th irdspace 261

Thirdspace: Expanding theScope

of the Geographical Imagination
Few wou d deny that unders andig the world is, in the rrrost basic
sense,a simultaneously historical and sociaI project. Whether inwriting
the biography ofa particular individual or interpretinga momentous
event or simply dealing with the intimate routines of our everyday lives,
the closely associated historical and sociaJ (or sociological) imaginations
have always been at the forefront in the effort to gain practical and
informative knowledge of the subject at hand. This has been especially
true in the development of critical thinking within the broadly defined
My purpose here, and in the writing of Thirdsyace.- Journeys to Los human sciences, where theexpress purpose is to gain knowledge that is
Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places 1996), is to encourage useful and beneficial, if not emancipatory, in its cumulative effect.
che development ofa different way of thinking about space and the Without reducing the significance of life's inherent historicalit)' and
many associated concepts that compose, comprise and infuse both the sociality, or dimming the creative and critical imaginations that have
inherent spatiality of human life and what is being described in this developed around their practical and theoretical understanding,a third
Olume as ‘Human Geography Today’. In encouraging geographers and critical perspective, associated with an explicitly s patial imagination,
others to ‘thinly differently’ about such familiar notions as spacc, place, has in recent years begun to infuse the study of history and society with
territory, city, region, location and environment,I am not suggesting new modes of thinl‹ing and interpretation. As we approach the n de
that you discard your old and familiar ways ofthinking, but rather that siecle, there isa growing awareness of the simultaneity and interwoven
you question them in new ways that are aimed at opening up and complexity of the social, the historical and the *katial, their inseparabil-
expanding the scope and critical sensibility of your already established ity and often problematic interdependence. It is this important ‘spatial
spatial or geographical imaginations. turn’, as it is now being described, thatI associate with the emergence
In this chapter,1 compress whatI have written in Th irdsface into five ofa Thirdspace perspective and an expansion in the scope and critical
summative arguments or theses. Each is rather boldly stated, addressed sensibility of the geographical imagination.
specifically to an a udience ofh uman geographers, and expansive and These new developments revolve, in large part, around what can be
open inits implications for human geography today. The brief commen described as an antological shi[t,u fundamental change in the way we
taries following each statement amplify and 1 hope help to clarify the understand what theworld must be like in order for us to obtain reli-
fundamental points being made, z hile at the same time providing able knowledge of it. For the pasr two centuries, ontological discussion
cumulative and fugue-like variations on the many ways of defining has focused primarily on the temporal and social characteristics of
Thirdspace. There is no singular definition presented for this differerit human existence, on what can be described as the existential relations
way of thinking about space and spatiality, but rather an open-ended between the historicality and sociality of being or, more concretely,
setof defining moments, every one of which adhs potential new insights of being-in-the-world. There were earlier attempts, by such critical
o the geographical imagination and helps to stretch the outer bound- philosophers as Martin Heidegger and jean-haul Sartre, to give to this
aries of what is encompassed in the intellectual domain of critical existential being and to itsd ynamic expansion in the notion of ‘becom-
human geography. ing’a pertinent spatiality, but until very recently this spatiality remained
262 Edward X. SoJa Th irdspace 263

fundamentally subordinatcd to thc dominant dialectic of historicality-

sociality, the interplay between what might more collectively be called
the making of histories and the constitution of societies. Today,
however, the inherent and encompassing spatiality of being and becom-
ing is beginning to be more forcefully- recognized than ever before,
injecting an assertive third tcrm into the ontoJogy of human existence.
This momentous development is creating whatI have described, reflect-
ing this assertive ‘thirding’, as an ontological trioJect/c of spatiality-
socialiry-historicality, or more simply, a three-sided rather rdan
two-sided way of conceptualizing and u nderstanding the world. Stated B E IN G
somewhat differently, the social production of human spatiality or the
‘making of geographies’ is becoming as fundamental to understanding
our lives and our life worlds as the social production of our histories
and societies.
Figure4 3.1 is an attempt to capture this now three-sided relation in
visual form.A different rendering appears in primary colours on the cover
of Thirdspace. Within this configuration are three interactive relationships
that apply not only to ontology, but also equally well to all other levels of
knowledge formation: epistemology, theory building, empirical analysis
and praxis, the transformation of knowledge into action. There is not Figure 13.i The triaiectics of being
only the ongstanding liisroricality—sociality relation that has heen the O riginally published in Soja, Tbir35Qncc( 1996}, p. 71.
