Bodies, Sensations, Space and Time: The Contribution from Henri Lefebvre Author(s): Kirsten Simonsen Source: Geografiska

Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, Vol. 87, No. 1 (2005), pp. 1-14 Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3554441 . Accessed: 21/04/2013 13:59
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley and Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE
by Kirsten Simonsen

Simonsen, K., 2005: Bodies, sensations, space and time: the contribution from Henri Lefebvre. Geogr. Ann., 87 B (1): 1-14. ABSTRACT. In geography as well as other human/social sciences, issues on the body and embodiment have increasingly come to the fore over recent decades. In the same period, and in particular following the English translation of The Production of Space, Henri Lefebvre has been a central figure in the geographical discourse. However, even though a range of writers on Lefebvre do acknowledge his emphasis on embodiment, it seems that he has only partially found his way into the core of the body literature. The aim of this paper is to explore Lefebvre's contribution to a geographical theory of the body, in particularwhen it comes to the conception of a generative and creative social body as an intrinsic part of social practice. I start by exploring the way in which Lefebvre's conception of the body is developed in creative dialoque with other philosophers, such as Marx, Heideggger and Nietzsche, and continue by way of an explication of his own contribution. This is done under the headings of 'spatial bodies' and 'temporal bodies', in this way also emphasizing creative, moving bodies. Instead of a conclusion the paper argues that Lefebvre's contribution could gainfully interact with later (not least feminist) approaches, and through such interactions add to current discussions on 'body politics' and 'performativity'. Key words: body, embodiment, space, time, Lefebvre

he wasveryfirmabouttheneedto reinstate although andsocialthought: the body in philosophy Westernphilosophyhas betrayedthe body; it in the great process has actively participated that has abandoned the of metaphorization body; and it has denied the body. The living body, being at once 'subject' and 'object', cannottoleratesuch conceptualdivision, and consequentlyphilosophicalconcepts fall into the categoryof the 'sign of non-body'. (Lefebvre,1991, p. 407; emphasisin original) Probablyone of the reasons why the Lefebvrian contribution had not the greatappealfor the early (mainly sociologist) theoristsof the body is that when authorslike Featherstone and Turnerargue that'we needto developan embodiednotionof the humanbeing as a social agentandof the functions of the body in social space' (1995, p. 7), space is conceived of in a purely metaphorical sense. To the body inevon the contrary, Lefebvre, theorizing itablyinvolvesa focus on space,on the body's imof a 'sensory-sensual plicationin and constitution withmoregeographical interventions, space'.Later, has come much more the space-bodyrelationship into the centreof analysis.All the same, although on Lefebvrenoticehis emphasis quitea few writers on embodiment 1994;BlumandNast, (see Gregory, 2000; 1996; Pile, 1996; Shields, 1998; Merrifield, Elden,2004), he does not seem to be considereda to a theoryof the body. majorcontributor As in manyof his themes,Lefebvre's writingson the body-space relationship include a conceptual anda politicaldimension,and as well as a historical his discussionslips in andout of these differentdimensions. Smith, not without some justification, talks about an unresolvedcontradiction between ontology andhistoryin muchof Lefebvre'svision (Smith, 1998). But Lefebvre also mindfully deploys these slippages and ambiguitiesin his Nietzsche-inspired style of Anti-Logos,in particular 1

Introduction of littherehasbeenanoutpouring Inrecent decades and the of embodiment erature on the importance as well as othbodyin (notleastfeminist)geography er partsof the humanitiesand social sciences.A number of monographs 1984;Shil(see e.g. Turner, ling, 1993; Butler, 1993; Grosz, 1994; Longhurst, 2001) andcollections(e.g.Feheret al., 1989;Featherstoneet al., 1991; Duncan,1996;Ainley, 1998; andin 1995the NastandPile, 1998)haveappeared, These atwas established. & Society journalBody temptsto establishthe body in social theoryhave tradibeenfuelledby a diverserangeof theoretical feminist themostimportant areFrench tions;among and authorssuch as deBeauvoir, Kristeva, Irigiray Cixous;phenomenological critiquesof CartesianandMerleauism in theworkof Husserl, Heidegger of thebodyliketheonesof Elias andhistories Ponty; Lefeseemto consider andFoucault. Few,however, to theseendeavours, bvreto be a majorcontributor
?Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography, 2005

