Cultural geography : Different encounters, encountering difference

Abstract In the first half of this paper it is argued that cultural geography is a dynamic and diverse field that extends well beyond a single branch of human geography. The boundaries between it and other sub-disciplines are often blurred. People have «different» encounters with cultural geography depending on their sub-disciplinary convergences. People also have different encounters with cultural geography depending on where they live and work. «Place matters» in the construction, production and representation of cultural geography. It takes different forms in different places. In the second half of the paper it is argued that as cultural geography continues to encounter «difference» in many guises, four possible future trends are likely: first, it is probable that there will be continued growth in cultural geography; second, there may be mounting recognition that cultural geography needs to be critical offering possibilities for radical critique and reflection; third, cultural geographers are likely to continue with their efforts to think about what, if anything, might lie beyond representation; and finally, cultural geographers are likely to deepen their reflections on the politics of knowledge production leading to more multi-language publishing practices in this area. Key words: bodies, critical approach, cultural geography, emotions, place. Resum. Geografia cultural. Trobades diferents, trobant la diferència A la primera part d’aquest article, s’hi defensa que la geografia cultural és un camp prou dinàmic i divers com per ser considerat una simple branca de la geografia humana. Els límits entre aquesta subdisciplina i d’altres són sovint difícils de discernir. Hi ha tantes visions de la geografia cultural com subdisciplines a partir de les quals s’hi convergeix. També hi ha tantes aproximacions possibles a la geografia cultural com llocs on es viu o es treballa. En la construcció, producció i representació de la geografia cultural, el lloc hi és important, ja que la geografia cultural adquireix formes diferents en llocs diferents. En la segona meitat de l’article, s’hi argumenta que, mentre la geografia cultural continua presentant moltes diferències en facetes distintes, s’hi aventuren quatre possibles tendències futures. En primer lloc, és probable que continuï l’expansió de la geografia cultural; en segon lloc, existeix un reconeixement creixent que la geografia cultural necessita ser crítica i oferir, així, possibilitats per a la crítica i la reflexió radicals; en tercer lloc, és probable que els geògrafs culturals continuïn esforçant-se a esbrinar què hi ha més enllà de la representació si és que hi ha res. Finalment, és probable que els geògrafs culturals aprofundeixin Doc. Anàl. Geogr. 50, 2007 105-120 Cultural geography. Different encounters, encountering difference Robyn Longhurst University of Waikato. Department of Geography, Tourism and Environmental Planning Private Bag 3105. Hamilton. New Zealand [email protected] Data de recepció: agost del 2007 Data d’acceptació definitiva: setembre del 2007 DAG 50 001-140 9/4/08 18:39 Página 105 les seves reflexions sobre la política de producció de coneixement que porti a una diversitat lingüística més gran en les publicacions d’aquesta àrea. Paraules clau: cossos, enfocament crític, geografia cultural, emocions, lloc. Resumen. Geografía cultural. Encuentros diferentes, encontrando la diferencia En la primera parte de este artículo, se defiende que la geografía cultural es lo suficientemente dinámica y diversa como para no ser considerada una simple rama de la geografía humana. Los límites entre ésta y otras subdisciplinas son a menudo difíciles de discernir. Existen tantas visiones de la geografía cultural como subdisciplinas a partir de las cuales nos aproximamos a ella. También existen tantas visiones de la geografía cultural como lugares de residencia o de trabajo. En la construcción, la producción y la representación de la geografía cultural, el lugar es importante, ya que la geografía cultural toma formas distintas en lugares diferentes. En la segunda parte del artículo, se argumenta que, mientras la geografía cultural continúa presentando muchas diferencias en distintas facetas, se entrevén cuatro posibles tendencias futuras. En primer lugar, es probable que continúe la expansión de la geografía cultural; en segundo lugar, existe un reconocimiento creciente del hecho que la geografía cultural necesita ser crítica y ofrecer así posibilidades para la crítica y la reflexión radical; en tercer lugar, es probable que los geógrafos culturales continúen esforzándose en averiguar qué hay más allá de la representación, si es que hay alguna cosa, y, finalmente, es probable que los geógrafos culturales amplíen sus reflexiones sobre la política de producción de conocimientos, lo cual puede comportar una mayor diversidad lingüística en las publicaciones de esta área. Palabras clave: cuerpos, enfoque crítico, geografía