In this reading group we discussed a draft piece of Tauri Tuvikene鈥檚 paper: 鈥淏ody-drivers鈥 in traffic: Walking the Streets of Automobile City in Tallinn, Estonia. Tauri, present at the reading group, explained his paper鈥檚 current ideas and where he ultimately would like his research to go.
One key issue that the paper concerns itself with is rethinking the pedestrian and how the human body is viewed in relation to the automobiles now dominating the roads of Estonian cities. The group returned to a key simile:
鈥榩edestrians appeared as part of the mechanic street system as if it was a conveyor belt鈥 (Hornsey, 2010)
In this sense, the human body is viewed as part of a system, a body to be regulated, controlled and incorporated into the traffic-system. Interestingly, 鈥榠n Estonia everyone must wear a safety reflector on all street environments. While pedestrians frequently violate norms, they are all still part of the almost industrially organised and mechanised system鈥攖raffic.鈥
Pedestrians are expected to follow traffic light rules, to cross at designated points, to make their bodies visible as a car would with headlights, yet Tauri pulled attention to how pedestrians are capable of more than the rules of traffic regulations: 鈥楾he bodily capacities of pedestrians who skilfully use their bodies in ways that cars, for instance, cannot鈥 “twist, duck and bend鈥濃攊nfluence social interaction in pedestrian spaces (Goffman 1971, 8).鈥
In our discussion, Tauri was particularly interested in how pedestrians violate traffic regulations and how this violation is perceived. For example, he draws upon the idea of the 鈥榣oiterer鈥. As Morag Rose twists the figure of a loiterer away from a rebellious deviator to a normalised behaviour, Tauri argues that 鈥榬ights for pedestrians mean right to loiter.鈥 How should we perceive and regulate the human body and pedestrians?
Although Tauri explores the pedestrian specifically in Tallinn, Estonia, even investigating the etymology of the Estonian work for walking, liikleja, the paper is conscious that elements of the research are applicable to other contemporary cities dominated by automobiles, making this research valuable to rethinking pedestrian-safety across the globe.
Although still in the stages of drafting, Tauri鈥檚 paper is already highlighting a range of interesting and complex questions and the reading group is looking forward to the completion of the final version and seeing where Tauri鈥檚 research leads.
The group concluded by speculating what is the future of traffic in cities? What is the future of the pedestrian and automobiles? How will traffic be regulated and safety measures implemented in future cities?
Some Further Reading:聽
Elvebakk, Beate. 2007. 鈥淰ision Zero: Remaking Road Safety.鈥 Mobilities 2 (3):425鈥41.
Goffman, Erving. 1971. Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Basic Books
Hornsey, Richard. 2010. 鈥溾楬e Who Thinks, in Modern Traffic, Is Lost鈥: Automation and the Pedestrian Rhythms of Interwar London.鈥 In Geographies of Rhythm: Nature, Place, Mobilities and Bodies, edited by Tim Edensor, 99鈥112. Farnham: Ashgate.
Rose, Morag. 2015. 鈥淐onfessions of an Anarcho-Fl芒neuse, or Psychogeography the Mancunian Way.鈥
Featured Image source:



