נגה קידר
I am an urban sociologist studying cities, ideas and the dialectic relations between them. In my research, I examine what it means for a messy and complex entity like a city to adopt a new idea, and how particular policy models have become ‘must-haves’ for cities. My research applies qualitative and quantitative methods and engages with literature from Political Sociology, Public Policy, Sociology of Culture, STS, Organization Studies, Human Geography and Urban Planning.
less
InterestsView All (11)
Uploads
Papers by נגה קידר
Through a series of spatial mappings and interviews with the neighborhood’s residents, we analyze the gaps between the planning rationality, based on a rigid dichotomy that sharply separates the “private” from the “public,” and the Arab-Islamic rationality that moves in between the private and the public. In response to the gaps and restrictions imposed by these rationalities, the local community creates a hierarchy of intermediate states through separation spaces and partnership spaces. These intermediate spaces constitute a special foundation for daily life in the neighborhood, which we call “a partition network” and which is based on partition and distribution – spatial partnership along with separation, and meet the residents’ needs, albeit partially. This examination through both spatial rationalities adds a new dimension to the accepted view that analyzes the socio-spatial occurrences in East Jerusalem mainly in terms of control versus resistance. This understanding, as well as the analysis of gaps and conflicts between them, constitute, in our view, a basis for the advancement of a more fertile dialogue and a more rational and accepted development of space in Eastern Jerusalem. Moreover, the study findings, which demonstrate the consistency of traditional spatial organization patterns, are surprising considering the social structure of the neighborhood, which is not based on distribution according to the extended family principle, in view of the accelerated urbanization processes and despite the continued struggle against Jewish sovereignty in the city.
significant investment. At the same time, Toronto is at an inflection point; our
investment and overall initiative has lagged vis-à-vis peer cities like Chicago, San
Francisco, and Ottawa. Toronto will thrive if we renew our commitment to a
powerful public art presence for our city and support that commitment with
appropriate private and public sector institutional capacity, funding, and
collaboration.
Given the cultural diversity of Toronto, its Indigenous population, ongoing
development, population growth, and the strength of its public institutions,
Toronto should be known for the reach, diversity, and transformational power of
public art in its downtown core and across its neighbourhoods and communities.
Toronto is Canada’s largest city and a dynamic hub of economic activity and
immigration. It is increasingly a vertical city where the public realm plays a critical
role in its social and recreational life. Public art can educate and engage youth,
spark tourism, help us to understand ourselves better, and enhance our day-today
experience of the urban environment. Public art can be a powerful force that
serves many constituencies and can unify and challenge us across our cultural
identities and neighbourhoods.
While at a turning point, Toronto has benefited from decades of significant
investment in public art. City policy has harnessed the unprecedented
development boom to make public art a compelling presence in the downtown
core and other areas of intense growth. Development is now moving into other
neighbourhoods, heralding opportunities for continued developer-driven public art
investment outside of the downtown core. The number of public art works within
the city borders is at an all-time high (700 public artworks in Toronto from 1967–
2015), and various programs co-exist to deliver large-scale permanent work,
festivals, and temporary and ephemeral installations across multiple media and
scales.
Yet there are gaps and challenges. The City of Toronto lacks a public art master
plan. Outside of intensive development zones, public art is scarce; and in the
urban core there are few sites where it is aggregated into larger or
interconnected projects. In comparison with other cities’ public art policies and
bylaws, Toronto lacks strong policy tools to bring public art to underserved areas.
The City of Toronto does not mandate a significant place in its own infrastructure
plans and budgets for public art. Moreover, Toronto’s formal public art guidelines
have not kept up with emergent global public art practices, which increasingly
encourage more open and diverse ideas of what public art is and can be,
emphasizing the power of public art for audience and viewer engagement. Even
within the limits of its current policy framework, there is much that the City of
Toronto could do to expand the scope and vision of public art. For example,
public art created through the City’s own capital projects offer opportunities to
4
realize projects beyond sculptural work, thereby redefining the notion of
permanence when it comes to public art.
Over the last four decades public art has galvanized neighborhoods around the
world, yet in Toronto it is a relatively untapped tool for engaging with and
promoting vibrant and inclusive communities. Inspired by the potential of art in
public space, a vigorous dialogue has sprung up from many sources with the
goal of making Toronto a leader in global public art practice. Participants seek to
evaluate current practice and explore future opportunities to expand the
definition, practice, and support for public art in this city. Though this
conversation transcends policy, policy is a key part of the puzzle. Spurred by this
dialogue and by the relevance of public art to universities, researchers from
OCAD University and the University of Toronto joined together to produce this
report, Redefining Public Art in Toronto.
