Conventionally, planning history is seen as the story of a series of ‘progressive’ planners seeking to create and reform our cities according to a set of utopian principles leading to a set of vague ‘improved’ conditions. The voices and desires of communities were, and in many ways are, missing, however. How can meaningful places be created if the voices, experiences, and knowledges of communities are unheard or ignored? This chapter focuses on the histories and stories of queer planners and communities. After a short introduction outlining our approach to understanding what planning history is (and what it could be), we define the benefits of a queer understanding of our planning past. We seek to understand the representation of queerness in the materials, structures, regulations, and policies of planning, thereby seeking to show what is known and what is absent. We explore how both awareness and representation of queerness can be used to actively disrupt planning norms, engaging a wider set of people, and empowering marginalised voices in shaping our cities. We conclude with a restating of the need to challenge and critique dominant ways of doing planning history.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

A Queer Lens for Planning History

  • Michael Short

摘要

Conventionally, planning history is seen as the story of a series of ‘progressive’ planners seeking to create and reform our cities according to a set of utopian principles leading to a set of vague ‘improved’ conditions. The voices and desires of communities were, and in many ways are, missing, however. How can meaningful places be created if the voices, experiences, and knowledges of communities are unheard or ignored? This chapter focuses on the histories and stories of queer planners and communities. After a short introduction outlining our approach to understanding what planning history is (and what it could be), we define the benefits of a queer understanding of our planning past. We seek to understand the representation of queerness in the materials, structures, regulations, and policies of planning, thereby seeking to show what is known and what is absent. We explore how both awareness and representation of queerness can be used to actively disrupt planning norms, engaging a wider set of people, and empowering marginalised voices in shaping our cities. We conclude with a restating of the need to challenge and critique dominant ways of doing planning history.