No. 52-53 (2020): Coronavirus City Architecture. Prospects of the architectural and urban design
Articles

Pandemic versus collective space? Towards a topology of care

HTML (Italiano) HTML PDF (Italiano) PDF
  • Silvana Segapeli
Silvana Segapeli
ENSASE Ecole nationale supérieure d'architecture de Saint-Etienne
Bio
FAMagazine. Research and projects on architecture and the city
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12838/fam/issn2039-0491/n52-53-2020/502

Published 2020-12-11

Keywords

  • Commons,
  • common spaces,
  • urban design,
  • urban regeneration,
  • care

How to Cite

Segapeli, S. (2020). Pandemic versus collective space? Towards a topology of care. FAMagazine. Research and Projects on Architecture and the City, (52-53), 184–188. https://doi.org/10.12838/fam/issn2039-0491/n52-53-2020/502
Copyright Notice

Abstract

During this health crisis a miracle has occurred. Beyond its tragic and painful aspects, the breach of confinement rules has led to unexpected changes, profoundly altering urban scenarios that were believed long established. With the lockdown over, attempts are now being made to design new biopolitical scenarios and define priority themes for a post-crisis urban regeneration, in terms of the constitution of social innovation practices and regarding the stimulation of urban cultures and policies, aimed at a greater care of the multitude of subjectivity of which the civitas is made up.

Within this framework, the theme of care represents an important challenge for a new epistemology of the crisis, on which to implant experimental policies of shared administration, new visionary capacities and renewed practices of communing.

HTML (Italiano) HTML PDF (Italiano) PDF

References

  1. AGAMBEN G. (2017) – Creazione e anarchia. L’opera nell’età della religione capitalistica. Neri Pozza Editore. Vicenza
  2. AGAMBEN G. (2001) – La comunità che viene. Bollati Boringhieri. Torino
  3. ANTONIOLI M. (2017) – “Le stade esthétique de la production/consommation et la révolution du temps choisi”. Multitude 69
  4. BIANCHETTI C. (2015) – Territoires partagés. MetisPresses. Ginevra
  5. BONSIEPE G. (2017) – “Design et démocratie” in J. Fezer et M. Gorlich (a cura di) Civic city. Notes pour le design d’une ville sociale, Éditions B42, Parigi
  6. BOULLIER D. (2014) – “Médiologie des régimes d'attention”, in Y. Citton (a cura di), L’économie de l’attention. Nouvel horizon du capitalisme ?, La Découverte, Parigi
  7. CAILLE A. (2011) – “Du convivialisme vu comme un socialisme radicalisé et universalisé (et réciproquement)”, in Alain Caillé et al. (a cura di), De la convivialité. Dialogues sur la société conviviale à venir, La Découverte, Parigi
  8. CITTON Y. (2018) – “Ré-ouvrir un horizon post-capitaliste ?”. AOC Media- Analyse Opinion Critique (aprile)
  9. DARDOT P., LAVAL C. (2014) – Commun. Essai sur la révolution au XXI siècle, La Découverte, Parigi
  10. HARDT M., NEGRI A. (2009) – Commonwealth, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
  11. HARVEY D. (2015) – La crisi della modernità, (Titolo originale : The Condition of Postmodernity, 1990, traduzione dall’inglese di Viezzi), Il Saggiatore, Milano
  12. HARVEY D. (2011) – Le capitalisme contre le droit à la ville. Néoliberalisme, urbanisation, résistances, (Tradotto dall’inglese da Le Roy, Vieillescazes, Garrot, Gross), Éditions Amsterdam, Parigi
  13. RANCIÈRE J. (2000) – Le partage du sensible. Esthétique et politique. La Fabrique Éditions. Parigi
  14. ROSA H. (2020) – « Le miracle et le monstre – un regard sociologique sur le Coronavirus ». AOC media - Analyse Opinion Critique (aprile)
  15. SENNETT R. (2000) – La Conscience de l’œil : urbanisme et société, (Titolo originale : The Conscience of the Eye: The design and social life of cities, Faber and Faber, 1991, traduzione dall’inglese di Dill) Verdier, Parigi
  16. TYRWHITT J. (a cura di) (1947) – Patrick Geddes in India, Lund Humphries, Londra