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KIRSTEN SIMONSEN

as performed in The Production of Space (see e.g. Merrifield, 1995), and his genealogical exploration of concepts and relations. In his search for a nonessentialist Marxism, Lefebvre incessantly resisted even the slightest hint of systematization and foundationalism, and for him the conceptions of body and space are inseparable both from their history and the concomitant critique and politics. Among these dimensions, Lefebvre's contribution to the understanding of the history of the human body is the most thoroughly explored, first and most elegantly by Gregory in his Geographical Imaginations (1994). With take-off in The Production of Space, he identifies one of its major themes to be a history of the decorporealization of space, thus establishing an indispensable connection between the history of the body and the history of space and, more particularly, comprehending the shift from 'the space of the body to the body-in-space' which somehow facilitates 'the spiriting-away or scotomization of the body' (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 302). The term is borrowed from psychoanalysis, but is used here to signal a historical process of abstraction of the body through an overlapping of the visual and the linguistic. Gregory (with Lefebvre) traces this decorporealization of space through the history of space - from analogical space, over cosmological and symbolic space, to abstract space and demonstrates it by examples from philosophy and science, from cities and architecture, and from art. Here, the body is disdained, absorbed, and broken into pieces by images: Picasso's cruelty toward the body, particularly the female body, which he tortures in a thousand ways and caricates without mercy, is dictated by the dominant form of space, by the eye and by the phallus - in short, by violence. (1991, p. 302) As indicated in this opinion on Picasso, for Lefebvre other processes or 'histories' accompany the decorporealization of space. First and foremost, although this is less developed in the text, the decorporealization of space is paralleledby a decorporealizationof time. The optical and visual world fetishizes abstraction and detaches the pure form from its impurecontent - 'from lived time, everyday time, and from bodies with their opacity and solidity, their warmth, their life and their death' (1991, p. 97). Furthermore, the process involves a logic of visualization and one of metaphorization;living bodies, the bodies of 'users' are caught up, not only in the toils of parcellized 2

space, but also in the work of images, signs and symbols. These bodies are transferredand emptied out via the eyes, a process that is not only abstract and visual, but also phallocratic. It is embodied in a masculine will-to-power and, metaphorically, abstract space and its material forms symbolize force, male fertility and masculine violence.1 For Lefebvre, however, the body serves as a critical figure too. It is not possible totally to reduce the body or the practico-sensory realm to abstract space. The body takes its revenge - or at least calls for revenge - for example, in leisure space. It seeks to make itself known, to gain recognition, as 'generative'. This renders necessary another understanding of the body, not only as the subject of historical abstraction and visualization, but also as an intrinsic partof social practice. It is Lefebvre's contribution to this endeavour, to the conception of the generative and creative social body - a phenomenological body, you could say - that I want to explore in the remaining part of this article.

Inspiration and dialogue

Lefebvre's interest in the body is founded on a conception of practice that is complex, open-ended and holding many dimensions. It relates to nature,to the past and to humanpossibilities, and it ranges in scale from gestures andcorporeal attitudes,over everyday activities, to overall social practice in the economic and political spheres. The considerations on the body in this connection are formulated in dialogue with a range of philosophers and social theorists, only the most importantof whom I will touch upon. First and foremost, a point of departureis taken in Marx. It is important to maintain that Lefebvre was first of all a Marxist philosopher, but also that, in his view, Marxism should be treated as one moment in the development of theory and not, dogmatically, as a definitive theory. From Marx comes the idea that human beings are characterized by the way in which - through work - they transform nature and, at the same time, their own nature. In this process of production - or domination and appropriation of nature- both biological (physiological) and social (historical) dimensions are involved. Productive activity is always oriented towards an objective, and during the process bodies, limbs and eyes are mobilized, involving both 'materials' (stone, wood, leather) and 'materiel' (tools, language, instructions, agendas) (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 71). In this way, a dialectic is established between social practices (work), bodies and nature.
Geografiska Annaler 87 B (2005) ? 1

