The article Tapestry of Space: Domestic Architecture and Underground Communities in Margaret Morton’s Photography of a Forgotten New York discusses how the art of studying urban areas came to be, how the city of New York have difficulties with the homeless living in public space opposes to the cities’ attractions and domestic architecture. I will be going into depth about domestic architecture and public space vs. city attractions.
According to Nersessova, homeless people are more similar to home owners than people would like to think. In reality, home owners have just about the same amount of control over their own space as the homeless do. But the difference is that the homeless people deal with the reality of their homes potentially getting taken away, while home owners make themselves believe that they have all the control of their own homes She also states how the people in the tunnel technically are not “homeless”. Those people build homes inside of the tunnel. She notes on how the city should allow them to live in parts of the city that are not being used. And by doing so that will take away stereotypes and the sense of charity from the homeless. They are consider inferior to the rest of society. She concludes that the homeless really don’t need handouts. They just need their own living spaces.
Nersessova writes that homeless people use the tunnels for homes but the tunnels are public spaces and since they are the spaces are regulated by the law. For example, the Amtrak police locked up parts of the tunnel and warned the homeless if they trespass, they will get arrested. Sarah tries to example the differences between an actual public space or place and a city attraction. She states how the locking up parts of the tunnel affect the rest of the city. Those parts of the city are no longer getting utilized and now the homeless has to find somewhere else to stay. The homeless are now forced to live in public parks and libraries in the richest parts of the city since parks and libraries are shut down in the more urban parts. The richest parts of the city is where the most tourists go. But now there are more homeless people in these upper, richer areas which causes the tourists to stay away. They intend to lose potential business and are sucking the beauty away from the city.
In conclusion, Nersessova just want people to understand how homeless utilizes parts of New York no one uses but yet won’t let the homeless use it. She explains the disconnection between them and the rest of the world and the effects both parties’ experiences. She also goes in depth about the differences between public space and city attractions. The public spaces are technically not open to everyone. The homeless wasn’t welcomed and their presence in the rich parts of the city steer tourists away and because of that the city lose profits. But the people of city did this to themselves.
Leave a Reply