Urban Place and Location
Under the notion of ontology, this study understands the things from the relationship between their concepts and historical presence in certain geographical context. Regarding concepts are contextually and historically related to each other; as a concept, place never stands alone as a socially isolated entity, for example, house: The concept is never understandable without owner, inhabitant, location, event, construction, form, material, etc. This interrelationship constructs systems or sets of the ecosystemic wholeness; the wholeness of a house is a place to stay for a family of certain people in a certain geographical location and certain period of time. Concepts related to placeāsuch as house, park, lake, market, shop, office, and schoolāare within the web of concepts that constructs the life-world. In other words, a place is a phenomenon social and geographical context that constructs the platform of reality for human habitation. Ontology of urban place is the theoretical construction of understanding what and why is the appealing location for urbanism important; this is in the context of the life-world as a transcendental and meaningful system of wholeness.
Culturally speaking, domains and districts in the urban area are conceptually functional which are articulated with the attributive, denotative, connotative, and adjective property, such as residential, industrial, recreational, commercial, and multifunctional. It is not by accidence that the category of urban places and domains reflects and represents the idea and value of purpose and preference as well as characteristic and identity. Domains are differentiated and distinguished according to their use, value, location, and dimension. However, beyond and behind the concepts of the domain, there is an ideological system that works to determine their presence sometimes in a contradictory way, for example, urban and rural, town and country, global and local, etc. Some domains are conceptually articulated without oppositional category but simply a denotation of use, characteristic or cipher such as park, square, street, road, path, and trail.
Urban Place in Space-Time
Space and time are indisputable archaic phenomena of being that construct the historical context of a thing; both are physically indefinable, infinite, and a priori in its reality. Space and time are a priori an archaic phenomenon because without both being and beings are impossible for experience. The question concerning space-time has been occupied philosophy from Western tradition since ancient Greek thinker of atomism Since Democritus (460ā370 B.C.). He understands the concept of space-time as the infinite, in which a particle moves or something is. Plato perceives space-time in Timaeus (48e4) in the context of chora; for him, chora is neither being nor nonbeing but the interval, in which the look of something gives or happens. Aristotle (384ā322 B.C.) in Book IV Physics elaborates the question of space-time in terms of topos as the site of happenings; this is considered a reinterpretation of Platoās chora in Timaeus within the experienceable context. Accordingly, Aristotle departs his discourse concerning space-time from the question of what it is; for him, space-time is the categorical components of topos, from which something must be somewhere spatiotemporally; topos is the site of happenings for something because there is energeia. The processes of transformation in the universe or cosmic nature are made possible because of this energeia. According to Aristotle, energeiaāpower, effort, energy, capacity, and potentiality (Beere 2009, 33)āworks within the cyclic system of aitia, in which what is received or gained as trust or gift should be given back with responsibility or reward as thankfulness (Heidegger, Basic Writings 1977, 289ā91). Aristotleās doctrine of aitia brings about cyclic process of energeia in full circle, in which the relationship between trust and responsibility as well as between presence and goodness (tā agathon kai to ariston, Nichomachean Ethics 1904a18ā23) comes into terms; this goodness is experienced as eudaimonia. Aristotle calls the full circle of energeia as telos; the notion of telos is often understood as finality but actually, it is a fulfillment of cyclic process of energeia.
The elaboration on space-time as category has been the work of Immanuel Kant (1791/1988) in his Critique of Pure Reason, Part I Transcendental Aesthetics; Space-Time, and Transcendental Idealism (Kant 1781/1990). Accordingly, space-time is a priori structure for the categories of the reality, presence, and possibility of things. Kant does not explore the relationship between place and space-time, but Heidegger does in the context of clearing. Heidegger describes space-time as the constitutive structure for the world in the sense of closeness or proximity, which is experienced in way of dealing with everyday comportment (Heidegger 1927/2010, Chapters 22 and 24). Space-time for Heidegger is not ever an extension of the thinking subject, but it is constitutive for the human existence; in Heideggerās thought, existence means standing out into the truth of being. Thus, space-time is already there prior to the existence of man as the site of the truthās happening. Nevertheless, the spatiotemporality is not thought by Heidegger as a matter but a clearing, which is discovered and experienced when the phenomena of closeness and orientation-direction come into being. Heideggerās clearing recalls us to Platoās chora that it is already there prior to any happening. As matter of fact, the possibility of being is categorically conditioned by the space-time awareness. Hence, the human existence is spatiotemporally conditional because the being of man is impossible without space-time (Ray 1991, 135).
Furthermore, a place is not a random area or arbitrary spot because it is ontologically associated with a destination of happenings about people and things. A thing is not a random matter or event, but it is something intentional that attracts and draws parts together as a system or a wholeness. Thus, a place is the site of things that implies it is the spatiotemporal location, condition, and position where and when the things happen. Questioning what and why a place is is indispensable to the quest of space-time in relation to the certain destiny of happenings. The question leads us to investigate the relationship between humankind and their destiny in space-time framework. Architecturally speaking, the space-time is the endless source of any possibility of providing people and things with places. However, Aristotle reminds us in Metaphysics on aitia that any gift contains responsibility. The generosity of space-time that provides people and things with the potential realm of happeningāPlato calls this potentiality as choraācomprises the responsibility of giving back with goodness and beauty. Aristotle understands this responsibility as the consequence of the cyclic transformation of energeia in terms of telos. Since everything through the transformation of energy takes place in space-time setting and context, place in terms of Aristotelian topos is the site of happenings with the quality of full circle or telos. In this sense, place is not any domain or location but the site that brings about the goodness according to its ontological destiny. Under the notion of ontological destiny, urban place is the site of urbanity or being urbane, in which people live, work, and play together to do their best and goodness as their thankfulness to what the resources have been given for their presence.
Concerning its space-time destiny, the urban place is not merely the location of settlement for certain number of populations and productions. Rather, the origin and the sense of urban place pertain to the purpose of community that is experienced as collective sense of purpose. The destiny of urban place cannot ignore the human call for the collective pursuit of growth in various fields. In order to understand the destiny of urban place, one needs to recognize the ontological boundary of town or city; this boundary is not a physical matter, but it is the collective mental states and affairs that spiritually drive and bring people together toward decisions and actions according to the principles of being urbane.
Architecturally speaking, the principle of being urbane for the built urban environment is the availability of safe, healthy, convenient, and attractive public domains for social interactions and gatherings. Accordingly, the urban place is a plastic artwork, in which the sense of its whole presence is experienced when its public realms are vibrantly occupied by the crowds. Heidegger signifies the sense of the plastic art as the embodiment of the truth of being in the work in its bestowing places (Heidegger 2007, 13). The truth of being in this sense is experienced by people as the integration of their presence and the place in infinite series of the now. Heidegger speaks of the happening of this truth in terms of Ereignis that the place gathers historically the fourfold of the worldly phenomenon; the fourfold encompasses the whole mortal and immortal properties, as well as the earthy materiality and heavenly spirituality. For Heidegger (2012), this happening unfolds and divulges the difference between withdrawing-preserving and emerging-revealing; in this event, humankind and being befit each other in a deep sway of being in sameness.
The place is not any spot (Locke 1841/2007, 97ā100; Creswell 2014, 66ā7). The place is characterized with a particular set of the occupied area with name or designation. Any appropriate designation of place is set up and fabricated to accommodate certain activities and collective interests. Urban places, in the context of public realms, are subjects to sociopolitical ideology (Mitchell 2003, 128) because they are the domains of the communal life-world of diverse populations, in which contestations, collaborations, and negotiations of power come into play. In democratic countries, such dynamics reveal and conceal the intentionality of urban collectivity so that people enjoy their freedom but sink into anonymous crowds.
As a matter of fact, the space-time of a location has its own destiny in terms of use and function in the whole system of urbanism from metropolitan, township, region, district/ward, subdivision, precinct, neighborhood to compound. The sense of place lies in its manifestly unfolded locality (Massey 1994, 151ā3). Accordingly, locality comprises demography, topography, layout position, geographic orientation, property, architectural feature, and landscape characteristics. The locality of urban place is demographically characterized by highly concentrated populations, geographically situated in a complex layout of settlement, and a network of utilities. The locality of a place is established with a collective memory of the populations, which supports its life-world.
However, the sense of local place is not merely the site of happening for occasional encounters. Rather, the locality of a place is the outcome of historical cultivation of events. The rituals and regular festivals enhance and enrich such cultivation with collectively shared memory among the populations. The phenomenal events constitute the structure of personal and collective memory (Jordan 2003, 31ā8) that matter for the establishment of local history and the sense of home. Being away from such a place will recall the sense of longing for its people. The relationship between people and places unfolds and uncovers the destiny of home in the cosmological realm. This destiny is recognized through familiarity and habitation. This experience builds up the identification of people with their place. A self-identification to place is nothing personal but the sense of belonging to a community and settlement. Such a self-identification brings about the space-time intimacy of people with their place in terms of home or stead. The memory of places recalls people for their gratitude to what has been given by space-time to their existence and growth. Establishing memorial structures and naming of places after certain persons are the way to express the gratitude of community to people and place, which are historically associated with the space-time locality of the area. Space-time provides people with the connection of people to their built environment. Space-time is inseparable from what it is now. Something happens is always to take space and time into experience. Being as presence correlates oneās space-time to āthe right nowā that brings about personally lived experience; the experience is based on the series of moments that comprise the unity of when and where into one occasion.
Urban Place and Aesthetics
Regarding space-time quality, public domains are the architectural things with the spatial permeability, accessibility, and fluidity for human movements. The permeability of public domain is made possible because of its spaciousness and connectivity with paths and other domains. Meanwhile, the accessibility of a public domain includes safe and convenient accesses by foot, strollers, and wheelchairs. However, as architectural works, public domains need to be in the network of public paths and areas so that they are not isolated from public accessibility for function and fire safety. The space-time quality of public domains provides people with the opportunity of leisure and relaxation with visual interactions and communications. Aesthetically speaking, attractive public realms are provided with a well-designed form of landscape and fixtures that befits specific designations,...