Henri Lefebvre
Henri Lefebvre has considerable claims to be the greatest living philosopher. His work spans some sixty years and includes original work on a diverse range of subjects, from dialectical materialism to architecture, urbanism and the experience of everyday life. The Production of Space is his major philosophical work and its translation has been long awaited by scholars in many different fields.
The book is a search for a reconciliation between mental space (the space of the philosophers) and real space (the physical and social spheres in which we all live). In the course of his exploration, Henri Lefebvre moves from metaphysical and ideological considerations of the meaning of space to its experience in the everyday life of home and city. He seeks, in other words, to bridge the gap between the realms of theory and practice, between the mental and the social, and between philosophy and reality. In doing so, he ranges through art, literature, architecture and economics, and further provides a powerful antidote to the sterile and obfuscatory methods and theories characteristic of much recent continental philosophy.
The core idea of the book is that there are different modes of production of space: natural space and social space. As a Marxist thinker, Lefebvre looks at a space and its production through a three-part dialectic between every day practices and perceptions, representations and the spatial imaginary of the time. He argues that space is a social product (based on value and the social production of meanings) which affects social practices and perceptions.
In a nutshell, there are three levels of analyses for each social space: the actual space (physical), discursive (representation), and lived space (via human experience). The physical space (or the abstract space in Lebfevre’s term), is constructed by various actors (kings, lords, and architects). In modern society, these actors are developers, state, and architects. Representations of space refers to discourses about a social space. For example, there is so much discourse around the building of H2Q in Queens, New York by Amazon and the media. However, this space did not even exist until this very moment. A couple of days ago, Amazon announced that it canceled the plan to build any new headquarters in New York City, which caused strong reactions from the city, and its residents. Regardless of whether the space exists or not, the discourse about it exists independently of its physical presence. Finally, the representational space is a lived experience of people who interact with the space. In other words, for each social space, there is a lived (phenomenological) component of it. If there is no such lived experience, the space should not be considered a social space.
The source of the text is NGA THAN
n The Production of Space, Henri Lefebvre argues that space is not simply a neutral backdrop for human activity, but is actively produced and shaped by social forces. He develops a dialectical theory of space that describes the relationship between three different modes of production of space:
-
Absolute space: This is the abstract, mathematical space of Euclidean geometry. It is a homogenous and undifferentiated space that is not tied to any particular social or historical context. This is the abstract, mathematical space of Euclidean geometry, characterized by its homogeneity and lack of differentiation. Absolute space exists independently of social relations and is often represented in maps, models, and mathematical formulas.
-
Perceived space: This is the space that we experience through our senses. It is a subjective and lived space that is shaped by our individual perceptions and experiences. This is the subjective and experiential dimension of space, shaped by our individual perceptions, memories, emotions, and interactions with the physical environment. Perceived space is constantly changing and evolving as we navigate and interact with the world around us.
-
Representational space: This is the space that is represented in maps, models, and other symbolic forms. It is a mediated space that is produced by social institutions and power relations. This is the space that is represented in symbolic forms, such as maps, drawings, models, and media portrayals.Representational space is mediated by social institutions, power relations, and cultural discourses, and it often reflects the dominant ideologies and perspectives of society.
Lefebvre argues that these three modes of production of space are not mutually exclusive but are instead constantly interacting and influencing each other. He also highlights that the dominant mode of production of space in capitalist societies is abstract space, which he associates with alienation, fragmentation, and exploitation.
According to Lefebvre, the production of space is a dynamic and contested process that involves three key phases:
-
Conceptualization: This involves the development of ideas and blueprints for how space should be organized and used. This phase is often dominated by architects, planners, and other experts who have the power to shape the physical environment.
-
Realization: This involves the transformation of conceptual plans into physical structures and landscapes. This phase involves construction workers, engineers, and other laborers who carry out the actual work of building and shaping the physical environment.
-
Appropriation: This involves the use and occupation of space by individuals and social groups. This phase is where space is lived and experienced, and where its social and symbolic meanings are produced and contested.
Lefebvre’s conceptual model of the production of space has had a profound impact on various fields, including urban studies, geography, sociology, and architecture. His work has challenged traditional notions of space and encouraged a more critical and nuanced understanding of the relationship between space and society.
Here are some key takeaways from Lefebvre’s theory of the production of space:
-
Space is not a neutral or pre-existing entity, but is instead actively produced and shaped by social relations, power dynamics, and historical processes.
-
The production of space is a dynamic and contested process that involves the interaction of three key modes of production: absolute space, perceived space, and representational space.
-
The dominant mode of production of space in capitalist societies is abstract space, which contributes to alienation, fragmentation, and exploitation.
