|

Public
spaces, public health

I FINALLY got to watch a video of "Gangs of New York"
the other day and remembered some of the articles that appeared
in Philippine newspapers trying to console Filipinos by pointing
out that New York, in the 1860s had terrible problems like
we have today: gang wars, dirty elections, and abject poverty.
I agree with that analysis, but I don't think we can just
sit back and hope that in a hundred years or so, we'll become
as "civilized" as New York City or the United States.
No, heavens, no, societies don't develop along a single model
and, in fact, I'd argue that many of the Philippines' most
serious problems hound us precisely because we insist on aping
the Americans.
There is, however, one aspect of New York which I wish we'd
imitate, and this is the way it was able to create a mega-city
while retaining a consciousness about the environment through
shared public spaces. Moreover, they did this even amid the
chaos and squalor that we saw in "Gangs of New York."
I'm talking here about New York's famous Central Park, which
marks its 150th anniversary this year. Yes, against the violence
and misery depicted in "Gangs of New York," the
city actually built an oasis for city dwellers. It's a model
our cities should be looking at so here's a bit of the park's
history.
I'll start out by referring you back to the movie, which
captures the congestion of the city. In 1850, New York City
had a population of half a million. I know that's about the
population of a single district in Metro Manila, but remember
this was the 19th century, with almost none of the basic services
we have today.
Many of the residents were migrants, escaping poverty and
political turbulence in Europe. But life in New York was often
even more unstable and miserable than it was back in Europe.
To escape urban blight, people flocked to the city's Greenwood
Cemetery, which offered some semblance of rural landscapes
and tranquility.
As early as 1844, William Cullen Bryant, the editor of the
Evening Post, called for the creation of a public park. Bryant
saw that a park could provide a healthy refuge for urban residents.
It took another 10 years before the city government began
to act. Between 1853 and 1856, the city spent five million
dollars to buy up undeveloped land, and in 1857, it launched
a public competition for a park plan.
The winning entry was the "Greensward Plan," produced
by Frederick Law Olmsted and Calvert Vaux. Construction began
in 1858 and was to continue for some 20 years. Out of rocky
and muddy swamps, and depending mainly on manual labor and
horse-drawn carts, the swamps were converted into Central
Park. Some four million trees, shrubs and other greenery were
planted, representing 1,400 species. Four artificial lakes
were created in a landscape that tried to imitate rolling
meadows.
The park has had its ups and downs and has often been the
subject of political squabbling. But each decline has been
followed by a renaissance. In 1934, following years of deterioration,
the park was renovated to introduce recreational facilities,
including 19 playgrounds and 12 ball fields. In the 1960s
and 1970s, the park again deteriorated, becoming notorious
for muggings. In 1980, a private non-profit organization,
the Central Park Conservancy, was created to raise funds for
the park's rehabilitation and maintenance. Today, the 843-acre
(about 350 hectares) park has come alive again, and gets as
many as 250,000 visitors in a weekend.
There are, of course, many other cities throughout the world
that have given emphasis to the creation of public spaces.
This is especially important in densely populated cities.
China has very limited living space in cities but this is
offset by large public buildings, from playgrounds to sports
stadiums and libraries. Britain and the Netherlands have their
parks and botanical gardens but go a step further: some cities
allow residents to claim temporary rights to small plots of
public land to tend small gardens. I love Brazilian cities'
public dance halls, where people of all ages, sizes, and genders
can samba away the night. All these public spaces make a great
difference for people's health, both physically and mentally.
In his book "Dead Season," American Alan Berlow
notes how the Philippines gives such low priority to creating
public facilities. I couldn't agree more. The very rich, with
the luxury of having their own mini-parks and fitness centers
within their own lavish homes, wouldn't care less about what
the unwashed masses have. Drive through our rural areas and
the two biggest buildings will be the Catholic church and
the cockpit. Sure there's always a plaza in the poblacion,
but with a weary-looking statue of Rizal in the center, weeds
growing all around.
The city of Manila bears watching, with Mayor Lito Atienza's
efforts to revive the city producing mixed results. The Metropolitan
Theater continues to languish and the adjoining Arroceros
Park continues to be the subject of dispute, but the Manila
Bay restoration and the building of children's playgrounds
in several parts of the city are commendable.
Perhaps the next step is to get private citizens more involved
through something like the Central Park Conservancy. The other
week, I was out on the boulevard taking in the Manila Bay
sunset when I noticed that on the next table a child kept
throwing pieces of paper into the bay. Her parents watched,
and did nothing. I wasn't surprised. With malls dominating
our concept of public space, we don't demand the creation
of real public spaces for our minds and bodies. And when we
do get them, like the Manila Bay area, we have nothing of
the community spirit to maintain these spaces.
Maybe, with time, we will appreciate how public spaces promote
public health and demand more playgrounds, parks, sports stadiums,
cultural centers (note with a small "c") and libraries
as our right, while learning to be responsible for nurturing
those spaces so that they grow into our national psyche.
Comments to miguel@pinoykasi.net
|