Summary of the introduction on Modernity in the book "Architectural Positions" (Part 2)

This article is the second part of my summary from the introduction in the book Architectural Positions. In this part there is a description of the 'public sphere' and the connection with 'public spaces'. As said before: 'public space' is a major part of the 'public sphere' and therefore the public sphere is very interesting while studying cities of today.

The public sphere – Gemeinschaft in absentia

Marshall Berman writes in 1982 a book on modernity: All That is Solid Melts into Air. The Experience of Modernity. Quote: “To be modern is to find ourselves in an environment that promises us adventure, power, joy, growth, transformation of ourselves and the world – and at the same time threatens to destroy everything we have, everything we know, everything we are.” (Berman, 1982)

Many philosophers refer to the German sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies who already in 1887 describes the social association Gesellschaft in opposition to Gemeinschaft. In a Gesellschaft people live together without being essentially united as in a Gemeinschaft: “In Gemeinschaft they stay together in spite of everything that separetes them; in Gesellschaft they remain separate in spite of everything that unites them.” (Tönnies, 1887) Further Tönnies states that the association Gemeinschaft is found mainly in rural areas and the association Gesellschaft is found mainly in urban environments. Remarkable detail is that Tönnies addresses the most important means regulation the Gesellschaft are contracts and money. (Tönnies, 1887)

The French socialist Emile Durkheim makes a difference between ‘mechanical solidarity’ and ‘organic solidarity’. Mechanical solidarity exists of a repetition of similar segments with a homogeneous group identity. Organic solidarity is based on the differences between individuals by an increasing process of specialization of social roles, professions and occupations.

The German sociologist Georg Simmel writes on individuality and modernity: “the self preservation of certain personalities is bought at the price of devaluating the whole objective world... It drags one’s own personality down into the same worthlessness. “ (Simmel, 1903)

The American urban sociologist Louis Wirth continues: “Modern urban society is the product of a complex interplay of roles”. This makes it possible to participate in different social circles without truly getting to know anyone. Besides that there are very different people living together in a very small area. This means that one is constantly in the company of strangers. (Wirth, 1938)

According to the authors the Polish sociologist Zygmunt Bauman states about modernity: “The promise of liberation from tradition, of individual freedom, and of self realization, a promise which is an inherent part of modernity, comes at a high price. After all, this freedom goes hand in hand with the loss of security, of tacit, shared opinions, and of social ties and shared sentiments, all of which were central to traditional ways of life.”

Public Space: a new mode of social organization

The debate about ‘public space’ is closely related to the debate on the ‘public sphere’ and the ‘public domain’. The term ‘public domain’ is used in the distinction between public and private domain and refers in the text to actual spaces. The ‘public sphere’ refers also to a specific set of practices and is according to the authors often linked to the debate on the development of Western democracy.

Public Sphere

Freitag, Bauman and Habermas agree that the most characteristic element of modernity is the new public sphere. This public sphere is according to Freitag characterized by a new mode of social reproduction. This means that the traditional symbolic and cultural spheres which regulated society are replaced by a debate about the proper organization of society and the proper form of community. This debate takes place in actual public spaces but is also transmitted by new media: newspapers, radio, television and so forth. (And I think the internet is a very important medium nowadays)

Public domain

During the French revolution there was a declaration made defining the modern public sphere for the first time: The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. (Déclaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen, 1798) This document introduces a distinction between public and private domain based on three points:

1. Ownership. The public domain consists of spaces under possession of the government: streets, squares, parks and some public buildings. The private domain consists of private property: land, shops, offices and interior spaces.

2. Accessibility. “The public domain is accessible to all, at every moment of the day.” The private domain is characterized by restrictions.

3. Purpose. The public domain serves the public interest and has a collective purpose. The private domain serves the interests of individuals or a private body like families, businesses and organizations.

But in fact there are many spaces in which the relationship between public and private is more complex.

Berman, M. (1982). All That is Solid Melts into Air. The Experience of Modernity. New York: Penguin Books.

Déclaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen. (1798).

Simmel, G. (1903). Die Grossstädte und das Geistesleben. New York : McGraw-Hill.

Tönnies, F. (1887). Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life. American Journal of Sociology 44 , 1-24.