-
Understanding the production of space is essential for addressing social injustice, promoting democratic participation, and creating more just and equitable spatial arrangements.
Lefebvre argues that these three modes of production of space are not mutually exclusive, but are instead constantly interacting and influencing each other. He also argues that the dominant mode of production of space in capitalist societies is abstract space, which has a number of negative consequences, including:
-
The alienation of individuals from their environment: Abstract space reduces individuals to mere consumers of space, and it destroys their sense of connection to their place and community.
-
The fragmentation of urban space: Abstract space leads to the development of fragmented and disconnected urban spaces, such as suburbs and industrial parks.
-
The exploitation of the environment: Abstract space promotes the exploitation of the environment for profit,leading to environmental degradation and unsustainable development.
Lefebvre calls for a new mode of production of space that is based on the principles of social justice, environmental sustainability, and democratic participation. He argues that this new mode of production of space will require a fundamental transformation of our social, economic, and political systems.
Absolute Space
Henri Lefebvre defines absolute space as “a homogeneous and undifferentiated space, a space in which all points are equivalent and interchangeable” (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 21). It is a theoretical space that exists independently of social relations and is not subject to change. Lefebvre contrasts absolute space with social space, which is the space that is produced and shaped by social forces.
Lefebvre argues that absolute space is an abstraction that has been overemphasized in Western thought. He contends that this emphasis on absolute space has led to a distorted understanding of the nature of space, and that it has contributed to the alienation of individuals from their environment.
Lefebvre provides a number of examples of absolute space in his work. He argues that the Euclidean space of geometry,the Cartesian coordinate system, and the maps and models used in science and planning are all examples of absolute space. He also argues that the space of capitalism, with its emphasis on efficiency and standardization, is a manifestation of absolute space.
Lefebvre’s critique of absolute space has been influential in the field of critical urban theory. His work has helped to raise awareness of the social and political implications of different modes of production of space.
Here are some key takeaways from Lefebvre’s definition of absolute space:
Absolute space is a homogeneous and undifferentiated space.
Absolute space is a theoretical space that exists independently of social relations.
Absolute space has been overemphasized in Western thought.
Absolute space has contributed to the alienation of individuals from their environment.
Examples of absolute space include the Euclidean space of geometry, the Cartesian coordinate system, maps and models, and the space of capitalism.
Lefebvre’s work on absolute space is a valuable contribution to our understanding of the relationship between space and society. His critique of absolute space has helped to challenge the traditional view of space as a neutral backdrop for human activity, and it has opened up new possibilities for thinking about how space can be used to create a more just and equitable world.
Percieved Space
Henri Lefebvre defines perceived space as “the space that we experience through our senses” (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 27). It is a subjective and lived space that is shaped by our individual perceptions and experiences. Perceived space is not a fixed or objective reality, but is constantly changing and evolving as we interact with the world around us.
Lefebvre argues that perceived space is an important part of our everyday lives. It is the space in which we live, work,and play, and it has a profound impact on our sense of well-being and our ability to participate in society. However,Lefebvre also warns that perceived space can be manipulated by powerful actors, such as governments and corporations, to promote their own interests. He argues that we need to be critical of the ways in which perceived space is represented to us, and we need to work to create perceived spaces that are more just, equitable, and sustainable.
Lefebvre provides a number of examples of perceived space in his work. He argues that the space of the home, the space of the city, and the space of the natural world are all examples of perceived space. He also argues that the space of the body and the space of the mind are important forms of perceived space.
Lefebvre’s work on perceived space has been influential in a number of fields, including critical urban theory,phenomenology, and environmental psychology. His work has helped to raise awareness of the importance of perceived space in our lives, and it has encouraged scholars and activists to think more critically about the ways in which perceived space is produced and shaped.
Here are some key takeaways from Lefebvre’s definition of perceived space:
Perceived space is the space that we experience through our senses.
Perceived space is a subjective and lived space.
Perceived space is shaped by our individual perceptions and experiences.
Perceived space is an important part of our everyday lives.
Perceived space can be manipulated by powerful actors to promote their own interests.
We need to be critical of the ways in which perceived space is represented to us.
We need to work to create perceived spaces that are more just, equitable, and sustainable.
Lefebvre’s work on perceived space is a valuable contribution to our understanding of the relationship between space and society. His work has helped to challenge the traditional view of space as a neutral backdrop for human activity,and it has opened up new possibilities for thinking about how space can be used to create a more just and equitable world.
