The Dictionary of Human Geography (100 page)

Read The Dictionary of Human Geography Online

Authors: Michael Watts

BOOK: The Dictionary of Human Geography
10.31Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
imaginative geographies
Representations of other places of peoples and landscapes, cultures and ?natures? that articulate the desires, fantasies and fears of their authors and the grids of power between them and their ?Others?. The concept is not confined to ostensibly fictional works. On the contrary, there is an important sense in which all geog raphies are imaginative: even the most formal, geometric lattices of spatiaL science or the most up to date and accurate maps are at once abstractions and cultural constructions, and as such open to critical readings. (NEW PARAGRAPH) The concept was originally proposed by the Palestinian/American literary critic Edward Said (1935 2003) in his influential critique of orientalism (Said, 2003 [1978]; see Gregory, 1995a). His emphasis on power (and in particular colonial power) was alien to the concepts of environmentaL percep tion and mentaL maps then current in beha viouraL geography, and underscored the radical ?non innocence? of representation. In some measure, Said?s formulation antici pated ideas of situated knowLedge: he was concerned to disclose the privileges that European and American authors typically claimed when representing other cultures, to chart the asymmetric grid of power within which (as he put it) ?the West? watches, ?the East? is watched, and hence to criticize the partialities of their constructions. (NEW PARAGRAPH) Said?s emphasis on viewing, watching, look ing, observing on vision and visuaLity drew attention to the cultural construction of the gaze. While Said?s critique of Orientalism was shot through with visual metaphors, the imaginative geographies with which he was centrally concerned were textual. Human geographers have been drawn to both the text ual and the visual image, however, including art forms such as fiLm and photography (Schwartz and Ryan, 2003), and they have drawn attention to viewing as an embodied, vitally sensuous practice (Martins, 2000). Un like the other constructs of behavioural geog raphy, therefore, none of these imaginative geographies are seen as the product of purely cognitive operations. As cultural constructs, their images are animated by fantasy, desire and the unconscious, and indeed the very idea of an ?imagination? has been extended through geographies indebted to various forms of psychoanaLytic theory (Pile, 1998). These images carry within them com parative valorizations what Said called a ?poetics of space? by means of which places are endowed with ?figurative value?. Such constructions also involve a poetics (and a politics) of nature, and there has been con siderable interest in recovering imaginative geographies of other ?natures? as well as other cultures. At the limit, these distinguish a ?nor mal?, temperate nature from other, intemper ate natures and install their own cultural subtext about those who inhabit such ?unnat ural natures? (Gregory, 1995b; Sioh, 1998; see also tropicauty). (NEW PARAGRAPH) Said claimed that these figurative values enter not only into the production of ?other ness? but also into the identity formation of the viewing subject in a complex diaLectic. Imaginative geographies thus sustain images of ?home? as well as ?abroad?, ?our space? as well as ?their space?: ?Imaginative geography and history help the mind to intensify its own sense of itself by dramatizing the distance and difference between what is close to it and what is far away? (Said, 1978, p. 55). Hence Orford (NEW PARAGRAPH) showed that imaginative geographies are regularly mobilized to separate the space of ?the international community? from the space of those facing security crises, so that intervention is always after the event and con structed as selflessly humanitarian; she argues that this separation is achieved through tactics of localizing and distancing (?their space?) that work not only to legitimize the actions of the global North as so many virtuous efforts to find a solution, but also in many cases to ob scure the active involvement of its inter national actors in the generation of the crisis. Similarly, Graham (2006) contrasts the im aginative geographies that have been used to separate homeLand cities from ?terror?, ?tar get? or Arab cities during the ?war on terror?, even as they are also being integrated through techno science ?into a single, transnational battlespace?. Studies like these show why Gregory (2004b, p. 256) concludes that ?im aginative geographies are doubled spaces of articulation? whose ?inconstant topologies are mappings of connective dissonance in which connections are elaborated in some registers even as they are disavowed in others?. (NEW PARAGRAPH) ?Dramatization? is not the same as ?falsifica tion?, however, and Said?s discussion under cuts the distinction between ?real? and ?perceived? worlds on which behavioural geog raphy depended. This is the most complicated and contentious part of Said?s argument. There are certainly passages where he con trasted what he called ?positive geographies? with imaginative geographies produced under the sign of Orientalism. And yet, if imaginative geographies are ?fictions? in the original Latin sense of fictio something made, something fabricated this does not mean that they are necessarily without concreteness, substance and, indeed, ?reality?. On the contrary, im aginative geographies circulate in material