In other words, the perception of Union Square as a publicly owned space is simply an illusion.
Since the 1980s, the city has increasingly relied on private intervention as a means of stimulating and revamping public areas. Private corporations were granted control and oversight of financing, maintaining, and governing these areas. Without a doubt, the rise of Business Improvement Districts and Local Development Corporations transformed Union Square into an economic and cultural hub that seems to burst with vitality, diversity, and opportunity. But in this process, there has been an overwhelming loss of authenticity – which Zukin defines as a form of democracy. Although democracy can at times be “loud, unruly, unpredictable, and dangerous,” we should always strive to preserve a degree of self-governance. Authenticity is also defined by a greater mingling or interaction of peoples from all walks of life (i.e. people from different racial, socio-economic, and educational backgrounds).
In Laura Bliss’s, “The New York That Belonged to the City,” she discusses the problematic effects of hyper-gentrification on the city. Over time, there has been a deterioration of the distinct New York character and a rise of a “plasticine playground” in its place. Similar to Zukin, Bliss argues that the wealthy, private sector has over-exerted its dominance on the city and has thus perverted our physical and cultural landscapes. Bliss says, “‘Hyper-gentrification’ is no natural turn of the free market, but the culmination of calculated takeover by elites.” She goes further by saying, “Where immigrants, minorities, radicals, queers, runaways, and everyday workers once built an island of tolerance, grit, and creative verve… tourists, college bros, and the super rich now occupy a blandified fortress of consumption.” Going forward, it is imperative for us to be conscious of the change in our urban surroundings, as well as be critical of our vision for the future of New York.