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THECONTRIBUTION FROMHENRILEFEBVRE SPACEAND TIME: BODIES,SENSATIONS,

However, Marx's concept of social practice is not sufficient to an understanding of human beings and their bodies. The most importantreason for this is that he reduces human reality to work, to making tools or to conquering nature. As Lefebvre tells us, Marx accentuated homo faber, without neglecting homo sapiens too much; he did not insist on homo ridens, and also homo ludens was put aside; he also disregarded death and the consciousness about death (Lefebvre, 1975, p. 143). In other words, subjectivity was founded in work and partially in knowledge, while issues such as joy, desire and play were missing. Shortly, it was reduced to toolmaking and had no right of satisfaction of its own. Marx therefore was unable sufficiently to integrate materialism and spiritualism.2 To cope with these problems and elaborate a richer conception of human beings, Lefebvre enters into dialogue with other authors, in particular Heidegger and Nietzsche. In doing so, however, he makes clear his dissociation from what he considers the false, fascist interpretation of Nietzsche's thinking and the tendency in Heidegger towards German chauvinism (Lefebvre, 1975). Heidegger is probably the twentieth-century philosopher with whom Lefebvre was most engaged. They shared a number of preoccupations concerning existence and the world, but did not come to the same conclusions (see also Elden, 2004). The relationship is most obvious in Lefebvre's trilogy Critique of Everyday Life (1958, 1961, 1981). The concept of everydayness (Lefebvre; Quotidiennete, Heidegger; Alltaglichkeit) in both authors refers to a theory of alienation, even if the substance is divergent. In Being and Time (1962), Heidegger uses the concept to characterize the inauthentic existence of Dasein. As everyday Being-with-one-another, it stands in subjection to others, not some definite others, but the indeterminate mass of 'they', of averageness and publicness. Dasein stops being itself and the ascendancy of others rids it of its being. In this way, everydayness opens the way to a loss of direction, to dereliction and disquiet. Lefebvre 'marxianizes' these ideas, reformulates them from an existential critique towards a more social one. He adds a historical and a utopian dimension and develops a theory of alienation that is an extension of what he considers Marx's incomplete one, extending it from production to the whole range of spheres of social life. In this connection Lefebvre also looked to French phenomenology and existentialism - that
Annaler 87 B (2005) 1 Geografiska

is, besides Heidegger also to Merleau-Ponty and in particularto Sartre3- in his development of the active side of consciousness and sensations in the process of human becoming. These considerations also, more or less explicitly, involve the body. Heidegger himself does not refer explicitly to the body, but with notions such as 'being-towardsdead' or 'ready-to-hand' his terminology is highly suggestive. Lefebvre, then, stresses the fact that, with his restitution of the practico-sensory realm, Heidegger continues the work that young Marx had started (Lefebvre, 1975). He emphasizes Heidegger's introduction of the question of 'the thing', not as technical product but as 'the work' (oeuvre) - as process and result of creative, bodily activity. In this sense the thing was rich in poetry (not understood as verbal art, but as the practical truth of orientated, bodily activity). Lefebvre criticized Heidegger for translating this insight into a cult of the artisan, touchingly patriarchal and Germanic feeling for the home.4 For him, rather than the home, it was the city that symbolized a person's being and consciousness, reflecting a shift from the individual to the collective level. So when Lefebvre adopted the existentialist concept of poesis - connecting orientated bodily activity with the experience and creation of human nature - he gave it a ratherbroad content. It includes the creation of villages and cities, the formation of territorial groups, the idea of 'absolute love', psychoanalysis, the decision to change one's life - all connected in the creative ability of daily life (see also Poster, 1975). Yet it is importantto maintain the dialectical nature of everyday life. Poesis cannot be sustained beyond specific 'moments'; continuous dis-alienation would be an impossible, utopian condition. It exists in dialectic with the routinization of everyday life and the historical process of institutionalization and stabilization of interaction into systemic domains. Another important source for the understanding of the body, including sexuality, poetry and drama, is Nietzsche, whom Lefebvre sought to conjoin with Marx. Lefebvre (1991) himself declares his critique of philosophy as rooted on the one hand in social practice (Marx) and on the other hand in art, poetry, music and drama (Nietzsche) - and rooted, too, in both cases, in the (material) body. From Nietzsche comes the idea that prior to knowledge, and beyond it, is the body and the actions of the body - suffering, desire and pleasure. Let Lefebvre himself summarize the consequences of these ideas: 3

