) planning’, which is used in British and American regions, and includes ‘planning regulations on buildings, development, and redevelopment within urban areas’. Urbanism used in urban space planning in France does not simply mean physical planning of urban space but implies the birth of a new urban culture through urban planning and sublimating urban space to an artistic level.

The dictionary meaning of modernism is commonly used as an art trend that expresses the present situation in contrast to traditionalism, which was popular before and after World War II from the end of the nineteenth century. The concept of modernism from an urban point of view has a characteristic derived from the process of urban modernization, and has been defined as a phenomenon of various elements and their relationships constituting a city in the process of advanced urbanization. During modernization of Paris in the nineteenth century, modernism emerged from Enlightenment, which pursued a new era based on reason and scientific progress in the eighteenth century and reorganized the urban space in Paris over the 18 years of the Second Empire.

In the early days of Paris modernization, before modernism began in earnest, French philosopher Charles Baudelaire established the concept of ‘modernity’ for Parisian urban spaces (Baudelaire, 1863). In his book ‘Le Peintre de la Vie Moderne’, published in 1863, Baudelaire defined modernity as ‘the transient, the fleeting, the contingent; it is the one half of art, the other being the eternal and the immutable’. In other words, modernity, as defined by Baudelaire through Paris modernization, pursues something different from the past, while the tradition of the past is maintained and sustainable in the future. As the rational and instrumental strategies for realizing the goals of enlightenment pursued by modernity rapidly changed to conscious and aesthetic strategies, the exploration of aesthetic experiences required a new methodology to find eternal changes in the moment and segmentation of modern life, which led to the emergence of ‘cultural modernism’ (Harvey, 1989, p. 18). The cultural modernism movement was actively developed as the subject of philosophers, thinkers, composers, writers, architects, and artists, especially targeting urban spaces (Scott, 1999). Urban planners and architects were immersed in the reproduction of modernism to find and express eternal immutability (Thompson, 2007).

Urban modernism, which emerged through the modernization of Paris in the nineteenth century, can be explained by the unique urban culture movement created by Paris (Gravari-Barbas, 2019; Kirby, 2017). Urban modernism is characterized by strong continuity in current and future French urban space planning, as it is based on important French philosophical ideas beyond simple urban planning. The fact that the construction project was carried out on ‘Boulevard Haussmann’ until 1927, after the second imperial period (De Moncan, 2009, p. 115) is a representative example of the permanence of Paris’ urban modernism.

Establishing the concept of urban modernism that emerged from modern urban planning of Paris in the Second Empire would not only reveal the source of Paris’ unique urban culture that continues to this day but also clarify the process of urban planning sublimating into an urban cultural movement. In addition, the concept of urban modernism identified in Paris, the origin of modern cities, would play an important role in examining the urban modernism of other cities.

2. Methodology

The methodology of this study is a theory-interpretive analysis method. Theory- interpretive analysis method, also known as a ‘concept-dependent method of understanding history’, aims to derive meaningful interpretations of historical patterns (Skocpol, 1984). In particular, the theory-interpretive analysis method focuses on enhancing the sociological understanding of historical changes by utilizing specific concepts. This study examines the modernization process of Paris based on the concept of ‘urban modernism’ in that the theory-interpretive analysis method analyzes historical phenomena centered on a specific concept.

This study aimed to investigate urban modernism, an urban culture that emerged as a result of the modernization of Paris, through three analysis factors targeting Paris’ urban planning during the Second Empire. This study used the research perspectives of planning leadership and investigated powerful planners who planned and implemented the urban modernization of Paris. In addition, this study examined the planning ideology and analyzed the purpose of modern urban planning in Paris and the impact that urban space reorganized by urban planning had on citizens of Paris. Finally, this study considered the planning paradigm and conducted a detailed theoretical analysis of the urban and architectural plans for the modernization of Paris.

