First off, I apologise for the gap between posts. I have been off study ill, so have not had much to write about. Having made a return to active studying, and having submitted the essay which marks the halfway point of the module, I am ready to go.
The essay concerned the making of social order in public spaces. I had the choice of writing about many aspects of this, including crime and road management. I chose the latter. The essay asked me to compare and contrast two views and approaches on social order. It sounds straightforward enough, but I am expected to look at things a little differently. So, that in mind, I looked at the work of Colin Buchanan and Hans Monderman, both enigineers charged with improving road safety. To their work, I applied the theories of Michel Foucault, and Erving Goffman, and it is to them I will comment first.
Michel Foucault theorised that we behave according to what he refers to as discourse. In this instance, discourse is what is in everyday talking, thinking and reading, but it has come down from people and institutions invested with authority. In his view, we think we are free to act, but in reality, we are obeying authority figures. I applied his thinking to a report by Colin Buchanan of 1963, which led to the type of road markings and signage, and segregation of people from cars we see on our roads today. When we drive, we automatically obey these signs and physical features. But, I imagine some may say, how did we manage before this? There were far less cars on the road at the time of Buchanan's report, but Foucault proposes that discourses are replaced as the need arises, but that they are always cascaded down from authority figures. These figures change through time, from kings to governments to scientific experts, and so on. So, as we had more cars on the road, we had new rules around their use.
Hans Monderman went onto the town of Drachten, in Holland, as the appointed traffic safety officer for the region. He had the traffic lights removed, the white lines burned away. Not only did he have the railings removed from the kerbs, he had the kerbs flattened to be indistinguishable from the road itself. The result?
A reduction in accidents at one particular junction, and improved traffic flow. Wow. How? Why? Locals said that going through what became known as shared spaces, they instinctively knew to be aware of other road users and pedestrians, and negotiated their way by making eye contact with each other.
Erving Goffman's theory covers this nicely. We interact with each other in daily life to make things work better. Not only this, we can make changes in social order which we can claim as our own, rather than being spoon-fed by governing bodies. As Hans Monderman put it. "If you treat people like zombies, they will act like zombies".
I do have my own experience of a type of social order which I can relate to today's entry. The only time I visited London was with someone whom had been there many times before. I noticed (I could hardly miss it) that people on the escalators in the tube stations all stood in single file on the right hand side. Well, I didn't need any invitation to stride right up the left hand side of the stairs to get where I wanted to be. No one flinched as I strode up the steps past them. I asked my friend what he made of it, and his opinion was that if they didn't file up one side of the escelators, then it woud lead to chaos, and that it was just the way things worked in that situation in that London.
Well, in this writer's opinion, these folks who file up like zombies are not free, are not acting in the public interest by complying, and made me feel more free in a city that was theirs than I ever have in the city that is mine.
The essay concerned the making of social order in public spaces. I had the choice of writing about many aspects of this, including crime and road management. I chose the latter. The essay asked me to compare and contrast two views and approaches on social order. It sounds straightforward enough, but I am expected to look at things a little differently. So, that in mind, I looked at the work of Colin Buchanan and Hans Monderman, both enigineers charged with improving road safety. To their work, I applied the theories of Michel Foucault, and Erving Goffman, and it is to them I will comment first.
Michel Foucault theorised that we behave according to what he refers to as discourse. In this instance, discourse is what is in everyday talking, thinking and reading, but it has come down from people and institutions invested with authority. In his view, we think we are free to act, but in reality, we are obeying authority figures. I applied his thinking to a report by Colin Buchanan of 1963, which led to the type of road markings and signage, and segregation of people from cars we see on our roads today. When we drive, we automatically obey these signs and physical features. But, I imagine some may say, how did we manage before this? There were far less cars on the road at the time of Buchanan's report, but Foucault proposes that discourses are replaced as the need arises, but that they are always cascaded down from authority figures. These figures change through time, from kings to governments to scientific experts, and so on. So, as we had more cars on the road, we had new rules around their use.
Hans Monderman went onto the town of Drachten, in Holland, as the appointed traffic safety officer for the region. He had the traffic lights removed, the white lines burned away. Not only did he have the railings removed from the kerbs, he had the kerbs flattened to be indistinguishable from the road itself. The result?
A reduction in accidents at one particular junction, and improved traffic flow. Wow. How? Why? Locals said that going through what became known as shared spaces, they instinctively knew to be aware of other road users and pedestrians, and negotiated their way by making eye contact with each other.
Erving Goffman's theory covers this nicely. We interact with each other in daily life to make things work better. Not only this, we can make changes in social order which we can claim as our own, rather than being spoon-fed by governing bodies. As Hans Monderman put it. "If you treat people like zombies, they will act like zombies".
I do have my own experience of a type of social order which I can relate to today's entry. The only time I visited London was with someone whom had been there many times before. I noticed (I could hardly miss it) that people on the escalators in the tube stations all stood in single file on the right hand side. Well, I didn't need any invitation to stride right up the left hand side of the stairs to get where I wanted to be. No one flinched as I strode up the steps past them. I asked my friend what he made of it, and his opinion was that if they didn't file up one side of the escelators, then it woud lead to chaos, and that it was just the way things worked in that situation in that London.
Well, in this writer's opinion, these folks who file up like zombies are not free, are not acting in the public interest by complying, and made me feel more free in a city that was theirs than I ever have in the city that is mine.