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KIRSTEN SIMONSEN

Spatial practice is neither determined by an existing system, be it urban and ecological, nor adapted to a system, be it economic or political. On the contrary, thanks to potential energies of a variety of groups capable of diverting homogenized space to their own purposes, a theatricalized or dramatized space is liable to arise. Space is liable to be erotisized and restored to ambiguity, to common birthplace of needs and desire, by means of music, by means of differential systems and valorizations which overwhelm the strict localizations of needs and desires in spaces specialized either physiologically (sexuality) or socially (places set aside, supposedly, for pleasure). An unequal struggle, sometimes furious, sometimes more low-key, takes place between the Logos and the Anti-Logos, these terms being taken in the broadest sense - the sense in which Nietzsche used them. (1991, p. 391) Lefebvre thus prioritized Eros (erotic knowledge) over Logos (logical knowledge) in his political thinking, very much as Nietzsche did with his desire for 'Anti-Logos'. So, even if Lefebvre was always guarded against the nihilism and anti-democracy involved, the emphasis on the body, desire, sexuality and not least festivals as 'intense moments' of everyday life have direct resonance from Nietzschean thought. As does the above-mentioned idea that the visual increasingly takes precedence over elements of thought and action deriving from other senses - the sense of smell, taste and touch and that sexuality and desire are more or less being annexed by sight. All these dimensions - work and social practice, bodily creativity and poetry, Eros, sexuality and desire - are connected in Lefebvre's conception of the body. Of the utmost importance too, though, is the intrinsic way in which this conceptualization relates to space and time, or rather to the spatiality and temporality of the body. In other words, how bodily practices that give rise to socially constructed modes of space and time are at the same time definitions of selfhood internalized within the body. In the following, I will consider the two in turn. This, of course, should be seen only as an analytical distinction, since in practice spatiality and temporality is inseparable. Or, with Lefebvre (1991, p. 175), time is distinguishable but not separable from space - the two of them manifest themselves as different yet inextricable. 4

Spatial bodies
The relationship between human bodies and space is most thoroughly explored by Lefebvre in his 'SpatialArchitechtonics' (1991, pp. 169-228), perhaps the most complex section of The Production of Space. There Lefebvre describes an anatomy of space generated by living bodies; at the same time he makes an ontological claim and establishes a material basis for the production of space consisting of ... a practical and fleshy body conceived of as a totality complete with spatial qualities (symmetries, asymmetries) and energetic properties (discharges, economics, waste) (1991, p. 61). The emphasis on production is vital because it enables Lefebvre - in critical dialogue with psychoanalytical assumptions of prohibition - to treat social space as not only a space of 'no', but also a space of 'yes', of affirmation of life. An important precondition of this material production is that each living body both is space and has its space; it produces itself in space at the same time as it produces that space. Theoretically, then, the body serves both as point of departure and as destination. It is an intrinsic part of the 'lived experience' - an experience that in modernity, from Lefebvre's point of view, is exposed to a tendency to be drained of all content by mechanisms of language, signs and abstractions, but which cannot be totally erased. As part of the lived experience, the body constitutes a practico-sensory realm in which space is perceived through smells, tastes, touch and hearing as well as through sight. It produces a space which is both biomorphic and anthropological. The physiological closures of the body imply a conceptual differentiation between internal and external spaces - and hence of a distinct body - while the external environment is perceived through a double process of orientation and demarcation. Orientation somewhat replicates the structureof the body itself, projecting into the world pairs of determinants such as right and left, symmetries and asymmetries, axes and planes or centres and peripheries. Demarcation adds to this traces and marks that are both practical and symbolic - directions which not only act as guidance to the world, but also make it meaningful. All this is connected to a conception of the spatial body:
Geografiska Annaler * 87 B (2005) ? 1

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE

A body so conceived,as producedand as the of space,is immediately subjectto production

