Category Archives: RA

Reading Analysis 6

His & Hers? Designing for a Post-Gender Society

In His & Hers? Designing for a Post-Gender Society, Susan Tick argues that due to the ever-changing view on the acceptance of gender rolls, designers should help promote this change in society by being more neutral in their designs. The first thing that comes to mind when reading this article is the reinforcement in the idea that everything has a rhetorical effect. In this specific article, I realized that even clothing is carrying a message. When I thought about this more, I realized that this was obvious, so obvious in fact that I took the rhetorical meaning that clothes carried for granted. Even something as simple as the mens or women’s section of a clothing store says something about how our society labels the aesthetics of the person rather then their true gender identity. Tick proceeded further in her essay to describe the current trend with clothing design today. With design being rooted in modernism which is heavily shaped by the male perspective, the result of our clothing and art has the same attitude. The solution prompted by Tick is to design clothing and spaces that have a more gender neutral tone to them, just like gender neutral bathrooms. She urges us, as a society, to lean in a more post modernism direction. In the art world, post modernism is described as an amalgamation of different narratives and cultures that don’t necessarily have a meaning, intend audience or message behind them. One of my favorite post modernist Artists is Rene Magrite. His paintings question the preexisting assumptions that society holds. Magrite questions phenomenon such as the meaning behind language, the power of assumptions and life as we know it. The common thread between Tick and Magrite is the idea that we shouldn’t think in a straight line. Nothing is to be assumed. Everything is subject for closer examination and questioning. Thats the meaning behind Magrites paintings and Ticks opinion on design.

Reading Analysis 5

Reading Analysis 5

In the last chapter City of Rhetoric, Fleming concludes his argument by serving the readers with a summary of the existing  enviable problems that lie, and forever will lie, In our cities today. Fleming states that these physical entities, which we call cities, act too much like a private space. Cities, weather intentionally or unintentionally, segregate and gentrify societies into categories. Fleming realizes that there and pros and cons to both low income housing as well as prestigious neighborhoods. Low income housings are more dangerous and have poor standards of living. However on then flip side, prestigious housing lacks diversity and social interaction. Fleming sees this as a problem. He believes buildings shouldn’t be designed for low income or higher income individuals, they should just be designed for humans. All humans are humans, therefore we shouldn’t be broken up in to categories that label us according to our income level or race. All humans are equal and cities should be designed to embrace that similarity. Fleming argues that the ideal cities should have the nessieties to sustain human life such as a close proximity to jobs, schools, parks etc. The most important quality that cities should have, however, is the adjacency to other people. Part of Flemings main thesis is that cities should cause public discourse and conversation whilst embracing the diversity that metropolitan areas are blessed with. This idea of public discourse and conversation can best be embraced if everyone, rich or poor, the majority or the minorities, lived within close proximity to each other. ” We need spaces that… not just as private individuals- as family members, friends, workers shareholders-  but as citizens who are irreducibly different from one another”

Reading Analysis 2

Schindler pt 2

In Sarah Schindler’s article ” Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment, Schindler argues that built environments are a catalyst for discrimination and segregation. Schindler spends a lot of time talking about how unique of a medium of Architecture is and how thats detrimental to the people effected by segregation. Architecture is unique in the sense that its negative effects can’t be regulated by laws, however Schindler doesn’t believe this is right. Even though she believes that there should be some sort of regulation on the discrimination caused by built environments, she knows its a slippery slope.  One of the interesting parts of this essay was her outlook on public transportation. Schindler feels that public transportation is a leading cause in the segregation. The example that he gives is how public transportation lacks acres to public parks. Schindler also shows how upper class white people in northern Atlanta are agains the expansion of the public transportation system. All these examples in regards to public transportation are perfect at explaining the gentrification that is happening all over the country through built enviorments that may have had the original intention to make things easier to the lower class. Public transportation is a perfect example of this. Normally the goal of public transportation is to allow access to different parts of the city with ease for the people who don’t have means of transportation on their own. Its almost like the upper middle class is using a tool meant to make things easier for everyone, agains the lower class to benefit them selfs and to keep them segregated from the rest. This text parallels that of our main text by Fleming in respects to the idea that built environments influence the way society acts both in ways that we can control and in ways that we can’t.

Reading Analysis 3

 

In City of Rhetoric by David Flemming, Flemming aims to convey to the readers that all built environments influence the way people interact with each other. These interactions can be through conversation, public discourse or language. In part two of the book, Flemming provides commentary on different types of subcultures and societies within cities. In this section, he focuses on the suburbs. Fleming talks about why academics have a “thinly veiled disdain” for suburbia as well as talks about the history of suburbia and the suburbs effect of society and vice versa. A man by the name of Gautreaux implemented the Gautreaux Assisted Housing Program in the late 70’s. This was a private, non profit housing program that moved family out of the main city of Chicago and put them in affluent, mainly white, neighborhoods. This new conglomeration of housing soon became the  definition suburbs that we picture today. Fleming gives the definition of what this new housing program turns into. “makes low-density density housing (2) possible, while the fear of urban heterogeneity (3) makes it attractive. As Dolores Hayden has put it, suburbia is the physical expression of the middle-class desire for living in a detached house (2) with like-minded neighbors (3) in a quasi-pastoral setting (1)” ( Fleming pt. 2). The result is a very homogenous group of homes where the look and the personality of the people living in these homes are similar and alike, this negates all types of diversity for the most part, given that a majority of the people living in these homes were alike in race and socioeconomic status. This is a perfect example of how society can be shaped by history. This also exemplifies how long the effects of these subcultures, such as the suburbs, can last.

