IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ijurrs/v25y2001i1p55-69.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clichés of Urban Doom: The Dystopian Politics of Metaphors for the Unequal City – a View from Brussels

Author

Listed:
  • Guy Baeten

Abstract

Drawing on evidence from the city of Brussels, it will be argued that much of today's urban governance discourses and practices contributes to anti‐urban ‘clichés of urban doom’ and betrays middle‐class, ethnocentric, sexist and racist prejudices about urban societies. Mainstream conceptions of urban problems and policies are modernist, white, patriarchal, heterosexual, nuclear family‐minded, middle‐class and suburban. Mainstream urban planning metaphors contribute to, instead of help to eliminate, sexist and racist urban politics. The uncritical use of concepts such as ‘polarization’, ‘exclusion’ or ‘poverty’ accords with the quest for urban purification by dominant groups in society, who seek to minimalize the urban experience of heterogeneity, otherness, diversity and urban unpredictability. The main contribution of this paper will be in trying to make clear how some key metaphors in contemporary urban planning disempower the already disempowered and in fact contribute to conservative urban politics, even when they are not intended to. Á partir du cas de Bruxelles, l'article démontre que les discours et pratiques actuels en matière de gouvernance urbaine participent, pour la plupart, aux clichés anti‐urbains sur ‘la ville en perdition’, tout en révélant des préjugés racistes, sexistes, ethnocentriques et bourgeois à l'égard des sociétés urbaines. Les principaux courants conceptuels des politiques et problèmes urbains sont de source moderniste, blanche, patriarcale, hétérosexuelle, favorable à la famille nucléaire, bourgeoise et suburbaine. Loin de s'en débarrasser, les grandes métaphores de l'urbanisme contribuent à une politique de la ville sexiste et raciste. L'utilisation sommaire de concepts tels que polarisation, exclusion ou pauvreté s'inscrit dans l'entreprise de purification urbaine des groupes sociétaux dominants qui cherchent à restreindre l'expérience d'hétérogénéité, de différence, de diversité et d'incertitude du cercle urbain. Cet article s'efforce surtout d'expliquer comment certaines images‐clés de l'urbanisme moderne privent de toute influence ceux qui n'en ont déjà aucune, et favorisent en fait une politique urbaine conservatrice, même involontairement.

Suggested Citation

  • Guy Baeten, 2001. "Clichés of Urban Doom: The Dystopian Politics of Metaphors for the Unequal City – a View from Brussels," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 55-69, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:ijurrs:v:25:y:2001:i:1:p:55-69
    DOI: 10.1111/1468-2427.00297
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00297
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1468-2427.00297?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gwen Van Eijk, 2010. "Exclusionary Policies are Not Just about the ‘Neoliberal City’: A Critique of Theories of Urban Revanchism and the Case of Rotterdam," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 820-834, December.
    2. Geoff Vigar & Stephen Graham & Patsy Healey, 2005. "In Search of the City in Spatial Strategies: Past Legacies, Future Imaginings," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(8), pages 1391-1410, July.
    3. Caglar Keyder, 2005. "Globalization and Social Exclusion in Istanbul," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 124-134, March.
    4. Mathieu Van Criekingen, 2009. "Moving In/Out of Brussels' Historical Core in the Early 2000s: Migration and the Effects of Gentrification," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 46(4), pages 825-848, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ijurrs:v:25:y:2001:i:1:p:55-69. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0309-1317 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.