MASTER THESIS
ENCOUNTERS IN SCRIPTED SPACE
HOW DUTCH CITY OFFICES AND DUTCH PUBLIC SPACES IN COVID-19 LOCKDOWN EMBEDDED ENCOUNTERS IN THEIR INSTITUTIONAL AND DESIGN
SCRIPTS Luuk Thijssen 31st of January 2021 Radboud University of Nijmegen Supervised by dr. R.G. Van Melik
Master Thesis
Human Geography | Urban and Cultural Geography s1047803
I’m educated to think like a designer.
During my studies to become an architect at the University of Technology in Eindhoven (TU/e), I am supposed to design concepts for given exercises. These assignments often took place in between the objective world of building regulations and the subjective world of creativity and out-of-the-box-thinking, both needed to design a building and its environs.
Therefore, by writing a thesis, doing research changes fundamentally. By making observations as a researcher, the focus shifts to the ‘objective’ interpretation of the studied phenomenon; this in contrast to architectural design, where a subjective interpretation can spark creativity or an intuitive understanding of the context, frequently results in a fi nal concept. Since I am aware of this background, I will try my best bracketing this way of thinking to ensure the validity of the research and stay as objective as possible.
Still, I think it is useful for the reader of the thesis to understand my position regarding architecture. Architecture, from my point of view, is fi rst and foremost an exercise to serve society. Aesthetics can celebrate this role, but only on completion of the fi rst statement. Also, I believe the term architecture transcends the autonomous building and deals with its surroundings as well, often in terms of public space. During the modern era (roughly the fi rst half of the 20th century) public space was considered rest-space since designers followed a sequence focussing on (1) infrastructure; (2) building; (3) public space; specifi cally in that order. I am interested in the outcome of architecture and urban design when one reverses this sequence. Architects, among others Christopher Alexander, conducted design research propagating this reversed sequence. Alexander describes in his book A New Theory of Urban Design (1987, p.31-99) a set of rules to design architecture guided, and therefore shaped, by the already existing public space. Preserving positive outdoor spaces and maintaining a sense of ‘wholeness’ are two of his main arguments. The book does focus solely on the spatial aspects of public space and leaves social aspects out of scope. To grasp the complexity of this topic as a designer, I think the social aspects of public space are valuable in the process of capturing and reshaping it.
The modern position towards public space has resulted in, especially within the fi eld of Human Geography, ‘the critics’ pleasurable exercise of architect-bashing’ (Sennett, n.d.-b). Where the modern top-down approach of designing ‘unifi es disparate elements of urban form, reducing human participants in its spectacle to a role equivalent to the fi gures in an architectural model’ (Miles, 2002; from Hubbard, 2017, p.208).
I do not want to engage or participate in disproving the argumentation of those critics. I started this second master’s degree since I acknowledge the limits of the architectural practice and the focus on design thinking in our education. So, during this research, I prevented pride or score to infl uence my interpretations of the data as best. Also, when they challenged the architect as a profession or the fi eld of architecture as a whole.
I do hope to get a better insight into the complex nature of public space which hopefully will lead to a richer and more substantive perspective in my future career as an architect.
Luuk Thijssen, 2021 i PREFACE
I would like to thank Rianne van Melik for her supervising, feedback, advice and inspiration of writing this thesis. In additions, I would like to thank Isis Boot, Marijn Smits, Bregje Thijssen and Giel Thijssen for the e ort of proof-reading versions of the thesis and providing much-needed recommendations.
‘Our incredibly comfortable modern way of living weakened the need for others’ and is resulting into an individualization and segregation of society–or the ‘erosion’ of the public domain (Alkemade & Atelier Rijksbouwmeester, 2020, p.50, see: Sorkin, 1992; Sennett, 1977; Robbins, 1993; Mitchell, 1995; Hajer & Reijndorp, 2001; De Cauter, 2004). As Chief Architect, Alkemade raises awareness of this societal problem and urges the facilitation of encounters in the Dutch public domain. This thesis aims to contribute to the understanding of the infl uence of policy and design on the encounter. In short, the infl uences of scripted spaces on the encounter.
Within this thesis, the public interiors of the city o ces of ‘s-Hertogenbosch and Utrecht were studied. The case study focused on institutional policies and interior designs that infl uence the meaning and value of the encounter. Theoretically guided by the spatial notion described in the Production of Space by French philosopher Henri Lefebvre (1974), and the dramaturgical framework of (among others) Erving Go man (1956), a narrative of the encounter in scripted spaces is provided. Instead of focusing on the whole process of producing social space, this thesis focusses merely on the relation between the representations of space (scripting) and the representational space (encountering).
The fi eldwork of this thesis was conducted during the fi rst Dutch COVID-19 lockdown, from March to July 2020. During this lockdown, two of Lefebvre’s spaces were forced into an unbalanced relation. All public life was scripted to a maximum to prevent a spread of the virus (representations of space), making improvised acting in the public domain di cult (representational space). Besides of the city o ce case being revisited, the temporarily changes in public life were taken as an opportunity and added as a second case: the infl uence of the COVID-19 script on the encounter in Dutch public space. This change resulted in a reformed methodology that fi tted the COVID-19 regulations. Instead of observing visitors in the public interiors of city o ces, there was chosen for conducting 12 semi-structured interviews with front desk employees and security guards; both profi les that are often present in public areas during regular working days. These interviews were prepared according to the outcome of a policy document analysis, a brief observation before the fi rst lockdown was established, and a brief architectural analysis. For the COVID-19 case, news reports concerning the social impact of the lockdown published by de Volkskrant, NRC and, de Correspondent were analyzed to search for recurring themes. In conclusion, case transcending emerging themes found in both cases were analyzed in a cross-case study (Creswell & Poth, 2018, p.159).
Both cases suggested a more complex relation between scripted spaces and the encounter then the initially stated dominance of the representations of space over the other (Lefebvre, 1974, p.398). Even though spaces scripted for e cient and circulating activities other than social ones were di cult for the encounter (see Amin, 2002, p. 967; Sennett, 1977, p. 14), the dominance of script over the encounter seemed to be ambiguous. Due to human emotions within scripted spaces, one did not always follow desired behaviour. Interviewees confi rmed that, when needed, they improvise in situations that asked for a di erent (read humane) approach. Scripts, eventually, could even be changed when the public disobedience turned out to persistent. The relation between script and encounter suggests, therefore, to be a two-way street. Last, the infl uence of contemporary technological development transcends the understanding of scripts. Within the case of the city o ces, digital applications made physical presence superfl uous, while in the COVID-19 case it assured social contact–digital or otherwise–in times of lockdown. In contrast to the other emerging themes, technological developments e ected the raison d’être of the encounter instead of solely scripting the encounter when it occured. This fundamental ii SUMMARY
di erence could suggest an addition to Lefebvre’s production of space: a fourth virtual space; a space that equally infl uences the production of social space as the representation of space, the representational space, and the spatial practice do.
This last conclusion was found to be the most promising further recommendation since fi ndings suggest that technological developments can be explained both positive as harmful to the encounter. With this in mind, Lefebvre’s production of space is set in unforeseen contexts with the fast developments of contemporary technology; which can denote the shift of common ground from the traditional physical gathering spots such as the piazza and the plaza towards a virtual gathering spot of the internet and social networks. Are these spaces as interchangeable as they seem on fi rst sight? Furthermore, is the physical gathering spot a sustainable typology as Alkemade propagates in his lectures and essays?
i Preface iv
ii Summary v
1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Encounters and Scripting 3
1.3 (Local) Government O ces 4
1.4 Implications of the COVID-19 Pandemic 5
1.5 Research Question 6
1.6 Scientifi c Relevance 7
1.7 Societal Relevance 9
1.8 Methods and Reader’ Guide 10
2 Literature Review
2.1 Lefebvre in Context 11
2.2 Lived Space - Performed Space 15
2.3 Conceived Space - Scripted Space 17
2.4 Encounters in Scripted Space 21
2.5 Conceptual Framework 24
3 Methodology
3.1 Two Types of Case Studies 26
3.2 Methodology: Policy Document Analysis, Interviews, Media Analysis 29
3.3 Analysis 32
3.4 Challenges of the Used Methods 33
4 Encounters in Scripted Space: Two Scenarios
4.1 City O ces 35
Box 1 | City O ces During COVID-19 54
4.2 COVID-19 55
4.3 Shared Understanding of Encounters in Scripted Space 60 5 Conclusion and Discussion
5.1 Answering the Research Question 64
5.2 Recommendations for Praxis 68
5.3 Refl ection on Thesis and Recommendations for Further Research 68
5.4 Architectural Perspective 70
References 71
Appendix 1 – Interview Guides 78
Appendix 2 – Codebook 80
Appendix 3 – Field study Notes ‘s-Hertogenbosch 82 iii CONTENT
‘Our modern way of living has become so incredibly comfortable that our social dependency weakens and transitions often are met with opposition’ (Alkemade & Atelier Rijksbouwmeester, 2020, p.50). Dutch Chief Government Architect, Floris Alkemade (1961) clarifi es in his essay de Toekomst van Nederland (2020) that our prosperity results in an individualised and segregated society. If everyone is capable of taking care of themselves, the need for others declines and the social cohesion crumbles. Yet, Alkemade understands just those social qualities as one of the fundamental motivations for a developing society (Milikowski & Alkemade, 2020).
Alkemade, as Chief Government Architect, is head of the O ce of the Government Architect. His o ce is advising the Central Government Real Estate Agency (hereafter CGREA) and acts independently. Advices emphasize spatial or architectural matters and the o ce provides self-initiated motivations (Central Government Real Estate Agency, 2020). Where the CGREA is holding the broadest portfolio of real estate within the Netherlands, their responsibility - on both fi nancial and social aspects - is signifi cant. The content of the portfolio is comprehensive and includes ‘prisons, court buildings, military barracks, airports, defence sites, ministerial o ces, ports, tax o ces, listed buildings and historical monuments, museums and palaces’ (Ibid.; CGREA, 2016, p.3). The O ce of the Government Architect is, therefore, a central authority within Dutch spatial planning and architecture.
Alkemade formulated ten priorities concerning spatial and social developments within the Dutch context. One of these is directly related to this thesis’ objective and is focussing on the potential benefi ts hidden in the CGREA’s portfolio: the potential of public spaces facilitating encounters. The earlier mentioned individualisation and segregation of Dutch society can be addressed, according to the O ce of the Government Architect, by encouraging physical spaces to increase their publicness and facilitate the encounter. They suggest a closer look at the development of the publicness of government o ces, resulting in a better embedding in the urban domain. Thus, facilitating those physical spaces and so addressing the social issues raised by the o ce.
First, one has to clarify what those social issues precisely entail when Alkemade is remarking the ‘erosion’ of the public domain (Alkemade & Atelier Rijksbouwmeester, 2016, p.47) wherein ‘social importance is most defi ned’ (Alkemade & Atelier Rijksbouwmeester, 2016, p.20). According to Alkemade, the public domain is the stage where encounters and interaction 1.1 INTRODUCTION
between social groups occur. Segregation and individualisation are symptoms of an environment in disrepair, or eroding. Alkemade suggests that our contemporary urban way of living minimizes interactions with other-minded strangers. This catalyses the erosion. A poem by Bertolt Brecht (1928)1 reveals the process of this erosion accurately:
Denn die einen sind im Dunkeln Und die anderen sind im Licht Und man sieht nur die im Lichte Die im Dunkeln sieht man nicht
This fragment characterizes the stated social issue: the segregation of groups in urban contexts and the alienation towards strangers. In Alkemade’s lecture, presented at de Dag van de Stad (2018), he exemplifi es this segregation by analysing the secured check-in gates at Dutch central stations, in his case, Rotterdam Central Station. He takes that 40% of Rotterdam’s youth lives below poverty rate and is unable to a ord the ticket fee for public transport. Since the introduction of the check-in gates, almost half of Rotterdam’s youth cannot enter and participate in the social gatherings within this architectural fl agship – a phenomenon he notes as poverty reduction (Alkemade, 2018).
ProRail – the owner of Rotterdam Central Station - and the architect – Benthem Crouwel Architects – both claim to have developed a grand station of international standing (BenthemCrouwelArchitects, 2014; ProRail, 2014). Alkemade, on the other hand, points out that the design is implicitly expressing towards almost half of Rotterdam’s youth: ‘This prestigious building is not available for you…’ (Alkemade, 2018).
Remarkable and illustrating for the complex objective of the research was the experience of entering a government o ce in the fall of 2019, as then this thesis was discussed with the O ce of the Governmental Architect, located in the department of Finance in The Hague. The harsh separation of the interior and the outside public domain became clear. Entering the building, the fi rst notions of human surveillance, electronic surveillance, hostesses behind the counter and the physical barrier to enter the main inner garden and diner were overwhelming. Strikingly, after being picked up from the lobby by my contact and completed all security checks, the objective of the thesis became a reality. The emphasis on security and surveillance challenges the desired publicness of interiors of government o ces. Aside from that, a work environment has to be shared with an environment suitable for encounters. The confl ict of co-functions in one space will be at the bases of the case studies.
So, by facilitating physical spaces of encounter, the CGREA tries to address our segregated and individualised society by fostering personal and intimate contacts with a broad range of di erent users. By increasing the public appeal of government o ces, Alkemade hopes to actively invite everyday life to establish a more extensive encounter among a broad range of users. Where Alkemade is stressing the collaboration of both the interior as the exterior, this thesis is focussing on the public interiors found in (local) government o ces. The reason behind selecting local government o ces, in terms of city o ces, will be discussed in the section 1.3. But fi rst, an adopted defi nition of the key concepts of scripted spaces and encounters.
1 Translated by Gi ord Cochran and Jerrold Krimsky, The Threepenny Opera was introduced to the anglophone world in 1933: ‘There are some who are in
Both anecdotes - of Rotterdam Central Station and the O ce of the Governmental Architect - are related to the concepts of scripting space and encounters, and their relation to each other. This relation forms the research objective and will be mentioned throughout the thesis. Therefore, an adopted defi nition would be in place.
