Yule Heibel on 2007-12-28
- "then"
This link has been bookmarked by 2 people . It was first bookmarked on 28 Dec 2007, by Yule Heibel.
- discussion of Starbucks coffee house culture as locative networked culture where people "camp" with their media (laptop etc) to work, network, inform themselves -- but they're not by a long shot isolating themselves from other people. In fact, they choose these locations b/c of what they offer in terms of ambience, connection with others, feel, and culture. Calls into question Habermas's bleak assessment of the death of coffee house culture...
culture locative_media media mobility sociability socialtheory society starbucks urbanism
- discussion of Starbucks coffee house culture as locative networked culture where people "camp" with their media (laptop etc) to work, network, inform themselves -- but they're not by a long shot isolating themselves from other people. In fact, they choose these locations b/c of what they offer in terms of ambience, connection with others, feel, and culture. Calls into question Habermas's bleak assessment of the death of coffee house culture...
culture locative_media media mobility sociability socialtheory society starbucks urbanism
Yule Heibel on 2007-12-28
- "then"
Yule Heibel on 2007-12-28
- "now"
Yet other more empirical research studies, such as Portable objects in three global cities: the personalization of urban places by Ito, Anderson and Okabe show that this binary opposition is too simplistic. In the article they describe a number of tactics through which people appropriate urban space. One of them is camping:
One brings a personal media device and works with it in a public space. Yet the goal is not to completely shut off public space, the public space is especially chosen because one finds it an agreeable location to work from. Like reading a paper in a café rather than at home. … They put down roots that have temporal limits, but are more extended than commuters who are simply passing through.
Camping is not so much about shutting out the environment: ‘people saw value in residing for a period of time in a desirable location. Just as people seek out beautiful campsites to set out there gear and reside for short periods of time, urbanites find attractive public places to temporarily set up camp with the help of their information technologies.’ For campers Starbucks is not a proverbial non-place, but a local place they engage with, where they perform their identity, yet at the same time keep in touch with absent others, still being part of their ‘full-time intimate communities’
Yule Heibel on 2007-12-28
- think about the difference btw "camping" and old coffee house culture...
We argue that culture is no longer localized in time and space, but neither is it non-place. Instead, individuals inhabit a physical world of simultaneous environments, of localized time and space as well as of multiple telematic worlds in which they can be co-present with others at a distance.
Yet, this still leaves some questions. To what extent are the sites of Starbucks-urbanism parochial rather than public spaces? And if they are mainly parochial, to what extend is that a threat to urban culture? Are critics clinging on to old, nostalgic ideas about a public culture? Or could new locative media ‘discovery’ services introduce new forms of contingency into Starbucks-urbanism?
Public Stiky Notes
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.