The newsletter fragments from Monocle, Semafor, Bloomberg, Rest of World, Newsweek, the Economist and ArtNews from September 1-3, 2025, provide a kaleidoscopic view of contemporary civilization at a pivotal moment—a moment when technological acceleration collides with ancient human needs for place, belonging, and meaning. Reading through these diverse reports, from urban shade policies to geopolitical realignments, we witness the profound tensions inherent in modernity's grand project of perpetual progress. This commentary seeks to examine the cultural, economic, and social implications of these developments through the lens of what might be termed "spatial politics"—the ways in which physical and digital environments shape human experience and democratic possibility.

The newsletter snippets offer a view of a world grappling with the intersections of climate, culture, economy, and geopolitics. These pieces reflect a post-pandemic, tariff-laden era where cities seek shade from scorching heats, museums plead for state sustenance, and conglomerates pivot toward social upliftment amid economic diversification. Analytically, these narratives reveal causal interrelations: urban heat islands exacerbate social inequalities, cultural preservation becomes a battleground for national identity, and defense deals underscore the realignment of global alliances in an age of multipolarity. Theoretically, they echo Ulrich Beck's concept of "risk society," where modernity's advancements—be they in urban design or AI-driven economies—generate unforeseen vulnerabilities (Beck, 1992).

The newsletters, thus, stitch together a compact map of contemporary cultural life: quotidian urbanism (shade and the heat-island problem), the fiscal and performative pressures on museums, the changing economics of the art market, corporate developmentalism in the Philippines, and the aesthetics-politics of contemporary media and AI. Read together, these items are not discrete beats but interlocking symptoms of a neoliberal attention economy compressed by ecological strain and geopolitical volatility.

Tom Vanderbilt's meditation on urban shade, a deceptively simple concept reveals profound truths about contemporary urban planning and cultural values. Vanderbilt's observation that "shade is no mere urban-planning metric, it is the stuff of life" echoes Henri Lefebvre's seminal work The Production of Space (1991), where he argues that space is not merely a neutral container but an actively produced social construct that reflects and shapes power relations (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 26). The "policy of shade" implemented in Seville represents what Michel Foucault would recognize as a biopolitical intervention—a governmental technique aimed at managing population health and comfort (Foucault, 2007).

The cultural significance of shade extends far beyond temperature regulation. As Vanderbilt notes, shade creates "outdoor rooms where barbers cut hair, hawkers haggle with customers and tea is served," revealing its function as social infrastructure. This resonates with Jane Jacobs's insights in The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961), where she demonstrates how seemingly minor urban elements—sidewalks, stoops, parks—constitute the "ballet of the sidewalk" that sustains urban community life (Jacobs, 1961, p. 50). The urban heat island effect, which the newsletter identifies as increasingly problematic, represents what Rob Nixon calls "slow violence"—environmental degradation that unfolds gradually and disproportionately affects marginalized populations (Nixon, 2011, p. 2).

Contemporary research confirms these patterns of environmental inequality. A study by Hoffman et al. (2020) found that formerly redlined neighborhoods in the United States are significantly hotter than their non-redlined counterparts, revealing how historical racism becomes literally embedded in urban infrastructure (Hoffman et al., 2020). The newsletter's attention to shade thus illuminates a broader crisis of urban habitability under climate change, where access to comfortable public space becomes a marker of social citizenship.

Tom Vanderbilt’s meditation on shade performs the useful labour of turning a banal element of urban life — shadow — into a political indicator: shade is comfort, dignity, and an infrastructural correction to uneven exposure to heat (and, by implication, to risk). The vignette about New Yorkers crossing to shaded sidewalks at >25°C and the bus-stop data on Detroit’s “shade deserts” make explicit what urban political ecology has argued for decades: environmental burdens are spatialized and socialized.