3. Planning leadership: powerful planners, Napoleon III, and Haussmann

The modernization of Paris during the French Second Empire was called ‘the great rebuilding project of Paris (Les projets de Grand Travaux de Paris)’ or ‘the transformation of Paris (La Transformation de Paris)’ (Malet, 1973, p. 167). At that time, France was in an authoritarian imperial era, and a powerful planning entity represented by the state conducted urban planning. Napoleon III, the emperor representing the country, decided the purpose and direction of the rebuilding project of Paris, and the detailed promotion of the project was carried out by the Prefect of the Seine, Haussmann. Regarding the city planning of Paris during the Second Empire, Napoleon III tends to be undervalued, rather than Haussmann, who was appointed by him, despite being an important figure in the emergence of modern Paris. It was an important project that Napoleon III planned before ascending to the throne. Napoleon III called the rebuilding project of Paris ‘beautify the city’, while Haussmann simply called himself the ‘person who promoted the emperor’s decision’ (Des Cars, 2008, p. 202).

Napoleon III promoted and prioritized the modernization of Paris for political reasons. Historically, French emperors undertook large-scale national projects to leave their mark during their reign. In accordance with this tradition of the French imperial family, Napoleon III saw the urban modernization of Paris, the capital of France, as an action that would leave his footprints; therefore, he strongly promoted it. In addition, it was Napoleon III’s duty to improve the underdeveloped urban environment in Paris as an emperor of a major country and the French people. Napoleon III believed that improving the urban environment of Paris was the most effective way to improve the quality of life of Parisians. Furthermore, Napoleon III tried to strengthen social class control by reorganizing the urban spatial structure through modern urban planning. After the February Revolution of 1848, the western part of Paris was divided into bourgeois-class urban spaces, while the eastern part was divided into working-class urban spaces. To effectively suppress and control them, the state promoted a large-scale urban plan centered on the construction of a boulevard to facilitate movement and mobilize troops immediately. The goals of modernization in Paris promoted by the state represented by Napoleon III can be summarized as an urban renovation ‘for citizens, on the other hand, to make citizens obey the state’ (Des Cars, 2008, p. 204).

If Emperor Napoleon III decided the direction of Paris’ modernization, then Haussmann, the Prefect of the Seine, embodied Napoleon III’s intention to concretely modernize Paris in urban space (Papayanis, 2006). Haussmann stated in his autobiography that under the influence of his grandfather, who was a member of the National Assembly, and his father, who was a soldier, ‘I was an imperialist by birth and conviction’ (Haussmann, 1890, p. 7). He was ready to faithfully carry out his orders with Emperor Napoleon III. As a submissive and competent administrator to his superior, Haussmann was the epitome of technocrats (Lee, 2020).

Haussmann was not only a competent official but also had the ability to recruit competent subordinates. Consequently, the dictatorial administrative system established by Haussmann and competent civil servants in the lower part to execute the administration facilitated the great rebuilding project of Paris. Haussmann, as an imperialist, tried to attribute the Paris rebuilding project to Napoleon III by naming it ‘Napoleon III’s Paris Beautification Project’. Haussmann described the Parisian beautification project as ‘The cult of Beauty, of Good, of great things, of beautiful nature inspiring Great Art’ (Panerai et al., 2006, pp. 13–14). The ultimate purpose of urban renovation was not simply to reorganize the space but to make Paris a model of a new urban aesthetic. To realize this, Haussmann’s mission was to coordinate various fields of expertise and implement professional opinions in urban space. It was to sublimate Paris into a ‘great art’.

This urban planning of Paris by Napoleon III, Haussmann, and various other experts was to establish ‘salutary urban communications’, which intended to put human beings and a modern built environment into a smoothly functional, healthful, and aesthetically attractive interactive network. ‘Urban communications’ refer not only to the material networks of telegraph, boulevard, transport, and gas and electric illumination that improved the circulation of people, goods, and capital but also to a means of institutionally creating and rationally managing dynamic economic and social relationships within the city, connected nationally and internationally through an urban environment built out of the most advanced technologies available (Levin et al., 2010). Such salutary urban communications led to the birth of modern Paris and are inherited today by French urban planning, that is, urbanism as the ‘total of art, science and technology across society that adjusts the space for humanity to coexist’.

