Urban Planning and Communication

In The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance Manuel Castells begins his work emphasizing the importance of “physical space—particularly public space in cities as well as universities—cultural institutions, and informal networks of public opinion formation” as the main developer of the public sphere.  Castells argues that the public sphere transforms into civil society, which ultimately can influence decisions of nation-states.   I wish to further develop his theory, in that the creation of public space encourages close contact to other people and ultimately acts as catalyst for the advancement of society, economic strategy and politics.  Would there have been a Renaissance in Italy without the piazza or migration from the country back to the city? Doubtful.  Communication, innovation and progress are reliant on human contact and urban areas are ideal platforms for these to be cultivated. 

As I read for our upcoming International Communication class I also came across The Atlantic Monthly’s article entitled, “Debunking the Cul-de-Sac,” which gave a brief history on America’s move away from the historic grid-pattern city planning towards the Cul-de-Sac neighborhood and its ramifications on society.  In the article, Norman Garrick, of the University of Connecticut emphasized, “We’ve really been designing communities that make us drive more, make us less safe, keep us disconnected from one another, and that may even make us less healthy.”  However, this article failed to mention the Cul-de-Sac’s effect on human contact-communication and the exchange of ideas.  Cul-de-Sac’s promote the American suburban dream but really close us off to diversity.   How can the United States continue to be a world-class innovator when the places in which we dwell and move about stale development?


Debunking the Cul-de-Sac