 

Reading Analysis 1

 

In David fleming’s book “ The City of Rhetoric”, Fleming argues that the man made and built environments that make up our city evoke conversation, conflict, public discourse and even capital. The specific way in which these cities are designed alter the way that communities act with one another as well as interact with the world around them. In the preface of the book, flemming claims that the organization the United States between 1865 and 1915 aided the emergence of the country as a whole buy structuring the city scapes in such a manner that was inviting to the immigrant population as well as enticing enough to move the country further economically.  

“…the massive urbanization of the United States, as the size and population of the nation’s cities swelled from both foreign immigration and internal migration; the heightened diversification of those cities, as residents from different racial, ethnic, religious, economic, and linguistic backgrounds suddenly came into close contact with one another; the rapid industrialization of the period, which saw not only increased capital concentration but also recurring financial panic” (Flemming 39)

In this particular example, Flemming’s main point is to highlight the success of America and how it’s grown over the years due to the infrastructure of the City. In this specific example, the political affiliation and conflict that cities conjure is less prominent. However the more positive aspects of the effects of these cities are illustrated. The urbanization of america offers a meeting place for immigrants all over, the advancement of technology is demonstrated throughout the cities, thus inviting a more diverse crowd.

This description of America during the 1900’s was merely an example of how influential and persuasive the infrastructure and rising of cities can be. America grew from nothing to one of the most diverse cities in the world. Immigrants referred to America as the new world because of the potential and the diversity that this country offered. This example was merely just the surface of the influence and power that cities have

Works Cited

David Fleming. City of Rhetoric: Revitalizing the Public Sphere in Metropolitan America (Kindle Locations 42-47). Kindle Edition.

 

Reading Analysis 4

 

In this chapter of the City of Rhetoric, David Fleming aims to draw conclusions about all of the subcategories of the built environments. He looks at a low income African American ghetto, and affluent white suburb, a mixed income “urban village” and a highrise city. Fleming continues in this chapter by individually listing and analyzing the effects of the different social spaces. For example, one of the social scapes he talks about is the urban district near the north side of chicago. He describes the urban district as an amalgamation of the good and the bad, the successful and the failures. “the Near North Side of Chicago, one at the crossroads of a troubled past, a conflicted present, and an uncertain future.” (Fleming Part 3). This quote illustrates the juxtaposition and contrast of the living styles and socioeconomics inside this diverse city. At first one might think that diversity conflict is good. However fleming argues that the city of Chicago does a poor job and embracing and harboring these differences. This poor coordination between the ever so different lifestyles in the urban environment is detrimental to the success of the individuals living in them. Fleming concludes his analysis on the urban environment in the north side of chicago by saying “Without a healthy attitude toward conflict, its inevitability and virtue, we will be unable to build either good cities in particular or good public spheres in general.” ( Flemming part 2). He concludes that chicago isn’t fostering the diversity that it holds. Diversity is a blessing, and given that most parts of chicago are either in the ghetto or in the suburbs, both of which lack diversity, when one place that has diversity isn’t being embraced, this blessing of a melting pot of individuals becomes a curse. This whole chapter is supporting evidence to his main thesis statement, that built environments have an effect on every part of human’s life. From their productivity, to their economy to their socioeconomic status.  

 

RA 3

 

In City of Rhetoric by David Flemming, Flemming aims to convey to the readers that all built environments influence the way people interact with each other. These interactions can be through conversation, public discourse or language. In part two of the book, Flemming provides commentary on different types of subcultures and societies within cities. In this section, he focuses on the suburbs. Fleming talks about why academics have a “thinly veiled disdain” for suburbia as well as talks about the history of suburbia and the suburbs effect of society and vice versa. A man by the name of Gautreaux implemented the Gautreaux Assisted Housing Program in the late 70’s. This was a private, non profit housing program that moved family out of the main city of Chicago and put them in affluent, mainly white, neighborhoods. This new conglomeration of housing soon became the  definition suburbs that we picture today. Fleming gives the definition of what this new housing program turns into. “makes low-density density housing (2) possible, while the fear of urban heterogeneity (3) makes it attractive. As Dolores Hayden has put it, suburbia is the physical expression of the middle-class desire for living in a detached house (2) with like-minded neighbors (3) in a quasi-pastoral setting (1)” ( Fleming pt. 2). The result is a very homogenous group of homes where the look and the personality of the people living in these homes are similar and alike, this negates all types of diversity for the most part, given that a majority of the people living in these homes were alike in race and socioeconomic status. This is a perfect example of how society can be shaped by history. This also exemplifies how long the effects of these subcultures, such as the suburbs, can last.