4. Planning ideology: space planning for the enlightenment of citizens

The modernization of Paris during the Second Empire was based on the urban planning theory of Napoleon III. Urban planning did not simply mean a physical reorganization of urban space but was an urban movement based on French philosophy and urban theory. Napoleon III established the urban planning theory due to the underdeveloped urban environment of Paris. The industrial environment, which started mainly in Europe in the nineteenth century, rapidly caused a deterioration of urban sanitation, and urban planning was conducted to improve these polluted urban spaces (Mumford, 1961).

Enlightenment, which emerged in France in the eighteenth century, had an important impact on cities and architecture. The outdated structure of urban space was an object to be enlightened by being compared to ignorant mankind, and urban planning for urban modernization was a sacred task of enhancing the universal life of mankind and creating a new urban culture. The process of embodying the enlightenment of urban space targets in Paris was carried out by Napoleon III, who was influenced by Saint-Simonism, which was an industrial supremacy accepted by the students of ‘Ecole Polytechnique’, the idea advocated by Count Saint-Simon (Picon, 2002, p. 166).

Enlightenment philosophers based on Saint-Simonism set space, fresh air, and light as three elements necessary for urban and architectural spaces for mankind (Markus, 2013, p. 406). To build such an ideal urban space, the existing underdeveloped urban space must be remodeled. If Enlightenment based on Saint-Simonism played an important role in the ideological aspect of Paris’ modern urban planning (Jenkins, 2006), other cities favored by Napoleon III were referred to in physical urban space planning.

As such, the modernization of Paris during the Second Empire was based on urban planning ideas based on Enlightenment and Saint-Simonism, which were developed from the eighteenth to the early nineteenth centuries by Napoleon III. Napoleon III considered Paris a sick human body in an underdeveloped urban environment. Healing sick Paris was a kind of urban enlightenment movement that improved the physical urban environment, and the quality of life of Parisians and reached spiritual elevation. The core of the urban enlightenment movement was to provide Paris with the three most important elements for an ideal city and architectural space: space, fresh air, and light. Detailed urban planning was conducted to concretely realize this urban enlightenment movement in the urban space of Paris. A large green space was planned to supply fresh air to the city center. The green space was designed to act as a lung for anthropomorphic Paris. The green space plan was inspired by the city center of London. In addition, a road that acts as a blood vessel was built to connect the green spaces that act as lungs in the human body to facilitate air circulation. A boulevard was expanded and newly established for the smooth flow of air circulation, sufficient lighting, and logistics in downtown Paris by expanding blocked blood vessels for sick Paris. The importance of the construction of these boulevards is demonstrated by the fact that Napoleon III decided the axis of the city to penetrate Paris. At the first meeting where Haussmann was appointed the Prefect of Seine, Napoleon III presented the axes of the city, which he urgently needed to pass through Paris, marked in blue, red, yellow, and green on the map (Morizet, 2014, p. 201). Consequently, Haussmann, an imperialist who thoroughly carried out the emperor’s orders, began the modernization of Paris centered on the construction of a boulevard.

Infrastructure-based Paris urban planning, in which new road networks were built based on the strong urban axis of Paris, was conducted over three periods during Haussmann’s tenure. The first phase was from 1853 to 1858, when the north-south and east-west boulevards passing through the city of Paris were built. The second phase was from 1858 to 1860, when arterial roads connecting the main road in the city center were built. The third phase was from 1860 to 1870, when Haussmann retreated on January first 1860, and several roads that served as blood vessels in the city center were expanded in line with the significant changes in size in the administrative district of Paris (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Paris urban planning in the second Empire centered on flat land in downtown Paris: a – topographical map of Paris; B – visualization of terrain; C – Principal urban planning of Paris during the second Empire. Drawn and visualized by the author, 2023.

