Metaphor and urban studies-a crossover, theory and a case study of SS Rotterdam

Abstract

Metaphors are used in various ways; at the surface for framing a message (systems of language) and below the surface metaphors are related to the ways we think and act. In this paper we will explore, below the surface, the relationship between metaphors and urban studies. From an analysis of metaphors used in urban studies, it will be concluded that, so to speak, every new phenomenon gets a new metaphor around which theoretical notions are developed. Indeed, 'a 1000 flowers bloom' . This paper will study what urban studies can learn from organization theory. In particular, the question whether the set of metaphors from one of the classics in organizational theory-namely Gareth Morgan's Images of Organization-can inform urban studies, can be used to grasp, to 'read' cities. After exploring theoretical notions, the case study is the SS Rotterdam, a former luxury cruise ship that that came back to Rotterdam to serve as a catalyst for urban development. Different metaphors of Morgan's set are applied in this case study to get a better understanding of the management, decision making, culture and political system. It will be concluded that Morgan's set of metaphors looks promising for urban studies and recommendations are made about research lines along which further theoretical and empirical work may be carried out.

Uncovering ‘Community’: Challenging an Elusive Concept in Development and Disaster Related Work

“…We believe that our argument has, over the past pages, made it quite clear that bringing order into everyday life, providing certainties and meaning, and thus helping people to adequately handling challenges 'in their own ways' are elements inherent in 'community' that hold the most important (potential) added values for 'community' members. As Solesbury points out, community implies "a commonality of values, identities and interests that help people to live together" [76] (p. 140). However, Solesbury, drawing on 'the city as community' as a common metaphor, also highlights a very important shift of meaning: "But, shift to the plural-communities-and differences on the basis of location, class, income, sexuality, ethnicity or faith are immediately implicit" [76] (p. 140).…”

“…As Solesbury points out, community implies "a commonality of values, identities and interests that help people to live together" [76] (p. 140). However, Solesbury, drawing on 'the city as community' as a common metaphor, also highlights a very important shift of meaning: "But, shift to the plural-communities-and differences on the basis of location, class, income, sexuality, ethnicity or faith are immediately implicit" [76] (p. 140). The city (and, we may add, any other spatial or social entity associated with 'community') now becomes a place where values and interests are in contest-in short, it is turning into a battleground.…”

“…In its extreme forms, 'communities' (pl.) and the conflicts between them become embodied in the structure of the city (or any other body) such that "the necessities for living together-security, health, shelter, neighbourliness-are no longer there" [76] (p. 140; Aleppo, Mogadishu and other places in war or crisis zones as examples). In another example, Bartels, based on the idea of 'quiet encroachment' by Bayat [77], explains how members of the middle-class are, in semi-legal fashion, quietly encroaching the peri-urban areas of Accra (Ghana) by informally, and individually, constructing new houses there [78].…”

“…We hope to convey to academia and 'practitioners' an understanding of why 'community-based' work is so often failing: it is almost impossible to agree on a least common denominator of what 'community' means. Solesbury's battleground [76], one might argue, tarnishes the image of 'community/ies' as a desirable and comforting social organisation or technology that we want to investigate or do development or DRR work with. However, why is the cuddly notion of 'community' so enduring?…”

“…Most humanitarian organisations, for instance, will at least partly fall into that category-'communities' that, by virtue of their predispositions or because of the very nature of their belief-based philanthropic and charitable claims, are forever reproducing a mythical image of social equity and equality. Solesbury's battleground [76], one might argue, tarnishes the image of 'community/ies' as a desirable and comforting social organisation or technology that we want to investigate or do development or DRR work with. However, why is the cuddly notion of 'community' so enduring?…”