Theoretically, this is the field where Henri Lefebvre’s insistence that space is produced socially (and therefore unequally) matters most: the absence of mature trees at bus stops is not an accident but an effect of investment choices, historical disinvestment, and landscaping decisions that map onto class and race (Lefebvre, 1991). David Harvey’s account of urbanization under capitalism helps us see how decisions about canopy cover are also decisions about accumulation and governance: who pays for planting and maintenance, who receives property premiums for shady streets, and who bears the heat externality (Harvey, 2012). Rob Nixon’s notion of “slow violence” is useful here too: the heat-related harms are dispersed, incremental, and bureaucratically unremarkable — until heat spikes make them visible (Nixon, 2011).

Policy implication (practical): simple fixes — tree-planting programmes, shade audits for transit stops, shading requirements in zoning codes — are effective precisely because they scale well and redistribute everyday comfort at low cost. Vanderbilt’s piece cues this pragmatic register while also reminding us of the aesthetic and communal functions of shade (reading, sociality) that market accounting often omits.

The lead piece on urban shade as a "forgotten natural resource" (Vanderbilt, 2025) underscores a cultural shift in perceiving summer not as unbridled sunshine but as a negotiation with shadows. In cities from New York to Accra, pedestrians instinctively migrate to shaded sides, a behavior Jae Min Lee's study quantifies as temperature-driven (Lee, 2018). Economically, this highlights the urban heat island effect, where treeless streets amplify temperatures by up to 19°C, disproportionately affecting low-income areas reliant on public transit—Detroit's bus stops, 90% unshaded, exemplify this (Vanderbilt, 2025). Policy-wise, planting trees emerges as a cost-effective intervention for equity, aligning with the 30% canopy threshold for mitigating heat islands (Nowak & Dwyer, 2007).

Causally, this interrelates with climate migration and social stratification: As global warming intensifies, shade deserts widen the "cooked and cooled" divide, echoing Mike Davis's Ecology of Fear (1998), where Los Angeles's environmental disparities foreshadow urban apocalypses. Philosophically, it resonates with Henri Lefebvre's "right to the city" (1968/1996), positing urban space as a social product; denying shade is denying access to public life. In literature, Gabriel García Márquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude (1967) portrays Macondo's oppressive heat as a metaphor for isolation—much like modern cities where unshaded realms stifle community. Associatively, this links to the newsletter's Philippine conglomerate story: San Miguel's disaster response (e.g., typhoon aid) addresses acute crises, but proactive urban greening could prevent chronic vulnerabilities, fostering resilience in tropical climes.

The discussions of digital detox movements and screen time reduction reflect what might be understood as a nascent resistance to what Shoshana Zuboff terms "surveillance capitalism"—the extraction of human experience as raw material for behavioral data (Zuboff, 2019, p. 8). The reported benefits of digital detox—improved mental clarity, better sleep, enhanced real-world connections—suggest profound costs associated with our hyper-mediated existence that extend well beyond individual wellness concerns.

This digital overwhelm represents what Jonathan Beller calls "the attention economy," where human consciousness itself becomes the primary site of capitalist accumulation (Beller, 2006). The newsletter's documentation of rising screen time and its correlation with anxiety and depression among adolescents echoes concerns raised by researchers like Jean Twenge, whose work iGen (2017) documents declining mental health among the first generation to grow up with smartphones (Twenge, 2017, p. 79). However, the individual solutions proposed—digital detoxes, screen time limits—may inadequately address what are fundamentally structural problems.

The philosopher Byung-Chul Han's concept of "burnout society" provides insight into why digital detox has become necessary. Han argues that contemporary neoliberal subjects exhaust themselves through voluntary self-optimization, creating what he calls "the violence of positivity" (Han, 2015, p. 12). Digital detox thus represents both resistance to and accommodation with this regime, offering temporary respite while leaving underlying attention extraction mechanisms intact.