The core of Haussmann’s infrastructure-based urban planning is the establishment of an urban network consisting of monumental buildings or large parks that connect the boulevard to the city (Figure 3). Haussmann’s urban planning had three purposes: (1) monumental architecture was further emphasized by separating it with the boulevard and visually connecting it, (2) the image of modernity as opposed to the unsanitary and aging past was imprinted through sufficient space and light created by the construction of the boulevard, (3) it facilitates the flow of traffic between stations and districts through boulevards. Haussmann’s urban planning reorganized the citywide urban structure and created an order that penetrated the entire city, with a characteristic system unique to the city of Paris. Above all, the new Paris, created according to the whole order, was in continuity and clearly showed a correlation with classical culture (Panerai et al., 2006, p. 20). The infrastructure built by Haussmann was planned to be connected to intentionally created large forests, with road network acting as a blood vessel and the forest acting as a lung. This laid the foundation for the Enlightenment of modern urban planning that compared the city of Paris to a sick human body and attempted to cure it (Olson, 2010). This idea of urban planning was the realization of the law of blood circulation discovered by William Harvey, a British doctor and physiologist, conducted by Napoleon III and Haussmann, who captured the organism called Paris as an analog of the human body (Shigeru, 2010, p. 329). Harvey’s theory of blood circulation in living things impacted hygiene, especially in French public space planning. Before the modern urban space was planned, the importance of the circulation of water in the city increased, but the use of water continued to be vague. Cleaning meant draining water rather than rinsing with water. After the discovery of William Harvey, the blood circulation model of living things became the norm when dealing with the movement of air, water, and matter in urban planning. In other words, the opposite of unsanitarity was movement (Corbin, 2016, p. 87).

Figure 3. Principle of the great rebuilding project for the beautification of Paris. Section and master plan of avenue de l’impératrice. Drawn by the author, 2023.

The change in urban space due to the establishment of such infrastructure impacted new architecture in the city center of Paris. As new large-scale buildings were built along the boulevard, architectural design became important for the urban planning of city beautification pursued by Napoleon III and Haussmann. In terms of architecture, specific regulatory laws were enacted for buildings for urban beautification. Regulations on the height of buildings and width of roads existed before Haussmann’s plan; however, since his urban planning in Paris began, detailed and strict building laws were applied not only to the height but also to the building façade. Regulations on building height and façade design played a key role in establishing a unified and aesthetic urban culture in Paris as a whole. In particular, Haussmann focused on the social role of public planning in urban planning and attempted to take responsibility for everything, from the overall plan to the most minute details. For instance, while planning a park, he was involved in the design of the park’s exterior and wooden fences, chairs, trash cans, and lamps (Choay, 2000). This means that the Paris Plan was implemented not only by Haussmann’s outstanding administrative drive but also by the highly aesthetic architectural regulations he led. Haussmann’s aesthetic modernism protected Paris from reckless development even after he was overthrown in 1870 and continued to dominate Paris’ city planning from the twentieth to the twenty-first century, making Paris the prototype of an aesthetic city in world history. Infrastructure construction in Paris, which Haussmann initiated first, is an important source of urban modernism in Paris that has created an aesthetic urban culture unique to Paris, which continued to this day, beyond simply building a physical space for the road network.

5. Planning paradigm: technology and aesthetic ‘form’ paradigm

As the first step in the modernization of Paris, the construction of the infrastructure for the expansion provided justification to clear away unsanitary dense areas and built a green infrastructure in the city by creating large forests on the left and right banks. The expanded boulevards established a network of transit routes in the city and formed a strong urban axis, laying the foundation for Paris’ urban planning. Through the newly built central infrastructure, classical cultures (historical stations, concert halls, and cathedrals) were interconnected in a continuum and ensured smooth flow of traffic, air circulation, and sufficient light through passageways. Consequently, Paris was reorganized into a future-oriented modern urban space while securing the tradition of the city of the past.

