Years ago I worked at a company that tried to discourage skateboarders from using their stairs and handrails with...
Years ago I worked at a company that tried to discourage skateboarders from using their stairs and handrails with various architectural retrofits. The stairs to the building received the same sort of textured bumps one might find on a sidewalk and the rails received small metal disks welded on at regular distances. The official word was these "improvements" were to proved grip and security to the people working in and visiting the building but the property manager was a friend and he told me they were to discourage skateboarders who flocked to the area on the weekends looking for places to practice their sport.
Ever since then I've always made it a point to notice these "anti-fun" modifications on various buildings and sidewalks wherever I go. Per the building manager in the anecdote above, it was to protect the property from damage and protect the property owner from law suits should a skateboarder get injured while misappropriating the facilities.
That cities and property owners would actively try and use architecture to create a hostile living environment for some people never even crossed my mind before reading this article. I mean, I've heard of cities de-facto banning homeless people through various ordinances, but creating so-called defensive architecture to make life even more hard on those who already have it rough? I find it appalling.
And yet, it makes sense. While I don't spend much time in affluent areas these days, my memory of higher-end neighborhoods is pretty clear on what's missing (now that I'm thinking about it): amenities. It's almost as though the wealthier among us don't want benches for people to sit on, (public) parks for people to congregate on or other gathering places for the mensch.
This sort of disdain for those considered "less" can clearly be seen just about every Halloween when kids from middle and lower-class neighborhoods go to wealthier neighborhoods to get the "good" candy and then some snob is quoted as saying something along the lines of, "Why do they have to come here? Our [good] candy is for our neighbors, not them."
I get it. People have their own property and they want to maintain what they believe is their privileged lifestyle, but in doing so these people are also separating themselves - building a physical wall, sometimes literally - between them and reality. They're not turning a blind eye to the troubles of the world, but rather taking active steps so they don't have to acknowledge it cognitively. This goes for those not wanting to realize that kids need a place to skateboard, homeless people need a place to feel safe or at least get out of the weather, or that poor kids might come into their neighborhood because this is the one time of year you care enough to hand out something for free.
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/the-subtle-design-features-that-make-cities-feel-more-hostile
Ever since then I've always made it a point to notice these "anti-fun" modifications on various buildings and sidewalks wherever I go. Per the building manager in the anecdote above, it was to protect the property from damage and protect the property owner from law suits should a skateboarder get injured while misappropriating the facilities.
That cities and property owners would actively try and use architecture to create a hostile living environment for some people never even crossed my mind before reading this article. I mean, I've heard of cities de-facto banning homeless people through various ordinances, but creating so-called defensive architecture to make life even more hard on those who already have it rough? I find it appalling.
And yet, it makes sense. While I don't spend much time in affluent areas these days, my memory of higher-end neighborhoods is pretty clear on what's missing (now that I'm thinking about it): amenities. It's almost as though the wealthier among us don't want benches for people to sit on, (public) parks for people to congregate on or other gathering places for the mensch.
This sort of disdain for those considered "less" can clearly be seen just about every Halloween when kids from middle and lower-class neighborhoods go to wealthier neighborhoods to get the "good" candy and then some snob is quoted as saying something along the lines of, "Why do they have to come here? Our [good] candy is for our neighbors, not them."
I get it. People have their own property and they want to maintain what they believe is their privileged lifestyle, but in doing so these people are also separating themselves - building a physical wall, sometimes literally - between them and reality. They're not turning a blind eye to the troubles of the world, but rather taking active steps so they don't have to acknowledge it cognitively. This goes for those not wanting to realize that kids need a place to skateboard, homeless people need a place to feel safe or at least get out of the weather, or that poor kids might come into their neighborhood because this is the one time of year you care enough to hand out something for free.
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/the-subtle-design-features-that-make-cities-feel-more-hostile
Comments