The Athens Dog Park: A Space for Everyone?

Spaces of Representation

This space is planned to be a space that allows dog owners to have their dogs roam freely. This is because of the strict leash laws that govern dog owners in Athens.  It is physically delineated within a larger park system in Athens by fences so as to keep the dogs within the space.  It’s loosely patrolled by vigilante dog owners who feel the need to uphold the rules. The park is fenced in order to keep dogs in, which functions as a manifestation of control over the area. According to the city of Athens’ website, rules for the dog park are as follows: all dogs at the park must be leashed at all time, clean up all messes, and close all gates.

The Athens Dog Park is a prime example of a representation of space because it was constructed as a place for owners of all types of dogs.  Many spaces in Athens don’t allow dogs, but this space was designed for use specifically by them and their owners. Looking at the posted dog park rules, there are no restrictions placed on the size of the dogs allowed to use the park. However as we will see, the actual use of the dog park does not always allow for owners of all types of dogs.

Representational Space

The dog park was constructed with the intent that all dog owners could bring their pets to this space.  Owners of small dogs bring them to the park so that they can simply get outside. Owners of larger dogs, however, bring their animals to the park so they can burn off their copious amounts of energy. What often results is larger dogs invading the space of smaller dogs, terrorizing them, and angering the small dogs’ owners.  This space was not physically planned to accommodate these two different types of dogs and their owners. Evidence for this is provided by the size of the dog park’s features. Clearly, the rocks and tunnels present are designed for larger dogs. Joy and Zen are able to only examine, rather than use, these features.  Small dog owners, therefore, were absent.

Spaces for Representation
In an effort to challenge the margianalizing norm that small dogs are absent and excluded from the dog park, we brought two Chihuahuas, Joy and Zen, to the dog park to interact with larger dogs. As we expected, only larger dogs were present at the dog park. Immediately upon entering, a larger dog growled at us and at Joy and Zen.  The dog park rules sign clearly states that owners need to keep control of “unruly dogs.” However, the owner of this dog, rather than apologizing simply commented on how cute the Chihuahuas were. Rather than taking note of the fear exhibited by Joy and Zen at the behavior of her dog, she contributed to marginalizing behavior that leads many small dog owners to refrain from using the park.

Interview

After briefly speaking with Ken’s roommate Eric, the owner of Joy and Zen, we found out his perception on the Athens Dog Park:

“The idea is great; it’s one of the only places in Athens where dogs can run freely and meet other dogs.  The problem is that little dogs are left out.  My dogs are terrified of all things bigger than them.  Even though some bigger dogs don’t mean to, they scare Joy and Zen when they run up and pounce on them.  My dogs don’t like going to the dog park because of that.  It doesn’t accommodate them. There isn’t a space for them to run around without being afraid.”

As we can see, the dog park does not fulfill the needs of every dog.  Non-aggressive dogs still frighten the smallest of pooches due to the nature of the park, and because of this, dogs like Joy and Zen are “left out” of the dog park.

Home and the Elderly

Part One

For many elderly persons, the home is not just a couple of sets of walls – the home can be a site that represents independence, holds special memories, and provides a sense of security and comfort. As they age, attachment to the relations socially embedded within their home grows. Valentine (2001) notes that people often treat their homes differently throughout the course of their lives due to the amount of time that is spent within it: a place imbued with years and years of time, memories, and possessions will most likely have a strong sense of place attachment. Their home, not just any material home, becomes a specific place that embodies them throughout the rest of their lives. Kellet and Moore (2003) call such a process “home-making.” Home-making is then what separates the material part of the home from the personally and emotionally constructed home.  Giving up such a place then becomes intrinsically tied to a loss to their identity.  Identity and home, for many elderly people, can often then be considered as one in the same.

