The Public Square: Memory and Meaning

Abstract

The term public has a rather ambiguous and broad meaning so does public space. Considering “its full development as a product of modern capitalist society,”¹ public space is constructed alongside private space. Kost of points out the organizational and legal consequences of “explicitly defining and articulating an outdoor space for the common good” in that “the people assume a double responsibility: the upkeep of this space and its preservation as public property.”²As such, public spaces can serve as sites where public identity and meaning are negotiated in complex ways. Today, even in countries governed by western style democracy, the use and access to public spaces are often restricted and policed. Public spaces can be highly politicized when they become the setting for the glorification of leaders, social activism, political uprisings, conflict and violence. Since public spaces are one of many settings where citizens experience their city, what happens when public spaces are under attack? What if the memory and the meaning are transformed into fragmented and irrelevant pieces by business interests or the government? What happens to public life when public spaces are stripped off of their spaceness?

Towards Sustainable Revitalization: The Public Squares Characteristics - Led the Adaptive Urban Revitalization Mechanisms

“…A focal point can be created using any designed element (such as a fountain, sculpture, or statue), and these elements can occupy the surrounding parts of the square or pedestrian roads nearby. However, theorists have emphasized that the center of the square should remain empty [1,15]. PSs in Baghdad were subjected to several influences and variables at the urban level, which have affected them as spaces that contribute to place-making and attract users [16].…”