Monday, 9 November 2009
Keywords Presentation
The second keyword I will look at is Modern, by Chandan Reddy (pp160-164). This term informs my FYP as both the terms "modern" and "post-modern" can be used when examining the American city. The essay looks at the implications of the word "modern" from a variety of different disciplines such as sociology, history and geography, and can be used when looking at the changing landscape of the American city, and the ways in which both modernity and post modernity have helped develop cities in America.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Sam's juxtaposition of 'modern' with the 'city' reminds me of the notion propounded by critics such as James McDonald (in 'Imagining the Modern City') that 'the city' is already a textual and cultural construct, rather than simply a spatial one. What he means by this is that to perceive as a whole the set of individual buildings, spaces, and even people who 'compose' a city, is to go further than simply identify a geographical/historical set of evidence. This conception is amenable to notions of modernity/postmodernity, but suggests a more complex state of affairs than is evident in your quotatation from Leonardo which assumes the spatial historical reality of the city which is only later depicted in culture.
ReplyDeleteAs the definition of 'modern' is so fluid, Sam made a brave choice when he selected it as one of his keywords. 'Modern' requires an accompanying noun in order to suggest any specificity of meaning for me. Even 'modern city' has a gestalt-like quality as it requires equal consideration for ideas in opposition of those associated with a 'modern’ city (post-modern, rural, traditional, etc.) as for those which are typified by it (urban, progressive, 'sinful'). The combination of the keywords also prompted ideas with respect to the signs and signifiers of the ‘modern’ and ‘post-modern’ urban space and how they evoke the evolution from one state to the other.
ReplyDeleteI think the words 'city' and 'modern' are very wide and could be discussed endlessly. What makes a city? - Do a group of people just set up on a through trading route, which grows in a town, then a city? - Or do town planners actually sit down and decide these things? There arises the question of whether in the city you are sophisticated, a go-getter with everything to hand (I'm thinking particularly NYC here) or whether you are the money-grabbing, heartless antithesis of the more 'true' small-town average-Joe American. In post-modern America is that still a vision that is held on to? - In other words is the concept of the city always more cultural than anything else?
ReplyDeletei think both the terms modern and city have alot of relevance to Sam's FYP especially when reading the articles and examining how America's concept of the city and "urban sprawl" has developed and been portayed over time. this links into hte modern article as in some ways you can compare a city before modernity and after and see the effects and changes.
ReplyDeleteThses keywords help open up Sam's FYP and begin to show a focal point for his study.
ReplyDeleteThe city is obviously important as a starting point when looking for a point of reference regarding the place he is looking at.
Modern is again equally important to show how these cities have evolved. I think it is important to look at why certain areas have become successful as well as why they look as they do when evaluating the progression of areas into what the are today. Overall this appears to be a tough topic and these keywords are very good at honing in on a starting point for the study.