{"id":1747,"date":"2016-11-07T23:55:04","date_gmt":"2016-11-07T15:55:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thesis.arch.hku.hk\/2016\/?p=1747"},"modified":"2016-11-08T16:53:28","modified_gmt":"2016-11-08T08:53:28","slug":"not-just-for-fun-playgrounds-for-spatial-identity-and-equality","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/thesis.arch.hku.hk\/2016\/not-just-for-fun-playgrounds-for-spatial-identity-and-equality\/","title":{"rendered":"Not just for fun: playgrounds for spatial identity and equality"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/p>\n
The thesis is a response to the monotonous playground environment in Hong Kong and the invasion\u00a0of public leisure spaces by government and private enterprises. The\u00a0potentials of in-situ, interactive\u00a0playgrounds that adapts to\u00a0multiple user groups will be explored.\u00a0It will be a contemplation on the value of playgrounds and leisure culture\u00a0in the urban environment. The thesis may go further to experiment on means of combining the playground with other leisure programmes to create a comprehensive play space in an architectural scale.<\/p>\n
Playgrounds foster community participation and interaction. Different from theme parks, playgrounds are embedded in the everyday lives and therefore have a much more significant contribution to the lived and urban experience. The aim is to use playgrounds as a means to engage the community to bring character to a place. On a political\u00a0level, playgrounds can promote\u00a0a liberal, egalitarian\/democratic way of social interactions. Interactive playgrounds also empower the people to take the design and use of public leisure spaces back into their own hands.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
1. A critique of Hong Kong’s public leisure spaces<\/span><\/p>\n Restricted, discriminatory leisure<\/em><\/p>\n J\u00fcrgen<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>Habermas<\/em> once wrote about the decay of the public sphere in a capitalist society. “In the past publicity was used to subject people or the present political decisions to the public. Today the public sphere is recruited for the use of hidden policies by interest groups.<\/em>“[1]<\/p>\n The situation in Hong Kong is proof of Habermas<\/em>‘ writing.\u00a0Public leisure spaces today are gradually being privatized by government and corporations, which compromised people’s freedom.\u00a0An increasing number of public leisure spaces\u00a0are under the management of developers\/ corporations. In 2008, the ground floor plaza of Times Square was\u00a0revealed to be rented out by the developer for profit, while according to Buildings Department regulation, the space belongs to “areas within private properties dedicated for public use<\/em>” [2]. The incident sparked an awareness of Hong Kong’s public spaces which prompted the government to implement the Public Open Space in Private Developments (POSPD) Design and Management Guidelines<\/em> in 2011. However the guidelines are poorly enforced. In addition, poorly situated\/ badly designed playgrounds also impose a multitude of\u00a0physical restrictions such as difficulty in access and pollution.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\nTimes Square, Causeway Bay. Nominee for “The Worst Public Space”, Hong Kong Public Space Initiative Facebook Page, accessed Nov 7 2016.
\n(A privately owned public space. People’s use of the space is under surveillance of security guards and can be evicted if failing to comply to their rules. )<\/h5>\nNominee for “The Worst Public Space”, Hong Kong Public Space Initiative Facebook Page, accessed Nov 7 2016.
\n(The children’s playground is so hidden that almost no one except residents know its existence. The large open space is left mostly underused.)<\/h5>\nSai On Lane Children’s Playground, Sai Ying Pun. Nominee for “The Worst Public Space”, Hong Kong Public Space Initiative Facebook Page, accessed Nov 7 2016.
\n(A playground at the back alley, facing pollution from exhaust fan and air conditioner outlets of restaurants.)<\/h5>\n