Three Space-Time Constellations of Urban and Architectural Activism in Brussels

Introduction

In the frame of the exhibition Chronograms at CIVA (Centre International pour la Ville et L’Architecture), taking its point of departure in the timeline diagrams, or genealogical trees, of the history of twentieth century architecture by Charles Jencks,[1] we were asked by its director, Nikolaus Hirsch, to do an evening about the ‘history of activism in Brussels’. We soon came up with a horizontal temporal axis and a vertical axis with our four categories of activism (political, urban and architectural activism and as cherry on the cake: activist architecture). Overwhelmed by the task of this vast amount of events within this ‘field’, we decided to focus on three spatio-temporal constellations and contribute to the genealogy of urban activism in Brussels.

But before we do that, we want to say something about Jencks chronogram. It is interesting that the famous flamboyant architecture critic, Charles Jencks, the pope of postmodernism, of all people, a dandy also considered activism to be an important aspect of architecture. Even though Mark Wigley claims that no one has ever actually read Charles Jencks’ chronogram, because it is just a drawing really,[2] there is a lot to be learned from it. The first thing is that Jencks indeed considers activism to be one of the six main themes or ‘ideologies’ in architecture. If we follow Jencks in his ‘chronogram’ activism in architecture begins with constructivism, he mentions Veznin, Tatlin, Leonidov and Lissitsky. Indeed, rarely architecture was so outspoken as part and parcel of a revolution. (Lissitky’s expressive speakers tower for Lenin could symbolize this).

Then the activist vector in architecture goes blank and resurges in the sixties with the name of Jacobs. Again Jencks proves his precision: Jane Jacobs, the Death and Life death of Great American Cities (1961) was the bible for the beginnings of urban activism. Then it goes more utopian (which is a cluster in his genealogical tree, of course linked activism) with Price, expandable architecture, metabolist, the French group utopie. He also mentions student-activist, drop-city (the first hippie commune in South Colorado) in the late sixties if we follow his timeline. The seventies circle around the cluster ‘Revolutionist’, with anarchist workers-councils, pneumatic architecture, and ‘interest community advocacy’, which we would in fact call reformist rather.

But also ‘minority groups’ and ‘black riots’ get mentioned at the turn of the eighties in the vector of activism. For the future (he designed this originally in 1969, but it evolved over the years), his prediction circle around Biomorphic, which we could interpret as a first hunch of ecological and circular architecture (all though it is much more confused and also high tech in Jencks’ vision). In any case, this is a clear line and a laudible attempt to give activism a place in the center of architecture and its historical evolution in the twentieth century.

1. The North Quarter and the Modernist Tabula Rasa

To understand the origin of urban activism in Brussels, we must begin by describing the North Quarter as part of three large-scale destructive interventions in Brussels that took place shortly before and after World War II. These interventions can undoubtedly be described as ‘urbicidal’: they knowingly and deliberately wiped entire neighborhoods off the map, and in that sense almost literally killed them.[3]

The first was the North-South connection, the famous ‘Jonction’, which, in addition to demolishing the then beautiful North and South stations, also mutilated the surrounding neighborhoods, but above all tore open the heart of the city, even unto the foot of the cathedral and wiped out entire neighborhoods (such as the Putterie neighborhood). Then, in preparation for the 1958 World’s Fair, Brussels was ready for the arrival of the herald and incorporation of modernization and consumption, the king of kings, the automobile, the motorcar. The conversion of the pedestrian boulevards around the pentagon into the ‘small ring’, a motorway around the city with tunnels and all, was another heavy-handed intervention that changed the face of Brussels. The third was the demolition of the North Quarter to make way for a forest of office towers. The so-called Manhattan Plan for Brussels’ North Quarter was the crowning glory of the modernists’ attempts to redevelop cities through a visionary, utopia-driven tabula rasa.

It is customary to attribute this urbicide of the North Quarter to the collaboration between Charlie De Pauw, a shady property developer, and Paul Vanden Boeynants, an equally shady political magnate, who became Prime Minister in addition to Deputy Mayor for Brussels. A rather mythical figure. But the truth is that the Manhattan Plan originally came from one of our great modernists, a friend of Le Corbusier and for a time president of CIAM: Victor Bourgeois.  This explains why the utopian plan, which was never actually realized, was entirely constructed according to the dogmas of the famous Charter of Athens, CIAM’s urban planning bible: separation of the four functions of living, working, leisure, and services. And above all: underground public transport, above-ground car traffic, and pedestrians on the plinths of buildings connected by footbridges, though these got never realized.[4]

The North Quarter was to become the intersection of motorways from Oslo to Marseille and from London to Berlin… Le Corbusier had already proposed this plan to wipe entire districts off the map with his Plan Voisin for Paris, which sought to replace the entire Rive gauche with residential towers surrounded by greenery. Jasinski proposed something similar in Brussels: a tabula rasa for everything south of the Stock Exchange building. One could say that the North Quarter is a realization of that urbicidal modernist tabula rasa.

Although the first signs of resistance to modern redevelopment were visible in the Marolles,[5] the resistance to the demolition of the densely populated North Quarter and the forced eviction of its residents was perhaps the first real form of urban activism in Brussels. We refer to the ‘Sofa Talk’ we had with professor emeritus sociology Albert Martens on his involvement in these events.[6] He called it quite rightly a case of ‘urban criminality’.

Here a long quote: ‘ “The tragedy of architecture,” said Albert Martens, “is that architects have actually come to believe in modernism.” Questions about financial and political interests were pushed into the background by an absolute belief in architectural quality. A modern city became a blessing for the people and the fatherland. The Noordwijk became the chosen laboratory. The architectural plan created consensus. The future is here, was the ideology. Turn dreams into action. “The reference to Manhattan shows the ideological lie all the more,” Martens laughs heartily, “since the architects, project developers, and politicians actually went on a working visit to Houston.’

He also stresses the importance of the architectural utopia: “The architect’s daydream united the most diverse actors. It is too easy to point the finger solely at the concrete barons and politicians. Martens mentions the trade unions, which saw opportunities for employment for their members. The media also lent a hand with juicy stories that denigrated the neighborhood. Finally, the limited stamina of local residents undoubtedly played a role. “Life in a permanent Pompeii of destruction should not be underestimated,” Albert Martens notes with some resignation.’[7] Indeed he was a witness of a true urbicide and the defeat of resistance against the fury of destruction.

Fast forward to the temporary use at the abandoned WTC towers at Brussels North Station, starting around 2018. Some artists had been using the 25th floor for years, upon invitation from the project developer Befimmo, after it acquired the high-rise tower complex and was awaiting definitive plans for its renovation. In the period between September 2018 until January 2020 the temporary use was enlarged with the stay of architectural offices Architecture Workroom Brussels (AWB) and 51N4E, also the KU Leuven Faculty of Architecture and other young independent architects and creatives. All these parties were invited by Befimmo to engage in a wonderful period of commoning the abandoned WTC tower floors and thus demonstrate the place making of an area that is known as the epitome of a monofunctional business location in Brussels.

For years the WTC towers stood as a symbol to the urbicide wrought on the North Quarter by project developers in the 1970s: a popular neighbourhood was simply erased, to permit the construction of the so-called Manhattan plan. In recent years the WTC towers also became a symbol for the transmigrant issue, after illegal refugees set up informal tent settlements in the adjacent Maximillian Park. The unique mixture of festive activities and intellectual programmes, such as architecture exhibitions part of the International Architecture Biennial Rotterdam (an interesting programme on the future of cities facing climate urgencies) and university programmes, were meant to turn the non-place into the place-to-be.

The temporary use plays in the context of renovation plans for most of the government office infrastructure in the North Quarter, the real estate parties count with an extremely short lifespan. After 15, 20 maybe 25 years of use, these big corporate complexes are up for demolition and get replaced by new architecture. Most notably, the Koning Boudewijn Building, standing prominently on the Small Ring road in Brussels’ North Quarter and designed by Jaspers-Eyers Architects, was demolished after only 25 years. No one has wept a tear for the demolition of that specific building, apparently the interior climate was as dramatic as its public appearance. The debate was more about the ugliness of the whole operation happening at the hands of the Flemish Government. How can we afford disposable architecture in the new climate regime? And, perhaps even more cynically: how is it possible that the new Quatuor building, which replaced the Koning Boudewijn Building, was designed by exactly the same corporate office responsible for the urban drama we were just liberated from?

