The only complex shit about this art installation by Paul McCarthy is the safety device that failed to work when a storm hit the Paul Klee Center in Bern, Switzerland. Titled Complex Shit, the inflatable dog turd blew away, brought down a power line, and broke a window before landing in the grounds of a children’s home.
I have mentioned the ideas DIY Urbanism here before, but recently came across an interesting project by Droog Design in the Netherlands. Its called Urban Play and is described as a catalyst to inspire creativity in the public domain. The event includes a number of individuals and groups who have come up here before including GRL, You Are Beautiful and a few others.
The site is short on content right now, but it does feature a statement from one of Cincinnati’s cultural “elite”, Aaron Betsky, who says,
Urban Play is designed to take back the street… to give us the tools that let us install ourselves, our friends, our families, our games and our desires in what should be the space we all own collectively. Urban Play is the most promising experiment in not urban design, but designing the urban I have seen so far.
There is a more in-depth overview of the project at the ExperimentaDesign site which mentions
Individuals are taking it upon themselves to physically alter their cities to make them more creative, interactive, personal and fun. What we are witnessing is an unparalleled level of creative urban intervention which represents the intersection of the latest genre of street art and the beginnings of open source urban design.
It is this idea of open source urban design that really caught my attention. This idea suggest that what is commonly considered vandalism can also be a civic endeavor. For all the private property rights advocates out there I know you’ll have a blast with this one, but rest assured, or don’t rest, that these ideas are becoming more intrinsic to the emerging urban culture. Without tolerance for these types of activities cities will have a difficult time remaining competitive. People want to be involved, but they don’t want to sit at the table and speak the language of yesteryear just to be heard.
This comment by curator Scott Burnham sums it up perfectly for me.
While some social attitudes have previously dismissed urban intervention as a form of vandalism, at the heart of this current wave of DIY urban design is in fact a deeply sophisticated movement driven by artists and designers who want to expand our relationship between creativity and the city.
I am slightly obsessed with the nature of public space so I find the whole Fountain Square abortion exhibit fascinating. Not because of the content, but because of the changing expectations of public space. The comment in the enquirer article by Fountain Square Managing Director Bill Donabedian sums this up pretty well. He says, “I think people would agree the square prior to renovation was about political space,” he said. “(Today) they see it as entertainment venue.”
This, for me, is the crux of the issue. What is the purpose of public space in the context of today’s cities? Are places like the renovated Fountain Square, and the renovation is important here, meant to be “traditional public forums.”
In determining the rights and privileges we have in public space the courts have established three categories of public spaces. The most protected of these is the “traditional public forum.”
In a 1939 case, Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization, the Supreme court ruled that,
Streets and parks…have immemoriably been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public issues. Such use has, from ancient times, been part of the privileges, immunities, and liberties of citizens.
With regards to free speech in a traditional public forum, the state may not restrict speech based on content unless it can show that its regulation is necessary to serve a compelling state interest and is specifically tailored to achieve that interest.
In terms of Fountain Square specifically, the courts have ruled that,
It is well established that Fountain Square is a traditional public forum (Congregation Lubavitch v. City of Cincinnati , 997 F.2d 1160, 1161 (6th Cir. 1993). Therefore, the City’s regulation of speech on Fountain Square is subject to the highest level of scrutiny. More here.
Given that this ruling applied to the old Fountain Square should it now fall under a lesser-scrutinized classification? There is more information about the distinctions between the classifications here.
Would this be in the contemporary public interest, or a legitimate state interest? Is attracting tourist, families, the managerial class, and new residents more important than political dialog?
Could an argument be constructed that it is in the state’s interest to reclassify Fountain Square, or that there is a legitimate reason to be more selective about the events that take place there?
This is after all what has been happening, not just on Fountain Square but in public space in general. Bill’s comment illustrates that the general public thinks differently about Fountain Square and the fact is that his position is to manage this “traditional public forum”, which “provides overall leadership, direction, and focus to deliver the vision for the revitalized Fountain Square.
Maybe it can be both, maybe politics is the new entertainment. Aftter all Obama is the world’s biggest celebrity.
As long as there have been cities, their residents have spread out, outside, when the temperature rises. New Yorkers have long been in the habit of bringing out lawn chairs, card tables and mattresses — even sofas and televisions — turning sidewalks and fire escapes into living rooms, dining areas and sleeping porches. But there are those, like Mr. Tsao, for whom the usual stoop picnic is not enough, expansionist entertainers who are putting a new spin on an old practice, and domesticating public space in ever more elaborate ways.
A NY Times article says that the U.S. rate of homelessness is down by a staggering 30%.
HUD collects the statistics as part of its Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress and while some say the methods have improved the large decrease raises some concern. Critics say it fails to count the number of people who have lost their homes, but have found temporary shelter in campgrounds, rural areas and with friends and family.
Given the state of housing and the larger economy the decrease certainly seems counter intuitive. The article mentions the Housing First approach where find housing is the top priority. Services are provided once people are housed and with the intent of enabling them to uphold a standard lease agreement.
Sidewalk by Mitchell Duneier is an ethnographic study of streetvendors in New Yorks City’s Greenwich Village. The observations and contextual descriptions are fascinating. This book is a must read for anyone directly or indirectly concerned with the public spaces and the quality of urban life.
Off and on over the course of four years Duneier worked alongside a variety of vendors, researched policy and interviewed officials to form a better understanding of what role streetvending serves in contemporary urban space.
Greenwhich Village is also the context for another book examining public life; The death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs. Duneier uses Jacobs ideas as a starting point but acknowledges that things have changed since she was observing the dynamics of the sidewalk. Spatial, social and economic polarization and fragmentation have made the Village a much different place, but Duneier quickly finds out that there are still what Jacobs termed “public characters.”
With this as a starting point the book considers a wide range of issues pertaining to public space and its formal and informal controls. Ultimately the book reveals that streetvending can be a very important informal social control that allows people who choose not to, or are unable to, participate in the formal economy a means for ordering and structuring their relationship to society through public spaces.
In explaining his observations Duneier confronts the “broken windows theory” head on. What the “broken windows theory” has come to view as disorderly is exposed as having its own order. Duneier argues that while there is value in the broken windows theory we cannot equate social disorder with physical disorder. In other words we shouldn’t treat people as broken windows.
This leads Duneier to propose a complementary “fixed windows theory.” You’ll have to read the book to find out more about that. Get it at your local library.
Here is a professional review of the book via the nytimes.
Here is a gallery of images from a super long signage scavenger hunt that took me through Walnut Hills, Evanston, St. Bernard, Spring Grove, Northside, Camp Washington, and the West End.
Does anyone else find this strange? I don’t know the specifics of the buildings but while they don’t seem especially significant they do seem to contribute to the district.
I guess the CIC didn’t care. Somehow they turned something that could have been controversial into a party. Everyone love a party right?
And they didn’t even demolish it, they just ripped a hole through it. Now it just looks blighted.
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.
|