cultural, emociones, lugar. Résumé. Géographie culturelle. Rencontres différents, trouvant des différences Dans la première moitié de cet article on constate que la géographie culturelle est un terrain d’étude si dynamique et divers et qu’elle ne peut pas être comprise simplement comme une branche de la géographie humaine. Les limites entre la géogrpahie culturelle et d’autres subdisciplines sont souvent difficiles d’écarter. Il y a autant de visions de la géographie culturelle comme subdisciplines prochaines. Aussi, existent autant de visions de la géographie culturelle comme des espaces de résidence ou travail. Dans le processus de construction, production et représentation de géographie culturelle, le lieu est important parce que la géographie culturelle prend des formes différentes dans les lieux différents. Dans la deuxième moitié de l’article on dit que comme la géographie culturelle continue à rencontrer beaucoup de différences en relation à des aspects différents, quatre tendances futures possibles sont possibles. D’abord, c’est probable qu’elle continue en avant; en deuxième partie, il y a une reconnaissance que la géographie culturelle a besoin d’être critique et offrir des possibilités à la critique et la réflexion radical; en troisième partie, des géographes culturels continuent avec leurs efforts de penser à propos de qu’est-ce qu’il y a au-delà de la représentation (s’il y a quelque chose); et, finalement, les géographes culturels ont des chances d’approfondir leurs réflexions sur la politique de la production de connaissance conduisant à plus de pratiques de publication multi langue dans cette branche géographique. Mots clé: corps, approche critique, géographie culturelle, émotions, place. 106 Doc. Anàl. Geogr. 50, 2007 Robyn Longhurst DAG 50 001-140 9/4/08 18:39 Página 106 Introduction The discipline of geography has long maintained a focus on and engagement with culture and cultural landscapes. Perhaps it is not surprising, therefore, that cultural geography, or cultural geographies (pluralizing the term may reflect more aptly the wideness and diversity of the field —see Atkinson et al. 2005, XII) extend well beyond a single branch of human geography. The boundaries between cultural geography and other sub-disciplines are often blurred. For example, my approach to cultural geography has always been filtered through my engagement with feminist and social geography. These days, however, social geographical research is often carried out under the banner of cultural geography (Del Casino and Marston 2006, p. 996; also see Valentine, 2001). Vincent Del Casino and Sallie Marston (2006, 1001) note that in the United States «[c]ultural theoretical approaches have become central to the way that geographers analyze the “social”». This merging of ideas across fields means that encounters with cultural geography differ depending on one’s relationships with other sub-disciplinary areas. Needless to say, cultural geography also shares territory with a range of other disciplines outside of geography such as cultural studies, communication and media studies, ethnic studies, postcolonial studies, and history. Encounters with cultural geography also differ depending on where one lives and works. «Place matters» (Monk, 1994) in the construction, production and representation of geography. In 2003 the journal Social & Cultural Geography (edited by Rob Kitchin, Michael Brown, Lily Kong and Gill Valentine) began publishing a new regular section titled «Country reports» (see Kitchin, 2003a; for examples of these reports see Dowling (2005) on Australia, Dodman (2007) on the Carribean, Hsin-Ling et al. (2006) on Taiwan, Lineham and Ní Laoire (2006) on Ireland, and Paasi (2005a) on Finland). The aim of the «Country reports» is two-fold. First, to provide a forum in which social and cultural geographers from different parts of the globe can share knowledge. Second, to disrupt the dominant trend towards English-language and Anglo-American hegemony in the international production of geographical knowledge (Gutiérrez and López-Nieva, 2001; Kitchen, 2003b). The reports are an attempt to acknowledge and value the myriad of ways in which social and cultural geography is constructed around the world. Anglo-American ways of knowing, interpreting and writing are clearly not the only ways. Clearly «different» people in «different» countries have «different» encounters with cultural geography. This paper engages with these different encounters with cultural geography and with cultural geography’s encounters with difference. It is divided Cultural geography. Different encounters, encountering difference Doc. Anàl. Geogr. 