فضای همگانی شهری اجتماع‌محور در اندیشۀ آرمان‌شهری طالبوف

محورهای موضوعی : مطالعات جامعه شناختی شهری

سیده آیدا حسینی ¹ ( دانشجوی دکتری گروه شهرسازی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران )
مهسا شعله ² ( دانشیار گروه شهرسازی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) )

تاریخ دریافت : 1402/03/19 تاریخ پذیرش : 1402/06/13 تاریخ انتشار : 1402/09/01

کلید واژه: فضای شهری, طالبوف, آرمان‌شهر, فضای همگانی اجتماع‌محور, نرم‌افزار اطلس‌تی,

چکیده مقاله :

شهرها دارای نظامی هستند که آهنگ سریع تغییرات موجب عدم تعادل ساختارهای اجتماعی، اقتصادی، مدیریتی و فضایی در آن‌ها شده است و نمود بیرونی این گسست‌ها در فضاهای همگانی به چشم می‌خورد. فضاهای همگانی به‌عنوان شاخصی برای تنوع زیستی شهر عمل می‌کنند که برنامه‌ریزی برای توسعه پایدار در آن‌ها می‌تواند نقطۀ عطفی در پیشرفت و حل مسائل گستردۀ شهری به شمار آیند. هدف پژوهش حاضر بررسی فضای همگانی اجتماع‌محور در اندیشۀ آرمان‌شهری طالبوف و تطبیق دیدگاه او با صاحب‌نظران حوزه‌های جامعه‌شناسی و شهری جهت دستیابی به راهبردی مؤثر برای داشتن فضاهای همگانی پایدار است. روش تحقیق این مطالعه توصیفی-تحلیلی با رویکرد کیفی و هدف آن بنیادی، با استراتژی پسکاوی است که در پارادایم تفسیرگرایی قرار دارد. جمع‌آوری اطلاعات به شیوۀ کتابخانه‌ای و نظری صورت پذیرفت و درنهایت به تحلیل محتوای پژوهش با استفاده از نرم‌افزار اطلس‌تی، پرداخته شد. نتایج حاکی از آن است که اندیشه‌های طالبوف آرمان‌گرا و نظریه‌پردازهای واقع‌گرا در ابعاد مدیریتی، اجتماعی و اقتصادی، بسیار مشابه است. در بعد بصری، طالبوف نگاهی دقیق‌تر به مسائل زیبایی‌شناسی دارد. او دین و مذهب را از اصلی‌ترین اصول پایداری یک ملت و شهر می‌داند که دیگران تنها به وجود این بعد اشاره نموده‌اند. طالبوف و دیگر نظریه‌پردازها معتقد هستند اگر این ابعاد پنج‌گانه، به‌طور هماهنگ با یکدیگر، در فضاهای همگانی اجرا شوند، موجب موفقیت و پایداری آنها و در پی آن پیشرفت و بهبود شهرهای امروزی خواهد شد.

چکیده انگلیسی:

The rapid pace of change in cities has led to disparities in social, economic, managerial, and spatial structures, which are evident in public spaces. These public spaces serve as an indication of a city's biodiversity, and developing sustainable public realms is crucial in addressing urban challenges. This study aims to explore Talebov's utopian perspective on community-oriented public spaces and compare it with the viewpoints of sociology and urban experts to devise an effective strategy for sustainable public spaces. The study utilizes a descriptive-analytical methodology with a qualitative approach, focusing on fundamental research goals and employing a post-exploratory strategy within the explanatory paradigm. Data collection was conducted in a library and analyzed using Atlas software. The findings revealed similarities between Talebov's idealist approach and the realist theories in terms of management, social dynamics, and economic aspects. However, Talebov specifically emphasizes the visual dimension and places importance on aesthetic values. According to Talebov's theory, religion can be one of the primary philosophies underlying the stability of a country or a city; other theories have only suggested the existence of this element. Based on Talebov and other theorists, if these five dimensions are applied harmoniously in public spaces, it will result in their sustainability, which is where today's cities progress and improve.

منابع و مأخذ:

• آدمیت، فریدون (1363)، اندیشه‌های طالبوف تبریزی، چاپ دوم، تهران، نشر دماوند.


• اصیل، حجت‌الله (1393)، آرمان‌شهر در اندیشه ایرانی (چاپ سوم)، تهران: نشر نی.


• باتلر، کریس (2012)، آنری لوفر، سیاست فضایی، زندگی روزمره و حق به شهر. ترجمه: نریمان جهانزاد (1399). تهران: انتشارات همشهری.