forms (including novels, paintings, photo graphs and film; intelligence reports, academic geographies and popular traveL writing; and collections and exhibitions) which become sedimented over time to form an internally structured and, crucially, self reinforcing arch ive. This supplies a ?citationary structure? for subsequent accounts that is also in some sub stantial sense performative: it shapes and legitimizes the attitudes and dispositions, pol icies and practices of its collective audience, so that in this way imaginative geographies spiral into and out of a sort of cultural paradigm of ?otherness? that has the most acutely material consequences. (NEW PARAGRAPH) Imaginative geographies thus act to both legitimize and produce ?worlds?. The circula tion and sedimentation of imaginative geog raphies produces a sense of ?facticity? and hence of authority: the repetition of the same motifs becomes a taken for granted citation of Truth (Vanderbeck, 2006). In some cases, im aginative geographies work to domesticate other spaces and hence validate (for example) colonial dispossession: thus Carter?s (1987) project of an avowedly spatial history showed how the Landscape of austraLia was brought within the horizon of European intelligibility through a series of explicitly textual and carto graphic practices. In other cases imaginative geographies articulate spaces of (radical) dif ference, but here too, through their implica tion in systems of power and practice, they may be read as so many performances of space. Thus Gregory (2004b) distinguished three strategies put to work during the ?war on terror? to bring ?the enemy? into view within three different spaces: reduced to targets in the coordinates and pixels of an abstract, geomet ric space; reduced to barbarians attacking the gates of civiLization from a wild, savage space; and reduced to the inhuman, lodged in a paradoxical space of exception (see excep tion, space of) wherein their deaths were of no consequence (see also terrorism).Seen thus, imaginative geographies are spaces of constructed (in)visibility and it is this partiality that implicates them in the play of power. (NEW PARAGRAPH) In response, imaginative counter geographies are deliberate attempts to displace, subvert and contest the imaginative geographies installed by dominant regimes ofpower, practice and repre sentation. Usually produced from within the tar gets of representation, they seek to give voice and vision to their subjects and to undo the separ ations between ?our space? and ?their space?: thus ?the empire writes back? and ?the subaltern speaks? to undermine the impositions of imperi alism and subalternity (Slater, 1999: see subaL tern studies). Testimonies of this sort have a long history, but today they frequently use so called ?new media? to produce new publics: hence Gregory (2009c) explores blogs from Baghdad whose counter geographies of every day life contest US political and military imagin aries of Arab cities. dg (NEW PARAGRAPH) Suggested reading (NEW PARAGRAPH) Driver (2005); Gregory (1995a); Said (2003 [1978, pp. 49 73]). (NEW PARAGRAPH)
immigration
A form of migration that oc curs when people move from one nation state to another. Immigrants change their perman ent dwelling place and are therefore distinct from sojourners, who relocate temporarily, usu ally for employment related reasons; immi grants also move voluntarily and are therefore distinct from refugees, who are forced to leave their homes because of persecution. When immigrants settle in a new country without the knowledge and approval of the government in power, they are called ?undocu mented?, ?illegal? or ?unauthorized? immi grants. Millions of people immigrate each year, and this form of migration is one of the most significant causes of social change in the world today (Clark, 1986; Sassen, 1996). (NEW PARAGRAPH) There have been several episodes of mass migration in history, but the decades following the Second World War have seen the largest population movements of all time. Immigra tion, in the sense in which the term is used today, began after the creation of nation states and, until recently, was closely associated with colonization (cf. colonialism). For example, British subjects migrated to the colonies and created settler societies; after colonies gained independence, this movement continued in the form of immigration. Others, at first mainly from European countries, joined them and many former colonies, such as Australia, Canada and the USA, consider themselves ?immigrant societies? in the sense that the overwhelming majority of their citizens are either immigrants themselves or the descen dents of immigrants. Until recently, virtually all immigrants migrated towards what they believed to be greater economic opportunities. These historic patterns have changed in the past twenty five years, in two key ways. First, both source and destination regions have multiplied, and immigration now is more global in scope than at any time in the past (Castles and Miller, 2003). Second, in marked contrast to past periods, a small but highly significant number of today?s immigrants are wealthy. These ?designer immigrants? are es pecially concerned with political issues (i.e. stability) and lifestyle. They are sought by many countries for their entrepreneurial skill and capital, and have significantly changed the way in which immigrants are perceived in the places in which they settle (Skeldon, 1994; Mitchell, 2004a). (NEW PARAGRAPH) According to the influential report of the UN Global