Urban spatial form as we know it has changed and is ever-changing. Spaces and what we do with them dictate large spheres of urbanism: distribution of wealth, segregation of classes and neighborhood typologies. As evidenced by Engels, his method of analyzing urban spheres was through a derive, or a wandering observational method, detailing the city through his experience. We have evolved our methods of analysis by way of the Chicago School, the social sciences and even the natural sciences with climate-change modeling.
Although we have developed further techniques, it is noteworthy to discover one main point gleaned from the derive of Engels: Making the invisible visible, particularly poverty in cities. A question that arises is who is responsible for poverty? Historically, poverty was spatially spread out invisible within the landscape fabric, where the church and the landed elite provided services and economy for the poor. Within cities, this is not the case, people in poverty are wage-dependent on market forces, lacking any methods to produce their own wealth.
With local cooperation, the everyday landscape can become modes of production for food security- from community gardens to vertical gardens. Increasing access to our urban landscapes for all people is becoming increasingly important in regard to the urban imagination.
No comments:
Post a Comment