ABSTRACT
Theoretical approaches and ethnographic studies related to the built environment in cities show that the spatial setting is closely connected to the specific ideologies and messages of power-holding individuals or groups. This phenomenon has been addressed by scholars from different disciplines with the conclusion that the design of space constitutes a cultural production that reflects urban hierarchies and shapes social interaction. Geographers point to the textual quality of the urban landscape by defining it as a signifying system that transmits and encodes specific information on a symbolic or metaphorical level (Donald 1992; Duncan 1990; Duncan and Ley 1993). Urban sociologists analyse the forms of occupation and the exclusion of social groups in the public and private spaces of the city (Sassen 1991, 1996; Zukin 1995, 1996). Referring to both the political and the symbolic economy of space, the visual representation of groups at the heart of global cities is detailed, focusing on individuals (such as the homeless or racial minorities) who are not usually considered in the official urban image. The interaction of diverse cultural and ethnic groups within the same spatial environment results in contests and conflict, as each of these groups strives to transmit different messages through the representation of space – messages that may be related to economic, social, cultural or political interests. This holds especially true for what Marc Augé (1992) has called ‘anthropological places’, meaning places comprising a highly symbolic and identity-creating quality.