the determinants of that space ... the spatial

character derivesfrom space, body's material fromtheenergythatis deployedandputto use there. (Lefebvre,1991, p. 195) to theenergyof the Lefebvre's references repetitive but also albody may seem not only biomorphic, in character. He refersto livingormostnaturalistic energiesthatareactivein their ganismsthatcapture vicinity - energiesthatare dedicatedby natureto In the next step,however, productive expenditure.5 Lefebvre withdrawsfrom any functionalismor 'principleof economy' in relationto that energy, it as a low-level principleapplying characterizing only at the level of survival.Again with reference to Nietzsche,he emphasizesthe Dionysianside of existence accordingto which play, struggle,art, festival, sexualityand love - in short,Eros - are of the livthemselvesa necessityanda potentiality enering being. They are partof the transgressive gies of the body. In continuation of this, Lefebvrediscusseshow between body and space are inthe relationship of the self. In thisdiscusvolvedin theconstitution andthemirrorsion,he drawson ideasof themirror effect, whichhe relatesto the mathematical theory to Nietzsche and surrealism, and to of symmetry, In an immediatesense, the mirror psychoanalysis. extends a repetitionimmanentto the body into sense it presentsthe Ego with its space;in another own materialpresence,with the doublenessof its absencefromandat the sametime its inherencein this 'other'space:
Space - my space - is not the context of which

I constitute'textuality': instead,it is firstof all my body,andthen it is my body'scounterpart or 'other',its mirror-image or shadow;it is the shifting intersection between that which touches, penetrates,threatensor benefitsmy body on the one hand,andall otherbodies on the other. (1991, p. 184;emphasisin original) A few authors(Gregory,1995; Blum and Nast, 1996;Pile, 1996)have shownhow Lefebvre'sdiscussion of the mirroris - among other things - pro-

Lefebvre'srelationship vokedby Lacan.However, is definitelyone of criticaldiato psychoanalysis for overlogue. He criticizedthe psychoanalysts
Geografiska Annaler 87 B (2005) ? 1

statingthe work of the mirror-effect by demateriit outof its spatialcontext alizingit andabstracting into the form of purely mental 'topologies'. This objectionis parallelto Lefebvre'sgeneralcritique of structuralist andpoststructuralist writingsforreducingspaceto a linguisticmentalspace.Lefebvre does not deny the importance of (Lacan's)Imaginary and Symbolic spaces for the constitutionof inthe self, buthe wantsto establishtheirmaterial scriptionin social space. He wantsto include the underlyingmaterial, spatial and political forces thathavethe possibilityto transcend the visual domain.The most interestingthing aboutthe mirror is therefore not so muchthe fact thatit projectsthe 'subject's'image back on the 'subject'as the way in which it extends a repetitionimmanentin the in the social relabody into space. He is interested tionshipbetween repetitionand difference,in the of social conflictualway in which the production of the self. In space is involvedin the constitution this process,the mirrorworks into social life and in the formof a dualspatiality; a space subjectivity with respectto originandseparathatis imaginary withrespectto tion,butalso concreteandpractical co-existence and differentiation(1991, p. 186). This meansa shift of emphasisfromthe 'psychic' towardsthe social and material,to the social relais facing tionshipsin work when the body/subject inthe 'other'as another body.Theserelationships cludea set of 'doubles'in time-space,suchas symconmetry/asymmetry, repetition/differentiation, nection/separation,surface/depth,opacity/transand conmaterial/social, parency,imaginary/real, sciousnessof oneself andof the other. As an illustration, Lefebvre(as one of the very few places in his text wherehe does so) discusses therelationship betweenthesexes.Herewe findthe 'double' of symmetry and asymmetrybetween male and female and subsequently displacedillusionaleffects (an oscillationbetweentransparency andopacity).The otheremergesandturnsoutto be the same, albeit in an ambiguousand shadowy manner.Each person seeks him or herself in the hope of finding the other, while what he or she of the self. A fragseeks in the otheris a projection ensues and,thanksto the oscillationbementation the other,a tween knowingand misapprehending will to poweris able to intrudeitself. The 'socialization'of the mirror-effect is based on a dual existence of social space relativeto its On the one hand,Lefebvresays, each participants. of societyrelatesitselfto space,situatesitmember self in it. This is partof the processof constitution
5