dominant focus of Western critical thought for at least the past two
hundred years, but also the relation between sociality and spatiality that1
described some years ago as the ‘sccc›o-spatial dialectic’; and the relation tial dimensions there is the danger of silencing TOO much ‹›i what
between historicality and spa tiality, time and space, that gives rise to a matters in human life, offalling into narrow-minded historical, social or
substantive spatio-temporal or geohistorical dialectic thatI cxplored in spatial -geographical determinisms. Practicality and inclination may
some detail in Postmadern Ceogrn96ies (1989) and again in Th irdspace, dictate that we emphasis.e one of the three fields over the others, but we
most directly in chapter 6, ‘Re-Presenting the Critique of Historicism’. must alWays try to maintain a critical consciousness that is aw are Of
The key to understanding the ‘trialectics of being’, and a ma)or qpd open tO the potentially equis•alent powers or all tkree WOrkiIlg
reason why the reassertion of critical spatial thinking is of transdiscipli- interdependently together.
nary importance and nor just confined in its impact to geographers, The very nature and social timing of this ontological ‘restructuring’,
architects, ur banists, and others for whom spatial thinking isa primary however, involve at least a temporary highlighting, if not a cautious
professional preoccupation, lies in the absence of any a priori privil privileging, of spatiality. This is not because spatiality is intrinsically
eging of the three terms. Studying the historicality ofa particular event, more important but because it has until recently been relatively peri-
person, place or social group is not intrinsically any more insightful pheralized in the humanities and social sciences and especiall{' in the
than studying its sociality or spatialiry. The three terms and the construction of critical social theory. InP astmodern Geo graphres and
complex interactions laetween them should be studied together as fun in Th irdspace,I pointed specifically toa deep tradition of historicism aS
dameiital and intertwined knowledge sources, for this is whar being-in a primar} reason for the difriinishment of critical spatial thinking.
the-ivorld is all about. Making theoretical and practical sense of the Un fortunately, this has been Mrequently interpreted, most often by gco
world is best accomplished by combining historical, social and spatial graphersI might add, either as an attempt re reduce the importance of
perspectives. Specialists (historians, geographers, sociologists) may historical analysis,a find of anti-history that verges on spatialism; or
focus more deeply on one of these modes of thinking, but when this is else asa failure to recognize that good historians have always been sen
done inways that exclude significant attention to the ‹,ther two existen- sitive to space and geographical analysis. I cannot emphasize enough
264 Edward X. $o;a Thiidspace 26S
that my spatial critique of historicism is not an anti-history, an intern-
perate rejection of critical historiography or the emancipatory powers
emanating from the creative historical imagination. Historians have
always produced some of the best human geographies and they con
tinue to do so today. M critique of historicism can be best described as
an attempt to rebalance the fundamental triaiectic of historicality-
sociality-spatiality, to make all three modes ofthinking operate together
at ‘full throttle’ at every level of knowledge formation, without any one
being inherently privileged, or diminished for that matter, with respect
to the others. SPATIALITY
li the current transdisciplinary spatial turn continues with the same OF
intensity as it has in the 1990s,a point may be reached when there may
no I onger bea need to accentuate the importance of the critical spatial
imagination or to emphasize the space-blinkering effects ofa persistent
historicism or sociologism. In the same way that we have come to SP&TI&L\TY
accept that everything in the world and every mode ofthinking about
the world hasa significant social and historical dimension, to the point
where we have historians and sociologists of science, of philosophy, of
geography, even of sports and sexuality, so too may use eventually re-
cognize the inherent and encompassing spatiality of everything and Figure 13.2 The trialectics of spatiality
every mode of thought, with human geographers accepted on equal Originally published in So}a, TO irdspqce (1996), p. 74.
terms with social scientists and historians as critical analJ'sts of the
human condition. But this moment hasnotyetarrived. The project of
rebalancing the *rialectic still has a long way to go, and the persistent ‘trialectics of spatiality’. It identifies in Thirdspace, here defined by Henri
powers of historicism and sociologism (or should we describe it as Lefebvre's notion of espace uécu, or ‘lived space’, an alternative mode of
'SOCa IS ) in constraining the development and expanding scope of
spatial enquiry that extends the scope of the geographical imagination
beyond theconfining dualism of whatI describe as Firstspace and Second-
space epistemologies — or what Lefebvre refers to as spatial practices or
‘perceived space’ on the one hand, and the representations of space or
‘conceived space’ on the other.A few simple definitions help to explain the
diagrammed relations, which mirror closely those of figure 13.1.
‘Firstspace’ (Perceived Space) refers to the directly experienced world
of empirically measurable and mappable phenomena. This materialized
spatiality, which presents human geographies primarily as outcomes,
has been the dominant and familiar focus for geographical analysis,
often to the exclusion of other ways of thinking about space and geo-
graphy. For many, especially those who see geography asa formal
science, this has heen the only objective or ‘real’ space worth studying.
