In The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Jane Jacobs offered an interesting insight on how different streets and communities provide people with different degrees of safety and comfort. I strongly agree with the point that it is not the density of population that decides how safe a street could be. Take my own experience for example. When I studied in NYU New York, I chose to live in Jersey City instead of NYC, because I felt my own safety could be more guaranteed in Jersey City. I have visited my friend’s apartment in midtown Manhattan (near K-town), and her apartment was surrounded by a lot of restaurants, bars and shopping malls. I concede that place was so busy and alive, but it didn’t provide me any sense of safety. To me, all the pedestrians are potential threats and could suddenly start an attack. In Jersey city, however, the street I lived was with more living facilities, such as grocery stores, markets, and parks. There were less people on the street at night, but when I passed them, I felt they were community members just like me and would be willing to lend a hand to others who got in trouble. I could smell a rich flavor of life from them, which comforted me a lot. It is hard to give explicit standards on classifying the safety level of different streets, but there are always dynamics among people on the street that convey their emotional states and their identities in relation to the street.
In Global Cities, Local Street, Zukin talked about how local culture and global trends converge in local shopping streets, and how the shift of the shopping street reflects the social changes happened in the local area. As the author states: “the aesthetic of the shopping street is a collective projection of social class and cultural capital”. I agree that the aesthetic preference expressed by a shopping street is designed to attract people from certain social group. and in turn shapes the local culture and educates the inhabitants. However, sometimes I also feel that some shopping streets only have exhibitionary value but are not able to provide people with any sense of belonging. One example I could think of is the Nanluoguxiang（South Luogu Lane) in Beijing. Nanluoguxiang is popular among young people because pf all kinds of snacks and small shops. Many stores are with delicate designs and ideal for taking pictures. What I feel strange about that street is that it doesn’t provide any kind of cultural sense but only consumerism. When a shopping street becomes famous, we always try to label it with a certain tag to account for its popularity. For example, Tianzifang is famous for its artistic atmosphere, whereas Houhai(a street in Beijing) is famous as a bar street and well-known for its rock culture. However, in Nanluoguxiang, some stores sell traditional Chinese street food, some sell western fast food, some sell originally designed clothes, whereas others sell chain brand products. It is hard to imagine those different kinds of products coexist on one shopping street, but they are sold there in a strange but harmonious way. Those stores are opened on that street not to built a space for certain social group to inhabit or to contribute to certain cultural atmosphere. Stores in Nanluoguxiang are just built to invite people to consume. Every day after 11:00 pm, after both shop owners and tourists leave the street, Nanluoguxiang becomes an empty hole in the middle of the city. To some extent, Nanluoguxiang is a great example of the integration trend of global culture, but on the other hand, it also reveals the nihility and rootlessness behind it.
Here you can see the appearance of Nanluoguxiang.
https://youtu.be/VhiR_Prq57A
Leave a Reply