DIVERSITY POLITICS AND ENGAGING PLURALISM AS TRANSFORMATIVE URBAN PRACTICE

My most recent research, a graduate thesis in theories of urban practice, examines notions of identity, culture, and urban imaginary in everyday practices.

Cities are dynamic, perpetually reproduced through negotiations and practices of myriad endogenous and exogenous actors and forces, as well as their interconnnections. In this regard, cities are active sites of collective imagination, invention and intervention. In these sites, there is perpetual urban transformation shaped by active engagement and lived experience.

There is a disconcerting pattern that has emerged in contemporary cities, which is the co-optation of diversity alongside reductionist notions of culture. The critique of this pattern lies in understanding how notions of diversity are wielded by power structures, such as city governments or anchor institutions. Rather than offering the city as an active and pluralistic platform, diversity is used as a veil to mask the actual and often complicated richness of pluralism.

The “We Went Looking for Home but We Found” interactive, bi-lingual exhibition asks attendees to contribute to the discourse of urban transformation through questions such as, “How does your identity shape the culture of Philadelphia?”

Mapping the relations between various stakeholders demonstrates which voices included in decision making and how power structures negotiate.

In order to identify new possibilities of diversity, I am collaborating with Al-Bustan Seeds of Culture, an arts and culture non-profit organization based in Philadelphia. My argument has three facets. One is the design of an interactive exhibition embedding identity within the urban realm, on display from February to April 2015 at Philadelphia City Hall. The second is a series of interviews. The third is a repositioning of actors from city departments, arts and cultural organizations, and small-scale, community-based organizations as collaborators.

These actors can inform and support one another in multiple ways to activate and co-design spaces of plurality toward urban transformation. Key actors are positioned as intermediaries able to wield power to affect transformation beyond symbolic support. These actors are fundamental to bridging the gap between local, nuanced knowledge of grassroots or community-based organizations and top-down, reductionist practices often found in urban governance.

When thinking of cities as shaped by active engagement and lived experience, conversations involving multiple voices from multiple actors are possible. An important moment is when the formation of strategic alliances begins to emerge. If these alliances prioritize complex identities as foundations for diversity and cultural initiatives, they might be able to consciously move toward a practice of co-design using the urban imaginary as a vehicle for inclusivity of multiple voices and aspirations. The interactive exhibition is a prototype of this. The goal is a practice of co-design of multiple voices and aspirations and a pluralistic framework for arts and culture in urban governance.

Understanding the city of Philadelphia as perpetually transforming allows for critical analysis of current systems of urban governance while also creating openings for new possibilities. Putting in conversation unlikely allies moves toward processes of inclusion and co-design of pluralistic frameworks for arts and culture and diversity politics.

I conclude the thesis by addressing a critical question: How can actors better navigate current power structures for urban transformation, while offering expanded notions of what constitutes valid knowledge of the urban? This necessarily becomes a project of making inclusive urban epistemologies while expanding and deepening urban practice.  NE

Infill: Incremental Process

As Spiro Kostof says, “In cities only change endures. Patterns of habitation are provisional, transformed by the ebb and swell of residency…” Cities are constantly evolving. Responding to economic pressures, demographic shifts, infrastructural challenges, advancements in technology and ever moving real estate trends. As identified by this week’s readings, there are various guiding powers informing the incremental processes of urban change: religious doctrines; social consensus; economic development; political strategies. Each present a sustained push for urban change through collective actions.

In the case of Philadelphia, similar to other Rust Belt cities like Detroit and Baltimore, much of the city has been abandoned due to suburban flight and divestment of industry. As the city has worked to change this urban pattern, new systems of approach have been established. Community Design Collaborative’s program Infill Philadelphia, a design competition seeking innovative designs and ideas, presents a social mission to incrementally reframe the image of Philadelphia: the city as an urban haven for community engagement and sustainable intervention. Collaborations between community board members, citizens, government representatives, and the design community produce both small and large scale approaches to implementing infill development throughout the vacant regions across the city. This approach often challenges the standard local government response to condemn and demolish properties without regard to the impact on the urban fabric and neighborhood morale.

By prioritizing social values and incorporating community involvement, the Community Design Collaborative provides an opportunity for engaging and critical incremental change.

Power Designs the ‘Ideal City’

“Ideal cities exist in context. They are often intended to clarify the standing of a ruler in relation to his subjects and a wider circle of contemporaries,” (Kostof,163). Some consideration of order is often imposed upon a community as a leader establishes power, whether it be the formal layout of a grid in order to control land or the introduction of new functions as superior to prior urban systems. In contemporary cities still besieged with defining a cultural identity, often a result of latent occupation, this process by which sources of power execute urban change or ‘renewal’ come under the guise of creating a forward-looking Ideal City. In his essay Arabian Tabula Rasa, Yasser Elsheshtawy speaks to the actualization of such ideal cities as “…shaped by their rulers – how their whims, opinions, and personalities direct the development of these cities.” Through such self-aggrandizing ideas, influencers of these new Arabian cities “create a city and turn it into [their own] paradise,” (100). These urban spaces disregard the needs and wants of the population, prioritizing images of power and advancement as understood by those outside the city, rather than systems integral to those within it. How does this create a culturally sustainable urban space?

As seen in the image above, Zaha Hadid Architects proposed design for Cairo’s new Expo City reveals this exact struggle Egypt is navigating in order to appear a cosmopolitan city to the global community before the needs of its overcrowded, underserved urban community. In the opinion of the government, “[t]he project is one of great significance for Cairo, a city which is undergoing revitalization. With this exceptional design by Zaha Hadid Architects, Cairo will be among the world’s top cities…” The concerns of those in power have little to do with the community, geography, history, or culture. In fact, it seems accurate to interpret the goals of the new Expo City solely as a beacon for global city status, regardless of all other interests.

As Elsheshtawy astutely summarizes, all cities in the Arab region, and across the globe, are not the same, they each have their own context within which urban development must react. The powers guiding and implementing the current stream of urban development, rather, is “geared toward an approach that is…a-historical,” (101) hyperconscious of change as the mask of such ideal cities. It seems important to question the role of government power, however. Does the vision of the ideal city, that is one reflecting the deals of those outside the city, prove effective when the urban community is marginalized as a result? Can a city even be identified as ideal if the basic needs of the community (modernized infrastructure, adequate housing, access to employment) remain overlooked? Are the authoritative powers misinterpreting their role in creating a sustainable and representative urban renewal in Cairo?