Rome is not an archipelago

This article criticizes the conventional portrayal of Rome as an archipelago, which simplistically divides the city into isolated urban and natural spaces. Instead, I propose a more nuanced interpretation, viewing Rome as a dynamic, amphibious entity where the boundaries between city and nature are blurred and interwoven. Key ideas include: 1. Critique of the Archipelago Metaphor: The "archipelago" concept reinforces a dualistic separation between city (urban) and nature (rural or wild), ignoring their intrinsic interconnectedness. This binary perspective limits our understanding and representation of Rome’s complex landscapes. 2. Amphibious Landscapes: Rome’s spaces are better understood as "amphibious," a term denoting dual existence—both urban and natural. Examples like the Circo Massimo illustrate spaces where urban and natural elements coexist and interact dynamically, defying strict categorization. 3. Unclassified Urban-Nature Spaces: The city is filled with "in-between" spaces, such as abandoned or obsolete sites (e.g., ex-industrial areas, unused parking lots), which foster cohabitation of human and non-human life. These places challenge conventional notions of functionality, blending decay and renewal, and showcasing a unique form of ecological and urban resilience. 4. Rome’s Resistance to Change: The city’s slow pace of transformation, often seen as frustrating, has paradoxically preserved these transitional landscapes. This inertia creates opportunities for innovative uses and reinterpretations of space, contrasting with the rapid and sometimes undemocratic urban changes in more dynamic cities. 5. Potential of Transitional Spaces: Transitional, impermanent landscapes hold immense potential for experimentation and integration into urban life. They offer opportunities for rethinking public spaces, fostering new relationships between humans, nature, and the built environment. 6. Call for Action: Instead of seeing these spaces as problems, we should embrace their irregularity and use them as platforms for creative and sustainable urban interventions. This requires shifting from frustration to a proactive approach that values and enhances these "in-between" landscapes. The document concludes by advocating for a vision of Rome as a city of amphibious, transformative landscapes, moving beyond outdated dualisms to embrace complexity and diversity in urban-nature interactions.