| | | | || || || | | |||||||||||||||||||

THOUGHTS
The architectural descriptions of the arcades are highly seductive. Elevated “sky”-streets, whose “passage is a city, a world in miniature”, composed of a classless society. It is a utopian vision. The initial arcades were a joint venture; a “private” partnership that projected a collective identity. It seems that initially they were “phalansteries,” [groups of people living together in community; free of extra regulation and holding property in common]. People lived in or adjacent to their workplace. Unregulated public access was permitted. Public space flowed through these privately constructed zones. Exterior and interior was blurred. This is interesting because in “spatial products” similar to Carousel Mall the line between regulated and unregulated or public and private space is clearly drawn. PHYSICALLY this boundary is crossed upon immediate entrance to a facility, within the confines of the “revenue envelope”. Could entry halls or atriums extend the “public” street inside, uninterrupted spatial flows? Could we achieve leisure/shopping architecture similar to the Arcades of Paris?

CONCERNS
How is cyberspace regulated within public spaces? Should Starbucks infiltrate exterior public space with its private, “locked” wireless networks?
[http://www.coin-operated.com/projects/wifiliberator] – EYEBEAM OpenLab