While the final chapter provides an in-depth discussion of our conclusions and
recommendations, major recommendations are summarized below and
structured into immediate actions and midterm actions.
Op-Eds by נגה קידר
Through a series of spatial mappings and interviews with the neighborhood’s residents, we analyze the gaps between the planning rationality, based on a rigid dichotomy that sharply separates the “private” from the “public,” and the Arab-Islamic rationality that moves in between the private and the public. In response to the gaps and restrictions imposed by these rationalities, the local community creates a hierarchy of intermediate states through separation spaces and partnership spaces. These intermediate spaces constitute a special foundation for daily life in the neighborhood, which we call “a partition network” and which is based on partition and distribution – spatial partnership along with separation, and meet the residents’ needs, albeit partially. This examination through both spatial rationalities adds a new dimension to the accepted view that analyzes the socio-spatial occurrences in East Jerusalem mainly in terms of control versus resistance. This understanding, as well as the analysis of gaps and conflicts between them, constitute, in our view, a basis for the advancement of a more fertile dialogue and a more rational and accepted development of space in Eastern Jerusalem. Moreover, the study findings, which demonstrate the consistency of traditional spatial organization patterns, are surprising considering the social structure of the neighborhood, which is not based on distribution according to the extended family principle, in view of the accelerated urbanization processes and despite the continued struggle against Jewish sovereignty in the city.
significant investment. At the same time, Toronto is at an inflection point; our
investment and overall initiative has lagged vis-à-vis peer cities like Chicago, San
Francisco, and Ottawa. Toronto will thrive if we renew our commitment to a
powerful public art presence for our city and support that commitment with
appropriate private and public sector institutional capacity, funding, and
collaboration.
Given the cultural diversity of Toronto, its Indigenous population, ongoing
development, population growth, and the strength of its public institutions,
Toronto should be known for the reach, diversity, and transformational power of
public art in its downtown core and across its neighbourhoods and communities.
Toronto is Canada’s largest city and a dynamic hub of economic activity and
immigration. It is increasingly a vertical city where the public realm plays a critical
role in its social and recreational life. Public art can educate and engage youth,
spark tourism, help us to understand ourselves better, and enhance our day-today
experience of the urban environment. Public art can be a powerful force that
serves many constituencies and can unify and challenge us across our cultural
identities and neighbourhoods.
While at a turning point, Toronto has benefited from decades of significant
investment in public art. City policy has harnessed the unprecedented
development boom to make public art a compelling presence in the downtown
core and other areas of intense growth. Development is now moving into other
neighbourhoods, heralding opportunities for continued developer-driven public art
investment outside of the downtown core. The number of public art works within
the city borders is at an all-time high (700 public artworks in Toronto from 1967–
2015), and various programs co-exist to deliver large-scale permanent work,
festivals, and temporary and ephemeral installations across multiple media and
scales.
Yet there are gaps and challenges. The City of Toronto lacks a public art master
plan. Outside of intensive development zones, public art is scarce; and in the
urban core there are few sites where it is aggregated into larger or
interconnected projects. In comparison with other cities’ public art policies and
bylaws, Toronto lacks strong policy tools to bring public art to underserved areas.
The City of Toronto does not mandate a significant place in its own infrastructure
plans and budgets for public art. Moreover, Toronto’s formal public art guidelines
have not kept up with emergent global public art practices, which increasingly
encourage more open and diverse ideas of what public art is and can be,
emphasizing the power of public art for audience and viewer engagement. Even
within the limits of its current policy framework, there is much that the City of
Toronto could do to expand the scope and vision of public art. For example,
public art created through the City’s own capital projects offer opportunities to
4
realize projects beyond sculptural work, thereby redefining the notion of
permanence when it comes to public art.
Over the last four decades public art has galvanized neighborhoods around the
world, yet in Toronto it is a relatively untapped tool for engaging with and
promoting vibrant and inclusive communities. Inspired by the potential of art in
public space, a vigorous dialogue has sprung up from many sources with the
goal of making Toronto a leader in global public art practice. Participants seek to
evaluate current practice and explore future opportunities to expand the
definition, practice, and support for public art in this city. Though this
conversation transcends policy, policy is a key part of the puzzle. Spurred by this
dialogue and by the relevance of public art to universities, researchers from
OCAD University and the University of Toronto joined together to produce this
report, Redefining Public Art in Toronto.
While the final chapter provides an in-depth discussion of our conclusions and
recommendations, major recommendations are summarized below and
structured into immediate actions and midterm actions.