A Waste of Space Unwin PDF

A Waste of Space? Towards a Critique of the Social Production of Space...
Author(s): Tim Unwin

Source: Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 25, No. 1 (2000), pp. 11-
29
Published by: The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/623315
Accessed: 10-05-2020 01:45 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/623315?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) is

collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions of the
Institute of British Geographers
This content downloaded from 157.253.50.50 on Sun, 10 May 2020 01:45:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
A waste of space? Towards a critique of the
social production of space...
Tim Unwin
This paper outlines a framework for a critique of Henri Lefebvre's notion of the
social production of space, undertaken around five intersecting themes: language
and meaning, the separation of space and time, the processes of production and
construction, empowerment and value, and space and place.
key words production of space Lefebvre
Department of Geography, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 OEX
email: t.unwin@vms.rhbnc.ac.uk
revised manuscript received 11 November 1999
Context terrain of geographical research that it has influ-

enced. Particular attention will thus be paid to the
work
In the midst of a gloomy and exceedingly responsible of David Harvey (1982; 1985; 1990) and Ed
Soja
business it is quite some trick to keep cheerful: and yet, (1996; 1999) (but see also Merrifield 1993;
what could be more necessary than cheerfulness? Smith 1998). La production de l'espace was the culmi-
nation of a sequence of books written by Lefebvre
Nothing succeeds without high spirits playing their
part. (Nietzsche 1998, 3) in the 1960s and early 1970s on the 'nature of
urbanization and the production of space' (Harvey
The idea that space is socially produced, or con- 1991, 430; see also Hess 1988), and it is impossible
structed, has become one of the foundations of to understand it without a grasp of some of his
contemporary social and cultural geography,other works (see particularly 1968a; 1968b; 1970;
generating a wealth of theoretical and empirical1980; 1981; for accessible works in English trans-
publications (for example, see the recent forumlation, see 1968c; 1996). However, The production of
published as Dixon 1999; Merrifield 1999; Price space is the work of Lefebvre that has been most
1999; Shields 1999; Soja 1999). However, therewidely cited in the Anglo-American geographical
remain fundamental problems with such a concep- literature, and, given the intention of using this
tualization of space, and this paper seeks to explorecritique to highlight wider problems with geogra-
some of the implications of these difficulties. This is
phers' uses of the idea of the social production and
inherently a highly complex task for at least twoconstruction of space, it does provide a useful
main reasons. First, by engaging with this litera- starting point for this investigation.
ture one in a sense becomes part of it; credence can Lefebvre has by no means been alone among
be given to the very ideas that are being challengedeminent social theorists in challenging past concep-
(Curry 1996). Second, the extensive volume of thetions of space (see, for example, Foucault 1980;
literature means that any such critique can only be1986). Furthermore, within geography there has
selective and thus partial. been a long tradition of concern with the claim that
The path chosen here has therefore been tospace can be shaped from the social meanings of
concentrate primarily on a single influential work,people's lives. This can be traced back at least as far
Lefebvre's (1974; 1991) La production de l'espace as some of Kirk's (1952) work in the 1950s and the
(translated as The production of space) and to use itemergence of a distinctive humanistic tradition
as a starting point from which to view some of thewithin the discipline (see, for example, Ley and
Trans Inst Br Geogr NS 25 11-29 2000

ISSN 0020-2754 @ Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2000
12 Tim Unwin
Samuels and 1978 of

