Al Zone Media.
Welcome to Kaben Here. I'm Andrew Sage from the UTUE channel.
Andrewism and today you will be shedding light on a recently popular discussion on the problems with modern cities and more specifically the growing absence of third places. Now love them or hate them, cities are here to stay and if you spend any time on urban plan and YouTube, or really just looked around, you know they have some issues.
Traffic congestion is a big one, a notorious nemesis of modern cities, stemming from increased population, poort uban planning, and excessive vehicle usage, creating a big waste of time and streaming our well being. There are also issues of physical and mental health among city inhabitants.
The environmental impact of luban areas can be quite terrible. Housing issues seem to be globally hellish, but still be People flock to cities because that's where the opportunities are. Hence the growth of slums and the overall straining infrastructure like utilities and transportation, and the functionality of cities, many of which are currently well above their capacity. Of course, many of these issues just don't touch the wealthy in
the same way. Within the city's gleaming skyscrapers lie stock disparities and income access to resources and opportunities. I for another issue, more relevantile discussionaire. In the midst of a crowd, even dwellers often grapple with feelings of loneliness and disconnection. The paradox are being surrounded by people yet feeling totally alone.
In a seminar work, The Great Good Place, published in nineteen eighty nine, American sociologist Ray Olenberg presents a captivator notion for a balance and fulfilling life, a harmony among the three spheres, the home, of the workplace, and the.
Realm of third places.
These third places encompass inclusive social settings crucial for community bonding and foster and meaningful interactions. Now, as for what qualifies a third place, common examples come to mind cafes, pubs, stoops, parks. However, not every cafe, pubs, stupa park captures the essence of a true third place as Oldenburg described it. Historically, their places have been a powerful force in shaping the course of revolutions and cultural movements. During the American Revolution, the
tavern was a vital health of political discourse. In the French Revolution, the cafe was a crucial meeting place for the revolutionary, intelligentia and common people. During the Enlightenment, coffeehouses in London assumed a central role in foster and the intellectual and cultural transformation of society, and during the Harlem Renaissance, third places could be found in theaters, churches, jazz cafes and more, servin as vital he events for African American musicians, writers, intellectuals,
the source to develop and celebrate cultural identity. Oldenberg outlines eight key characteristics that define the allure of these communal spaces. He takes a rather strict approach, and this is key, emphasizing that his description excludes the maturity of venues even
if they exhibit some of these defining traits. And I suppose you can argue with that, but I think that's equival I've had with the discussions about third places because people seem to be more infatuated with the vague idea of them and not so much interested in what the term has actually been coined to describe. See end with people label in all sorts of spaces, clubs, and organizations
third places, even if they don't fit the criteria. At this point, the Internet has seemingly lost the plot on third places and it's taken a life on its own independent of what Oldenburg intended. But he's dead. His book is still around, but I don't think a lot of people have read it. But I did in preparation for this, and so we'll tell them some of those characteristics now.
For one, a third place lies on neutral ground.
No one is expected to play host for the others, no one is obligated to be there, and people are comfortable and free to come and go as they please. Three places are spaces where people can jest, be where you can where opportunities can exist for fraternization in a safe public setting that car be found in the privacy of the home or the professional boundary of the workplace.
A space where a variety.
Of relationships can blossom, including the ones that don't go any deeper than friendly public encounters.
Secondly, the third place is a level in place.
It requires no formal criteria for membership in places, no emphasis on one's social status, and provides the possibility for people of a variety of backgrounds and experiences to associate on the merit of their personality alone. Within third places, people can find friendships with those who, under ordinary circumstances, never cross paths. The third characteristic of a third place is there's a place in which conversation is meant to be the main activity.
It does not have to be the only activity.
For example, card games or pool or dominoes make for an excellent social lubricant, but the space should be comfortable enough to facilitate pleasurable, lighthearted, and entertaining conversation. Now, it is that difficult to create a space that can facilitate good conversation, but it's also easy to ruin the flow of good conversation. Music, personal screens, ecosistical people. They can all be quite ruinous to the social energy that a good third place tries to foster.
Fourthly, third places need to be open and readily accessible.
That means being accessible in the sense of being in a convenient location and open whenever the demons is lowliness, mportant strike, or when the depressures and frustrations of the day call for relaxation.
A mid good company.
In other words, third places are available when people need them to be. Now, the form of accessibility that will in build iscribes is not the form of accessibility that Disability Justice advocates five for, and that is one of the quibbles that I have with Rosenberg's conception of third places that are get into later.
Next.
Third places are given their appeal by their regulars, who help set the mood of the space and provide a welcoming environment for newcomers. Every regular was once a newcomer, and the acceptance of newcomers is essential to there sustained vitality of the third place. Sixth, third places keep a low profile. They're not exclusive, extravagant, potentious to overly fancy. They're usually openly advertised, and they seem to be older places with a sort of a modest or even CD atmosphere. They're
certainly not tourist traps. Seventh, and we're almost done. Third places have a playful mood. It will go to third places for the banter and the laughter, not tension and hostility. So that's what the space is set up to encourage.
