justforview

Saw this interesting segment on Newsmakers a few weeks ago and remembered to post it today. It is an interview with Jayne Merkel, a architectural historian and writer.

I especially like the comments about the power of planning as it relates to Cincinnati.

An article in re:place, a Vancouver based public space magazine, considers the public rhetoric of streetposters.

To some, posters might be seen as little more than crass, obtrusive clutter. Yet for others they are essential to the lifeblood and culture of a place. Thus, it is important to understand the forces and attitudes that lie behind street posters and the things that allow them to keep popping up even in places they are not supposed to. Their existence is tenuous, but the role of posters in public life should not be overlooked.

…street posters also reflect something deeper: the creativity, entrepreneurship, passion and political ideals of communities…

As much as urban enthusiasts might fantasize about the city as a place of surprise and wonder, there is also an opposing tendency to contain, define, and regulate public spaces. Ironically, the lack of formal respect for street postering is partly a function of the fact that posters represent culture without permission and, almost by nature, are not intended to be formal or particularly orderly.

No doubt the internet and social networking sites (in particular) have taken on an expanded role in the public sphere, disseminating information and building community. But these mediated forms ultimately do not work on the same tactile level. Think of street posters as part of a broader community dialog: one in which anyone with an idea, a message, and a willingness to put in a little effort can participate in.

Postering, at its core, is culture without permission. The lack of formality and established order are what give street posters a unique kind of validity. There are layers upon layers of significance both in the act of postering and the posters themselves that speaks to the need for negotiating between order and disorder. Posters themselves are not an end. What is more important is that such negotiations happen.

A short article and slide show from the NY Times looks at vanishing Newsstands in NY and suggest that they signify the pedestrian vitality and cultural character of the city. “Each reflects the personality and business acumen of its owner as well as the needs and tastes of its neighborhood.”

This form of street vending is threatened by increasing regulation, cost of operation and a new partnership with Cemusa.

A report at NAC brings up the issue and role that opinion plays in our society. It shouldn’t be underestimated. Even the philosophical text On Bullshit has become required reading for architecture and design students.

The report points towards a new book and uses the combined sewer overflow issue in Milwaukee to illustrate the point.

The book, True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society, “explains how modern media technology has exacerbated human tendencies to selectively absorb information that comports with our beliefs, and to screen out information that doesn’t jive with our version of “reality.” In a post-fact society, the line between what is fact and what is opinion has become blurred to the point of irrelevance.”

“We now conduct public debates without a base of verified, agreed-upon facts. …the lack of fact-based debate also shows up in questions of local infrastructure and services, where the public is called upon to decide how to invest public dollars to solve public problems.”

Most interesting to me is how information technology plays into this. Obviously, this site factors in to this. I’ll be the first to admit it my opinions presented here add to the masses of information we have to sort through. I imagine most people choose to agree or disagree, but it is nice when there is evidence of a dialog that goes somewhere unanticipated.

So is the “blogosphere” part of the problem or part of the solution? Should we leave information disemenation to fact purveyors, or is opinion just as important in shaping cultural discourse? Sometimes it seems more divisive than anything.

Mine is probably only found on the shelves of the library but these theoretical meanderings are one of my muses. One of my favorites is the online journal Urban Reinventors. In the latest issue, Celebrations of Urbanity, the introduction by Alessandro Busà “deconstructs the rhetoric of urbanity”.

Busà suggest that “In a new, after-modern era wherein the notion of urbanity is widely celebrated, bill boarded and squeezed into an often narrow iconic vision by realtors, private enterprises as well as by entrepreneurial administrations, our first aim must be to question, challenge and re-discuss urbanity.”

Busà then describes some of the existing models

We have the archetypal Jane Jacobs’ urban model of Manhattan’s West Village, with its narrow lively streets, its short blocks, its mix of old and new architectural styles, its density of smallscale retail and its pedestrian friendliness.

We have the “dirty” urban model of places such as Jackson Heights in New York’s borough of Queens, where urbanity results from the crowding of people of all races mingling together in a multicultural, chaotic, untidy and extremely lively environment.

We have the selective urbanity of the gentrified city, home to Florida’s “creative class”, such as the new downtowns in Berlin Mitte, in Paris’ Le Marais or in London’s East End, with their array of Starbucks cafés, lounge bars and trendy commercial streets.

We have the “urban renaissance” model, such as the new Covent Garden in London, where a brand new urbanity made of polished architectures, fine stores and coffee tables in the streets are mostly catering to gentrifiers and tourists, and where a strong surveillance through cameras and police guards is constantly needed.

We have the “festival marketplace” model of a nostalgic, inauthentic urbanity, invented or reinvented as a commodity for mass tourism.

We finally have the New Urbanist model, with its brand new, if often historicist, architectures, its pedestrian oriented environments, its dense urban fabric, its promises of an urban quality of life unknown to most US dwellers.”

What is important here is to investigate whether urbanity may be the answer to our concerns of social inclusion, tolerance, quality of life, individual and collective fulfillment. And if so, what kind of urbanity do we stand for?

Yesterday some rendering of the first phase of the banks were released. I haven’t seen them all, but there are a few here. I’m curious what everyone thinks, specifically in regards to the idea from the article about how the “riverfront development’s look fits Cincinnati.” Seems like it could be in Anywhere USA to me.

I also thought that changing the heights of the elevation to make it appear to be separate buildings is just a faux finish. It reminds me a lot of contemporary mixed use buildings. Why can’t these large developments reinvent how mixed use feels. Even changing the materials on the street level and offsetting the setback a touch would make more sense than altering the heights. Especially, because it should be about the pedestrian.

Graffiti was never intended to dominate this space, especially not discussion of it, but there has been some interesting questions raised and I have had more time than usual of late, so whateva.

And that is what happens with graffiti when left to its own devices, it dominates. But that is never the case. It is never left to its own devices. It is the product of people who are in someway reasonable in both producing it and countering it. It is not everyones reasoning, but it came from somewhere. Many of which are not bad places. And it goes somewhere too. Which are also not all bad.

Graffiti may have saved this life. Maybe not entirely, but it certainly had a lot to do with the path that I am on, which honestly doesn’t have much to do with graffiti anymore, which is sometimes unfortunate.

God bless graffiti

This, spotted in Chicago, is probably meant to be a critique on the gentry moving in, but some have seen it as a statement on the unjust taxes on the wealthy.

What does it say to you?

Here are images from the Cans Festival, a stencil art street party that took place in London this weekend.

is your trash your home

On the soup bean side kid

street let me eat

NEE NEE was here 10-22-07 This is why I’m hot

My real killas
run this park
Who want it !!!
Who want it bitches!!

NEW BATTLE PLAN (you have to look harder to know the details)

DT ____ go to _____ _____ u do what ur sistor do and get out of my life u love _____ u play to much but ____ can go to _____. _____ this is my nigga foe life

LT ____ ____ Snay Boo Baby daddy for life 12th aww! Big things going A.K.A husband and wife come and get some I am ___.

Back on da block Snowflake & Phil Wall 5-1-08 & its the 1st

Life’s to short so don’t wast it