Marxist worlds of differencestradit
that constitute constructions
Peet 1977)
of postmodernism itself (Duncan 1996; alsoCouclelis
conceptualizat
and Gale 1986). At times, therefore, the contrasting
the writings
interests of modernism and postmodernism have
the interpreta
coalesced in their pursuit of the meaning of space.
Lefebvre (196
As one referee of an earlier draft of this paper so
continued em
cogently observed, the translation of Lefebvre's The
particularly
production of space into English 'coincided with the s
high days of the postmodern debatede
production in social
the 1990s,
theory and the fluidity of his work war lent itself to
I begin easy recuperationwith
by the postmoderns'. The wider a
of significance of spacedebat
these in social theory also reflects
lar onthe increasing
the rein
acceptance that the previously domi-
culturalnant rhetoric of temporal
theor modes of explanation
an and understanding in the social sciences has failed
examination
ments sufficiently
in to accountThe
for the realities of contem- p
which these
porary existence (Gregory 1994). Moreover, such a
realization has been heightened
graphical theo by the collapse
of the former Soviet Union in the late
developed aro 1980s, and
guage the confusion
and into which this has thrown methose
time, the
intellectuals on the Left who proc had been brought up
empowermen
on the hope that historical materialism would
Given reveal
the hug
the fatal flaws of capitalism, and in so doing
enable the global proletariat
extensive use to throw off the
yearsshackles(Soja
of its repression and exploitation 1 (Pensky
1994; Gowan 1995).
Strohmayer 1
1998), Although it 'space', however
is defined, onhas been at
such athe heart critiqu
of geographical enquiry since antiquity
question(Unwin 1992), the rapidity some with which geographers
and other social scientists in the 1980s and 1990s
arguments an
the have adopted the idea that space is socially
interface b
'produced', or 'constructed', is worthy of note
particularly c
(Swyngedouw 1992; Lagopoulos 1993). The con-
geographical
1986; ceptLivings
is now so widely accepted that it frequently
1998a; appears in geographical publications with little
1998b; S
and Smith
apparent need for justification (for recent 199 exam-
ples, see Berg and Kearns 1996; Clarke et al 1996;
Pain 1997; Flint 1998). Sustained critiques by geog-
raphers of the concept, however, and of the com-
Space, societ
plex details of Lefebvre's own arguments, remain
scarce (although see Merrifield 1993; Soja 1996;
Reassertion o
theory Casey 1998; Dimendberg
in 1998; Smith
the 1998).
from Moreover,
a most critiques have been broadly sym-
divers
of influences
pathetic to Lefebvre's argument; very few have yet
Agnew been overtly critical of his overall project (although
1995). I
enced see Curryby 1996). the
of a Four main reasons can be adduced for the grow-
radical cr
ing emphasis on the social production
reflected in of space,th
as of and the rapidity with which the idea has been
Lefebvre
ever, taken up as a cornerstone of contemporary
more rec social
from theory.
diverseFirst, as Lefebvre (1974) himself has noted,
Towards a critique of the social production of space 13
capitalist society, it
attempts to understand the contemporary may thus become possible to
world
that focus primarily on temporal
understand change and
ways of changing the 'shape' of that
ignore spatial considerations are both partial and
society.
incomplete. Second, such approaches have found
resonance with many geographers, particularly
Lefebvre and the social production of
those with a background in historical geography
space
(Harvey 1961; Gregory 1982), who have long
sought to grapple with the spatial and
Lefebvre's temporal
writings have received considerable
dimensions of explanation and understanding.
critical acclaim, and engagements with his argu-
Third, as Harvey (1990), for example, has available
ments are widely illus- (among geographers,
trated, these arguments can be linked to those
see Harvey 1990; Merrifieldof1993; Gregory 1994;
geographers in the wake of Hdigerstrand
Soja 1996; Light and(1975),
Smith 1998). Rather than
who have advocated a time-geographical approach
trying to summarize the corpus of his work, itself
to the interpretation of society,an
and also to
impossible those
task, this of
section therefore lays
other social scientists, such as out
Giddens (1984),
a selection of somewhoof his more significant
have developed concepts such arguments,
as time-space so as to dis-
provide a basis for the
tanciation and compression asdevelopment
analytical tools
of the in
subsequent critique. At the
their attempts to grapple withoutset,
understanding con-
though, it is important to stress the contra-
temporary society. A fourth dictions
reason lies in
involved the
in this exercise. Lefebvre's argu-
changing nature of the academy, mentsand the way
are constructed in in
such a way that they are
which some geographers have not increasingly sought
readily summarized; his project is designed to
to engage with colleagues inelicit
the wider
debate social
and engagement, and the metaphors
sciences, seeing the reassertion
and of spacehein
illustrations social
uses are not reducible to a
theory as an opportunity to develop
simple set innovative
of parameters. For his advocates this is
insights into contemporary social,
indeed economic and
one of his strengths; for his critics, it
political practices (Unwin 1992).
remains problematic. The following exploration
The meanings that we attribute to space,
therefore seeksand, for a difficult path between
to explore
that matter, time, are intimately
thesetied up withItour
two positions. is in no way an attempt
understandings of the world in which
to identify we live.
a single central core to Lefebvre's argu-
They have thus become central to debates
ments, over
but at the same time it wishes to keep open
modernity and postmodernity. theAs Harvey
possibility that(1990,
it is not itself subverted by
201), following Berman (1982),
them. has suggested,
modernity can be seen as 'a certain mode of ex-
perience of space and time'. TheInform
a similar way,
of Lefebvre's argument
postmodernism can be conceived of as
Working an explor-
within the framework of a long tradition
ation of different spaces and of
times,
French and also
critical of
literature, Lefebvre's arguments
different ways of thinking about space
in The and time.
production It are not always easy to
of space
is here that Lefebvre's work is of such relevance. As comprehend. This is particularly so for those
Soja (1996, 6) has commented, Lefebvre 'has been versed in Anglo-Saxon quests for certainty and a
more influential than any other scholar in openingclassificatory logic in which everything has its
up and exploring the limitless dimensions of ourclearly defined place. In part this is because of the
social spatiality'. Significantly, while Soja (1989)breadth of his approach, ranging from the 'Roman
has been an ardent advocate of the need to ex- state-city-empire' (Lefebvre 1991, 252) to the archi-
plore these alternative postmodern geographies,
tecture of Frank Lloyd Wright, from the space of
Lefebvre's work follows in a long tradition of Christendom to the French Revolution,
medieval
humanist Marxists concerned overtly with andthe
from Heraclitus to Marx. While the initial
modernist belief that it is possible to make the upon which he builds his subsequent dis-
outline
world in which we live a better place. In seeking to is established in a relatively straightforward
course
understand the ways in which space and time have in the first two chapters of the book, his
fashion
been socialized as particular constructs of moder-
subsequent arguments are very much more com-
nity, and also the ways in which their production
plex. Many commentators have therefore concen-
play a significant part in shaping the character oflargely upon the initial framework, and have
trated
14 Tim Unwin
failedThe temporal
sufficinarrative of text thus appears to be
challenging
rethought according to some kind of spatialized
book, let
form of logic. alone
other works. This logic is in turn tightly structured through
The complexity of Lefebvre's arguments Lefebvre's
is insistent and consistent use of triads
closely related to the elusiveness with which he(see Blum and Nast 1996 and Gregory 1997 for
Lefebvre's debt to Lacan here). For Lefebvre, these
develops them. Reading The production of space can
be compared to walking across quicksand, or try-triads are not simply a traditional dialectic of
ing to find the end of a rainbow. No sooner doesthesis/antithesis/synthesis, but are rather a way of
one think that one has understood what he is trying to develop a completely new form of con-
trying to say, than he shifts his position, so that
ceptualization, avoiding the temporal logic associ-
what was once thought to be acceptable ated
is now
with both Hegelian and Marxist dialectics.
shown to be problematic. At the heart of Soja (1996) thus describes this 'thirding' as a dis-
Lefebvre's
project there is thus an intention to make complex
tinct form of 'othering', and uses it to develop his
the taken-for-granted, and to force theown reader to of what he names 'Thirdspace'. Triads
concept
question her or his own understandingsare ofeverywhere
space. in Lefebvre's argument. Two of the
As well as being elusive, though, there ismost a tension
commonly referred to are his physical, mental
within Lefebvre's work, because this veryand social 'fields' (1991, 11), and his threefold
character
of being contradictory, and lacking certainty, conceptualization
to of spatial practice, represen-
some extent runs counter to his own certainty tations that
of space and representational spaces (33).
space is actually produced. However, many other examples of triads can also
This elusive character of Lefebvre's argumentbe found in isThe production of space, and among the
in part achieved through the way in which most interesting
he of these is his discussion of
approaches his subject matter from a range the geometric,
of optical and phallic formants, or
different perspectives. Soja (1996, 9), in elements
grapplingof the multiform character of abstract
space (285-7; for a critique focusing on his failure
with the complexities of the book's organization,
has thus commented that to develop a sufficiently robust theory of represen-
tation, see Dimendberg 1998, 37). Throughout his
I began to think that perhaps Lefebvre was presenting
analysis, he seeks to develop his argument around
The Production of Space as a musical composition, with a
this threefold logic: it exists in his three moments of
multiplicity of instruments and voices playing together
at the same time. More specifically, I found that the 'the
text great dialectical movements that traverse the
world-as-totality and help define it' (218); it is to be
could be read as a polyphonic fugue that assertively
introduced its keynote themes early on and thenfound in the three questions that need to be asked
beyond the idea of
changed them intentionally in contrapuntal variations a "'plural", "polyscopic", or
"polyvalent" space'
that took radically different forms and harmonies. (292); and it is there in the
three meanings that he attributes to Descartes'
Following the first two chapters outlining thesis
the (283).
book's initial framework, Lefebvre examines the
same basic themes in chapters entitled 'Spatial
architectronics', 'From absolute space to abstractAims and content
space', 'Contradictory space' and 'From the contra-At the outset, it would appear that Lefebvre's
dictions of space to differential space'. Each of paramount intent in The production of space is to
these explores 'the mode of existence of socialconfront previous ways of considering space. Near
relations' (1991, 401) from a range of contrasting, the beginning of the book, he thus claims that
but interconnected, perspectives. A key effect of
Most if not all authors ensconce themselves comfort-
this approach is to challenge the logic and spatial
ably enough within the terms of mental (and therefore
arrangement of traditional texts. As Soja (1996, 9)
neo-Kantian or neo-Cartesian) space, thereby demon-
once again perceptively comments,
strating that 'theoretical practice' is already nothing
it was a way of spatializing the text, of breaking out of more than the egocentric thinking of specialized
the conventional temporal flow of introduction- Western intellectuals - and indeed may soon be
development-conclusion to explore new 'rhythms' of nothing more than an entirely separated, schizoid
argument and (con)textual representation. consciousness.
The aim of this book is to detonate this state of affairs.
The praxis which guides our journeys to Los Angeles
More specifically, apropos of space, it aims to foster and other real-and-imagined places is organized
confrontation between those ideas and propositions around the search for practical solutions to the prob-
which illuminate the modem world even if they do not lems of race, class, gender, and other, often closely
govern it, treating them not as isolated theses or associated, forms of human inequality and oppression,
hypotheses, as 'thoughts' to be put under the especially those that are arising from, or being aggra-
microscope, but rather as prefigurations lying at the vated by, the dramatic changes that have become
threshold of modernity. (24) associated with global economic and political restruc-
