egypt.
SJ—485
34–94–28
In The Last Days of the City
a retroactive manifesto for cairo
karim fouad
“At
times all I need is a brief glimpse, an opening in the midst of an incongruous
landscape, a glint of lights in the fog, the dialogue of two passersby meeting
in the crowd, and I think that, setting out from there, I will put together,
piece by piece, the perfect city, made of fragments mixed with the rest, of
instants separated by intervals, of signals one sends out, not knowing who
receives them.”
- Invisible
Cities, Italo Calvino
“With
cities, it is as with dreams: everything imaginable can be dreamed, but even
the most unexpected dream is a rebus that conceals a desire or, its reverse a
fear. Cities, like dreams are made of desires and fears, even if the thread of
their discourse is secret, their rules are absurd, their perspectives
deceitful, and everything conceals something else…take delight not in a city’s
wonders…but in the answers a city can give to questions we pose or in the
questions it asks us in return”
-Invisible Cities, Italo Calvino
“Our
bodies are never safe from the people who rule this place. Not in life, not
even in death. What about our memories? Will they too be
slowly erased along with the city?”
Preamble,
Cairo is complicated, its history old, grand and convoluted.
Its architecture layered so deeply the rubble is hard to differentiate from the
sediment above. Its piecemeal and fragmented; far from perfect. Here I offer
one reading of the city, a subjective, fragmented, and incomplete reading based
on observations both up close and far away. Crude and schematic. Rough and far
reaching. At times paradoxical, in many ways, it mirrors its subject. A city
I’ve obsessed over, dreamt of, both hated and loved. Of Cairo.
Dichotomic Cairo
Cities are intricate manifestations of desire and fear. Cairo
embodies the desires of its governing powers—colonial extraction, revolutionary
aspirations, and relentless modernization—while simultaneously harboring the
fears of systemic neglect, disenfranchisement, and socio-political instability. Here the built environment serves as an archive of
collective sentiment—a repository of unresolved contradictions.
Cairo, then, is a city marked by dichotomies: past and
present, chaos and order, abundance and neglect. Its streets narrate stories of
colonial exploitation, revolution, and relentless transformation. Cairo’s
history is that of extraction, of struggle and survival. At every turn the
governing bodies who inscribe themselves onto the city have sliced, extracted,
and moved resources away from Cairo, leaving those millions of Cairenes pushed
through the cracks left in their wake.
Cairo, a 5000-year-old urban palimpsest of 25 million
inhabitants, dry oppressive heat, seemingly infinite expansion, violent
intersection, and everlasting disorientation: the impossible city. How do you
make sense of an impossible city?
What follows
is a brief introduction of Cairo’s historical architectural production. This
broad context serves as backdrop for the present-day exploration.
Red Land—Black Land
The geography of Egypt is one primordially divided. Egypt
has always been understood by its earliest inhabitants in relation to the
river, its flow, and the conditions it births. Early Egyptians divided the land
longitudinally and laterally into Red and Black, Upper and Lower. Longitudinal
division was that of the river. Red understood what was out of reach of the
rivers influence: the desert synonymous with death, famine and pestilence.
Black understood the fertile edge hugging the river, the same sliver 95% of
Egyptians cling to today. Upper and Lower denoted lateral division. That of the
rivers flow, Upper Egypt, the south, was higher on the water table, Lower
Egypt, the north, where the Nile emptied into the Mediterranean Sea.
The Nile is
the common way in the middle. It is a carrier of things, a bringer of life, a
keeper of time, driver of technological innovation, framework for geographical
understanding, spatial organizer, political unifier, national identity, and at
times religion.
The Nile dictated
both the practical and symbolic dimensions of social life and material
construction. Its annual inundation defined the cycles of labor, resource
availability, and spiritual meaning that underpin early Egyptian architectural
forms. The Nile was a
bridge between the terrestrial and the divine, its flow mirrored in the axial
alignments of temples and the positioning of tombs in the cosmic landscape of
life and death.
This is not
to offer an indigenous framework as binary against contemporary architectural
production rather to evidence the profound relationship Egyptians have with the
land and river. Egyptians
still speak today of upper and lower, red and black. The Nile is ever present
in contemporary urban life. Today it is most visible as a social organizer.
