I'm toying with an idea for a new feature, and I'm hoping for some reader feedback. If you're a regular, an occasional reader, or even a drop-in checking out Where for the first time, I hope you'll weigh in on this concept, as the reader response will determine its future.I read posts on two blogs recently that have started my brain a-thinkin' about how effective a good game can be. (Monday's
post on the X Prize, and the value of competition, served as part of the inspiration as well). The first post, over at Inhabitat, talks about a new board game called Play Rethink, in which players use a spinner and product cards to create a variety of environmentally-friendly design challenge scenarios which they must then address. The intent is to get normal people (non-professionals) thinking about eco-design and issues like local vs. imported materials, sustainability, and adaptive re-use. It does so, rather ingeniously, I think, by making the process fun and entertaining. It's public engagement through play.
Play is a powerful method of communication. When we are playing (on a playground, a sports field, a computer, etc.) our guard is down. We are having fun, and that makes us more receptive to the ideas that we are being exposed to through the game. Thus, it seems like play would be an excellent way to address seemingly intractable urban problems. Make policy and urban design fun, and we might start coming up with some interesting answers to exhausting questions.
Enter inspiration #2: a recent post at Brand Avenue spotlights a 100-day-long game called "Future City," being facilitated by the
Hamilton Spectator, a newspaper in the city of Hamilton, in Canada. In the game, the paper poses scenarios in the city's imagined future and asks readers to vote on the outcomes. There's a fun interactive map of the evolved version of the city that
Spectator readers are creating, and the whole thing seems to be quite the little success. It's getting Hamiltonites actively thinking about and participating in their city's future, which will (hopefully) translate to these citizens becoming more politically active and aware at the local level.
Where's "Conscious Urbanism" series has, for whatever reason (I suppose I should know, but I can't come up with anything solid), fallen by the wayside over the past several months. I find this unfortunate, since the discussion of active citizenship and innovative neighborhood-based solutions was part of my original inspiration for starting this blog. As stated in the
inaugural post, I have always hoped that Where might be able to spark some interesting conversations about urbanism, but I have admittedly had little success in encouraging such activity thus far.
Thus, Conscious Urbanism provides us with a possible jolt of conversational energy. I would very much like to create some sort of game, as a recurring feature at Where, that takes urban problems found in news items or submitted by readers and challenges readers to create, discuss, and debate potential solutions. The idea is, of course, to start something constructive -- and
fun. (It is intended to be a game, after all). But I'm not yet sure exactly what form the game should take...there would need to be some framework of rules and instructions -- nothing too limiting, but enough to give the game some direction. And, certainly, there would need to be a clarification of what, exactly, "Conscious Urbanism" really is. (Admittedly, it's been a bit vague in the past). Whatever it is, it's about people working together, socially, to solve urban problems, so it seems logical to re-think the feature in a more participatory way.
So this brings us to a crossroads, and to an invitation. I hope that you'll sound off on this little seed of an idea. If you have an idea for how the game might be structured, or how participation might be encouraged, or even if you just want to voice your interest in participating once the thing gets off and running, I do hope you'll take a moment to contribute. If you think this sounds utterly inane, say that, too. I'm open to suggestions as to why it shouldn't be done. At this point, I'm open to suggestions, period.
Of course, if there is no response, I'll let this one slip quietly by. There's no need to push the idea if there's no interest in participation, as reader involvement would be critical to this feature's success. Of course, if you have nothing to say, by all means, say nothing! :-) I do hope you'll participate, though. We'll see where things go from here...
(Photo from Flickr user colampearson. The original full-color version can be viewed by clicking the photo.)Links:
Play Rethink: The Eco-Design Game (Inhabitat)Dreaming Big (Brand Avenue)
Fast-forward a bit. Let's say that it's 2050, since that seems to be a popular year for speculation these days. You're living in a stylish downtown penthouse a few blocks from a gleaming transit station servicing three different high-speed lines. You work in an office building as a Chief Innovation Officer -- not a light title to carry, by any means -- for a major technology firm. One day after work, you take a train a few miles west of the bustling commercial hub where you work to a rapidly-gentrifying neighborhood to meet a friend at a sunny sidewalk cafe on a dense street filled with shops and new condos. You are living the American Dream, with a beautiful home and a fantastic job in the heart of a dynamic urban center with its finger pressed firmly against the pulse of globalized culture. You are a proud resident of one of the world's Great Cities, capital letters required.
Sorry for the slow week. Regular posting should resume after this weekend. In the meantime, there's always plenty of weekend reading to go around!
Fair warning: this installation of Weekend Reading is kind of one huge shameless plug for a project I'm involved with called Solutions Twin Cities.