ANALYSIS
THE CITY AND THE CAR
Mimi Sheller & John Urry © Joint Editors and Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2000
The article analyzes rather than questions; it aims to discuss the specific character of the car and emphasizes the need for social analysts to take seriously their relationship with the car. In doing so, it highlights the lack of content in globalization literature, despite the car's integral role in global cultures. To support this argument, the article refers to contemporary global cities that remain fundamentally rooted in and defined by the car and its influence on social life.
Within the article, the problem is framed across three disciplines that should have examined the social impact of the car, given its significant consequences, which have been largely overlooked by the social sciences. Among these disciplines—industrial sociology, consumption practices, and urban studies—the article focuses on urban studies as its primary concern, given the notable absence of cars in urban analysis. From the perspective of the founders of sociology, the modern city and modernist ideology become central to the discussion, particularly in the context of the contraction of social space, the density of interactions, and the compression of social distance that defined the modern city. According to the authors, it is critical to understand how urban life has failed to account for the car's transformative impact on modern urban and suburban dwellers in terms of time-space dynamics.
The article delivers a pointed critique: urban studies have remained remarkably static, paying little attention to the forms of mobility within, across, and through cities. This critique underscores the authors' main argument—that urban studies have focused disproportionately on the sociospatial practices of walking, presuming the car’s movement and environmental hazards to be irrelevant for understanding the essence of urban life.
To bolster this critique, the article introduces the concept of automobility, asserting that urban studies have neglected to explore how the car reconfigures urban life through travel and socialization within an automobilized time-space. It delves into the intersection of mobility and urbanity as defining elements of modernity, arguing that automobility must be critically examined within the framework of civil societies.
Although the article’s epistemological foundation is rooted in subjectivism, echoes of constructivist and objectivist stances are evident. Subjectivity implies that perceptions of the car shape its reality, particularly within the urban and social contexts. This perspective posits that the car’s reality does not exist independently of perception. At the same time, the article hints at a constructivist approach, exploring how different people, eras, and cultures construct varying meanings of the car in relation to the same phenomenon. Objectivist epistemology is also present, suggesting that the car, as a product of man-machine interaction, creates a spatial organization that exists independently of individual consciousness. This interaction forms its own mechanized and emotional consciousness, organically affecting society and grounding the article's claims in objectivity.
The article synthesizes insights from multiple disciplines to present the car as both a coordinated phenomenon and a social manifestation, creating a cohesive analysis of urban morphological transformation through mobility. This interdisciplinarity positions the article at the crossroads of industrial sociology, consumption practices, and urban studies, aiming to integrate knowledge and develop new methodologies. The authors advocate for the emergence of new fields, such as car and transportation studies or intelligent mobility design, emphasizing the need to transcend disciplinary boundaries. Simultaneously, the article aligns with transdisciplinarity, as it seeks to move beyond individual disciplines to construct a holistic understanding of the car and its societal implications.
The main theoretical debate centers on automobility as a complex amalgam of civil society and urban life. Automobility is presented as both a social practice and a mode of dwelling—not in stationary homes but in mobile, semi-privatized capsules. The authors argue that automobility has reshaped citizenship and the public sphere, suggesting that civil society should be reconceptualized as a “civil society of automobility,” comprising quasi-objects such as car-drivers, car-passengers, and pedestrians. The dual resonance of the term “auto” is particularly striking, referring both to human autonomy (as in autobiography or autoerotic) and to mechanical self-movement (as in automaton or automobile). This duality culminates in the concept of the car-driver as a hybrid assemblage of humans, machines, roads, buildings, and cultural practices, which the authors argue has profound implications for contemporary urban analysis.
Another central theoretical debate examines how automobility redefines time and space in cities, shaping social life through the negotiation of instantaneous time and expansive space. The notion of “dwelling in mobility” takes center stage, illustrating how people use cars to transcend distances and engage in fragmented activities within constrained timeframes. The conclusive theoretical discussion envisions a redesigned urban future, where public spaces might be reclaimed and reimagined within an evolved framework of automobility.
Methodologically, the article adopts a constructivist approach, seeking to elucidate in-depth interpretations of the car as a social phenomenon. It emphasizes the diversity, density, and stimuli of urban life, considering cars as central to the experience of urban space. The qualitative approach is reinforced by its reliance on written, experiential, observable, and interpretative data, alongside artifacts such as buildings and urban infrastructure. The subjective reality of automobility, coupled with the authors’ interactions with the subject, underscores the article’s qualitative research design.
At its core, the article posits automobility as a mode of dwelling, architecture, and association, where movement constitutes cities as civil spheres. It explores urbanization as the intensification of human habitats and automobilization as their dispersal, offering a nuanced understanding of how cars shape socialities and fragment temporal flows, particularly through suburbanization.
The article is radical in its content and approach, demonstrating how automobility fosters a hybrid civil society of car-drivers, blurs public and private boundaries, and redefines mobility and communication within urban infrastructures. It concludes by critiquing the transformation of public spaces into traffic flows, asserting that urban analysts have yet to fully grasp the implications of this shift.
Reflecting on the industrial revolution, the article underscores the car’s pivotal role in shaping society and design practices. It advocates for a convergence of architecture, urban planning, and car design to foster a more integrated and sustainable future.
Through its interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary lens, the article challenges traditional disciplinary silos, urging a unified approach to understanding the profound social and spatial impacts of the car on modern cities.