The Flemish Government Architect Leo Van Broeck and Brussels Government Architect Kristiaan Borret seized upon the upcoming demolition processes, seeing them as ‘windows of opportunity’ and finding ways of having good architects on the job. So it happened that the headquarters of the KBC bank, a sort of pseudo-neo-classicist pastiche designed by Jaspers-Eyers architects and built in the 1990s, will be (partly) replaced by a multifunctional office-living block, designed by Office KGDVS in collaboration with Jaspers-Eyers architects. The fact Befimmo took 51N4E on board Jaspers-Eyers architects, they were already on the job, for the redevelopment of WTC1 & 2 could be read as a sign that the real-estate market is well aware that things need to improve. Idem ditto for the government agencies in charge, these are somehow conscious that the assessment of architectural quality on the basis of the glass façade is no longer tenable.

The commission for the new WTC tower complex (in the design phase called ZIN, once in use called Marie-Elisabeth Belpaire building) came after a two-step competition, Freek Persyn explains. First, the tender by Befimmo was about finding a concept architect that could collaborate with Jaspers Eyers architects, they were already on board. Second tender by the Flemish Government was about the search for new administrative offices, in which different developers were competing. The Silver Tower development by Ghelamco was also in the running, later they succeeded in a bid for the administrative offices of the Brussels Government in the Silver Tower (also called Iris Tower).

The role of 51N4E is described by cofounder Freek Persyn as ‘navigator’: ‘we took the investment, and we shifted the project in alliance with the Flemish Government, the Government architect, and others.’ The project brief for the concept study was clear: demolition and rebuild. During the process the developer and corporate architect became enthusiast for the adaptive reuse and circular building, involving ROTOR. Although ambitions were later downscaled – in the end only the elevator shafts and underground levels were kept – still the issue suddenly became how to convince the Flemish Government, the potential major tenant.

Still there are several points of gain throughout the design process, Freek Persyn mentioned: the greenhouse was not what they asked for, raising the lobby of the Government allowed open access, the sport hall allows for a different relation with the Maximilliaan park, double height levels and 22 by 100 m open floor plan, and much more. Once part of these sort of industrial complex, the architect fulfills a role in the supply chain, the overall process is fixed. The role of 51N4E was to integrate, redefine and reframe the supply chain logic.

The commercial interest brings us back to the temporal use of the WTC – it was in fact organized by Up4North, a cultural nonprofit created by the property owner Befimmo together with 51N4E and AWB. The branding campaign with the slogan ‘The Future is Here’ – commissioned by AWB – played a crucial role. The creative energy in the tower was an important factor, but the slogan on the 20th floor was next level when it comes to influencing and place-making.

Interesting element in the temporary use of the WTC tower complex was how the architects did consciously anticipate their function as urban catalysts. Most temporary occupants (the artists, the Faculty of Architecture) were provided with a rental contract, beneficial but still paying for the essential costs of electricity, elevators, insurance, water, toilets, etc. Other actors, such as 51N4E (architect office collaborating in the redesign of the tower) and AWB (curating the ‘You are Here’ exhibition as part of the International Architecture Biennale Rotterdam) were presented with an advantageous service contract, with free rent in exchange for services, primarily to attract people to the area. The point is that the real estate operator cannot organise the dynamics of place-making by itself, as an eventual invitation to the public would immediately be considered in the context of consumer relations. It is a world of difference to be invited in the context of an architecture biennial (that deals with the many challenges the climate regime poses to future urban development), while enjoying time with your friends at a rooftop party.

In the case of the WTC makeover the real estate operations is no longer the hidden context to architectural agency, no longer the political and financial interests operating in the shadow of great architectural projects, on the contrary it appears as the condition of possibility for practices of change. The most clear image for this coming together of real estate interests and architectural activism is perhaps the use of the fountain at the Bolivar roundabout by Pool Is Cool. Interestingly the website of Befimmo includes a collage where you see the one-day activity of Pool Is Cool, using inflatable pink flamingos, against the backdrop of the future ZIN building, the latter still in rendering.

While working with Befimmo on the ZIN project, 51N4E got involved in the design of the Victoria building (also known as the IBM tower) at Botanique. As the project was considered a renovation, it was much easier to obtain the building permit; the procedures follow different pipelines. The adaptive reuse was a development by DWNTWN and is now known as the Hoxton, after the hotel chain settles in the tower. The development is a clear market product, explicitly not choosing housing and including a Mexican-inspired restaurant on the rooftop. The role of the architect is different with regards to the ZIN project. In the case of the Victoria ‘Hoxton’ tower 51N4E figured as end-to-end architect, in the case of the ZIN ‘Belpaire’ tower their role was to contribute intelligence to the corporate architect Jaspers Eyers. Striking similarity is the rooftop on both towers as reminiscent of the 1960ies phantasy in Brussels with the former Martini tower at Place Rogier. The opening of the Hoxton by Stromae recalls the myth of the Rolling Stones performing on the rooftop of the Martini tower. Following the reasoning Freek Persyn suggests that the future Standard Hotel at the Belpaire building will realize the infamous Manhattan plan perhaps for the first time.

TRACK is the logical follow-up of the temporary use of the WTC tower in the period 2018-19: ‘It started as temp use, but it created a community’, says Freek Persyn. The community being those involved in Up4North: Architecture Workroom Brussels, Vraiment Vraiment, some artists, IABR, and others. After the temp use of WTC got finished, the good relationship with Befimmo was helpful in finding other locations, first an office complex in the European Quarter and later in the CCN building (next to Brussels Noth Station, now under demolition). The community is at the basis for the temporary use of the former Railway Museum in Brussels North Station, today called TRACK. The public railway company NMBS was searching for new tenants, part of their program ‘Life in the Station’. In the tender procedure, one of the competing bids was by the fitness club Basic-Fit. The bid by Up4North and 51N4E was to renovate the complex, complement office space with a publicly accessible space, provide room for local associations, etc. Organizations involved are Urban Foxes, Sint Lucas Academie, La Fourna, Ten Noey, and others. Although the initiative of TRACK is much smaller compared to the former WTC, the duration of the temp use is totally different – WTC was only one and a half years, TRACK will use the Railway Museum for about 12 years. TRACK features as ‘broedplaats’ (breeding place) in the Brussels Fund of the Flemish Government. Today, after the demolition of the CCN building, the vacant rooftop of the bus station is organized as Place Nord, an empty concrete slab as big as five football terrains. Awaiting the construction of four new tower buildings, the building site is now used as alternative party location. The tabula rasa keeps haunting the Northquarter…

2.  The Beurs and the right of centrality

In the run up to the world exhibition of 1958 Brussels was radically modernized and sacrificed to the car and turned into office town. In the 1980s Brussels was, like so many other (Belgian) cities, suffering from city flight, an urban exodus that was the consequence of the rush to the ‘countryside’, that led to the urban sprawl, the suburbanization of most of the Flemish landscape, with it typical ribbon development.

One can point to the catholic ideology to keep the people in their villages, as the city represented all that was bad (modernity, anonymity, liberalism, socialism, etc), so early on the authorities made a very dense network of public transport (train, tram, bus), but the real urban exodus took off in the late sixties, and again the car was main driver, helped with modern consumer goods, and media like the radio and the television, that made a home feel connected even in the middle of nowhere. The citta diffusa was born.[8]

But the old inner cities were the victims: empty buildings, and speculation waiting for better times, or actively ruining buildings by open window practices, to make sure of quick demise to be able to put modern apartments or office blocks instead. This was particularly clear in the center of Brussels. Even if this exodus created a sort of breeding ground for artists to thrive, and indeed the Quarter around the Stock Exchange was the epicenter of an wave of artistic excellence (Dominique Deruddere, Jan De Corte, Josse Depauw, Arno, Walter Hus, Thierry Demey, and Anne Teresa De Keersmaeker). That is the paradox of urban decay.