Haussmann used the city beautification perspective on boulevards (Figure 4). Although the modern principle of perspective is based on mathematical formulas, it is an extremely subjective construct, and the perspective space is artificially constructed from a subjective perspective (Giannakopoulou, 2017). In line with the visual pyramid perspective, the expansive and long procession of monumental boulevards and buildings overwhelms the gaze of pedestrians and makes the daily lives of residents disappear from the view (Chun & Bae, 2020, p. 43). The importance of façades, which can be said to be the face of the building, was emphasized for city beautification declared by Napoleon III through expanded boulevards and the architecture built along it. Haussmann considered building façades the most dramatic element to demonstrate his achievements in the great rebuilding project of Paris and developed the ‘immeuble Haussmannien’, a façade design with strict regulations (Figure 5). Ultimately, the construction of the boulevard influenced the building codes and plans.

Figure 4. Principle of the great rebuilding project in which perspective was used for the beautification of Paris. View of Saint-jean-baptiste de grenelle church from the street of Commerce (Rue du Commerce), Paris. Photographed by author, 2006.

Figure 5. Immeuble Haussmannien: façade codes for an architecture built around the boulevard. Drawn by the author, 2023.

The urban landscape centered on the boulevard constructed by Haussmann has an architectural aesthetic linked to classical tradition with strict unity. Due to this urban landscape, Paris has the appearance of a single, coherent city without the identity of each district. However, the splendid urban landscape has been criticized for expressing the role of a mask that hides the difficult daily life of ordinary citizens and privilege of the members of modern bourgeois society (Fishman, 1982, p. 16).

The Haussmann style (immeuble Haussmannien) is an architectural design code that clearly expresses Haussmann’s Parisian beautification project. The specific code is based on the traditional beauty of the past, which pursued a clear symmetry from the center of the building and proposed traditional patterns outside the building. In addition, the uniform frontal aesthetics of buildings are very important because they limit the height of the building façade rather than the height of the building. To maximize the effect of these aesthetic façades, the design of building materials, handrail design, and exterior stone decorations were strictly regulated.

The urban modernism of the Paris beautification project, which pursues the beauty of the unified city of Paris, was established through the presentation of strict guidelines for the exterior, height, and façade design of the building. Urban modernism, established by Haussmann in the mid-nineteenth century, was maintained as a strict norm in the Parisian urban space until the twenty-first century. Haussmann-style buildings with strict regulations regarding façades were built around the road for urban beautification, and newly created green spaces and public buildings were placed at both ends of the road. When the opening ceremony of the Boulevard de Strasbourg was held in the north-south direction in April 1858, Parisians were surprised to see the wide and beautiful scenery extending southward from the East Station (Gard de L’Est) to the Seine River. Luxurious buildings with uniform height and stone color were lined up on both sides in accordance with building regulations. Looking at it from the boulevard (Boulevard de Strasbourg), only the dazzling façade of the East Station is faintly visible at the vanishing point of that perspective (Figure 6). Parisians have now come to understand the aesthetic aspects of Haussmann’s great rebuilding project in Paris (Shigeru, 2010). However, behind the Haussmann style beautiful façade, a social problem arises in which social classes are divided according to the number of floors in the building. Haussmann’s unified urban aesthetic city regulations stipulated the height of the building, and the number of floors was subdivided for economic profit within the building with limited height. The lower floors of the buildings belonged to the bourgeoisie, and the upper floors belonged to the low-income classes. In particular, the top floor of the building, the so-called ‘maid’s room (chambre de bonne)’, is a narrow space of 9 m² and is poor to be used as a residential space, but it was used as a residential space to accommodate the high population density of Paris. In this way, Haussmann’s aesthetic modernization of Paris, which divided the urban space into social classes, is facing a new urban problem of climate change in the twenty-first century. The worst heat waves issued in Europe in 2003 killed 735 Parisians. Most of the dead were Parisians, the socially underprivileged, who lived on the top floor of Haussmann style buildings. The reason why so many deaths occurred due to the heat on the top floor was because, first, ventilation of the interior space was impossible with a single window on the façade of the building, and second, because the zinc material that covered the roof of the building had high thermal conductivity, the space on the top floor directly under the roof became very hot when the weather was hot (Keller, 2015). Haussmann’s modernization of Paris faces a transition from an aesthetic point of view as well as a scientific point of view to urban planning due to the climate change phenomenon that the world is facing today.