Encounters describe – in its most simple defi nition – nothing more than the unexpected or casual meeting with a stranger. However, according to Wilson (2017, p.451), defi ning encounters just as the interaction between two human beings does not fully sustain as a comprehensive concept. She adds that encounters are ‘meetings where di erence is somehow noteworthy’ (Wilson, 2017, p.464), and, therefore, are ‘fundamentally about di erence’ (Wilson, 2017, p.452). Since an encounter is a meeting between two opposites, contact between the two participants has the potential to change values, prejudices, or even popular racism towards the other and has to be understood on a ‘deeper level than just fl eeting tolerance’ (Valentine, 2008, p.325). It is considered ‘central to understanding the embodied nature of social distinctions’ (Wilson, 2017, p.452) which are constructed during encounters between participants in public space (Hubbard, 2017, p.19-20).
According to LaVan (2003, p.6; found in Leitner, 2012, p.830), encounters are thus ‘necessarily confrontational since we tend not to welcome di erence, transformation, and change into the habitation of our habits’. By experiencing this confrontation nonetheless, the unknown stranger could become more familiar. Note that the encounter does not occur in a vacuum and is loaded with history (Wilson, 2017, p.462); the constructed image of the stranger can then be taken to the next encounter to be confi rmed or revisited. It is, therefore, that the encounter is not a singular or passing event (see Lawson and Elwood, 2014) but rather a familiarity that continues shaping and reshaping our understanding of social distinctions. When societal issues, such as mentioned in the introduction, have to be addressed, this insight could contribute to the solution since encounters could ‘catalysing change’ (Wilson, 2017, p. 451; see social relevance 1.6). It, then, transcends the CGREA’s scope of facilitating social space in government buildings and contributes to the research on scripting and the encounter in general.
Encounters are highly embedded in the construction of social life but do not stand in social context alone [see 2.4]. The physical context creates an atmosphere for encounters to arise. To contribute to the spatial understanding of encounters, the concept of scripting is addressed; a term following the analogy of the theatrical as utilized in the dramaturgical framework constructed by the Performative School [see 2.2.1]. Scripting is closely related to Lefebvre’s concept of coded space. He states that coded space has to proclaim its function trough form similar as the signifi er is to the signifi ed. Since this coded space – by furnished or animated signs – become ‘readable’ one can act within that space accordingly (Lefebvre, 1974, p.144). The scripting of space follows this phenomenon but the design and management of space actively guides the desired behaviour of the participants in that given space – or to maintain jargon, a predetermined desired scenario; it uses signs and symbols to trigger a reading linked to the desired behaviour conform the owners agenda.
As stated, this thesis makes a distinction between (1) design script; and, (2) institutional script. In short, the di erence is found in the material state of scripting. When using the term design scripts, this refers to the architecture and the interior of the space; hence the material scripts. When discussing institutional scripts, house rules and behaviour policies are discussed; hence the immaterial script.
An example of a designed script can be found in the concept of ‘stealthy, slippery, crusty, 1.2 ENCOUNTERS AND SCRIPTING
The choice for government o ces as potential spaces to facilitate encounters is not suggested by Alkemade just because it is part of CGREA’s portfolio. The primary reason is that ‘state-owned buildings are paid for out of tax revenues’, including government o ces (CGREA, 2016, p.19). So, it is di cult to reconcile that often these o ces are hermetically sealed. Alkemade acknowledges that trends of privatization, the repelling of public duties and a more and more withdrawing government, seen last decades, has taken their fair share in the process of exclusions from the public domain. Therefore, Alkemade stresses the state’s duty to revisit their public tasks and focus on the long term, carefully planned, and integral vision for earlier mentioned social issues (Alkemade & Atelier Rijksbouwmeester, 2020, p.55).
Secondly, as a typology, government o ces often o er a range of facilities, nowadays exclusively for employees. One can think of co ee corners, meeting rooms, inner gardens, and even gyms. Opening up those facilities and managing a high-e cient occupancy rate can be a double-edged sword. First, due to e ciently managed facilities, the scarcity of space within Dutch city centres can be addressed. Secondly, by combining several functions, di erent users are attracted to one spot, increasing the level of encounters with strangers.
Thirdly, from a historical point of view, government o ces – at that time town halls – fulfi lled their role as a public space with more responsibility. They were considered a model public space in the ‘name of citizenry’ and the ‘virtues of the public’ (Chattopadhyay & White, 2014, p.7). Historian Lewis Mumford (1938, p.32) praised those city halls as ‘a sort of collective palace for the patriciate: hence it was often called a ‘theatrum’ or ‘playhouse’’. Nevertheless, Mumford did not clarify if he understood the ‘palace of the patriciate’ in a democratic or aristocratic form. Still, he was suggesting city hall as a space for encountering, debating and ‘civic decision-making’ (Chattopadhyay & White, 2014, p.8), fundamentals of a democratic society (Arendt, 1958; Habermas, 1962; Sennett, 1977).
1.3 (LOCAL) GOVERNMENT OFFICES
prickly and jittery’ space (Flusty, 1997, p.16). These spaces have in common that they are designed for exclusionary purposes. They deliberately create by design an obscured, unreachable, unwelcome, or uncomfortable space for defensive motives and so script the desired behaviour. Practical examples could be sloped ledges to prevent sitting, deliberately missing pavements to challenge approachability, or lacking any clues or signage to indicate the presence space (Flusty, 1997, p.17). Institutional scripting of an immaterial manner is e.g., the usage of house rules or opening hours. Not by design, but by management behaviour is guided. The eventual desired behaviour is up to the owner and is not necessarily exclusive.
For reasons of clarity, the two types of scripting are separated. However, in practice, design and institutional scripts often cooperate to achieve desirable behaviour. So is the library of the TU/e designed in a three-layered souterrain. When one descends a layer, the atmosphere becomes gradually more concentrated and quiet. This is achieved by the density of book cabinets, number and orientation of desks, and the lack of visual lines towards the outside. In this material manner, a pleasant study space is achieved. To ensure this quietness during the management of the library, the institutional script does not allow mobile phone use, loud chatting, or food consumption in the lowest layers. The latter is considered fl exible since it can be changed easily. So is during exam week chatting discouraged on all layers and is entrance to the library for non-TU/e students forbidden. Now, the design and institutional scripts cooperate to ensure the desired study climate. Social coding – human beings infl uencing other’s actions, or in jargon: herd mentality (see Sunstein and Taylor, 2008)– is left out of scope. Social coding is hard to design upfront and less malleable. Nevertheless, the e ects of social coding are taken into account in the literature review [see 2.2; 2.3.3; 2.4.1].
1.4 IMPLICATIONS OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
In the initial proposal, the analysis of the public interior would be conducted through behavioural mapping and observation. Behavioural mapping and observation both cover ‘presence, movement and features of individuals or groups’ (Cli ord, Cope, Gillespie, & French, 2016, p.170). It would provide a basis for the interview guides, selecting potential participants, and provide the context of the physical aspects of the interior and the initial design and institutional scripts - the latter to maintain and control the public character. In line with the trialectics of the Production of Space by French philosopher Henri Lefebvre (1974, for further elaboration, see 2.1), conclusions would be drawn from the functioning of those spaces as potential spaces for encounters.