50, 2007 107 Summary Introduction What is cultural geography? Where to from here for cultural geography? Conclusion References DAG 50 001-140 9/4/08 18:39 Página 107 into two main parts. The first part addresses the question «what is cultural geography?» (sometimes seemingly simple questions such as this are the most difficult to answer). In addressing this question it is necessary to consider the ways in which cultural geography varies from place to place. The second part of the paper addresses the question «where to from here for cultural geography?». This is always a difficult question to answer but I think there are a number of trends that seem likely to continue and some new directions that might be taken in the future that are worthy of discussion. What is cultural geography? Despite reading and publishing in cultural geography for more than a decade I’m still not sure exactly what it is. This uncertainty does not stem from a lack of information on the topic. Over the past few decades there have been enough journals, articles, authored books, edited books, textbooks and dictionaries written on culture (e.g. Williams, 1976) and on cultural geography (e.g. Anderson and Gale, 1992; Foote et al., 1994; Jackson, 1989; Mitchell, 1995 and 2000; Sauer, 1962; Stratford, 1999) to fill many libraries (in the US and UK at least). Many of these texts focus on what cultural geography is, how it ought to be thought about, and how it ought to be carried out. Rather, my uncertainty about what cultural geography is stems from a sense that formal definitions have a way of leading to «problems of closure and exclusion» (Atkinson et al., 2005, p. VIII). I am cognizant of a point made by Mike Crang (1998, p. 1) that «Defining the word culture is a complex and difficult task which has produced a range of very different definitions» (italics in original). Crang continues that maybe it is easier to actually define and grasp the term «cultural geography» than it is to define and grasp each of its constituent parts. This is because culture «can only be approached as embedded in real-life situations, in temporally and spatially specific ways» (Crang, 1998, p. 1). This view is shared by Kay Anderson, Mona Domosh, Steve Pile and Nigel Thrift (2003) in the Handbook of Cultural Geography (a 580 page edited collection that presents the work of more than 50 authors). Anderson et al. (2003, p. 2) explain «Cultural geography is a living tradition of disagreements, passions, commitments and enthusiasm» (my emphasis). They claim that cultural geography does not have clearly defined boundaries and it has not carefully marked out a fixed terrain for itself over the decades. Anderson et al. (2003, p. 2) suggest cultural geography is much more «a series of intellectual —and, at core, politicized— engagements with the world». In the introduction to Handbook of Cultural Geography they point out that it soon became clear to them that it is very difficult to delineate «the field» of cultural geography. Anderson et al. (2003, p. XVIII) argue: Indeed, if there is one thing about cultural geography that we know for sure, it is that it is not a field. As we debated this «broader» problem, it became clear to us that the field of cultural geography was better marked both by its dis108 Doc. Anàl. Geogr. 50, 2007 Robyn Longhurst DAG 50 001-140 9/4/08 18:39 Página 108 ruption of the usual academic boundaries and by its insatiable enthusiasm for engaging new issues and ideas —whatever their source. Consequently Anderson et al. (2003, p. 2) do not provide a history of cultural geography as though it were «a character in an academic drama». They do not present a seamless story of key foundational figures and iconic texts that mark the discipline’s journey. Instead they offer multiple stories about a range of different figures and texts that make up the contested terrain of cultural geography. Cultural geography varies hugely over time and space which no doubt contributes to making it so interesting but also so difficult to define. Pamela Shurmer-Smith (2002, p. 3) in introducing her edited collection Doing Cultural Geography argues cultural geography is concerned with «the ways in which space, place and the environment participate in an unfolding dialogue of meaning». Alison Blunt, Pyrs Gruffudd, Jon May, Miles Ogborn and David Pinder (2003, 2) in another edited collection Cultural Geography in Practice understand cultural geography as being «a very broad and diverse field with a whole series of connections to other ways of understanding “culture”». Given these definitions it is unsurprising that the topics covered under the label «cultural geography» are wide-ranging. A small sample of topics mentioned on the back covers of some of the books on cultural geography currently sitting on my desk include the roles of states, empires and nations, corporations and the city, shops and goods, literature, music and film (Crang, 1998), the body, national identity, empire and marginality (Blunt et al., 2003), the streets, back yards, out bush in the wilderness (Stratford, 1999), and landscapes and «culture wars» (such as a struggle over public art in Denver) (Mitchell, 2000). Questions about the politics of gender, sexuality, class, ethnicity and nationality in a myriad of spaces such as the street, home, sports field, and shopping mall are pertinent to many cultural geographers. Given the breadth of topics, theories and methodologies employed under the label cultural geography it seems that «any single or univocal definition of “cultural geography” would be misleading» (Johnston et al., 2000, p. 134; for debate over cultural geography’s scope and methods see Foote et al., 1994). While in recent years cultural geography has prospered in many parts of the Anglo-American world this is not the case everywhere. Gill Valentine (2001, p. 166) notes in an article titled «Whatever happened to the social? Reflections on the “cultural turn” in British human geography» that she is telling «a very specific story about this particular tradition, which does not necessarily resonate with the development of human geography in other parts of the world where cultural geography has had a different tradition and a different trajectory». As most readers of Documents d’Anàlisi Geogràfica will be aware, cultural geography to date has received next to no attention in Spain (García-Ramón et al., 2003). Maria Dolors García-Ramón, Abel Albet and Perla Zusman (2003, p. 419) note that not «a single reflection or elegy has been devoted» to cultural geography. Social geography has faired a little better but it is still not Cultural geography. Different encounters, encountering difference Doc. Anàl. Geogr. 50, 2007 109 DAG 50 001-140 9/4/08 18:39 Página 109 a field that geographers in Spain (for a variety of reasons) have been interested in developing either theoretically or empirically. García-Ramón et al. (2003) argue geographers in Spain, even if their work is socio-cultural in its orientation, tend not to identify as social or cultural geographers. «Social geography and cultural geography per se are almost totally absent from Spanish university curricula» (García-Ramón et al., 2003, p. 420). This is not to say that there is no socio-cultural geographical work being carried out in Spain but rather that it tends to be carried out under other labels, in particular «geographical thought», «gender geography», and «the city». In my own country, Aotearoa New Zealand, the situation is somewhat similar to that in Spain in that there are a number of geographers who do not represent themselves as cultural or social geographers even though their research contributes to this sub-disciplinary area. Robin Kearns and Ruth Panelli (2006) argue that in New Zealand much socio-cultural work is published in research streams such as «population movement and urban change», «services and social inequalities», «rural geographies», «embodiment» and «Maori geographies». Kearns and Panelli (2006, p. 325) claim there is «evidence of a maturing of socio-cultural geography embedded in New Zealand universities illustrated in recent publication of texts which incorporate local examples». Many of the themes of Anglo-American social and cultural geography resonate in New Zealand geography but they are not the only drivers. Kearns and Panelli (2006, p. 325) state that New Zealand social and cultural geographies have been strongly infused by critical perspectives and as is the case with Spanish geography (see García-Ramón et al., 2003) «feminist approaches have been especially important for invigorating social and cultural analyses». Australia, on the other hand, has a strong tradition of cultural geography. The Institute of Australian Geographers (IAG) has an active Cultural Geography Study Group (see IAG Cultural Geography Study Group, http://www.iag.org.au/cultstudy.html, accessed 29 June 2007; Mee and Waitt, 2003) and in recent years several books have been published that focus entirely on Australian cultural geographies and landscapes (Stratford, 1999; Winchester et al., 2003). Kathleen Mee and Gordon Waitt introduce a special edition of Social and Cultural Geography on «Culture Matters» in which the articles stem from a meeting of the Cultural Geography Study Group of the IAG held at the University of Newcastle, Australia. It is not possible to comment on all the «Country reports» that have to date been published in Social and Cultural Geography because by now there are now quite a number of them including reports from Australia, Brazil, Britain, (Anglophone) Caribbean, Canada and Québec, Denmark, Estonai, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South East Asia, South Africa, Spain, Taiwan, and the United States. Many of the reports function at two levels. First, they provide an account of social and cultural issues in the country under consideration. Second, they provide information on the state of the art of the discipline of cultural geography in the country concerned. 110 Doc. Anàl. Geogr. 