?

Log in

No account? Create an account

The Past | The Previous

quote: 'in different versions of the good city, diversity is taken to be not only an urban fact, but a principal urban value. city living is invariably held to thrive where there is a density of people and a diversity of uses. this ideal is not entirely captured in strategies of urban development in which 'mixed use' refers to live/work spaces with rapid internet access--just as shops stocking six different types of olive oil does not in itself represent 'diversity'.residential strategies of inner city development have been an effective component of recent urban policy and planning, but they can work to zone out, to price out, alternative uses and other populations.

'a diversity of use generally implies a diversity of people. in these terms, social mix is not simply a cultural, but functional feature of urbanism as a way of life. it entails a mix of occupations, of income, of housing type and tenure.'

fran tonkiss, 'inner city living'.

but how do you gauge what is important in diversity? i mean, really, having to pick from six different types of pickles might be diversity--or a consumer diversity, such as eating chinese, indian, whatever. there is, at the most superficial level, a look of cultural acceptance and utopian bliss going on, if you look purely at the eating habits of inner city people. (or even suburban people.)

diversity. diversity. this is what i want to show, in my work, i think. so note to self, remember this. diversity. the diversity of people, of living conditions, the snap shots of a city: no city is ever experienced in one moment, but rather taken in moments, degrees, and i have gotten off topic.