空间象征性意义的研究进展与启示
收稿日期: 2010-01-01
修回日期: 2010-05-01
网络出版日期: 2010-06-25
基金资助
国家自然科学基金项目(40771067);广东省普通高校人文社会科学研究重点项目(05ZD790008);教育部新世纪优秀 人才支持计划项目(NCET-07-0889).
On the Symbolic Meanings of Space
Received date: 2010-01-01
Revised date: 2010-05-01
Online published: 2010-06-25
朱竑,钱俊希,封丹 . 空间象征性意义的研究进展与启示[J]. 地理科学进展, 2010 , 29(6) : 643 -648 . DOI: 10.11820/dlkxjz.2010.06.001
The trend of cultural turn in western academia galvanized a transformation in European and American human geography, especially cultural geography, from a macroscopic view of space to a more microscopic one. According to the viewpoints in “new cultural geography”, space should be textualized and thus made accessible for interpretation. Space is no longer defined merely as a material entity where social, cultural and political phenomena are located and distributed, but media through which social processes take place and exert influences. Since social processes and power relationships constantly reshape the meanings and define the constructions of spaces, the interpretations of spaces can therefore reveal those processes and transformation embedded in the meanings conveyed by particular spaces. To understand spatial symbolism requires at first the clarification of the conceptions of symbolism and its application in human geography. With elaborations by Aase, Peirce etc., we get a basic understanding of symbolism in geography, which mainly focuses on the meanings engendered from the interactions between human behaviors and the environmental milieu. In the mean time, geographers should then focus their attention on intense social transformation and power relations, in order to reveal both cultural and spatial impacts of the above processes in society. Research cases in the western academia can be roughly divided into two main themes: (1) social transformation; (2) political and power relations between or among different social groups. In this paper, cases drawn from western literature are briefly introduced to present a collective view of mainstream research interest concerning the meanings and symbolism of space. The authors then propose that in order to keep up with the international academic trends, the topic of space symbolism is worth attention for the Chinese geography researchers. In light of the rapid social and economic social transformation in contemporary China, it is reasonable to assume that processes in Chinese society will then produce profound influences on spatiality, thus inserting meanings into spaces.
Key words： meanings; new cultural geography; space; symbolism
[1] 唐晓峰, 周尚意, 李蕾蕾. “超级机制”与文化地理学研 究. 地理研究, 2008, 27(2): 431-438.
[2] 李蕾蕾. 从新文化地理学重构人文地理学的研究框架. 地理研究, 2004, 23(1): 125-134.
[3] Cosgrove D. Social Formation And Symbolic Landscape. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1988: 1-34.
[4] Duncan J. The superorganic in American cultural geography. Annals of the association of American Geographer, 1980, 70(2): 181-198.
[5] Mitchel D. Cultural Geography: A Critical Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell, 2000: 3-100.
[6] 李蕾蕾. 当代西方新文化地理学知识谱系引论. 人文地 理, 2005, 20(2): 77-83.
[7] 周尚意. 英美文化研究与新文化地理学. 地理学报, 2004, 59(SI): 162-166.
[8] Aase T H. Symbolic space: Representations of space in geography and anthropology. Geografiska Annaler, series B, Human Geography, 1994, 76(1): 51-58.
[9] Halford S. Sociology of space, work and organization: From fragments to spatial theory. Sociology Compass, 2008 (2-3): 925-943.
[10] Harvey D. Social Justice And the City. London: Edward Arnold, 1973:13-14.
[11] Peirce C S. Logic As Semiotic: A theory Of Signs. New York: Dover Publications, 1955: 19-20.
[12] Backhaus G. Introduction I: The problematic of grounding the significance of symbolic landscape//Backhaus G, Murungi J. Symbolic Landscape. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2009: 3-21.
[13] Daniels S, Cosgrove D. Introduction: iconography and landscape//Cosgrove D, Daniels S. The Iconography of Landscape. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988: 32-42.
[14] Richardson T, Jensen O B. Linking discourse and space: towards a cultural sociology of space in analyzing spatial policy discourses. Urban Studies, 2003, 40(1): 7-22.
[15] Kong L. Ideological hegemony and the political symbolism of religious buildings in Singapore. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 1993, 11(1): 23-45.
[16] Kong L. Negotiating conceptions of “sacred space”: A case study of religious buildings in Singapore. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. N. S, 1993, 18(3): 342-358.
[17] Waley P. Parks and landmarks: Planning the Eastern Capital along western lines. Journal of Historical Geography, 2005, 31(1): 1-16.
[18] Park D C, Coppack P M. The role of rural sentiment and vernacular landscapes in contriving sense of place in the city's countryside. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 1994, 76(3): 161-172.
[19] Miles S. “Our Tyne”: Iconic regeneration and the revitalization of identity in Newcastle Gateshead. Urban Studies, 2005, 42(5-6): 913-926.
