Meaning: The quote by Rem Koolhaas, a renowned architect, challenges the conventional notion of urban design and questions the pursuit of creating beautiful, unique, and distinct cities. Koolhaas suggests that perhaps the characterless nature of cities serves as the ideal environment for human habitation. This thought-provoking statement raises important questions about the purpose of urban design and the relationship between the built environment and the people who inhabit it.

Koolhaas' assertion that "we say we want to create beauty, identity, quality, singularity" reflects the common aspirations and goals of urban planners, architects, and designers. The desire to create visually appealing, culturally rich, and high-quality urban spaces is deeply ingrained in the ethos of the design profession. This pursuit is often driven by the belief that well-designed cities can enhance the quality of life, foster a sense of community, and contribute to the overall well-being of their inhabitants.

However, Koolhaas challenges this conventional wisdom by suggesting that the very absence of distinct character in cities might be what makes them desirable for living. This assertion prompts a reevaluation of the traditional understanding of what constitutes an ideal urban environment. It forces us to consider whether the pursuit of beauty and singularity in urban design aligns with the actual needs and preferences of city dwellers.

Koolhaas' perspective can be seen as a critique of the prevailing trend of prioritizing aesthetics and uniqueness in urban development. In many cases, the relentless pursuit of creating iconic structures and distinctive cityscapes has led to the gentrification of neighborhoods, displacement of communities, and the prioritization of visual appeal over practicality and functionality. Koolhaas' statement challenges us to reconsider the value of characterless or seemingly generic urban spaces and to recognize the potential benefits they offer.

The idea that characterless cities provide the best context for living raises fundamental questions about the relationship between urban form and human experience. It suggests that a lack of distinct character in cities may actually offer a neutral backdrop that allows for greater flexibility, adaptability, and diversity in how people inhabit and use urban spaces. This notion challenges the romanticized view of cities as havens of unique and iconic architecture, instead emphasizing the importance of creating environments that can accommodate a wide range of activities, lifestyles, and cultural expressions.

Koolhaas' perspective also invites reflection on the nature of identity and the role of the built environment in shaping it. While many urban design initiatives aim to create distinct and recognizable identities for cities, Koolhaas' assertion suggests that the absence of a strong, predetermined identity may allow for a more organic and inclusive process of identity formation. In this view, characterless cities may provide a blank canvas upon which diverse communities can project their own identities and narratives, fostering a sense of ownership and belonging that is not constrained by predefined urban aesthetics.

In conclusion, Rem Koolhaas' quote challenges us to reconsider our assumptions about the relationship between urban design, beauty, and livability. It prompts us to question whether the relentless pursuit of distinctive and visually striking cities truly serves the needs and desires of their inhabitants. By advocating for the potential value of characterless cities, Koolhaas invites us to explore alternative approaches to urban design that prioritize adaptability, inclusivity, and the diverse ways in which people interact with and inhabit urban spaces. This thought-provoking perspective encourages a reexamination of the fundamental principles that underpin our understanding of what makes cities livable, functional, and truly desirable places to call home.