The second spatial temporal constellation we want to highlight in the rich history of urban activism in Brussels, takes therefore a start in the heart of Brussels, at this former Stock Exchange (Beurs). The building is set at the crossing of the central Anspach boulevard and the now posh Ortsstraat/Dansaertstraat, just a few steps away from the Grand Place. The constellation of activism around De Beurs allows us not only to re-imagine democracy in the neoliberal city, but also to liberate activism from its self-imposed aura of marginality. Activism can play an important role in the city center too, not only in fringe fields and terrains vagues at the outskirts, or in the interstices of the urban landscape.

The occupation of the Hôtel Central building block, situated opposite the Stock exchange, is a truly legendary example of urban activism for Brussels, one that successfully influenced history and thus marks an important moment, the breakthrough for urban activism in Brussels. It was called in retrospect in the Press: ‘the mother of all occupations’.[9] An unseen coalition was mounted which included cultural institutions, ngo’s (with BRAL[10] and Inter-Environement Bruxelles[11] as important players, but also ARAU[12]) cultural institutions (like De Markten and the Beursschouwburg), schools (Sint Lucas architecture and RITCS), a citizen movement, (‘Committee for the defense of the inhabitants of the Centre’) and of course (ex)inhabitants and occupants, with the Beursschouwburg, situated at the other side of the street, as epicenter and headquarters.

It was there in the café in 1994, after a workshop under the banner of the program Open Stad (Open City), lead by Patrick Moyersoen, an architect, that the idea came about to do something about the derelict building block opposite, where the former hotel Central had been located, but the building was emptied out by Landmaster Invest, who wanted to tear the entire block down and build a sort of mock building instead. Only the barber and a restaurant (the restaurant de la bourse) were still functioning, and, strangely enough, a McDonalds (that held its place). Both the barber and the restaurant owners, the family Gharbi, were fierce opponents of the destruction.

The action stated in a theatrical way: the city authorities were invited for a prize the golden crowbar, for the most spectacular destruction, and was led with a brass band into the empty building block, this was the beginning of the squat, which in a sense the city authorities were part of…  the occupation was a sort of urban festival that lasted ten days in January 1995, with concerts and debates, with around seventy people sleeping in the building, with pickets in front of ‘sell’ ‘Habitat Central’,  with guided tours of model appartement, and of course, parties, like the ‘Urban Squat Dance’ (word game on a then famous pop group Urban Dance Squad) in the old, closed children’s cinema beside the hotel. It was pretty unforgettable for all those involved.

There were several architects in the group (like the legendary Marcel Rijdams of BRAL) and they had more knowledge than the city services they had to deal with. That was certainly a defining aspect of the action: its professionalism. To make things concrete some urgent works were carried out, to avoid further deterioration of the buildings. There was also a legal team, to fight off decisions of the city authorities, a group of experienced activists who gave some training in civil disobedience for participants, and a communication team. The press was played diligently, so that the Mayor of Brussels (the tall, noble Xavier de Donnea), had to change his haughty attitude.

Even if the decision to demolish the entire historical block in front of the Stock exchange was taken and the building permit given, the occupation was able against all odds to win the battle for preservation. After a second occupation in 1996 the battle was won, the block could stay. And the space for dwelling and individual shops was preserved. Of course, the Marriott Hotel replaced Hotel Central, eating away the Cinema, and the upmarket appartements, are not exactly what the activists dreamed of, but another major disaster for the historical urban fabric was avoided.

The victory of Hotel Central lifted up the spirits of its inhabitants. Even if it was not the first local urban activism, the occupation of the Hotel Central block meant a breakthrough, it somehow shifted the mentality. It seemed that the city flight was not fatal, that Brussels had a better future than demolition after demolition. It seemed that Brussels could be turned into a place for its inhabitants, not for speculators and developers.

This first big victory of urban activists in Brussels gave a boost to the idea that citizen initiatives could make a difference and gave rise to the activist collective CityMine(d) and the summer festival in forgotten or problematic spots with high potentiality, PleinOpenAir. It was set up in collaboration with the then brand-new squat cinema for underground movies, cinema Nova. It started in 1996 as ‘Cinema Legumen’ (vegetable cinema) and became a ‘mobile festival with a true urban dimension’ in 1998: ‘Unusual in its scope and atmosphere, the festival program puts into perspective the issues surrounding certain urban sites and offers a chance to build bridges with other urban activists and movements (…).’[13]  It still goes on, albeit with an interruption of five years, one of the most recent editions was around Marais Wiels, an urban pond in a building pit, an new urban ecology, now defended by a community. That was in 2023. It is an excellent example of how a cultural festival can join forces with local urban activists.[14]

The 2001 occupation of the Brussels-Luxembourg railway station by the BruXXel collective, of which CityMine(d) was amongst the driving forces, is another case in which the demolition of a building got halted. These temporary occupations were not carried out for the purpose of using the building, but rather to protect them from deterioration due to vacancy and/or imminent demolition. Still, these occupations did also have larger claims, such as the right to affordable dwelling in the city centre against real-estate speculation, which was made clear in the slogan ‘Habitat Central’ used during the Hôtel Central occupation.

Another major struggle for centrality that took place some 15 years after the occupation of Hotel Central was ‘PicNic the Streets’, a spontaneous action that became defining for the image of the city today, with the Anspach Boulevard in particular. The idea of the picnics was to give a final push to the long-awaited makeover of Place de la Bourse and Place de Brouckère – two squares that, at the time, were cut by the main boulevard (4/5 lanes and 2 parking lanes) running from north to south and leading to an endless stream of traffic through the heart of the city.[15] In fact the boulevard was the fastest connection between Brussels South and North Station and the architectural plans (designed by SUM projects) were on the table for years but never realized for unclear reasons.

On May 24, 2012 philosopher Philippe Van Parijs published an open letter in the three local newspapers addressing the three main language communities in Brussels – French, Dutch and English. The open letter was a classic article in which the author makes use of the upcoming elections to voice discontent about a certain issue – in this case: traffic congestion on the central boulevards of Brussels. The letter was not just a lament but brought a clear proposal to end the political lethargy around the issue. Van Parijs suggested the organization of a massive picnic at the (non-existent) Square de la Bourse, actually calling for an act of civil disobedience by blocking the Anspach Boulevard. The suggestion could not be misunderstood as the author addressed the call explicitly to the Twitter- and Facebook generation.

And so it happened: a group of some 10 people got together to launch the idea of a picnic, they were linked to the famous citizen council BRAL, media platform BRUZZ, and others. A date was pinned for the first picnic: June 10, 2012 and the rest is history. After the event was announced on Facebook, the sniffy rejection by former mayor Freddy Thielemans (French speaking socialist party PS) went viral and in no time thousands of people confirmed their presence through Facebook. The picnics continued until the new mayor Yvan Mayeur (PS) gave in and promised to make the central boulevards of Brussels car-free.[16]

A key strategic element in Picnic the Streets was the festive, family-friendly atmosphere, traditional protest attributes such as slogans and placards being forbidden. This made it possible for all sorts of people to join the movement. It also presented the authorities with a response dilemma: they could negate the activists or support them, but in any case they could not win.[17] The actual renovation of the central boulevards took still another year of preparation, but in the meantime the deserted asphalt was used as test-phase pedestrian zone. Today, the central boulevard is perhaps just as popular as the famous promenade in Blankenberge at the Belgian coast, or the Ramblas in Barcelona for that matter.

Interestingly, the picnics spread across the city as a powerful tool for urban activism, for instance in 2013 with the demand to limit property development at the Porte de Ninove and turn this junk space into a park. In 2022, ‘Picnic the Bridge’ was organized, an occupation to demand the authorities to do something about air quality and pedestrian comport at the Gentse Poort, the bridge crossing the canal. In the meantime the strategy of festive street occupation was tactically adopted by citizen movements like Heroes for Zero and Filter Café Filtré elsewhere in the city, active since 2017 and 2018 respectively, using the street blockade for different purposes, respectively road safety and air quality, but still fighting for a more equal, social, and just city. In all cases the tactic of the festive street blockade is used to pitch a certain single issue on the political agenda by disrupting the distribution channels of the city, even for brief moments.

