In the article, De Certeau M mainly discussed the relationship and difference between “space” and “place.” A place is “an instantaneous configuration of positions” with an indication of stability. But, space only exists when there are composed of intersections of mobile elements, like a party that is full of people, a lecture that is full of students, and a famous site that is full of visitors.
From my perspective, “place” is cold-blooded. It is an indication of position. It has no other deeper meaning. However, people can feel more in the word “space”, since a place is not equal to space, only when significant events happened in a place, then we can provide value and make it into space. So, from this point, different people may have different definitions of an area. it can be a “place”, or it can be a “space.” Because people may define meaningful events based on their own understanding.
– Lau Kong Ngai, 3035822756
A good attempt to use direct reference from de Certeau’s text to summarise the concept of “space” and “place” in your response. Why do you think “place” is cold-blooded? is it because of its neutrality compared to the “space”? The adjective is rather subjective which needs further explanation to support. You may also wish to elaborate your point on “meaningful events” in defining “space” and “place” by extending it to film-making. How do the framing angle, narrative, subjects come into play in realising those concepts?