The coverage of museum restoration projects being conducted in public view reveals important tensions in contemporary heritage practices. The popularity of these "behind-the-scenes" exhibitions at institutions like the Musée d'Orsay and Rijksmuseum suggests public hunger for authentic engagement with cultural production processes. This phenomenon can be understood through Walter Benjamin's concept of "aura"—the unique presence and authenticity of cultural objects that mechanical reproduction threatens to destroy (Benjamin, 1968, p. 220).

The public restoration process paradoxically both preserves and transforms cultural aura. By making restoration visible, museums democratize expertise while potentially transforming conservation from scholarly practice into entertainment spectacle. This reflects broader tensions identified by Pierre Bourdieu in Distinction (1984) regarding the democratization of high culture and its potential transformation into what he terms "cultural goods" subject to market logic (Bourdieu, 1984, p. 228).

Recent scholarship on community engagement in heritage preservation reveals the political dimensions of these practices. As Smith (2006) argues in Uses of Heritage, heritage is not inherent in objects but actively created through social processes that inevitably involve inclusion and exclusion (Smith, 2006, p. 44). The newsletter's emphasis on public restoration may represent what Waterton and Smith (2009) call "authorized heritage discourse"—officially sanctioned narratives that privilege expert knowledge while appearing to embrace democratic participation.

Support

Art-related snippets reveal museums as cultural battlegrounds, where funding pleas signal economic precarity and policy neglect. The Van Gogh Museum's €2.5m subsidy demand (Jenne, 2025) mirrors the Louvre's decay, illustrating how inflation and energy costs erode cultural infrastructure. Socially, this risks public alienation from heritage, as ticket hikes fail to bridge gaps (Remuseums research cited in Jenne, 2025). Policy implications are stark: States like the Netherlands must honor 1962 agreements, lest privatization commodify art, per Pierre Bourdieu's cultural capital theory (Bourdieu, 1986), where access reinforces class hierarchies.

Interrelating with public restorations—e.g., Courbet at Musée d’Orsay or Rembrandt at Rijksmuseum (Gavin, 2025)—these processes demystify art, boosting footfall amid funding droughts. Gavin notes restoration's "allure" as revealing institutional secrets, akin to Walter Benjamin's "aura" of art (1935/1968), now democratized through plexiglass barriers. Economically, this turns conservation into spectacle, with da Vinci's Salvator Mundi fetching $450m post-restoration (Gavin, 2025), highlighting market-driven valuations. In world literature, Umberto Eco's The Name of the Rose (1980) portrays monastic preservation as a quest for truth; similarly, public restorations invite viewers into art's "melancholic appeal" of decay (Gavin, 2025), countering perfectionist impulses.

Associatively, this connects to Japan's Kagawa Prefectural Gymnasium preservation fight (Wilson, 2025), where modernist architecture faces demolition despite petitions. Culturally, it evokes Japan's postwar identity crisis, as analyzed in Kenneth Frampton's Modern Architecture: A Critical History (1980/2020), where Tange's works symbolize reconstruction. Policy failure here—ignoring "important cultural property" status—mirrors global heritage erosion, per UNESCO reports (2019). Philosophically, Heidegger's "dwelling" (1951/1971) critiques such losses: Buildings like Tange's boat-shaped gym foster being-in-the-world, their erasure alienating societies from history.

Two linked motifs run through the cultural coverage: (1) museums under fiscal strain (the Van Gogh Museum’s plea for state support), and (2) the public appeal of restoration work as a mode of drawing audiences (Courbet, Rembrandt restorations). These are not incidental: they indicate an attention-economy logic in which institutions must both protect fragile assets and manufacture access as spectacle.

This double dynamic can be read with Bourdieu’s field analysis (Bourdieu, 1984): museums sit at the intersection of symbolic capital (authenticity, scholarly authority) and economic capital (tickets, philanthropy). When the Van Gogh Museum points to an agreement with the state and to rising energy/building costs, it is staging a claim on the public purse based on a transfer of responsibility embedded in a historical pact. That claim is both moral and economic: heritage as a public good requiring public underwriting. The restoration spectacles — plexiglass galleries, glass chambers — exploit the dramaturgy of care: care (conservation) becomes a way to justify presence and generate footfall. Francesca Gavin’s reporting is acute on this point: visibility can subsidize conservation, but it also instrumentalizes expertise into an attraction.

