6
| Places in the Making
her personal experiences living in New
Philosopher Henri Lefebvre’s work on
ground upon which people may gather…
York, William “Holly” Whyte took a
urbanism and the creation of space lays
in which none are required to play host,
more analytical approach, using time-
another key foundation for the place-
and in which all feel at home and com-
lapse photography and a team of re-
making movement today. He argued in
fortable”14 and expresses concern that
searchers to record direct observations
1968 that there is a fundamental “right
these third places are being lost.
of human behavior to determine why
to the city,” an assertion against the
some spaces are good for people and
top-down management of space that he
Third places, our public spaces, have
others not. By the late 1970s, the tide
felt restricted social interactions and
long been studied and celebrated by
of placemaking was beginning to turn
relationships in society. Contempo-
urban theorists. Urban sociologist
toward a refocus on human-centered
rary critical theorists have taken up the
Richard Sennett stresses the import-
design. In his 1980 book and compan-
“right to the city” movement, describing
ant role public spaces play in creating
ion film, The Social Life of Small Urban
it as one of the most important social
necessary “social friction,” the inter-
Spaces, Whyte laid out his findings and
movements today. Philosopher David
action between different groups of
provided, for the first time, a catalog of
Harvey writes,
people who would otherwise not meet.15
11
Sennett echoes the passion of Freder-
elements and factors that make a good public place. His observations of human
“The right to the city is far more
ick Law Olmsted, the great creator of
behavior in public spaces linked urban
than the individual liberty to access
over a dozen major municipal parks
design and the needs and desires of
urban resources: it is a right to change
from Mount Royal Park in Montreal
people—the raison d’être of placemaking.
ourselves by changing the city. It is,
to Central Park in New York City, who
The year 1975 saw the formation of Proj-
moreover, a common rather than an
believed parks should be the public
ect for Public Spaces (PPS), founded by
individual right since this transfor-
meeting ground of human kind. Olmst-
Fred Kent, a disciple of William Whyte.
mation inevitably depends upon the
ed believed, “The park is intended to
Since then, the organization has spent
exercise of a collective power to re-
furnish healthful recreation, for the
nearly a half-century as a thought leader
shape the processes of urbanization.
poor and the rich, the young and the
in the field of placemaking, setting an
The freedom to make and remake our
old, the vicious and the virtuous.”16 He
early standard of practice with a global
cities and ourselves is, I want to argue,
was committed to an important role
influence. Concurrent with PPS’s found-
one of the most precious yet most
for public open space in our society
ing, Christopher Alexander’s A Pattern
neglected of our human rights” 12
and believed “the park was turning out
Language was published in 1977, which
to be a “democratic development of
celebrated design for people by people.
Placemaking is a critical arena in which
Alexander vehemently rejected the top-
people can lay claim to their “right to
down urban design and architectural
the city.” The fact that placemaking
Placemaking offers not just social
trends he felt were against fundamental
happens in public spaces, not corpo-
friction but social capital. Robert
needs of human nature. While Alexan-
rate or domestic domains, is a critical
Putnam’s seminal 2001 book, Bowling
der’s deeply personal recommendations
component to its impact on cities.
Alone, defined social capital as “the
caused great discussion and dissent
Public places, which are not our homes
connections among individuals—social
in the design field, he appealed to the
nor our work places, are what Ray
networks and the norms of reciprocity
profession that “people should design
Oldenburg calls “third places.” Place-
and trustworthiness that arise from
for themselves, their own houses,
making creates these “third places”
them.”18 Through extensive interviews
streets and communities. This idea…
that he describes as, “the places of
and research, Putnam determined that
comes simply from the observation
social gathering where the community
our civic and personal health was at risk
that most of the wonderful places of the
comes together in an informal way, to
from decreased community activity and
world were not made by architects but
see familiar and unfamiliar faces, some-
sharing. The concept of social capital is
by the people.” 10 Alexander’s ethos of
where civic discourse and community
not new. Alexis de Tocqueville, French
community-centered design is the core
connections can happen.” Oldenburg
historian and political observer, alluded
philosophy of placemaking.
stresses the importance of this “neutral
to it in the early nineteenth century
13
the highest significance.”17