The Nature of Kelowna

Posted on by
2

The bridge into Kelowna, British Columbia

 

In our group discussions we were addressing Max Weber’s “The Nature of the City,” in particular, we were debating about the question “Does Kelowna satisfy Weber’s definition of what a city is.”

 

At first glance, Kelowna satisfies most of Weber’s major attributes of a city; it has a court and partially autonomous law, and it is partially self-governing due to municipal elections. Kelowna also has a much larger connection to its hinterland than most modern cities because it is based on the tourism of its lakes, mountains and wineries. Kelowna has all of the properties that Weber mentions with the exception that Kelowna does not have a fortress or garrison. Kelowna has no surrounding walls, no great military base and no other major defense system to speak of. With this in mind, according to Weber, is Kelowna still not considered a city because it is lacking fortification?

 

In our group we delved into this topic and realized that Kelowna does indeed have a defense system in place, just not in the way that one might expect. While Kelowna may not have physical walls surrounding the city, the natural environment provides its own defense structure. If Kelowna were under attack, the city needs only to cut off access to the roads in and out of the city. By shutting down the bridge and blocking off the road to Vernon, there is virtually no direct access to Kelowna, except from boat or plane. Kelowna is also built into a natural valley; the mountains and lake surrounding the city form a natural defense against enemies. There is no protection from an aerial attack, but even with city walls that would be next to impossible to prevent.

 

In this respect, our group decided that Kelowna can, and should, have city-status.

 

 

 

Summation of September 11th

Posted on by
Reply

On Tuesday’s class we discussed Max Weber’s definition of a city; the city is a settlement where the inhabitants move away from an agrarian society to an urbanized one in which they transition into a life that flourishes from trade and commerce rather than agriculture. A city is made up of three key points that we agreed upon in class: a market which generates trade and commerce; a political-administrative with at least partial autonomy (controls government and law); a fortress or garrison which allows for a defensive military function; and an interconnectedness of these activities in a city to allow for it to function. An example of a symbiotic relationship we discussed was between a City’s military and it’s market. This relationship functions because each party benefits from the other where the Military provided protection and a consumer for the markets products, whereas the market supplied goods and also taxable persons providing further funds for the city.

Further questions could be invoked from our discussions in this course like whether this definition can applied to all cities; can our modern day city be defined by Weber’s ideas; what is missing or dated about weber’s definition of a city. All these questions were answered in class, and the general consensus is that the city has evolved from Weber’s definition while also maintain some of the core elements. I chose to focus on what could be added to Max Weber’s original definitions because I found the additions to be multi-faceted where they could define today’s cities or not. Architecture, Culture, numerical and spatial factors, and the ability to provide activities or fulfill people’s desires are all important options that could fit the definition but were arguably not appropriate.

The Cultural aspect would provide a distinction between urban life versus rural since in today’s society one can order things online whereas arts must be seen and are therefore irreplaceable. An example is that a person can not order or view certain aspects of art which are essential to culture like the opera, plays, art exhibits, and more. Arguably, this could provide a negative connotation towards a city because Culture is very subjective and therefore cannot be applied to all.

The Numerical or Spatial element could also differentiate a city from a village. Further into our discussion, however, more observations provided a clear disassociation with this element as part of Weber’s definition. When comparing the population factor, refuge camps have the same population as large metropolitan areas but are distinctly different from each other because of the conditions within the two areas. These poorer nations also can be quite grand in space but it is because they must travel larger distances to acquire their resources. We can also look into the history of the city back in Europe and compare the population, which was small, but did not prevent this area from becoming labeled as a city. A key characteristic that helped define these ancient cities was the machinery and the specializations that their markets provided that drew people to it and therefore a minimum population could possibly be applied but not a maximum.

The last few comments we discussed in class touched on a few added points that could be added to the definition. Along with the specialties that these ancient markets provided that drew people to cities there was the question of whether a city provides activities and fulfill desires and was apparently proposed by Weber in a separate definition. There is also the architectural structure that a city has that elevates it from a township or rural community.

To sum up this class we mainly focused on Weber’s definition of the city, added to it with our own ideas, deconstructed his to apply it to Modern cities, and discussed if it does apply to our cities. We found that it could be applied to our modern cities, but they needed to be revamped by altering the language to fit appropriately. What I mean by this is that a garrison has evolved to our Nations Army and our markets have grew into grander shopping malls. Just as our cities have evolved from Weber’s times, so must his definition grow to fit these modern times.