See number eight.
Third places are meant to be home away from home, offering a sense of intimacy, regeneration, and community that puts people at ease in a warm and friendly atmosphere. So to summarize, third places exist on neutral ground, function as equalizers or social stallus. Provide an environment where conversations are the center, keep a low profile, are open and accommodating, have an essence shape by their regulars, characterized by playfulness and a sense of home away from home. Third places,
with their unique characteristics, present an array of advantages. There are only enhanced individual social and conversational skills, but also foster a sense of genuine connection and belonging within the community. Third places are arrested for the monot need daily life under the weight of modern capitalism. They inject much needed novelty into our routines, often a diverse and free flow in atmosphere that stands apart from the rigidity of our daily grind.
They are a bond for.
Emotional wellbeing, a spiritual tonic and the loss that's happen to our creative and expressive selves. Crucially, third places offer what Oldenburg coined as friends by the set. They provide convenience spaces for social gatherings, offering routine and reliable interactions with a diverse array of individuals both casually and intimately,
without the hassle of scheduling meetups. Unfortunately, third places kind of fell off in many areas, obviously not everywhere, but especially in places where American style urban sprawl and suburbia has proliferated. I've been describing the characteristics and benefits and historical potency of these spaces, but I've only gotten small tastes of some of these myself and for a lot
of people, I think, particularly of my generation. Besides, perhaps the approximate experience of a college common room, third places are a distant cultural memory, not a lived experience. So Oldenburg basically asks what's up with that? And, according to him, the blame for this spanisional falls squarely on the suburbs. These sprawl and enclaves prioritized private abodes over public spaces, perfatuating and isolated narrative that confines the good life within
individual homes and yards. Suburban designs, often imposed by distant developers, stifle community connections. Few opportunities exist within them for organic social interaction beyond your immediate neighbors. The car centric layout further thoughts the revival of the placers, as reliance and cars diminishes chances and counters, and informal gathering spots along daily routes, fostering a culture of detachment among neighbors. But
it's not just the suburbs suffering this issue. Urban environments too have succumbed to efficiency and profit sacrifice in space for genuine human connection. Standardized franchise chains dominate eras in the character and charm that encourage communal interaction, replacing it sterile environments. And technology hasn't exactly aided third places either, as the alert of the Internet has been a substitute for real life interaction that tends to.
Keep people indoors.
Sure, you can see the Internet as the frontier for new third places, and in some ways they are, but not quite in the same way. And of course, I mean unless qual its out, even though Wordenberg doesn't. Capitalism plays a significant role in the decline of third places. Work life imbalances leave scant time for social engagements to relentless cmercialization, prioritization of public spaces, gentrification, close intraditional hubs, and profit driven urban designs all contribute to this decline.
The disappearance of third places.
Isn't an accident of history, but a consequence of our modern societal choices.
And systemic pressures.
So all those ideas have been catched on a lot lately, especially with younger generations. Like I said, it's this distant yet learned cultural memory for obvious reasons, though things kind of suck right now, and a lot of people are taken a half understood grasp of the concept and running wild with it, Like for example, I will see some people like just Blankets applying the.
Internet as the new third place.
And while there are corners of the Internet that do approximate that experience, and I recognize the potential of virtual spaces such as discord to embody the characteristics of third places, I fully believe that virtual third places lack the tangible elements inherent in traditional spaces that are essential for fostering deep emotional connections and empathy that are fighter for healthy
community life. These social media platforms, particularly sites like Twitter, often lack the authenticity and nuanced communication present and face to face interactions. That's by design, of course, Twitter thrives on conflict. That's why I'm not there anymore. But it's all too easy on sites like those the miss interpret intentions or to use anonymity for negative interactions like cyber.
Bullion, trolling, or online harassment.
In real life, trolls get kicked out, bulliers, in some cases are dealt with people who are harassing people also tend to get kicked out, but online all those things often run rampant. Moreover, the permanents of online interactions can hinder the relaxed vulnerability often experience in traditional spaces, as everything is recorded, which makes trust easier to breach.
But despite my critique of how.
Some people have been run in with the term third places, I think the actual book and its concepts do deserve furtherest rutiny, and in my view, articalization will in book's idea of the whole in the workplace. In the third place is a sort of a pecking order. It also really sidelines domestic labor as like not really work as if it's separate from the workplace, And I also don't like the idea of work being prioritized over like essential social interaction.
I think there's also the interesting aspect now that for a lot of people like myself included, working home are now the same spot and there is. Ever since the pandemic, there's been a large searge of people working from home, which kind of complicates this dynamic.
Yeah, yeah, pre industrialization. I think especially that idea also coincide it.
You know, the first and the second place, the home in the workplace, we're also a bit blurred, and now I think we're witness in a similar blurred today, you know, post industrialization, and as a consequence of the pandemic with remote would work really catching on and blearing those lines for sure. I think another major oversighting Oldenbook's work is the gender bias within.