Theorists of cultural economies (e.g., Arjun Appadurai on the social life of things) remind us that restoration is not merely preservation; it is an intervention that reassigns value, authenticity and marketability (Appadurai, 1986). The Salvator Mundi example in the newsletter underscores how restoration can be conjugated with market logic to create extraordinary monetary outcomes.

Policy implication: public support for museums should be reframed not as nostalgia but as social infrastructure — places of civic literacy, climate-controlled public space, and technical labour. Conditional support might require transparent staffing, conservation standards, and commitments to local access rather than simple marketization.

The reporting on galleries (Bank, Galerie Lelong, decisions to skip fairs, longer exhibition runs) captures a moment of contraction and strategic retrenchment. Dealers who previously chased global fairs are recalibrating toward slower rhythms (longer local shows, pop-ups, carefully chosen fairs). That adjustment is both tactical and structural: rising costs, geopolitical trade frictions, and a deflating collector base make the old high-velocity fair circuit riskier.

This mirrors broader political-economic logics: the commodification of cultural production has been optimized for acceleration (short runs, multiple fairs), but when global arbitrage costs rise (tariffs, travel contraction), market actors revert to lower velocity, higher-quality engagements. The newsletter’s interviews (Borysevicz, Shainman, Gray) reveal an industry negotiating between prestige economies and business survivability.

Theoretical echo: this is an instance of what Fredric Jameson described as the cultural logic of late capitalism — market forms shape aesthetic circulation, and aesthetic producers internalize market constraints (Jameson, 1991). For practitioners, diversification — pop-ups, institutional partnerships, and longer exhibitions — becomes a resilience strategy.

The coverage of rising populist movements across Europe illuminates what Chantal Mouffe identifies as the "populist moment"—a crisis of traditional left-right politics that creates space for both democratic and authoritarian forms of populist mobilization (Mouffe, 2018, p. 10). The electoral successes of parties like the Alternative for Germany and Austria's Freedom Party reflect what Cas Mudde and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser describe as populism's "thin-centered ideology" that can attach to various political projects while maintaining its core anti-establishment appeal (Mudde & Kaltwasser, 2017, p. 6).

The geographical distribution of populist support—often concentrated in smaller towns and rural areas—reveals what geographer Doreen Massey calls the "power-geometry" of globalization, where different social groups experience uneven access to global flows and connections (Massey, 1993, p. 61). The newsletter's documentation of migration concerns driving electoral behavior connects to what Arjun Appadurai terms "the anxiety of incompleteness"—fears among dominant groups that demographic change threatens their cultural reproduction (Appadurai, 2006, p. 83).

However, populist success cannot be reduced to economic or cultural backlash. As Jan-Werner Müller argues in What Is Populism? (2016), populism's core claim—that it alone represents "the real people" against corrupt elites—poses fundamental challenges to pluralist democracy by refusing the legitimacy of opposition (Müller, 2016, p. 20). The newsletter's coverage of migration protests and nationalist mobilization reveals how populist movements create what Benedict Anderson calls "imagined communities" through exclusion as much as inclusion (Anderson, 2006).

The documentation of military deployments in civilian contexts—from National Guard troops in Los Angeles to surveillance technology proliferation—reflects what Hardt and Negri identify as the emergence of "Empire," a new form of sovereignty that operates through permanent states of exception (Hardt & Negri, 2000, p. 20). The ruling that military deployment in Los Angeles violated federal law reveals tensions between democratic governance and security imperatives that Giorgio Agamben analyzes in State of Exception (2005).