It forms the geographer’s primary ‘text’ or subject matter, and can be
‘read’ or explained in two broad ways. Endogenous approaches explain
Firstspace geographies through accurate descriptions of patternings and
Figure 13.2 summarizes visuallya central argument in Thirdspace that per- distributions (as in the study of areal differentiation), the search for
tains to what1 call, following the ontological triad mentioned earlier, the recurrent empirical regularities (the Foundation of specifically spatial
266 Edward W. Sofa th irdspace 268

science), and the correlation or spatial covariation of one geographical Most hiiman geographers do not work attheextremes of these two
configuration with another (the basic method of both idiographic and approach es, but somewhere in between, conceiving of ‘pure’ material-
nomothetic geographies). The key point here is rhat empirical analysis, ism/objectivity and idealism/subjectivity as opposite poles ofa conrin-
theory building and explanation remain internal to geography, that uum of approaches. There has beena persistent tendency, however, to
is, ger›graphies are used to explain other geographies. Exogenous see Firstspace and Secondspace as together defining the whole of the
approaches explain material geographies by focusing on the underlying geographical imagination, as encompassing in their varying admixtures
social or physical processes that produce them. Human geographies are all possible ways ofconceptualizing and studying human geography and
seen here as the product or outcome of forces which are not in them- the spatiality of h um an life. Elvis b icameral’ c onfinement of the geo-
selves gcographical or spatial, but are derived from theinherent sociality graphical imagination, or whatI calla Firstspace—Secondspace dualism,
and historicality that lie behind the empirical patternings, distributions, has becn primarily responsible for the difficulty many geographers and
regularitics and covariations. These approaches are particularly well other spatial thinkers have in understancling and accepting the deeper
developed in most critical forms of geographical thinking and interpreta- meaning tit the ontological restructuring discussed earlier, and hence in
tion, such as in the application of class analysis in Marxist geography or comprehending 'Thirdspace’ (Lived Space) as representinga call for a
the analysis by feminist geographers of the space-shaping impact of different wa} of thinking about human geographies. Instead of respond
patriarchy and masculinism. But various kinds of exogenous analysis, ing to the growing spadial rum as a profound challenge to developa
including those thar use the physical en viionment as an explanatory sari ncw mode of understanding the spatialiry of li uman 11fe (human geo-
able, infuse all fields of human geographical enquiry. graphy in its broadest sense) that is commensurate in scope and critical
‘Secondspace’ (Conceived Space), in contrast, is more subjective and insight with life's intrinsic historicality and sociality, many geographers,
‘imagined’, more concerned with images and representations of spatial- pleased with the growing attention being given to their discipline,
ity, with the thought processes that are presumed to shape both mater- simply pour the new wine into the same old double-barrelledc ontain-
ial human geographies and the development of a geographical ers, thus reinforcing the c onsrraints and illusions of the Firstspace—
imaging tjon. Rather than being entirely fixed on materially perceivable Secondspace dualism. It is not surprising then that many oftheprimary
spaces and geographies, it concentrates on and explores more cognitive, sources for the reconccptualization of spatiality and the expansion in
conceptual and symbolic worlds. It thus tends to be more idealist scope of the geographical imagination have been coming from outside
than materialist, at least in its explanatory emphasis. If Firstspace is the traditionally spatial disciplines. To find where this challenge to
seen as providing the geographer's primary empirical text, then Second- think differently about space was first and most cogently asserted brings
space represents the geographer's major ideational and ideological us to my third argument.
‘discourses’, the ways we think and write about this text and about
geography (literally ‘earth-writing’) in general. Although there is an '‹' /°/‹ 5s- ,;j -.(»„.;'‹',"{.t?â' '›2'/. 4;- ..o .',::;-/2 '-"I' 6.: , '?’: .› '° '›‹' '° ;; -' {-\;
tests III A d I b ’k ñ this‘ fifi d “I was initiated
epistemology to the study of Firstspace, it is in Secondspace that episte-
iological discourse receives the greatest attention. In the long history of
geographic thought, Secondspace approaches have been turned to most
often when mainstream Firstspace approaches have become too rigidly
materialist and ‘scientistic’, as with the various critiques that emerged in
response to the epistemological closures of positjvist human geography.