            After reviewing several online magazine articles, advertisements, a movie, and newspaper articles, I have found that there are different ways of thinking about the home for elderly people in our society

1. The private home is a site of independence.

This point is first because it is articulated in nearly every “cultural” artifact that I encountered. For example, the first artifact that I found was an NPR article with the headline “At 88, a Chance to be Independent Again.” It was about certain legislature that was being passed involving funding that would go towards in-home care for the elderly. In our society, we relate the private sphere with words like “freedom” and “independence” so much to the point that without ownership, a dwelling without it is hard to classify as a home.  From the opposite end of the spectrum, Kellet and Moore (2003) found that some refer to this type of ownership is part of the meaning behind “home” and without it, people lack security.

There are entire businesses that sell gadgets to improve the ability for elderly people to live away from the nursing home.  Agingcare.com (2013) sells everything from toilet raisers to television remotes so the elderly can improve their living situation.  All of these items are intertwined with freedom and independence in the home. 

2. It’s not necessarily about losing material possessions in the home, it’s about who is taking the responsibilities associated with the home away.

For many elderly people the thought of not being able to use the accessories of the home is discomforting.  However, I think that its not really about losing the possessions; its more about losing the power to use them and to whom.  This is why Home Helpers (2013), a business that provides the elderly with home health care professionals, claims to “keep the home as he/she does” and “help them use their home.”

In the movie Requiem for a Dream, one of the main characters repeatedly steals his elderly mothers’ appliances and sells them.  Despite the fact that she is in horrible health, the mother continues to buy her appliances back from the pawn shop.  Several times throughout the movie, the son also tries to put her in “a home.” The mother abhorrently rejects the suggestion each time. Not only is she attached to her specific things, but she is less bothered by her son stealing her microwave than she is by thought of having someone take care of her or going to a nursing home. For her, the home is much more than a wooden structure; it is a place that supports all of her daily activities that define her as a human being.

           

3. There are really very few positive things about nursing homes.

Okay, that statement may be a bit of a stretch. I’m sure that there are positive things about nursing homes, I just did not find very many instances during my brief search. Neglect, for example, often occurs in nursing homes because most are for-profit institutions.  A CBS (2009) article had some comments that compared the care that for-profit nursing homes provide to be worse than within prisons. This article even cited some instances where the elderly have been left to sit in their own feces for hours. According to the Huffington Post (2011), two nursing home workers were arrested in 2011 for coating seven dementia patients with Vaseline.  This cruel “joke” was intended to make the patients “slippery for the next workers.”

Nursing home patients also feel a general loss of control and self esteem. Because of this, one electronic magazine titled Home and Family (2010) insists that the transition into the nursing home requires a great deal of comfort from that of the family. Taking away a persons routine can be demoralizing, and they suggest that this can be overcome by creating new ones for the nursing home patient or else self esteem loss is inevitable.

            Besides basic human rights violations and self esteem issues, I feel that some nursing homes can be compared homeless shelters: these institutions create an identity for those who use them.  Just as Kellet and Moore (2003) found that shelters create an identity for some users, nursing homes also allow for an undesired identity to be bestowed upon the elderly.  Nursing homes are seen as a last resort and a sign of complete loss over a situation. Just as both of my grandparents loath the idea of it, I think that most elderly people do as well. Substituting a meaningless material home for that of the meaningfully constructed “home” (Valentine 2001) thereby constitutes as a loss in the game of life.  The identity that comes with being a “nursing home patient” can cause a loss in self esteem for the elderly, somewhat to that of the shelter user.  Because of this, I think that nursing homes share similarities to that of a homeless shelter.

4. It’s hard to picture Grandma and Grandpa without their home.

The material home is embedded with so much meaning that elderly family members are difficult to imagine without it.  Throughout our childhoods we have been bombarded with popular images depicting grandparents and their home.  Take, for instance, the classic children’s song “Over the hill and Through the Wood.” All of the lyrics relate warm, fuzzy feelings to that of the idea of grandma’s “home.”  Grandmother’s house is not just a place; it is a pleasant place that makes people feel secure.  Of course, this is a popularized notion (Just as Valentine points out, the home can be made up of other types of meaning), but it is what’s engrained within the minds of most when they picture an ideal scene involving the elderly and the home.  Just typing in the word "elderly" in a Google image search will elicit photos of elderly persons in some type of a home.

