Public vs. Local
Architecture’s Public
I agree with the idea that architecture should involve the
public. However, sometimes the public doesn’t always know what they want. Which
is why we have to be able to listen to what they want, figure out what it is
that they are really asking for, and then present a concept in a way that is
easy for them to understand but also still flexible to change. We also have to
be able to differentiate between the “public” and the public. Sometimes the
people who speak the loudest are not always the ones experiencing the day to
day. There is a difference between the public and the locals. The locals have
been there for years. The public changes every day. The locals are the experts;
however, you won’t find them at public meetings or design charrettes. The locals
are the ones that we should be consulting, even if the public is who we are designing
for.
Great thought Jed! You make a valid point between public and local that I think most of us forget. I think when most of us talk about designing and consulting the public, we intend to consult the ones who truly experience the space but I think we forget who they truly are when we throw around the term "public".
ReplyDeleteJed, you make a great point. I think the reason why locals are not at public hearings is because they are not announce as often as they should. The public is always striving for change but is usually the local who are unknown of the issues. When Covid was around, all the public meetings were on Zoom which made it easy to address the issues. Now that everything is back in person the local is usually forgotten.
ReplyDeleteJed I have to agree with you in the sense that there is a fine line between being a member of the public and being a local resident. The general masses of people could include those who are not accustomed to a city's certain way of operations can be frustrating. I think everyone needs to open their eyes and taken in what's around them a little better.
ReplyDelete