The Dictionary of Human Geography

Comp. by: VPugazhenthi Stage : Revises1 ChapterID: 9781405132879_4_S Date:1/4/
09 Time:15:23:40 Filepath:H:/00_Blackwell/00_3B2/Gregory-9781405132879/appln/3B2/
revises/9781405132879_4_S.3d

and its reassertion of space – of spatiality

• in critical social thought (Soja, 1989:
  see also third space; trialectics).
  Other human geographers working
  under the sign of a critical Marxism
  equally cognizant of Lefebvre have also
  conceptualized spatiality as socially
  produced space, and while they rarely
  endorse Soja’s celebration of postmod-
  ernism they do accept that space is not
  a mere reflection of but is ratherconstitu-
  tive ofcapitalism as a dialectical totality
  (see, e.g., Sheppard, 2004; Harvey,
  2006a). More than this, many of them
  now recognize that this implication of a
  produced space must incorporate non-
  human agency too: ‘the manifold bio-
  physical processes and technologies
  that shape the spatiality of the world’
  (Leitner, Sheppard and Sziarto, 2008,
  p. 158).
  (4) Drawing uponpost-structuralism–in
  particular, the work of Michel Foucault
  (1926–84) and of Gilles Deleuze (1925–

95. and Fe ́lix Guattari (1930–92), to-
    gether with the post-phenomenology of
    Alphonso Lingis (1933– ) and others – a
    number of writers use spatiality to indi-
    cate the ways in which mobile constella-
    tions of power-knowledge and subject
    positions are constituted through the
    production and performance of space as
    an ‘ordering’ rather than a fixed and
    closed order (cf. Thrift, 2007, p. 55). Ac-
    cordingly, they attempt to grasp space as
    an ‘immanent spatiality’, through which
    the world is registered as a ‘multi-linear
    complex’ whose contingent intersections
    and folds constantly open and present –
    which is to saymakepresent – the emer-
    gence of ‘the new’ (Dewsbury and Thrift,
    2005). These developing conceptions of
    spatiality, like those in the preceding
    paragraphs, have important implications
    for ageographical imaginationthat is
    also a profoundly materialimagination
    (Anderson and Wylie, 2008) (see also
    non-representational theory).

These four traditions cannot be assimilated

to any grand synthesis, but many writers

share a subterranean dialogue with figures

such as Marx, Heidegger and Foucault, and

there is increasing traffic between their con-

ceptions of spatiality: for example, Sheppard’s

(2008) exploration ofdialectical totalities

and assemblages. For all the differences

between them, all four traditions reject the

conventional separations between ‘society’

and ‘space’ (which can be traced to a persist-

entkantianism) and in this sense can be read

as four moments in the movement towards an

exploration of what Smith (1990) called ‘deep

space’: that is to say, ‘quintessentially social

space ... physical extent fused through with

social intent’. dg

Suggested reading

Dewsbury and Thrift (2005); Pickles (1985);

Soja (1989).

spectacle A term that often refers to a large-

scale cultural event, festival or celebration, or

to an urban scene or stage set presented for

visual consumption. It has been prominent in

analyses of the significance ofimageproduc-

tion and the management of appearance in

strategies of urban development in recent dec-

ades, with attention focusing in particular on

temporary cultural events such as carnivals,

International Expositions and sporting events,

including the Olympic Games (Gold and

Gold, 2005), as well as on more permanent

spaces of entertainment, ‘theme park urban-

ism’ and ‘cities of spectacle’. The use of spec-

tacular events has a long history, from the

‘bread and circuses’ of ancient times to efforts

to promote European medieval city-states and

metropolises of the nineteenth century. Yet the

production of spectacles has become a com-

mon part of cultural strategies of economic

development more recently, with studies

exploring their implications for capital invest-

ment, cultural identity and tourism, and

drawing out their multiple and contested read-

ings by audiences. Many critics argue that

such spectacles serve a diversionary function,

masking underlying social and economic

inequalities.

A key reference in critical discussions is Guy

Debord’s bookThe society of the spectacle, first

published in 1967. This is concerned less with

spectacles as cultural events than withthe

spectacle in a critique of an alienated and

image-saturated world. Developing earlier

Marxist critiques of commodity fetishism

andalienation, Debord writes that the spec-

tacle ‘corresponds to the historical moment at

which the commodity completes its coloniza-

tion of social life’ (1994 [1967], thesis 42).

This new stage in theaccumulationof capital

and the domination of social life by theecon-

omyis not simply the result of mass media

manipulation and visual technologies, he

stresses, for ‘the spectacle is not a collection

of images; rather it is a social relationship

Gregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_S Final Proof page 717 1.4.2009 3:23pm

SPECTACLE