Certeau’s The Practice of Everyday Life offers a philosophical and social scientific perspective on urban living, particularly in “Walking in the City“, which explores the relationship between pedestrians and urban spaces. This work prompts a reflection on the identity of a “walker” and their role in the urban landscape, which further suggests that urban navigation is shaped by social norms, cultural practices, and collective behaviors. However, questions involves as I trying to find who are the walkers.
My tutor said that anyone living within the city can be considered a “walker” through their engagement with and interpretation of the city’s spatial practices. However, how an individual shapes the city he or she lives in? The spatial practice includes that people brings meaning to symbols inside a city, which individuals lack capabilities to do so. Thus, how does people, most of time, can give a similar meaning to symbols? Is it architecture design playing between?
A film clip shown during a lecture, featuring a monk traversing urban environments, further complicates the definition of a “walker.” Although the monk interacts with the city and “speech out” his understanding through movement, his lack of influence on the urban fabric- he don’t have any demands so the city will not build for his demands. This exploration reveals the complexity of defining who can embody the role of a “walker” within the dynamic and symbolic landscapes of urban life. This confused me again that whether the monk is a walker or not.
Liu Mingyao
3036267692
Appreciate your effort to understand the idea of Hong Kong’s urban experience through your analysis of the film ‘walker’ and our class discussion on de Certeau’s “Walking in the City.” A few comments on your text: 1) Referring to paragraph 2, the purpose of posing questions in your writing is to enable you to respond to them through your reading and reflection of the text you’ve selected (de Certeau); 2) paragraph 1 & 2 can be one response topic and paragraph 3 can be another response topic; 3) On this note, it would be more meaningful to discussion how the “confusion” that you raised is being produced through the film. This allows you to read closely.