The transformation of the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam

This article focuses on the design process for the transformation of the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam (1885, by P.J.H. Cuypers), with special attention for the evolution of the design by Cruz y Ortiz arquitectos and the associated history of ideas. How did opinions on the intervention evolve from the concept for a masterplan in 1996 to the realized project? To what extent were all those diverse ambitions regarding the city, the monument and the museum realized? What was the role of the designers, not only referring to Cruz y Ortiz, but also to Van Hoogevest Architecten (restoration) and Wilmotte & Associés (interior)? How did the design evolve in a complex and ambitious context involving a great many interested parties, and what effect did this have on the design process from the first sketches to the ultimately realized renovation?

A Critical Response to Kevin Stenson’s Governing the Local: Sovereignty, Social Governance and Community Safety

In his compelling case study of local governance and community safety in the UK Thames Valley, Kevin Stenson makes several important contributions to the field of governmentality studies. While the paper’s merits are far-reaching, to this reader’s assessment they can be summarized in the following key areas: 1) Empirically, the article enhances our knowledge of the political economic transformation of a region otherwise overlooked in social science research ; 2) Conceptually, Stenson offers several theoretical and analytical refrains that, while becoming increasingly commonplace, are nonetheless still germane and rightly oriented to offer push back against otherwise totalizing, reified accounts of roll back/roll out neoliberalism. A welcomed new approach is offered as a corrective, The Realist Governmentality perspective, which emphasizes the interrelated and co-constitutive nature of politics, local culture, and habitus in processes related to the restructuring of social governance; 3) Methodologically, the paper makes a pitch for the ways in which finely grained, nuanced, mixed-method/ethnographic analyses have the potential to further problematize and recast a field of governmentality studies far too often dominated by discursive and textual approaches.