What little public space exists in Cairo is situated on the corniche of the
Nile. Boats ferry people along the riverbank servicing the cities social life
as it has since the beginning. Less visible today is the fact that the Nile is still
Egypt’s only fresh water supply and services all its agriculture. Today the
Nile also fulfills contemporary functions of energy production at the Aswan
High Dam and plays a significant role in the tourism industry.
However the
way this land is used today; the way it is architecturally transformed has
fundamentally changed. Its no longer a matter of harmonic mirroring of the
river rather aggressive terraforming. The Egyptian president has stated the
goal of new developmental projects is to turn “the dirt of the desert into
money.” The red land long synonymous with death and famine has now become
synonymous with speculative development. The effort is to turn Red land to grey
and grey to money. Resultingly these exploitative resource practices have left
the Nile polluted. This present-day movement away from the Nile signals a
paradigm shift in resource management as it relates to Egypt’s contemporary architectural
production.
El Qahira: Vanquisher—Victorious
Cairo is a place of incident and anecdote. It’s a place of
binary. The Arabic word for Cairo, El-Qahira, means victorious (after
the battle won to establish it), it can also mean oppressor.
Part of the difficulty in making sense of Cairo has to do
with its age. The earliest human settlement in the area dates 5000 years back,
its current urban agglomeration started roughly 1000 years ago. 5000 years of
connection and disconnection have typified the land of Cairo. 5000 years of
layering and overlaying. 5000 years of infilling and backfilling.
Each new regime has sought to legitimize its authority
through the establishment of new urban centers and administrative capitals. The
geographic location Cairo sits on today was first formally settled in 3100 BCE
by the newly unified Upper and Lower kingdoms of Egypt for a capital city known
as Memphis. In the 1st century CE, during the Roman colonial
project, a fortress named Babylon was established near the remnants of Memphis.
In 641 CE Fustat became a satellite settlement for the Islamic rulers situated
around the old fortress. Fustat gave way to El-Qahira in 969 CE as a satellite
for the Fatimid dynasty. Heliopolis, 6th of October, Shiek Zayed all
built as satellites of Cairo in the 1950’s and 60’s.
The practice of relocating administrative centers has
persisted, culminating in the present-day construction of the New
Administrative Capital 45 km from Cairo’s bustling core. With every new regime
there’s an attempt to legitimize power and control. The administrative center
is moved and reconnected then moved and reconnected once more. These moves
signify not only attempts at political legitimization but also a recurring
pattern of disconnection and neglect for the cities lived social fabric.
Cairo’s architecture has always reflected a synthesis of
internal innovations and external impositions, offering valuable insights into
how architectural forms encode complex histories.
Additionally, by recognizing that Cairo has always been
shaped by external influences and internal resilience, this historical analysis
challenges the notion of a singular "authentic" architectural
identity. Instead, it frames Cairo’s current architectural paradoxes as part of
a long continuum of negotiations between competing ideologies, economic forces,
and cultural expressions.
illuminating the enduring tensions between power,
inequality, and identity
A New Republic:
Desert Cities—Informal Settlements
The paradox of Cairo is not merely one of disparity but of a
city grappling with its own impossibility its architecture an unfinished
negotiation between what is and what might have been.
In the 60’s Egyptians took to the streets to overthrow the
British backed monarchy to gain independence. The Arab Republic of Egypt was
the result of that revolution, four autocratic regimes has been its legacy.
Cairo’s first contemporary satellite was built
by Egypt’s first president, Gamel Abdel Nasser, to solve the issue of
congestion. The model as set up then was build a city in the desert, connect it
with a highway regardless of where that road geographically lands and hope
congestion decreases. Nasser’s socialist policies attempted to frame the
satellite as an egalitarian means of redistribution. Utilizing open land and
newly acquired resources to build housing for the countless internal migrants
coming to Cairo in search of work. However this approach was quickly soured
under Anwar Sadat’s Infitah policy which sought to build satellites as a
means of attracting foreign investment to solve the issue of Egypt’s economy.
