The Blackwell Companion to Sociology (6 page)

individuals but in abstract systems or capacities, and is specifically related to absence in time and space.

Towards a Sociology of Place

In the contributions so far considered, space and time have been treated as

Newtonian, as objective, linear, and absolute notions in which there are three

dimensions of space and the separate dimension of time. It is presumed that

objects are located within these objective dimensions of time and space,

that objects are not intrinsically ``spaced'' and ``timed.'' However, in recent

years the challenges to these views from twentieth-century science have begun

to trickle into the sociology of place and space.

10

John Urry

Thus, for example, twentieth-century physics has shown that time is not a

separate dimension along which objects may travel forwards or backwards.

Time is now conceived of as irreversible and as constitutive of physical and

social entities. This is clearly seen in the expansion of the universe through the cosmological arrow of time, following the singular historical event of thè`big

bang.'' There are many mundane examples of such irreversibility: coffee always

cools, organisms always age, spring follows winter, and so on. There can be no

going back, no reabsorbing of the heat, no return to youth, no spring before

winter, and so on. Laws of nature are historical and imply pastness, presentness, and futureness. ``The great thing about time is that it goes on'' (Eddington,

quoted in Coveney and Highfield, 1990, p. 83), whilèìrreversibility [of time]

is the mechanism that brings order out of chaos'' (Prigogine and Stengers, 1984, p. 292; see also Hayles, 1991; Adam, 1998).

More recently, chaos and complexity theories have begun to inflect socio-

logical analysis (Byrne, 1998). Such theories involve repudiating simple dichotomies of order and disorder, of being and becoming. Physical systems do not, it

seems, exhibit and sustain structural stability. The commonsense notion that

small changes in causes produce small changes in effects is mistaken. Instead,

there is deterministic chaos, dynamic becoming, and non-linear changes in the

properties of systems as a whole rather than transformations within particular

components. Time in such a perspective is highly discontinuous, and there are

many non-equilibrium situations in which abrupt and unpredictable changes

occur as the parameters are changed over time. Following a perfectly determin-

istic set of rules, unpredictable yet patterned results can be generated. The classic example is the famous butterfly effect, where minuscule changes at one location

produce, in very particular circumstances, massive weather effects elsewhere.

Such complex systems are characterized by counter-intuitive outcomes that

occur temporally and spatially distant from where they appear to have origi-

nated.

Complexity theory emphasizes how complex feedback loops exacerbate initial

stresses in the system and render it unable to absorb shocks in a simple way

which re-establishes the original equilibrium. Very strong interactions are seen to occur between the parts of a system and there is a lack of a central hierarchical structure. Zohar and Marshall (1994) elaborate the implications of the concept

of the quantum society. They describe the collapse of the old certainties of

classical physics, characterized by rigid categories of absolute time and space; solid impenetrable matter made up of interacting ``billiard balls'' and strictly determinant laws of motion. In its place there is ``the strange world of quantum physics, an indeterminate world whose almost eerie laws mock the boundaries of

space, time and matter'' (Zohar and Marshall, 1994, p. 33). They particularly

develop analogies between the wave/particle effect and the emergent character-

istics of social life: ``Quantum reality'' has the potential to be both particle-like and wave-like. Particles are individuals, located and measurable in space and

time. They are either here or there, now or then. Waves arè`non-local,'' they are spread out across all of space and time, and their instantaneous effects are

everywhere. Waves extend themselves in every direction at once, they overlap

The Sociology of Space and Place

11

and combine with other waves to form new realities (new emergent wholes),

such as those changes occurring at the emergent global level (Zohar and Mar-

shall, 1994, p. 326; Urry, 2000).

Many writers have directly or indirectly developed aspects of these arguments

in relationship to the social world (Byrne, 1998; Cilliers, 1998). I shall now

discuss three older writers whose ideas connect to such notions: Lefebvre,

Bachelard and Benjamin. First, Lefebvre (1991) argues that space is not a neutral and passive geometry. Space is produced and reproduced and thus represents the

site of struggle. Moreover, all sorts of different spatial phenomena ± land,

territory, site, and so on ± should be understood as part of the same dialectical structure of space or spatialization. While conventionally these different phenomena are separated as a result of fragmented discipline-based analyses, they

need to be brought together in a unified structure.

This comprises three elements. First, there arè`spatial practices.'' These range from individual routines to the systematic creation of zones and regions. Such

spatial practices are over time concretized in the built environment and in the

landscape. The most significant spatial practices are those of property and other forms of capital. Second, there are representations of space, the forms of knowledge and practices that organize and represent space, particularly through the

techniques of planning and the state. And, third, there are the spaces of representation, or the collective experiences of space. These include symbolic differ-

entiations and collective fantasies around space, the resistances to the dominant practices, and resulting forms of individual and collective transgression.

Lefebvre is particularly concerned with the production of space under capital-

ism. Different forms of space succeed each other through time. There is succes-

sion from natural to absolute to abstract space, the effect being progressively to expel nature from the social. Abstract space is the high point of capitalist

relations, leading to extraordinary ``created spaces.'' Shields's (1991) analysis of social spatialization develops Lefebvre's examination of the cultural construction of space. He examines the changing social spatialization of the beach, as it went from a medical zone to a pleasure zone; the social construction of the place-myths of Brighton and Niagara Falls; the construction of thè`north'' and

``south'' ``spaces'' of Britain; and the contested space myths of the north of

Canada (see Urry, 1995, for other examples).

Bachelard (1969) likewise develops a conception of space that is qualitative

and heterogeneous, rather than abstract, empty and static. He specifically con-

siders the nature of thè`house'' and argues that it is not to be seen as a purely physical object. In particular, it is the site within which one's imagination and daydreaming can take place and be given free rein (Bachelard, 1969, p. 6). And

the home is also a metaphor for intimacy. Houses are within us and we reside in

houses. In particular, all sorts of spaces, such as the house in which one is born, are imbued with memory traces. And that belongingness derives from the

materiality of the particular place in question. Moreover, Bachelard argues

that the very duration of time is itself dependent upon such spatial specificity.

Space is necessary to give quality to time. Or, as Game (1995, p. 201) expresses it, ``Space transforms time in such a way that memory is made possible.'' Thus a 12

John Urry

space such as a house plays a particularly significant role in the forming and

sustaining of memory. It shelters daydreaming. Further, our bodies do not forget the first house that we encounter. Bachelard (1969, p. 15) talks of à`passionate liaison'' between the body and this initial house. Its characteristics are physically inscribed in us. Memories are materially localized and so the temporality of

memory is spatially rooted. Bachelard spatializes the temporality of memory.

Houses are lived through one's body and its memories (Game, 1995, pp. 202±3).

Memories of places are embodied. The past is ``passed'' on to us not merely in

what we think or what we do but in how we do it. And places are not just seen,

as in the scopic regime of thè`sightseer,'' but perceived through the diverse

senses that may make us ache to be somewhere else or shiver at the prospect of

having to stay put (see Urry, 2000, on the senses). Proust conveys this embodied character of memory: `òur arms and legs are full of torpid memories'' (Lowenthal, 1985, p. 203).

Benjamin (1979) draws on similar themes in his analysis of how peoplè`read''

the city (see also Buck-Morss, 1989). This is not a matter of intellectual or

positivistic observation; instead, it involves fantasy, wish-processes, and dreams.

The city is the repository of people's memories and of the past; and it also

functions as a receptacle of cultural symbols. These memories are embodied

in buildings that then take on a significance different from that intended by

the architect. However, this is not simply a matter of individual interpretation, since buildings demonstrate collective myths. Understanding these myths

entails a process of unlocking or undermining existing interpretations and

traditions and of juxtaposing conflicting elements together. Even derelict buildings may leave traces and reveal memories, dreams, and hopes of previous

periods. Wright's A Journey through Ruins (1992) well demonstrates Benjamin's

method, as he begins his journey with an old toilet in Dalston Lane in east

London.

Benjamin was also concerned with the similarities between artistic perception

and the reading of the urban text. Benjamin suggests that buildings are normally appreciated in passing, in a state of distraction, as people are moving on elsewhere. This is by contrast with people's ``concentrated'' absorption of paintings in a gallery. Most famously, Benjamin examined the role of the flaÃneur, the

stroller, who wandered around the city sampling life in a distracted and unpre-

meditated form (Buck-Morss, 1989). The voyeuristic and distracted nature of

the encounter with the urban means that memories of the past can be ignited by

some current event. It is only with distracted perception that this chance linking of past and present can occur and undermine the oppressive weight of past

traditions. Benjamin also analyzes those places concerned only with entertain-

ment, such as the expositions in Paris; they transform visitors to the level of the commodity as they enter à`phantasmagorical world.''

Following on from these theories, a variety of crucial points about place have

been developed by writers influenced in one way or another by these older

contributions. However, the kinds of points now made are diverse and mean

that the sociology of place has moved a long way from the simple and objective

dimensionality of Newtonian space and time.

The Sociology of Space and Place

13

First, it is now more clearly seen that places are not necessarily static and

unchanging (Massey, 1994, pp. 136±7). Places involve process and such pro-

cesses involve more local and much wider sets of social relations. Massey states that what I have termed localness is à`distinct mixture together in one place

[which] produce[s] effects which would not have happened otherwise'' (1994,

pp. 156, 138). Places can therefore be loosely understood as multiplex, as a set of spaces where ranges of relational networks and flows coalesce, interconnect,

and fragment. Any such place can be viewed as the particular nexus between, on

the one hand, propinquity characterized by intensely thick co-present interac-

tion, and on the other hand, fast flowing webs and networks stretched corpore-

ally, virtually and imaginatively across distances. These propinquities and

extensive networks come together to enable performances in, and of, particular

places.

In particular, places, we now know, arè`gendered.'' Men and women can have

different relations to thè`city,'' which is often dominated by male interests and by the predominant forms of representation, such as monuments, commemora-tive buildings, and historic sites, that record male activities. We also know just how important urban design is for the safe dwelling and mobility of women,

especially in those places dominated by automobility (Wilson, 1991; Ardener,

1993; Wolff, 1995; Sheller and Urry, 2000). There are, of course, complex

interconnections between such analyses and those of ethnicity. Particularly in

the USA, much focus has been placed on showing the changing spatial distribu-

tion of different ethnic groups and especially the development of a black under-

class in the inner city (Wilson, 1987). Wilson argues that this has resulted from the spatial mobility of the black middle class that in large numbers left the black areas. This has helped to undermine the bases of community life, at the same

time that such areas have been devastated by massive deindustrialization as jobs moved south and west and out to the suburbs. There is an `èmptying out of the

ghetto'' (Wacquant, 1989; Davis, 1990).

Changing gender and ethnic character is associated with cities being recon-

structed as centers for postmodern consumption (and employment); the city is