The person and their self

The relationships within Thompkins Square Park consist of interactions involving people and objects. The nature of these relationships, person and person, person and object (e.g. – bench), and the person and their self, all form in order to create the affective atmosphere and the ecology of the park.


While some of these relationships are obvious in nature, some, such as the person’s interactions with oneself (if they were napping in the park, for example) must be contemplated in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the nature of the park. Within Autonomy of Affect, the article states “The levels at play could be multiplied to infinity… volition and cognition, expectation and suspense…and so on” (33). So, while there are many possibilities to consider, one of the relationships I am most curious in is the relation of the person and the self. How does each individual’s internal processing affect their perception of the park? From the history to the culture, what exactly are the influencers at play?

Additionally, the park, relative to the short film Fragments on Machines, can be connotated to the notion that any ecology is fragmented. The film, which depicts multiple still scenes intertwined with black screens and rapidly paced shots, emphasizes the idea that every type of ecology is substantiated with various types of interactions. Some of these interactions that I will also study while in the park should be those who not only relax and use the park as a therapeutic source to unwind, but also those that use it as a shortcut while in a rush, or people who bring their dogs to play in the park.



~ by adamzhujiang on October 5, 2015.

2 Responses to “The person and their self”

  1. Its interesting that you are focusing on the various roles that the park plays for people. You note that it is a place of relaxation, exercise, or even just convenience for a quick morning commute. This can allow for a multi-faceted look at how the park functions. In this regard, my critique would be to question the idea of looking at how person affects self and rather how space affects self. I see what you mean by taking on an introspective look at the various players in the park and what their individuality adds to the atmosphere, but in regards to affect, I would rather suggest to look at how the physicality of the park influences how the people use it and not the other way around. For example, if the weather is bad, what are people doing? If the park is crowded, how do people respond? If there’s a new attraction temporarily on display, do passer-bys take notice? That could allow you to see the park in the role of affect that those individuals using it might not even consciously realize.

    -Stephanie L

  2. Adam, I like what you have written about the relationship between a person and their self. It’s not something that I previously considered in this context, so I am now thinking I should be doing this with my own ecology.

    Your argument relating Fragments On Machines with your ecology was strong. Finishing that paragraph I feel like I absolutely understood your thought process and rationale. Looking at how different people use the park, including relaxation, play, or as a shortcut on their commute, offers a wide range of affect to explore.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s