Baker Center: Representation of space, or representational space?

Part 0.9- Choose a public space in or around Athens to research. This is a pseudo-public. Either way, it should be a place that either functions or has the potential to function as a public space as described by Mitchell:

Baker Center, as presented on Ohio University’s main page dedicated to the space, describes the place as a “vibrant” and “welcoming” hub that serves “students, faculty, staff, parents, alumni, community members, and other campus visitors. Baker would be considered a pseudo-public place for several reasons.

PART I. Baker Center as a Representation of Space:

Even though Baker University Center contains an array of different spaces (including conference rooms, dining areas, student organization offices, service centers, and university departments), the space is one that is planned in a specific manner as to be a “representation” of a certain space. As a representation of space, or planned, controlled, ordered space, Baker Center is planned to have a “main street effect” both through its design and through its function (Mitchell 115). Ohio University explicitly states that the building was designed by architects and planners (specifically Moody/Nolan and WTW Architects of Columbus and Pittsburgh, respectively) who sought to construct expansive windows, red brick exteriors, high ceilings, and white columns as to create a planned space that feels casual and inviting yet expansive and “mall-like.” Additionally, the building was planned in order to function as a “connector” between the upper and lower areas of campus (the connector, i.e. the central escalator system, also serves to emphasize the mall-like quality of the building). Baker Center can be considered as a pseudo-public place that definitely looks, feels, and seemingly functions as a public place, yet is underlying backed by “red tape” bureaucracy that covertly controls and orders the building against total public use by both university and community residents alike. Like in the Mitchell Article, “there is little tolerance for uprisings,” and true free speech or the right to assemble is squashed in this public place (113). To get a better grasp on the clean, ergonomic, and arguably “consumerist” style and design of Baker Center, take a look at some pictures:

The strong aspects of architectural symmetry, brightness from natural light, multi-level construction, vaulted ceilings with chandeliers, overwhelmingly neutral colors, and floor lamp lighting fixtures that look incredibly similar to street lamp posts all denote a space that is free, open, large, and welcoming (and that is exactly how the planners, architects, and the university want you to feel upon entering this space). But, how is this space controlled “behind the scenes?” Baker Center allows groups to use their “public” space in certain areas. These areas include the fourth floor, outdoor area by the entrance and the atrium area on the first floor entrance. These areas are a representation of space because they are highly controlled and planned. You must sign up within the Baker Center to be able to set up at one of the allotted areas. In addition to this, you can only stay at your given place on a certain day and time. Any other time and you would be illegally using this public area. Another way that Baker can be seen as a representation of space is through the activities held in the building. There are several organized and planned exhibitions, shows, and events that are put on throughout the year in the center. Examples of these events would be this year’s American Planning Association (Ohio Chapter) conference, the weekly Blue Pencil Comedy, and the occasional Red Cross blood drive. These are all planned and controlled by the university and have to follow certain rules in order to continue to be allowed to use the Baker Center spaces. No one has explicit permission to just walk in as use this public space as a true public area. Baker Center is successfully a representation of space through all of these aspects explained.

PART II. Baker Center as a Representational Space:

Baker Center has many different functions. It is a place where economic exchanges can take place, people can buy food, coffee, a new laptop and school themed paraphernalia. It is used as a place for informal and formal meetings. It can be used as a place of recreation, there are pool tables on the first floor. It serves as an office for different departments. It has also been a sight of protest (which are now not allowed). In an aside, at OSU protests are allowed within the student union and have been exercising this right more frequently.

While I do not use this space, it seems like it is widely used by a majority of the student and faculty/staff population. The users of this space typically do not challenge the design/purpose of the place. Last year, students did challenge the purpose of Baker Center by sitting in the main lobby in protest of Donald Trump and is racist policies. 70 students were arrested because they were impacting operations, egress and creating a safety issue.

I am not entirely sure who is absent from the space since everyone is technically welcome. I guess I have never seen someone in a wheelchair in Baker Center. While there is an elevator and handicap access to bathrooms, the space still seems to give off a message that handicap people are not welcome.

In the section of Mitchell’s article titled The Importance of Public Space in Democratic Society “by calling on the rhetoric of inclusion and interaction that the public sphere and public space are meant to represent, excluded groups have been able to argue for their rights as part of the active public”. The handicapped and citizens who wish to protest have to right to be included in Baker and to use it.

Public Space and the Contemporary City- “imposing limits and controls on spatial interactions has been one of the principal aims of urban and corporate planners during this century”. The university banned indoor protests as a result of the protests held in February 2017.

In New Ways of Thinking About Space- the article notes that even though we have been given rights by our nation via the constitution, that the cities (the university) can easily take away our rights. As noted above, Ohio University took away our right to protest inside and if we want to gather outside we need a permit.

PART III. How do these two aspects coincide/conflict with one another?:

One thing that coincides between the representation of space and the representational space of Baker Center is the underlying “red tape” bureaucracy that covertly controls and orders the building against total public use. A student union should be a place where students can gather to protest and at OU it is not. Another is that while most of the building is open to the general public, there are plenty of places that are ‘off limits’ to the students.

Essentially, Baker Center is a pseudo public space that has many written and unwritten rules. Students should play by these rules, or risk repercussions from the University.

In reality, college campuses really do not have public spaces. Every place is essentially a representation of space even though it may masquerade as a representational space.