For Henri Lefebvre, however, Secondspace is not so secondary. He
argues in The 1°roduciion o[S pace( 1991) that ‘conceived space’ is the Drawing primarily from Lefebvre's major work ThePro clvcti›n o f
dominant sJaace in that it powerfully controls the way we think about, !h• •• (fora discussion of Foucault’S ‘heterotopol ogies’, see chapter5
analyse, explain, experience and act upon or ‘practice’ human spatiality in Th irdspace), we can see a very different picture of the scope and
(or the ‘making' of geographies).I cannot dwell on his argument here, substancc or the geographical ima gination. For Lefebvre, the persis
b utI suggest that it providesa ver( different may’ of approaching the tent dualism 6etween mental end materialist approaches to space,
subject matter thar conventionally comprises what is called the history or between what he called spatial pra ct'ice and the representation of
of geographic thought. space, was a form of reductionism that was akin to thar produced by
z^68 Edward W. Lola
Thirdsyace 269

many other ‘Big Dichotomies’ that run through the history of Western ThisO thering does not derive simply and sequentially from theoriginal
philosophy and social theory: sub ect—ob ect, abstract—concrete, binary opposition and/or contradiction, but seeks instead to disorder,
agency—structurc, real—imagined, local—global, micro-macro, nature— deconstruct and tentatively reconstitute ina different {ore the e tie
culture, centre—periphery, man—woman, black-white, bourgeoisie— dialectical sequence and logic. It shihs the ‘rhythm’ Of dialectical think-
proletariat, capitalism—socialism. Confined in such a way, the geo- ing froma temporal toa more spatial mode, froma linear or diachronic
sequencing to the configurative simultaneities and synchronies I have
graphical imagination could never capture the experiential complexity,
attempted to capture visually in the diagrams of figures 13.1 and 13.2.
fullness and perhaps unknowable mysrery of actually i'red space, or
As Lefebvre described it, ‘the dialectic today no longer clings to histori
what he described somewhat cryptically (by intent?) as the Spaces of
city and historical time, or toa temporal mechanism such as “thesis-
Representation (translated from theFrench as Representational Spaces).
antithesis-synthesis” ... To recognise space, to recognise what “takes
Whenever faced with such Big Dichotomies, Lefebvre sought to break
place” rhere and what it is used for, is to resume tlae dialectic.’ To
them open to new and different possibilities. As he would repeatedly
underline his point and ro avoid reducing the ‘contradictions of space’
sa)', rwo terms are never enough to deal with the real and imagined
only to the Firstspace—Secondspace dualism, he adds: ‘ be pre not
world. i/y n tou/ours l'Autre. There is always an-Other term,a third
syeak ing o[a s cience o[ space but o(a knowledge (a iheoi- o/ the pro -
possibility that works to break down thecategorically closed logic of
ductian o/ syace ... this most general of products’ (Lefebvre, 1976: 18;
the ‘either—or’ in favour ofa different, more flexible and expansive logic
emphasis in the original).
of the ‘both-arid-also’. Note that this approach differs from seeking an
Lefcbvre saw this thirding as the beginning ofa heuristic chain of
‘in-between’ position along the presumed continuum that connects the
‘approximations’ that builds curnulatively in an ever-expanding process
opposite extremes of the dichotomy, for sucha positioning still remains
of knowledge formation. There are no closures, no permanent struc
within the totalizing dualism. Lefebvre seeks instead to break out from
tures of knowledge, no intrinsically privilcged epistemologies. One must
the crinstraining Big l3ichotomy by introducing an-Other, a different
always be moving on, nomadically searching for new sources of practi-
alternative that both reconstitutes and expands upon theoriginal oppo-
cal knowledge, better approximations, carrying along only what was
sition.
most usefully learned from earlier voyages. To avoid the dangers of
Such thinking was not unique to Lefebvre. It has beena feature of
ñyper-relativism arida freewheeling ‘anything goes’ philosophy that is
diaiecticai thin2ing from the ancient Greeks to Hegel and Marx, and
often attached ro such radical epistemological openness, one must be
has featured prominently in the more recent development of postmod-
guided by and committed toa challenging intellectual and political
em, poststructuralist, post-colonial and feminist critiques of mod-
project. Thirding thus does not end with theassertion ofa third term or
ernism, of the persistent constraints and closures of modernist
with the construction of what some might describe asa holy trinity.
epistemologies, arid of such ‘closed’ binariyations as those between
Making practical and theoretical sense of the world requiresa conrinu-
a gency and structure, man and woman, colonizer and colonized, etc.
ous expansion of knowledge formation,a radical openness that enables
But Lefebvre was the first to apply this critical method comprehensively
us to see beyond what is presently known, to explore ‘other spaces’ {see
to the ways we think about, and practise, what he described as the pro-
Foucault's dev esyaces Autres and ‘heterotopologies’) that are both
duction of space, or, in other words, the making ofhuman geographies.
similar to and significantly different from the real and-imagined spaces
In doing so, he also engaged in another philosophical (and political)
we already recognize.
project: the spatialization of dialectical thinking itself. Lelebvre called
In this sense, Thirdspace (as Lived Space) is simultaneously (1)a dis-
his approach une dialectique de trip licité.I have chosen to describe it as
tinctive way of looking at, interpreting, and acting to change the spa-
a criti'cal th i'rding-as-Otheri'ng, retaining the capitalized emphasis on the
tiality of human life (or, if you will, human geography today); (2) an
Other.
integral, if often neglected, part of the trialectics of spatiality, inherently
Critical thirding-as-Othering creatively expands upon the dialectics
no better or worse than Firstspace or Secondspace approaches to geo-
of Hegel and Marx, moving beyond the presumed completeness and
graphical knowledge; (3) the most encompassing spatial perspective,
strict temporal sequencing of its classical {raming in the form of thesis-
compara bleinscope to the richest forms of the historical and sociologi-
antithesis synthesis. Rather thana culminatory synthesis ora conclusive
cal imaginations; (4) a strategic meeting place for fostering collective
statement that can itself trigger an other dialectical round of thesis-
political action against all forms of human oppression; {5) a starting
antithesis-synthesis, thirding introducesa disruptive ‘other-than’ choice.
