What makes a place “COOL”?
Physical, emotional & symbolic considerations
by Thor Larson (Research Editor, GETOUT! Ideas Factory), October 19, 2005
» What makes a place attractive to youth?
» Respectful & youthful supervision
» A place to ‘hang-out’
» Opportunity for stimulating & engaging activities
» “Owning” the space
» Works cited
On any given weekend, youth can be found gathering in the parking lots of strip malls, outside convenience stores, in parks, cemeteries and other secluded spots.
In towns and cities around the world, youth appropriate the spaces deserted by the adult world in order to socialize and ‘hang-out’ – free from the social restrictions of home, school, work, and the community.
Since 2001, the City of Richmond has provided its youth with a progressive alternative to hanging out in the parking lot on Friday nights. ‘Night Shift’ is a late night initiative that provides recreational programs for youth on Fridays from 10pm until midnight. The initiative is an outcome of Filling the Void – a youth needs survey that uncovered what determined and motivated youth to participate in community-based activities.
[top]
What makes a place attractive to youth?
A core finding of the Richmond study revealed that whether youth perceived a place to be ‘cool’, ‘safe’ or ‘boring’ place was a key factor that determined their level of involvement in a facility or in a program.
Furthermore, the majority of teens surveyed felt there was “not enough for youth to do” in their community and thought that the lack of things to do led to engagement in risky and socially unacceptable behaviours.
The study concludes that youth programs need to be “youth-friendly and marketed within a context of ‘cool’ as understood by popular youth culture.”
The youth surveyed by Filling the Void identified a ‘cool’ and ‘safe’ space as a place:
- that is non-threatening where they feel secure, relaxed and comfortable;
- with no adult supervision or supervision by ‘relatively’ young adults;
- where they feel respected, liked and accepted for who they are;
- where they can hang-out with their friends;
- where they can be part of a group; and
- where they could partake in more structured activities that interest them, if they choose.
[top]
Respectful & youthful supervision
A space that is a good space for youth is more than what makes up the physical environment of a teen centre. It involves the emotional influence that a certain place can hold for an individual or group. Some places can induce feelings of empowerment, while others can evoke insignificance and powerlessness.
As Tuan (1977) suggests, “‘place’ is perceptually and socially produced by individuals who establish some type of identification with a space or an environment.” Significant to youth’s identification with a space as a ‘cool’ and ‘safe’ space is the ability to maintain their social identity as a youth and as a group of youth. In the home and in most public spaces, being a “youth” is often frowned upon, and constrained by adult controls and expectations to behave more like adults.
Wayne Yee, Coordinator of Youth Services in Richmond, suggests that respect is a key component of making space attractive and welcoming to young people: “we have a team approach, everyone from the janitor to the front desk person to whoever is in charge, treats [youth] with respect, treats them as human beings.”
For Yee, issues of appropriate teen behaviour are the biggest challenges to running late night programs. Drinking, drugs and drug-dealing have become a problem with the program’s increasing popularity. “It’s a victim of its own success and has attracted unwanted elements,” Yee reports.
The need for youth to have autonomy in their space and the differences that exist as to what is socially appropriate and legal creates a dilemma that programmers must confront. The solution, according to Yee, is that “you have to focus on the positive, let the kids know what the boundaries are and that they are welcome back if they behave within those boundaries.”
Providing effective supervision that is considered ‘relatively young,’ respectful, and supportive is essential to the success of spaces devoted to youth.
Peter Witt (2002) notes that the most effective adults are those who “work in partnership with young people, who see themselves as supportive friends and advocates, in contrast to adults motivated to save, reform or rescue young people from their circumstances.”
[top]
‘Hanging-out’ is another dominant theme found in Filling the Void, echoing findings in much of the literature about youth. Youth assert again and again the need for space in which they can gather with their peers to share in a group identity.
Yet, ‘hanging-out’ with friends in a safe environment is not typically considered a form of meaningful recreational activity. As Henderson and King (1999) suggest, “a major goal of recreation agencies is to document that something good is happening as a result of programming efforts.”
