Sociology of (contemporary) urban public spaces

Changes and evolution in the relation between the urban setting and the public realm

Sociology of [contemporary] urban public spaces

Piacenza, 19/10/2015Course analysis of temporary inhabitants in urban public spaces – Prof. citroni – 4CFU 1

OUTLINE• 2 main (interrelated) perspectives:

a) Public space, civic engagement, citizenship;

b) Crisis of public space in contemporary city;

c) Persistence of urban public space (new ways to think public space);

• On the road: distinction between urban public space and the public sphere (Habermas);


the rise of a public SPHERE in the city: the Greek polis


• Polis, active participation of free-citizens in the political life of the city-state;• Establishment of a public sphere separated from the private dimension (oikos);• Public dimension: basis for the political life (Arendt 1958), world in common, where is

possible to discuss the affairs of the community;• Public sphere (POLIS) = public space (AGORÀ);

the rise of a public SPHERE in the city: the European civitas


• Symbol of an open society, held together by a shared common pact; • Spatial manifestation in the collective themes of the Urbs;• Ex. The PIAZZA and the 3 powers (Church, Commune, Chamber of commerce);

what is the legacy of this conceptualisation of the public dimension (POLIS/agorà and CIVITAS/piazza) in contemporary societies?

Question time



…. Idea that PUBLIC SPACE IS…

…the PLACE of POLITICAL LIFE……the PLACE of CITINZESHIP…

PUBLIC SPACE = PUBLIC SPHERE

Public sphere ≠ Public placeImmaterial sphere of communication, in which a public opinion on topics of general interest can be formedthrough debate and deliberative mechanisms;

It is a (democratic) form of communication: decision are made through a public debate among different opinions;All opinions have the same power;


Habermas, Jurgen. [1961] 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.


Press, Salons, Coffee houses

In the bourgeois society, Public opinion is externalized to counterbalance the voice of the state;It is a way through which social power and political domination are submitted to the democratic

precept of publicity;


Blog, forum, mailing list, social media

• The only places regarded as real public spaces are those where there is political participation and citizenship activation;

• Inclusion of immaterial spaces, which are relevant for the formation of a public opinion;

• Focus on the relationship between communication and democracy;

An evolution A misunderstanding


Political philosophy; Sciences of communication

This interpretation leads to an impasse: where are the public space in contemporary cities? Anywhere!

What is a city?Urban Sociology; Symbolic interactionism


• Simmel Metropolis and the mental life; The Stranger

• Chicago school: Park, Burgess, McKenzie The City; Park Human Migration and the Marginal Man; Wirth Urbanism as a way of life

• Jacobs The Death and Life of the Great American cities

• Lefebvre The Urban Revolution; Differential Manifesto;

• Lofland A World of Strangers: Order and Action in Urban Public Space; The Public Realm: Exploring the City’s Quintessential Social Territory

• Goffmann Behaviour in Public Places: Notes on the Social Organization of Gatherings

• Sennett The fall of public man


the public realm of city


Coexistence in space and in time of a great (social, cultural, architectural) heterogeneity;

Interaction among different elements and production of hybrids (cosmopolite, stranger, marginal man, urban animal);

Living in this setting is impossible without civilization, that is the activity that places individuals away from each other and allows them to enjoy each other’s company; Shared norms and rules that establish the ability to build a bond, even in situations of social distance;

Recognition of legitimacy for each one to be present in the urban space;

Urban revolution, the right to the city (Lefebvre);

Do you agree with this perspective? What is left away?

Question time



The issue of power• Valentine (2008):«Romanticization of urban encounter […] potentially naïve assumption that

contact with ‘others’ necessarily translates into respect for difference»

«Spatial proximity does not equate with meaningful encounters»

• Chamboredon, Lemaire (1970), Proximité spatiale et distance sociale;

• Brighenti (2010) Public realm as an inter-visibility REGIMES (rules, norms, thresholds, defining the access to the public realm);

• Struggle for the definition of the LEGITIMATE public, who can access, use and find representation in the city and its public spaces;

• Lefebvre, The right to the city;

A synthesis with a definitionPUBLIC SPACE as a relational arena,

where people and social groups form different publicsthat become inter-visible in the public,

according to norms and rules defining and managing the access to the public realm,

which are the outcome of the competition (struggle) between different interests,

and forms different inter-visibility regimes;


contemporary city and public space


Suburbanization: intimacy and self-segregation;

Mobility: public space as derived of movement; different

paths in space and time;

Global city and commodification: city-users, deny of the

right to the city;

The end of public space in the contemporary city?

MOBILITY


Suburbanization, gated communities


Commodification


IS it possible to find another interpretation?

Question time


Amin a. (2008), COLLECTIVE CULTURE AND URBAN PUBLIC SPACE

• PUBLIC SPACE = OPEN, CROWDED, DIVERSE, INCOMPLETE, IMPROVISED AND LIGHTLY REGULATED;

• TROWNTOGETHERNESS;• PUBLIC SETTING IS A SITUATED MULTIPLICITY OF CORPS,

OBJECTS, IMPULSES, USES, THAT CIRCULATE IN A DEFINED SPACE-TIME;

• THIS SETTING HAS NOT A DIRECT EFFECT (e.g. citizenship activation, sharing norms, etc.) BUT AN INDIRECT EFFECT

• In the public setting we experience a situated surplus…


Luca Daconto Dipartimento di Sociologia e Ricerca Sociale - Università di Milano Bicocca

Gabriele Manella Dipartimento di Sociologia e Diritto dell’Economia - Università di Bologna

SALA BORSA as a public spacethe respondents’ point of view

27

openness

gratuity

meeting place

heterogeneity

neutrality

symbol

user-friendly

citizenship

Reading list – some suggestions• Amin A. (2008). Collective culture and urban public space. City 12(1): 5-24;

• Brighenti A. (2010). The Public realm of Public Space: On the Public Domain. Dipartimento di Sociologia e Ricerca Sociale dell’Università di Trento Quaderno 49(marzo); http://web.unitn.it/files/quad49.pdf

• Carr, S. et al. (1992). Public Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

• Flusty S., “The banality of interdiction: surveillance, control and the displacement of diversity”, in International Journal of Urban and Regional research, vol.25, n.3, September 2001, pagg.658-664

• Mitchell D. (1995). The end of public space? People’s Park, definitions of the public and democracy. Annals of the Association of American geographers, 85(1): 108-133;

• Sennett R. (2008). The Public Realm http://www.richardsennett.com/site/senn/templates/general2.aspx?pageid=16&cc=gb

• Valentine G. (2008). Living with difference: reflections on geographies of encounter. Progress in Human Geography, 32(3): 323-337;

• http://www.interculturalurbanism.com/?p=1255

• https://vimeo.com/111488563

• Daconto, Manella (forthcoming), Sala Borsa: plural presences and innovative public spaces


Sociology of (contemporary) urban public spaces

Education

Transcript of Sociology of (contemporary) urban public spaces