 TPi dspace 271

point for new and different explorations that can move beyond tine I am located in the margin. I makea de£nite distinction between that
‘th›id rerm’ ira constant search for other spaces; and still more to marginality which is imposed by oppressive structures and that marginaI -
come. itv one chooses as site of resistance - asa location of radical openness and
possibili ry. This site of resistance is continually formed in thar segregared
culture où opposition thar is our critical response to domination, Wc come
Thirdspace, and heu to rhis space t11rou6li suffering anJ f'ain, rhr°"gh ^* "8E* ' " are
ma nsformed, individually, co llcctively, as we lijakera d ical crCatiVe spaCe
geogra ima inatiori, have cômehmm the'br dl
wliich affirmsa nd sustains our subj ectivity, which giv.•s us a new location
cuftural' étudiés.' Pprticiilarl .prominent here has
from which toa rticula te our se use of the world. (p. 153 }
work' ôf ,feminist and:post colonial crimes who approach the!newnul!rural
ÇOÎiticS Df\ñlass-race@ender frÔm “a radical @oitm'odernist /erp@eétive: One - lt was this marginality thatI was naming asa central lOCatiOn fOf theb IO
.'of the;accom lishmènts où thèse sehol d activists has'been to maf‹e hu- - Auction ofa counter-hegemonic discourse that is not just found in w ords
‹manage 0graphy Soda than it ever Iras been before, but in ha bits of f›eing and the way one )ives. As sucé,I was not speal‹ing
refa marginality one wishes to lose, to give up, Int ratheraS a Site onC
The African American writer and social critic bellh ooks occupies a stays in, clings to even, because it nourishes one's capacity tra resist, Ir
special place in widening the scope of the spatial imagination. Drawing oilers the possîbilytj' of radical perspectives from which *° ^**and °'"°°°›
to imagine alternatives, new wr rlds, (p. 152)
inspiration and insight from theworks of both Lefebvre and Foucault,
she creatively enriches our understanding of lived space by infusing it Postmodern cultura with its decentered sub ject can be the space whete tres
witha radical cultural politics and new political strategies to deal with a re severed or ir can provide the OCCaSiOn for new and varied forms of
the multiple axes of oppression huilt sround race, class and gender. bonding, To some exrent, ruptures, surfaces, ccintextua lity, and a. host Of
Although she speaks specifically as a radical woman ofcolour, her other happenings create gaps tha
r ma ke space fOt 05 Ositiona1 praCfiiCCS
words resonate with mucln broader implications for contemporary poli- which no longer require intellectuals to be confined ton arrow separate
tics as well as for the practice of human geography. hooks does this in s aheres with no meaningful connection to the world of the everyday
{A] space is there for critical exchange ... a13d} this n3ày ver} Well be
part by empowering liveds pace with new communicative meaning and
‘the’ central future location of resistance struggle,a meeting place where
strategic significance. For hooks, lived space and whatI would describc
new and radical happenings can occur. (p. 31.)
asa Thirdspace consciousness provide a new political grounding for
collective struggles against all forms of oppression, whatever their ' Radical postmodernism calls attention to those shared sensibilities which
sources and at whatever geographical scale they are expressed, from the cross the b O und aries of class, race, gender, *88-› 88* 88888 8ᵉ fertie
intimacies of rhe human body (what the poet Adrienne Rich once called ground fortheconsrrucrion of empathy - lies that would promote recog-
the ‘geography closest in’) to the entrapinents built in to the global nition of common commirrnents, and serre asa base for solidari ry and
political economy, What follows isa series of passages from hookss coalition ... To change rhe exclusionarv practice of postmOdern criticaI
most spatial work, learning: Race, G ended- and Cultural Politics d recourse is to enacta postmodernism of resisdance. (pp, 2*, 3 0)
199 0), and especially froma chapter evocatively titled ‘Choosing the Spa ces can be real and ima gined, Spa ces can tell stories and unfold histo
Margin asa Space of itadicalO pcnness’:
artistic and literar ' practica. A$ l•rati bha Parmar nores, ‘The appropria-
As a r adical stan dpoint, perspective, position, ‘the polifees of location’ tioz and use où space ale po1itical acts.’ (p.t J2)
necessarily calls rliose of as w‘ho iv•ould partJcipa re In the formation of
counter-hegemonic culture1 pra cricc to identify the sp uces where we begin This is an interve zrion.A message horn that space in themargin that isa
the prc›cess of re-vision .. For many of us,that movement requires site of creativiry and power, that inclusive spa cc where wc recoverO ur-
pushing against o{npressive bou nda ries set by race, sex, and class domina- selues, where wc more insolîdarity to erase the category colonizer/col o-
tion. Initia11}', then, it isa d efiant political gesture. {p. 145
there. En ter that space. Wc greet you as liberators. (p.Ï i2)
For me this space of radical openness isa margin -a profound edge.
