Very few concepts are transparently transhistorical, or globally global in a transhistorical sense. None of those that I commonly use, in my professional setting, are. Literature, the author, the text, the work— all these concepts are dated and situated. Moreover, only very few concepts cut across planes of existence as diverse (although related) as politics, culture, urbanization, territorialization, or domesticity. Public space, however, is one of those concepts that, although unqualifi able as “universal” in the sense of an anthropological structure, could be described as transhistorical, as global, and as traversing almost all planes of existence. The last fi fty years have continuously attested to its importance. I say “fi fty,” because in 1962 Jurgen Habermas proposed an archaeology of modernity around the conceptualization of public space.1 “Fifty,” because for fi fty years all revolutions, all political upheavals have expressed themselves via the occupation of public spaces, up to and including Tahrir Square, Zucotti Park, and the Puerta del Sol. Because we are continuously reminded that the global network represents a new agora, a term for which “public space” might read as the modern translation. Because our hyperurbanized world has come into being alongside spaces other than those places of privatization: parks, gardens, and what anthropologist Marc Auge terms “nonplaces”