However, providing space for youth to ‘hang-out’ has important benefits because it provides an alternative to an entirely unsupervised place where there is more potential for risky and socially unacceptable behaviour to occur.
Furthermore, McMeeking and Purkayastha (1995) argue that available spaces for leisure and ‘hanging-out’ are integral to a youth’s increasing need for independence. Witt (2002) elaborates. “Like emerging buildings, youths need support during ‘construction and development’ … (a)s they become better able to stand on their own, the scaffolding can be reduced and, eventually, withdrawn.”
[top]
Opportunity for stimulating & engaging activities
While ‘hanging-out’ seemingly requires very little planning by recreational programmers, providing unstructured space for youth to ‘hang-out’ that is stimulating and engaging at the same time is a challenge.
For all young people, averting boredom by finding constructive and interesting things to do can be difficult. Witt suggests that especially “those who have been exposed to the ‘action’ and ‘excitement’ of illicit activities require especially challenging, interesting programs to retain their interest.”
DJ-ing at Night Shift, Richmond
Richmond Park Board photo archives
In their comparative study of youth clubs, Henderson and King’s (1999) identify that young people “wanted opportunities for unstructured activities to occur inside that place.” Therefore, the space needs to include not only unstructured space to ‘hang-out’, but also possibilities for other activities.
Richmond’s “Night Shift” seems to achieve this delicate balance – publicized as a place “where you can hang-out or participate in different activities in a relaxed, safe, open-minded environment.” Activities include: hanging-out with friends, meeting new ones, hoops, DJ-ing, dancing, watching local bands, joining-in on or watching improv, MC Battles, and watching movies.
Supplying youth with a ‘cool’ and ‘safe’ space to gather in order to ‘hang-out’ sets the stage for them to participate in other recreational activities that keep the space interesting and engaging.
[top]
Finally, providing a space that symbolically reflects youth culture is another important element in creating a sense that the place belongs to them.
Henderson and King draw on Greenman (1988) to explain that spaces have little meaning until individuals feel some connection to them. In their comparative study, they found that successful teen clubs and centres were perceived “as belonging to the teens who came there because it embodied their cultural symbols through the murals on the walls and the décor of the room.”
It is important then that there is a place for youth to “create” and customize their own spaces through youth-driven graffiti, murals, decoration and design. This self and group expression allows youth to inscribe meaning and ownership into that space.
Breitbart (1998) asserts that “one of the clearest demarcations of power, wealth and influence in the urban landscape has always been the ability to invest one’s living space with meaning – to literally occupy, define and decorate one’s surroundings.”
Programmers can design spaces and programs that are attractive to youth by combining the right mix of unstructured space for ‘hanging-out’ that feels safe and inviting to youth; some youthful and respectful supervision; and opportunities for engagement in activities that appeal to and reflect popular youth culture.
[top]
- Breitbart, Myrna Margulies. (1998). “‘Dana’s Mystical Tunnel’: Young Peoples Designs for Survival and Change in the City”. Cool Spaces: Geographies of Youth Cultures. Ed. Skelton and Valentine. Routledge, New York.
- Eward, Laura and Wayne Yee. (2001). Fill the Void: A Youth Study for the Promotion of Active and Positive Community Involvement. The City of Richmond website.
http://www.richmond.ca/__shared/assets/fill_the_void8569.pdf
- Henderson, Karla A. and Kathryn King. (1999). “Youth Spaces and Places: Case Studies of Two Teen Clubs”. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 17(2).
- “Night Shift”. City of Richmond Website.
http://www.richmond.ca/parksrec/youth/programs/nightshift.htm
- McMeeking, Diana and Bandana Purkayastha. (1995). “‘I can’t have my mom running me everywhere’: Adolescents, leisure, and accessibility”. Journal of Leisure Research. 27 (4).
- Tuan, Y. (1977). Space and Place. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
- Witt, Peter. (2002) “Programming for the Future”. Parks & Recreation. 37(12).
- Yee, Wayne. Telephone Interview. August 19, 2005.
[top]