Part Two:

 The concept of the home for the Elderly is deeply interwoven with memories, feelings of independence, and is a form of self-identification.  However, many elderly persons do not get to pass their entire lives in their primary residence due to health or financial reasons.  As I found through my document analysis, this seemingly normal life occurrence changes much more than just the four walls that previously surrounded them.  The transition from the emotionally-embedded home that allowed personal freedom to assisted living care requires large amounts of effort and thought. Because of this, I chose to design my ad campaign around this seemingly normal phenomenon.

Recreational Rules at Strouds Run

Rulebook: Recreational Use at Strouds Run State Park

            When I am not slaving away as a graduate student, I spend most of my free time in the outdoors doing some type of activity. Whether it is hiking, camping, mountain biking, or kayaking, I usually find some way to blow off steam while amidst the Great Outdoors. Because of my personal interests, I spend a lot of time in state parks or national forests.  After reading Wood and Beck’s “Home Rules,” I started to think about how rules apply to my outdoor activities. Although there are various methods of organizing these rules, I chose to do so according to the type of user.

            On the Ohio State Parks page, the “purpose of state parks is to enhance the quality of life through exceptional outdoor recreational experiences." When compared to other state parks, Stroud’s Run has far fewer written rules than any other. The park also is quite short staffed so the enforcement of what few rules exist rarely happens (my friends and I joke that it’s the Wild West of Ohio’s state parks). However, there are some rules that apply to recreational users no matter what, regardless of what rules the park applies.

RULES:

            I started by examining the park’s trail system and noted the differences between the types of users that frequent the trails:

            1. Hikers: Anyone can be a hiker; all it takes is a decent pair of shoes and some relatively strong legs.   Hikers are the smallest and slowest of trail users. Because of this, hikers have to yield to everyone.  When encountering other hikers, they simply move to the other side of the trail and pass easily.

            2. Trail Runners: Trail runners usually consider themselves to be at some sort of higher level than hikers, even though they both use the trail in a similar fashion.  Because trail runners are moving faster than hikers, they are given the right of way. However, trail runners have to yield to all other users

            3. Mountain bikers:  Cyclists typically are moving much faster than most other trail users. When encountering hikers and other cyclists on a narrow section of singletrack, the cyclist riding downhill always has the right of way. On other sections, slower riders are expected to make room by riding to the right side of the trail (or stopping on the side of it) and letting the faster rider pass. Cyclists only have to yield to horses.

            4. Horses:  Horses have to yield to no one except other horses, in which case they typically arrange some sort of way of passing through verbal communication. As the largest member of recreational trail users (and the most potentially violent), they always have the right of way.

As we can see, the least equipped trail or smaller user always has to yield to the faster or larger user.  Regardless of how much the other user is enjoying their experience on the trails, these facts remain a part of recreational trail-using.

Let’s move on to the lake.  There are a few major rules that apply to everyone who choose to enter the lake:

1. You must be in a boat:  For everyone’s safety, people outside of the beach area must be in some kind of legal vessel.

2. The boat must be licensed: Not just anyone with a canoe can jump into it and take off. The boat has to be inspected and have an updated license (it has to be replaced every 4 years). If the vessel can’t pass inspection, it’s not allowed. This further limits access to the lake.

3.  All persons must have a lifejacket on board: The park service likes to know that they are at least not liable for your mistakes.  Boaters aren’t required to wear them but they at least need to be in the vessel.

4.  Alcohol is not permitted:  Although many people believe that a frosty 40 ounce malted beverage is essential to the canoeing experience, drinking alcohol while boating can get you a DUI.