turing and the related postmodernization of urban life
However, even here, he is arguing for much more
and society. (Soja 1996, 22)
than a simple reappraisal of the meaning and
character of space, suggesting instead that one of A fundamental issue that this paper seeks to raise
his purposes is actually to understand the genesis is whether or not Lefebvre's formulation, and like-
of modernity. Elsewhere, he extends this argument wise that of scholars, such as Soja, who have
to include an understanding of the ways in which followed in his wake, actually enables this political
the relationships between space and modernity project to be achieved.
have shaped particular expressions of capital- Before Lefebvre's central conceptual triad is
ism. He thus begins his aptly titled final chapter examined in more detail, it is important to note
'Openings and conclusions' as follows: 'There is a three other aspects of the context within which
question implicit in the foregoing analyses and Lefebvre was writing. First, in his concern with the
interpretations. It is this: what is the mode of mode of existence of social relations, he chose to
existence of social relations' (401). Elsewhere, concentrate primarily on developing an under-
Lefebvre (410) also emphasizes his concern withstanding of capitalism and modernity. His focus,
examining the particular ways in which space has moreover, was on the urban world, particularly in
a European context. He thus had very little to say
become 'the principal stake of goal-directed actions
and struggles', and with the way in which 'space about rural life, or about the conditions of people
is assuming an increasingly important role in living in other parts of the world (although see
supposedly "modem" societies' (412). Lefebvre 1970 for some discussion of rural interest;
There is also another, more overtly political, note that Lefebvre worked for ten years at the
aim in The production of space. As Lefebvre (419) Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique on
comments, rural interest and agrarian reform, but commented
that 'At the end of ten years I realized that it was to
This book has been informed from beginning to end by
a project, though this may at times have been discem-no purpose whatsoever', Lefebvre 1987, 32). This
ible only by reading between the lines. I refer to theeurocentric and urban bias in his writing is closely
project of a different society, a different mode of pro-reflected in much social theory written in his wake
duction, where social practice would be governed by(Harvey 1991) as well as under the banner of
different conceptual determinations. postmodernism (Soja 1996; although see Escobar
Lefebvre appears, though, to have been troubled1995; Corbridge 1998). Second, Lefebvre's writing
by this idea. As he alludes in the above quotation,was grounded in a deep commitment to Marxism
this project is not always clear or as immediatelythat was both theoretical and practical. Signifi-
recognizable as it is in some of his other works.cantly his interpretations of the trajectory of
Moreover, while he goes on to suggest that 'No capitalism also owed much to a surprisingly
doubt this project could be explicitly formulated'Leninist view of globalization. Lefebvre (65) thus
commented that
(419), he emphasizes that it would remain an
abstract project, and that 'Though opposed to the Within this global framework, as might be expected,
abstraction of the dominant space, it would not the Leninist principle of uneven development applies
transcend that space' (419). Soja (1996, 68), in his in full force: some countries are still in the earliest
evocation of Thirdspace, seeks to make this political stages of the production of things (goods) in space, and
aim more explicit, describing 'lived space as a strate- only the most industrialized and urbanized ones can
gic location from which to encompass, understand, exploit to the full the new possibilities opened up by
technology and knowledge.
and potentially transform all spaces simultane-
ously'. More overtly, Soja claims a very specific His theoretical debt to Lenin is also reflected in
practical intent in his work. As he states, some of his arguments concerning the character of
16 Tim Unwin
space,
social space where
is constituted neither by a collection of
the things or an aggregate of (sensory) date, nor by a void
thought
copy,packed like
or a parcel with various contents,
pho and that it is
irreducible to a 'form' imposed upon phenomena, upon
introductor
things, upon physical materiality. (27)
eager to rein
framework.
Two important implications are derived from these
initial frameworks. First, Lefebvre
Western phil is eager to show
how every societypartic
actively produces a space, which can be
izationseen and understood
that as its own space. He thus
h
the traces how the ancient city had
body. its own spatial
(407
practice, and how various subsequent
Arguing tha societies,
notably Christian
object atEurope and the modern
th capital-
ist city, each created and were shaped by their own
conceptual
how distinct spaces. Second, he is also keen to point out
physica
production how '(physical) natural space is disappearing' (30). o
Against This comment has important resonance
this for debates
initial over the relationships
conce between humans and the
triad physical
of or 'natural' world, spat
and indeed for under-
and representational spaces (Harvey 1990; standing the relationships between 'human' and
Merrifield 1993; Soja 1996). As he mentions, this is'physical' geography. Lefebvre (31) suggests that
a triad to which he keeps 'returning over and overalthough nature obsesses us, and we want to
again', and it is therefore worth citing in full protect and save it, 'Yet at the same time every-
(Lefebvre 1991, 33): thing conspires to harm it'. His discussion of the
complex relationships between the physical world
1 Spatial practice, which embraces production and
of nature, and human responses to it, though,
reproduction, and the particular locations and
remains ambivalent and uncertain. Thus, he argues
spatial sets characteristic of each social formation.
that while natural space remains 'the background
Spatial practice ensures continuity and some degree
of cohesion. In terms of social space, and of each of the picture' (30) it 'will soon be lost to view' (31),
member of a given society's relationship to thatand in just the same way 'Nature is also becoming
space, this cohesion implies a guaranteed level of lost to thought' (31). The rise of environmental
competence and a specific level of performance. movements, and the growing attention currently
2 Representations of space, which are tied to the rela-being paid, particularly by geographers, to the
tions of production and to the 'order' which thoserelationships between nature and society (see, for
relations impose, and hence to knowledge, to signs, example, Proctor 1998a), would caution against the
to codes, and to 'frontal' relations.
apparent certainty with which Lefebvre makes
3 Representational spaces, embodying complex symbol-
such claims. Moreover, as the above quotations
isms, sometimes coded, sometimes not, linked to
illustrate, there is at times a tendency for Lefebvre
the clandestine or underground side of social life, as
to conflate his notions of 'nature' and 'natural
also to art (which may come eventually to be
defined less as a code of space than as a code ofspace', or at least to shift from one to the other with
representational spaces). considerable sleight of language. Indeed, as Smith
(1998, 59) has commented, Lefebvre leaves
The other central triad developed in his initial plan
is the distinction between social space, mental nature largely unreconstructed, and with it the relation-
space and physical space. For Lefebvre (27), ship between space and nature ... Nature for Lefebvre is
on the verge of becoming a corpse at the behest of
Social space will be revealed in its particularity to the abstract space.
extent that it ceases to be indistinguishable from mental
space (as defined by philosophers and mathematicians)In the remainder of The production of space, Lefebvre
on the one hand, and physical space (as defined bydevelops the ideas outlined in his introductory
practico-sensory activity and the perception of 'nature')chapter from a range of different perspectives. In a
on the other.
largely historical account, he explores the way in
Much of the remainder of the book demonstrates which ideas about abstract space developed
that this from those of absolute space, he undertakes a
compelling critique of Cartesian would
space,seem and
to be one of the core characteristics not
then
examines a series of contradictions in the
only nature of enquiry, but also of wider
of geographical
debate within
space, focusing particularly on quantity andphilosophy,
qual- science and social theory
ity, spaces of consumption and the (Sack 1980; Bird 1981;
consumption of Pred 1981; Couclelis and
space, and the global and fragmentary Gale 1986; Livingstone
character of 1992; Unwin 1992; more
space. These explorations all serve recently, see Massey
to reinforce his1994; 1999; Golledge and
view that 'Social relations, which are concrete Stimson 1997). What Harvey (1990, 203) seeks to
abstractions, have no real existence save in anddo, though, is 'to challenge the idea of a single and
through space' (404). In conclusion, he returns objective sense of time or space, against which
we can measure the diversity of human concep-
to the relevance of his theory of space to the rev-
olutionary movement today, suggesting that tions and perceptions'. He suggests that from a
although the bourgeoisie may have overcome materialistic perspective,
many of the contradictions of capitalism, it will bewe can ... argue that objective conceptions of time and
unable to 'resolve the contradictions of space'
space are necessarily created through material practices
(420). Because political organizations are a result of
and processes which serve to reproduce social life.
history, which they seek to maintain ideologically, (Harvey 1990, 204)
Lefebvre suggests that they are therefore unable
satisfactorily to understand space. This is significantly different from Lefebvre's lines
of argument on at least two counts. First, he uses
the verb 'created' rather than 'produced'; indeed,
Geographers and the social production of here it is the conceptions of space and time, rather
space than space and time themselves that are seen as
Two of the most significant geographers to have being 'created' by society. Second, he refers to the
conceptions of both space and time as being
engaged with Lefebvre's arguments and to have
incorporated them into their own work have created,
been whereas it is central to Lefebvre's (1974;
1991) argument that primacy is given to the
David Harvey (Katz 1998) and Ed Soja (Dixon
1999). This section of the paper therefore briefly production of space alone.
seeks to establish the significance of Lefebvre's Harvey (1989; 1990) nevertheless then incorpor-
ideas for Harvey and Soja, and to note their more ates Lefebvre's triad of spatial practices, represen-
widespread introduction into geographical theory tations of space and spaces of representation into
and practice. Throughout Harvey's work (1982; the three rows of his grid of spatial practices
1985; 1989; 1990), he has been an ardent advocate (Harvey 1990, 220-21), the columns of which he
of the need to examine the spatial implications chooses
of to represent as four more conventional
Marx's analysis of capitalism, with particular understandings
ref- of spatial practice (accessibility
erence to the urban context. This espousal of and the distanciation, appropriation and use of space,
need to insert space into Marxist theory finds close domination and control of space, and production
echoes with Lefebvre's intentions in The produc- of space), influenced in part by his readings of
tion of space, and Harvey draws significantlyHaigerstrand,
on Bourdieu, Gurvitch and Giddens. In
Lefebvre's arguments in developing his formu- so doing, and in penning in several illustrative
lations of spaces and times in social life in his'positionings'
The within the squares of the grid,
condition of postmodernity (1990, especially Chapter Harvey (1990, 222) seeks to examine different pos-
13; see also 1996, Chapter 10). itions of entry into 'the experience of space in the
In referring to the everyday, Harvey (1990, 201) history of modernism and postmodernism'. How-
argues that: ever, by giving concrete expression to Lefebvre's
essentially fluid ideas, Harvey effectively destroys
Space and time are basic categories of human existence.
Yet we rarely debate their meanings; we tend to their
take enigmatic and uncertain character. Lefebvre's
them for granted, and give them common-sense triad
or is continually in motion, and by trying to tie it
down to four other elements, which are not neces-
self-evident attributions. (but see, for example, Adam
1998) sarily independent, Harvey departs considerably
Geographers have for long debated the meanings from Lefebvre's original intentions.
of space and time. Indeed, from antiquity to the Furthermore, Harvey's (1989; 1990) own use of
present day this concern with space and time the word 'space' is ambiguous and problematic,
18 Tim Unwin
shifting cultural studies (Soja 1989; Smithfro 1998) is much

then broader back
than merely an incorporation of Lefebvre'sa
argue conceptualization
both into geographical practice, andt
buying and
also reflects the importance of other leading social s
1989,theorists, 175)such as Foucault (1986) and Said (1994)
an
trated (see also Gregory
in 1994; Watson spac
and Gibson 1995;
to accept Jameson 1991; 1998). that
'Command This can be exemplified by a brief consideration
ov
significance of the different meanings of 'production', 'con-
wider struction' discus
and 'creation' used by geographers with
Soja's respect(1996) to space. In much research, the terms 'social
evident, production of space' and 'social
and construction of
than space'
is have come to be Harv
used more or less inter-
Thirdspace changeably. To take but one example, Berg and i
designed Kearns (1996) note specifically to that Lefebvre c
about described space as a social product, and yet they
space a
through focus particularly on place a names as an jux
expression
with those of other writers such as bell hooks and of the social construction of space. Lefebvre (1991),
Foucault, but always with the intention of prevent-though, was careful to apply a distinct, if complex
ing these formulations 'from solidifying into rigidand varied, set of meanings to the production of
dogma' (13). He also engages recent feminist space, that owed much to a very specific reappro-
priation of Marx's conceptualization of production,
retheorizations of spatiality and the spatial critique
of historicism, before applying his own theoreticalthe act of production and indeed modes of produc-
arguments to Los Angeles and Amsterdam. For tion. As Smith (1998, 54) has neatly summarized,
Soja (22), Firstspace has been explored 'primarily for Lefebvre 'Space is in any meaningful sense
through its readable texts and contexts' and Sec- produced in and through human activity and the
ondspace 'through its prevailing representational reproduction of social relations'. This is therefore a
much more restricted use of terminology than the
discourses'. In contrast, his intention is for explor-
ations of Thirdspace to be guided by an emanci- more general argument that space is socially 'con-
patory practice that is consciously spatial, and structed', or indeed 'created' in the sense attributed
designed 'to improve the world in some significant to Harvey above. This distinction is important in
understanding the way in which such terminology
way' (22). Paradoxically, at the heart of his critique
of modernism, and his evocation of the diversity has
of been incorporated into geographical enquiry in
postmodernism, there can therefore still be found recent years. While most geographers have tended
an echo of the radical Enlightenment belief thattoituse the more general phrase 'social construction
is possible to make the world a better place (see of space', they frequently resort to Lefebvre's more
Gould 1999). restricted definition in theoretical support for their
arguments. Although the following critique is
If the incorporation of Lefebvre's arguments into
geography has been most evident in the workdirected of specifically at Lefebvre's conceptualiz-
Harvey and Soja, there have been numerous other ation, it also has wider resonance for those who
broadly sympathetic critiques of his work, most argue in a general sense that space is socially
constructed.
notably Merrifield's (1993) use of his triadic frame-
work to offer a dialectical interpretation of place,
Dimmendberg's (1998) critique of his views on
abstract space, and Smith's (1998) commentaryTowards
on a critique of the social production
his conceptualization of nature. It is important,
of space
though, to emphasize that much contemporary
Set against this background, the remainder of
geographical research purporting to reflect
Lefebvre's ideas invariably only pays lip service this
topaper outlines five elements of a critique of
them, and frequently fails to incorporate the radi-Lefebvre's arguments concerning the social
cal programme that he advocated (Berg and Kearns production of space: language and meaning, the
separation
1996; Clarke et al 1996). The so-called spatial turn in of space and time, the processes of
production and construction, interpretations,
empowerment reinterpretations
andand critiques,
value, and space and place. have
Although clearly
helped to formulate wider debate about the
importance of
interrelated, each of these elements the production
engages withof space in con-
temporary way.
Lefebvre's arguments in a different society. The considerable number of
such publications, and the numerous citations
of The production of space in academic papers (Curry
Language and meaning
1996), suggest that this audience has indeed found
In referring to previous interpretations
Lefebvre's work to be of value,of
even if those who
Lefebvre's notion of abstract space by Gottdiener,
cite him have not always read all of the book, nor
Dear, Gregory, Pile and Smith, Dimendberg
understood what he wrote. (1998,
18) comments that
However, such a positive evaluation can be
Each of these understandings of challenged
abstract through
space reference
can be to the early
Wittgenstein's
justified by reference to different passages in (1961,
The 3) Pro-
famous assertion that
duction of Space, yet it remains'What
difficult to at
can be said grasp
all canthe
be said clearly, and
specificity of the notion and what its relations
we cannot talk toabout
these
we must pass over in
various definitions.
silence'. Why is it that complex arguments tend to
The complexity of Lefebvre's arguments, and their
be privileged over the simple? Is it not just possible
elusive character, thus make it very difficult
thattocomplexity reflects as much the inability of
an author to express ideas clearly, as it does any
interpret precisely what he means at any particular
juncture. This is not only because he develops inherent difficulty in the subject that is being writ-
similar notions in different ways throughoutten theabout? Language itself is a form of power.
book, but also because his sentence construction is
Restricted access to knowledge of the codes and
frequently opaque. Moreover, short sentences meanings
are of languages thus enables groups to
often juxtaposed in ways that make it extremely
maintain their elite status and control. If we really
wish to reshape the power structures of contem-
difficult to detect what exactly he meant by them.
Does this matter? porary society, should we not be doing so in
How do we even approach answering this ques- ways which seek to make our meanings readily
tion? At one level, Lefebvre's project was to accessible
get to as wide an audience as possible?
Billinge (1983, 400), for example, has argued
people to rethink their ideas about temporal expla-
nations of society. Readers are forced to think anew
powerfully with reference to a style of writing
by the very complexity of the language that he prevalent
uses in human geography in the early 1980s
that
(see also Olsson 1991; 1998; Curry 1996). In this
sense, what matters is not so much what he wrote,
This style whilst claiming to capture with richness and
but rather the reactions that the book evokes in its
subtlety the nature of the human subject and its mode
readers. His style is therefore part and parcel of the of cognition, has in fact served different and more
project, although it does require that the reader is covert purposes: the perversion of meaning, the dis-
able profitably to engage with it. guise of mediocrity of sentiment, the inflation of the
This raises the question of the audience for authors' self-regard and the representation as profound
whom The production of space was written, and for of ideas which are in reality cliched or banal.
what purpose. Lefebvre's underlying political It is far from easy to reconcile these two contrasting
project has been alluded to above, but the agents of interpretations of the value of complexity in writ-
this revolutionary practice have not, and Lefebvre ten style. At one level, it can be argued that
himself remains strangely quiet about them different texts are, and should be, written for dif-
(although elsewhere he does devote considerable ferent audiences, and that a diversity of styles and
attention to political practice: 1968a; 1968c). representations is to be applauded and encour-
Lefebvre was writing primarily, if not exclusively, aged. However, at the same time, some caution is
for social theorists and philosophers in the French- required in necessarily allocating primacy to the
speaking world, and translating his work for an complex over the simple, to the contradictory over
Anglo-American audience presents particular dif- the coherent, and to the obfuscating over the direct.
ficulties. For example, the French 'espace' has rather A second difficulty with Lefebvre's use of lan-
different connotations from the English 'space', as guage and meaning concerns the ascription of
does 'lieu' from 'place'. However, subsequent value to different definitions of space. In essence,
20 Tim Unwin
how do we
failed to convince jud
many physical scientists, who
when their referential contexts have little in com- continue to find value and meaning in their tra-
mon? A widely adopted solution to such a questionditional formulations of space. Moreover, their
is to return to notions of utility, and to relate theadoption by some social scientists has actually led
values of meanings to their utility. However, if weto greater divisions between physical and social
reject the notion of meanings necessarily needinggeographers, many of whom increasingly find little
