Download as PDF [10.6 MB]

033 Issue # 11/11 : PublIc Issues
Trialectics of spatiality
The relational space model of the French philosopher and
sociologist Henri Lefebvre has, since the 1990s, changed the
understanding of space in many disciplines (Lefebvre 1974).
The thoughts on space of the American social geographer
and urban planner Edward Soja advanced Lefebvre's ideas,
introducing a trialectics of spatiality in which three
aspects of equal value were brought together to constitute
space: sensually perceptible space, i.e. materially built
space (perceived space); imagined, calculated or abstract
space, the space of images and models (conceived space);
and the space in which things are lived and experienced,
the social space (lived space) (fig. 1). Only these three
aspects together yield space, or as Lefebvre says: produce
space (Soja 1996). Space, and thus also public space, is
a social product.
Since space is a social product, so are cities. Cities first
emerge when people perceive the existing material struc-
tures there with their senses, use it and appropriate it.
Individual perceptions are filtered through a manifold
network of ideas, memories and images in the mind of the
perceiver, are coloured and composed into a temporary super-
ordinate total event. Each action resulting from this
intervenes in the city's form and thus modifies the setting
for those who constitute the urban space. Thus, the entire
urban material and symbolic ensemble is in constant trans-
formation and must continually be recreated, i.e. produced
by residents in an active process. Hence the city is an
expression of continual discontinuity.
The same applies to streets: built streets are part of the
city's material structure. While their measurable material
form cannot be changed, they are lively as space. The space
of a street appears in a different form depending on usage
and appropriation, action and interaction, on the time
of day or the time of year. Street space – one of the last
public spaces – is not fixed and rigid but dynamic, a pro-
duct of social action.
When we observe life on the streets of a city, it becomes
apparent that the activities on the pavements and small
side streets are often more intense and varied than on many
new very aesthetically designed squares. In Asian cities,
the streets have formed the basis for urban life for centu-
ries. The idea of the square as the place where people
gather is a Western one. In India, China and Japan there
didn't use to be any squares. The place for ceremonies and
festivals was always the street (Kurokawa 2005). This
seems to be one reason why many newly built squares in Japan
don't function well. They are not – or not yet – part of
the culture.
This raises some important questions. What exactly is public
space in Japan and China? What takes place in public, and
private, space? How are the two separated from one another?
Or to go even further: Can we even speak of private and
public space in Japan and China? These issues will now be
addressed.
From XXL to XXS – the structure of Tokyo
Approximately 34 million people live in the Tokyo metropoli-
tan area. As a result, many envision Tokyo as a monstrous
metropolis with countless high-rises and impassable motor-
ways. However, even a cursory glance at a map of the city
shows that this impression is not entirely accurate. Un-
like the much smaller city Berlin, Tokyo has a very finely
structured road system (fig. 2, 3). Large through roads,
many of which are elevated highways, branch out into two-
to four-lane main roads that enclose residential areas
(fig. 4). Within the latter, there is a further refinement
of the road system into smaller access roads and resi-
dential side streets. Some of them have speed limits and
1 — Trialectics of space according to Edward Soja /
Trialektik des Raums von edward soja
2 — Berlin street grid (detail) / strassenraster
berlin (Detail)
3 — Tokyo street grid (detail) / strassenraster
Tokyo (Detail)