Agamben's concept of "bare life"—human existence stripped of political qualification—helps explain how surveillance and security measures transform citizens into subjects of biopolitical management (Agamben, 1998, p. 8). The newsletter's coverage of facial recognition technology and digital surveillance reflects what Simone Weil anticipated in The Need for Roots (1949), where she warned that modern bureaucratic systems would reduce human beings to administrative categories, severing their connections to place and community (Weil, 1949, p. 43).

The increasing normalization of surveillance represents what Naomi Klein calls "disaster capitalism"—the exploitation of crisis conditions to implement policies that would otherwise face democratic resistance (Klein, 2007). The newsletter's documentation of surveillance expansion during immigration enforcement illustrates how security logics colonize everyday life, transforming public space into sites of potential investigation.

The coverage of art and media — from Hiromi Ozaki’s “tech bros” avatars to bundle strategies at the New York Times — highlights how cultural forms are being used to interrogate and monetize attention simultaneously. Ozaki’s avatars dramatize the uncanny political authority of algorithmic elites; the Times-Economist bundling shows legacy media converting editorial reputation into platformized products. Both phenomena revolve around control of narrative frames and distributional reach.

Here, Hannah Arendt’s distinction between the public realm of appearance and the instrumentalization of publicity is instructive: the attention economy collapses appearance into commodity form, and art/practice that resists that collapse (Ozaki’s unsettling performance) becomes a critical intervention.

The extensive coverage of Gulf states' economic diversification efforts, particularly Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030, reflects broader patterns of what Giovanni Arrighi calls "systemic cycles of accumulation"—long-term shifts in global economic hegemony (Arrighi, 1994). The Saudi emphasis on artificial intelligence, renewable energy, and cultural tourism represents attempts to position the Kingdom within what Manuel Castells identifies as the "space of flows" characteristic of informational capitalism (Castells, 1996, p. 407).

However, these transformation efforts face what Albert Hirschman analyzed as the "development dilemma"—the difficulty of maintaining social stability while undergoing rapid economic change (Hirschman, 1958). The newsletter's coverage of protests in various countries reveals how economic transformation generates social tensions that can destabilize the political projects they are meant to support.

The emphasis on artificial intelligence across multiple newsletter items reflects what Nick Srnicek calls "platform capitalism"—the extraction of value from data and network effects rather than traditional production (Srnicek, 2017). The competition between nations to develop AI capabilities represents what Benjamin Bratton terms "planetary-scale computation"—the emergence of computational systems that operate across traditional territorial boundaries (Bratton, 2015).

Defense snippets, like the UK's £10bn frigate sale to Norway (Mueller, 2025), highlight post-Brexit interoperability amid Russian threats. Policy-wise, this bolsters NATO's non-EU flank, causally tied to energy security (North Sea oilfields). Socially, it counters isolationism, echoing Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations (1996), where alliances mitigate hybrid threats.

Migration woes—Australia's anti-immigration marches, UK's family refugee curbs—interrelate with demographics: Greece's school closures (due to low birthrates) and Guyana's oil-fueled growth signal uneven global flows. Per Saskia Sassen's Expulsions (2014), tariffs and borders expel the vulnerable, widening divides. Philosophically, Levinas's ethics of the Other (1961/1969) demands hospitality: "The face of the Other... calls into question my freedom."

In headlines, Russia's Ukraine strikes and China's parade (with Putin, Kim) evoke multipolarity, per John Mearsheimer's offensive realism (2001): Alliances like SCO counter US hegemony. Trump's Guard deployments (ruled illegal) mirror domestic militarization, associatively linking to art's "political messages" bans in Florida.

Business narratives pivot on conglomerates like San Miguel, aiming to uplift 15 million Filipinos by 2030 (Monocle, 2025). Economically, diversification into infrastructure and banking mitigates beer dependency, causally linked to disaster-prone climates—typhoons demand rapid response, per Ramon Ang's vision. Socially, this corporate responsibility echoes Amartya Sen's capability approach (1999), where upliftment enhances freedoms, though family-led projects risk nepotism.

