Report on Manila City Beautiful? The Works of Daniel Burnham The Metropolitan Museum Submitted by Enrico C.

. Bagadion Plan 201

1. The Exhibit
The exhibit chronicled the urbanization of Manila from the Spanish period to the American and early post-American era. Particular emphasis was given to the contributions of Daniel Burnham, after whose works the exhibit was primarily organized for. Several panels showing pictures, maps and chronicles characterized the exhibit. Starting with the 17th Century Plano de Manila, it pictured Manila during the Spanish era as already a city beset with the typical urban problems of its time. Sampaloc was shown as already densely populated, with many structures made of light materials. The Spaniards built the Intramuros de Manila where the clergy and the ruling elite lived, while the local population together with enclaves of Chinese and Japanese lived in Extramuros. A kind of urban code was said to be already in use then for all Spanish colonies; King Philip IIs Law of the Indies, was said to have had specified a basic drainage system and a grid of streets laid out around a central plaza mayor. At the turn of the century, squatting was already a problem in Manila and floods a seasonal nuisance (said to be caused by inadequate or improper drainage systems), the exhibit noted. By the end of the Spanish rule, the urban population reached 200 thousand and urbanization spilled to the suburbs Binondo, San Nicolas, Quiapo, Ermita, Malate, etc. The American occupation ushered in a new era of aggressive urban planning for Manila with the designation of Daniel Burnham as Manilas chief architect. Burnham, top architect and planner, leading light of City Beautiful Movement, and known for his works in Chicago, Washington DC, etc., was reportedly so enamored with Manila, describing it as possessing the Bay of Naples, the winding river of Paris, and the canals of Venice. Burnham was in Manila December 1904 to June 1905, and his Manila plan was a grand layout crisscrossed by wide boulevards and large open spaces. Central civic complexes were oriented out to the scenic bay. Implementation started June 28 1905, two months after approval by then Civil Governor William Howard Taft. Manilas plan emphasized landscape design as well as proper site planning, following Burnhams design for Washington DC. A notable picture in the exhibit was that of a Spanish 1901 map indicating a population of 200 thousand, with most of built-up area north of the Pasig River, and proposed piers by the Manila Bay. The planned new piers would have blocked the view of the sea from the Luneta so Burnham proposed to have the area extended by a thousand feet. Burnham also noted the importance of Spanish heritage in Intramuros and merged the old with the new pattern of the city. William Parsons continued where Burnham left, constructing Manilas buildings in neo-classic style. Ralf Doune succeeded Parsons in 1914 and stayed until 1918, after which Filipinos took up the job of building the city. Noted names in the exhibit were those of Carlos Barreto, Juan Arellano, Antonio Toledo, Tomas Mapua, Fernando Ocampo, Juan Nakpil, Alejandro Arellano, and Angel Nakpil.

P.2

Parsons returned to plan UP Diliman in 1939. The Burnham plan was then still the basis of city planning until the start of World War II. In 1941, President MLQuezon approved the Quezon City plan that was envisioned to be the expansion of City Beautiful. Harry Frost, Juan Arellano, AD Williams and Louis Croft were designated planners and implementers. Following the Burnham Plan, the Frost Plans geometry was formal, the central axis pronounced, and the office complexes clustered together. Towards the end, the exhibit chronicles events and circumstances as to how and why the plan to build Manila as a City Beautiful remained an unfulfilled dream.

2. Thoughts
The exhibit ends with this tribute to Burnham: The ultimate hallmark of Daniel Burnhams master plan is that it persisted in concept for so long. It survives with us today, in the spirit of a forever uncompleted planning. In this sense, the exhibit is somehow bleakly unsettling, leaving one with a feeling of frustration over the present realities of what would have been the magic of Manila, the City Beautiful. Yes, Burnham, we might say, never shrank from the big stuff. The buildings that he and his apostles planned and built around Manila stand as lasting monuments to his famous adage Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir mens blood. Make big plans, for a noble document once recorded will never die. One may be tempted to challenge this belief in the squalor of Philippines realities. Was Burnhams vision of what looked like an aristocratic Manila unrealizable because it was not simply in accord with the realities of future downtown real estate development? Or was it because, in a larger sense, Burnhams plans were not in harmony with the future socio-economic, physical, political and cultural scenario? Was it his failure as a planner not to have adequately considered the possibilities and the needs of Manilas future? What would he have planned for Manila, one can wonder, if he had noted that the post imperial experience in many countries have often been a miserable one; that following independence, many countries are raped by a succession of self-serving elite with only a scant regard for the public good? Selfrule does not necessarily translate to wise rule. But having said that, the resilience in us Filipinos continue to beg the question - can our Filipino leaders in general, and our planners in particular, of today and tomorrow rise above themselves and their narrow business interests to plan and implement for the common good? Can they, singularly and collectively, face their own demons and muster the courage and political will to stir mens blood and ensure that their noble documents never die? One finishes the exhibit laden with questions of What-if? What-could-have-been? What-couldbe-done? Is-there-hope? Kung-hindi-ngayon-kailan-pa? questions that leave one longing for the relief of a warm shower and a good massage. Perhaps another reason to pay tribute to Daniel H. Burnham is that his forever uncompleted plans will continuously hound us to seek answers to such uncomfortable questions.