Historical and contemporary three places.
You know, these spaces have been predominantly male dominated or gender segregated. I think it's nostalgia for three places, which you kind of pick up on in the book, neglects the historical limitations to women face and accessing these spaces. So I think if three Places words make a resurgence, we would definitely need to address these systemic barriers, like the double shift that many women juggle to ensure their inclusion in future three places. I think another critique I
would have is on ownership control. You know, third spaces are touted as neutral, but when they're operating under the whims of private owners or state authorities, they very easily succumb to those profit driven motives.
I don't think a community.
Space, a space that is to be sent that is central to a community, should be so concentrated in the hands of private developers or private owners. I think those spaces are the types that should be collectively stewarded. There's also the cost barrier of food places, you know, due to financial constraints. I have already's able to you know, spend the time there and spend the kind of money there that those spaces kind of require for you to stay there for extended periods of time.
They kind of have to buy something in all of those places.
A lot of the places are alcohol oriented, which is not exactly inclusive for people who are not interested in alcohol consumption or recovering from addiction. But of course, speaking of inclusivity, Willenberg's idea of accessibility, like I said before, doesn't really come from a place of disability justice. But that has to change, you know, we need a broader grasp of accessibility, which is why, despite my critiques, I do acknowledge the merits of what are often termed as
virtual third places. They save us more accessible alternatives for the immunal compromise or disabled individuals. These places break down geographical barriers, uniting people from diverse backgrounds, locations, fostering connections based on shared interests, passions, and identities with all the constraints of physical distance. And unlike physical third places, virtual third places are offered around the clock case into us as diverse lifestyles and rhythms, offering a flexibility that is
really rarely found in real life settings. At the same time, though in Oullenberg's defense, he does point out that third places will not resonate with everyone. There is this popular notion that third places have to be for everybody, and then I see people criticize them, saying, oh, well, I prefer to just stay at home. I don't really like the places. I don't like social interaction or whatever, or I don't like that form of social interaction.
And that's cool.
You know, third places shouldn't be the sole remedy or the main remedy.
For social ills.
Preferences will, of course vary, and not everyone finds cafes or bars appealing, which is fine. But I still think we can radicalize third places a bit further, not just in the sense of diversifying it, but also in the sense of bringing it under popular power. You see radical to places in my vision on content to merely existing
on neutral ground dictated by capital or state initiatives. Know the envisions collective grounds, common grounds where individuals not only frequent but co own these spaces invest in time, energy, and resources to ensure their survival. Imagine spaces that transcend the typical lightheartedness associated with third places. They wield the power to spark social revolutions, serving as zones for decompression, rallying spots for union activities, and nurturing ground for mutual aid,
a nucleus of community driven change. But what setige radical spaces apart is not just the accessibility in location, operating hours, but also a culture of inclusivity that goes beyond nostalgia for traditionally male dominated three places. You know, it's about welcoming or broad a spectrum of perspectives againsties and abilities. Imagine that's not just a space away from home, but integrated with the neighborhoods and mixed use buildings.
Fostering community into creation.
As for how we bring these radical three places to life, the road Flora in Hamburg, Germany, I think provides some great inspiration.
Formerly a theater.
It was transformed into a political and cultural hub by activists in nineteen eighty nine. Today it stands as a symbol of resistance against against social injustice and a space pulsating with artistic expression and vibrant dialogue.
Achieved that place through squatting.
And squatting is risky revolutionary, but it isn't the only path for secure in such spaces. I think we can mobilize communities, empowering them to actively participate in shape in public spaces instead of waiting for decisions from above. I really like the idea of camera where the same comes from.
But it's.
Gorilla urban planning.
You know, painting lines on the pavement for bike paths, you know, reclaiming the sidewalk, claiming spaces in your neighborhood, taking control and not asking for permission to shape the park or the spaces that you share as you see fit. It's really about, you know, co creating our environment. It's not merely accepting what's imposed upon us. Reformist strategies in instances like these can have their merits.
They don't exactly advance revolution, but.
You know, advocating for walkable neighborhood to improve public transportation doesn't you know, it doesn't hoot. But the crooks remain, you know, these actions, these pushing, this effort to push for reform. You know it can solely accomplish potentially some change, But the crux remains, you know, empowering people to manage their own lives and spaces, not relinquishing that power to
uncare and autocrats. The decline of third places might not be catastrophic, but until we recognize and harness our power to shape physical environments, our urban social life will continue to lack of vibrancy. I think we have to acknowledge our profound influence and our surroundings and seize our agency to actively craft our spaces.
All power to all the people. This is Andrew, This is a good peace.
It could happen here as a production of cool Zone Media. For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website coolzonemedia dot com, or check us out on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can find sources for It Could Happen Here, updated monthly at coolzonemedia dot com slash sources. Thanks for listening,