Interwoven is the work-fulfillment study (Steck, 2025), drawing on 1930s biographies to prioritize meaningful labor over work-life balance dichotomies. Theoretically, this counters Hannah Arendt's The Human Condition (1958), distinguishing labor (survival) from work (creation); fulfillment arises from the latter's mastery and camaraderie. Policy-wise, amid AI disruptions (xAI's API mentions), governments must foster "pride in achievements," lest automation exacerbate alienation, as Karl Marx warned in Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts (1844/1932): "Labor produces wonders for the rich, but... misery for the worker."

Globally, headlines on Aramco's dividend borrowing (despite stock slumps) and Trump's tariffs illustrate economic interrelations: Saudi diversification falters on oil volatility, per Vaclav Smil's Energy and Civilization (2017), while US protectionism ripples to Brazil (50% tariffs over Bolsonaro's trial). Culturally, this fosters "affective polarization" (Rees-Sheridan, 2025 on Penn Station), where infrastructure debates moralize policy.

San Miguel’s ambition to “uplift 15 million Filipinos by 2030” via conglomerate platforms (airports, foundations, infrastructure) is a revealing case of corporate social compacting: a private actor assuming functions conventionally in the remit of public administration (transport infrastructure, disaster response). The newsletter captures both the scale of the claim and the institutional complexity — family leadership, intergenerational governance, multi-sector levers.

This raises classical questions in political economy: what happens when corporate capacity substitutes for public capacity? On one hand, private speed and logistics can be decisive in disasters; on the other, public accountability, redistributive policy, and democratic oversight can be attenuated. Naomi Klein’s work on disaster capitalism warns of the risks when crises become pretexts for privatized upgrading that bypass public deliberation; conversely, state weakness can make such private roles politically necessary (Klein, 2007). The newsletter’s reporting is judicious: it admires the capacity while implying the policy need for rigorous oversight and partnership frameworks.

Reading across these newsletter fragments reveals a fundamental tension between technological possibility and human flourishing that requires careful navigation. The urban planning insights about shade and public space suggest directions for what David Harvey calls "the right to the city"—the collective right to shape urban environments according to human needs rather than capital accumulation (Harvey, 2008, p. 23).

The digital detox movements, while limited in their individual focus, point toward necessary conversations about collective digital governance. As Zeynep Tufekci argues in Twitter and Tear Gas (2017), digital technologies reshape political possibilities in complex ways that require new forms of democratic organization (Tufekci, 2017, p. 14). The challenge lies in developing what Langdon Winner calls "technological citizenship"—forms of democratic participation that engage seriously with technical systems rather than treating them as neutral tools (Winner, 1986).

The restoration and heritage preservation discussions suggest possibilities for what James C. Scott terms "metis"—practical wisdom embedded in local practices and relationships (Scott, 1998). The popularity of public restoration projects reveals hunger for authentic engagement with cultural production that could inform broader democratization of expertise and knowledge production.

Most fundamentally, these newsletter fragments document societies struggling to maintain human-scale meanings within planetary-scale systems. As Anna Tsing argues in The Mushroom at the End of the World (2015), the challenge of the Anthropocene requires developing what she calls "the arts of living on a damaged planet"—practices that maintain possibility for flourishing within conditions of systemic crisis (Tsing, 2015, p. 2).

Taken together, the newsletter items form a circuit: ecological stress (heat) makes everyday life more contingent, cultural institutions respond by converting expertise into spectacle to survive, markets tighten and force cultural actors to respecify practices, and powerful corporate actors fill governance gaps. The theoretical frame that most usefully knits these threads is urban political economy: space and culture are co-produced with capital (Lefebvre; Harvey), and the distribu­tion of comfort, access, and aesthetic capital is inherently political.