any universal utility, then even this form of logicin common between their disciplinary languages
becomes problematic (Habermas 1984; 1987). Two(for an attempt to bring these contrasting view-
particular issues are pertinent in this context. First,points together, see Massey 1999). This problem is
enhanced when the difficulties over his ideas about
although Lefebvre is very careful not to say specifi-
cally that notions of mental space or absolute spacenature are taken into consideration (Smith 1998).
are 'wrong' or have no value, his whole enterpriseFurthermore, there is a danger in the very compre-
is to encourage the acceptance of a new way of hensiveness of Lefebvre's conceptualization of
looking at, and understanding, space. He thusspace. His attempt to grapple with this enormity
comments quite categorically that 'Absolute spacecan be seen in the following quotation:
has not disappeared' (Lefebvre 1991, 251), but at
Social space can never escape its basic duality, even
the same time he is extremely critical of most though triadic determining factors may sometimes
philosophers and scientists in their understandings override and incorporate its binary or dual nature, for
and uses of space (6). More widely, many social the way in which it presents itself and the way in which
and cultural geographers adopting Lefebvre's it is represented are different. Is not social space always,
arguments, and even those who adhere to more and simultaneously, both a field of action (offering its
general conceptualizations that space is socially extension to the deployment of projects and practical
constructed, have tended to reject outright scien- intentions) and a basis of action (a set of places whence
tific understandings of space as part of their wider energies derive and whither energies are directed)? Is it
not at once actual (given) and potential (locus of possi-
rejection of the modernist enterprise. As Soja (1996,
bilities)? Is it not at once quantitative (measurable by
4) has put it, 'For some, the power of the critique
means of units of measurement) and qualitative (as
has been so profound that modernism is aban- concrete extension where unreplenished energies run
doned entirely'. However, this raises the second out, where distance is measured in terms of fatigue or
aspect of our understandings of the values attrib- in terms of time needed for activity)? (1991, 191)
uted to different meanings of space, for to many
in the 'physical' and 'natural' sciences, includ-The danger here is that in revealing the complexity
ing 'physical geographers', Euclidean space and of space, Lefebvre makes the concept lose meaning;
Cartesian dualism still provide a valuable frame-his all-inclusiveness takes meaning away from any
work within which to practise research. Lefebvre definition that he attributes to space.
(1991, 6) is very specific about his views on this There is also a complex problem in the way in
matter: which Lefebvre's writings relate to previous uses
The quasi-logical presupposition of an identity
of the meanings of space. By using the word
'space', Lefebvre, whether intentionally or not,
between mental space (the space of the philosophers
and epistemologists) and real space creates an draws
abyss upon a collective understanding of the pre-
between the mental sphere on the one side and vious
the meanings ascribed to space. Yet, he is also
physical and social spheres on the other. seeking to create a new meaning for the word and
for the idea of space. A similar argument has been
Here, we have not only the dilemma between the
advocated by Curry (1996), where he suggests that
mental and the physical, but also between the in making commitments to a set of conceptions
'real'
spaces of physical and social geography, however about space in Western thinking, Lefebvre effec-
these are defined. tively undermines his own possibility of develop-
This leads directly into a third broad problem ing a truly critical view of these concepts; he
with Lefebvre's use of language and meaning, honours the very views that he seeks to criticize.
Moreover, this also raises the question of the
which relates to his attempt to develop a new
relationships between words and what they sig-
all-encompassing definition and science of space
that would be acceptable to all (Lefebvre 1991,
nify. Does space thus exist, or is it merely a figment
of our collection imagination? But to ask this
8-9). Lefebvre's arguments have, for example,
known it.
question, is in a sense to answer and By
actualized in space, becoming a social
naming
something we give life to it; reality
just by byvirtue
namingof a spatial
' ' inpractice. Similarly,
space However,
our imagination we make it real. is known only is in there
and through time' (219).
really something that we call space,
Given or doit we
this position, just to try to under-
is important
use the word 'space' as a way stand why he remains
of trying so insistently fixated on
to under-
stand the complex world in space
which alone.we live,
In part, the but
answer lies in the aims of
which has no actual reality other
his book,than
which that?
required It
an is
examination of space
just such issues that Lefebvrethroughexplores in
history, rather The
than of time through geog-
production of space, but usingraphy. His particular
the very wordconcern
'space'was thus to under-
prevents him for escaping fromstand
the the space of modernity,
confines of the and he did so
through
way in which the word has been an interpretation
used in the past.of space as a product
of capitalism, a product that could be used and
consumed, and as a means of production (85).
Space, time and space-time Elsewhere, indeed, Lefebvre (1987, 33) has
The central tenet of the second element of this
acknowledged that 'time and space are intimately
critique is that in giving dominance to space, related', and he emphasizes the importance that
Lefebvre has dangerously reduced the significance
Einstein's arguments played in helping him to
of time. This is not to imply that a reincorporation
formulate his own ideas about time and space. Yet
of space into social theory was not long overdue,
he remains reluctant to abandon space and time for
but it is to argue that any sustained analysisspace-time.
of society must incorporate an understanding of
Both Harvey and Soja have tackled the incor-
space-time. The logic involved in such an assertion
poration of time into their spatial arguments in
can be applied equally to Lefebvre's concept of the
somewhat different ways. Harvey (1989; 1990) is
production of space, as it can to arguments assert-
consistent in his attention to the experience of both
ing the need for geographers to focus attention on
space and time, but draws extensively on the
the social construction of space in its many diverse
forms.
concepts and terminology of time-geography and
time-space compression in order to interpret the
In writing about space, Lefebvre frequently connectivities between space and time. Moreover,
incorporates and subsumes an understanding of
in the light of this theoretical context, he is insistent
time. He thus comments that, 'if space is produced,
on the use of the term 'time-space', in opposition to
if there is a production process, then we are dealing
the 'space-time' commonly used by physicists and
with history' (1991, 46), and
philosophers. For Harvey (1990, 240) there is,
Let everyone look at the space around them. What nevertheless,
do no doubt that we have both 'spatial
they see? Do they see time? They live time, afterand all;
temporal worlds'. Soja (1989; 1996) also draws
they are in time. Yet all anyone sees is movements. In on Foucault's (1986; 1988) examination of
heavily
nature, time is apprehended within space - in thespace
veryand spatiality. Interestingly, though, he does
heart of space. (1991, 95)
so by shifting the ground subtly from space and
It is an interesting experiment to transpose theto Foucault's examination of spatial and
time
words 'time' and 'space' in the above twohistorical
quo- imaginations. Foucault's critique was
tations, and notice the differences that this makes
essentially an argument against the privileging of
to their meanings. historicality over spatiality, and for the reintroduc-
At the heart of Lefebvre's (1991), Harvey's (1989;
tion of a critical spatial imagination into social
1990) and Soja's (1996) arguments is a tendency to rather than the development of a specific
thought,
treat both space and time as separate concepts,
newand
interpretation of space as such. While the
yet they remain obstinately determined to try to
development of a particular conception of spatial-
bring them together. Why is the focus on ity thewas thus at the heart of much of his writing, as
production of space alone, or should it be time, or
Soja (1996, 147) has acutely observed, Foucault
should it be '...'? Lefebvre grapples with 'never
thesedeveloped his conceptualizations of space in
great
issues in a diversity of ways, arguing that 'With theself-conscious detail'.
advent of modernity time has vanished from socialWhat nevertheless remains strange about all of
space' (95), that 'time is distinguishable, but notarguments is the way in which they seek
these
separable from space' (175), and that 'time is
to privilege space over time. It is, after all, the
22 Tim Unwin
a forma
production of
upon which
spatial a
c
co-ordin
therefore a d
new laws.
kind of (e
sp
to that which
There i
1950s argum
and 196
Smith's
connected, wh
them,clusion and
that can be drawn with confidencepri
is that
It is there will be no purely philosophical

here tha nor a purely
cists, physical resolution of this controversy'. Once
philoso
example,
again, we are brought back toFloothe need to combine
to have
not only our conceptions
some of space and time, but
also the physical and mental worlds
occasional for that Descartes
quantumsought to split asunder. me
1995; Harriso
In essence, there is a danger that by focusing on
have been rem
the production or construction of space, we may
create a damaging new fetish of (alt
literature space. We need
1999). instead
Thisto heed Massey's (1994, 2) call is
'that space
in must be conceptualizedand
social integrally with time;
indeed the aimHarve
(1991), should be to think always in
example, all
terms of space-time' (see Unwin 1992 for a similar g
moded
argument). conce
'space'. In ge
quantum the
The processes of production and construction
relevant to of
becausespace it is c
the A further fundamental difficulty with
scale of the idea of e
phers the are
production, or even construction,inte of space, is
in geomorph
the way in which it places emphasis on the final
1977). 'thing' thatHowev
is produced, or constructed, namely
portantspace. For Lefebvre (1987, 30), space signis very much
Dunham 'a social and political product', something
(1998 that 'one
ceptualbuys and sells'. Whileandthe process of production, or p
are of construction,suchis implicated in this action, it is the in
argued,culmination of the process,there
space itself, that we are
wider drawn to. In partdiscus
this reflects the way in which
betweenlanguage shapes what we are able humto communicate.
However, in referring to the production of space,
re-examinatio
quantumLefebvre objectifies space; he gives
theo it meaning,
social character
and and significance. Moreover, in this verycul
ized process, he relegates all else to a secondary pos- I
space. h
1992) ition. There is, for example, a categorical difference
the imp
claim between in 'the production of space'1908
and 'the produc-
itself,tion of human
are misery'. Lefebvre chooses to doo
address
and the former, mainly on the grounds that a
only by so doing ki
he can illuminate the latter. But in this very
preserve anpro-
Russellcess, he draws our (1961,
attention away from the misery,
tant from the livedthe
to experience of humanity, and ph
the towards an intellectual and arid conceptualization
substituti
of an idea, of space.
Moreover, as
the As outlined above, both Harvey (1990) and
critical
Lefebvre (1991) have deliberately addressed
relativity was the
production of space, in large part tothe
to study emphasize their
production of space, what exactly is it
that we 'must' study?
commitment to a particular understanding of Take,
the for
way example, the ques-
in which society is shaped. Harveytion of political
(1990, violence,
183),of state
forformation, of
example, is specifically concernedethnic with
cleansing in former
'the Yugoslavia, or of the
produc-
tion of new spaces within which massacres in Rwandaproduction
capitalist and Burundi in the 1990s.
can proceed'. Lefebvre's emphasis on production,
In a descriptive account of the rise of the modern
likewise, closely reflects his engagement
state from thewith Marxist
sixteenth century onwards, Lefebvre
theorizations of capitalism. As (1991,
he has280) argued,
argues that
If space is a product, our knowledge
Sovereigntyof it 'space',
implies must andbe
what is more it implies
expected to reproduce and expound thewhich
a space against process
violence,of
whether latent or overt,
is directed
production. The 'object' of interest must be - a space established
expected to and constituted by
shift from things in space to the actual violence.
production of space,
but this formulation itself calls for much additional
He goes
explanation. Both partial products located in space - on to assert 'that every state is born of
that is, things - and discourse on space can henceforth
violence, and that state power endures only by virtue
do no more than supply clues to, and testimony about,
of violence directed towards a space' (280). One of
this productive process. (1991, 36-37) the remarkable things about his whole discussion of
An important feature of this quotation, is thatthese
for fundamental geopolitical issues is that people
Lefebvre it is 'the production of space' rather than get a mention. It is not women, men and
never
children to whom violence is meted out, it is not the
'space' itself that becomes the fundamental object
voices of humans being slaughtered that cry out, it is
of interest. He also puts both 'products in space'
not the pleading of a parent whose child is being
and 'discourse on space' on the same theoretical
level, as clues to understanding the process violated
of that we hear, it is not the stench of mass
production. Moreover, by focusing specificallygraves
on being opened up that we smell, it is not the
space, this formulation would seem to denysound the of exploding warheads that reaches our ears -
it is 'space' against which violence is directed.
possibility that there might exist things in space-
This distinction may seem to some to be merely
time. Another interesting feature of this quotation
is its emphasis on the word 'must'; it brooks onenoof semantics, but to me it is actually very
possibility of uncertainty. much more important, and touches at the heart of
Lefebvre (1991, 124) suggests that this contemporary
new geographical practice. Should our
awareness of space and its production emerged attention be drawn to the production and social
with the Bauhaus movement of the 1920s, which construction of space, or should it address the
'developed a new conception, a global concept,causes
of of the inequalities that influence human
existence
space'. In exploring exactly what he means by the in space-time? Lefebvre (1991, 33) claims
production of space, Lefebvre specifically links that
it to 'social space "incorporates" social actions,
a new mode of production, and a leap forward theinactions of subjects both individual and col-
the productive forces. Moreover, this new mode lective
of who are born and who die, who suffer
production is neither state capitalism nor state and who act', but in practice, these very people
socialism, but rather 'the collective management seem
of to be subsumed within a dehumanized con-
space, the social management of nature, andception the of space. Lefebvre's focus on the produc-
transcendence of the contradiction between nature tion of space, is not only in danger of making
and anti-nature' (103). Once again, then, he is nature a corpse (Smith 1998), but it is also worry-
drawn into a consideration of ways of transcend- ingly silent about the lived experience of the
ing the traditional divide between nature and anti-human dimension of that nature. This in turn has
nature, which can be seen as having close parallelsprofound implications for the political claims of
with the interests of geographers concerned with Lefebvre's project.
the Cartesian dualism of the physical and human
worlds of their discipline.
At this juncture, it is worth pondering some of Empowerment and value
the ramifications of Lefebvre's formulation, and toAs the introductory section of this paper has out-
ask the question 'what are the implications of thislined, Lefebvre, Harvey and Soja all lay claim to a
for our empirical research practice?'. If our task is
particular political project, which, in Soja's (1996,
24 Tim Unwin
68) been with getting the academy to thinkis

