35 | 234 Introduction. Autonomy and the search for meaning In this historical phase, cities are intensely crossed by processes and practices of appropriation and re-appropriation of places and life environments. These are, in fact, very diferent experiences: urban gardens, forms of self-management of a self-made informal city, parkour, occupations of houses, self- managed green spaces, recently occupied sites of cultural production (theatres and so on), the tempo- rary use of abandoned areas as well as the use of public spaces for organized group activities. Such experiences are in progress not only in Italy, but all over the world (Hou 2010), including Western ‘de- veloped’ and neo-liberal world; and it’s no accident, although one would expect this areas to be more refractory to self-organization, mainly because cit- ies appear to be more efcient, fully provided with all services not to mention ofers and opportunities. Such practices and processes have always been present in cities, with degrees and in diferent ways, but today they are in the forefront, not only because some lines of research (and political movements as well) pay to them specifc attention by raising an important debate at international level (and here we clearly refer to the ‘right to the city’ and to the related on-going debate), but also because they constitute an extremely broad landscape gradually widening with the most diverse experiences. This phenomenon appears even more interesting if we consider that it afects pervasively heavily planned and institutionalized Western cities, thus highlight- ing a reaction, almost a search for an alternative to control and neoliberal development, a form of au- tonomy and research of meaning within the more or less tight mesh of the planned city. Self-organization and the need for urbanity Experiences vary a lot, regarding not only the typol- ogy of self-made city: ‘informal’, ‘abusive’ or else, although self-made city plays a pivotal role in urban development and response to housing needs in the Southern hemisphere. Even within the same type of experience, such as urban gardens, we encounter important diferences at many levels, from the sub- jects involved to the organizational forms, from the type of activity to the culture of the public and the connection to the urban environment, and so on. That is why it is so important to observe these ex- periences in their specifcity (see for example Attili 2013, on urban gardens) to grasp their meaning and implications. Motivations, in this variety of instances, are diverse and may be not present all together. Nonetheless, they represent the foundations of the experiences themselves. Motivations are at diferent levels: ne- cessity, political and personal. First, the practices of appropriation often respond to a material necessity, In this historical phase, cities are intensely crossed by processes and practices of appropriation and re-appropriation of places and life environments. Motivations are at diferent levels: necessity, political and personal. The feldwork shows, however, another reason, namely a need for urbanity and quality of urban life. Space is the medium of all these ex- periences. Places and everyday life have a strong centrality in them. In fact, these experiences fnd in the texture and spatiality of places their solidifcation point, their drive and motivation, often their raison d’être, as well as an activator for their passion. A place is a material and signifcant space, which precipitates the linear chronographic time and turns it into everyday lifetime. The process of self-organization in / with the territory becomes a principle and a process of individuation. Finally, some experiences directly and explicitly pose questions about the modes of production of politics and institutions, thus entering into a broad debate. Self-organization, Appropriation of places, Urbanity Carlo Cellamare Self-organization, appropriation of places and production of urbanity