Abstract:

The visual design of urban public spaces (hereinafter “cityscape”) has an important impact on city life – it can channel interpersonal communication into certain directions while excluding others; it can powerfully communicate notions of what is socially acceptable or important. Yet, while everyone may access urban public spaces, cityscapes are designed by a very limited social group, consisting predominantly of property owners, politicians, and commercial enterprises.

This paper focuses on the narratives embedded in the cityscapes. Analyzing legal conflicts arising around expressions that seek their way into the shared visual environment, as well as expressions whose presence in the cityscapes is disputed, we trace the dynamics of battles over urban narratives. Our discussion encompasses various legal fields – such as government speech, zoning regulations, graffiti, and the protection of artworks against destruction – aiming to provide a comprehensive picture of the battleground over narratives constructing our visual environment.

The discussion of legal rules is complemented by photographs. Rather than illustrating the text, the photographs will relate to the discussed topics in their own way, offering the reader a visual tour through the narratives of urban public spaces.

Our inquiry reveals that several narratives – such as consumerism and patriotism – are constant winners in the battles over the cityscapes, whereas others – such as social and political critique – are permanent losers. This situation is unjustified. Cityscapes are important media of communication that should be used to develop a meaningful democratic discourse rather than buttressing widespread views. We suggest redefining the boundaries of property right in a way that would disconnect real estate ownership from the right to design the shared public spaces. Visible urban surfaces will then be used as a medium of free expression, creating cityscapes as ever-evolving collages of the residents’ expressions.