words, about
taneously'. space in new ways; very little is Sur
said about how
the productiosuch thinking might transform society, and achieve
action is one on which all of these authors remain the radical objective of creating a completely new
remarkably quiet. How do we enable people to of world. I suggest that it is not enough for
kind
transform space? Can we actually do so? Indeed, geographers merely to advocate social change
what is the difference between encouraging them rather there is also a need for them to offer visions
'to transform all spaces simultaneously' and of to alternative social and political formations, and
encourage them to change things and processes ways
in in which these might be achieved.
space-time? Merrifield (1993, 526) has commented My argument here is very much more than
that 'For Lefebvre any emancipatory politics simplypre- a criticism of Lefebvre and his followers for
supposes a dialectics of space', but precisely howwriting
this for an intellectual audience. It is much
should be worked out remains unclear. At one more fundamentally that focus on the production of
level, it involves a reintegration of the global space means that Lefebvre is actually unable to
whole
and the local everyday that has been separated addressby the crucial issues that shape inequality,
modernism. As Merrifield (1993, 527) has deprivation
asserted, and human misery. In part this is
'This deeper knowledge of the whole and the because
part,Lefebvre dehumanizes space; indeed,
space and place, the global and the local must despite his aspiration to bring back the body into
also
be acted upon politically'. his understandings of space, he fails to take seri-
However, there is a fundamental tension ously in thisthe role that human agency has in shaping its
argument, because it relies on a belief that own future. Moreover, by concentrating on an
society
can indeed be made better, and that we, as essentially
geog- urban and Western intellectual history
raphers or indeed social theorists, can actually of spacedo he is unable to consider the diversity of
something about it. It is here that profoundly other human experiences of existence, which lie
moral
questions about the role of academics in influenc-outside this framework. Aboriginal understand-
ing social change, and the grounds upon which ings it
of is
the place of humans in the country thus
possible to act in this way come to the foreprovide(Proctor a significant alternative interpretation
and Smith 1999). A difficulty with a focus which Lefebvre, Harvey and Soja, among many
on the
others,isare unable to understand (Rose 1992;
construction or production of space in this context
that such action also takes place throughFaulstich time; 1998).
spatial practices are not atemporal. This is In a nutshell, Lefebvre, Harvey and Soja waste
indeed
acknowledged by Lefebvre, but concentration space from
of the viewpoint of actually implementing
attention on the production of space, detracts radical
fromsocial and political change. To effect such
the political, economic and ideological processes change, it is important to listen to other voices, and
that shape inequality; by treating space as perhaps
an endeven to leave space behind altogether.
Moreover, if we seek to break free from Cartesian
product, it minimizes the significance of processes
by which human life is mediated on a day-to-day dualism, if we endeavour to understand the place
basis (for a wider discussion of these issues, see in the world in which we live, we need to
of people
Olsson 1991; 1998). understand them in the diversity of instants that
What then is the value of the production shape of spaceplace.
for the notion of empowerment? Lefebvre's practi-
cal involvement in the French Communist Party,
and his commitment to social change,Place and space
is well
documented (see, for example, Lefebvre 1987; element of this critique concerns the
The final
complex ways in which Lefebvre has sought to link
Harvey 1991). In writing books such as The produc-
tion of space, he was eager to encourage people to
the production of space to his ideas about place.
This has already been the subject of a sensitive and
become involved in social and political change,
compelling analysis by Merrifield (1993, 520), who
indeed in politicizing life itself. However, the evi-
argues that understanding the interaction between
dence of many texts that have been written in the
wake of The production of space (Harvey 1990; Soja
space and place is crucial, and that
1996; although for a rather different view, whilesee
we must distinguish between these different
Harvey 1996) is that their concern has primarily realms if we are to apprehend place construction
4 Junction points:
and transformation, we must simultaneously these are often places of passage
capture
how they are in fact forged together andin
encounter; often, too, access to them is forbid-
a dialectical
unity. den except on certain occasions of ritual import -
declarations of war or peace, for example.
Building on Lefebvre's notions, Merrifield (1993, Here, (3) and (4) are mentioned as places, but
525) seeks to expound the notion that: Lefebvre chooses specifically to use the word
everyday life becomes a practical and sensual activity 'space' for (1) and (2). What would the difference
acted out in place. The battle becomes the moment of be between writing that boundaries and forbidden
struggle between conceiving space through representa- territories are 'places' not 'spaces'? Lefebvre comes
tion and living place through actual sensual experience dangerously near implying that routes, boundaries
and representational meaning. Place is synonymous and forbidden territories are spaces, whereas
with what is lived in the sense that daily life practices
spaces of abode and junction points are places. This
are embedded in particular places. Social practice is distinction is far from clear.
place-bound, political organization demands place
organization. Life is place-dependent. On the whole, though, Lefebvre seems to use
'place' primarily to refer to the everyday and the
However, in developing his own notions of the lived. Merrifield (1993) thus draws attention to
what he sees as the distinction between conceived
dialectics of space and place, Merrifield (1993) fails
sufficiently to note the problems with Lefebvre's space and lived place. Even here, though, Lefebvre
formulation. himself is ambiguous in his uses of the word
Lefebvre has a tendency to use the word 'place'place. In referring to the growth in the forces of
in a variety of different ways, particularly conflat-production, he thus argues that
ing ideas about the place of social space and the The forces of production and technology now permit of
notion that place is a particular kind of space. Once intervention at every level of space: local, regional,
again, this in part reflects the problems of translat- national, worldwide. Space as a whole, geographical or
ing the French 'espace' and 'lieu' into the English historical space, is thus modified, but without any
'space' and 'place'. Nevertheless, on the one hand, concomitant abolition of its underpinnings - those
he argues that initial 'points', those first foci or nexuses, those 'places'
(localities, regions, countries) lying at different levels of
The places of social space are very different from a social space in which nature's space has been
those of natural space in that they are not simply replaced by a space-qua-product. (1991, 90)
juxtaposed: they may be intercalated, combined,
superimposed - they may even sometimes collide. Once again, the meaning of this remains confused,
(Lefebvre 1991, 88) although it would seem to suggest, first, that locali-
ties, regions and countries are places, second that
However, elsewhere, he is eager to use the wordthese lie at three different levels of social space, and
'place' to refer to a bounded space. The inconsist-third that places are where some kind of space of
ency in his use of terminology can be seen in thenature is replaced by space as product. The obser-
following quotation taken from his chapter on vation that there are four levels of space can readily
spatial architectonics: be resolved by introducing the idea of a place, the
world, at the worldwide level of space. Nevertheless,
Every social space, then, once duly demarcated and
the precise translation from nature's space to
oriented, implies a superimposition of certain relations
upon networks of named places, of lieux-dits. Thisspace-qua-product remains far from clear, and what
results in various kinds of space: Lefebvre seems to be implying is that there is some
space of nature untrammelled by human inter-
vention, which can then be replaced by the notion
1 Accessible space for normal use: routes followed by
of space as a product. He seeks to explain this as
riders or flocks, ways leading to fields, and so on.follows:
Such use is governed prescriptively - by established
rules and practical procedures. In this way reflexive thought passes from produced
2 Boundaries and forbidden territories - spaces to space, from the space of production (the production of
which access is prohibited either relatively (neigh- things in space) to the production of space as such,
bours and friends) or absolutely (neighbours and which occurs on account of the (relatively) continuous
enemies). growth of the productive forces but which is confined
3 Places of abode, whether permanent or temporary. within the (relatively) discontinuous frameworks of the
26 Tim Unwin
dominant relat
the process of the production of space, he fails to
1991, 90) address the complex everyday lived processes
which help to shape human experiences, particu-
Lefebvre's lack of detailed exegesis on place can be
understood largely because of his concern with larly those that generate inequality. Fourth, he did
not sufficiently indicate how his notion of the
space. However, it does bring us back, once again,
to the difficulties Lefebvre's formulation faces production of space will necessarily and actually
when confronted with nature and physicallead to a transformation of society; and fifth, his
space.
At one level, The production of space can be notion
seen as of place is confused and poorly articulated.
espousing the radical thesis that all space is Although
pro- the arguments of this paper have
duced. Casey (1998, 72), nevertheless interprets specifically addressed the notion of the 'production
Lefebvre's arguments to suggest that 'physical of space', the logic of many of these conclusions can
also be applied to the more general concept of the
space as such is outside the realm of social produc-
tion'. He derives such a conclusion in part 'socialfrom construction of space'. In particular, much
what he describes as 'the near-tautology' (Casey research developed within such a framework fails
1998, 72) of Lefebvre's (1991, 26) assertionsufficiently
that to consider questions of temporality,
'(Social) space is a (Social) product'. Elsewhere,and by focusing on space as the implicit end prod-
Casey
(1997) has developed a powerful argumentuct, con-is unable to address the question of how to
cerning the relationships between space and place, human society. The implication of this is
change
in which he suggests that an ancient view of that approaches that, for example, concentrate on
space
as place was transformed into a view of place the racializing or gendering of space provide only a
as space
just before the middle ages. Building on this,partial
Casey understanding of how to change our being
(1998, 78) goes on to suggest that Lefebvre's in con-
the world. To say that our ideas about space are
cept of 'abstract space represents the triumph socially
of constructed is something very different
space over place in such a way as to favor homoge- from saying that space is socially constructed.
neity over heterogeneity at every turn'. In this There
vein,are two other important implications of these
it is possible to develop a powerful argument arguments.
in The first concerns the relationships be-
favour of the abandonment of space altogether, tween andthe practice of what have come to be known
a refocusing of the attention of social theoryas on'physical'
the and 'human' geography. In particular,
meaning and character of place. Again, as Casey the paper has sought to encourage geographers
(1998, 78) argues with reference to time and from space, different backgrounds to learn each other's
languages, particularly with reference to 'space'. If
The effort to establish primacy between these two
we fail to do this, we will only make our task of
dimensions, to rank them as it were, an effort that has
understanding the physical-human totality of our
characterized modern thought since Kant, shows the
existence
insistent need for a return to place as their third term -
that much more difficult. Second, though,
one that combines both while allowing forittheir has important ramifications for social action. At
nuances and specificities all too often lacking the heart of this critique has been the conviction
in the
generalities of space and time as general cosmic that
media.we will never be able to change the world
merely by writing about the social production or
construction of space. But that, of course, implies
Beyond critique that, as academic geographers, we do indeed have
This paper has argued that Lefebvre's notion a commitment
of to help others to make their worlds
the production of space, as well as the arguments better places (see Proctor and Smith 1999).
of geographers who have incorporated this In ideaessence, I have sought to argue that we need
into their own work, are fundamentally flawed. to leave behind the space we cannot transform,
Five key problems have been highlighted because with it does not exist save in and through its
Lefebvre's formulation. First, by using therelationship word with time. Two immediate solutions
'space', Lefebvre ties himself to old notions seem of pertinent: either we can explore further the
space which prevent him from achieving the notion
radi- of place along the lines alluded to by Casey
cal task that he set himself. Second, by insisting (1997; on1998), or we can listen to Massey's (1994;
separating notions of space from time, he is 1999) unableplea for a more sensitive understanding of
to develop the comprehensive framework for
physicists' conceptions of space-time. Better still,
which he was seeking. Third, by concentrating we might
on seek to engage the dialectics of place and
space-time through a particular ethical
University stance
of Oxford. I am(see,
very grateful to col-
for example, Sack 1999). Massey leagues (1994, 263)hospitality
there for their has and for provid-
argued cogently ing me with a place to think, as well as to Ron
Martin for encouraging me to submit the outcome
that the social issues which we currently need to
understand, whether they be thetohigh-tech
Transactions.postmodern
Earlier versions were presented at
seminars at Kent
world or questions of cultural identity, State University,
require some- Ohio, and in the
thing that would look ... like theUniversities of Gdteborg,
'modem physics' viewStockholm, Uppsala,
Manchester
of space. It would, moreover, precisely by and Cambridge. I have benefited enor-
introducing
into the concept of space that element
mously from ofthe
dislocation/
comments and suggestions made
freedom/possibility, enable the politicization of space/
by colleagues on these occasions. Many individuals
space-time. have also influenced my exploration of place and
These engagements, however, take place and find space-time, and I would particularly like to record
their expressions in particular places which people my appreciation here to Gunnar Olsson, Erik
and societies create through space-time. Place can Swyngedouw, Michael Curry and Franco Farinelli
thus involve a reintegration of both the physical/ who have all contributed, albeit probably unknow-
human and the space/time dualisms that have so ingly, to the ideas expressed here. I am also very
beset geographical enquiry since the seventeenth grateful to Doreen Massey, Peter Gould and Rob
century. Whereas we cannot change space-time, we Imrie, as well as to four anonymous referees, for
do have the means to influence place. The moral their perceptive and helpful comments on earlier
questions that then arise are 'how?' and 'for drafts of this manuscript.
whom?'. Merely by understanding what makes
places different, we cannot change them. A critical
geography needs to engage with the everyday References
practices of all of us who live in the places that we
do; it needs to focus on the needs and interests of Adam B 1998 Timescapes of modernity: the environment and
invisible hazards Routledge, New York
the poor and underprivileged; it remains a very
Agnew J 1995 The hidden geographies of social science
modern enterprise, retaining a belief that it is
and the myth of the geographical turn Environment and
possible to make the world a 'better' place.
Planning D: Society and Space 13 329-80
In this sense, Lefebvre was bound by his own Bauman Z 1993 Postmodern ethics Blackwell, Oxford
place in space-time. His was not the totalizing dis- Benko G and Strohmayer U eds 1997 Space and social
course that some might claim, but rather a reflection theory Blackwell, Oxford
of his place in France in the late 1960s and 1970s. Berg I D and Kearns R A 1996 Naming as norming:
Lefebvre as a person was very much more than his 'race', gender, and the identity politics of naming
written texts, and his own commitment to activism places in Aotearoa/New Zealand Environment and
and radical opposition, be it to the German invasion Planning D: Society and Space 14 1 99-122
Berman M 1982 All that is solid melts into air: the experience
of France during the Second World War or through
of modernity Simon and Schuster, New York
his inspirational lectures to French students in the
Billinge M 1983 The mandarin dialect: an essay on style
1960s, were equally as important to him as were his
in contemporary geographical writing Transactions of
books (Lefebvre 1969). By engaging with his written the Institute of British Geographers 8 4 400-20
words, one is caught up in the project that he and Bird J 1981 The target of space and the arrow of time
others set themselves: to rethink our taken for
Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 6 2
granted notions of space. 129-51
Blum V and Nast H 1996 Where's the difference? The
A revaluation of all values, this question mark so black, so
immense, that it casts a shadow over the one who sets heterosexualization of alterity in Henri Lefebvre and
Jacques Lacan Environment and Planning D: Society and
it down - such a destiny of a task forces you to run out
Space 14 5 559-80
into the sunshine every instant and shake off a heavy,
all-too-heavy seriousness. (Nietzsche 1998, 3)
Campbell C 1995 Does quantum theory add to the
geographic perspective Professional Geographer 47 2
216-17
Acknowledgements Casey E S 1997 The fate of place: a philosophical history

