Space

Silvia De Nardis, Sapienza University of Rome 

Definition

Space generally refers to an objective and tangible portion of reality described as a concrete extension of visible matter endowed with volume, surface area, size or weight, in which people and objects are usually located. However, space is not reduced to a simple collection or container of material elements, neither as a motionless nor static repository for human activities. Spatiality is achieved by an organisation of the co-existence of physical and intangible features, such as values, memories, and identities, and the interrelation of global and local factors that are constantly under construction (Massey, 2005). Space is a social phenomenon, representing a resource for social action and a relational context that hosts social interaction while participating in society’s organisation and development. It is not merely a reflection of social structure but the expression of a historical combination of interacting elements and structures (Soja, 1980). At the same time, space is a socially constructed representation resulting from human practices and an active driver of social change, affecting behaviours and public choices.

Background information and contemporary debate 

In recent decades, a growing interest in the spatial dimension of social phenomena has emerged, contributing to a redefinition of the concept of space itself. Far from considering space in purely geometric and abstract terms, a flourishing field of research focuses on space as a field of intertwined tangible and intangible elements, giving strength to a spatial analysis sensitive to social processes.

In a pioneering way, in the early 1990s, George Simmel (1908) defined space as a significant human activity whose value derives from its capacity to “put in relation” and create forms of association and reciprocity in social life. A few decades later, Henri Lefebvre (1974) explores the idea of ​​“social space” as a producer and product of the dynamics internal to society, using a prolific conceptual triad that includes “spatial practice” (spatially experienced and concretised social formations), “representation of space” (conceptualised by technical and specialised scientists, planners, architects), “representational spaces” (lived and sometimes redesigned by inhabitants and users through symbols, images and codes). Humanistic geography, as a critique of modernism, is concerned with the relationship between space and place, introducing analytical categories such as perceptual, existential, architectural, planning, cognitive, or abstract space (Relph, 1976). Space is also explained as a field of control, conflict and contestation. From a critical theory perspective, Michel Foucault (1984) defines it as a power device and David Harvey (1989) goes in the same direction, underlining the profound correlation between space and neo-capitalist economy. Furthermore, due to globalisation, the dematerialisation of many human activities and technical advancement, space is also defined as a “space of flows” (Castells, 1996) in a network society that influences the modes of social interaction and spatiality, questioning the most consolidated relationships between people and places.

From this brief literature review, an understanding of space as a multidimensional domain emerges, along with its complex relationship with the social world. Since the 1980s, the idea of ​​a “spatial turn” within the Social Sciences and Humanities has been recognised in academia (see Massey, 2005 for a comprehensive review). A common opinion among sociologists, geographers, and urban planners is that space should be explored analytically and addressed practically, considering a relational and dialogic approach (Fuller & Löw, 2017). The issue of space—how it is produced, who produces it, what feedback it entails for social life, and how mutual influences occur—is an ever-open field of study because of its deep, intimate, and historically situated correlation with a changing social world. The assumption of space as a cohabitation of ever-in-the-making material, political, economic, cultural, social, and symbolic influences invites us to adopt a distinctive way of thinking in analytical and empirical work that is specifically socio-spatial. 

References

Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Blackwell.

Foucault, M. (1984). Des espaces autres, “Architecture, Mouvement, Continuité”, 5, October 1984.

Fuller, M. G., & Löw, M. (2017). Introduction: An invitation to spatial sociology. Current Sociology, 65(4), 469-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392117697461

Harvey, D. (1989). The condition of postmodernity: An inquiry into the origins of cultural change. Blackwell. 

Lefebvre, H. (1974). La production de l’espace. Anthropos.

Massey, D. (2005). For space. SAGE.

Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness. Pion.

Simmel, G (1997). The sociology of space. In D. Frisby & M. Featherstone (Eds.), Simmel on culture (pp. 137–170). SAGE.

Soja, E. (1980). The socio-spatial dialectic. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 70(2), 207-225. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2562950