• بلیکی، نورمن (1400)، طراحی پژوهش‌های اجتماعی، ترجمۀ حسن چاوشیان، تهران: نشر نی.


• پهنادایان، شاهین (1396)، (مروری بر ساختار اجتماعی و اقتصادی ایران عصر قاجار)، فصلنامه تخصصی علوم سیاسی، سال سیزدهم، شماره 38، صص 194-173.


• روویون، فردریک (1385)، آرمان‌شهر در تاریخ اندیشه غرب، ترجمۀ عباس باقری، تهران: نشر نی.


• طالبوف، عبدالرحیم بن شیخ ابوطالب نجار تبریزی (1356)، مسالک‌المحسنین، تهران، انتشارات شبگیر، چاپ دوم، (چاپ شده از روی نسخه چاپ مصر-قاهره،1323 هجری قمری).


• طالبوف، عبدالرحیم بن شیخ ابوطالب (1394)، احمد، تهران: انتشارات علمی و فرهنگی، چاپ دوم.


• فیض رفعتیان، احسان (1397)، آرمان‌شهر: مطالعه تطبیقی آرمان‌شهر در غرب با آرمان‌شهر در ایران، کرج: انتشارات فروغ سپهر.


• کسروی، احمد (1340)، در راه سیاست، تهران، کتاب‌فروشی پایدار.


• مهدی‌زاده، میثم؛ دشتی، فرشاد و علی‌شیری، سکینه (1395)، هم پیوستاری خانه و شهر؛ خانه ایرانی جزئی از نظام همسایگی و محله با تأکید بر ارزش‌های شهر اسلامی، نشریه علمی مدیریت شهری، شماره 43، صص 366-343.


• نوری، شیخ فضل‌الله (1374)، «در رساله حرمت مشروطه» رساله مشروطیت (18 رساله و لایحه دربارۀ مشروطیت)، به کوشش غلامحسین زرگری نژاد: تهران: انتشارات کویر.


• Akkar, M. (2005). “The changing ‘publicness’ of contemporary public spaces: A case study of the Grey’s Monument Area, Newcastle upon Tyne.” Urban Des. Int. 10 (2): 95–113. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.udi.9000138


• Arendt, H. (1958). The Human Condition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/H/bo29137972.html


• Atkinson, R. (2003) “Domestication by cappuccino or a revenge on urban space? Control and empowerment in the management of public spaces.” Urban Stud. 40 (9): 1829–1843. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098032000106627.


• Atkinson, R. (2003). Domestication by cappuccino or a revenge on urban space? Control and empowerment in the management of public spaces. Urban studies, 40(9), 1829-1843.


• Banerjee, T. (2020). The idea of the urban commons,Challenges of enclosure, encroachment, and exclusion. In Mehta,V., & Palazzo, D. (Eds.), Companion to Public Space. Routledge.


• Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage. ISBN 0-8039-834S-x


• Benn, S., and G. Gaus. (1983). “The liberal conception of the public and private.” In Public and private in social life, 31–65. London: Croom Helm.


• Berger, P.L., Berger, B., & Kellner, H. (1974). The Homeless Mind, Penguin Books, Ringwood.


• Berman, M. (1986). “Take it to the Streets: Conflict and Community in Public Space.” Dissent 33: 476 – 485.


• Blackmar, E. (2006). Appropriating the ‘‘commons’’. In S. Low, & N. Smith Eds. , The politics of public space. New York:Routledge.


• Blomley, N. (2005). Flowers in the bathtub, boundary crossings at the public–private divide. Geoforum, 36(3), 281-296.


• Bodnar,J. (2015) Reclaiming public space. Journal Urban Studies. Volume 52, Issue 12.pp 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015583626


• Bourdieu, P. (1997).distinction, Routledge Kegan Paul The Forms of Social Capital, in Halsey, A.H (1997) Education, Economy and Society, Oxford University Press, New York.


• Brill, M. 1989. “Transformation, Nostalgia, and Illusion in Public Life and Public Place.” In Public Placesand Spaces, edited by I. Altman. New York: Plenum Press.pp: 7-29. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4684-5601-1_2


• Butler, C.(2012). Henri Lefebvre : spatial politics, everyday life and the right to the city.


• (2004). The Value of Public Space: How High Quality Parks and Public Spaces Create Economic, Social and Environmental Value. London: CABE Space.


• Carmona, M. (2010) “Contemporary public space: Critique and classifica- tion, part one: Critique.” J. Urban Des. 15 (1): 123–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574800903435651.