Figure 6. The first infrastructure construction plan and the view of East Station (gard de L’Est), Historique de Paris (1854). Credits: atlas historique de Paris.

The Second Empire saw significant development, particularly in urban planning centered on large cities and the railway industry. With the tremendous development of the railroad industry, France during the Second Empire was summarized as an era of railroads (Plessis, 1979). The green spaces and public buildings on boulevards at both sides of downtown Paris were influenced by the railroad industry (Picon, 2003), which was the most advanced technology at the time (Gordon et al., 2011). Contemporary intellectuals, including Napoleon III, considered that the revival of rational and scientific technology-based industries was the development of the country and industry was a process in which various products in various places were realized as a final product. The well-established rail network to gather various products from all over the country in one place meant the revival of the industry (Picon, 2003). The newly constructed railway station was not only related to the railway industry, which was the most technologically advanced industry at the time, but also played a very important role as a public building that was the gateway to Paris (Galviz, 2013). The best construction technology and cutting-edge building materials of the time were used for the construction of the railway station, and Paris urban planning centered on the railway station.

The development of the railroad industry brought about the birth of large-scale distribution warehouses and public buildings, such as markets, depending on the amount of logistics concentrated in Paris. In particular, while these public buildings were vulnerable to sanitation, they were used by many citizens and located in important places in central Paris. In the enlightenment of urban space during the Second Empire, these public buildings had to become models of modernism newly proposed by state power; therefore, the final architectural plan had to be approved by Napoleon III. Public buildings had to be sublimated into an art form that was more than a physical object, considering the members of all classes and large numbers of people. In particular, the public building plan was a kind of sacred work that allowed the viewer to recognize its true value (Choay, 2000).

The new architectural style pursued by Napoleon III was strongly influenced by buildings related to the railroad business. Steel, which is associated with railway technology, was used as a building and construction material. Overall, a building composed of steel and glass has a light image unlike the heavy buildings of the past. As the entire exterior of the building was finished with glass, it allowed for sufficient light and ventilation, realizing the modernization of the urban space. A building that embodies the architectural utopia of Napoleon III is the East Station, located in northeast Paris and completed in 1850. Napoleon III, who directly participated in the opening ceremony of the East Station, looked at the architectural space built with steel and glass materials inside the East Station and said that this type of ‘giant umbrella’ structure should be applied to future public buildings. Paris Central Markets reflects Napoleon III’s intentions in public architecture. Paris Central Markets consisted of 12 pavilions, and construction began in 1854 at the beginning of the Second Empire. Ten of the 12 pavilions were completed by 1874, four years after the Second Empire. The markets crowded with filth and people were the first public buildings to be enlightened in Paris. Above all, Central Markets which were to be located in the center of Paris, had to be realized as a symbol of an ideal building based on its locational value. Due to the importance of the Central Markets, Napoleon III sketched the future Paris Central Market design in the form of a giant umbrella and delivered it to Haussmann. Haussmann instructed architect Victor Baltard, a public architectural design expert, to build the Central Markets (Pinkney, 1972).

Baltard designed Paris Central Markets as a large technology-intensive machine. The glass used for the exterior of the pavilion allowed sufficient air and light to flow into the market, and glass windows that can be opened and closed were installed around the pavilion to prevent damage to the building from strong winds. In addition, by making the material of the openable and closing windows opaque, strong light could not penetrate the market. A dome-like device (lanternon) was installed on the roof of the pavilion (Figure 7). This device ensured natural air circulation, with air from the lower part of the building escaping to the upper part (Baltard & Callet, 1862).

Figure 7. A cross-section of the Paris Central market, 1863. Credits: archives de Paris.

