The concept of the Right to the City, introduced into scientific use by Henri Lefebvre in the late 1960s, is actively used in the study of conflicts between residents and city authorities, as well as between different groups of citizens. However, such studies tend to overlook a special type of city — capitals, where the social demands of local residents oppose the political expectations of the country's population. In this case the debate around the interpretation of space comes to the fore, and here the conflict is transferred from the field of social and political activism to the field of symbols. This problem is especially acute in countries with ambiguous identities, where the capital is aimed to represent geographically and culturally diverse territories. Moscow is one of such capitals. This article, using the example of Moscow Zaryadye Park, examines the conflict of capital city space interpretation and possible ways of resolving it. Drawing on such sources as the projects, created by the participants of the contest to create the architectural concept of the park, analytical materials of “Zaryadye” digest, issued by Moscow Architecture and Urban Planning Committee, as well as Yandex.Wordstat web service statistics, the author shows, that the symbols of the capital and the local can coexist in one landscape. The article demonstrates that Zaryadye Park contains images of the capital that represent national identity. These images are embodied in specific design solutions that provide a balance between the interests of citizens, who perceive this space mainly physically, and the perception of the country’s population, for whom visual images play an important role. According to the author’s conclusion, it is precisely thanks to such objects as Zaryadye Park that it is possible to resolve the conflict around the interpretation of capital city space, which for the population of the country turns out to be political (the space of images), and for citizens — social (the space of functions).
Read full abstract