• Carmona, M. (2014) “The Place-Shaping Continuum, A Theory of Urban Design Process”, Journal of Urban Design 19 (1): 2–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2013.854695


• Carmona, M. (2019) Principles for public space design, planning to do better. Urban Design International. volume 24, PP 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-018-0070-3


• Carmona, M. (2019). Place value: Place quality and its impact on health, social, economic and environmental outcomes. Journal of Urban Design, 24, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2018.1472523


• Carmona, M., C. de Magalhaes, & L. Hammond. (2008) Public Space, the Management Dimen-sion. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203927229


• carmona, M., T. Heath, T. Oc., & S. Tiesdell.( 2003) Public places urban spaces: The dimensions of urban design. Oxford: Architectural Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080515427


• Carmona,M. (2015) Re-theorising contemporary public space: a new narrative and a new normative, Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability.8 (4): 374-405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2014.909518


• M. (2021). From cities to networks: Power rules. Journals Sage. Volume 21, Issue 3-4. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468795X211022054


• M. (2022). The Network Society Revisited. Volume 67, Issue 7. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642221092803


• Cullen, G. (1961). The concise townscape. New York: Reinhold. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080502816


• De Magalhães, C. (2010). “Public space and the contracting-out of publicness: A framework for analysis.” J. Urban Des. 15 (4): 559–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2010.502347


• De Magalhães, C., and S. Trigo. (2017) “‘Clubification’ of urban public spaces? The withdrawal of the re-definition of the role of local government in the management of public spaces.” J. Urban Des. 22 (6): 738–756. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2017.1336059.


• Durkheim,E. (1964). the Division of Labor in Society, Free Press, New York.


• Ellin, N. (1996) Postmodern urbanism. Oxford: Blackwell. https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/167495


• Fainstein, S.S. (2010). The Just City. New York: Cornell University Press. ISBN: 0801446554.


• Fincher, R. and Iveson, K. (2008). Planning and Diversity in the City: Redistribution, Recognition and Encounter. DOI 10.1080/08111146.2010.513474. http://hdl.handle.net/11343/28047


• Foucault, M. (1991). Space, Knowledge and Power, in Rabinow, P. (ed). The Foucault Reader, Penguin, London. PP, 56-239.


• Francis, M. (1989). “Control as a dimension of public space quality.” In Public places and spaces, edited by I. Altman and E. H. Zube, 147–172. New York: Plenum Press. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4684-5601-1_7


• Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for people. London: Island Press. ISBN: 9781597265737


• GiddenS, A. (1994). Elements of of the Theory of Structuration, in The Polity Reader in Social Theory, Polity Press, Oxford. PP. 79-88.


• Goffman, E. .(1990). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Penguin, London.


• Haas, T., and Olsson, K. (2014). Transmutation and Reinvention of Public Spaces Through Ideals of Urban Planning and Design. Space and Culture Journal, Sage. 17 (1): 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1206331213493855


• T., & Mehaffy.M. (2019). Introduction: the future of public space. Journal URBAN DESIGN International volume 24, p.p 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-018-0062-3


• J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge: Polity Press.


• Herbert Mead, G.(1934) Mind, self society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist.


• Hou, J. (2020). Public space as a space of resistance and democratic resilience. In V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds), Companion to Public Space. Routledge.


• Iveson, K. (2006) Strangers in the cosmopolis, in Binnie, J., Holloway, J., Millington, S. and Young, C. (eds.) Cosmopolitan Urbanism. London: Routledge, pp. 70–87.


• Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House.


• Jalaladdini, S. & Oktay, D. (2012). Urban public spaces and vitality, a socio-spatial analysis in the streets of Cypriot towns. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, (35), 664-674.


• Johnson, A. J., & Glover, T. D. (2013). Understanding urban public space in a leisure context. Leisure Sciences, 35(2), 190-197.


• Justin, S., Connolly, J. J. T., & Orum, A. M. (Ed.) (2017). The Just City. In The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies, (1 ed., Vol. 1). (Encyopledia Series).


• Koch, R. & Latham, A. (2012). Rethinking urban public space,accounts from a junction in West London. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(4), 1-15.


• Lee, D. (2020) Whose space is privately owned public space? Exclusion, underuse and the lack of knowledge and awareness. Urban Research & Practice. Volume 15, Issue 3. PP 366-380. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2020.1815828


• Lefebvre, H. (1991). The Production of Space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.


• Lofland, L. (1998). The Public Realm: Exploring the City’s Quintessential Social Territory. New York: AldineDe Gruyter. ISBN-10: ‎0202306089


• Lopes, M., Santos Cruz, S., & Pinho, P. (2019) Revisiting Publicness in Assessment of Contemporary Urban Spaces. American Society of Civil Engineers. Journal of Urban Planning
  and Development, 145(4): 04019013. ISSN 0733-9488. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000521


• Low, S. (2013) How private interests take over pu-blic space: zoning, taxes and incorporation of gated communities, in Low, S. and Smith, N. (eds.)The Politics of Public Space. London: Routledge.


