Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Spatializing Culture

    Uploaded by

    Yvette Carrillo
    6 views19 pages
    Producción social y construcción social del espacio público en Costa Rica

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Producción social y construcción social del espacio público en Costa Rica

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views19 pages

    Spatializing Culture

    Uploaded by

    Yvette Carrillo
    Producción social y construcción social del espacio público en Costa Rica

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 19
    spatializing culture: the social production and social construction of public space in Costa Rica SETHA M. LOW—Graduate School and University Cemer ofthe Cty Univesity of ‘New York Ina recent aicle Denise Lawrence ard reviewed te literate on the anthropology othe built ervronment ad spatial form (awtence and Low 191), Ne iene! he history and contributions of diverse theoretical and methodological perspec ves onthe development ofan ntvopoogical approach tothe bi environment, nd concuce: “Theos ros new drecion fr anbropologis sine aes loi prodicon tors. These ‘pps sat pace he undenng tb tars ia the age coe sys ition and ts history... Asan object a he ung becnes «poo spl aiulson [Grivemtenecon of mii laces of conan Sooty anes, here meaning te bul ernment reveled rough te metaphor! connections and stl pace comatcs at importa bar al sno expel mera The says and iertaionobllig decir crn undead spat forn olan econo ratatonal {Sema contnooy nioence Sco no cane herpcaono snboke mening be vse emibse bres hay 1 have continued to explore these dimensions futher in an efor to theorize space and spatalize human experience more efectively within cultural antropoogy. By spailze mean to locate, both physieally and conceptual social relations andocial practice in socal space. In this acl | a using the specific analysis of two plazas in Costa Rica to explore the use of| the two miually complementary perspectives of socal production of space and social constuction of pace as tools for understanding how public space in urban socety becomes semioically encoded and imerpreted realty. In order to laf this discussion is important dsinguish tween these two tems, fr they are often used interchangeably. The social production of space includes all those facts social, economic, ideological, and technological the intended goal of whichis the physical creation of the material sting. The materialist emphasso the tem soca production is useful in defining the historical emergence and politcal and economic formation of urban space. Te term social constriction may then be conveniently reserved for te phenomenolog Cal and symbolic experience of space as mediated by social processes such as exchange, In this article 1 explore how an integrated approach o the anthropological study of urban space would work ethnographical. | css fur areas of patialcutural analysis—historcal emergence, sociopolitical and ecnomicstuctring, pats ‘Of social use, and experiential meanings—os a means of working oUt ofthe methodological impleations of broader social corsirction theoretical perspec tives, Two plazas in San ose, Costa Ric, kamish efnographic Mlustations othe social mediating processes of spatial practices, smbolic meaning, and social ‘conto! tha provide insight ino the conics that arse as diferent groups and ‘oclopolica forces struggle to claim and define these cultraly significant pubic sacs range empaphetn pizasCosain pion social consnscton “Aner ge DT Os. Cogn Te rca eye A, spatializing culture 854 confli, and contol. Ths the social construction of space fs the actual transiormation of space—through people's social exchanges, memories, mage, and daily use ofthe material seting—into scenes and actions that convey symbolic meaning! Both processes are social in the sense that both the production and the constuction of space contested for economic and Ideological reasons understanding them can help us se how lca confi over space can be Used to uncover and illuminate larger sss. Contemporary debates concerning ethnographic methodologies and writing strategies em phasize the imporance of characterizing social actors in teras of ther experience of the theorized phenomena. The coproducers ofthe ethnography mustbe given a voice and a place in the writen document (Appadurai 1992; Rodman 1992), and ethnographic research is increasingly judged by es abilty to portray the impact of macro and micro processes though the “ved experience” of individuals. Thus an efective athropogical theory ofthe spatial ation of culture and human experience must integrate the perpecives of social production and socal constuction of space, bath contszualizing the fore: that produce it and showing eople as social agents constructing their own reales and meanings. Buti mus also elect both these perspectives inthe experience and dally lie of publiespace user. There have been many approaches o various aspects of ths publem. David Haney (1985, 1990) and Manuel Calls (1983, 1988) have examined the sptializtion of social confi, focusingon class-based stuggle wth state-inposed spatial reins. Tey provide historical and contemporary examples ofgrassoots organizations fighting to maintain contol of housing (astells 1983), urban sacred space Harvey 1985), and neghbortod realestate (Castells 1983; Peat 1969, 1967; alo see Smith 1991. I thet analyses, they view the local population as having role tough social movements that resi the contol ofthe dominant classes and planning elit. They fll, however, to account either forthe agency ofthe individual actor or for the deals of how spatial srucures influence human betavoe, and conversely, how behavior influences the experience, ulzatin, and allocation ol space. ‘Michel Foucault, n is werk onthe prison (1975) and ina sees of interviews and lectures ‘on space Foucault 1984; Rabinow 1984), takes ahistorical approach othe spatialization of socal contro trough analysis ofthe human body spatial arangemens, and architecture. He ‘examines the relationship of power ad space by posting architecture a apolitical “techao- ‘ofy” for working ou the concems of government—tha i, contol and power ove individ als—theough the spatial “canalizaio” of everyday Wile. The alm of such a technology isto ‘rete a “docile body Foucault 1975198) tough enclosure andthe organization of individ alsin space, Continuing his approach, Paul Rabinow (1989) inks the growh of modern forms of political power to the evoition of aesthetic theories and shows how French colonists sought to use architecture and city planning to demonstrate their cultural superiority. He focuses on the ‘ordering of space 3¢ 2 way to undersand “the historically variable links between spatial relations, aesthetics, socal science, economies, and poles” (Rabinow 1982:267). James Holstein (1989) develops this argument further by examining the state-sponsored architecture and master planing of Brailiaas new forms of poltical domination trough which the domains ‘of dl life become the targets for sate intervention These writers successfull illustrate how architecture contribates othe maintenance of power of one group over anther a level that includes both the contol of the movement and the surveillance ofthe body in space, but do notadressditety ether the lived experience ofthe individual ete esitance of indvidals and groups to these architectural fons of social contol Miche de Ceteau (1984 takes this omission as his starting pot fr his aterpto show how people's “ways of operating” constitute the means by which uses reappropriate space orga ized by techniquesof sociocultural production (1984). These practices ae articulated inthe

    You might also like