Neither administration aspirations for the satellites were realized. The
satellites never solved the issue of congestion nor the issue of economics. The
Satellites are in essence a form of architectural economic sequestering. They
are buildings, architectures, spaces, that do not complete their intended
function or program. While they were designed to redistribute the city's
population and alleviate overcrowding, their inaccessibility to the working and
middle classes rendered them ineffective. The lack of public transit,
affordable housing, and employment opportunities meant that the majority of
Cairenes could not migrate to these new developments. Instead, the satellites
became enclaves for elites, often dominated by gated communities and
underutilized industrial zones, reinforcing the very inequalities they were
meant to address.
Conceptually it’s an interesting condition a
few kilometers back the highway are informal settlements that operate on an
entirely different model. Bottom up, without government intervention, entirely
used for their intended purpose. These spaces represent a raw form of urbanism,
driven by necessity and shaped by the agency of their inhabitants. This duality
underscores Cairo’s broader paradox: a city where the most “modern” spaces are
the least utilized, and the least planned are the most vital. The satellites
and the informal settlements are not just spatial opposites; they are
ideological opposites, embodying two competing visions of what urbanism can be.
The nationalistic fervor which inspired the first two
administrations of Nasser and Sadat eventually gave way to the autocratic gang
of Hosni Mubarak. Mubarak’s regime funneled Egypt’s economic resources into its
own bank accounts. The self-interested regime left openings for other
government bodies. The military became powerful, heavily involved in the
economy and most importantly autonomous from Mubarak’s regime. When the 2011 Tahrir
Revolution broke out the Military complex feigned alignment with the people to
further their own economic interests. Toppling Mubarak’s regime and the Muslim
Brotherhood allowed the army free and unbridled access to Egypt’s economy at
all levels of government and society.
Speculative Futures—Exploitative Histories: Development
and the Surveillance State
Revolution
doesn’t seem to take hold in Cairo. The deep-rooted corruption seems to preside
in the underbelly of the city’s memory. Any attempt at ridding Cairo of its
exploiters has historically birthed new agents to take their place.
Cairo is under
constant surveillance.
The
architectural production of modern-day Cairo is predominantly defined by the
surveillance state of authoritarian president Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. The
construction of the New Administrative Capital and “revitalization” of public
space and infrastructure like Tahrir Square represent the latest chapter in
Cairo’s history of urban fragmentation. The streets, once spaces of revolution
and resistance, are now under constant watch, their flow interrupted by
barriers, cameras, and walls. Urban space has become an extension of state
power, its architecture serving as both a physical and symbolic mechanism of
discipline and exclusion.
Sisi’s Cairo
is one of Architectural Mutations and Utopian Fragments. The new Grand Egyptian
Museum and American University Campus are architecturally opulent projects
designed to fulfill a vision of a Cairo which doesn’t exist. Deeper out of
Cairo into the desert one finds the New Administrative capital, the satellite
this regime has constructed as its own.
Meanwhile the
apparatus demolishes and redevelops informality, what it calls a “sickness”
plaguing the city, further deepening divisions. Informal housing, home to
millions of Cairenes, is systematically erased under the pretext of
modernization, its residents displaced into inadequately designed housing
projects that surveil rather than serve them. These architectural acts are
calculated measures of control, designed to strip communities of their autonomy
and reconfigure urban space in ways that prioritize surveillance and exclusion
over habitation
Architectures of Neglect
Today there is a greater sensitivity towards architectures
innate political nature. Its deeply rooted influence on daily life in the city.
The
conditions described earlier are not all unique to Cairo and are the
predominant urban form many post-post-colonial cities have taken on.
[If postcolonialism
can be understood as a cultural phenomenon concerned with the fallout of
colonialism; late stage postcolonialism can be understood as a cultural
phenomenon which examines the lived realities of urban environments post
postcolonial projects. Characteristic of this post-post-colonialism is
authoritarian government serving neoliberal interest, a general malaise and
dissociated constituent population.]
What’s being traced in Cairo is the colonial architectural
project and its manifestations through time. This, I argue, is a direct result
of the post-post-colonial condition: a cycle of revolution followed by
stagnation, leading to widespread disillusionment. The absence of meaningful
change fosters a resigned malaise among people, visible in their demeanor and
reflected in the city’s architecture. The prevailing attitude seems to be one
of helpless acceptance—"this is the way it is." Such an outlook is
unsurprising for a population repeatedly told they "cannot,"
"could not," and "never will." The architecture becomes
both a mirror and a symbol to this wearied state of existence.