As such, Paris Central Markets were architectural space that embodied the Paris urban modernism of the Paris urban space rebuilding that was underway at the time. Urban modernism based on human analogies developed new architectural inventions with the theme of space, light, and air targeting the enlightenment target space called markets. This new architectural model not only had important significance as a technology-intensive architectural invention but also created a new architectural aesthetic through architectural technology by exposing iron and glass to the exterior of the building. After the first Universal Expo held in London, England in 1851, Napoleon III held the Paris Universal Expo in 1855 and 1867, exaggerating the architectural inventions he developed through the Paris Central Markets and exhibiting them in the city center of Paris.

Public buildings developed by Napoleon III were the most effective publicity exhibit to express national power to the world as a means of enlightening Parisians for the modernization of Paris (Levin, 2021). In addition to buildings, public facilities included external public spaces, such as parks. Based on the well-established infrastructure in Paris city center, several parks were created in various places to complete urban planning (Closmann, 2021). Parks in Paris are artificial natural objects applied with technology, the result of enlightenment by the power of the Second Empire. They are important urban elements that gave birth to the unique park culture of Paris. Parks are more than just a green space; they have been used to add glory to the empire as ‘a constructed concept of nature’ and ‘the spectacle of nature’ artificially created by the planner (De Oliveira, 2015).

Parks in Paris city center created during the Second Empire were developed based on thorough policy decisions (Laurian, 2019). Haussmann placed parks in the heart of Paris according to a strategic plan with the intention of enlightening the general public regarding the culture of walking through a park. The newly ‘purified green space park’ was fascinating to walkers who wanted to take comfort among the large-scale flowers and trees that symbolize joy and happiness. Walking in such an organized park is a type of ‘luxury element’. To walk in the garden, walkers had to decorate their appearance and undergo expensive maintenance. The garden became the walkers’ own ‘field of exhibition’, and the managed walkers were symbolized as having a high moral and ethical status. To walk through the ‘well-cut’ park, walkers had to have high ethics; therefore, the garden had to be maintained at all times (Limido, 2002).

In the sense that park culture enlightens citizens, Haussmann created parks for the general public as well. Consequently, Bois de Vincennes (1860–1865) to the east, Bois de Boulogne (1853–1858) to the west, Parc Montsouris (1867–1869) to the south, and Parc des Butte Chaumont (1863–1867) to the north were created (Alphand, 1867). As such, various parks built during the Second Empire were modern urban inventions that were not seen in the past and were of great significance in creating a new urban culture for modern people beyond just a green space called a park.

The parks created during the Second Empire symbolically represented Paris’ urban modernism, which was realized as a new urban culture through urban planning. Paris, a city with a lively free economy and capitalism, was divided into various classes of citizens and became the center of consumption culture. Parks were strategically planned in line with rapidly changing urban topography. Bois de Boulogne in the west was created during the Second Empire for the bourgeois class. Bois de Vincennes in the east was created later for the general public. If Bois de Boulogne and Bois de Vincennes represent different social classes of park culture in Paris, Parc des Butte Chaumont in the north, completed in 1867, and Parc Montsouris in the south, where construction began shortly after the Parc des Butte Chaumont in the same year, were planned to create a new urban culture through the park. The emergence of the importance of visual elements in cities due to the development of consumption culture and the development of technology-oriented cities required new inventions to symbolize them clearly. Therefore, Haussmann selected a park to be sublimated into a ‘natural spectacle’ beyond a simple green space (Limido, 2002). With this intention, Parc des Butte Chaumont and Parc Montsouris were linked with the Paris Universal Expo on 1 April 1867 and played a key role in recognizing the park as an important component of urban culture. Parc des Butte Chaumont, completed in 1867, was a modern invention in which technology and aesthetics representing the Second Empire were concentrated (Alphand, 1867, p. 199) (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Aerial view of the parc des Buttes Chaumont, from ‘Les promenades de Paris, 1867’. Credits: Adolphe Alphand (1867), Hachette Livre.