University of California Press, Berkeley
This paper was largely written during a period of The production of space or the heterogeneity
- 1998
sabbatical leave at the School of Geography in the
of place: a commentary on Edward Dimendberg and
28 Tim Unwin
Neil Habermas J 1978 Knowledge and human interests

Smith in 2nd
and edition (translated by J J Schapiro) Heinemann,
geography
and Littlefield, Lanham MD 71-80 London
Clarke D B Doel M A and McDonough F X 1996 - 1984 The theory of communicative action. Volume 1: reason
Holocaust topologies: singularity, politics, space Politi- and the rationalization of society Beacon Press, Boston
cal Geography 15 6-7 457-89 - 1987 The theory of communicative action. Volume 2:
Corbridge S 1998 Development ethics: distance, differ-lifeworld and system Polity Press, Cambridge
Higerstrand T 1975 Space, time and human conditions in
ence, plausibility Ethics, Place and Environment 1 1 35-54
Couclelis H and Gale N 1986 Space and spaces Karlquist L Lundquist L and Snickars F eds Dynamic
Geografiska Annaler 68B 1-12 allocations of urban space Saxon House, Farnborough
3-12
Curry M R 1996 The work in the world: geographical practice
and the written word University of Minnesota Press, Harrison S and Dunham P 1998 Decoherence, quantum
Minneapolis theory and their implications for the philosophy of
geomorphology Transactions of the Institute of British
Dimendberg E 1998 Henri Lefebvre on abstract space in
Geographers 23 4 501-14
Light A and Smith J M eds Philosophy and geography II:
Harvey D 1961 Aspects of agricultural and rural change
the production of public space Rowman and Littlefield,
Lanham MD 17-48 in Kent, 1800-1900 Unpublished PhD thesis, University
of Cambridge
Dixon D 1999 Between difference and alterity: engage-
- 1973 Social justice and the city Arnold, London
ment with Edward Soja's 'Thirdspace' Annals of the
- 1982 The limits to capital Blackwell, Oxford
Association of American Geographers 89 2 338-9
- 1985 Consciousness and the urban experience Blackwell,
Duncan N 1996 Postmodernism in human geography in
Oxford
Earle C Mathewson K and Kenzer M S eds Concepts in
- 1989 The urban experience Blackwell, Oxford
human geography Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham MD
429-58 - 1990 The condition of postmodernity Blackwell, Oxford
- 1991 Afterword in Lefebvre H The production of space
Einstein A 1964 Autobiographical notes in Smart J J C ed
Blackwell, Oxford 425-34
Problems of space and time Macmillan, New York 276-91
- 1996 Justice, nature and the geography of difference
Escobar P 1995 Encountering development: the making and
Blackwell, Oxford
unmaking of the third world Princeton University Press,
Hess R 1988 Henri Lefebvre et l'aventure du sikcle Editions A
Princeton NJ
M Metailie, Paris
Faulstich P 1998 Mapping the mythological landscape: an
Jameson F 1991 Postmodernism; or, the cultural logic of late
aboriginal way of being-in-the-world Ethics, Place and
Environment 1 2 197-222 capitalism Verso, London
- 1998 The cultural turn: selected writings on the post-
Flint C 1998 Forming electorates, forming spaces - the
modern, 1983-98 Verso, London
Nazi Party and the social construction of space
Katz C 1998 Book review forum. Political and intellectual
American Behavioral Scientist 41 9 1282-303
passions: engagements with David Harvey's 'Justice,
Flood R and Lockwood M eds 1986 The nature of time
nature and the geography of difference' Annals of the
Blackwell, Oxford
Association of American Geographers 88 4 706-7
Foucault M 1980 Power/knowledge Pantheon, New York
Kirk W 1952 Historical geography and the concept of the
- 1986 Of other spaces Diacritics Spring 22-7 behavioural environment Indian Geographical Journal
- 1988 Politics, philosophy, culture Routledge, New York Silver Jubilee Edition 152-60
Giddens A 1984 The constitution of society: outline of the
Lagopoulos A P 1993 Postmodernism, geography and the
theory of structuration Polity Press, Cambridge social semiotics of space Environment and Planning D:
Golledge R and Stimson R J 1997 Spatial behavior: aSociety and Space 11 3 255-78
geographic perspective Guilford Press, New York Lefebvre H 1968a Le droit a' la ville Anthropos, Paris
- 1968b La vie quotidienne dans le monde moderne
Gould P 1999 Becoming a geographer (space, place, and
society) Syracuse University Press, Syracuse NY Gallimard, Paris
Gowan P 1995 Neo-liberal theory and practice for eastern- 1968c The sociology of Marx Penguin, London
Europe New Left Review 213 3-60 - 1969 The explosion: Marxism and the French revolution of
Gregory D 1982 Regional transformation and industrialMay 1968 Monthly Review, New York
- 1970 Du rural i l'urbain Anthropos, Paris
revolution: a geography of the Yorkshire woollen industry
Macmillan, London - 1974 La production de l'espace Anthropos, Paris
- 1994 Geographical imaginations Blackwell, Oxford - 1980 La presence et l'absence Casterman, Paris
- 1997 Lacan and geography: the production of space
- 1981 Critique de la vie quotidienne, III: de la modernitM au
revisited in Benko G and Strohmayer U eds Space andmodernisme (pour une metaphilosophie du quotidien)
social theory Blackwell, Oxford 203-31 L'Arche, Paris
Proctor
- 1987 An interview with Henri Lefebvre J D 1998a The social
(interviewers G construction of nature:
relativist
Burgel, G Burgel, M G Dezes, translated by E accusations,
Kofman) pragmatist and critical realist
Environment and Planning D: Society responses
and Space Annals
5 1of 27-38
the Association of American Geogra-
phersOxford
- 1991 The production of space Blackwell, 88 3 352-77
- 1996 Writings on cities (selected, translated
- 1998b Ethics and intro- giving moral form to the
in geography:
duced by E Kofman and E Lebas) Blackwell,
geographical Oxford
imagination Area 30 1 8-18
Ley D and Samuels M S 1978 Humanistic
Proctor J D geography:
and Smith D M eds 1999 Geography and ethics:
prospects and problems Croom Helm,journeys
London in a moral terrain Routledge, London
Light A and Smith J M eds 1998 Philosophy andDingo
Rose D B 1992 geography
makes us human: life and land in an
II: the production of public space Rowman and Littlefield,
Aboriginal Australian culture Cambridge University
Lanham MD
Press, Cambridge
Livingstone D N 1992 The geographical tradition: episodes in
Russell B 1961 History of Western philosophy Allen and
the history of a contested enterprise Blackwell, Oxford
Unwin, London
Massey D 1994 Space, place and gender Polity Press,
Sack R D 1980 Conceptions of space in social thought
Cambridge Macmillan, London
- 1999 Space-time, 'science' and the relationship between
- 1999 A sketch of a geographic theory of morality
physical geography and human geography Transactions
Annals of the Association of American Geographers 89 1
of the Institute of British Geographers 24 261-76
26-44
Merrifield A 1993 Place and space: a Lefebvrian reconcili-
Said E 1994 Culture and imperialism Vintage, London
ation Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 18
516-31 Shields R 1999 Harmony in thirds: chora for Lefebvre
- 1999 The extraordinary voyages of Ed Soja: inside the Annals of the Association of American Geographers 89 2
340-42
'trialectics of spatiality' Annals of the Association of
American Geographers 89 2 345-8 Smith N 1998 Antinomies of space and nature in Henri
Minkowski H 1964 Space and time in Smart J J C ed Lefebvre's 'The production of space' in Light A and
Problems of space and time Macmillan, New York 297-312Smith J M eds Philosophy and geography II: the produc-
Newton-Smith W H 1986 Space, time and space-time: tion
a of public space Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham
MD 49-70
philosopher's view in Flood R and Lockwood M eds
The nature of time Blackwell, Oxford 22-35 Soja E 1989 Postmodern geographies: the reassertion of space
in critical social theory Verso, London
Nietzsche F 1998 Twilight of the idols or how to philosophize
with a hanner Oxford University Press, Oxford - 1996 Thirdspace: journeys to Los Angeles and other real-
Olsson G 1991 Lines of power/limits of language University
and-imagined places Blackwell, Oxford
of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis - 1999 Keeping space open Annals of the Association of
- 1998 A critique of cartographical reason Ethics, Place
American Geographers 89 2 348-53
and Environment 1 2 145-55
Stoddart D R 1986 On geography and its history Blackwell,
Pain R H 1997 Social geographies of women's fearOxford
of
crime Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers
Strohmayer U 1998 The event of space: geographic allu-
22 2 231-44
sions in the phenomenological tradition Environment
Peet R 1977 The development of radical geography in the
and Planning D: Society and Space 16 1 105-21
United States Progress in Human Geography 1 3 64-87
Swyngedouw E A 1992 Territorial organization and the
Pensky M ed 1994 The past as future: Jiirgen Habermas
space/technology nexus Transactions of the Institute of
interviewed by Michael Haller Polity Press, Cambridge
British Geographers 17 417-33
Peterman W 1994 Quantum theory and geography: what
Thornes J and Brunsden D 1977 Geomorphology and time
can Dr Bertlmann teach us? Professional Geographer 46
1-9
Methuen, London
Pred A ed 1981 Space and time in geography: essays dedicatedUnwin T 1992 The place of geography Longman, Harlow
Watson S and Gibson K eds 1995 Postmodern cities and
to Torsten Hiigerstrand Lund Studies in Geography
Series B 48 spaces Blackwell, Oxford
Price P 1999 Longing for less of the same Annals ofWittgenstein
the L 1961 Tractatus-logico-philosophicus Routledge
Association of American Geographers 89 2 342-44 and Kegan Paul, London

A Waste of Space Unwin PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

A Waste of Space Unwin PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

A Waste of Space? Towards a Critique of the Social Production of Space...

Author(s): Tim Unwin

The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) is

key words production of space Lefebvre

revised manuscript received 11 November 1999

Context terrain of geographical research that it has influ-

Trans Inst Br Geogr NS 25 11-29 2000

Samuels and 1978 of

shifting cultural studies (Soja 1989; Smithfro 1998) is much

It is there will be no purely philosophical

68) been with getting the academy to thinkis

Acknowledgements Casey E S 1997 The fate of place: a philosophical history

Neil Habermas J 1978 Knowledge and human interests

Вам также может понравиться