 

Why I like Split, Croatia

Posted on by
1

 

Split, Croatia

I love European cities, big and small, famous and the “not so famous”.

European cities have a flair unlike any cities in North America. Not only do they have thousands of years of history, they have a certain class of “having been there” for a very long time, a certain maturity.

What is it about Split, Croatia that caught not only my eyes but my heart? And where is this place anyway?

Last June I spend three weeks traveling throughCroatiaandMontenegro. Everybody was talking about Dubrovnik, which is indeed a magnificent fortress town. Our self made itinerary meant a stop in the coastal town ofSplitlocated at the north end of the peninsula on the Dalmatian  Coast.Split is the largest city on the Adriatic Sea and the second largest in Croatia.

Split is also one of the oldest cities in the area, just over 1700 years old. Splitwas initially an ancient Greek town part of the Aspalathos colony. The beginning of Splitis almost always associated with the construction of Diocletian’s palace. Who is Diocletian? A Roman Emperor and a great reformer of the Late Roman Empire. He decided to retire to his hometown ofSplit and built this humongous palace and gardens.

OK, a lot of towns in Europe have Roman ruins, why is this Palace so special?

 Because the city of Split has incorporated the palace as part of their downtown and made it not only livable but accessible to all. 1500 people are permanent residents of the palace. These are not city officials or well-to-do jet setters, they are regular citizens who apply and rent a small apartment in the palace itself. The Old Town of Split and its palace is not only an extremely beautiful site, it is filled with small shops selling Croatian goods, no trinkets, it has lovely public plazas and squares filled with music, cafés and restaurants. Nothing in theOldTownis tacky; it thrives with businesses and people. The Palace sets the tone of downtown as well as the ocean.

A beautiful pedestrian promenade was built along the marina to accommodate both visitors and residents to stroll along the turquoise Adriatic, and enjoy both the sites and activities theOldTownhas to offer. Every aspects ofSplit’s downtown are pleasing. The new modern skyscrapers are located above theOldTownup on the mountains overlooking the sea and the OldTown.

The mix of the old and the new has made Split one of my favourite European cities. The site of the town is breathtaking; the ancient buildings are well preserved and are not considered  “closed museums”, they are simply part of the history of the town. The modern flair is also appealing and gives you this sense of being able to stroll by the sea, yet enjoy an active life just beyond the walls of the OldTown.Splitis not only pleasing to the eyes but it wants to bring you in and around. Another visit is a “must”.

 

Why I’m passionate about cities

Posted on by
Reply

The Early Hours of July 14, 1789 in Paris.

I think I first became fascinated with cities when I was 12, and it was the bicentennial of the French Revolution. The Revolution happened in Paris, and it couldn’t have happened anywhere else – all the ingredients were distinctly urban: the intellectual ferment of the cafés, the printing presses churning out inflammatory pamphlets, the public buildings that represented royal tyranny, the popular classes seething with frustration…  A year spent in Paris as an undergraduate confirmed to me that there was something special about that city that manifested itself in its cafés, street-scapes, public spaces, in the magical experience of taking the metro.

Quartier Latin, Paris
By Jordgubbe (Own work)

Since then I have lived in several European cities: Zagreb, Budapest, Belgrade, Stuttgart and Florence – and I’ve visited many more.  When I think of my favorite cities (Budapest, Belgrade, Berlin, Paris and Florence), I realize that each one is unique, and yet they all seem to possess one unifying characteristic: to borrow a term from the Soviet avant-garde, they are social condensers.  there’s something about that concentration of people that creates something extraordinary – a cultural and social effervescence that, in my opinion, is the stuff of civilization. It’s about the concerts, the festivals, the lecture series, the farmers’ markets, the art-house cinema, the obscure ethnic restaurants, the art galleries, and yes, the protest marches too.

Porto, Portugal, 2010

Kneza Mihailova, Belgrade, 2010.

Flea Market at Britanski Trg, Zagreb, 2009

Great cities also have something else in common: great spaces.  Some are no-brainers – think of the Piazza de la Signoria in Florence, the bridges over the Seine in Paris, or picturesque German old towns.

Passau, 2009

But others are less monumental, less orchestrated, more accidental: here I’m thinking of corners or fragments of residential neighborhoods that somehow coalesce into perfect three dimensional moments.  That street where the autumn afternoon light sets the rooftops aglow and trickles through the chestnut trees.  That little neighborhood square with its café terraces.

Café Ušće, Belgrade, 2009

Can you tell yet that I love European cafés?