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KIRSTEN SIMONSEN

of the self- of designating oneself to an individual as well as a public identity. On the other hand, space serves an intermediary or mediating role through which 'one' seeks to apprehend something or somebody else. It offers sequences, sets of objects and concatenations of bodies, giving the impression of transparency,of the world as reflected within each body in an ever-renewed to-and-fro of reciprocal reflection. Social space itself becomes a mirror, in a collective and historical sense. This duality between opacity and transparency, subjectivity and objectivity, is a point of intersection between the body and social space. Lefebvre however also offers more material solutions to the relationship between the two. More precisely, he considers the articulation between sensory and practico-perceptual space on the one hand and specific or practico-social space on the other. Historically, sensory-sensual space may be seen as sediment, destined to survive as one layer or element in the stratification and interpenetration of social spaces. But that does not address the issue of more specific articulations. One immediate answer given by Lefebvre is a conception of social practice and its objects as an extension of the body. Among the last-mentioned are everyday utensils or tools, which extend the body in accord with its rhythms, or speech and writing, which sometimes disclose and sometimes dissimulate.6 Practically, this takes place through performance of gestures and development of gestural systems. Social gestures in Lefebvre's sense consist of articulated movements mobilizing and activating the whole body. Their accomplishment implies the existence of affiliations, of groups (family, tribe, village, city) and of activity - the most obvious example being gestures of labour.7Ensembles of gestures or gestural systems are further invested with meaning and codes. Like language, they are made up of symbols, signs and signals. Such codes are, of course, specific to a particular society: To belong to a given society is to know and use its codes for politeness, courtesy, affection, parley, negotiation, trading, and so onas also for the declaration of hostilities. (1991, p. 215) What this sentence says is that gestural systems embody ideology and history and bind them to practice, thus recalling a spatialized version of Bourdieu's theory of practice and the body's incorporation of history (1977, 1990). The importance 6

of places and space in gestural systems is obvious. But organized gestures, which are codified gestures, are not simply performed in space. Bodies themselves generate spaces, which are produced by and for their gestures, and this also goes for systems ranging from the everyday microgestural realm to the most highly formalized macrogestural one. Lefebvre sees gestural systems as something that can connect representations of space and spaces of representations. More generally, therefore, the articulation between bodily practices and social space may be understood through the way in which the body is involved in the constitution of the dimensions of social space. In order to consider this, let us very briefly recapitulate Lefebvre's by now widely discussed conceptual triad of social space (see e.g. Soja, 1989, 1996; Shields, 1998). He introduces it twice in the introductory chapter of The Production of Space and even though it is not developed later in the book, it permeates the whole text.8 Briefly recapitulated, the three dimensions are: 1. Spatial practice, which embraces social production and reproduction and the particularlocations and spatial forms characteristic of a given social formation. It would, for example, include the built environment, urban morphology and the creation of zones for specific purposes. Through everyday practices, space is dialectically created as a human and social space. This aspect of spatiality helps to ensure continuity and some degree of cohesion in social configurations. The spatial practice of a society at the same time propounds and presupposes its space in a dialectic interaction; it relies on a 'commonsense' understanding of space including both the taken-for-granted dimensions of everyday life and the rationalized institutions and urban networks that we pass through in our daily routines. Lefebvre characterizes this space as aperceived space, which embodies the interrelations between institutional practices and daily experiences and routines. 2. Representations of space are connected with the dominant 'order' of any society and hence with its codes, signs and knowledge about space. These are the forms of knowledge of space in society, the ideological content and claims of truth of theories, and the conceptual imaginations of space linked to production relations. This is a conceived space, conceptualized and
Geografiska Annaler 87 B (2005) * 1

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE

discursivelyconstructedby professionalsand - planners,developers,urbanists, technocrats social engineersand scientists- and mediated throughsystemsof verbalsigns. If we applya Foucauldian discourses term,it is the dominant of space in a given society.These 'representaanddetions'areabstract, buthavea substantial cisive role in the productionof space through social andpoliticalpractices.
3. Spaces of representations embody complex

or undersymbolismslinkedto the 'clandestine ground'side of social life. In this sense, it is a of struggleon the way to realizingourterrain selves as 'totalpersons'andbringingintobeing alternative imaginationsof space. This space embraces places andtheirsymbolicvalue,conof everyday life, feminine/masflictingrhythms culine andso on. It is the livedspace;the space of inhabitants and users as well as of some artists andwriters,the spacetheyincessantlyseek to createthroughappropriation of the environment.Lefebvre cites Dadaandthe Surrealists as examplesof art, literarycommentand fantasy dealing with other, possible spatialities.The Lefebvresays,tendtospacesof representation, wardsmoreorless coherent systemsof non-verbal symbols and signs. In some of Lefebvre's in raththis categorymayappear presentations, er comprehensive rhetooppression/opposition ric.However, as I see it, spacesof representation will also workin moremodesteverydayapproof space. priations Here,however,the issue at stakeis morethanjust of space by way of the three elethe production ments,butalso the role of the body in this process. As an initial point, Lefebvrestresseshow social/ at the level of spatialpractice,which is performed the use of thebody- of the perceived, presupposes the hands,membersand sensoryorgans,performof workorof activityunrelated to work ing gestures (1991, p. 40). As for the conceived- the representationsof thebody- theyderivefromthe discourses of scientificknowledge,fromthe knowledgeof anatomy,of physiology,of sickness and its cure, and from the knowledge of the body's relations orwithits surroundings withnature or 'milieu'.9In this way,the body is involvedin the oppositionbetween ourperceptionof space- concreteandmaterial - and our conception of space - abstract and

