Since the 19th century, industrialisation and the modern movement have promoted the idea of viewing cities primarily as spaces of efficiency and functionality, rather than as places for dwelling and collective exchange among citizens. As a result, public spaces seem to be impoverished, and emptied of meaning, losing their central role as facilitators of collective identity as in the past.
The famous Nolli map of Rome showed the interiors of public buildings as void, mostly places of worship, in the same hierarchy as outdoor spaces such as streets and squares. It raised a profound urban idea that the interiors of public buildings were public spaces, as if the outdoors extended into the buildings. Think of the analogy between the places of worship (cathedrals, churches, etc.) in old Rome and the public cultural institutions (museums, galleries, etc.) in modern cities, where similar publicity is shared for the meeting of citizens.
This leads us to speculate: could museums be designed to better integrate internal and external spaces, enhancing their role their publicity? By doing so, they might contribute more effectively to the collective identity of the city.

Conjuction

“To live together in the world means essentially that a world of
things is between those who have it in common, as a table is
located between those who sit around it; the world, like every
in-between, relates and separates men at the same time. […] The
public realm, as the common world, gathers us together and yet
prevents our falling over each other.”

Reference : The Human Condition
By Hannah Arendt · 2019

---