Public Spaces and Private Spaces and Culture, Identity, Place and Place-Making - Term Paper Example

Public Spaces and Private Spaces and Culture, Identity, Place and Place Making Name Institution Date Public spaces and private spaces The difference between public spaces and private spaces Whereas work on public space accessibility is informed by various political and analytical projects, when thought of jointly it points to the significance of the day to day urban sphere to struggles about the democracy and citizenship meaning. If individuals are not able to be available in public spaces like squares, cinemas, town halls, churches and parks without being uncomfortable, victimized and essentially inappropriate, then it ought to be questionable if or not these individuals can be considered as citizens by any means: or, to some extent, if they will consider themselves as complete inhabitants on an equivalent footing with different individuals who appear perfectly comfortable when walking within public spaces (Kurt, 2003). On the other hand, private space is where people do not have access freely as some fees may be charged. The key elements of a liberal idea of public space It is clear that liberal idea that public spaces ought to be open to everyone in spite of status has moved to powerful impact, serving as an assembly center for struggles over exclusion. It is argued that during its liberal formulation, entry to public space need to be open to every person provided their specific subjectivities are left behind within the private area (Kurt, 2003). Official access equality is to be established by bracketing disparities in identity and status from the public sphere. Hence, for instance, the generally held idea that lesbians and gays must have equal right to get entry to the public spaces and public sphere just like everyone else, provided their particular sexuality is kept private, may possibly be illustrated as a political position that is liberal. From this viewpoint, an individual’s sexuality is considered their personal private affair, not a public or politics exposure and public debate (Kurt, 2003). However the bracketing of identity and status questions from the public realm has the impact of excluding a number of the considerable concerns of various members of whichever polity, both the ones whose present identities are devalued or suppressed and the ones whose possible exploration of identities is truncated (Kurt, 2003). This liberal framework of public access masks the reality that, in several spaces and times, a number of groups appear to have been somewhat (if not totally) successful in describing their particular subjectivities and norms as universal, hence making a public appears like the public (Kurt, 2003). Subsequently, the public realm is best comprehended not as a political space that is universally accessible, but, to a certain extent, as the planned setting where ideological and cultural contest among an array of publics happen. From this point of view, struggles over the conditions on which individuals can have access to public space is able to be comprehended as struggles involving a number of publics over publicness meaning, instead of struggles over the public’s inclusion (Kurt, 2003). How these ideas have been changed by post-liberal ideas Embracing these ideas, some writers have emphasized the significance of municipal public spaces as locations where diverse publics are able to interact. According to them, the liberal framework of openness in spite of the difference must create way for openness to difference (Kurt, 2003). Public spaces considerably make contribution to democratic inclusion as they convey differently situated strangers into the presence of one another; they make solid the truth that individuals of differing needs, interests, tastes, and life situations dwell together within a region or city (Kurt, 2003). Kurt Iveson’s argument as a third way of viewing public space today According to Iveson, the construction as well as defense of permanent spaces of extraction is not actually the only or in essence the best means to institute and defend alternative types of publicness (Kurt, 2003). However, there exist no motive to assume that trials to handle a threat through its externalization is not able to co-exist with endeavors to change more spaces that are open to the public. According to Iveson, while men exclusion is rationalized on the ground of a number of recognition of different interests and needs of women, this recognition requires not reify or fix a woman as a category of identity (Kurt, 2003). The idea of a restricted and democratically instituted right to exclude and withdraw explored in the article has a number of interesting implications for modern attempts to create the right to the city concept. For instance, the significance of the town has been emphasized as a testing basis for politics’ new configurations. Culture, identity, place and place-making What makes a space into a place Sense of place is looked upon as a multidisciplinary and multidimensional notion that summarizes the natural and social landscape meanings to groups and individuals, as well as their roles in carrying out day to day activities (Jennifer et al, 2007). Since meanings invoke individual emotions and are created from different values and experiences, a sense of place might be both contested and shared at a single region generating territories of meanings. The relations between place and people are further made harder by a person’s degree of detachment or familiarity with the landscape. For instance, a place familiarity is an idea that comes up with regular visitation to (or imaginings concerning) a region, for example, through family visitor or business traveler (Jennifer et al, 2007). An identity that is place-based comes up when landscape’s powerful meanings influence people in a manner that their self-identity and behaviors, or their shared group belonging, turn out to be associated with a specific locale via project, performance and process. Transnational forces like global economies and networks that are internet-based are concomitantly shaping place in a way that dependence or place-identity might develop without visiting or using that place. According to the Sunshine Coast research, it is established that place-identity and sense of place are not very well connected in a number of places (Jennifer et al, 2007). Present place-identity’s representations imply a lifestyle within the sun. Again, theme parks symbolize leisure as lifestyle whereas tourism is represented as opportunity. However, neither of the representations is essentially experienced within the area, which had consecutive displacement waves, and unemployment (Jennifer et al, 2007). What kind of transformations of space do place-makers/cultural planners aim to achieve Cultural planning is considered an organized method of appreciating and fostering local beliefs, rituals, and day to day activities as well as priorities (Deborah, 2005). It is also a strategy where difference and creativity are fostered and place-identity and fundamental community values are articulated. Cultural planning targets to ascertain the things that people hold as values for the place that they live are safeguarded and presented in the manner that government plans, endorse and provide services and infrastructure. The community’s cultural identity encompasses who the individuals are; in addition to their tastes, rituals, diversity, talents, backgrounds, as well as their future aspirations. The richness of culture of a region is also controlled by local custom characteristics together with the innate and built characteristics that attracted inhabitants to the region (Deborah, 2005). In addition, cultural planning aims to recognize and substantiate such principles with the help of the local society and offer data to the state for planning in addition to land management. Cultural planning promotion has been tremendously successful; for example, in New South Wales, every local government was obligated to possess cultural plans by 2004, and different other states, considering different emphases, have equal expectations (Deborah, 2005). Amusingly, in every state, alliances of federal, state, and more presently organizations of local arts with associations of local government have been greatly influential. Cultural planning was again perceived as a method of facilitating the reasonable participation of a broad cross-section of concerns within the process of local planning and if incorporated with other strategies like roads, urban safety, street lighting, and public transport to attain broad-ranging social goals and to significantly enhance the quality of life in urban residence (Deborah, 2005). That is to say, in Australia, cultural planning conversant by anthropological comprehension of culture as the whole means of life of a society was basically supported as an innovative means of tackling a variety of economic, urban development, social, and cultural issues (Deborah, 2005). What impact can place-making have on communities Cultural planners are normally based in community or recreation services sectors that historically have taken up marginal positions within the organizational framework of councils and where civil engineering and urban planning reign supreme (Deborah, 2005). Additionally, the influence of communities’ local arts as well as priorities on cultural planning implementation needs not to be underestimated. In general, the aesthetic interests of arts policy restrict the social importance on cultural planning. Even though cultural planning is consistently framed widely to imply cultures of day to day life, closer evaluation show that the great stress falls on resources, conventional arts practices, and organizations with subsidizing associations to the sphere of community arts together with public art promotion and placemaking (Deborah, 2005). The way people feel about a particular region is greatly reflected in the place-making. Reference list Deborah S, 2005, Cultural Planning in Australia: Texts and Contexts, The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 35:1, 36-48 Jennifer C, Pam, D. & Bishnu S, 2007, Dis-placed voices: sense of place and place-identity on the Sunshine Coast, Social & Cultural Geography, 8:5, 755-773 Kurt, I, 2003, Justifying exclusion: The politics of public space and the dispute over access to McIvers ladies' baths, Sydney, Gender, Place & Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, 10:3, 215-228 Read More