[20] Curtis J R. Pracas, place and public life in Brazil. Geographical Review, 2000, 90(4): 475-492.
[21] Till K E. Staging the past: Landscape designs, cultural identity and Erinnerungspolitik at Berlin's Neue Wache. Cultural Geographies, 1999, 6(3): 251-283.
[22] Bell J. Redefining national identity in Uzbekistan: Symbolic tensions in Tashkent's official public landscape. Cultural Geographies, 1999, 6(2): 183-213.
[23] Sidorov D. National monumentalization and the politics of Scale: the resurrection of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 2000, 90(3): 548-572.
[24] Zukin S. Loft living: Culture and Capital in Urban Change. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1989, 1-173.
[25] Zukin S. From Coney Island to Las Vegas in the Urban Imaginary: Discursive Practices of Growth and Decline. Urban Affairs Review, 1998, 33(5): 627-654.
[26] Loukaki A. Whose genius loci? Contrasting interpretations of the “Sacred Rock of the Athenian Acropolis” . Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 1997, 87(2): 306-329.
[27] Leib J I. Separate times, shared spaces: Arthur Ashe, Monument Avenue and the politics of Richmond, Virginia's symbolic landscape. Cultural Geographies, 2002, 9(3): 286-312.
[28] Mitchell K. Monuments, memorials and the politics of memory. Urban Geography, 2003, 24(5): 442-459.
[29] Kenny J T. Climate, race and imperial authority: The symbolic landscape of the British hill stations in India. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 1995, 85(4): 694-714.
[30] Philp J, Mercer D. Politicised pagodas and veiled resistance: contested urban space in Burma. Urban Studies, 2002, 39(9): 1587-1610.
[31] Thomas M. Out of control: emergent cultural landscapes and political change in urban Vietnam. Urban Studies, 2002, 39(9): 1611-1624.
[32] Salmenkari T. Geography of protest: places of demonstration in Buenos Aires and Seoul. Urban Geography, 2009, 30(3): 239-260.
[33] McGreevey P. The end of America: The beginning of Canada. Canadian Geographer, 1988, 32:307-318.
[34] Blake K. Peaks of identity in Colorado's San Juan Mountains. Journal of Cultural Geography, 1999, 18(20): 29-55.
[35] Duruz J. Rewriting the village: geographies of food and belongs in Clovelly, Australia. Cultural geographies, 2002,9 (4): 73-388.
[36] Shoval N, Strom E. Inscribing universal values into the urban landscape: New York, Jerusalem and Winnipeg as case studies. Urban Geography, 2009, 30(2): 143-161.
[37] Azaryahu M, Kellerman A. Symbolic places of nationalhistory and revival: A study in Zionist mythical study. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. N.S, 1999, 24(1): 109-123.
[38] Nast H J. Islam, gender, and slavery in West Africa circa 1500: A spatial archaeology of the Kano Palace, Northern Nigeria. Annals of the association of American Geographers, 1996, 86(1): 44-77.
[39] Mock J. We have always lived under the castle: historical symbols and the maintenance of meaning//Rotenberg R, McDonogh G. The Cultural Meanings of Urban Landscape. Westport: Bergin & Garvey, 1993: 63-73.
[40] Rutheiser C. Mapping contested terrains: schoolrooms and streetcorners in urban Belize//Rotenberg R, McDonogh G. The Cultural Meanings of Urban Landscape. Westport: Bergin & Garvey, 1993: 103-120.
[41] 庞宏, 刘峰. 创造新型的城市文化空间. 武汉工业大学 学报, 1998, 20(4): 121-123.
[42] 冯健, 周一星. 转型期北京社会空间分异重构. 地理学 报, 2008, 63(8): 829-844.
[43] 李志刚, 吴缚龙. 转型期上海社会空间分异研究. 地理学 报, 2006, 61(2): 199-211.
[44] 袁媛, 薛德升, 许学强. 转型期广州大都市区户籍人口贫 困特征和空间分布. 热带地理, 2006, 26(3): 248-254.
[45] Liu Y T, Wu F L, He S J. The making of the new urban poor in transitional China: Market versus institutional based exclusion. Urban Geography, 2008, 29(8): 811-834.
[46] 徐裕健. 历史街区空间文化意义的重构: 台北“剥皮寮 老街” 的人文生命力的发掘与实践. 城市建筑, 2006(2): 25-29.
[47] 陈金泉, 谢衍忆, 蒋小刚. 乡村公共空间的社会学意义及 规划设计. 江西理工大学学报, 2007, 28(2): 74-77.
[48] Phillips M. The production, symbolization and socialization of gentrification: impressions from two Berkshire Villages. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. N. S, 2002, 27(3): 282-308.
[49] Borer M I. The location of culture: the urban culturalist perspective. City & Community, 2006, 5(2): 173-197.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |