РОССИЙСКО-АРМЯНСКИЙ УНИВЕРСИТЕТ

In this paper, the concept of urban ideology – a cultural system that influences modern cities – is explored. Urban planning and development techniques alter urban environments not only physically but also in social dynamics and public interactions. Urban ideologies, which have their roots in historical, political, economic, and cultural elements, are crucial in determining the personality and course of development of a city. The article explores three contrasting urban ideologies: modernist (right), new (left), and hipster (third). In the 18th and 19th centuries, modernist urbanism, which was founded on efficiency and economic expansion, began to take shape. Top-down decision-making was given priority, leading to the high-density, industrialized urban areas typified by people like Charles Le Corbusier and Robert Moses. Jane Jacobs’ new urbanism, in contrast, places a strong emphasis on social cohesion, inclusivity, and communal well-being. To promote a sense of community among people, this ideology places a high priority on walkable communities, mixed-use areas, and decentralized decision-making. The hipster urbanism, or third urbanism, reconceives cities as venues for creative expression and sensory experiences. This philosophy, promoted by Jan Gehl, puts people first and creates pedestrian-friendly, lively surroundings where urban areas serve as venues for social interactions and activities. Recognizing that no city is defined by a single ideology, the article introduces dimensions and measures for each urban ideology. To understand a city’s prevailing ideology across different dimensions, including management, architecture, nature, control, lifestyle, and symbols, “ideal models” and a tool called “The Mayor” are presented. This article clarifies how urban ideologies influence cities and offers a framework for evaluating urban planning and development initiatives. Urban planners and politicians may create more livable and vibrant cities by making decisions that are informed by their communities’ values and ambitions and by having a better understanding of these beliefs.

Keywords: urban ideology, modernist or right urbanism, new or left urbanism, third or hipster urbanism, Charles Le Corbusier, Robert Moses, Jan Gehl, Jane Jacobs.

References

Ballon, H., & Jackson, K. T. (2007). Robert Moses and the modern city: The transformation of New York. W. W. Norton & Company.

Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14–25. Clarke, J. (2015). Stuart Hall and the theory and practice of articulation. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36(2), 275–286.

Connolly, J. J. (2008). Decentering urban history: Peripheral cities in the modern world. Journal of Urban History, 35(1), 3–14.

Dei, G. J. S. (1995). Integrative anti-racism: Intersection of race, class, and gender. Race, Gender & Class, 2(3), 11–30.

Fishman, R. (1982). Urban utopias in the twentieth century: Ebenezer Howard, Frank Lloyd Wright, Le Corbusier. MIT Press.

Gehl, J. (2011). Life between buildings: Using public space. Island Press. Gehl, J. (2013). Cities for people. Island Press.

Gehl, J., & Gemzøe, L. (1996). Public spaces. Public life. The Danish Architectural Press and Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, School of Architectural Publishers.

Glazychev, V. L. (2008). Urbanistics. Europe Publishing. (In Russian).

Harvey, D. (2015). The right to the city. In R. T. LeGates & F. Stout (Eds.), The City Reader. (pp. 314–322). Routledge.

Hummon, D. M. (1985). Urban ideology as a cultural system. Journal of Cultural Geography, 5(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/08873638509478545

Jacobs, J. (1992). The Death and Life of Great American Cities, reissue edition. Vintage.

Kallinen, Y., & Häikiö, L. (2021). Individualization of disadvantaged young people’s agency. Journal of Youth Studies, 24(1), 110–125.

Lagopoulos, A. P. (2009). The social semiotics of space: Metaphor, ideology, and political economy. Semiotica, 173, 169–213.

Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Blackwell Publishing.

Lefebvre, H. (2002). Propositions pour un nouvel urbanisme (S. A. Efirov, Trans.). The Russian Sociological Review, 2(3), 19–26. (in Russian).

Lefebvre, H. (2003). The urban revolution. University of Minnesota Press.

Merin, G. (2013, August 11). AD Classics: Ville Radieuse / Le Corbusier. ArchDaily. https://www.archdaily.com/411878/ad-classics-ville-radieuse-le-corbusier.

Monclús, J., & Díez Medina, C. (2018). Modern urban planning and modernist urbanism (1930–1950). In C. Díez Medina & J. Monclús (Eds.), Urban Visions: From Planning Culture to Landscape Urbanism. (pp. 33–44). Springer.

Ostrogorsky, A. (2011, December 8). Interview with Jan Gehl: “The main thing is not the buildings, but what is between them”. The Afisha Daily. https://daily.afisha.ru/ar- chive/gorod/archive/jan-gehl/ (In Russian).

Smith, P. D. (2012). City: A guidebook for the urban age. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Steele, B. J., & Homolar, A. (2019). Ontological insecurities and the politics of contemporary populism. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 32(3), 214–221.

Tilly, C. (1996). What good is urban history? Journal of Urban History, 22(6), 702–719. Tuan, Y.-F. (1977). Space and place: The perspective of experience. University of Minnesota Press.

Vermishyan, H. (2021). Ideological and cultural practices in the Soviet housing space: The case of allocation and obtaining of apartments in Yerevan. Studies of Transition States and Societies, 13(2), 23–38.

Vermishyan, H., & Michikyan, S. (2020). The transformation of urban public space of post-soviet Yerevan: The case of Northern Avenue. Journal of Sociology: Bulletin of Yerevan University, 11(1 (31)), 3–15.

Vakhshtayn, V. S. (2014). Reassembling the City: Between Language and Space. Sociology of Power, 2, 9–38. (In Russian).

Vakhshtayn, V. S. (2015, July 31). Urban ideologies [Video]. Lectorium of “City Projects”, Episode 11. (In Russian).

Information about the authors
Harutyun R. Vermishyan
Cand. Sci. (Sociology),
Head of the Theory and
History of Sociology Department
Yerevan State University
1, Alex Manoogian St., Yerevan, 0025, Armenia
ORCID: 0000-0003-2464-0072
Scopus AuthorID: 57189257650
e-mail: [email protected]

Srbuhi G. Michikyan
PhD student at the Faculty of Sociology
Yerevan State University
1, Alex Manoogian St., Yerevan, 0025, Armenia
ORCID: 0009-0002-1245-8134
e-mail: [email protected]

Armine N. Ghalamdaryan
PhD student at the Faculty of Sociology
Yerevan State University
1, Alex Manoogian St., Yerevan, 0025, Armenia
ORCID: 0000-0003-3786-1624
e-mail: [email protected]

For citation:

Vermishyan, H. R., Michikyan, S. G., & Ghalamdaryan, A. N (2023). Urban ideologies: Theoretical backgrounds, dimensions, and measures. Urbis et Orbis. Microhistory and Semiotics of the City, 3(2), 189–205. https://doi.org/10.34680/urbis-2023-3(2)-189-205

Urban ideologies: Theoretical backgrounds, dimensions, and measures

ORCID: 0000-0003-3786-1624

References

НАШИ ПАРТНЁРЫ