Important in the chronological constellation of urban activism in Brussels is that the picnics at the Beurs were neither unique nor original, there was an important precursor. In the newspaper piece in which philosopher Philippe Van Parijs suggested a picnic, he referred to a historical moment 1971 at the nearby Grand Place were a picnic was held to make the central market car free. Unbelievable as it may seem, for decades it was possible to park your car in front of the Town Hall, a Gothic master piece, surrounded by one of the most beautiful squares of Europe.[18] Under impulse of the international community  behind The Bulletin,[19] the newspaper by the European community in Brussels, a massive festive picnic was held to stress the issue. The change started in May 1971 with an article by John Lambert, a British journalist for the Sunday Times, in the Bulletin and subsequent petition calling to end “the most beautiful car park in the world”. Sure, it took a while before politicians and local shopkeepers were going along, but today the Grand Place is the ultimate tourist attraction of Brussels.

In the same way, the 2012 picnics led to the (self-claimed) ‘largest pedestrian zone in Europe’, and it is indeed quite extensive and impressive. After a turbulent time at the beginning, with night noise, trash and vandalism, now the promenade is immensely popular, not so much with tourists but with the population, or should we say, the populace. All the complaints about the ‘vulgarity’ of the promenade between the Brouckère square and the Fontainas, with all its pitta joints and snack bars, proves in a sense that it is for once the ordinary inhabitants and not the middle class that has claimed and embraced its right to centrality.

It goes without saying that the success of urban activism is relative: the occupation might help to save a building from demolition but not necessarily from real-estate speculation: the Hôtel Central was, as said, converted into high-class apartments, luxury shops and a five-star hotel, the Marriot. Still, the Hôtel Central occupation can be seen as a success in setting the tone for a future revitalization of the city centre pushed in different actions over a long period of time and also spreading over the city. It brings us to the theory of the long waves, which links the Hôtel Central occupation with the later picnics on Anspach Boulevard (2012) and the picnic on the Grand Place (1972).

Hotel Central and Picnic the Streets are literally neighbors (as the Hotel Central block is located at the Beurs). Both prove that urban activism not only takes place in the abandoned parts of a city, the terrains vagues, the waste lands, the ‘interstitial spaces’ of the city, as Isabelle Doucet argued,[20] but also right in the middle, in the center of a city. The right of a city is also the right to centrality (as we know since Henry Lefebvre).[21] This ‘Right to Centrality’ runs like a recurrent theme through all the actions in this constellation. This right to centrality was formulated by Henri Lefebvre, the philosophical godfather of urban activists (Jane Jacobs could be called their godmother).  It was a specification of his even more famous idea of the right to the city.[22]

The Brussels Stock Exchange is the heart of Brussels. Literally. In addition to the central location of the Stock Exchange on the main avenues between the North and South stations and between the upper town and the Canal Area, there is also the exuberant monumentality of the building and the large staircase that has made the Stock Exchange a meeting place and speakers’ corner for all kinds of events for decades. For decades, it has been the public place par excellence in Brussels and even in Belgium. Public also in the sense of ‘a place for politics’. It made the Beurs into  protagonist in the history of political protest in Brussels. The steps of the Beurs were democracy in action. Every national protest march by whatever organization was running from North to South station with a classic stop for speeches and chants at the steps of the Beurs. This has been changing for some time: since 2014 political expression was banned from the Beurs and protesters are not welcome anymore at the steps of the Beurs.[23]

In 2015 Anna Rispoli, activist artist and Koen Berghmans, activist architect, organized for the opening of the famous KunstenFestivaldesArts a re-enactment of 60 years of protests on the steps, as a sort of artistic ode, both protest and mourning.[24] All sorts of organizations, from the miners, over the Catalans to Kurds or the Brussells Tribunal against the invasion of Iraq and of course pro-Palestinian protests, were all assembled in a mass ceremony on the steps of De Beurs. It was an impressive procession and gathering, both for the participants and for the public, many people were both. It was a forceful contestation of the fact that the steps of La Bourse were since 2014 closed to political manifestations.

Later, there were other actions like ‘Reclaim the steps’ *. All this had no immediate effect. But since the reopening of the Stock exchange, this has changed again: the Gaza protest of 2025 give rendez-vous every night at seven at the steps. Again a proof that urban action for true public space has effects. But we are running ahead of our story.

The makeover of the pedestrian zone, however, fitted in with the trend of turning the Brussels city center into a shopping mall with no place for politics (like in a real shopping mall)  – remember Michael Sorkin’s variations of a theme park. Alderwoman Marion Lemesre (MR) dreamed of it openly. The slogan that was everywhere in Brussels around 2015 went like this: “The heart of the city makes yours beat too, especially in the shops.”[25] An unabashedly neoliberal program in a nutshell: the city as a shopping mall.

Theme park Brussels would find its symbolic culmination in ‘the Beer Temple’, designed by Robbrecht & Daem Architects, and set in the former Stock Exchange (Beurs). The Beer Temple was only meant for tourists and was also a showcase for beer giant AB Inbev, in fact the local beer branches are not represented in the temple. That would have been and still is a disgrace in itself: turning the Beurs into Beer Temple is handing over public property and national heritage to multinationals.

The Beer temple became topic of public debate after a petition was launched in 2017 against the straightforward commercial new program for the abandoned Stock Exchange, and it was quite successful, it had some 6000 signatories in no time and had of course echo’s in the press.[26]

We, both authors in a coordinated crossfire of opinion pieces, added fuel to the fire with articles in Bruzz and on the news website De Wereld Morgen. As it is an amusing but convincing example of the power of discursive architectural activism, we reconstruct it here briefly for you. Gideon’s article ‘Beer, waffles, and architecture’ was criticizing the use of fancy architecture as lubricant for the commercial program and suggesting to keep the Beurs as an empty public interior. No sooner than the next day Bruzz published an answer by state secretary Sven Gatz, formerly president of the Belgian Beer Union, obviously he defended the Beer Temple. Lieven followed up with ‘Beer Temple? Over our dead bodies’ criticizing the depolitization of the Beurs and pleading to turn it into a People’s Palace (Maison du people Bruxellois/ Brussels Volkshuis). Also Brussels Government Architect (BMA) Kristiaan Borret wrote an article admitting the danger of Disneyfication, but still defining the Beer Temple project for architectural reasons.

Years later, Borret admitted (in a public ‘sofa talk’ in the frame of our class ‘Architecture and Activism’) that the controversy we created based on the petition had an effect. Not only the name Beer Temple disappeared but also the urban permit exceptionally requested that beer program was to be reduced to the top floor.[27] Indeed, the Beurs is now a passage, an open urban room, a public interior where people, tourists and inhabitants alike, hang out in peace in the beauty of this Beaux Arts grandeur.

One of us summarized it this way: “In the wake of my and Gideon Boies’ articles, which echoed the petition with more than 6,000 signatures, architects, the Flemish Minister of Culture, the Flemish Government Architect, the Brussels Government Architect, and the new Brussels Alderman for Tourism have successively felt compelled to respond and intervene. Polemics and activism go hand in hand. I would even go further: polemics is activism, and activism is polemical. Or is it not?”[28] This link between discourse and activism is a theme in itself, one could also say a genre in itself: activism by steering public debate through publications.[29] The constellation of activism around the Beurs we are highlighting here, give very clear examples of this, from Picnic the streets ignited by a publication of a philosopher (Philippe Van Parijs) to the ‘Beer Temple debate’.

Interestingly, the centrality of the Beurs was at play in a unique yet painful historical moment in the history of Brussels. At the time of the grand scale terrorist attacks in the Zaventem National Airport and Maelbeek metro station, on March 22 2016, a most traumatic event in the collective psyche of Brussels, and indeed of Belgum, the square in front of the building immediately became a spontaneous memorial site. It was an impressive sacred space of grief and mourning, a concrete proof of unity in diversity, as the very diverse population of Brussels was there to be seen, most visible, and somehow unexpectedly maybe, also the Muslim community. This spontaneous collective gesture of mourning – non-activist to be clear – confirms the unspoken but widely shared feeling that the Stock Exchange and the Square in front of it are the real heart of the city.

Strangely enough the official memorial site was organized as far as possible from the city center. Landscape designer Bas Smets was commissioned a memorial site in the Sonian Forest (Zoniënwoud) in the far Southern edge of the Brussels region, reachable after an hour at public transport and hike in the last stretch. The monument became part of the ‘Onument’ initiative by mourning psychologist Uus Knops and takes the shape of an open circle. Still it is a missed chance to make the spontaneous memorial site at the Beurs a permanent one. The latter would have fit the call by the activists to turn the Beurs into a ‘Maison du Peuple Bruxellois’ (People’s Palace for the inhabitants of Brussels), and to reclaim the steps for political expression, also wanted the space in front of the steps to become a commemoration space for unity in diversity[30]. At least the Stock exchange became a public interior, an urban ‘antechamber’.

But the protest against the commercialization and gentrification of the city centre is not over. Free 54 brought another chapter of this struggle for the right of Centrality.[31] The Saint Catherine Square (Saint Cath, in sms language cinq quat[re] hence 54) was for years the meeting point of Brussels youth, as several schools were situated in the neighborhood, and it was near metro stations, it was near everything, it was central. So the steps of the church and the many benches were their hangout spots. But the same alderwoman for commerce, Marion Lesmesre, decided to give the restaurants more terraces, up to half the square, and therefore many benches had to go. So, again commerce and gentrification over youth hanging around. An obvious neoliberal choice. Protests were arising. The youngsters organized, with some backing of the socio-cultural nonprofit Toestand, really big sit-ins and playful actions, and statements.

Free 54 started in 2015 and continues in waves till today. In the post-Corona period the so-called corona terraces replacing car parking in streets, often in quit neighbourhoods, did not detract from the struggle against the commercialization of the city center – the discussion led to the article ‘The Capital is not a shoppingmall’ in De Standaard.[32] A highlight was in 2024, when after a debate with politicians in the Ancienne Belgique, a famous concert hall, we all carried the benches we had been sitting on via the Beurssquare to the Saint Catherine square (Some are still there a year later, at the moment of writing).[33] All this, this entire space-time constellation we have tried to briefly sketch here, proves the struggle for the right to centrality continues.

3. Tour & Taxis and the possibilities of temporary occupation

The site of Tour & Taxis near the canal is one of the hallmark developments in Brussels today. It is a typical example of the long and difficult process of transforming a derelict industrial complex into a place to be in the post-industrial city. It forms an impressive ensemble. First there is the stately Entrepôt Royal, a gigantic warehouse with a huge inner gallery, built around the beginning of the twentieth century, it has some impressive art nouveau touches.[34]  It was empty for years and was turned into a place for upmarket small businesses, shops and some eating places. The Post office was turned into an event space[35] and more warehouses behind the Depot Royal were turned into exhibition spaces, with some famous yearly events, like the famous Brussels art and antiques fair. Then there is Gare Maritime, suggesting its function for international trade and transshipment by its name. It was renovated by the architect office Neutelings Riedijk, who turned this industrial heritage into a majestic public interior.[36] Next door came the newly built Herman Teirlinck office block for the Flemish Government, designed by the same office. On the opposite side stands the Brasserie de la Senne, a brewery designed by Generale. And the new urban quarter behind the Gare Maritime contains apartment blocks by Sergison Bates, noAarchitecten, AWG, and others. In between all this there is a linear park, a ruin of another tiny train station and still huge void spaces waiting for development, according to a Masterplan by MVRDV, called Lake Side.[37]

For centuries, Thurn und Tassis was the noble family managing postal services in Europe. First used as a grassland for their horses, the site conveniently located along the canal of Brussels was developed from the mid ninetheenth century and truly industrialized around 1900. The Royal Depot and the Gare Maritime cargo station were built in connection with the first railway line on Europe’s mainland, running between Brussels and Mechelen. The site was till well in the twentieth century a gigantic hub where railway, road and waterway transport were combined for transshipment and stocking goods for customs. The growth of truck transport and the disappearance of legal hinderances for international trade made the entire complex superfluous by the 1980s.[38] The last function, the Post office, left in 1987. By the end of the 20th century, the site fell indeed into total disuse and was abandoned, occasionally serving as the grounds for festivals and informal activities. The famous Couleur Café festival, a colorful, child friendly world (or urban) music event, took place in the gigantic voids in between these majestic ruins from  1994 till 2016.

Thurn und Tassis, “Frenchified” as Tour et Taxis, became the biggest open land reserve in the heart of the Brussels-Capital Capital Region, just a stone’s throw from the North Station, and thus a prime stage for speculative real estate developments. During the nineties, the idea was to create a Music City, whose main attraction was a concert hall with a capacity of 12,000 visitors. The music program was a catalyst for administrative and commercial services on the vacant site, and before long, the site was privatized with the plan to clear out its industrial remains.

From the outset, local communities pushed back against the project, offering up counter proposals against this destructive development. One of the protest movements, once more led by BRAL (Brusselse Raad voor het Leefmilieu), an acronym that stands for Brussels Council for the Environment, was known as “TouT Public, Rachetons TouT” (Make It All Public, Buy It All Back), playing with the T’s of Tour & Taxis. For the activists, the battle was about urging the government to buy back the site and render it a public space for all. An important part of the advocacy activism was carried out by heritage association La Fonderie, an organization for industrial archeology, fighting for the preservation of the former warehouses and railway infrastructure. Due to hard work of La Fonderie the site was finally protected in 1987, the same year that the post office closed the curtains on the heroic century of the site as transport and customs hub.

That battle, however, was not just antagonistic, but about many different key actors — public, private, and civil — engaging in intersecting processes. The interests were often conflicting, but over the course of 30 years, new positions developed, and agreements were made. Most notably, the green development was subject to ongoing negotiations, with studies by Michel Desvigne and others in 2011, commissioned by the regional agency for the environment. The green corridor is one of the elements first pushed by activists that was adopted in the final design for the park.

In that context, the tiny new pond before the Gare Maritime deserves attention. The pond, designed by Bas Smets, is in many ways the final element of the extensive Tour & Taxis redevelopment project. Of course, the project developer, Nextensa, is still planning new buildings with about 700 living units in a dozen high-rise buildings, but the small pond marks the starting point for what is known as the green alley, cutting through the development of the former railway site and connecting with different new parks along its path.

The pond is also the most visible sign of Bureau Bas Smets’ landscape design for the Tour & Taxis site — part of a wider goal to rethink the urban landscape on the basis of water flows in the region. Although the Senne River was covered in the 19th Century, it is still a defining urban infrastructure in many ways. Similarly, the network of secondary streams and valleys forms a defining substratum, including the Maelbeek, Molenbeek and the Woluwe, if only because these hidden flows are still reflected in the names of municipalities and neighborhoods in Brussels.

The plan of water flows in Brussels, reconstructed by Bas Smets, is an unofficial working document, once commissioned by the Government Architects of Flanders and Brussels. Still, the document steers detailed interventions scattered throughout the region, such as Tour & Taxis. The absence of true regional planning in Brussels means that, paradoxically, the sustainability and resilience of the landscape depends on specific building developments. The landscape of Tour & Taxis is therefore a necessary compromise with the needs of real estate development.

One of the ecological interventions by Bas Smets was in fact a smart tactic to delineate the buildings and secure an open area. The open field, part of the green corridor along the former railway bed, was used as a dumping ground to store soil excavated elsewhere on the building site. The intervention allowed for a wet area to drain surface water, but it also ensured that the area would never be stable enough to function as a foundation for buildings. Still, the inspiration for the green corridor however is part of a much greater history of civic protests by BRAL and others.

Another unusual element that was integrated in the Tour & Taxis park was the idea of urban gardening. The catalyst was the Parckdesign Biennial 2014, curated by Alive Architecture, and again commissioned by the regional agency for the environment (IBGE/BIM). The former railway bedding was transformed into (the already often referenced) “Parckfarm,” designed by Taktyk and complete with installations, a greenhouse, a pizza oven, a vegetable garden, a chicken run and much more. Initially intended as a temporary project to last just 6 months, the unique ‘farmhouse’, the recycled greenhouse, was made permanent, with activities like urban gardening, cooking courses, children afternoons, etcetera. All this still up and running today.

After the recent opening of the Pannenhuispark, designed by LandInZicht, and the L28 park, designed by Sweco, the whole area of Tour & Taxis now functions as what Bas Smets calls “a kind of autonomous metabolism” in the city. The landscape is not only brought into connection with water management, but it is also used to bridge the real estate developments with the sociological reality in the densely populated areas around the former industrial site. In fact it is only thanks to the extensions with the different parks – Parckfarm, Pannenhuispark and L28 park – that the enclave of the Tour & Taxis development got connected with the neighboorhood, the very coloured ‘Maritiemwijk’.

The splendid isolation of Tour & Taxis in fact mirrors the history of Allée du Kaai, the former spontaneous action zone organized by socio-cultural nonprofit Toestand. Since 2014 the wasteland and abandoned warehouses at the Quai des Matériaux were turned into a highly popular hangout for youngsters. The autonomous zone for play and party, together with workshops, was also a welcoming infrastructure for homeless and undocumented migrants and refugees. These different users were intermingling thanks to the alternative workshops.  ‘PERSONNE N’EST ILLEGALE’ (Nobody is illegal) was the slogan painted on the roof of one of their main buildings, symbolizing the openness of the site.

For years Allée du Kaai was in fact the only social program along the Canal, awaiting the future corporate developments, perhaps even announcing these. The place-making quality of temporary use was most probably one of the drivers for regional government, but still the temporary activities were transgressing the real estate interests. The temporary use was meant to last until 2019 but lasted much longer. Finally, Toestand was forced to leave the site in 2023, the warehouses got demolished and the area was turned into an official public park, cynically adopting the popular name ‘Allée du Kaai’, now devoid of its social program, although there is, under and around the fancy new bridge, a skate park.

Another great piece of activism surrounding the Tour & Taxis site is OpenStreets, an initiative of the nonprofit ‘Filter Café Filtré’, since 2020. OpenStreets is an experiment, in the tradition of play streets and car free summer streets elsewhere, that puts streets under temporary self-management and reorganizes these as platforms for cultural exchange and collective dream labor. The location of the first open street in Brussels was Picardstraat, connecting the North gate of the Gare Maritime with the popular neighborhoods of Molenbeek and Laken. Top art institutions, theatre houses and dance companies are involved. The vacant chemist was renamed ‘Barmacie’, (playing on pharmacy), now functioning as workshop.

Picardstreet is also at the front door of architect Annekatrien Verdickt, driving force of Filter Café Filtré. With the local government showing little interest in opening up Picardstraat, its status as a regional road was tactically used in obtaining permits from the regional government. The architect’s hand is visible in the staging. Reclining chairs, worktables and plants furnish the street as if it were an extension of the living room. Painted circles on a 1.5 m pattern brighten up the asphalt. First meant only to last only for two weeks, the Picardstraat was kept open the whole summer and became the reason for an expanding multi-year program with different open streets each time. Again, OpenStreets shows how, like with Parckfarm, the utopian visions of the new urban development at Tour & Taxis only got realized outside its perimeter – temporarily but all the more concrete.

The Monument for Human Rights, designed by Bas Smets, is a 12-meter-high obelisk set along the running track in the Tour & Taxis park. The colored marble stones have on it all the articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in four languages – French, Dutch, German and English. The different colors – dark at the bottom, light in the top stone – are said to represent the diversity of rights and the richness of cultures in Brussels. One could question if the temporary initiatives circling around Tour & Taxis – ParckFarm, Allée du Kaai, OpenStreets – are not better suited as living monuments for human rights, at least functioning as very concrete gateway for this oft forgotten human right: the right to the city. This right to the city indeed presupposes a livable, lively convivial city. That is exactly what urban activism is all about.

4. Post script on Activist Institutions

Can institutions be open to their neighborhood? And by doing so becoming a factor of urban activism? That is the question we would like to address at the end of our talk, because of the brilliant idea of Annekatrien Verdickt of making an OpenStreet here for one day on the occasion of our talk. (that was unfortunately not realized – some other time).

The relationship between activism and cultural institutions remains a difficult one, if only because of the difference between paid labor and the spontaneous, unpaid enthusiasm of citizens. Institutions have closing hours, which activism does not allow. Institutions work with policy plans spread over several years, while activism is determined by the urgency of the day, or determines this itself if necessary. An institution also has its own accommodation, with all the domestic chores that entails, while activism appears on the streets, or on the internet if necessary; in any case, it is homeless.

Still, constellations are emerging as institutions are often present in the background of activism, if only for providing support. Activism is clearly driven by spontaneous and unsolicited actions by civil movements, usually set up ad hoc with a single issue in mind and initiated out of indignation or need. In Brussels, we can think of recent movements such as Common Josaphat, 1030/0 (Heroes for Zero), and Filter Café Filtré. The movements mentioned can count on the support of civil society organizations and cultural institutions, such as BRAL, KANAL, and Greenpeace. This support includes advice and assistance, promotion, contacts, a little credibility, and so on.

In fact there is a whole urban dynamic at play once we talk about activist institutions. One could speak about an open, activist institution as opposed to the normal tendency of institutions to be closed, indifferent to their immediate surroundings, Islands in an archipelago of (high) culture. Cultural institutions function by definition as islands in the city; they are closed spaces that rely on the public to come to them. This commuting also applies to staff, who are not necessarily familiar with the location. In any case, the theater is a ‘different space’ in the city, a heterotopia. The most important instrument is the black box; the blind walls alienate the audience from everyday reality, and an imaginary reality appears on stage. After the performance, the audience enjoys a drink in the foyer.

The closed logic does not detract from the fact that cultural institutions make an effort to open up to the neighborhood, but this usually takes the form of attracting ‘other’ target groups. Certainly in the case of the large institutions, the program is particularly exclusive, aimed at a white target group, also known as the affluent class. There is nothing wrong with appealing to a more diverse audience. However, the question raised by the flirtation with activism is to what extent a cultural institution can step outside itself. Is the support of civil movements purely instrumental? Or can a cultural institution also make a substantial contribution to the activism of civil movements? Or can the cultural institution itself be activist?

The Beursschouwburg was avantgarde in its care for its immediate surroundings. It became the epicenter of the occupation of Hotel Central, by radically focusing on the neighborhood, with street festivals in Ortsstraat, and by choosing to work towards a multicultural city. But the Beursschouwburg was also activist in being the first Flemish institution to communicate in two languages, which caused a stir in political circles, but was later adopted by almost all Brussels institutions.  It was a wakeup call for many other cultural institutions, and even the fact that Brussels 2000 cultural capital was so much centered on the making of a convivial city, can be seen as an echo of this action.[39]

A more recent, radical example than the Beursschouwburg in the nineties is OpenStreets, initiated by the citizen movement Filter Café Filtré during the first Corona lockdown in response to the need for public space. Importantly, the opening of the street was accompanied by staging and programming. Art institutions such as KANAL, KVS, Kaaitheater, and Ultima Vez eagerly used the street as a stage. Cultureghem let people sample each other’s cuisine. ‘t Zinneke, a residential facility for people with mental disabilities, moved its activities outside, giving the summer street the additional meaning of a care street.

The institutional commitment in these examples is commendable, but remains occasional and does not necessarily affect the operation itself, let alone the infrastructure. Perhaps the infrastructure is the most fundamental element on which the involvement of a cultural institution in the neighborhood is truly ingrained in its daily operations. Remarkably, the renovation of the Beursschouwburg (2003), designed by B-architecten, reflected the ambitions to be open to the neighborhood: the lobby was designed as an extension of the street—with all the logistical problems that entailed. In the case of KANAL, KVS, and Kaaitheater, participation in Openstreets was primarily an opportunity at a time when cultural centers were forced to close their doors. In the case of the latter, the threshold remains high and mutual dependence is anything but supported by the architecture. Even in the current renovation of KANAL, designed by noAarchitecten, it remains to be seen how accessible the intended ‘hangout space in the city’ in the former showroom will be.