The reason this initial plan is brought to attention in the introduction is that the conditions signifi cantly changed during the process of the thesis. This thesis is written from February 2020 to January 2021, the period of the SARS-CoV2/Covid-19 pandemic (Hereafter: COVID-19). To prevent further infections, the Dutch State summoned an ‘intelligent lock-down’ for an ungiven period (BBC News, 2020). The results of this lock-down meant drastic government measurements that changed public life and our understanding of public life.
During the lockdown, two of Lefebvre’s three spaces were forced into an unbalanced relation. To prevent a spread of the virus, the Dutch government enforced a set of rules how to behave in public space. These rules made improvised acting in the public domain marginalised, whereupon the encounter - the unexpected or casual meeting with a stranger - became unusual. Note that Lefebvre is criticising the dual understanding of space by technocrats, focusing solely on physical space and scripted space and neglect the lived space. However, during the lockdown, participants of public space were forced to ‘stay at home as much as possible, always stay 1.5 metres away from each other’ and only go outside for necessary needs (Government of the Netherlands, 2020). Space was produced precisely on the bases of that dual understanding of space since the physical setting was now regulated by policymakers.
Fourthly, government o ces are considered public buildings. Opposing the defi nition stated by Chiodelli and Moroni (2015, p.35), where public places contain the right to free access, government o ces are highly secured by human and electronic surveillance and not unconditionally accessible. Still, all inhabitants of a given city have to visit their city o ce at one time. The civic administrative function of city o ces forces inhabitants to fulfi l their civil duties and therefore triggers users to get familiar with the public space within the building. This phenomenon is noted by Jan Gehl (2011, p.9) as a necessary activity, which leaves a guest no choice than to enter the building. To facilitate a space for encounter means to seduce guests to prolong their stay for optional or social activities (Gehl, 2011, p.9).
To conclude, government o ces often have lost their centrepiece role in urban planning due to the fragmentation of city, regional, national and global political scales. They all operate from di erent locations, losing the iconic character of town halls seen in the 19th-century. Still, town halls are emblems of ‘civic pride’ seen in cities in the present world, for example, the ‘iconic’ city o ce of Utrecht (Chattopadhyay & White, 2014, p.8; Huisman, 2014). How local government o ces harbour their role in public and public space nowadays, is an underlying objective in this thesis. By analysing two city o ces and the scripted part of encounter in their public interior, this study aims the gain insight into the role of the encounter in scripted spaces, both design and institutional.
For this thesis, the two selected city o ces of Utrecht and ‘s-Hertogenbosch are introduced and substantiated in the methodology section.
1.5 RESEARCH QUESTION
This thesis’ theoretical body will be written largely based on the work of Henri Lefebvre, emphasising his three-fold reading of space. Here, space is understood as an intersection of spatial practice, representation of space and representational space (Lefebvre, 1974, p.38-39). Since the research is conducted in times of lockdown, an empirical exploration of the role of representational space was proven infeasible. However, concerning the theoretical exploration of the thesis’ research topic, the social aspects of public life and encounters do have been included in the literature review. This to ensure a broader understanding of the concept of public space and the encounter within, despite of the empirical limitations due to COVID-19. Where Lefebvre’s work transcend the themes of the production of space (see the right to the city, Marxist urbanism), the research question is thus concentrating empirically merely on the spatial practice and representations of space. In conclusion, the theoretical reading of the Lefebvrian understanding of space will be combined with the empirical data to answer the following research question:
These measurements seriously implicated the practice of doing fi eldwork. Primarily since public life in city o ces was brought down to a minimum by strongly advising to work at home, allowing physical contact with inhabitants solely for most necessary activities and adapting opening hours. This forced the objective, methodology and eventually, the research question to be revisited, to suit the study to be feasible and representative in this suboptimal conditions. On the other side, this unusual shut down of public life brought an interesting perspective to earlier stated issues. A more refl ective understanding of the functioning of public life became imaginable since the public domain was restricted by COVID-19 measurements; a public domain extremely governed by an additional script was available for observation, lacking most of the lived space. So, lacking a space considered crucial in Lefebvre’s theories.
This refl ective section of public life and the role of encounter in times of social distancing will be occupying section 4.2 the thesis. Section 4.1 will be reserved for the initial issued of city o ces, however, rephrased in a feasible version. Both sections combined form the research question as stated in the next section. The thesis contributes in how we understand scripts in space and their infl uence on the encounter. It can, as Alkemade stressed, help to restructure our knowledge of everyday life and therefore help pin-point the erosion of the public domain. For Alkemade, a prior role to guide this pin-pointing is assigned to design and science (Alkemade & Atelier Rijksbouwmeester, 2020). The connection between staged social activities and urban planning asks for creative and out-of-the-box thinking to create a pleasant public domain. So, actively planning spaces to guide ‘people together in the same space (…) to see and hear each other, to meet’, or what Gehl (2011, p.13) refers to when he is discussing social planning.
To fulfi l the foreseen potential of government o ces, the challenge of addressing the erosion of the public domain asks for a similar strategy. However, the infl uence architects and planners have on the physical environment cannot be confused with the infl uence on the quality or content of this social activity. It is but a piece of the puzzle; it is facilitating the possibility of encounter rather than scripting it. Design can spark a starting point for any form of contact but is not the complete practice. In this thesis, the design aspect will be retained for the further graduation in 2021 at the University of Technology in Eindhoven in the department of the Architecture, Building and Planning. This thesis is focussing on the social understanding of public space and encounters, necessary to fully grasp the consequences of the erosion. After all, from a designer point of view, the cause can be a massive inspiration to motivate design alternatives.
1.6 SCIENTIFIC RELEVANCE
Literature concerning the state of public space can be roughly divided into two main dichotomies. The fi rst body portraits a positive refl ection of the state and well-being of public space and its participants (Haas & Olsson, 2014; Iveson, 2007; Lofl and, 1973; Sennett, 1978; Spierings, Van Melik & Van Aalst, 2016). The second body of literature can be identifi ed by the announcement of the fall (or end, phantom etc.) of public space and is opposing the earlier stated positive attitude. Arguments for the cause of this decrease are often found in the individualisation, digitalisation and privatisation of society and its habitat, or are understood as results of the COVID-19 pandemic. Often these writings end with a paragraph reminiscing about the bygone age of face-to-face social encounters (Sorkin, 1992; Sennett, 1977; Robbins, 1993; Mitchell, 1995; Hajer & Reijndorp, 2001; De Cauter, 2004). The initial motivation for this thesis’ topic,
To what extent are encounters embedded in the institutional and designed scripts? - Applied to the publicly accessible interiors of the city o ces of ‘s-Hertogenbosch and Utrecht.
- Applied to the Dutch measurements, preventing further infections of the SARS-CoV2/ COVID-19 virus, imposed on Dutch public space.
To elaborate on the fi rst case of the thesis, which is gaining insight into the assigned role of the encounter from the perspective of the Utrecht and ‘s-Hertogenbosch municipalities. It concerns only two of Lefebvre’s concept: (1) the spatiality and physical nature of the specifi c case study; and (2) the representations of space imposed by the institutional and designed scripts to maintain the public character of their entrance hall and common areas. Note that this research question is exploring the embedded encounter in an ‘optimal’ situation, therefore leaving temporary implications of the quarantine and the lockdown out of scope. The methodology section is elaborating on how this will be achieved.
