This page was created by Collin Hardwick. 

RHETORIC, COMPOSITION, AND DIGITAL & MATERIAL SPACE

Massey, Space, Place, and Gender

Author Name & Title: Doreen Massey (1944-2016), Professor of Geography, Open University.
Discipline/Field: Geography, gender studies, cultural studies, political economy
Year: 1994

Main Arguments & Concepts

In these chapters, Massey makes the case that place is relational, process, individually experienced. Responding particular to Marxist scholars, she questions universalist descriptions  of place, in particular pointing out women’s experiences of places. These chapters also seems to respond to a sort of disciplinary dilemma in Geography about the utility of “locality.” My reading is that she is for their study, as long as places are understood as social processes, not fixed, bordered objects.

Space-Time Compression
Marxist “time-space compression” is experienced unequally, and usually described from a place of power.  I agree with her here, but I don’t know that the point entirely diminishes the concept as a way of describing the progression of capitalism. Even if everyone has a unique perspective and experience with the phenomenon, it still seems like a fair way to describe trends in the economy? Also, Massey makes the case that some countries are “now” (as in 1994) are even less connected than they were pre-“late capitalism.” I’m curious if this is still true, and what role digital technologies have played in this increased/decreased connection. She seems to associate the narrative of the “connected world” with businessmen flying around the globe on work-trips. Now, when we talk “connected world,” we’re usually talking Facebook.   

Local
She notes that focusing on the local is not a panacea; rooting into some concept of the local doesn’t sidestep issues of racism, sexism, neoliberalism, etc.

Notes

Massey uses the Isle of Dogs as an example of essentialized place -- it sounds like there was some controversy surrounding “yuppies” moving into a working class area (122). Again, I think this is a fair enough point, but I do wonder if she is sidestepping connections to gentrification. Can it be useful to essentialize places as a political and/or survivance strategy?

Related

Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Jameson, Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism

 

This page has tags: