UBC | Digital Visions
Digital Visions
Back
 
Kirsten Forkert
Writer: Jaynus O'Donnell       Edited by: Sylvia Borda
Misplace: park zones in a mobile society

Jaynus O'Donnell: "Misplace" contains aspects of exploration, discovery, data collection and education. How do these parts of the project function within your greater art practice?

Kirsten Forkert: My practice is quite broad; I'm also an organizer, and a writer, and a teacher. I feel there are aspects of my practice that cross over into critical pedagogy, activism and certain forms of research (like social geography).

I'm interested in looking at how we experience time and place, and the city, etc. what we think of as a direct perceptual sense, and then looking at how this is affected by ideologies we've internalized. So that means looking at how we experience space in the city, what our habits are, etc. and how our behaviour is affected by the design and planning of city spaces (for example, we may never go to certain areas of the city even though we might live there our entire lives) and in general living in a capitalist society.

While there might be similarities with for example anthropology, I don't claim to be objective or to prove a theory. With Misplace, I became the guinea pig of my own experiment.

But it also does come down to creating and facilitating spaces for asking questions.

Jaynus O'Donnell: What mechanisms in urban and suburban spaces lead to this insider/outsider dichotomy? Are they different or similar in each space? Maybe you can compare your experience of this in Vancouver versus what you found in Oakville.

Kirsten Forkert: Cities historically have always involved these dynamics: there are rich neighbourhoods and poor neighbourhoods, neighbourhoods where ethnic groups tend to be segregated. Urban design has also historically played a role in managing public space and populations. For example, there was a neighbourhood in Strathcona called Hogan's Alley, which was home to Vancouver's Black community. The neighbourhood was torn down to build the Georgia Viaduct. At the time (50's/60's) it common practice to tear down neighbourhoods perceived as 'slums', often for racist reasons. But I think that with suburbia, what we have is a greater physical separation of social classes. And car culture plays a role in this: if you drive you can pass through certain areas without stopping in them. The logical conclusion of this is gated communities, or condos with high security systems.

To compare Vancouver and Oakville: Oakville defines itself in terms of its separation from Toronto. This was the case from the beginning: it started off as a place where Bay St. financiers could escape the city, which at the time was perceived as polluted, stressful and unhealthy (and I do think the subtext also was that there were too many immigrants and poor people). Certainly neighbourhoods were quite segregated: Kerr St. was considered the 'bad neighbourhood', and was also the most culturally diverse.

I don't see the same sort of separation of social classes and ethnic groups in Vancouver during my day-to-day life, but I do know it does exist. An obvious example of this is some of the loft condos which have high security systems, fences and even barbed wire around them. They may not fit the stereotypical definition of 'gated communities', but it could be argued that they function in a similar way. For example, one that is presently being built (can't remember the name) has a supermarket attached to it. So if you want you never have to go outside. When we see these sorts of buildings in the Downtown Eastside, they function as very graphic reminders of income disparity, and all the tensions that result from this.

Jaynus O'Donnell: Can you please further expand on your concerns on the compartmentalization of society through lifestyle demographics and explain how this manifested itself in the community of Oakville.

Kirsten Forkert: This compartmentalization is not necessarily specific to Oakville or to suburban communities. In terms of the bigger picture, I think that it's a consequence of capitalism in general (which as we know very well is based around ideologies of individualism). This has intensified in the present 'postmodern condition': people leave rural communities for jobs, people leave their countries because there are no opportunities for them… and of course, it's an increasingly transient and fragmented society we live in. And for the past 30-40 years, and especially after 1989, the Left has focused on the small, the localized, the contingent and the specific, in all those critiques of grand narratives and political programs that you've probably read about in class (in terms of theories of postmodernism).

In terms of the niche markets, it's to do with identities being formed basically in consumer terms: we buy the same products and so we share something. We listen to the same music and so we share something. The example I gave you over coffee is one I find particularly disturbing: where voting patterns can be determined through your shopping habits.

But my concern is to do with a common space, a space of shared concern. And that when we're isolated and fragmented as individuals we're left with a sense of lacking this, and then this desire gets displaced onto consumer culture, or, more disturbingly, nostalgic and simplistic forms of nationalism or religious extremism.

And in terms of Oakville, as I've said before, social classes are separated from each other so people don't have to deal with others who might come from a radically different point of view, who might come from different cultural contexts, etc. So that desire for that shared space was articulated around those myths of the small town.

 
previous | next 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
Site: Misplace: park zones in a mobile society