This fi rst sub research question will provide an insight into the policies that manage public interiors and the interaction with and between customers. It will focus on the earlier stated problems of security versus publicness, and the administrative function versus the social/leisure function. It aims to understand how a script is infl uencing encounters in a small-scaled physical setting. Therefore, the thesis does stay devoted to the initial proposal and of interest to the CGREA’s priorities. The outcome of these questions will be discussed in section 4.1.
The second sub research question can be of interest to a wider audience since it explores scripts, such as lockdown measurements, and the infl uence to encounters in times of a lockdown. It aims to provide an umbrella perspective of how the encounters in public space are changed during the pandemic. It too comes with the opportunity to revisit the explored literature and mirror their statements to a public space in lockdown. The second sub research question is, therefore, aiming to state the infl uence of a wider deployed script. Given the fear of further virus infections, all public spaces are scripted to an extreme, which infl uences our behaviour and understanding of public space. This part is therefore not solely focussing on city o ces and their public areas. However, it is zooming out to address all implications of encounters in public space in times of lockdown.
Both sub research questions touch upon the fundamental relation between scripted space and human performance, focused on the role of the encounter. The refl ections of the COVID-19 case will be projected on the city o ce case and vice versa. In this way, together with the theoretical fi ndings, this thesis aims to contribute to the understanding of the encounter and the infl uence of the institutional and design scripts on it, in a regular public domain, and an extreme one.
based on Alkemade recognised erosion, can be found in the latter. Nevertheless, the positive endorsement of physical facilitation of the encounter and its value are key aspects of the thesis as well.
To position a thesis within one of the dichotomies, one has to defi ne the concept of public space. The debate often concentrates on the ontologies of public space inter-depending with private space. However, the increased complexity of public space queries this binary notion. Kohn (2004, p.11) refers to the blurred boundaries of public and private and suggest that it is ‘necessary to develop a fl exible defi nition’ since most public spaces are di use, and, given the array of activities within, hard to categorise and analyse.
These di use forms of publicness are what Shields (1996, p.233) refers to as ‘half-way-cases’. He sees half-way spaces as those that ‘tend to confuse us and are often neglected in policy and research’ leading to the loss of their ‘possibilities and potentials’. Several scholars tried to pin-point the range of in-between spaces and coined models aiming for a clear and comprehensive system. Examples of those systems are found in, among others, the work of Staeheli (1996), Boomkens (1998), Lofl and (1998), Dessouroux (2003), Varna and Tiesdell (2010) and Glover (2015). By nominating spaces as ‘half-way-cases’, Shields is answering the question raised in the introduction of A Guide to Urban Representation and What to Do About It (1996, p.227), concerning the ‘ontological status’ of public space. He, however, immediately concludes that ‘of course, most people usually don’t bother with speculating about the real nature of the city’.
This thesis cannot escape from positioning itself in the debate on the ontology of public space since it includes a reading of the public interiors and Dutch public space in lockdown found in the case studies. However, it is refraining from a precise ontological defi nition of those spaces. It is, instead, aiming to understand the use of public space, focused on the encounter. After all, this is the fundamental interest of the CGREA, who prioritized the increase of publicness in their real estate.
City o ce interiors can be considered half-way spaces since their public character is troublesome. First, city o ces are owned and controlled by the State and therefore are considered public buildings. Nonetheless, according to Marcuse’s six levels of publicness (2007, p.778), city o ces currently are holding a second-place since their ownership and function are both public, but the use is mainly administrative. However, when examining publicness to a further extent Varna and Tiesdell’s Star Model of Publicness (2010, p.581) draw a di erent conclusion. In here, city o ces score signifi cant on publicness concerning (1) meaning; (2) ownership; and, (3) civility. But, poorly when including factors of (1) control; and, (2) animation. It illustrates the complex and distorted conclusion when examining city o ces with existing models.
Moreover, most of the public space literature is concerning exterior public spaces. The contribution of this thesis to the existing literature would be the addition of an underexposed half-way case: Publicly Owned Public Interiors (POPI). A reading of publicness of public interiors is, therefore, contributing to the narrow scientifi c debate on the POPI and is contributing to the exploration of their hidden potentials.
The second research question is o ering a unique take on the existing literature concerning encounters in public space (see LaVan, 2003; Valentine, 2008; Wilson, 2017). The conditions of studying encounters in times of social distancing may be suboptimal or even ironic, but it does provide the opportunity to study public life in a heavily scripted condition. Almost all theories used in the literature review are written without the notion of the COVID-19 outbreak. The scientifi c contribution of the thesis is to address the infl uence of social distancing and the ‘intelligent’ lockdown towards encounters. Those observations will be set against the existing literature to explore the relevance of encounters in those conditions. In doing so, it is contributing
2 Combining functions and blurring the lines of private and public is opposing the strict modern dogma’s. During the fi rst half of the twentieth century,
modernism was the prevailing movement in architecture and urban planning. Dogma’s based on functionalism, the loss of redundant decoration and the use of industrial, often prefabricated, materials where dominant. The combination of functions and blurring lines within buildings was undesirable since the lack of defi nition in designs led to a lower e ciency in the design and building process. Therefore, the use of those building became calculable. Those idea’s in architecture and planning are often re-introduced when high e ciency rates are demanded.
1.7 SOCIETAL RELEVANCE
The exploration of the publicness in city o ces and infl uence of scripts on the encounter is, in agreement with the CGREA, relevant for the social domain for the following reasons. Since the CGREA advises to increase the publicness of governmental o ces to facilitate social contacts among all members of society, this thesis is researching the encounter in the aforementioned POPI - studying, aside from the municipal administrative activities, an additional social one. Therefore it contributes to the understanding of ‘the construction of social identity, social di erence, and social power relations and the way space might articulate all of these’ (Gregson & Rose, 2000, p.434).
The spatial aspect of the encounter cannot be underestimated. One can easily suggest that design and architecture can stimulate people to gather and spend time pleasantly, which can reinforce the feeling of community. Prime examples seen in (architectural) history are found in sacral architecture. This type exemplifi es a strong community who gather in specifi c spaces such as churches, mosques or synagogues. However, in our contemporary Dutch society, the role of the church is decreasing, and religious buildings are transformed across the nation. Hertzberger (2013, p.20) is stressing the need ‘for more attention to social spaces’. He continues that ‘creating space is primarily about people living together and about the diversity in which this tends to be expressed’. Understanding what makes, according to Hertzberger, social spaces underexposed is vital for this thesis. He suggests that social spaces are minimized due to budget cuts and the fact that they gain minimal profi ts. Smithsimon (2008, p.347), on the other hand, argues that developers ‘determine usability [of public space] and that most chose to discourage people from using public plazas’ due to fi nancial motives: pleasant spaces are expansive to maintain. So, pleasant physical spaces with well-scripted policies are not a given but can enforce the encounters immensely. For these reasons, this research insights provide social relevance and address both the institutional and designed scripts.