50, 2007 Robyn Longhurst DAG 50 001-140 9/4/08 18:39 Página 110 As a whole the reports illustrate the huge variation in cultural geography across globe. Language is an important issue raised by many of the commentators. For example, Roberto Lobato Corrêa and Zeny Rosedahl in their discussion of «Brazilian studies in cultural geography» explain that some cultural geography texts have been translated into the Portugese language whereas others have not. This makes a profound difference to the «development» of an area of study. García-Ramón et al. (2003) also mention the importance of translation. They provide an example of a text by Milton Santos titled Por una geografia nueva (1990) being translated from Portuguese to Spanish. This influenced how some geographers conceived the relationship between time and space. Social and Cultural Geography publish «Country reports» in both English and in the country’s national language in order to the challenge the linguistic hegemony of English. Sometimes the decision of what «second» language to publish the report in is complex. For example, in the «Country report» on South Africa, Jane Battersby (2004, p. 155) explains: South Africa has eleven official languages […] Afrikaans would be the obvious choice for the second language of publication […] However, this relative dominance of Afrikaans is a result of apartheid (and colonial) language strategies, which promoted the language and devalued black languages. This is the legacy we are attempting to overcome. Understandably, in this instance the report was published in English only. To conclude the first part of the paper, it has been established that cultural geography is difficult to define mainly because it is a living, lively and complex «field» (if one can even call it a field —see Anderson et al., 2003, p. 2) that insects with so many other fields in human geography and beyond. It’s also been established that cultural geography is not the same everywhere and therefore over the next few years it will undoubtedly unfold differently in different spaces. In general though there are some interesting possible trends worth noting. In the second part of the paper I turn attention to the question «where to from here for cultural geography?» This question is difficult to answer but as I indicated earlier I think there a couple of trends that seem likely to continue and some new directions that might be taken in the future which are worth discussing. Where to from here for cultural geography? The first trend that I think is set to continue over the next few years is growth in cultural geography. During the past few decades it has carved out important territory in the discipline and I think this will continue for a few years to come. Consider, for example, the success the journal Social & Cultural Geography. This journal, which began publication in 2000, concerns itself with the «spatialities of society and culture, particularly the role of space, place and culCultural geography. Different encounters, encountering difference Doc. Anàl. Geogr. 50, 2007 111 DAG 50 001-140 9/4/08 18:39 Página 111 ture in relation to social issues, cultural politics, aspects of daily life, cultural commodities, consumption, identity and community, and historical legacies» (front cover Social & Cultural Geography). In 2005, five years after Social & Cultural Geography began publishing, it was ranked for the first time by Thomson Scientific (formerly ISI —Institute of Scientific Information) Journal Citation Reports. Journals cannot be ranked immediately because data needs to be collected over a period of years. It came in at 7th out of a total of 38 geography journals. Whilst the weaknesses of citation and impact factor indexes are acknowledged (see Yeung 2001 and 2002) this is still a remarkable result for a «new» journal. Clearly social and cultural geography, in general, occupies a strong position in the discipline of geography. The journal Cultural Geographies (formerly Ecumene, edited by Philip Crang and Mona Domosh) also ranked highly in the Thomson Scientific Journal Citation Reports coming in 10th out of 38 geography journals and 4th out of 51 Environmental Studies journals. Cultural Geographies aims to publish: […] scholarly research and informed commentaries on the cultural appropriation and politics of nature, environment, place, and space. It welcomes contributions from the growing numbers of scholars and practitioners across the arts, humanities and social and environmental sciences who are interested in these cultural geographies. (Cultural Geographies, available http://cgj.sagepub.com/, accessed 21 August 2007) Blunt et al. (2003, 3) sum it up when they say «What is certain is that cultural geography is becoming more and more popular. There are more and more courses put on to introduce students to it. There are more and more books devoted to explaining what it is and how it should be thought about». The second trend that I think might continue in cultural geography over the next few years, and one that I personally welcome, is that it will become increasingly «critical». David Aitkinson, Peter Jackson, David Sibley and Neil Washbourne (2005, p. VIII) argue «Given the ways that power is embedded throughout society, we suggest that, in their theoretical articulation and in their engagement with social relations and questions of human well-being, cultural