Parc des Buttes Chaumont, which integrated advanced civil engineering technology, was a stage of large and exaggerated artificial nature. All series of park-related processes were planned and carried out accurately; therefore, the official opening day of the park was scheduled for the opening date of the Paris Universal Expo, April first, 1867 (Wilson, 2005). Parc des Buttes Chaumont was on a continuous line with the Paris Universal Expo exhibition events. Various winding trails in the park were connected to the city of Paris outside the park, attracting urban walkers to the park. The railroad representing Paris’ modernity was planned as part of the park, demonstrating France’s modernity and technology. In particular, artificial lakes were the most important part of the park due to the implementation of advanced civil engineering technology. Steam engine technology was developed to supply water to artificial lakes and enable artificial waterfalls that fell from a height of 32 m along artificial cliffs (Meyer, 1991). Parc des Buttes Chaumont was the result of the city’s rebuilding through industrial technology, and the direction of rebuilding exaggerated with the goal of city beautification. Parc des Buttes Chaumont was more than merely a small park for the people but was a remarkable object that summarized the idea of Haussmann-led Paris urban modernism developed during the Second Empire.

6. Discussion and conclusions

The modernization of Paris during the Second Empire in the nineteenth century had a high status in terms of urban history, as it was the source of modernist urban planning that gave birth to the modern city. As such, modernism, a type of urban norm that refers to modern city planning in Paris in the nineteenth century, is being inherited as urbanism today. Urbanism means that the ultimate purpose of spatial planning goes beyond simply physical urban space planning to reach a state of total culture and art. Through urbanism, Paris today has its own urban culture, which is distinct from other cities. This study derived ‘urban modernism’ as a concept that implies urban culture that gave birth to Paris’ unique urbanity based on French Enlightenment of the nineteenth century, ‘modernism’, and ‘urbanism’, which sublimated the city to the dimension of art.

Urban modernism, which emerged with the modernization of Paris during the Second Empire, provided implications for the role of the state as a planning entity, revealed that an important attribute of urban planning deals with public planning. However, as the modernization of Paris was conducted by a strong planning entity, urban problems, such as space capitalization and bureaucracy, emerged. It was important to modernize Paris, and the purpose of modern urban planning promoted by the planning entity was not simply a physical space reform but a type of civic enlightenment movement promoted for social reform. Urban theory is based on French philosophy built by the planning entity. In other words, Paris’ urban modernism was promoted to enlighten the public through urban space reorganization. As it is a strongly established urban movement, it has sustainable characteristics in the future. As such, if the idea of civic enlightenment forms the basis of modern urban planning in Paris, the urban elements of technological aesthetics have been developed and constructed in actual urban space. In accordance with urban planning based on human analogs inspired by hygiene, boulevards were built in Paris city center, and public buildings and parks connected to the boulevards were developed. Public facilities in the city were planned based on the urban planning goals of the enlightenment of citizens, strengthening of publicness, and beautification of the city.

In mid- nineteenth century, strong urban modernism emerged through the 17-year rebuilding project of Paris. Urban modernism was an urban movement with strong norms aimed at city beautification and had sustainable planning characteristics. Consequently, urban modernism remains the basis of Paris urban planning currently and will be utilized for future Paris urban planning. It plays an important role in maintaining Paris’ unique urban cultural identity. Paris’ urban modernism contributed to broadening its academic horizons, sublimating urban planning into a higher-level urban movement beyond physical urban space reform. Paris’ urban modernism at the level of urban movement has great implications for urban planning based on advanced technology in the twenty-first century. Today, urban planning called ‘smart city’ based on cutting-edge technology considers urban space as an experimental space for technology application. Due to the limitations of advanced technologies applied to urban planning, similar types of smart cities are being created all over the world. As a result of urban planning being conducted for the purpose of technology application rather than human-centered cultural creation, cities that do not reflect the identity of each city are being born. Today’s smart city should be sublimated into an urban movement such as Paris’ urban modernism, which tried to create a new urban culture through urban space beyond simple urban space planning.

Future cities must respond to new urban problems such as climate change based on the current cities that each city has its own history. While preserving the individuality of each city, it is necessary to study urban planning that applies advanced technology to solve the problem of human settlement space. Urban planning studies have become the basis for multilateral research with humanities and technology.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government, Ministry of Science, and ICT (MSIT) (No. 2022R1F1A1065442).