We are still looking for couple of papers for the session:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
GOVERNMENTALITY OF BUILT ENVIRONMENT: CREATIVITY, CULTURE AND DESIGN
Association of American Geographers Annual Meeting, 9-13 April 2013,
Los Angeles, CA
Organizer: Maros Krivy (Estonian Academy of Arts / University of Helsinki)
This paper session proposes to analyse multiple and contested
processes by which discourses on urban creativity, culture, and design
are materialised in urban space (Murdoch, 2004). While paying
attention to its uneven geographies, we would like to investigate the
process of materialisation as a question of architecture and built
environment. How do the notions of creativity, culture, and design
enter into the process of governmentality of built environment? To
what extent and in what ways are the patterns of producing
architecture and built environment determined by these discourses?
What are the feedback loops between production of discoursive
knowledge and production of built forms?
Papers interrogating the uses of creativity, culture, and design in
either of the three distinct, yet interrelated forms – as 1/ academic
concepts, as 2/ operational concepts and as 3/ architectural practice
–, and/or analyse the multiple translations involved are invited. The
session wants to ask the following questions. How are the academic
concepts and theories operationalized into guidelines for
architectural production and urban development? How are operational
concepts and theories utilized in the actual architectural production
and urban development? And how are new built configurations reflected
in academic and operational concepts? Some of the more specific
questions can be the following ones. In what ways have been the
concepts of creativity, culture and design translated into concepts of
'creative city', 'cultural quarter', or 'design district'? How are
these concepts translated and utilized in the actual formal and
informal architectural practice of urban actors? And in what way is
the architectural practice of 'creative city', 'cultural quarter', or
'design district' challenged or reproduced by new academic and
operational concepts?
Critical urban theory widely documented the conspicuous use of
'star-architecture', 'iconic architecture', and 'urban megaprojects'
in uneven geographic development. Our ambition is to move beyond these
notions and analyse subtle yet complex forms through which production
of built forms is governed. In contrast to analyses of urban
entrepreneurialism and boosterism of 1980s-2000s, our focus is on
recent and more refined uses of creativity, culture and design, in
which citizens are conceived as quasi-actors rather than spectators.
Such focus would follow a hypothesis of a shift from roll-out
neoliberalism (Peck and Tickell, 2002) to inclusive neoliberalism
(Ruckert, 2006). The session wants to investigate how is built
environment shaped through subtle operation of power in
quasi-inclusive and quasi-participatory uses of creativity, culture
and design.
We invite theoretical papers and case studies investigating the role
of different actors and socio-spatial practices in governmentality of
built environment. Investigation of actors and practices that cannot
be clearly categorized in terms of state/non-state,
institutional/non-institutional, and formal/informal divides is of a
particular interest.
Please submit a 250-word abstract to Maros Krivy
([log in to unmask]) by November 11th at latest.
|