Summary of a Summary: Nersessova on Morton’s In the Tunnel

In “Tapestry of Space: Domestic Architecture and Underground Communities in Margaret Morton’s Photography of a Forgotten New York” Irina Nersessova provides a interpretation, criticism, and analysis on the pictures in Margaret Morton’s “The Tunnel”. She starts her introduction by explaining the contents of “The Tunnel” as well as provides a background on the many different photographs. After that she then explains Situationist International and explains that their views will guide this discussion. After explaining symbolism of the homeless and home we are left with a definition to describe the homeless: it is described as the absence of having a stable home. Irina explains the background of the Situational International, a group that from 1957=1972 focused on everyday life through the spectacle (the spectacle of society’s consumption through image promotion). The Situational’s goals were to only view everyday life and eliminate bias between art and life, so they employ the technique of the derive (also drift) to gain awareness on the enviroment’s effect on one’s behavior. The role of the urban photographer is explained in the next passage, where one is explained on the history of the derive. It starts with the flaneur, one that practices flanerie, which plays the two roles of a regular stroller of careful observer who studies a social environment. Morton employs this technique in the tunnel to capture many events from dweller’s efforts to make homes to outsider efforts to destroy them. As she travels these tunnels, she shows actual spaces that are alive and taken care of, which incriminates “those who do not respond to the forced removal of the homeless and their self-created homes” (Irina). According to Irina the homeless utilizes their environment differently as “ they do not treat the environment as a commodity” (Irina). Nersessova then explains psychogeography and claims that it is a rejection of imperialism. Psychogeography attempts to combine the objective and subjective views on the environment, and then analyzes these views to create a social geography of the city. Situationist were liked this idea because it theorized “space as the product of society” (Irina) and it was a more expanded than reductionist view on the city. In the Public Space vs. City Attractions section Nersessova moves towards the end of Morton’s book, where the tunnel is in the process of being closed. This shows another move to exclude these homeless, just as the homeless have found an adequate home for themselves, a move by the city (predominately rich people) issues the destruction of these homes. Nersessova then references Debord, who claims that psychogeography “sets for itself the study of the precise laws and specific effects of the geographical environment, whether consciously organized or not, on the emotions and behavior of individuals”. This goes into a discussion of psychogeographical maps, which a Situationist likes to reinterpret. In her domestic architecture and conclusion, Nersessova explains that domestic architecture is a new understanding of structural design. She also explains the conflict with the homeless creating space and how Morton celebrates their power of creativity. Nersessova ends with a call to action, urging policy makers to addresses and subscribe to a new vision of architecture. Ending by explaining that “the environment responds to every human action as an interaction, regardless of whether such response is foreseen” (Irina).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *