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

Bakhtin (1984, p. 246) offered the concrete

example of the French literarysalonas a key

nineteenth-century chronotope, ‘where the

major spatial and temporal sequences of the

novel intersect’ in the works of Balzac and

Stendhal. Not surprisingly, the term has been

influential in theatre studies, with the stage

providing an intuitive location for the observa-

tion of chronotopes in action, and theories of

performance have developed these imma-

nently geographical tropes still further by

insisting on the contextual boundedness of

human actions. In human geography,

Folch-Serra (1990) proposed a dialogical con-

ception of landscapethat derived directly

from Bakhtin and promised to reconstruct

the power-laden interactions ‘that alternately

‘‘anchor’’ and destabilize the ‘‘natural har-

mony’’ of a region’. This focus on the narration

of landscape resurfaces in interdisciplinary

studies of landscape andidentity(Lehman,

1998), but the sense of diversity, dialogue and

disputation that is crucial for any Bakhtinian

approach is best exemplified by O’Reilly’s

(2007) study of the unfolding micropolitical

relations between competing voices and the

co-production of gendered time–spaces of par-

ticipation in development projects in North

India. As she shows, and as the concept of a

chronotope strongly suggests, struggles over

meaning are also and reciprocally struggles

over the production of distinctive time–spaces.

us

Suggested reading

Holloway and Kneale (1999); O’Reilly (2007).

citizenship The rights and duties relating

to an individual’s membership in a political

community. In the past several centuries, the

boundary of this community has been the

nation-state and membership has implied

some degree of integration into a common

nationalheritage. In its early formulations,

however, citizenship was understood as a set

ofrightsand freedoms located primarily at

the local scale. The expansion of individual

freedoms (such as the right to work andhabeas

corpus) into a national institution was one of

the key components of the growth of modern

citizenship. It reflected a shift from local, com-

munal relations and social rights rooted in

village membership into a sense of a national

community and of individual rights guaran-

teed by astate. This shift in scale from the

local to the national and from communally

sanctioned rights to those protected by the

state is an absolutely fundamental aspect

of modern citizenship, and one that is

profoundly intertwined with the growth of

industrialcapitalism,liberalismandmod-

ernity in the West (Weber, 1978 [1922];

Turner, 1993; Marston and Mitchell, 2004).

As it has developed in British and North

American societies, citizenship owes its mod-

ern legacy to a succession of legal and political

rights and responsibilities originating in

Britain mainly in the seventeenth century and

continuing through to the present. According

to T.H. Marshall, citizenship can be usefully

periodized in terms of: (a) the eighteenth-

century development of civil citizenship,

which encompasses civil and legal rights,

especially property rights; (b) the nine-

teenth-century expansion ofpoliticalcitizen-

ship, which involves the rights to vote, to

associate and to participate in government;

and (c) the rise of twentieth-centurysocialciti-

zenship, which involves entitlements such as

provisions for health, housing and education

(see Mann, 1987, p. 339; Marshall and

Bottomore, 1992). Marshall envisioned a con-

tinuous positive trajectory for citizenship in

terms of the ongoing inclusiveness and expan-

sion of universal rights, as well as the evolution

of those forms of state welfarism (social citi-

zenship) that guaranteed all members the

chance to access those rights and participate

in the politics of the community. Although his

framework remains influential, Marshall

has been criticized for his lack of attention to

the experiences of women (Vogel, 1994;

Walby, 1994), for the linear and evolutionary

qualities of his model (Giddens, 1982),

and for his unquestioned liberal assumptions

relating to the positive integrative capacity of

citizenship itself (seeliberalism).

Like many mid-twentieth-century liberals,

Marshall was a strong nationalist who concep-

tualized citizenship as corresponding with a

specific state territory and as fundamentally

linked with its economic development and

cultural narratives. For him and many others,

citizenship necessarily assumed both a sense of

belonging and identity rooted in a shared

national past and a commitment to the pro-

duction and defence of its territorial borders.

Over the past few decades, however, these

types of assumptions have been overturned.

As a result of the powerful new forces ofglob-

alization andtransnationalism, both the

national narratives of heritage and community

and the state’s discrete and autonomous juris-

diction overterritoryand population have

been called into question. One of the many

new kinds of tensions that have erupted in this

Gregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_C Final Proof page 84 31.3.2009 9:45pm

CITIZENSHIP