The Spatial Imagination And The Construction Of Community:Study On The New Urban Community Development

Practice and Dialectics are the basic characteristics of Marxism-space theory. From the ontological sense, space is transformed from a natural existence to a social existence, by the human practice activities, with both materiality and sociality. From the standpoint of dialectics, on the one hand, people act in a certain space within the limits of social structure; on the other hand, people can create and change the space to express their needs and desires. Based on the Marxism-space theory and research methods, this paper intends to propose a "Constraint-Convert" framework of community space research so as to research the development of community space and the structure order of it in the process of rapid urbanization, and the generation of a kind of new urban community characterized by social solidarity.This framework follows three principles:(1) The community is a social existence with spatiality, which is constantly constructed and re-constructed by human practice.(2) The concrete and real community is our research starting point, it is present in the space which has been shaped by the existing strength(capital and power).(3) Actors’ behaviors are constrained by spatiality in the community space, where various contradictions and uncertainties exist, which also constitute the driving force to promote community space conversion. Formally, the "Constraint-Convert" framework of community space research includes two models:(1) Constraint Model, emphasizing the intermediary role of space in practice. First, through practical activities (although through different logics of practice), people create a space, which is the result of human practice; then, people continue to make a new practice in the existing space made by the former practice, and this existing space becomes premise and includes many constraints.(2) Convert Model, emphasizing the intermediary role of practice in space. Human practice with a purpose is a bridge which can connect two different spaces. The former space is the presupposition and medium of social action, and the latter space is the outcome and embodiment. Community construction is people’s spatiality practice, and its goal is to shape a new social solidarity-oriented space in the existing space under the constraints (the capital and power’s space).This is an empirical research that focuses on the China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park(SIP). As a new district under overall development, it has gone through the stages of planning, relocating and constructing, which is a whole case of city space expanding from zero. It is the typical representation of Development Zones. The city space mainly experienced3spatial forms (planning space, basic space and city space) and2developing courses (1st development and2nd development). These accompanied with the transferring and adjusting of power relationship between the central and local government, and embodied the complex financing of capital from home and abroad. It is the cooperation of power and capital that led to the radical change of urban landscape, industrial structure, population composition, and management modes. In the course of urbanization for the industrial park, as the cells of city, communities experienced rapid change, i.e. changed from communities of towns and villages to the relocation communities, staff dormitory communities, and modern urban communities, etc. Accordingly, the residential construction, public infrastructures, and management modes differ from the former.The new city space, which was shaped by and permeated with a strong logic and rule of capital and power, has many constraints. However, with all kinds of people poured into the city, tensions and conflicts have emerged, due to the interests disputes between different subjects. This is reflected in the geographical segmentation and stratification of different people, and there are landless peasants, employees (mostly floating staff), ordinary residents, expatriates and other types of residents in SIP, who are centralizing in different residence space because of the constraints from power operation and split capital. Part of their interests and rights can be achieved in the existing urban space, and some cause conflicts, which were showed clearly in the "Tong’an Incident" in Suzhou and "Provident Fund Event" in SIP. In the daily life space in the community, these contradictions and tensions mainly show amid personal integration issues, neighborhood disputes, property management and service issues, public order issues. All of these contradictions and tensions, confusion and problems are the concrete manifestation of the constraints of space, and constitute the basic driving forces in space conversion.This ontological spatiality situates the human subjects in a position with formative ability once and for all. The spatial logic of community construction is opposite to the logic of capital and power, which based on the subject’s initiative, through the establishment of social interaction with social cohesion oriented (solidarity, belonging, identity) between people in daily life, thereby changing the spatial order, spatial structure and the space environment. In the SIP’s new urban communities, different groups (such as the elderly, the young people, migrant workers, expatriates, etc) gradually adapt to the new community environment, by community organizations, network platform, and cultural activities. Under the guidance of community workers and collaborative participation of multi-agent, new neighborhood relationships and public orders are reconstructed in residential areas. Neighborhood Center extends the public space. It is not only well positioned to meet the needs of different groups in public life (such as communication, recreation, participation, etc.), but also build up a wider range of community. There are many new social organizations that are formed (such as Know How English club, Corporate Social Responsibility Alliance) in SIP, transcending the limitations of traditional geographical boundaries of the residential area, advocating and forming a kind of community social life in the whole area of SIP. All of these different spatial levels and social relations clearly demonstrate that communities are not inevitably eliminated in modern economic and social conditions, instead, they may be reconstructed.