The second social issue addressed by this thesis is concerning space itself. Considering the growing population and the limited amount of space in the Netherlands, architects and planners have to design space with high-e ciency rates. Combining functions and blurring the lines of private and public implicates building developments, but can be a solution to the lack of space2. Reforming city o ces as social spaces, co-existing to the administrative function, saves space and increases the occupancy rate. Thus, by increasing the publicness of those buildings, the loss of social space in a quantitative manner can be addressed as well.
Challenging for the encounter is the rise of impersonal exchange and the di erent media people interact with space and others. Studies have shown that the internet and mobile devices made face-to-face contact and the co-presence of others irrelevant (Madanipour, 2003; to the scientifi c debate by taking advantage of the unique state of the public domain during the research; aiming to provide a clear and comprehensive reading of the scripting of encounters in public space in conditions so extreme that they probably would leave traces in future encounters in public space.
All in all, both parts contribute to the scientifi c debate on the encounter and scripted space on a di erent level. This results, in conclusion, in a case study conducted at a small scale in the public interiors of city o ces, up to the overall exploration of the infl uence of scripts in Dutch public spaces in lockdown.
1.8 METHODS AND READER’S GUIDE
For this research, the following methods were used to gather the data: a policy document analysis, 12 semi-structured interviews, and a media analysis of newspaper articles discussing the social e ects in Dutch public space during the fi rst lockdown. In order to analyse the scripts maintained in the city o ces of Utrecht and ‘s-Hertogenbosch, fi rst, a policy document analysis was conducted. This provided an understanding of the institutional and designed scripts that were into e ect in the public interiors of the o ces. It also provided a basis for the interview guides for the semi-structured interviews. Three signifi cant roles concerning the interaction with the customer were identifi ed: (1) the host(ess); (2) security; and, (3) front desk employee. In both municipalities, six interviews were conducted; resulting in a total of 12. For the COVID-19 case, there is chosen for a media analysis, since it o ers a nationwide narrative of the state of the public domain and the social consequences. The articles were selected from the news platforms of de Volkskrant, NRC, and, de Correspondent. A complete elaboration on the methodology is provided in chapter 3 of this thesis.
In order to interpret the empirical data gained by the aforementioned methodologies, chapter 2 is o ering a theoretical framework based on the Production of Space (1974) by Henri Lefebvre and the work of the Performative School and their dramaturgical framework. After the discussed methodology (chapter 3), section 4.1 is elaborating on the city o ces case, which is followed by the COVID-19 case in section 4.2 and concluded with four cross-emerging themes in section 4.3. Chapter 5 is concluding the thesis by combining the theoretical explorations and the empirical data, and is refl ecting on the conceptual framework. It too refl ects on the process of in thesis in general, provides recommendations for further research and praxis applications, and the potential applications in the fi eld of architecture.
Sennett, 2000). On the other hand, globalization and urbanization make our direct habitat more diverse than ever. To prevent living conditions at odds with our neighbours, personal exchange ‘whether rational and instrumental or expressive and meaningful’ (Madanipour, 2003, p.117) can be the solution to a balanced and peaceful society. However, to establish this, Hubbard (2018, p.106) highlights that ‘individuals and groups create their personal urban geographies, using cities in ways very di erent than bureaucrats and administrators intended’ and that ‘after all, cities might be scripted, but our performances do not always follow the script’ (p.126). So scripts that desire certain behaviour are not always obeyed as such and therefore the predicted performance can di er.
Insights into the process of scripts infl uencing our acts and the physical environment are crucial for propagating this recognition. An awareness that in times of social distancing could be more meaningful than ever. No-one can foresee the permanent changes in public life after the lockdown is lifted. How we experience public space and how we participate in it is, for now, based on experiences and indication. The thesis can contribute to these experiences and hopefully, help planners, architects and policymakers to design spaces that facilitate the encounter with a stranger, with or without strict scripts in play.
The theoretical discussion underlying the research question is discussing the interaction between human performance and (scripted) space. In this thesis’ scope, human performance is framed to the performance of everyday social contact and encounters. To understand this interaction, French Marxist philosopher and sociologist Henri Lefebvre (1901-1991) suggests that ‘(social) space is a (social) product’ (1974, p.30). His theory is adopted as a central concept on which the literature review is written. Since this model provides a tool for analysing scripted space and lived space, it covers the thesis’ objective in a single framework. After expounding Lefebvre’s theory of the production of space to a further degree (section 2.1), key concepts such as human performance and encounters (section 2.2) and scripted spaces (section 2.3) are explored. This to provide a greater understanding of these concepts and their relation to one another. The relation will be shortly discussed separately in section 2.4. To conclude, section 2.5 is o ering a conceptual framework to serve as a summary of the chapter and a visualisation of the most important concepts of this thesis.
Conceived space and lived space are discussed in separate sections. The perceived space, the remaining concept of Lefebvre’s triad, is highly contextual and focussing on ‘daily reality and urban reality’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.38). Since this notion is so dependent on a specifi c physical context, it is impractical to devote a theoretical section solely to this concept. However, to prevent neglecting the understanding of the perceived space in this review, there is chosen to address the concept of physical space in constant relation to the other two discussed spaces. It will be addressed when relevant during the exploration of the earlier stated concepts, to conclude with a complete and justifi ed understanding of Lefebvre’s triad. But, as aforementioned, fi rst an exploratory reading of the work of Lefebvre and his book The Production of Space (1974) and the context it is written in.
02 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
To understand the origin of the spatial triad by Lefebvre, one has to understand the ideological background of Lefebvre’s thinking and the infl uence of the thinking by Karl Marx. Marx’s views on capitalist cities is a product of his time. In the nineteenth century, socialist writing progressed class revolution and revolted the thought and theories of everyday life. According to Marx, cities are the breeding ground for capitalism and warned in his writings that class relations 2.1.1 THE ORIGIN
would lose sight. Lefebvre, (among others such as Guy Debord, Marshall Berman, and David Harvey) elaborated Marxist thinking by emphasising ‘the importance of cities in social production and reproduction’ (Hubbard, 2017, p.30). Together, this asks for a framework for analysing social processes. For Lefebvre this resulted in an exploration of the interaction between the city and capitalism, to paraphrase Lefebvre (1991) ‘we do not know why capitalism continues to survive, but we know how: by producing space’ (Hubbard, 2017, p.30, Hubbard’s emphasis).
This critical reading of the city by Marx infl uenced Lefebvre, a politically left-orientated urbanist, to question the current capitalist city life. He critiqued the dominant discourse at that time understanding the city as a top-down organisation, focusing on physical space and the institutional policies governing them, which would ‘lead to the elimination of the subject “in every sense of the word”’ (Lefebvre, 1973, p.61, in Madanipour, 2003, p.13). Out of this conviction, a Marxist geography was developed. This development stated that: (1) studied spatial patterns were often neglecting social processes that produce inequalities in those studied patterns; (2) those studies, therefore, enable and preserved those unbalanced power relations rather than challenging them; and (3) instead of reading space within the frame of industrialized Western societies, trying to focus on exploitation and inequality (McCarthy, 2009, p.446). Lefebvre, therefore, often described urban space – in a capitalist context and infl uenced by Marxism - as cold and ‘repressing the wishes and desires of the [bodies]’ within (Hubbard, 2017, p.205).