Public spaces, once aspirations of civic engagement, have
become decayed remnants, green bulldozed into dirt. Turning black land into red
or often grey and then red ostensibly turned into financial gain. In reality
all is transformed into the inaccessible tendrils of the surveillance state.
Post-postcolonialism is also evidenced by a fractured urban
landscape. Luxury developments abound in contrast to crumbling ad hoc housing
blocs echo a collective resignation to inequality as an unchangeable reality.
There is an idea that this is the way it is not necessarily the way it ought,
it’s a pragmatic matter of reality.
This cycle also characterized by a city designed to exclude
rather than unify. Where vast swathes of the urban landscape are neglected
coupled with a lack of institutional accountability.
Its also present in the lack of meaningful architectural
innovation. Rather than addressing pressing urban issues such as affordable
housing, sustainable or better yet functional infrastructure the architectural
production sponsored by the power apparatus prioritizes aesthetic grandeur,
politicized to legitimize one person’s regime over the other.
In the architecture of Cairo you can see what post-post
colonialism looks like.
It’s in the hundreds of vacant housing developments and
satellites.
It’s in the seemingly unregulated yet authoritarian and
militaristic streets.
It’s in the way public services are handled.
It’s in the extraction of resources away from Cairo towards
the periphery into the desert.
The post-postcolonial city is trapped between
aspirations of modernity and the weight of unresolved historical and political
struggles. It doesn’t just mirror disillusionment it perpetuates it
Epilogue: a taxonomy of linear spaces:
What exists in Cairo today is made possible through the quotidian architectural
condition of the street. In the same way Koolhaas made sense of New York metropolitan
life and western, namely American, cultural development through a deep reading
of its skyscrapers. I’d argue the street is the analogue spatial organizer
present in Cairo.
First the River, then highway, road, street, path,
alleyway, corridor, crack.
These are the sorts of spaces which mediate between
two sides. Spaces which cut through. Allow for the passage of time. Become
receptacles for life. They are transitory spaces—long and linear, subject to
change, and in constant flux.
They are carriers, transporters, and bridges
between.
These spaces (the river) were naturally occurring
thus cosmologically democratic. The Nile typified a way of life and fundamental
conception of the world. It was open to all; understood as a natural right.
Conversely the rivers contemporary urban counterparts are spaces which consign
urban inhabitants to a limited territory, always adjacent to, but never within
the contemporary mode of formal architectural production.
Cairo’s
satellites are connected through these spaces; the street is where the
undesirable, the difficult to deal with, the watermelon stall and the toy
vendor spills out onto. The streets of Cairo are what connect the myriads of
projects the government has undertaken. The streets in Cairo are simultaneously
where every revolution has taken place and what gash through settlements to
connect increasingly distant satellites.
The five-thousand-year-old
urban agglomeration of Cairo and its history can then be traced, understood,
and made sense through a taxonomy of its streets and related conceptual spaces,
the river, highway, road, alleyway and corridor. Emergent from this framework I
argue is a city always trying to move away from itself, developing satellites
in chase of political legitimacy, connecting them with infrastructural chaos,
never seeming to commit, always on the verge of ending…ultimately creating cracks
the inhabitants of Cairo pushed through left to be ignored.
The
cracks are highways cutting through neighborhoods, severing communities while
funneling wealth and resources toward gated developments on the city’s
periphery. They are the hollow promises of satellite cities—constructed as
solutions to overcrowding but designed for elites, leaving the majority in
informal settlements with no access to basic infrastructure like water,
electricity, or public transit. These cracks are the product of a state
apparatus that demolishes informal housing only to replace it with
standardized, inadequate government units that fail to accommodate the cultural
and spatial needs of the displaced.
The
cracks also manifest in the everyday struggles of Cairo’s residents. They are
the spaces where public services have been privatized or neglected, forcing
communities to improvise solutions. Education is underfunded, healthcare is
inaccessible, and informal economies flourish in the absence of state support.
These gaps in the urban fabric and governance are the result of deliberate
choices: policies that prioritize large-scale developments and foreign
investments while ignoring the needs of those who live on the city’s margins.