ABSTRACT
Cities, which are the object of planned development operations, present a sort of morphological relief, with a historical thickness and inertia in contrast to the planning initiative with which the action plan must deal. However, even in this case, planning presupposes that the urban space is considered intellectually, technically, even visually, as an object which is cut out and organised, transformed, modelled, and on which a number of intentions are foisted and recorded. Of course, the ideal-typical distinction, which has just been presented between the two attitudes summarised by the verbs planning and inhabiting, is abstract and schematic. In fact, the invitation to think of the city as an inhabited environment, i.e. practised, experienced and felt, but also expressed, and more generally, the proposal to integrate the power of the ‘ordinary’ aesthetic relationships which the inhabitants develop with the city into the thinking of urban planning.
