Advertisement

Terrains and Landscapes of Urban Politics

  • Jens Kaae Fisker
Chapter

Abstract

Based on a post-foundationalist, ‘weak’ theoretical framework, this chapter argues that an understanding of the strategic possibilities towards the production of alternative urban futures can be enhanced significantly if ‘the urban’ is reimagined as contested, cooperative, and cultivational terrains upon which urban politics unfold. To this end, an elaborate imagery is proposed with an outset in the metaphorical pairing of terrain and landscape to create a space of thought within which the complex intersectionality of urban politics can be grasped, explored, and analysed in novel and innovative ways. Use of the metaphorisation is exemplified by drawing on the well-researched case of the Argentinazo, an instance of contentious urban politics that played out in Buenos Aires in the beginning of the 2000s.

Keywords

Weak theory Metaphor Post-foundationalism Terrain Landscape Gramsci Buenos Aires 

References

  1. Angelo, H., & Wachsmuth, D. (2015). Urbanizing Urban Political Ecology: A Critique of Methodological Cityism. IJURR.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12105
  2. Black, M. (1962). Models and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brabazon, H. (2016). Occupying Legality: The Subversive Use of Law in Latin American Occupation Movements. Bulletin of Latin American Research.  https://doi.org/10.1111/blar.12527
  4. Brenner, N. (2014). Urban Theory without an Outside. In N. Brenner (Ed.), Implosions/Explosions: Towards a Study of Planetary Urbanization. Berlin: Jovis.Google Scholar
  5. Brenner, N., & Schmid, C. (2015). Towards a New Epistemology of the Urban? City, 19(2–3), 151–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bryer, A. (2009). The Politics of Value-Creation: Struggles for Self-Determination and Social Responsibility in the Empresas Recuperadas. PhD dissertation, University of Manchester.Google Scholar
  7. de Certeau, M. (1984). The Practice of Everyday Life (S. Rendall, Trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dinerstein, A. C. (2015). The Politics of Autonomy in Latin America: The Art of Organising Hope. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elden, S. (2010). Land, Terrain, Territory. Progress in Human Geography, 34(6), 799–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gibson-Graham, J. K. (1996). The End of Capitalism (As We Knew It). A Feminist Critique of Political Economy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2008). Diverse Economies: Performative Practices for ‘Other Worlds’. Progress in Human Geography, 32(5), 613–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gramsci, A. (2000). The Gramsci Reader. Selected Writings 1916–1935 (D. Forgacs, Ed.). New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Gregory, D. (1994). Geographical Imaginations. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. Haraway, D. (1991). Simians, Cyborgs, and Women. The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Hart, G. (2016). Relational Comparison Revisited: Marxist Postcolonial Geographies of Difference. Progress in Human Geography.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132516681388
  16. Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, Nature, and the Geography of Difference. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Jazeel, T. (2017). Urban Theory with an Outside. Environment and Planning D.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775817707968
  18. Jessop, B. (1982). The Capitalist State: Marxist Theories and Methods. Oxford: Martin Robertson.Google Scholar
  19. Jessop, B. (2008). State Power: A Strategic-Relational Approach. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  20. Katz, C. (1996). Towards Minor Theory. Environment and Planning D, 14, 487–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  22. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Leitner, H., Sheppard, E., & Sziarto, K. (2008). The Spatialities of Contentious Politics. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 33, 157–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mannheim, K. (1936). Ideology and Utopia. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Marchart, O. (2007). Post-Foundationalist Political Thought: Political Difference in Nancy, Lefort, Badiou and Laclau. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Massey, D. (1993). Politics and Space/Time. In M. Keith & S. Pile (Eds.), Place and the Politics of Identity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. McGuirk, P., & O’Neill, P. (2012). Critical Geographies with the State: The Problem of Social Vulnerability and the Politics of Engaged Research. Antipode, 44(4), 1374–1394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Petras, J., & Veltmeyer, H. (2005). Social Movements and State Power: Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Ecuador. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  29. Ricoeur, P. (1977). The Rule of Metaphor (R. Czerny, K. McLaughlin, & J. Costello, Trans.). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  30. Routledge, P. (1994). Backstreets, Barricades, and Blackouts: Urban Terrains of Resistance in Nepal. Environment & Planning D, 12, 559–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Roy, A. (2015). What is Urban About Critical Urban Theory? Urban Geography.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2015.1105485
  32. Said, E. (1994). Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  33. Sitrin, M. (2006). Horizontalism: Voices of Popular Power in Argentina. Oakland, CA: AK Press.Google Scholar
  34. Smith, N. (1993). Homeless/Global: Scaling Places. In J. Bird, B. Curtis, T. Putnam, G. Robertson, & L. Tickner (Eds.), Mapping the Futures: Local Cultures, Global Change. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Smith, N., & Katz, C. (1993). Grounding Metaphor. Towards a Spatialized Politics. In M. Keith & S. Pile (Eds.), Place and the Politics of Identity (pp. 66–81). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Smith, P. (1999). Drawing New Maps: A Radical Cartography of Developmental Disabilities. Review of Educational Research, 69(2), 117–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Soja, E. (1996). Thirdspace. Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  38. Tomkinson, F. (2012). From Metaphor to the Life-World: Ricoeur’s Metaphoric Subjectivity. In T. S. Mei & D. Lewin (Eds.), From Ricoeur to Action: The Socio-Political Significance of Ricoeur’s Thinking. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  39. Vieta, M. A. (2012). Taking Destiny into Their Own Hands: Autogestion and Cooperation in Argentina’s Worker-Recuperated Enterprises. PhD dissertation, York University, Toronto.Google Scholar
  40. Zukin, S. (1991). Landscapes of Power: From Detroit to Disney World. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Danish Centre for Rural Research, University of Southern DenmarkEsbjergDenmark

Personalised recommendations