More rules of the lake definitely exist for recreational users, but they fall more into the “unwritten” category. They are as follows:

1. Moving Boats: Boats moving through the lake are expected to do so in the “center”. The center of the lake is an imaginary boundary area.  Much like a public road, boats are expected to move forward on the ride side of this ill-defined space.  Moving boats can further be placed in different categories:

A. Rowers: The fastest of the lake users, row boats generally do or go where they want. People on rowing teams use the space of the lake differently because they view it as a means of training and not so much as a leisure activity. Usually these boats are moving fast

B. Peddle Boats:  These are arguably the slowest and viewed as being the most inept of boat users since anybody can use a peddle boat.  Peddle boats don’t require any knowledge regarding paddling abilities (strokes, boat dynamics) so other boaters tend to be annoyed by their existence. They are, however, larger and slower than other boats in the lake. Because of this, all other boats have to go around them.

C. Canoes:  Canoes require some paddling knowledge but, for the most part, canoeing is a leisurely activity.  Canoeists aren’t trying to race, but they still take the experience of being in a canoe somewhat seriously.  Canoes are slow but agile, therefore they often pass the peddle boats but have to make way for the faster-traveling rowers.

D. Fishing boats:  Fishing boats use this space only to move to another side of the lake.  The objective of the fisherman is not to enjoy the boating experience but to move to a bank and fish.  

2. Non-Moving Boats: Non-moving boats are to stay outside of the imaginary “center” area and remain near the banks. These include any type of parked boat such as fishing boats. Although no one reinforces this rule, the parked fisherman will surely let the offender know of their mistake. When non-moving boats park in the center, it causes disturbances. 

             

DISCUSSION

As we can see, recreational users at Stroud’s Run have to use this public space differently according to their size and speed. On the trail, this type of public space is not respected the same to everyone; the faster, larger user takes over the trail, while the slower and smaller one has to make room for them. In the lake, we see a similar phenomenon.  Space in the lake is designated differently and not everyone can venture through it as they please.  The video below is just one example.

            Class interferes to with the freedom to use this public space to a certain degree.  With the trail systems, the more equipped person is always given the right of passage and therefore can enjoy their experience the most.  In the case of trails, to be more equipped means that the user has a more expensive method (bike or horse). At a glance, this doesn’t seem to be any really big problem.  However, when the trails are extremely crowded on a busy Saturday afternoon this can ruin someone’s experience. Instead of respecting each person the same, we make way for some users while others have to submit to everyone else.  This fact isn't because of any written rule, its just the way that our society works.

In the lake, the state government decides who can even be in the lake; even if you have a boat, you can’t just get in the lake without a license. Whether this fact is for safety or monetary gain is debatable.  Either way, the public space in state parks is not as free to all public users as it appears to be.

CONNECTION TO LARGER THEME

            The values behind these rules (both written and non-written) reflect that of our fast paced society.  After I wrote these rules down, I found that many of the ones that apply to recreational park users are replicated in other public places; specifically, with our highway system.  On the highway, cars always have to make way for the faster or larger vehicle.  A few that come to mind are fast-driving sports cars, semi-trucks, ambulances, ect.  Leisurely-driven personal vehicles are not tolerated by the rest of drivers on the highway; people accelerate and create more dangerous situations because of their impatience. We don’t take into account that another person may be enjoying their drive or simply traveling at a rate that's acceptable for their own comfort.

       Not just anyone can get on the highway either (I found this out the hard way with my moped when I was 16).  You have to have a license and, in most states, a properly inspected vehicle. Some states even require subsequent driving exams for elderly people once they hit a certain age. Public space, even when regulated, is not as "public" as we think it is.

       In our fast-paced society, we focus on ourselves so much that we don’t take into account other people when we use public space. We don't look at the capabilities of other people or their situation; it's always about getting to where we need to be as fast as possible. Whether its in a state park, a highway, or any other public space, some people do not have the same amount of freedom as others.