geographies —above all else— must be critical» (italics in original). Aitkinson et al. use the term «critical» in two senses, that is, to refer to that which is fundamentally important and to the notion of critique. I concur that cultural geography needs to be critical, that is, it needs to carry a political imperative, to recognize the materiality of people and places, and to acknowledge the politics of knowledge production. Cultural geography is about the multiple and complex ways in which spatial and cultural relations are mutually constituted, it is about meaning, it is about «things», it is about the way individuals and groups live their lives and what they do. Therefore, cultural geography is about power. Given this it is unsurprising that cultural geographers often focus on various axes of identity such as ethnicity, gender, sexuality, class and religion. These axes of identity are inevitably linked to power relations 112 Doc. Anàl. Geogr. 50, 2007 Robyn Longhurst DAG 50 001-140 9/4/08 18:39 Página 112 and to issues such as racism, sexism, homophobia and elitism. These politics are both reflected and reinforced in space and place. Over the past decade cultural geographers have increasingly begun to put power relations at the centre of their analyses. In the 1970s and 1980s «radical geographers» inspired by political and social movements such as Marxism, anarchism, feminism and environmentalism offered profound critiques of political issues of the time. Cultural geographers seemed slower to question the structure of society. When I started researching sexual violence in the mid 1980s and pregnancy in the early 1990s at the Department of Geography at the University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand I did not identify as a cultural geography. I was interested in the culture of sexual violence and then of pregnancy but I did not see myself as a cultural geographer. I identified as a feminist geographer who was interested in bodies, emotions, and everyday experiences. To me this didn’t seem to be the «stuff» of cultural geography or even of the emerging «new» cultural geography. Cultural geography, as I understood it in the late 1980s and early 1990s, was something for scholars engaged in work on landscapes, texts, metaphor, representation, symbols, and meanings (see Barnes and Duncan, 1992; Duncan and Ley, 1993). I too was interested in these things but I also wanted to talk about power relations, the production of knowledge, and the messy materiality of bodies (including sexual difference, abjection, and bodily fluids) (e.g. Longhurst, 1995, 1999). Cultural geography did not seem to offer a discursive space in which this was possible. Over the intervening fifteen to twenty years, however, things have changed (see Atkinson et al. 2005 on critical cultural geographies and Anderson et al. 2003 as an example of the breadth of critical work carried out under the label «cultural geographies»). As the wider political context changed and the «cultural turn» in geography progressed (see Johnston et al., 2000, p. 141-43) questions about cultural processes figured more and more prominently on a range of geographers’ research agendas. At some point it became possible (and even desirable) to talk more explicitly about power relations, the production of knowledge, materiality, and more recently, emotions. I became increasingly interested in what cultural geography had to offer me and what I might have to offer cultural geography. This leads to a third possible trend in cultural geography. For a number of years now «nonrepresentational theory» or NRT has been a corner-stone of much cultural geography. The term «nonrepresentational theory» was coined by Nigel Thrift in Spatial Formations (1996) (also see Thrift 1997, 2007) and tends to be used as an umbrella term that covers a broad array of work that aims to shift geography’s emphasis away from representation and on to practice or performativity in a manner that emphasizes flows and relationships. In a report on cultural geography in Progress in Human Geography Hayden Lorimer (2005, p. 84) makes an argument for replacing the term non-representational geography with «more-than-representational» geography. Lorimer (2005, p. 84) argues that the «teleology of the original “non-” title» has proven to hinCultural geography. Different encounters, encountering difference Doc. Anàl. Geogr. 50, 2007 113 DAG 50 001-140 9/4/08 18:39 Página 113 VALENTINE, G. (2001). «Whatever happened to the social? Reflections on the cultural turn in British cultural geography». Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift, 55, p. 166-172. WIDDOWFIELD, R. (2000). «The place of emotions in academic research». Area, 32, p. 199-208. WILLIAMS, R. (1976). Keywords: a vocabulary of culture and society. London: Croom Helm. WINCHESTER, H.P.M.; KONG, L.; DUNN, K. (2003). Landscapes. Ways of imagining the world. Harlow: Pearson. 120 Doc. Anàl. Geogr. 50, 2007 Robyn Longhurst DAG 50 001-140 9/4/08 18:39 Página 120