Modest policy recommendations implicit in the reporting:

Urban microclimate equity audits (shade, cooling at transit nodes) as public-good investments.

Mission-aligned public subsidies for cultural heritage that require accountability, conservation plans, and community access (to stabilize museums like Van Gogh’s).

Support for lower-velocity cultural models (longer exhibitions, local programming) to reduce the precarity induced by the global fair circuit.

Structured public–private frameworks for corporate actors doing quasi-public work (transparency, performance metrics, labor protections) as in San Miguel’s case.

The patterns revealed across these newsletter items suggest the need for what might be termed "spatial democracy"—forms of democratic practice that take seriously the ways physical and digital environments shape political possibility. This would require integrating insights from urban planning, media studies, heritage preservation, and political theory to develop more comprehensive approaches to contemporary governance challenges.

Such an approach would recognize that questions of shade policy, screen time, cultural memory, and surveillance cannot be addressed through purely technical or administrative means. Instead, they require what John Dewey called "the public and its problems"—forms of collective inquiry and action that emerge from shared experience of common challenges (Dewey, 1927). The newsletter's documentation of various crises and innovations provides raw material for such democratic experimentation, revealing both constraints and possibilities for more livable futures.

The ultimate question raised by these fragments concerns whether democratic societies can develop the institutional capacity to govern technological and environmental change in ways that preserve human dignity and flourishing. As the philosopher Hannah Arendt observed, politics emerges in spaces where people gather to act together in ways that exceed individual capacity (Arendt, 1958). The challenge for contemporary societies lies in creating and maintaining such spaces under conditions of accelerating change and systemic crisis.

These snippets, therefore, portray a world where shade—literal and metaphorical—offers respite from existential heats. Culturally, preservation battles affirm identity; economically, diversification buffers volatility; policy-wise, alliances navigate risks; socially, work and migration demand equity. As Beck (1992) notes, "risks... escape perception and are localized in the sphere of physical and chemical formulas" (p. 21), yet newsletters like this humanize them. Interrelations suggest causality: Climate inaction fuels migration, which stokes polarization, necessitating ethical policies. In literature, Italo Calvino's Invisible Cities (1972) reminds us: Cities are dreams shaped by desires—may ours include equitable shadows.

Thanks for reading The Open Access Blogs! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Subscribe

Agamben, G. (1998). Homo sacer: Sovereign power and bare life. Stanford University Press.

Agamben, G. (2005). State of exception. University of Chicago Press.

Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (Rev. ed.). Verso.

Appadurai, A. (1986). The social life of things: Commodities in cultural perspective. Cambridge University Press.

Appadurai, A. (2006). Fear of small numbers: An essay on the geography of anger. Duke University Press.

Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. University of Chicago Press.

Arrighi, G. (1994). The long twentieth century: Money, power and the origins of our times. Verso.

Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. Sage Publications.

Beller, J. (2006). The cinematic mode of production: Attention economy and the society of the spectacle. Dartmouth College Press.

Benjamin, W. (1968). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. In H. Zohn (Trans.), Illuminations (pp. 217-251). Schocken Books.

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste (R. Nice, Trans.). Harvard University Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). Greenwood.

Bratton, B. H. (2015). The stack: On software and sovereignty. MIT Press.

Calvino, I. (1972). Invisible cities (W. Weaver, Trans.). Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Blackwell.

Davis, M. (1998). Ecology of fear: Los Angeles and the imagination of disaster. Metropolitan Books.

Dewey, J. (1927). The public and its problems. Henry Holt.

Eco, U. (1980). The name of the rose (W. Weaver, Trans.). Harcourt.

Foucault, M. (2007). Security, territory, population: Lectures at the Collège de France 1977-1978. Palgrave Macmillan.

Frampton, K. (2020). Modern architecture: A critical history (5th ed.). Thames & Hudson. (Original work published 1980)

García Márquez, G. (1967). One hundred years of solitude (G. Rabassa, Trans.). Harper & Row.