In all cases, the institution’s commitment is expressed in its openness to a different audience. The question remains whether a cultural center can also make an active/activist contribution to the urban dynamic that goes beyond its own functioning and transcends its own interests (sacrifice is an essential characteristic of activism). A reverse movement is needed here, whereby the cultural institution can step outside itself.

In this regard, the design of Théâtre Le Rideau (2014) in Ixelles offers a fairly literal escape route. The cultural space is housed in a closed block of buildings, consisting of a number of former mansions with rear extensions, including a coal storage facility. However, the most important element is what was not built. In the design by OUEST, due to a lack of space and money, an expensive professional kitchen was abandoned and it was decided instead that staff and audiences should use the local restaurants. This enabled the theater to strengthen its ties with the local community, and its name even began to function as the nickname for the neighborhood, ‘Quartier Le Rideau’.

(Envoi [Dear Nikolaus]) The ‘Open street’ that was supposed to be playing out in front of CIVA on the occasion of our evening on the history of urban activism in Brussels, just even the mere idea of it, seemed to us an open invitation to CIVA to take up the challenge and become an open, activist institution that is involved in the struggles of the city and the neighborhood. For sure, this will be logical, if not inevitable once it will be located in KANAL-Centre Pompidou, as it will be in the center of a new cultural agora for Brussels.

5. Prolegomena on the ‘Metabletics of Activism’

When we tried to somehow invent an answer to the question (we were asked to speak on the history of Activism in Brussels by the director of CIVA, in the frame of the exhibition Chronograms, remember) in reference to Jencks’ genealogical tree/timeline of architecture in the 20th century and the exhibition Chronograms, we soon realized that making such a timeline would be interesting, but very time consuming and extremely difficult.

Activism is like sand in the wind, like dust in time: it just disappears, it has no consistency and disappears once the action is over. Even the exhibition of 50 years of BRAL did not have very much photographs or other documents to document its timeline.[40] The advent of Internet has changed this ‘tracelessness’ of activism to a large extend, thank God. For social and alternative media keep track of these local actions.

So, we decided to restrict ourselves to three time-space constellations (of which we really worked out one and a half). Maybe the word constellation deserves some epistemological or philosophical reflection. It is not only a relation between things, people and events, but it also refers to the stars. To astronomy and astrology. Hence in our first meetings to prepare for this evening we started to dream of a ‘metabletics of activism’.

Metabletics is a term coined by the peculiar psychiatrist & historian Jan Hendrik van den Berg, with his book Metabletica van de materie. De leer der veranderingen. (Metablectics of matter. The doctrine of change). Metabletica literally means the doctrine of change. Both authors of this text, for different reasons, were influenced, or at least fascinated by this now forgotten discipline, this idiosyncratic approach to history. For Gideon because one of his teachers, Jacques De Vischer, was a pupil of van den Berg. For Lieven because this approach had affinities with Walter Benjamin’s vision of historical constellations (a term he used many times), and Foucault, for instance his reading of the Panopticon as a historical constellation, as marking the rise of disciplinary society.

Jan Hendrik van den Berg read historical constellations often linked to a specific year, he was interpreting the ‘simultaneity’ between often very diverse historical events. One of such simultaneities happened around 1856 and 1977 with the opening of Chrystal Palace in London and Centre Pompidou in Paris respectively, both linked with the rise of hooliganism. Lieven had a bash at this with the year 1791: in that year not only was the panopticon or the inspection house published by Bentham, but also the Montblanc was conquered, the first high mountain in (western) history, and the painter Robert Barker took a patent on his new circular painting: the panorama. Lieven coined this constellation, with the rise of a new focus on vision and overview, ‘the panoramic gaze’.[41] Ever since this metabletica as science of constellations has kept a particular fascination for us both.

We wondered in our musings if, against the transience and disappearance, the ‘tracelessness’ of activism and the enormous amount of invisible labour activism presupposes, there would be possible this sort of metabletica of activism. It seems uncertain. The many sketches and schemes of Amber and Ymay on Miro in preparation of this evening, are proof of our attempts to visualize this constellation in graphs of sorts.[42]

But we somehow hope that the three space-time constellations we excavated here for you, quite textbook examples of urban activism in Brussels actually, are a modest contribution to this new, most probably impossible science.[43]

NOTES

* As Nikolaus is a foreigner and new to Brussels, our text is directed towards newcomers, like our international students, who are interested in Brussels, but do not necessarily know its history well, let alone the history of urban activism in the city.

[1] See: https://civa.brussels/en/exhibitions-events/chronograms-architecture

[2] Mark Wigley gave a talk called ‘The drawing that ate architecture’, at CIVA, on Jencks timeline: see: https://civa.brussels/nl/expo-events/mark-wigley

[3]   The neologism ‘Urbicide’ was coined by Marshall Berman to describe the large-scale interventions in New York in the 1960s and became widely used in academic circles following the destruction of Sarajevo during the Yugoslav civil war. See also Lieven De Cauter, ‘The Rise of Zoöpolitics. On urbanism and Warfare’ in: Nikolina Bobich & Farzaneh Haghighi, The Routledge Handbook of Architecture, Urban Space and Politics, Volume 1, Violence, Spectacle and Data, Routledge, London, New York, 2023, pp. 45-56 (also in a first version, in the collection of essays by Lieven, Ending the Anthropocene, NaiO10, Rotterdam, 2021).

[4] “The project for the North district by Bourgeois was not immediately for an office district, but for a residential area with modernist mid-rise buildings that were linked two by two to form blocks with an inner courtyard. This was the first time that a complete tabula rasa operation was proposed for the North quarter. However, Bourgeois opted to retain the historic axis of the royal route, thereby introducing a diagonal into the new checkerboard street pattern. Bourgeois presented the plan on the occasion of a small retrospective exhibition of his own work that took place in April 1930, which actually sought to offer an alternative to the North-South connection, with a new Central Station near the Antwerp Gate and thus a new station district to the north of it. Later, he continued to work on the idea of transforming the entire area on the east side of the canal into a residential area as part of a linear city based on the Russian model. (quote from a Mail by Iwan Strauven, author of Victor Bourgeois. Modernity, Tradition & Neutrality, Nai010 publishers, Rotterdam, 2021).

[5]  This resistance or at least irritation about the transformation of the Marolles is immortalized in Jean Harlez’s film Le chantier des gosses (restored and screened in the summer of 2025).

[6] Gideon Boie, De Tragedie van de Noordwijk, A+, available online: https://a-plus.be/nl/tragedie-van-de-noordwijk/

[7] See ibid: https://a-plus.be/nl/tragedie-van-de-noordwijk/

[8] We here refer to the term introduced by Bernardo Secchi and Paola Vigano, who went sometimes a bit far in her declaration of urbanity in this diffusion…

[9] See Lieven De Cauter, ‘From Hôtel Central to Picnic the Streets’, https://www.dewereldmorgen.be/community/from-hotel-central-to-picnic-the-streets-small-panorama-of-urban-activism-in-brussels/. A more recent article, an interview (in Dutch) with a key player, Patrick Moyersoen: https://www.bruzz.be/samenleving/burgers-maken-de-stad-1-hotel-central-de-moeder-aller-bezettingen-2018-07-30. Steven Van Garsse, De kraak van Hotel Central: ‘Er heerste een Berlijns gevoel’, Brussel Deze Week, 04/02/2015. https://www.bruzz.be/news/de-kraak-van-hotel-central-er-heerste-een-berlijns-gevoel-2015-02-04

[10] Brusselse Raad voor het Leefmilieu, an organization that played a crucial role in almost all actions of urban activism in Brussels, often in the background and recently had its 50 birthday. See: https://bral.brussels

[11] See: https://www.ieb.be/

[12] See: https://www.arau.org/en/who-are-we/

[13] For a more detailed history see https://www.nova-cinema.org/nova/programmation/article/special-events

[14] Marais Wiels would deserve more attention in itself, but it shows well how a cultural festival can join forces with urban activists defending a new urban ecological system: See: https://www.bruzz.be/culture/events-festivals/pleinopenair-onze-films-boksen-hier-op-tegen-kikkers-en-treinen-2023-07-05.