However, even though cities give the impression of being carefully planned and orchestrated, ‘things can happen which surprise or shock and shake our bodies out of their habitual urban routines’ (Hubbard, 2017, p.206). In agreement with Marxism, Lefebvre stressed the potential power of the user of space to rebel against the imposed script. This was the motivation for adding a third space in the dualistic proposition at that time; lived space or ‘space for “inhabitants” and “users”’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.39). The potential power within the lived space created a new tendency in producing space, a process of constant negotiation, performed within the setting of the physical and scripted space.
Due to the constant process of negotiation, Lefebvre suggests that space is not given. He argues that space is constantly produced and reproduced by this negotiation, and is, therefore, a product. He opens his argument by stating that ‘(social) space is a (social) product (…) that in addition to being a means of production it is also a means of control, and hence of domination, of power’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.26). He understood power not solely as an institutional power – which he does nominate as the dominate power (Lefebvre, 1974, p.38-39) – but evokes societal powers as well.
To fully understand this rather critical perspective, Lefebvre adds two additional concepts which are of importance: the di erentiation between (1) abstract space; and (2) di erential space. He states that abstract space is ‘instrumental (…) [and] manipulated by all kinds of “authorities”’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.51). If so, space can be read based on the characterisation of exchange value and the expression of power. Urban spaces, then, could tend to develop in homogenisation since a homogeneous urban space is easier to control (Leary-Owhin, 2015, p.4); a process very much in line with the earlier stated critiques developed by Marxist geographers.
In contrast to this abstract space, Lefebvre identifi es di erential space. Here, use and inclusiveness are the most important themes. However, the latter seems a bit utopian thinking. Closely related to Marxist beliefs, it even can be interpreted as a call for social revolution, which he enforces by propagating ‘the creation (or production) of a planet-wide space as the social foundation of a transformed everyday life open to myriad possibilities’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.422). 2.1.2 SPACE AS A PRODUCT
Figure 1 | Lefebvre’s Production of Space
Again, this reading tempts to understand lived space as best and regards the conceived space as inferior or freighting. But the denial or disapproval of the powers expressed in the conceived space would give a distorted view of space.
Since Lefebvre suggested that space is a product of three concepts of space, the three spaces can be explored further. Note that none of the spaces is interpreted solely on their own — all spaces together are fulfi lling the process of producing space. For reasons of clarity, this review is discussing the concept separately but does understand them as parts of a whole, starting with (1) spatial practice or perceived space. This space is directly perceptible by the human senses and gets his meaning, according to Lefebvre, due to the materiality of the physical world. However, we attach individual meaning to these perceptions by interpreting this in the context of our daily life routine and the society we live in. It is constructed out of ‘concrete, material [and] physical’ components (Elden, 2009, p.590), forming according to Lefebvre (1974, p.33) the ‘particular location and spatial sets, characteristic of each social formation’ which ensures ‘some degree of cohesion’.
Then, (2) representations of space or the conceived space. Lefebvre explained this in terms of ‘abstract plans and mental processes’ (Elden, 2009, p.590) also characterized as the ‘conceptualized space’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.38). Within this space, and wherefore it is of great interest of this thesis, all technocratic interpretations of the lived and perceived spaces are categorized. It is the closest reading of institutional and designed scripts but does limit itself to ‘intellectual worked out signs’ such as written texts, drawings and documents.
Lefebvre adds another perspective when discussing the representations of space. Not solely, architects, planners or policymakers are concerned within this space. Graphic representations, of a quasi-scientifi c or even aesthetic level, are classifi ed as representations of space as well, ‘artists with a scientifi c bent’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.38). Examples can be found in ‘maps, master plans, and design guides’ (Leary-Owhin, 2015, p.3); therefore, artist, poets, or writers can contribute to the representation of space Lefebvre (1974, p.39) stressed that this infl uence on the experience of the spatial practice and representational space makes the representations of space the ‘dominant space in any society’. As a politically left-orientated urbanist, Lefebvre provoked individuals to ignore the imposed scripts and empowered them to break through urban routines.
So far, the dual reading of space was ‘relatively common in human geography’ (Elden, 2009,
1
2
590). It was where Lefebvre added the (3) representational spaces, that he made a signifi cant contribution to the concept of space and defi ned Marxist geography as it is understood today. Within the representational space, he categorized the ‘lived, experienced and recoded (…) actions of those that occupy and use [the spatial practice and the representations of space]’ (Elden, 2009, p.590). But, instead of rejecting the prior dialectic relation of space as known before completely, he added a third; converging into his trialectics of space.
Often literature concerning public spaces is either focusing on the ‘sociological aspects of public life’ (Shields, 1992; Castells et al., 2001; Hajer and Reijndorp, 2001; Sheller and Urry, 2003; found in Aelbrecht, 2016, p.125) or is focusing on the ‘production of urban spaces’ (Flusty, 1997; Loukaitou-Sideris and Banerjee, 1998; Németh and Schmidt, 2011; found in Aelbrecht, 2016, p.125). Lefebvre’s contribution to this theoretical discussion - and therefore important to this thesis - is the understanding of space in three concepts: ‘perceived’, ‘conceived’ and ‘lived’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.38-41). In this three-part model, both social and scripted concepts contribute to the production of space. As said, Lefebvre understands the production of space as a process, developing from the ‘basis of all “originality”’, that is (physical) natural space (Lefebvre, 1974, p.30). Natural space persists in the background, like décor, and acts as the physical setting wherein the process of the production of social space occurs. By doing so, all societies create their own specifi c social space, ‘nature is [therefore] seen as merely the raw material out of which the productive forces of a variety of social systems have forged their particular spaces’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.31). This natural space, coined by Lefebvre as the spatial practice, together with the representations of space and the representational space, form his conceptual triad [see fi gure 1]. Altogether, creating a useful tool to analyse how space is ‘created, coded and used through social, political and everyday processes’ (Elden, 2009, p.590).
Lefebvre is best known for his work concerning the critique of everyday life and the right of the city, but as said pioneered the theoretical concept of space in The Production of Space (1974). His analysis of space was infl uenced by three main tendencies in European philosophy: Marxism, (Marxist) political economy and the interest in everyday life (Elden, 2009). Karl Marx’s (1818-1883) contribution to Western philosophy is immense, and an overview of his work by means of introduction could not serve the magnitude of his impact. Therefore, only Marx’ work which infl uenced the spatial triad directly was discussed. Marx’ infl uence on Lefebvre’s (see Lefebvre 1970; 1972) writings on the right of the city is left out of scope.
Lefebvre’s analysis of space in three concepts was not unique. Peers as Harvey (1973) or Soja (1996) too elaborated the discussion of space and introduced a third concept. Koskela rightfully points out that there is a potential hazard in introducing a third level of space. She argues that the ‘”third” space is regarded implicitly as the newest, the most “intelligent”; and therefore the “best” space’, following that ‘the fi rst two spaces are described in detail simply to create a yardstick against which the third, “right” space might be measured to its advantage’ (Koskela, 2000, p.248). In doing so, one could interpret the work of Lefebvre (and peers) as somewhat activist or critical. With this perspective, one will lose the added depth in the analysis by denigrating the other two spaces as lesser or even negative counterparts of the added third space. The benefi t of the Lefebvrian triad is rather based on the interaction of the three concepts. It is providing a tool to analyse the complicated nature of space. So, in the thesis, and especially in the literature review, none of the spaces is considered more valuable than others, it is instead combining the three spaces to grasp the nature of space as rightfully as possible within the brief volume of a thesis.
