This paper examines the redevelopment of Times Square in New York City and brings together two discourses, the discourse of design and the discourse of eminent domain case law. I argue that both were inextricable parts of the Times Square redevelopment process and served similar functions: defining a public for The New Times Square. By determining what was 'in the public interest', eminent domain case law set out two opposing publics: the criminal Times Square public and an idealized general public. By selectively editing the Times Square public's desires and behaviors, design helped define and represent new moral norms.
|Number of pages
|Published - 2002