Subject/Object

Steven Chabot

Public Spaces and its relation to Media

No Comments »

I know, I know, I haven’t written.

Today I listened to Fred Kent on CBC radio (welcome back CBC, we missed you). He is a member of the Project for Public Spaces, a group into urban revitalization and the building of communities. I encourage everyone to look at their website, which is very interesting as well as informative, and not dry at all: it is filled with lists of great and horrible spaces, as well as pictures of cities and their wonderful city life not only here in North America, but world wide.

Their idea is that cities, specially car-driven North American ones, should return to this livable and public life of town squares, markets and urban diversity (as exemplified by Kensington Market:

The areaÕs mixed uses have the streets occupied at all times of the day. Murals on shops and local stores, layers of posters, low-rise buildings and a central park space create an oasis within the city.

The mixed diversity of living spaces, independent restaurants, bars, clubs, grocery shops, coffee shops give the place a real local feel. There is a high level of neighbourhood involvement in issues surrounding Kensington market and have worked to maintain the local identity of the neighbourhood.

However, what if this applies not only to our physical space, but our mental or media based space as well. This struck me because I realized that I was listening to the radio, a medium which is slowly being eradicated (like market places or local shops): wiped out all together, or replaced with large, corporate, bland replacements of top-40 hits and sports stations (think the local mall).

I hate the term “Virtual Reality”–it reminds me of too many bad mid-90′s movies. However, our life in the media is somewhat of a “virtual space”. Small, independent booksellers are like little markets or stores, fighting against the large corporations for survival, and they give you some thing extra in that fight: a different perspective, where you can get thing you can’t get in the mainstream places. The web, originally a dynamic and bustling place, like a market place, which the PPS calls “the original meeting place”, is being dominated by government and corporate control, which is as we speak turning the web into a mall.

However, I think that the web will fare much better than the destruction of urban centres, or even of more traditional media like the radio. That is it costs nothing, or next to nothing, to start a website. And now, with the prices of hardware coming down, it costs nothing to start a web radio show–a podcast–and get it out to your listeners. Right now, it is just becoming cheap enough to produce video content, although I don’t think that video content is completely compatible with the way we interact with the internet, which is a whole other topic.

We can have this lively debate between healthy and organic spaces of information very easily: how much easier is it to make an socialist and anarchist website, then go through the rigour to make a physical anarchist bookstore, especially when it is the bank granting you a loan, the same bank you are looking to do away with.

A little bit of a rebirth

No Comments »

I have been very exhausted lately. I am working at my last few shifts of my crappy undergraduate part-time job, and quickly moving into my better, full time, graduate-ish job at Autoshare, a car sharing company here in Toronto.

As someone currently beginning to apply for a degree in the Faculty of Information Studies, I am slowly realizing that it is not one particular genre of book that I enjoy, but all genres together, and in fact the book itself. When first coming to Toronto, which has the second largest book collection after Harvard in North America, I got this classic feeling of Angst that I would not be able, even in a thousand lifetimes, to read all the books at Robarts Library. Robarts itself reminds me of “The Library of Babel“, its shape at least. Also, I got very happy this week reading Boing Boing about this Information Scientist, Eugene Garfield, compiled the most cited works of 1976-1983. This list affirms my believe that I cannot specialize in any one genre, as shown by the top ten:

1. T.S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 1962

2. J. Joyce, Ulysses. 1922

3. N. Frye, Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays. 1957

4. L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations

5. N. Chomsky, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. 1965

6. M. Foucault, The Order of Things. 1966

7. J. Derrida, Of Grammatology

8. R. Barthes, S/Z. 1970

9. M. Heidegger, Being and Time. 1927

10. E.R. Curtius, European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages. 1948

I love books themselves, information itself, regardless of the truth of falsehood of what is proposed. Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit is a beautiful book, with a highly suspect thesis. Does it matter? What I want to defend and fight for is the propagation of ideas themselves, in order for us to be able to make comments and judgements for ourselves. Like Borges, I see books and library with touches of mysticism and religiousness, and for me this religiousness transcends East, West, analytic, literary, poetry, prose, fiction.

In the future, I would love for this list to include some non-Western books, but as it stands it makes me very excited, to an unhealthy degree. Why should we privilege Anglo-American philosophy over Continental, or even Philosophy over Literature–I’m sure some would argue there is no distinction. I would add, why privilege academic works over religious ones, modern over ancient, etc etc. I like that I’ve read quite a few of them myself.