Michel de Certeau mentioned several concepts in the ‘Spatial Stories’ part of his book ‘The Practice of Everyday Life’. Among his discussions of space and place, map and tour, I am obsessed with the relationship between space and place.
Space and place are similar, but each has its own features. The author understands a place as “the order in accord with which elements are distributed in relationships of coexistence” while space is “composed of intersections of mobile elements”. In other words, “space is a practiced place”. This seems to be contradictory to the idea “place is a space practised” that I learnt from the lecture. In my own view, a place is a space with stories and personal impression, while space is related to human activities. For example, when I think of Victoria Park as a place, it reminds me of a crowded park packed with domestic helpers on Sunday. However, if I see Victoria Park as a space, it reminds me of the activities I can do there (picnic, take a walk, etc.). In this way, a place is not only a location but also a spiritual bond connecting memories, impression and thoughts; while a space involves more physical aspects such as interactions between humans and the environment.
A place always exists, while a space is created for someone once he or she can interact with this place. Consequently, the place is “reshaped” after the person experienced the space and came up with personal memories. This pattern is like a loop: a place creates space while space recreates the place. During this process, place and space are more than a simple location; they connect us with the exact site using our stories, experience, and memories.
Lin Wei Alex, 3035767554
Enjoyed how you thought about Victoria Park experimentally in terms of space and place. Your piece is like writing while thinking and it has successfully helped clarify your confusion of place, space, and practice.