Represenational Space
Henri Lefebvre defines representational space as “the space that is represented in maps, models, and other symbolic forms” (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 39). It is a mediated space that is produced by social institutions and power relations.Representational space is not a direct reflection of reality, but is instead a selective and distorted representation of space that serves the interests of the ruling class.
Lefebvre argues that representational space plays a crucial role in the reproduction of social relations. He contends that representational space helps to naturalize and legitimize the existing social order by presenting it as a fixed and objective reality. By controlling the production of representational space, the ruling class is able to maintain its dominance and prevent challenges to its authority.
Lefebvre provides a number of examples of representational space in his work. He argues that maps, models, city plans,and architectural drawings are all examples of representational space. He also argues that the media, such as television and newspapers, play an important role in the production of representational space.
Lefebvre’s work on representational space has been influential in a number of fields, including critical urban theory,geography, and media studies. His work has helped to raise awareness of the power of representational space to shape our understanding of the world, and it has encouraged scholars and activists to challenge the dominant representations of space.
Social Space
Henri Lefebvre’s concept of social space is a key element of his theory of the production of space. In his book The Production of Space, Lefebvre defines social space as “the space produced by social relations, a space in which social relations are established, maintained, and reproduced” (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 40). It is a space that is shaped by the interplay of social forces, including class, power, and ideology.
Lefebvre argues that social space is not simply a passive backdrop for human activity, but is instead an active agent in the production of social relations. He contends that the way we organize and use space has a profound impact on our social lives, and that it can contribute to either social justice or social inequality.
Lefebvre identifies three key dimensions of social space:
Perceived space: This is the space that we experience through our senses. It is a subjective and lived space that is shaped by our individual perceptions and experiences.
Representational space: This is the space that is represented in maps, models, and other symbolic forms. It is a mediated space that is produced by social institutions and power relations.
Conceptual space: This is the space of our thoughts and ideas. It is a space in which we construct our understanding of the world and our place in it.
Lefebvre argues that these three dimensions of social space are not mutually exclusive, but are instead constantly interacting and influencing each other. He also argues that the dominant mode of production of social space in capitalist societies is abstract space, which is characterized by:
The alienation of individuals from their environment: Abstract space reduces individuals to mere consumers of space, and it destroys their sense of connection to their place and community.
The fragmentation of urban space: Abstract space leads to the development of fragmented and disconnected urban spaces, such as suburbs and industrial parks.
The exploitation of the environment: Abstract space promotes the exploitation of the environment for profit,leading to environmental degradation and unsustainable development.
Lefebvre calls for a new mode of production of social space that is based on the principles of social justice,environmental sustainability, and democratic participation. He argues that this new mode of production of social space will require a fundamental transformation of our social, economic, and political systems.
Lefebvre’s work on social space has been influential in a number of fields, including critical urban theory, sociology,and geography. His work has helped to raise awareness of the importance of social space in our lives, and it has encouraged scholars and activists to think more critically about the ways in which social space is produced and shaped.
Here are some key takeaways from Lefebvre’s discussion of social space:
Social space is the space produced by social relations.
Social space is not simply a passive backdrop for human activity, but is instead an active agent in the production of social relations.
The way we organize and use space has a profound impact on our social lives.
The dominant mode of production of social space in capitalist societies is abstract space.
Lefebvre calls for a new mode of production of social space that is based on the principles of social justice,environmental sustainability, and democratic participation.
Lefebvre argues that these three modes of production of space are not mutually exclusive but are instead constantly interacting and influencing each other. He also highlights that the dominant mode of production of space in capitalist societies is abstract space, which he associates with alienation, fragmentation, and exploitation.
Here’s a diagram illustrating the relationships between the different types of space:
+-----------------------+
| Absolute Space |
+-----------------------+
/|\
/ \
/ \
/ \
+-----------------+ +-----------------+
| Perceived Space | | Representational Space |
+-----------------+ +-----------------+
\ /
\/
+-----------------------+
| Social Space |
+-----------------------+
In this diagram, absolute space is represented as the foundation upon which perceived and representational spaces are built. Perceived space is shaped by our individual experiences and interactions with absolute space, while representational space is a mediated representation of both absolute and perceived spaces. Social space is the overall product of all three modes of production of space, and it reflects the social relations and power dynamics that shape our spatial experiences.
Lefebvre’s analysis of the production of space highlights the dynamic and contested nature of our spatial experiences. He demonstrates that space is not simply a passive backdrop for human activity but is an active agent in shaping our social lives, identities, and experiences. By understanding the relationships between the different types of space, we can gain a more critical and nuanced understanding of how space is used to produce and reproduce social relations.
Contradictory space
Henri Lefebvre introduces the concept of “contradictory space” to describe the inherent tensions and contradictions that exist within spatial structures. He argues that space is not a static or homogeneous entity, but is instead a dynamic and contested arena in which power relations are negotiated and social conflicts are played out.
Lefebvre identifies two primary types of contradictory space:
Abstract space vs. lived space: Abstract space is the rational and abstract conception of space as a homogeneous and measurable entity, often represented in maps, blueprints, and mathematical formulas. In contrast, lived space is the subjective and experiential dimension of space, shaped by our individual perceptions, memories, and emotions. Lefebvre argues that the dominance of abstract space in modern society has alienated individuals from their lived experiences and disrupted their sense of connection to place.
Dominant space vs. resistant space: Dominant space is the spatial manifestation of power structures and ruling ideologies, designed to control and regulate the movement and behavior of individuals. Resistant space, on the other hand, emerges from the actions and practices of marginalized groups and social movements that challenge and subvert the dominant spatial order. Lefebvre highlights the importance of recognizing and supporting resistant spaces as a means of challenging social injustice and promoting democratic participation.
Lefebvre’s concept of contradictory space provides a valuable framework for understanding the complex and multifaceted nature of space. It challenges the traditional view of space as a neutral backdrop for human activity and instead emphasizes its role in shaping our social lives, identities, and experiences. By recognizing the inherent contradictions within space, we can begin to develop more critical and nuanced approaches to spatial planning and design, striving to create spaces that are more inclusive, equitable, and sustainable.
Here are some key takeaways from Lefebvre’s discussion of contradictory space:
Space is not a static or homogeneous entity, but is instead a dynamic and contested arena in which power relations are negotiated and social conflicts are played out.
There are two primary types of contradictory space: abstract space vs. lived space, and dominant space vs.resistant space.
The dominance of abstract space in modern society has alienated individuals from their lived experiences and disrupted their sense of connection to place.
Resistant space emerges from the actions and practices of marginalized groups and social movements that challenge and subvert the dominant spatial order.
Recognizing and supporting resistant spaces is a means of challenging social injustice and promoting democratic participation.
Abstract vs Lived space
Abstract space
Abstract space is the theoretical, mathematical space that is often represented in maps, models, and mathematical formulas. It is a homogeneous and undifferentiated space that is not tied to any particular social or historical context.
Examples of abstract space include:
The Euclidean space of geometry
The Cartesian coordinate system
Maps and models used in science and planning
The space of capitalism, with its emphasis on efficiency and standardization
Lived space
Lived space is the subjective and experiential dimension of space, shaped by our individual perceptions, memories,emotions, and interactions with the physical environment. It is the space in which we live, work, and play, and it has a profound impact on our sense of well-being and our ability to participate in society.
Examples of lived space include:
The home
The city
The natural world
The body
The mind
Comparison of abstract space and lived space
The following table compares and contrasts abstract space and lived space:
| Feature | Abstract Space | Lived Space |
|---|---|---|
| Nature | Theoretical, mathematical | Subjective, experiential |
| Context | Independent of social or historical context | Shaped by social relations, history, and culture |
| Representation | Maps, models, mathematical formulas | Personal experiences, memories, emotions |
| Impact on individuals | Alienation, fragmentation | Sense of belonging, connection, and well-being |
| Role in society | Production of knowledge, planning, and control | Everyday life, social interactions, and personal identity |
It is important to note that abstract space and lived space are not mutually exclusive, but are instead constantly interacting and influencing each other. Abstract space provides a framework for understanding and organizing the physical world, while lived space is the space in which we actually experience life. By understanding the relationship between abstract space and lived space, we can develop a more nuanced and critical understanding of our spatial experiences.
Dominant vs resistant space
Dominant space
Dominant space is the spatial manifestation of power structures and ruling ideologies, designed to control and regulate the movement and behavior of individuals. It is often characterized by its homogeneity, orderliness, and conformity to prevailing norms.
Examples of dominant space include:
Surveillance architectures: CCTV cameras, security checkpoints, and gated communities reinforce the notion of constant surveillance and control, discouraging non-conforming behavior.
Urban planning and design: Zoning regulations, street layouts, and architectural styles often reflect the interests of the ruling class, limiting access to certain areas and imposing restrictions on how spaces can be used.
Consumerist landscapes: Shopping malls, chain stores, and advertising billboards promote a homogenous and materialistic culture, shaping consumption patterns and reinforcing dominant values.
Digital spaces: Social media platforms, search engine algorithms, and data collection practices can shape our online experiences, limiting access to diverse viewpoints and reinforcing dominant narratives.
Resistant space
Resistant space emerges from the actions and practices of marginalized groups and social movements that challenge and subvert the dominant spatial order. It is often characterized by its heterogeneity, creativity, and defiance of prevailing norms.
Examples of resistant space include:
Informal settlements: Slum areas, shantytowns, and squats challenge the formal spatial order and provide alternative housing options for marginalized groups.
Street art and graffiti: Murals, graffiti, and street performances transform urban spaces into canvases for protest, self-expression, and community engagement.
Community gardens and urban farms: These spaces reclaim neglected urban land for food production,promoting environmental sustainability and community resilience.
Occupation of public spaces: Protests, demonstrations, and sit-ins temporarily disrupt the normal functioning of public spaces to challenge government policies or advocate for social change.
Digital activism and online communities: Social media platforms and online forums provide spaces for marginalized groups to connect, share experiences, and organize for social change.
The interplay between dominant space and resistant space is a dynamic and ongoing process. Dominant forces seek to maintain control and order, while resistant movements challenge and subvert the status quo. By recognizing and supporting resistant spaces, we can promote social justice, democratic participation, and the creation of more equitable and inclusive spatial arrangements.
Conceptual space
In his book “The Production of Space,” Henri Lefebvre defines conceptual space as the “space of our thoughts and ideas” (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 40). It is a space in which we construct our understanding of the world and our place in it. Conceptual space is shaped by our individual experiences, knowledge, and social and cultural influences.
Lefebvre argues that conceptual space is not a fixed or static entity, but is instead constantly evolving and changing as we learn and interact with the world around us. He also argues that conceptual space is not independent of other modes of production of space, such as perceived space and representational space. In fact, all three modes of production of space are constantly interacting and influencing each other.
Here’s an example of how conceptual space can influence our perception of physical space:
Imagine you are walking through a park. As you walk, you notice a group of people playing basketball on a court. This basketball court is an example of physical space. However, your perception of this physical space is also shaped by your conceptual space. For example, if you have positive associations with basketball, such as memories of playing the game in your youth, then you will likely view the basketball court as a more inviting and positive space. Conversely, if you have negative associations with basketball, such as memories of being bullied or excluded from playing the game, then you will likely view the basketball court as a more negative and intimidating space.
This example illustrates that conceptual space is not simply a matter of abstract thought, but has a real and tangible impact on our experiences of the physical world. By understanding the relationship between conceptual space and other modes of production of space, we can gain a more nuanced understanding of how our spatial experiences are shaped by social,cultural, and historical factors.
Spatial Practice
Henri Lefebvre introduces the concept of “spatial practice” to describe the everyday activities and routines that shape our spatial experiences. He argues that spatial practices are not simply individual actions, but are instead socially constructed and embedded in broader patterns of social relations and power dynamics.
Lefebvre emphasizes that spatial practices are not merely passive or neutral, but are instead productive and transformative. They actively shape the physical environment, influencing the design, organization, and use of space.By engaging in spatial practices, we reproduce and reinforce existing spatial arrangements, but we also have the potential to challenge and subvert dominant spatial norms.
Here are some key characteristics of spatial practice according to Lefebvre:
Embeddedness in social relations: Spatial practices are not isolated individual actions, but are instead embedded in broader social relations and power dynamics. They reflect the interests, values, and norms of the social groups that engage in them.
Production of space: Spatial practices actively shape the physical environment, influencing the design,organization, and use of space. They contribute to the creation and reproduction of spatial structures, such as neighborhoods, workplaces, and public spaces.
Transformative potential: Spatial practices have the potential to challenge and subvert dominant spatial norms.They can be used to create more equitable, inclusive, and sustainable spatial arrangements.
Dynamic and evolving: Spatial practices are not static or unchanging, but are instead dynamic and evolving.They reflect the changing social, economic, and technological conditions of society.
Lefebvre’s concept of spatial practice provides a valuable framework for understanding the complex relationship between space and society. It highlights the dynamic and contested nature of our spatial experiences, emphasizing that space is not simply a passive backdrop for human activity but is an active agent in shaping our social lives.
Here are some examples of spatial practices:
Commuting to work: This routine involves navigating transportation systems, interacting with fellow commuters, and occupying designated spaces within the workplace.
Shopping at a mall: This practice involves moving through a designed space, selecting and purchasing goods,and engaging in social interactions with other shoppers and employees.
Visiting a park: This practice involves occupying a designated public space, engaging in recreational activities,and interacting with other park visitors.
Protesting in a public square: This practice challenges the dominant use of public space through collective action and the expression of dissent.
Participating in a community garden: This practice involves transforming a neglected space into a productive and social environment, promoting environmental sustainability and community engagement.