Commission on International Mi gration (GCIM, 2005), there are nearly 200 million people in the world who have been living, for at least one year, outside their coun try of birth, which translates to roughly 3 per cent of the global population. According to the GCIM (p. 2), ?The Commission concludes that the international community has failed to capitalize on the opportunities and to meet the challenges associated with international migration.? In particular, the GCIM con cluded that the reception policies of destin ation countries do not enable immigrants to integrate efficiently. (NEW PARAGRAPH) Immigrants, wherever they settle, are usu ally culturally different from their receiving societies. Often, they are ?visible minorities? (i.e. of a different skin colour than the domin ant population). The reception of immigrants varies widely between countries, but three types of responses are typical: isolation, assimilation and pluralism. Some societies believe that immigrants are necessary to fulfil certain functions for example, when they face labour shortages but that they should remain separate from the dominant popula tion and, ideally, leave when no longer needed. This was the case, for example, in many Western countries in the period follow ing the Second World War, and it is true of countries such as Japan and Singapore today (Yeoh, 2006). Countries that ascribe to this view make it difficult for immigrants to acquire full legal rights and, especially, citizenship. Others, such as France and, to a more limited extent, the USA, expect immigrants to conform, or assimilate, to a predefined national culture. In this case, full legal rights and citizenship are often granted in stages, in step with the assimilation process. Finally, a few countries, notably Australia and Canada, have enacted legislation enshrining the con cept of multiculturalism, a policy that fos ters the coexistence of many forms of cultural expression. These countries typically allow immigrants to become citizens quickly and, acknowledging the complexities of identity, allow individuals to hold dual or multiple legal citizenship(s). Note, though, that the differences between these policies are easily overstated, and that countries rarely follow single immigration policies that are applied to all groups equally. Also, recall that the GCIM has concluded, generally, that reception policies are inadequate. (NEW PARAGRAPH) Traditionally, immigration has been ana lysed in straightforward terms as a push pull process: people leave a country to escape problems, such as poverty or political con flict, and are drawn to particular places that offer them a better life. In this conception, people are treated as rational individuals who are willing to cast aside their old identities and loyalties and embrace new ones if they believe it is to their advantage. Settlement is seen as a unidirectional, progressive process, where im migrants eventually become indistinguishable from the society that receives them they become assimilated. This interpretation arose out of the research of the chicago school in the early twentieth century and continues to affect immigration research. However, recent work, drawing on different understandings of history, culture and identity, offers an alternate perspective. First, migration is seen as a col lective process that occurs sequentially and in both directions. Immigrants rarely sever the links between their previous and present places and social contacts, and life in the new country is linked to life in the old (cf. chain migration). As a result, immigrant culture becomes a melange of practices, and identities are in flux rather than fixed, or in an inexor able progression from old to new. More and more, immigration studies are adopting the view of cultures as diasporic as scattered, but connected across vast distances. This real ization has led to the concept of transnation alism, the idea that many people live in societies that stretch across and perhaps even transcend national boundaries (see Appadurai, 1996; Van Hear, 1998). (NEW PARAGRAPH) These new understandings of the immigra tion process are particularly salient given the (NEW PARAGRAPH) importance of immigrants in (re)defining contemporary economic, political and cul tural systems. For example, non white people are about to become the majority of the population in the state of California, the first time in history where a white society has voluntarily become a minority in a terri tory under its control (Maharidge, 1996). Similar cultural transformations are occurring in large cities throughout the Western world, which are becoming more multi ethnic and polyglot than ever before (e.g. nearly 200 languages are spoken in the area served by the municipal government of Toronto). There are few studies of the cultural dynam ics of living in multi ethnic cities (though see Jacobs, 1996; Germain, 1997), but it is clear that these new contexts raise fundamental questions about the meaning of equity, public participation, and even citizenship itself (Jacobson, 1996). dh (NEW PARAGRAPH) Suggested reading (NEW PARAGRAPH) Castles and Miller (2003); Global Commission on International Migration (GCIM) (2005); Richmond (1994); Segal (1993). (NEW PARAGRAPH)

Other books

The Dark Thorn by Speakman, Shawn
The Other Lands by David Anthony Durham
Graphic the Valley by Peter Brown Hoffmeister
War Trash by Ha Jin
No Police Like Holmes by Dan Andriacco
The Hound of Ulster by Rosemary Sutcliff
The Last Days of the Incas by KIM MACQUARRIE
Fragments by M. R. Field