2.2
The immersion of the concept of lived space, ‘the space of “inhabitants” and “users”’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.39), will be further explored following the theory known as the dramaturgical framework as defi ned by the Performative School, represented by Erving Go man (1922-1982), Cli ord Geertz (1926-2006), and Richard Sennett (1943-). Within the dramaturgical approach, social life and public behaviour are compared with play-acting and the theatre (Madanipour, 2003, p.130). From here, everyday life in public settings is organized and so, studied. This section will explore Lefebvre’s concept of lived space in terms of this performative perspective.
As Lefebvre strikingly wrote: ‘theatre, which in addition to a text or pretext embraces gesture, masks, costume, a stage, a mise-en-scène [signifi es] in short, space’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.62). The representational space entails more than our verbal and physical presence in space; it addresses signs and symbols of all kind. Understanding society as a ‘social construction of the self and objects through interaction with others’ (Duncan, 2009, p.739), Lefebvre described those non-verbal sets of signs and symbols as ‘characterized by a spatiality which is, in fact, irreducible to the mental realm’ (Lefebvre, 1974, p.62). Thus, the interpretations of the meaning of space are an individual and mental process but constructed through the interaction with others; a notion explored in the Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life (1956) by Go man. He is using the theatre metaphor to analyse self-representation, and the interaction with the environment called the dramaturgical framework3. Go man made in his writing abundantly use of the dramaturgical aspects, i.e., ‘stage, zoning, front and back regions, masquerade, and so on’ (Gregson & Rose, 2000, p.433). By doing so, he described and organized practices of everyday life and reasoned with the analogy of staged life and reality4.
2.2.1 THE DRAMATURGICAL FRAMEWORK
3 Also known as Theatrum Mundi (the Great Theater of the World). Referring to ‘a metaphorical concept developed throughout Western literature and
thought, apparent in theories of the world such as Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, and a popular idea in the Baroque Period among certain writers’ (Ho meister, 2009).
4 This metaphor resonates in architectural theories as well. Most explicit is given by Italian architect Aldo Rossi (1990, p.29), In his book Autobiografi a
scientifi ca he writes that ‘[he] always thought that the term teatrino [a form of theatre comparable with charades or puppet show] was more complex than teatro [theatre as a form of art]; it refers not just to the size of the building but also to the private, specifi c, repetitive character of all that is fi ction in the theatre’. According to Aldo Rossi, architecture facilitates events, despite the fact of they occur or not. Teatro is based too much on scripts and therefore loses the improvisational tone a puppet show characterizes, a more suitable use of the metaphor according to Rossi.
5 One could ask why Go man called the book ‘the presentation of self in everyday life’ instead of ‘the performance of …’, since he consistently relates
everyday life with a performance rather that a presentation. The title even can be explain paradoxically, since a presentation implies that there is a true self to present, a concept that is refuted by Go man himself (Social Science Bites, 2015).
In the words of William Shakespeare (1740): ‘all the world’s a stage, and all man and woman are merely players’, the thinking of Go man is aptly portrayed. Go man is reminding us that we, human beings, constantly change roles in di erent social environments. With these roles – understood by Go man as masks – we control, or stage, the display of ourselves expressed to others, this practice is called ‘performance’ (Go man, 1956, p.28)5. By explaining social activities in this manner, these can be specifi ed as a ‘performative exchange among strangers’ (Madanipour, 2003, p.116). However, there is a fundamental di erence between encounter and performance which has to be clarifi ed, Go man (1956, p.26) writes:
‘An interaction [or encounter], that is, face-to-face interaction, may be defi ned as all the interaction which occurs throughout any occasion when a given set of individuals are in one another continuous presence (…). A ‘performance’ may be defi ned as all the activity of a given participant on a given occasion which serves to infl uence in any way any of the other participants’.
This demonstrates that interaction or encounter involves two participants directly interacting with each other, where performance is based on an individual, performing an activity infl uencing the other participant in a more indirect way, or even occurs when there is no audience present at all. Nevertheless, both occur in a specifi c place, or using Go man’s jargon, a ‘setting’ (Go man, 1956, p.32). This setting is the décor for the encounter and includes ‘furniture, the physical layout, background items which supply the scenery and stage props’ (Go man, 1956, p.32) present in the setting. The setting can be interpreted as Lefebvre’s spatial practice.
Go man understands the setting as the décor of an individual scene. One can enter the setting, play their role, and when fi nished, leave the setting by exiting the physical space. Go man, therefore, refutes the idea of a setting following an individual. The setting stays geographically put, and the individual moves from one setting to the other. When leaving the setting, those who participated ‘must terminate their performance’ (Go man, 1956, p.33). Thus, the participants of the performance cannot start their act before all actors are in place and, for the same reasons, must fi nish their performance before leaving the setting. This can be related to the cue of an actor who cannot start their scene before all co-actors and décors props are in place.
According to Go man, in the actors’ performance, two main forms of communication can be found in face-to-face interaction: the ‘expressions given’ and the ‘expressions given o ’ (1956, p.14). Expressions that are given concerns verbal communication or substitutes such as sign languages. This is a form of communication in the narrow sense of the word. The latter, expressions gave o , focus on all forms of non-verbal communication, such as gestures, clothes, status symbols, and so forth. This form of communication prevails in Go man’s work, coined as a mask. Where verbal communication is highly intentional, non-verbal communication is more contextual, cultural and presumably of an unintentional kind. Also, Go man considers this form more theatrical since the performance aims to convey a creditable impression, covering all aspects of communication rather than verbal alone (Go man, 1956, p.16; Madanipour, 2003, p.121).
Thus far, Go man’s theory solely addressed performances on personal behalf. But when performances are directed by representations of a larger whole (such as a nation, group, or enterprise), Lefebvre’s concepts of representations of space and representational space become more and more di use. Since the participant, before was occupying the representational space on personal initiative, now is guided by behavioural rules stated by forces of the representations of space. A phenomenon Go man relates to in the introduction of his second chapter, addressing ‘”performance teams” or, in short, “teams”’ (Go man, 1956, p.85). Please bear in mind that this book is written in the 1950s and portrays an outdated positions towards females and the middle-class.
‘In our society, when husband and wife appear before new friends for an evening of sociability, the wife may demonstrate more respectful subordination to the will and opinion of her husband than she may bother to show when alone with him or when with old friends’ (Go man, 1956, p.84).
Here, the setting is defi ned by social roles. The setting does alter the behaviour of the wife, but this is not motivated to represent the third party. When a professional role is performed, the setting is fundamentally changed.
‘An overall impression of middle-class service was achieved by the management, which allocated to themselves the roles of middle-class host and hostess and to their employees that of maids’ (Ibid., p.84).