[15] Gideon Boie, ‘Pic Nic Architectuur’, A+ 264 (2017): 22–24.

[16] One of the protagonists, Bram Dewolfs, looking back on the action, in Dutch: https://www.bruzz.be/stedenbouw/burgers-maken-de-stad-4-de-pietonnier-2018-08-02.

[17] The response dilemma is conceptualized by Roger Hallam, https://www.rogerhallam.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Common-Sense-for-the-21st-Century_by-Roger-Hallam-Download-version.pdf.

[18] Karen McHugh, ‘The Picnic that Changed Brussels: How a Bulletin Campaign 50 Years ago Helped Pedestrianise the Grand Place’, The Bulletin, 30 May 2021, https://www.thebulletin.be/picnic-changed-brussels-how-bulletin-campaign-50-years-ago-helped-pedestrianise-grand-place.

[19] Typical it were not the Belgians themselves, with their lack of collective self-respect and commitment for the common cause. It must be said that this lack of chauvinism touching upon collective indifference for anything public, has been considerably amended in recent years. But foreigners are still important in many initiatives of Urban activism in Brussels.

[20] Isabelle Doucet, The Practice Turn in Architecture, Routledge, 2015.

[21] Henri Lefebvre, The Right to the City, Blackwell, 1996. Original publication in French, 1968.

[22] It echoes in a marvelous way in David Harvey’s Rebel Cities. From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution, Verso, London, New York, 2013. As the subtitle suggests it is one long meditation on this idea of Lefebvre and how to realize this right to the city against the capitalist forces in the neoliberal city.

[23] Lieven De Cauter, ‘Bericht aan de bevolking over de depolitisering van de Brusselse binnenstad’: (English translation: https://www.dewereldmorgen.be/community/reclaim-the-steps-a-message-to-the-population-about-the-depoliticization-of-downtown-brussels/

[24] https://kfda.be/nl/festivals/2015-edition/programme/les-marches-de-la-bourse/

[25] Zie lieven De Cauter, ‘Bericht aan de bevolking…’, o.c.

[26] Bruzz, https://www.bruzz.be/samenleving/1600-handtekeningen-tegen-biertempel-2017-09-23

[27] Here inks to the entire controversy. The Petition: https://www.change.org/p/sauvons-la-bourse-non-au-temple-de-la-bi%C3%A8re; the reaction of the architects and the occasion of the the controversy: https://www.bruzz.be/samenleving/architecten-lanceren-communicatieoffensief-voor-beursrenovatie-2017-09-27;  Gideon Boie, “Wafels, bier en architectuur”, in the paper version of BRUZZ actua 1586 (4 October 2017), p. 18-19. Also published on the website of BRUZZ: Gideon Boie, “Moet de beurs een biertempel worden?” BRUZZ, 3 Oct. 2017, online article: http://www.bruzz.be/nl/debat/moet-de-beurs-een-biertempel-worden;  The response of Sven Gatz, ‘We geven Beursgebouw terug aan de mensen’, BRUZZ, 10 Oct. 2017. https://www.bruzz.be/samenleving/sven-gatz-we-geven-beursgebouw-terug-aan-de-mensen-2017-10-10;  Lieven De Cauter, ‘Biertempel? Over our dead bodies!’, BRUZZ, 11 Oct. 2017. https://www.bruzz.be/samenleving/lieven-de-cauter-biertempel-over-our-dead-bodies-2017-10-11 ; Gideon Boie, ‘Verslaafd aan architectuur’, A+ Architecture in Belgium, 16 Oct. 2017. https://a-plus.be/nl/opinion-esclave-de-larchitecture/ ; Kristiaan Borret, ‘Tijd om alternatieven voor Disneyficatie concreet te maken’, BRUZZ, 25 Oct. 2017. https://www.bruzz.be/opinie/beursrenovatie-tijd-om-alternatieven-voor-disneyficatie-concreet-te-maken-2017-10-25; Yannick Schandené, ‘Biertempel en activisten: mag het debat gematigder?’ BRUZZ, 25 Oct. 2017. https://www.bruzz.be/opinie/biertempel-en-activisten-mag-het-debat-gematigder-2017-10-26 ; Lieven De Cauter, ‘Waarom een verwaterde biertempel? Een antwoord aan Sven Gatz’, De Wereld Morgen, 26 Oct. 2017. https://www.dewereldmorgen.be/artikel/2017/10/20/waarom-een-verwaterde-biertempel-een-antwoord-aan-sven-gatz/ ; Lieven De Cauter, ‘Beurs als Brussels Volkshuis’, De Wereld Morgen, 1 Nov. 2017. https://www.dewereldmorgen.be/artikel/2017/11/01/beurs-als-brussels-volkshuis/

[28] https://www.dewereldmorgen.be/artikel/2017/11/01/beurs-als-brussels-volkshuis/

[29] It can even become a specific method. See the action research around this sort of discursive activism in Gideon Boie, Discursive Architecture, Nai010, 2024.

[30] See: https://www.dewereldmorgen.be/artikel/2018/05/02/reclaim-the-steps-actie-op-1-mei-voor-beurs-als-brussels-volkshuis/  Anna Rispoli, the artist, and the authors were involved.

[31] An interesting document on Free 54 by Free 54: http://www.free54.be/FREE%2054%20-%20manifest%20-%202016%20web.pdf

[32] Gideon Boie, ‘De hoofdstad is geen shoppingmall’, De Standaard, 17 augustus 2023 , https://www.standaard.be/opinies/de-hoofdstad-is-geen-shoppingmall/40731597.html

[33] See: https://www.bruzz.be/actua/stedenbouw/banken-van-actievoerders-op-sint-katelijneplein-weggehaald-2024-09-11

[34] See: https://monument.heritage.brussels/fr/buildings/36260#&gid=null&pid=30

[35] https://tour-taxis.com/event-space/maison-de-la-poste/

[36] See for yourself on: https://neutelings-riedijk.com/projects/gare-maritime/

[37] A commercial impression of all the elements of the site in a video on: https://tour-taxis.com. One can get an idea of how the void will be filled in this image by MVRDV: https://www.mvrdv.com/projects/632/tour–taxis-lake-side

[38] For a more detailed history see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tour_%26_Taxis

[39] As Patrick Moyersoen suggests in the long interview, looking back on the occupation, in BRUZZ: https://www.bruzz.be/samenleving/burgers-maken-de-stad-1-hotel-central-de-moeder-aller-bezettingen-2018-07-30

[40] De verbeelding aan de macht BRAL viert 50 jaar stadsactivisme (Power to imagination, Bral celebrates 50 years of activism), See: https://bral.brussels/nl/50jaar

[41] ‘The Panoramic Ecstasy: on World Exhibitions and the disintegration of Experience (November 1993) Available online: See: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/026327693010004001 (in Dutch also in Archeologie van de kick)

[42] See: We would not call genealogical tree  ‘chronograms’, for these are mostly latin phrases with Latin dates hidden in them, at least in French. In Spanish it simply means schedule, order of the day, time scheme. Nowhere it has the meaning of timeline, let alone genealogical tree. So the name of the exhibition was the beginning of a series of misunderstanding, we suppose.

[43] This evening and this text are the cherry on the cake of ten years of teaching together, in a course, invented by Gideon, called ‘Architecture and Activism’ (we were already teaching a common course called Ethics & Criticism). Another apotheosis of this collaboration (that now has come to an end as Lieven is retired) will be a book, to be published soon: Gideon Boie & Lieven De Cauter, The Activist City, Essays on political, urban & architectural activism, Nai010publishers, Rotterdam, 2025.