Han, B.-C. (2015). The burnout society. Stanford University Press.

Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Harvard University Press.

Harvey, D. (2008). The right to the city. New Left Review, 53, 23-40.

Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel cities: From the right to the city to the urban revolution. Verso.

Heidegger, M. (1971). Building dwelling thinking. In Poetry, language, thought (A. Hofstadter, Trans., pp. 143-159). Harper & Row. (Original work published 1951)

Hirschman, A. O. (1958). The strategy of economic development. Yale University Press.

Hoffman, J. S., Shandas, V., & Pendleton, N. (2020). The effects of historical housing policies on resident exposure to intra-urban heat: A study of 108 US urban areas. Climate, 8(1), 12.

Huntington, S. P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. Simon & Schuster.

Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. Random House.

Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism, or, The cultural logic of late capitalism. Duke University Press.

Klein, N. (2007). The shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism. Metropolitan Books.

Lee, J. M. (2018). Pedestrian behavior in urban heat: Shade-seeking patterns in New York City. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 144(3), 04018025.

Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Blackwell.

Lefebvre, H. (1996). The right to the city. In E. Kofman & E. Lebas (Eds. & Trans.), Writings on cities (pp. 63-181). Blackwell. (Original work published 1968)

Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority (A. Lingis, Trans.). Duquesne University Press. (Original work published 1961)

Marx, K. (1932). Economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844. Progress Publishers. (Original work published 1844)

Massey, D. (1993). Power-geometry and a progressive sense of place. In J. Bird, B. Curtis, T. Putnam, G. Robertson, & L. Tickner (Eds.), Mapping the futures: Local cultures, global change (pp. 59-69). Routledge.

Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. W.W. Norton.

Mouffe, C. (2018). For a left populism. Verso.

Mudde, C., & Kaltwasser, C. R. (2017). Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.

Müller, J.-W. (2016). What is populism?. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Nixon, R. (2011). Slow violence and the environmentalism of the poor. Harvard University Press.

Nowak, D. J., & Dwyer, J. F. (2007). Understanding the benefits and costs of urban forest ecosystems. In J. E. Kuser (Ed.), Urban and community forestry in the northeast (pp. 25-46). Springer.

Sassen, S. (2014). Expulsions: Brutality and complexity in the global economy. Harvard University Press.

Scott, J. C. (1998). Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press.

Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Knopf.

Smil, V. (2017). Energy and civilization: A history. MIT Press.

Smith, L. (2006). Uses of heritage. Routledge.

Srnicek, N. (2017). Platform capitalism. Polity Press.

Tsing, A. L. (2015). The mushroom at the end of the world: On the possibility of life in capitalist ruins. Princeton University Press.

Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. Yale University Press.

Tufte, E. R. (1990). Envisioning information. Graphics Press.

Twenge, J. M. (2017). iGen: Why today's super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy--and completely unprepared for adulthood. Atria Books.

UNESCO. (2019). Culture for development indicators: Methodology manual. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

Waterton, E., & Smith, L. (2009). There is no such thing as heritage. In E. Waterton & L. Smith (Eds.), Taking archaeology out of heritage (pp. 10-27). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Weil, S. (1949). The need for roots: Prelude to a declaration of duties towards mankind. Routledge.

Winner, L. (1986). The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in an age of high technology. University of Chicago Press.

Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.

[Written, Researched, and Edited by Pablo Markin. Some parts of the text have been produced with the aid of Research, Perplexity, ChatGPT, OpenAI, and Grok, xAI, tools (September 9, 2025). The featured image has been generated in Canva (September 9, 2025).]

[Support the Open Culture Blog: https://ko-fi.com/theopenaccessblogs/tip.]

OpenEdition suggests that you cite this post as follows:
Pablo Markin (September 9, 2025). Global Narratives: Urban Shadows, Cultural Custodianship, and the Interplay of Power in a Warming World. Open Culture.

Share

Support dialog