History accumulates and the future is born
Public spaces gain and give historic significance from and to the events that take place on their grounds. We have seen this feedback loop in the repeated use of the Red Square as a protest site. The Red Square, due to its location relative to the Kremlin, is a symbol of the consolidation of Russian political power at the capital. Correspondingly, it has been the focal point for demonstrators against government corruption, flawed elections, and encroachments on individual liberties. Demonstrators choose this site in order to stomp on hallowed grounds, assert their presence in counterbalance to the Kremlin. They use the venue as a symbol to enhance the message of their protest. However, it can be argued that the protests, including major events in 1968, 2008, and 2011-2013, also strengthen the Red Square’s symbolism of state power by turning it into a battle ground between two competing parties.
We have also seen this mutual reinforcement of the significance of incidents and location in the choice of Istiklal Avenue as the site of an ISIS-coordinated terrorist bombing in March 2016. This bombing gained significant media and government attention due in part to its central location. If this bombing had taken place on another avenue, it would not have been quite as strong a blow to the Istanbul’s pride. However, the bombing also reinforced the identity of Istiklal Avenue. Long a symbol of western influence in the city, Istiklal Avenue has housed European architecture and infrastructure and been the site of earlier outbreaks of tension between Istanbullus of eastern and western cultural heritage. This attack by the Islamic State, which we perceive to be an eastern entity, creates an east-west dichotomy that reinforces Istiklal’s identity as an icon of Western European influence in Istanbul.
As history accumulates and a public space begins to hold significant symbolism, these become the places where citizen rally together to shape and change their society, using public spaces as a cornerstone of the future urban identity. This understanding of the significance of public spaces is more closely aligned with Habermas’s theory: the argument that the public is a place where the free flow of communication gradually breeds awareness of the interests of others; the nature of different interests gradually comes to the fore, rather than simple assertions of one’s own self-interest” (Blackwell, 262). In Boston, visionary and conductor of the Boston Pops Orchestra, Arthur Fiedler, was determined to make classical music more accessible and relatable. In fulfilling these ends, he used the Hatch Oval to create a shared experience open to everyone. In Moscow, demonstrators eager to improve the democratic processes of the Russian Government rallied together at the Red Square to speak their mind. Both of these examples show that actions at public spaces can alter society: Fiedler introduced Tchaikovsky’s 1812 into the common household of Boston, while the Free Elections demonstrations at the Red Square helped to place Putin’s third re-election under the limelight. By bringing their interests to historically-significant public spaces, citizens find a platform by which to shape their cities’ and societies’ future.
Timelines are powerful tools for understanding this layering of past and future. The map of Boston with a timeline overlaid on it allowed us to visually compare how the built environment has evolved over time. As we did with the Istanbul assignment, Neatline offers the option to further attach photos and videos that illustrate how the space has changed over time. We begin to organise and curate the many layers of historical and cultural development that a public space has experienced within itself, and we can come to understand the order of events by which public space shaped city, and city shaped public space in turn.