Not long ago, I read an essay by Emerson concerning the role of the public intellectual. In it he argued that a complete person embodying the many dimensions of human potential actualized should never be bound by scholarly pursuits in a study, but rather should engage in public action. This action would not stem from one's obligation to society, but one's obligation to one's self.

Edward Said, another leading intellectual, commented much later on the role of the public intellectual in a series of lectures at Columbia University called Representations of the Intellectual (1993). In his estimation, the intellectual stands outside society and its institutions--questioning the status quo--while remaining a part of that society. Thus, she must constantly balance her commitment to personal ideals with the relevance of those ideals for society.

Douglas Kellner, cultural critic and intellectual in his own right, expands on these conceptions in "Intellectuals, the New Public Spheres, and Techno-Politics," drawing a distinction between "functional intellectuals" who reinforce dominant ideologies and "oppositional intellectuals" who challenge the existing order.

I lack the experience to comment much on these conceptions of the public intellectual. But I do know that as a graduate student of urban studies and planning, I plan to engage in public action, strive for balance in my pursuits, and constantly question the existing orders of the world. In this vein, I am particularly interested in studying Habermas's conceptions of the public sphere and its implications for contemporary public discourse. As a starting point, I designed my first "scholarly" research project around a community-building project in which my neighbors and I reclaimed a public right-of-way in order to turn it into a public gathering space.

To learn more about this project, please browse the website of the Mt. Scott-Arleta Neighborhood Repair Project or jump directly to my research proposal.