Architecture + Violence / Sidewalks + Safety
I just wanted to comment on a couple of the readings/conversations we had this week. The first being the Rebel Architecture video about Architecture of Violence in Israel. When I first saw the title of the video "Architecture of Violence" I was trying to figure out what that meant, I hadn't thought of architecture having that sort of power in a sense. Something Eyal Weizman stated in the video was that architecture and the built environment are a form of slow violence...he also said that architecture can be used by the architect as a weapon, as tactical tools. I had never thought of architecture in this way, and think it's crazy... especially the bit where certain buildings are required by law to have red roofs in order to distinguish which buildings are not to bombed during war, for instance. Or even building on top of hilltops for surveillance and to serve as a domination tactic. I haven't heard of buildings being designed for warfare necessarily before.
I also enjoyed reading Jane Jacob's piece The Uses of Sidewalks: Safety. It brought up a lot of different ways to view sidewalks and how you perceive the city. Jacobs spoke a bit about how that in order to be a successful city, it must feel safe. In order to feel safe there must be a clear distinction between public and private, have "eyes" on the streets, and must have constant use. Basically one's perception of safety within a city is contingent on the sidewalks and streets being/feeling safe. I started to think back about different cities that I have been to and analyze whether or not me liking them had anything to do about feeling safe getting around the city. For example, New York's streets are always bustling, their is an easy organization of streets, and ultimately I still feel safe walking along the sidewalks in New York for the most part. With Charleston, I didn't feel as safe where my apartment was, but once I drove into downtown, or walked along King Street I was loving the Charleston experience. I was trying to think of why I didn't feel as safe by my apartment and it was because it was right next to a busy off-ramp, and there were virtually no sidewalks for an inviting pedestrian experience. I hadn't really thought of the two being hand in hand, but the more I thought about it... the cities that I felt most comfortable in had to do with my experience walking along the streets and so forth. Interesting read.
I appreciate you talking about your experience with feeling safe with different cities. I also feel the same way about NY + Charleston and the difference you feel going from the quiet northern section of Charleston to King Street. I also was think about time of day and the 'one off' streets of King Street. During the day when people are about I never minded walking down the ally ways but as soon as the sun set and people went inside for dinner, or even later at night when people went to bed, my awareness of the area increased and the feeling of safety decreased. Although it was like this in Charleston I think it is different than nights in NYC not only because people seem to never sleep in NY but due to the density I felt there was always someone watching me - from across the street or peering from an apartment above, giving me a level of comfort.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree. There's a big difference between fear and perceived fear. An allyway could be completely safe during the day with the daylight and other people around, but the second the light and people are gone, things get spooky.
ReplyDeleteI agree as well! I immediately thought of my times in NYC and Charleston, and how I felt safer in the daytime on the more occupied streets. It's interesting to think that architecture contributes to this concept and can help provide comfort depending on how it is placed/occupied.
ReplyDelete