Centrality and central places in contemporary urban discourse

Thesis

In 1962 Thomas S[NZM1] amuel Kuhn described transformation of the scientific paradigm as a linear
process, i.e. how new paradigm replaces the old one.[1] Regardless other facts, this state has
become invalid for (urban) geography with respect to “grand theories” criticism. In recent decades
inner space of cities has been widely discussed by many authors and this discussion is still open
in contemporary geography. Different approaches to urban centrality are accepted. Thus, the aim of
this thesis is to capture changes in the understanding of central locations (in everyday life). The
thesis should consist of different sources and different views of the same. City centre, in my
opinion, can be understood as the object of long duration which (can) serve as the discourse change
indicator.

Paper n. 1 (work in progress)

The paper aims to take a closer critical look at the production, perception and representation of
centrality within the urban time-space. I try to argue that contemporary (not exclusively
post-socialist) city centres need to be considered as a set of earlier historic layers. New
nodalities replacing the previous ones, thus, city centre is in this sense variegated entity, which
can serve as an indicator of transitions of whole city. The centrality should be therefore
understood in its wider sense[NZM2] . Centres, in contemporary geography, are mainly discussed by
two approaches. In short:

·         Firstly, can be reminded morphology concerned approach – focuses on places (physical
structure) like squares, main streets etc.;

·         Second approach base on „nodes“, where emphasis is mainly on flows and functions, i. e.
gathering places, traffic nodes etc.

Indeed, main idea is to ask in the paper slightly different: Is centrality in (post) city dynamic
or stable in time? In meaning of short-time period (day, week, weekend x instead of long duration
cores). Methodology is based on quantitative evaluation of cell phone data (time-rhythmicity based
approach[NZM3] ).

Paper n. 2 [NZM4] (work in progress)

Firstly, this article will rather have historical character. Polycentricity is relatively new
(urban) paradigm interconnected with emergence of suburbia in US (after 1945). In fact, also
paradigm of monocentricity is not so old how it seems[NZM5] . Secondly named paradigm is related
especially to industrial cities - a simplified and abstract model of the city. Mentioned
descriptions of the cities are nowadays taken for granted, therefore the framing research question
could be formulated as: How was the centrality interpreted and perceived in the Middle Ages? Is it
just a question of what we nowadays call “historical core”? Thus, main task of second paper is to
understand centrality in paradigm (spatial memories, everyday symbolism) and configuration of the
medieval city. For this article will be used the 15th century chronicles written by „citizen” of
Prague in sense of qualitative research. These sources reflect important events, places, actions,
etc.[NZM6]


Related literature

GOETZ, A. (2013): Suburban Sprawl or Urban Centres: Tensions and Contradictions of Smart Growth
Approaches in Denver, Colorado. Urban Studies, 50 (11), s. 2178–2195.

KOTUS, J. (2006): Changes in the spatial structure of a large Polish city – The case of Poznan.
Cities, 23, p. 364-381.

STAVRIDES, S. (2013): Contested urban rhythms: from the industrial city to the post-industrial
urban archipelago. The Sociological Review, 61, p. 34–50.

SZELENYI, I. (1996): Cities under socialism – and after. In: ANDRUSZ, G., HARLOE, M., SZELENYI, I.
eds.: Cities after socialism. Urban and Cities after Socialism: Urban and Regional Change and
Conflict in Post-socialist Societies. Blackwell, Oxford, s. 286–336.

SOJA, E., W. (2011): Beyond Postmetropolis. Urban Geography, 32 (4), p. 451–469.

WARF, B. (2009): From surfaces to networks. In: Warf, Barney –Arias, Santa (edd.): The Spatial
Turn: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. London, p. 59−76.

And more.

________________________________

[1] We use simplification here
________________________________

 [NZM1]Generally well written introductory paragraph.

 [NZM2]Even though that is just and intro you should mentions other relevant sources dealing with
the city centrality.  Places and nodes – I have heard about it, haven’t I??

 [NZM3]Again, no references?? Do not forget about Radim Lískovec and his diploma thesis. This is
the ground you can build upon.

 [NZM4]What is the title of the article?

 [NZM5]References?? You must support your statements.

 [NZM6]Sounds really interesting. I would like to see more of this. What about relevant
visualization of medieval city centricity perception??