>and the urban...?
>i don't think it's possible to construct a reading of the urban today
>without accounting for the "pictures, stories, and visions" Noller and
>Ronneberger talk about, nor do i think that the implications of doing so
>are necessarily "obstructive for an 'activist inhabitation' of urbanism" as
>brian states. the production of these pictures, stories and visions is for
>me an active form of both inhabitation and transformation of the urban, one
>which is not (and cannot become) soley the practice of advertising. to
>construe 'the urban' in terms of purely physical space (brian) is to
>construe the citizen in physical terms, supplanting the immaginative
>faculties of a subject with a materiality which in the end better serves a
>politic of preservation than one of growth.
and I reply:
Certainly there is no point in developing a simple dichotomy between the
fields of production (and occupation) of the image and the urban. Yet I
would contest that, in particular with these fields, there is a
difficulty in defining a practice which can vie with mainstream
consumerist practices for a productive public attention. And I believe
that there is something practically useful in constituting the limits of
these fields today.
I have just spent two weeks living in big malls. One week in the West
Edmonton Mall in Edmonton, Canada and one in the Mall of America in
Minneapolis, MN. I'm researching the construction of entertainment-based
consumption, specifically as it relates to many things that have been
discussed on this list. There are complex fields at play in the design,
construction, maintenance, and promotion of these malls; fields which
transcend in their complexity any simple task of building design,
construction management, building maintenance, or advertising. It is, in
fact, the image which is being produced (the image, as proposed by Jordan
in his recent posts on this thread, not as a merely visual
representation); even consumption is at the mercy of image production.
At this point, these malls are striving to maintain their idiosyncrasy
and scale at all costs. The most popular thing repeated by all PR reps
at the Mall of America is that, each year, it brings more visitors than
Disneyland, the Grand Canyon, and Graceland combined. Scale as producer
of hegemony.
The West Edmonton Mall develops its image through the (protective)
dissemination of photos via brochures and by maintaining a high level of
secrecy about its operations (in fact, visits to the mall by distant
tourists are frequently disappointing; too much information in advance
would discourage even these visits). The Mall of America by contrast
tells you everything about their operations; they offer behind-the-scenes
tours, in-depth interviews, and oodles of brochures and photographs.
They offered me extensive sets of slides for the asking. Clear
indication of their confidence in their image-making successes.
Michel DeCerteau's observation (via the situationists) of walking as a
potential critical tactic is hardly a purely philosophical construct.
This is something within the grasp of anyone able to walk. To walk away
from something, to choose one's path, to interact unhindered -- these are
the means people define their freedoms in space. What these parallel
tactics are for the realm of the image however is unclear; this is the
field of study of the arts, of experimental architectural practices, of
critical sociology, etc. Seen at its extreme, to offer a 'pure' physical
space is to offer much ground for the exploration of certain freedoms; to
offer a 'pure' imagist realm is to offer little if any ground for these
explorations. But as these pure states are impossible, a
well-orchestrated blurring of them such that the constrictive overcomes
the liberating is among the strategies employed in these malls. I don't
intend to sound like a conspiracy theorist; I am merely re-framing the
information freely given to me about their strategies. Wandering in the
Mall of America is untenable unless consumption is the prime motivator;
there is simply no reason. A derive in this space is impossible. Rules
of conduct, the transcendence of the image over the spatial, and extreme
boredom would prevent it.
This suggests to me that this dependence on the blending of space and
image must be overcome; it must be given a critical tactic akin to
walking. But it represents a realm where simple mechanisms of control
will not suffice. If I look away, I simply look at more of the same; if
I close my eyes, I am spotted as a deviant subject by others' eyes and
woken up; if I _imagine_ an alternative, I have ultimately internalized
my protest to no avail.
This realm of the image clearly requires a more skillful mechanism of
navigation. The discovery of this is what I am finding next to
impossible.
brian lonsway
......................................................................
j erik jonsson distinguished visiting assistant professor.
rensselaer architecture.
lonsway@rpi.edu.
-------------------------------------------------------------
a forum on spatial articulations, perspectives, and procedures
texts are the property of individual authors
for information, email majordomo@forum.documenta.de with
the following line in the message body: info blast
archive at http://www.documenta.de/english/blasta.htm
or http://www.documenta.de/deutsch/blasta.htm
documenta X Kassel and http://www.documenta.de 1997
-------------------------------------------------------------