Dublin divided? Deep ecologies and social complexity
I was recently thinking about popular conceptions of Dublin urban geography. The most dominant one is probably the North:South divide. Quoted from a site found from a quick Google search for 'Dublin inner city culture' (www.streetsofdublin.com):
The article does go on to give a deeper history for divisions and also discusses East:West issues. What I was thinking was, however, that I feel our project should make some direct statements about the problems with such reductive and essentialised divisions. Bifurcating the urban fabric creates dangers territorial conceptions and in many way reifies boundary - almost regressing debate to early 20th century siedlungsarchaologie (settlement archaeology) - advocating notions of Gustaf Kossinna's kulturkries (culture area).
I feel our project - through the optics of social research, archaeology and art - has the potential to offer constructive complexity to the conception of Dublin's geography. Most critically, it should add two more dimensions to the standard 2D boundary lines of N:S bifurcations. Adding both depth and temporality.
I feel our project - through the optics of social research, archaeology and art - has the potential to offer constructive complexity to the conception of Dublin's geography. Most critically, it should add two more dimensions to the standard 2D boundary lines of N:S bifurcations. Adding both depth and temporality.
It's an ambitious goal, but one certainly attainable - developing a process that both captures and enlivens the flow of a 4D conception of social space in Dublin in which all civic participants can feel they have representation and a stake.
Let the comments and debate begin...
Labels: archaeology, sociology, theory
posted by Ian Alden Russell @ Thursday, October 16, 2008
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home