The Dictionary of Human Geography

Comp. by: LElumalai Stage : Revises1 ChapterID: 9781405132879_4_C Date:31/3/09
Time:21:45:56 Filepath://ppdys1108/BlackwellCup/00_Blackwell/00_3B2/Gregory-
9781405132879/appln/3B2/revises/9781405132879_4_C.3d

interdisciplinary space. It is now difficult to

imagine critical analysis of, say, american

empire,colonialism,imperialismorterror-

ismthat does not touch on critical geopolitics

at some point. These are vital developments,

at once political and intellectual, because they

disclose a series ofintersections between biopo-

litics (seebiopower), geopolitics and geo-

economics that lie at the heart of the contem-

porary political moment and that urgently

require critical analysis (cf. Sparke, 2007). jh

critical human geography Theoretically

informed geographical scholarship, commit-

ted to Leftist politics,social justiceand lib-

eration through scholarly enquiry. Critical

geography is one variant of the rich tradition

of critical enquiry in social science and the

humanities that embraces Marx’s call not only

to interpret the world, but to change it. Fay

defines contemporary critical science as the

‘attempt to understand in a rationally respon-

sible manner the oppressive features of a soci-

ety such that this understanding stimulates

its audience to transform their society and

thereby liberate themselves’ (1987, p. 4). Agger

(1998) identifies several features of critical social

theory, as practiced in fields such asgeography.

These include: a rejection of positivist enquiry

(seepositivism); an endorsement of the possi-

bility of progress; a model of society character-

ized by structural domination produced, in

part, through myth andideology; and a rejec-

tion of revolutionary expediency with a con-

comitant faith in the agency of everyday change

and self-transformation.

Critical human geography emerged from a

long tradition of dissent. Although its predeces-

sors include the anarchist geography of scholars

such as Reclus and Kroptkin (seeanarchism),

Anglo-American critical geography’s roots are to

befoundintheradical geography that

emerged in the 1970s (see Peet, 2000). A self-

identified field of critical geography began to

emerge in the late 1980s. Important departures

included a rejection of some of the structural

excesses ofmarxism(in line with a generalpost-

modernturn),andasharpeninginterestinques-

tions of culture and representation,as

opposed to the economic focus of radical geog-

raphy. Radical and critical geography, while

closely related, are not interchangeable. Some

observers (Castree, 2000) worry at the eclipse

of the former by the latter.

One important consequence of the post-

modern turn has been that critical geography

is remarkably varied in its commitments.

For Hubbard, Kitchin, Bartley and Fuller

(2002), critical geography is diverse in its

epistemology, ontology and methodo-

logy, and lacks a ‘distinctive theoretical

identity’ (p. 62). That said, certain common

themes can be discerned (Blomley, 2006).

These include:

(1) A commitment tosocial theoryand a

rejection ofempiricism: critical geog-

raphers draw from a number of theoret-

ical wells, includingpolitical economy,

queer theory,post-colonialism and

feminism.

(2) Self-consciously oppositional enquiry:

scholarship that seeks to unmaskpower,

demonstrateinequality, uncoverresist-

ance and foster emancipatory politics

and social change.

(3) An emphasis onrepresentationas a site

for domination and resistance: given a

general interest indiscourseand mean-

ing, one common focus is the ways in

which representations of space serve to

sustain power (or conversely, can be used

to challenge power).

(4) An optimistic faith in the power of critical

scholarship: critical geography can both

undo oppressive forms of social power,

and provide transformative insights. In

speaking truth to power, in other words,

the scholar can undo domination, and

free the oppressed: ‘Dissentient thoughts

and norm-challenging information can,

as history shows, be as potent as armies

given the right conditions’, Castree and

Wright(2005, p. 2) argue.

(5) A commitment to progressive praxis:

critical geographers claim common-cause

with movements committed tosocial

justice. The precise nature of the rela-

tion, and the appropriate focus for, and

locus of,activismhas been much debated

(Fuller and Kitchin, 2004b).

(6) spaceas a critical tool: a particular atten-

tion to the ways in which spatial arrange-

ments and representations can serve to

produce inequality and oppression and

opposition. To varying degrees, critical

geographers note the ways in which

space can serve as both a tool and veil

of power.

Some important and unresolved questions

remain. For example, relatively limited discus-

sion has occurred over the shared commit-

ments, if any, of critical geographers (though

cf. Harvey, 2000b). What are geographers crit-

ical of? Why? And to what end? To borrow

Gregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_C Final Proof page 123 31.3.2009 9:45pm

CRITICAL HUMAN GEOGRAPHY