Summary: Fantasy City: Pleasure and profit in the postmodern metropolis – John Hannigan
Introduction
In the nineties a new phase of ‘entertaining consumption’ emerged, which consisted of megaplex
cinemas, themed restaurants, simulation theatres etc. This ‘Fantasy City’ would become a global
trend in the next millennium. This indicates a new urban economy, which has its roots in tourism,
sports, culture and entertainment. It are called urban entertainment destination (UED) projects.
Fantasy city is bounded by 6 central features.
1. Theme-o-centric: everything from individual entertainment venues to the image of the city
itself conforms to a scripted theme. Sometimes a single theme is used, while other times
‘theme enhancement’ is used, in which an ambience is created around a distinctive feature
of the city. Multi-theming refers to dividing the city in zones, each with its own theme.
2. Branded: urban entertainment locations are not financed exclusively by their ability to
deliver a high degree of consumer satisfaction and fun, but also by their potential for selling
licensed merchandise on site.
3. Day and night: fantasy city operates day and night, it actively encourages after-dark
activities, which range from themed night clubs to late-night entertainment.
4. Modular: the city is modular, which means that it mixes and matches an increasingly
standard array of components in various configurations (it’s like a standard building idea, of
what kind of things are part of a fantasy city, the same shops, theatre, cinema et cetera).
5. Solipsistic: it is focused on their self, isolated from surrounding neighbourhoods physically,
economically and culturally. It is the perfect example of the ‘city of illusion’: a metropolis,
which ignores the reality of homelessness, unemployment, social injustice and crime.
6. Postmodern: it is postmodern, as it is constructed around technologies of simulation, virtual
reality and the thrill of the spectacle. The major inspiration has been the Disney model.
The UED were stimulated by among others local politicians, planners and economic development
offices, who view UED as the key to continue urban growth. Opposition has come from academics,
neighbourhood activists and writers, all of whom decry the elitism and architectural phoniness of
these new ‘landscape of leisure’. Fantasy cities ‘celebrate the fake over real’.
The fantasy city is the end-product of a long-standing cultural contradiction in American society
between the middle class desire for experience and their parallel reluctance to take risks, especially
those which involve contact with the ‘lower orders’. Therefore the goal of UED projects was to dazzle
and reassure people from the lower orders. However those ‘urbanoid environments’ raise also a
number of significant issues for the future growth based on four domains of moral meaning:
Polity: It is important to consider how the boom in UED can control the balance between
public and private space in the future city (many public-private partnerships).
Equity: we must be prepared to judge how equitable these new UED are likely to be, both in
terms of the audience they serve and with respect to the surrounding community. Do they
serve only tourist? Import question as they are underwritten by public subsidies.
Authenticity: Those new UED are bogus, because they are inauthentic. Besides this, with a
new generation of nature-themed attractions (Sea World) it is important to assess how and
with what intent the natural environment is depicted within these theme parks, as well as
considering the social implications.
Civility: We should consider the issue whether current UED represent an existing new form of
urban renewal or whether they are simply a case of cynical hucksterism. Those UED are
characterized by a drive for brand superiority, however can they also accommodate variety,
or will they impose a uniformity in which local initiative and identity is stifled?
Introduction
In the nineties a new phase of ‘entertaining consumption’ emerged, which consisted of megaplex
cinemas, themed restaurants, simulation theatres etc. This ‘Fantasy City’ would become a global
trend in the next millennium. This indicates a new urban economy, which has its roots in tourism,
sports, culture and entertainment. It are called urban entertainment destination (UED) projects.
Fantasy city is bounded by 6 central features.
1. Theme-o-centric: everything from individual entertainment venues to the image of the city
itself conforms to a scripted theme. Sometimes a single theme is used, while other times
‘theme enhancement’ is used, in which an ambience is created around a distinctive feature
of the city. Multi-theming refers to dividing the city in zones, each with its own theme.
2. Branded: urban entertainment locations are not financed exclusively by their ability to
deliver a high degree of consumer satisfaction and fun, but also by their potential for selling
licensed merchandise on site.
3. Day and night: fantasy city operates day and night, it actively encourages after-dark
activities, which range from themed night clubs to late-night entertainment.
4. Modular: the city is modular, which means that it mixes and matches an increasingly
standard array of components in various configurations (it’s like a standard building idea, of
what kind of things are part of a fantasy city, the same shops, theatre, cinema et cetera).
5. Solipsistic: it is focused on their self, isolated from surrounding neighbourhoods physically,
economically and culturally. It is the perfect example of the ‘city of illusion’: a metropolis,
which ignores the reality of homelessness, unemployment, social injustice and crime.
6. Postmodern: it is postmodern, as it is constructed around technologies of simulation, virtual
reality and the thrill of the spectacle. The major inspiration has been the Disney model.
The UED were stimulated by among others local politicians, planners and economic development
offices, who view UED as the key to continue urban growth. Opposition has come from academics,
neighbourhood activists and writers, all of whom decry the elitism and architectural phoniness of
these new ‘landscape of leisure’. Fantasy cities ‘celebrate the fake over real’.
The fantasy city is the end-product of a long-standing cultural contradiction in American society
between the middle class desire for experience and their parallel reluctance to take risks, especially
those which involve contact with the ‘lower orders’. Therefore the goal of UED projects was to dazzle
and reassure people from the lower orders. However those ‘urbanoid environments’ raise also a
number of significant issues for the future growth based on four domains of moral meaning:
Polity: It is important to consider how the boom in UED can control the balance between
public and private space in the future city (many public-private partnerships).
Equity: we must be prepared to judge how equitable these new UED are likely to be, both in
terms of the audience they serve and with respect to the surrounding community. Do they
serve only tourist? Import question as they are underwritten by public subsidies.
Authenticity: Those new UED are bogus, because they are inauthentic. Besides this, with a
new generation of nature-themed attractions (Sea World) it is important to assess how and
with what intent the natural environment is depicted within these theme parks, as well as
considering the social implications.
Civility: We should consider the issue whether current UED represent an existing new form of
urban renewal or whether they are simply a case of cynical hucksterism. Those UED are
characterized by a drive for brand superiority, however can they also accommodate variety,
or will they impose a uniformity in which local initiative and identity is stifled?