• Low, S. and Iveson, K. (2016) Propositions for more just urban public spaces. City, 20(1), pp. 10–31. DOI: 10.1080/13604813.2015.1128679


• Luger, J., & Lees, L. (2020). PLANETARY PUBLIC SPACE Scale, context, and politics. In V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds.),Companion to public space. Routledge.


• Madanipour, A. (2003). Public and private spaces of the city. London: Routledge. DOI:4324/9780203402856


• Madanipour, A.(2010).Whose public space?,International case studies in urban design and development.London: Routledge.


• Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1973). The German Ideology, International Publishers, New York.


• McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/15206629(198601)14:1<6::AID-JCOP2290140103>3.0.CO;2-I


• Mehta, V. & Palazzo, D. (2020).Companion to Public London: Routledge.


• Mehta, V. (2014). Evaluating public space.Journal of Urban Design, 19(1), 53-88.


• Mitchell, D. (2003). The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space. New York: Guilford Press. ISBN 9781572308473


• Mitchell, D. (2017). People’s Park again, on the end and ends of public space. Environment and planning A, economy and space, 49(3), 503-518.


• H. (2013). Happy City: Transforming Our Lives Through Urban Design. New York : Farrar, Straus and Giroux. ISBN: 978-0-374-16823-0


• Nemeth, J. (2009). “Defining a public: The management of privately owned public space.” Urban Stud. 46 (11): 2463–2490. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009342903


• Nemeth, J. (2012). Controlling the Commons, How Public is Public Space? Urban Affairs Review 48 (6): 811–835. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087412446445


• Németh, J., and S. Schmidt. (2007) “Toward a methodology for measuring the security of publicly accessible spaces.” J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 73 (3): 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360708977978.


• Németh, J., and S. Schmidt. (2011). “The privatization of public space:Modelling and measuring publicness.” Environ. Plann. B: Plann. Des.38 (1): 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1068/b36057


• Oc, T., & S. Tiesdell. (1999) “The fortress, the panoptic, the regulatory and the animated: Planning and urban design approaches to safer city centres.” Landscape Res. 24 (3): 265–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426399908706563.


• Oldenburg, R. (1999), The great good place: Cafes, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons, and other hangouts at the heart of a community, Washington: Marlowe & Company. ISBN: 9781569246818, 1569246815


• Pahl, R. (ed.). (1974). Readings in Urban Sociology, Pergamon, Oxford.


• Rossi, A. (1966) The architecture of the city. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262680431/the-architecture-of-the-city/


• Sandercock, L. (2003). Towards Cosmopolis. Chichester:Wiley.


• Sennett R (1990) The Conscience of the Eye: The Design and Social Life of Cities. New York and London: W. W. Norton. ISBN: 0394571045, 9780394571041


• Sezer, C. (2017) Public Space and Urban Justice. Vol. 43, No. 2. pp. 165-172. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44329733


• Simmel, G. (1993). The Metropolis and Mental Life, in Levine, D.N. (ed). 1971. Georg Simmel on Individuality and Social Forms: Selected Writings, University of chicago, Press, Chicago. PP, 39-324.


• Talen, E. (2007). Design for diversity: evaluating the context of socially mixed neighbourhoods. Journal of Urban Design, 11(1), pp. 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574800500490588


• Thomas, M. (1991). “The Demise of Public Space.” In Town Planning Responses to City Change, edited by Nadin, and J. Doak, 209– 224. Avebury: Aldershot.


• Tibbalds, F. (2000) Making people-friendly towns: Improving the public environment in towns and cities. Harlow, Essex: Longman. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203469521


• Toennies, F. (1995). Community and Association, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, PP, 9-37. quoted in Worsley, P. (ed.).1973. Modern Sociology: Introductory Readigs, Penguin, London. PP, 6-295.


• Varna, G., & Tiesdell, S. (2010). Assessing the publicness of public space: The star model of publicness. Journal of Urban Design, 15, 575–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2010.502350


• Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society, University of California Press, london.


• Whyte, W. H. (1980) The social life of small urban spaces.


• Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a Way of life, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 44, July.


• Zarate, L. (2015). Right to the City for All: a manifesto for social justice in an urban century,in Griffin, T.L. Vol. 1. New York:The J. Max Bond Center on Design for the Just City.