iocatlng olJc8e$f Her e is difficult yes Necessary. It is not a ‘safe’ place. OJ4c In
is alt ays at risk. One needsa community of resistance. (p.1 49) kind of human geography, one that combInes the grounded and
 Thirdsyace 273
politically conscious materialism of Firstspace analyses and the rich,
ari... Itisa movement between the (represented; and what therepresen-
often metaphorical representations of space and spatiality characteristic tation leaves out or, 4nore poinredJy, mattes unrepresenta ble. It isa move-
of Secondspace geographies; and at the same rime stretches beyond their ment between the (represented) discursive space of the positions made
mere additive combination to create ‘Other’ spaces that are radically availa ble by hegemonic discourses and the spa ce-off, the elsewhere of
open and openly radicalized, that are simultaneously material-and- these discourses . .. These two spaces are neither in opposition ro one
metaphorical, real-and-imagined, concretely grounded in spatial prac- another nor strunga longa chain of signification, but they exist concur-
tices yet also represented in literary and aesthetic imagery, imaginative rently and in contradiction. (pp.1 1 1—12)
recombinations, epistemological insight, and so much more. hooks liter
ally cracks open lived space to new insights and new expectations that Another newcomer to thespatial disciplines, Barbara Hooper, focuses
extend well beyond the long-established boundaries of the traditional her work on thedisruptive interplay of bodies, cities and texts in an
geographical imagination. unpiiblished manuscript that focuses on ‘The case of citizen Rodney
But it is to the specifically political implications of hooks's emphasis King’( 1994):
on ‘choosing the margin asa space of radical openness’ and her explicit
but cautious adoption ofa radical postmodernism thatI wish to draw lT]he space of the human body is perhaps the most critical site tti watch
your attention, for it is this combination of an expansive Thirdspatial the production and reproduction of power It isa concrete physical
imagination, a strategic attachment toa new cultural politics of dif- space of flesh and bone, o{ chemisrries and electricities; it isa h ighly medi-
ference and identify, and a radical postmodernist critical positioning ated space,a space transformed by cultural interpretations and represen-
that has become thesource ot some ofthebest new writings emanating tations; it isa lived space,a volatile space of conscious and unconscious
not just from radical women ofcolour such as bell hooks but from the desires and motivations —a body/self,a subject, an identify: it is, in sum,a
social space,a complexity involving the workings of power and know-
wider fields of feminist and post-colonial criticism. Here isa brief sam-
ledge and the workings of the body's lived unpredictabilities, . . Body and
pling from chapter4 of Soja (1996), ‘Increasing the Openness ofThird- body Politic, body and social body, body and city, body and citizen-body,
space’. Page numbers refer to that chapter, not the original sources. are intimatel} linked productions ... These acts of differentiation, separa-
From theartist and urban critic Rosalyn Deutsche (1988), on the sig- tion, and enclosure involve material, symbolic, and lived spaces.. . and
nificance of geographically uneven d.-velopment within the city and are practiced asa politics of difference. (p.i 14)
‘Spatial design’ asa tool for the social control of class, race and gender:

Lefebvre's analysis of the spatial exercise of power asa construction and The geographer Gillian Rose brings home thecritical power of the
conquest of difference, although it is thoroughly grounded in Marxist spatial feminist critique to brealc down themasculinisr hegemony that
thought, rejects economist and predicta bility, opening up possibilities for continues to dominate the discipline. From T-eminism and Geography
u dvancing analysis of spatial politics into realms of ferrrinist and anti (1993):
colonialist discourse and into the theorization of radical democracy. More
successfully than anyone of whomI am aware, Lefebvre has specified the Social space can no longer be imagined simply in terms ofa territory of
r›pera lions of space as ideology and h nilt the to undations for cuiture1 en- gender. The geography of the master subject and the feminism complicit
ti ques of spatial design asa tool of social control. (p. 106) with him has been ruptured by the diverse spatialities of different wo men.
So,a geographical imagination is emerging within feminism which, in
from Teresa de Lauretis's Technologies of tender (19
8 7), on moving order to indicate the complexity of the subject of feminism, articulatesa
the ‘subject of feminism’ beyonda simple Man/Woman dichotomy into ‘plurilocality.’ In this recognition of difference, two-dimensional s ocial
a wider frame of cultural representations related to class, race and sexu- maps areinadequate. Instead, spaces structured over many dimensions
ality. Note how de Lauretis, like hooks, intertwines the material and are necessary. (p. 124)
metaphorical to define the importance of spaces on the margin:
Rose adds her own expansion of hooks's space of radical openness arid
1 e are looking at] the elsewhere of discourse here and now, the blind
spots or space-off, of its representations.I think of it as spaces in the
whatI have been describing as Thirdspace:
margins of hegemonic discourses, social spaces carved in the interstices of
The subject of feminism, then, depends ona paradoxical geography in
institutions and in the chinks and cracks of the power-kmowledge appar-
order ro acknowledge both the power of hegemonic discourses and to
274 Edward X. So/a Th irdspace 275
insist on the possibility o/ resistance. This geography’ describes rdat sub- Finally, some passages from Homi Bhabha, wlaose fascinating w ork on
jectivi as Char of borh prisoner and exile; it allows the subject of Semi- the ‘location of culture’ and the notion of hybridity’ is framed by his
Iziomto occupy both rhe centre and the margin, t1J¢ inside and the outside.
own conceptualization ofa ‘third space’, similar to yet different from
It isa geography structured by the dynamic tension between such poles,
and it is alsoa multidimensional geogiaph structured by the simultane-
what is being dcfined as Thirdspace in this chapter. From ‘The thirfi
ous contradicrory diversity of social relations. It isa geography which is ! space’ {1990).
as multiple and contradictory anh different as the subj ectivity imagining it
a different kind of space through which difference is tolerated rather All forms of culture are continually ina process of hybri dity, But for me
than erased. (pp. 124—5) the importance of hybridity is not to be able ter trace two original
moments from which the third emerges, rather h} brid ir} to me is the
‘third Mpa ce’ which ena blew other posi£i€'ns to emetge. ThiS third Space
Gloria Anzaldua,a poet and cultural critic of the lii ed spaces found
displaces the histories that constitute it and sets up new strip ctures of
along the US—Mexico borderlands, creates another form of ‘plurilocal- authority, new political initiatives, which arei nadequately underster›d
ity’ around what shecalls the consciousness of the mestiza, or niestizaje through received wisdom. .. The process of cultural hy bridity gives rise
(198 7), another way of being outside and insidc at the same time: to something different, something new and unrecognisable,a new a rea of
negotiation of meaning and representation. (p. 140)
As a res Siza,I have no country, my homeland castsme out; yet all coun-
tries are mine becauseI am every woman'ss ister or potential lover. (As a
Bhabha grounds his third space in the perspectives of postmodernism,
leslai an I have no race, my own peopled isclaim me: butI am all races
because there is the queer of me in all races.} . i a m an act of kneading,
post-colonialism and post-feminism, but urges us to be ready to gc
of unitirig and j‹7in1ng that not only has piobuced botha rreature of dark- ‘beyond’, to cross boundaries, ‘to live somehow beyond the border of
ness and a creature of light,b ut alsoa creature that c|UPstionS the d efini- our times’. From TheI ocation o[ Culture (1994):

It is significant that the productive capacities of the Third Space havea

colonial or postcr›lonial provenance. Fora willingness to descend into
Anzaldùa’s poetics also journey into theorizing space( 1990):
that alien territory — whereI leave led you — may reveal thar the theo-
V'e need theories that will rewrite history using race, class, gender and retical recognition of the spI it space of enumeration may open theway to
etnnicity as ca tegorres ofa nalysis, theoI-ies that cross F'orders, that blur conceptualizing an international cut pure, based not on the exoticism of
boutdaries ... £ecause we are nota llowed ro enter discourse, beca use we
areo then disqualified or excluded from it, because what passes for theory articulation of culture'sh ybridit.y. To that end we should rememherthat
these days is forbidden territory for us, it is Sila/ that we occupy theoriz- it is the ‘inrer’ — the cursing edge of translation and negotiation, the i»-
rig space, thaI we not allow white men and women solely to occupy it. By 6eWeen space— that carries the burden of themeaning of culture... And
bringing in our own approaches and methodologies, we transform that by exploring this Third Space, we may elude the politics of polarity and
theorizing space. (p.1 29) emerge as others of ourselves. (p. 141)

Of all the cultural ciitics of Eurocentrism and post-cor onialism, Edward

Said has probably received the greatest attention from human geogra-
phers. Derek Gregory's excellent expansion upon Said's ‘Imaginative
geographies’ (199â) provides us with the followingo bservations from
Said.
Just as none of us is outside or beyond geography, none of us is com
ise sch 1ats‹aie erwin
1 ô ' eàlm I
gore
pletely free from the struggle over geography. That struggle is complex
and interesting because it is not only about soldiers and cannons but also
a bout ideas, about forms, about images and imaginings... WhatI find
îhJt,na ed,atcons Jt g-a ygminuntty°n ‹esas can be ’as
myself dclng is retlai taking geography... charting the chang*ng constella-
tions of power, lcnowledge, and geography. (pp. 13 7—8)
ng.g l and the Conftlftltion of'butnan OC10t.US.
