Liminality as an Autopoietic Process within Spatial Identity

Katarina Bošnjak

doi:10.54889/issn.2744-208X.2021.1.1.28

Authors

Katarina Bošnjak University of Sarajevo, Faculty of Architecture

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54889/issn.2744-208X.2021.1.1.28

Abstract

Spatial identity surpasses geographical boundaries of a certain space, and denotes not only physical characteristics of space, but its meaning to people that use it, as well as their intercommunication, which produces new social and spatial meaning. Unless there is an abrupt change in social structure or formal/functional transformation of (un)built environment, we perceive spatial identity as something almost permanent. However, it is in a constant state of change, existing in a present state that relies on our past experiences and contains projections of our future, maintained through constant background processes of disorganization and
concomitant organization – in other words, identity is in the state of (perpetual) liminality. Liminality is the product, as well as the initiator of autopoietic processes within identity, which leads to the main premise of this article – (spatial) identity is an autopoietic system. This is analyzed through three chosen aspects of place attachment: ritual, memory and architecture.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anderson, B. (1983, 2006). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London, New York: Verso.

Aquile, I., Lekovic, M., & Sanchez, J. R. (2014). ''Urban Trauma and SelfOrganization of the City. Autopoiesis in the Battle of Mogadishu and the Siege of Sarajevo '', Urban, 63-76.

Assman, J. (2005). Kulturno pamćenje: Pismo, sjećanje i politički identitet u ranim visokim kulturama. Zenica: Biblioteka Tekst.

Kostof, S. (1991). The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings Through History. London: Thames.

Lacan, J. (2006). Écrits: The First Complete Edition in English. New York, London: W. W. Northon&Company.

Lefebvre, H. (1974, 1984). Production of Space. Oxford, Cambridge: Blackwell.

Price, C. (2003). Re: CP. (H.-U. Obrist, Ed.) Basel: Birkhäuser.

Rykwert, J. (1988). The Idea of a Town: The Anthropology of Urban Form in Rome, Italy and the Ancient World. London: The MIT Press.

Said, E. W. (1978, 1995, 2003). Orientalism. London: Penguin Books.

Seidl, D. (2004). ''Luhmann’s theory of autopoietic social systems'', Munich Business Research, 1-28.

Turner, V. (1969). The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. Chicago: Aldline Publishing.

Turner, V. (1974). ''Liminal to liminoid in play, flow and ritual: An essay in comparative symbology'', Rice University Studies, str. 53-92.

Varela, F., Maturana, H. R., & Uribe, R. (1981). ''Autopoiesis: The Organization of Living Systems, Its Characterization and a Model'', Cybernetics Forum, 7-14