The Dictionary of Human Geography

Comp. by: LElumalai Stage : Revises1 ChapterID: 9781405132879_4_C Date:31/3/09
Time:21:45:54 Filepath://ppdys1108/BlackwellCup/00_Blackwell/00_3B2/Gregory-
9781405132879/appln/3B2/revises/9781405132879_4_C.3d

powers in question do not pertain to the own-

ership or control of things in general, but spe-

cifically to resources or assetsas they are deployed

in production. The fundamental contrast in cap-

italist societies, for example, is between owners

of means of production (machines, inputs,

space etc.) and owners of labour power, where

each category of owner – the capitalist and the

labourer – deploys the resource that they own

in production. That said, it is worth emphasi-

zing that class relations as defined are elastic

enough to recognize patriarchy within

the household and beyond and racial discrimin-

ation within society (seeracism) as concurrent

class processes. Meanwhile, work inradical

geography has convincingly shown that

exploitative class relations are fundamentally

spatial and that this spatial organization is crit-

ical to understanding the nature ofuneven

development.

The ambiguity of class location – or location

within social relations of production – is force-

fully illustrated by managers within corpor-

ations, who exhibit the rights and powers of

both capital (they can hire and fire workers,

make decisions about new technologies and

changes in the labour process, etc.)andlabour

(they cannot sell a factory, they have limited

discretion in the use of surplus or profit, they

can be fired from their jobs if the owners are

unhappy, etc.). Workers as corporate share-

holders (via an employee stock ownership

plan, for example) provide another vivid illus-

tration of ambiguity, since they simultaneously

occupy two class locations. Other instances

that complicate the empirical exercise of class

location include persons who work at two jobs,

one as a worker in a firm and the other

as a self-employed tradesman; professional

women, who employ a full-time housemaid;

or historically, working-class sepoys stationed

in colonies who, by virtue of racial difference,

found themselves in positions of class super-

iorityvis-a`-visnatives (one imagines a similar

phenomenon at work in today’s imperial out-

posts). In short, class relations, class structure

and class location in societies are complex – as

such, we should presuppose neither unity of

purpose (class interest) nor consciousness

(class agency) within a given class category

(see Marx, 1963 [1852]).

The German sociologist Max Weber’s

analysis of class is the primary alternative to

Marxist class analysis. In Weber’s scheme,

classes are distinguished by positions of rela-

tive advantage and disadvantage in terms of

wealth and income. He writes: ‘We may speak

of a ‘‘class’’ when (1) a number of people have

in common a specific causal component of

their life chances, in so far as (2) this compon-

ent is represented exclusively by economic

interests in the possession of goods and oppor-

tunities for income, and (3) is represented

under the conditions of the commodity or

labor markets’ (Weber 1968 [1946], p. 181).

While there are overlaps here with Marx’s

understanding of class, there are also clear

differences. Weber, for instance, emphasizes

‘personal life experiences’ and ‘life chances’

as critical aspects of ‘class situation’, and takes

class to be ‘any group of people that is found

in the same class situation’ (ibid.). Thus,

whereas for Marx class is an objective set of

social relations, for Weber subjective elements

become key. Also in contrast to the Marxist

view ofclass as relational, the Weberian view

emphasizesclass as market position. Classes are

hierarchical arrangements, but potentially

dynamic ones becausemarketposition may

be changed by collective strategies in the

labour market (e.g. through professional asso-

ciations or trades unions). In underscoring the

‘life chances’ that accompany ‘class situation’,

Weber draws attention to individuals’ pro-

spective ‘personal life experiences’: ‘the prob-

abilities of social and occupational mobility; of

educational access and achievement; of illness

and mortality’ (Clarke 2005, p. 40). While

classes, in Weber’s view, derive unambigu-

ously from economic interest, they are linked

to political organization (party) and social pos-

ition (status), both of which may be shaped by

non-economic processes and may influence

‘class-consciousness’. The French sociologist

Pierre Bourdieu is a prominent example of a

scholar who has creatively fused the Marxist

and Weberian perspectives of class in his

analysis of various forms ofcapital. vg

Suggested reading

Bourdieu (1984); Massey (1995); Weber (1968

[1946]); Wright (2005).

class interval A key element in the design of

a quantitativemapthat partitions the range

of data values into discrete categories, each

assigned a unique symbol. Common onchor-

oplethmaps, class intervals are also used

for maps of linear and point phenomena

and embedded in maps on whichisolines

divide the data into categories or layers.

Typically, a map key links the class intervals

to their respective symbols, which may vary

in size, greytone value or colour. Because

different class intervals can yield radically

different depictions of the same data, viewers

Gregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_C Final Proof page 89 31.3.2009 9:45pm

CLASS INTERVAL