When we define the city, there are two major approaches - geographical one is a way of measuring, mapping. Another is sociological way - in what ways can urbanism be said to denote a distinctive way of life?
First, this is about geographical definitions of the city. Geographical definition is related to size, administrative divisions, functional regions.
Second, we can say social definitions 1. City constitutes community, being intimate/personalized relationships/strong kinships. Its strong community belief and land basis of wealth is related to little mobility. City also has association which is impersonal or contractual relationships having weak kinship. This association is based on money basis of wealth and high mobility. So city has two different aspects about community.
Furthermore, we also can say another social definition 2. This is defined by Louis Wirth in 1938. It is related to size which has more impersonal relations and division of labour. So people contact more likely on contractual basis. And density is also related because it is results in diversification and specialization which have close physical contact but distant social relations.
Based on this definitions, we can ask for ourselves. Are our cities too big? In what sense is the city a community? How is the politics of propinquity negotiated?
We can see cities as communities. That looks like mosaics of multiple, overlapping communities.
There are many kinds of communities and it has appearance of the contemporary fragmentation of the city-privatism.
In cities, it is possible to distinguish levels of city living. It is two levels -real and imagined. When we imagine city, an image is the set of ideas through which the city is interpreted in terms of the imagination we have of it. And this is influenced in turn by stories of the city, like the media (TV, newspapers, films) and others. What is your image of New York? From where have you learnt about NY? If you have been to NY, was your...