“PLACE” vs “SPACE”

“PLACE” vs “SPACE”

The ‘Re-Space-ing Place: “Place” and “Space” Ten Years On’ article took me two days to read and digest the ideas it conveyed. The main concept within it is the difference between Space and Place and the development of these situations with the emergence of ubiquitous technologies.

“space is the opportunity; place is the (understood) reality.”

This is the broad distinction as discussed in the original paper 10 years ago. From my understanding space is designed for a particular purpose and is used to manipulate behaviour of the user. Architects design spaces for particular functions. Place is where users appropriate space, inhabit it, maybe even change its function.

For example, one of my favourite places in London is the South Bank and one of the most interesting spots along the river is the skate park. It is full of great graffiti and always has a good atmosphere. This area was never designed for this use. It was described as an “architectural dead spot” which was then appropriated by the British skateboarding community turning it into a “place”.

Technology has also begun to effect how we appropriate space. For example, clusters of people in a certain place in a public square, using their computers suggests it may be a Wi-Fi hotspot.

I believe it is clear that both “space” and “place” are inextricably linked. Spatiality can effect social behaviour. In regards to my research I want to create a “place” in the high street. Somewhere people can project their personalities rather than a "space" that is just getting people to shop more.