At first glance, Malmo did not look that much different from Copenhagen. Both possessed the classic European architecture and quaint cafés lining the pedestrian zones. The only glaring difference I immediately spotted was the biking trend. Malmo did not have as many bikers as Copenhagen; however, their infrastructure was still one that designed for frequent bike transportation. In all honesty, I thought Malmo just looked like a stereotypical, picture-perfect European city. By the end of the day, my perspective of the city had completely changed.
All throughout the day, our insanely insightful and intelligent tour guide, Anders, continually pointed out the architecture and layout of the city. He started by asking us to observe any similarities and differences between Malmo and Copenhagen. Naturally, I could not help but think there really was not any. I know what you are probably thinking, “silly Emily”, which is an accurate thought: silly me.
While Anders did admit there were many similarities between the two cities, Malmo’s city infrastructure and layout was more than what meets the eye. At each stop on the tour, he discussed the reasoning behind the area’s urban design. He spoke of how the urban city planners took numerous factors into consideration when building different sections of the city. Obviously, the “common sense” factors were obvious: is this area pedestrian friendly? Is it designed for cars, bikes, or simply walking? Does the design increase traffic in and out of the local shops?
Yet, there were multiple factors Anders mentioned that I had never even considered. He touched on the topic of “human-scale” and how it influences people’s feelings and perspectives of the area. If the buildings are closer together in a city square, it creates a more intimate atmosphere for people. This makes sense, but I guess I had never really taken the time to understand that these easily noticeable observations were meticulously planned to make me feel a certain way. In fact, included in the description of “human-scale” included the aspect of building height. If people can see the building’s roof (i.e. if the building is not towering over them), that adds to the intimate aura.
Thinking back to large cities in the States, like New York City or Chicago, it now dawns one me why it is easy to “feel lost” in the sea of the city. It is tough to find tight, intimate atmospheres in the downtown of major metropolitan cities. Sure, there can be little nook-and-cranny spots that locals can consider their intimate spots, but they are not as frequent or grand as the areas of Malmo (or even other European cities). I think that is why I have heard so many people talk about the relaxing and chill atmosphere of Copenhagen. The urban planning of these cities is tailored to make visitors feel a certain way ,whereas it seems that in US cities it is more tailored to jam as many people into a tight space as possible.
Whether it be in Sweden, Denmark, or back home in the States, I will view public areas in a different light. Instead of thinking about how quaint and beautiful the buildings are, I will start thinking about what the various factors that create a specific atmosphere.