276 Edward W. SaJa TLirdsporr 27T

Ncver betore have human geographies been given such transdisciplinary specifically spatial power differentials arising from class, race, gender,
attention. But the best are human geographies ofa different sort, more and many other forms of the marginalizing or peripheralizing (both
comprehensive in scope, more empowered and potentially empowering, pre-eminently spatial processes) of particular groups of people. Rather
more explicitly politicized at many different levels of knowledge forma- than operating in separate and exclusive channels, this new
tion, from ontology to praxis, from tlae materially concrete to the imagi- movement/community is insjstently inclusive (radically open) and
natively abstract, from the body to the planet. They are made more recombinative, searching for new ways of building bridges and effective
‘real’ by being simultaneously ‘imagined’. The metaphorical use of political coalitions across a]I modes ofradical subjectivity and collective
space, teizitos/, geography, place and region rarely floats very far from resistance. In this coalition building, it isa shareds patial consciousness
a material grounding, a ‘realandimagined’ that signals its intentional and a collective determination to take greater control over the pro duc-
Otherness from m ore conventional geographies. Thirdspace as Lived tion o( our liveds paces that providc the primary foundation — the long
Space is portrayed as multi-sided and contradictory, oppressive and lib missing ‘glue’ — for solidarity and political praxis.
erasing, passionate and routine, knowable arrd unknowable. It isa space Coalition buildinq is a I ong-established political strategy, but these
of radical openness,a site of resistance arid struggle,a space of multi- progressive coalitions have formerly been mobilized in the largest sense
psicitous representations, investigatable through its binarized opposi- primarily around taking collective control over the making of history
tions but also where if ‘ya taujours l'Authe, where there are always and the way social relarions of power and status are constituted and
‘other’ spaces, heterotopologies, paradoxical geographies to be ex- maintain ed; that is, to redress the inequalities and oppression produced
plored. It isa meeting ground,a site of hybridity and mesfizn/e and in the historical course of societal development. The nez coalitions
moving beyond entrenched boundaries,a margin or edge where ties can retain these empowering sources of mobilizarion and political identity,
be severed and also where new ties can be forged. It can be mapped but but add to thema reinvigorated spatial consciousness and subjectivity,
never captured in conventional cartographies; it can be creatively ima an awareness that the spatiality of human life, the making ofh uman
gined but obtains meaning only when practised and fully lined. geographics, the nexus of space—I‹nowledge-power also contain tire
For the past two centuries, radical subjectivity and progressive polit- ,sources of continued oppression, exploitation and domination.
ical action with regard to the unequal power rclations associated with This newly spatialized form of individual and collective struggle is
class, race and gender have revolved primarily around conscious inter- still in its earliest stages and not yeta formidable force in contemporary
ventions into the historicality and sociality of human life, around how ! politics. And it must be recognized that the new spatial politics is not
societies make histories and organize their social relations and modes of exclusively confined to progressive forces. Indeed, conservative and
production. For the most part, these struggles have tended to remain neoliheral approaches to spatial politics in the new information age of
relatively confined to separate channels of collective identity and con- globalization and economic restructuring have been significantly
sciousness, with either class or race or gender (codified in such Big empowered all over the world over the past thirty years. This makes it
Dichotomies as Capital v. Labour, White v. Black, Man v. Woman} all the more important for progressive thinkers and activists to set aside
occupying entrenched and essentialized positions so politically and the- their internal conflicts over postmodernism (and geography) to find new
oretically privileged that forming effective coalitions between these ways to contend strategically with the postmodern right in the struggle
often chauvinistic and exclusive channels was extremcly difficult. Even to shape our contemporary worlds, We must recognize and pa rtic'pzte
when linkages were formed, they tended to remain unstable, as each in the expanding sites and communities of resistance and assertion that
radical movement retaineda distinctive and exclusive prioritization of bell hooks and others invite us to enter, to move inconsciously spatial
its own particular binarized axis of oppression. solidarity and begina process of re-visioning the future. This opportu-
Inspired by the breakdown of these totalizing modernist political nity to reassert the expanded theoretical and strategically prilitical
epistemologies (that is, the orthodoxies of Marxism, radical feminism impoi tance of the critical spatial imagination may be what is most new
and black nationalism) and the possibility ofa radical postmodernism and different — and most challenging and exciting — about hurriangeo-
(a possibility which many on theleft still refuse to recognize), a new graphy today.
socio-spatial movement or ‘community of resistance’ is beginning to
develop around thatI am describing asa Thirdspace consciousness and
a progressive cultural politics that seeks to break down and erase the