Just after I went and made new friends...
The new days begin. I got up a litter earlier today than normal to start the readings from 'Blackboard' site and found that I will most likely still get to work about 8:30. The reading, Bickford, Susan. 2000. "Constructing Inequality: City Spaces and the Architecture of Citizenship." Political Theory 28:3, 355-376. )is a good read so far. I have made it half way through and cannot wait to finish it up during lunch today.
So-far this "Political Theory" is just that. I really take offense that there is suggestion, strong suggestion that Architecture (the built environment) is to blame for the in-opportunities, inequality, homeless, etc. I can and will get into this a little more, later tonight.
I would like to add this for thought until my next post.
Do not all persons, irregardless of race, religion, political persuasion, economical status have the same root? Each person is born into this world able and eventually capable to make decisions that ultimately pave the path to their future. How can it be that a "safe" environment for one "group" can not be the same "safe" environment for another?
1.03.2007
the readings....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I haven't yet read the reading yet, but I would like to make a comment regarding your statement.
A man can act like a dog but a dog can not act like a man. What does this mean? Well there was an idea that low income housing should be grouped together with a large area for everyone togather. Like an upscale Apartment complex, but due to lack of personal ownership of public area by the residence and poor upkeep by the community it fell into disrepair. After years of decay, crime started taking place in the public areas further degrading the community. These are refered to sometimes as the projects. They start off trying to be one thing but fail because they are what they are. Thus a dog will never act like a man.
All kinds of rich material here already. First, I think Ken makes a good point that architecture can't be "blamed" for social ills. But by the same logic, it also can't be credited with social good. What design does is makes some actions easier and more likely and others more difficult.
However, I think the "all persons have the same root" doesn't work, and that's a large part of the inequity. We have a lot of variance (gender, age, ethnicity, culture, religion, physical ability) that tends to be left out of consideration when white-guy designers work for white-guy clients. For instance, take suburban housing. For all its ills, it remains enormously popular as part of the real estate market, so clearly it's fulfilling some needs. However, those needs are not universally shared, as shown in a large body of social research. Elderly people don't do well in the suburbs, because they don't drive and there's no transit, so they stay at home and become isolated (the elderly watch more television than any other age group). Working mothers don't do well in the suburbs, because they tend to still be assigned most of the childrearing chores, and they have to drive and drive and drive (the stereotype of the soccer mom is exactly this mother-as-chauffeur phenomenon, which is supported by some interesting research). Teenagers tend not to do well in the suburbs, because there aren't many places to be social or go people-watching or to be anonymous and not constantly observed by people who know you. So who's buying all those McMansions? Mid-career men lusting after the John Deere riding mower.
This is the issue, I think. Not everyone wants exactly what I want, or values what I value. But if I presume that everyone is more or less like me, then that allows for two problems. The first is that I create something that the recipients don't want. The second is that I can blame them for not using it the way I would.
Hi Ken!
I agree with Herb - we don't all have the same values or wants, but this can also be said that safe for you isn't necessarily safe for me. I may feel safe in my home with my boyfriend, but a battered woman may feel scared and nervous sitting next to her boyfriend. You may feel perfectly safe walking by yourself at night, while I may feel on edge. I think that it is all relative, and what works for one group will not necessarily work for another.
Have you seen the Brady Bunch movie from about 10 years ago? Mike Brady is an architect, and all the buildings he proposes to his clients are identical replicas of his split-level house. What's good for the goose... :)
While architecture might not be able to be independantly "blamed for social ills" it certainly must share part of the blame (and part of the credit for social good). Architectural decisions can most certainly impact the social environment. Cabrini Green vs. Google Headquarters. Or 0% public space within the building vs. 0% private space within the building. That leads to vastly different social cultures.
Post a Comment