is it fair?
This week we talked twice about fairness in architecture. First, we talked about hostile/anti-homeless architecture, second, we talked about architecture within NYC. Interestingly, I think the argument for equitable and affordable spaces in NYC also creates an argument that supports “hostile” architecture. On Thursday we discussed how expensive and unaffordable architecture within NYC is creating spaces that not everyone can participate in. In a sense, one group is using its power to overtake a space and make it uninhabitable for another group. Based on the conversation many agreed that it was unfair for one group to use its power to exclude another group.
We also discussed how there is power within inhabiting a space. When protests occur they gain power simply by being within a space with large numbers of people.
Now, to tie this back to hostile architecture, If a public space is designed to serve everyone, why should one group be able to use their power to make it uninhabitable for other groups. When large populations of homeless people camp within a public park they make it unsafe for other groups. These groups gain power over the space through sheer numbers. So if you agree with the first argument about the misuse of power within NYC, what is different about the misuse of power within public parks?
KJ, I like how you pull out the less obvious or maybe it is just the more "socially accepted norm" of spaces that have often been allocated for those of a higher class such as the high rise apartment in NY city. It is easier sometimes to ignore issues such as these because they seem too lofty in comparison to marking off benches or creating "hostile architecture" when in face it might be the most hostile architecture of them all.
ReplyDeleteKara, you bring up interesting arguments here. The different uses of 'power' to maintain the program of the space may be seen as morally more harsh than others, but is it only harsh because they are designed toward people. I would consider the pigeon spikes on canvases as hostile architecture too. Perhaps zoos and aquariums can fit into this category if we look at the position of the neglected.
ReplyDelete