the abstracttogether;we need a dialectic relation between materialismand idealism.This is where thenotionof thelivedcomesin - as a thirdtermbetween the poles of perception andconception.Socially lived space dependson materialas well as - andon thebody.Hereagainwe mentalconstructs can see the influenceof both Heideggerand Nietzsche.Theinfluenceof theformermaybe seen in the emphasison the spatialnotionof 'poeticdwelling' (Lefebvre,1975, 1991, pp. 121, 314): Lefebvre's discussion of the contradictionbetween a bettertranslation habiter(translated as residence; be dwelling)andhabitat(housing) wouldprobably suggestsa directlived experience,a bodily embedded understanding of space and place. The Nietzscheaninfluenceis evidenteverytime Lefebvre arguesthatembodiedlived experiencecomes from the excessive energies of the body, from creative activityandfromthe level of affection- involving need anddesire,passionandsexuality,images and the spokenword.Furthermore, Lefebvrenotes,the partof embodiedlived experienceis highly comintervenes here.Buthe does plex, because'culture' one could probanot developthis line of thinking; bly do this by way of a dialoguewith the corporeal elementsin the laterculturalstudies. Even if the threedimensionsof spatialityenjoy the same ontological (but not necessarilyhistorithereis no doubt cal) status,withno one privileged, thatthe elementof lived space is centralto Lefebvre's project,from a strategicpolitical viewpoint, andalso in theoretical terms.Morethanonce in The Productionof Space he stressesthat spatialpractices are lived directlybeforethey areconceptualized. The centralitygiven to the body in this discussion as well as the position of the body in all threedimensionsof spatialityrenderspossible an of the body as a mediatorof the reunderstanding lationshipbetweenthe differentdimensions. Temporal bodies AlthoughLefebvrenevereffectively producedan of time, his analysisof analysesof the production do yield signifieverydaylife andrhythmanalyses cantinsightson time,multiple andthe temporalities time-body relationship.For Lefebvre, time was in closely connectedwith space and apprehended space,andbothenjoyedthesameontologicalstatus. He also sketchedout a periodization of time in sohimselffrom ciety(Lefebvre,1970),butdissociated a reduction of time to historyor evolution.Time is also part of the lived experience,and it can take
7

the productionof mental.In orderto understand we need to graspthe concreteand space,however,

Geografiska Annaler ? 87 B (2005) ? 1

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KIRSTEN SIMONSEN

Lefebvre played with metaphorsof everyday life. Thereis a cliche, he said,whichcompares creativemomentsto the mountain tops andeveryday time to the plains, or to the marshes.He himself anothermetaphor, preferred comparingeveryday life to fertile soil. A landscapewithoutflowersor woods may be depressingfor the pasmagnificent ser-by;but flowers and trees should not make us forgettheearthbeneath,whichhas a secretlife and a richnessof its own (Lefebvre1958). The idea of outstandingcreative moments was however not strange to Lefebvre. Sporadicallyhe developed whathe called a 'theoryof moments'."M In this he the moment as fleeting, but decisive interpreted sensationimplicatinga doublerecognitionof the 'other'andthe self. It is a conjunction of temporalities, a functionof the individual'shistoryand a formthatis superior to andelevatesitself overrepetition and reappearance. Among the 'moments' thatarisefromeverydaylife arelove, games,rest, knowledge,poetry andjustice, activitiesthatin a temporalityof ruptureand spontaneitytend towardsa unification of thefestivalandeveryday life. For Lefebvre,the momentwas also characterized towardsthe realizationof a posby its orientation sibility;the possibilityis given, standsthereto be both uncoveredand achieved,and the realization action.This idea allowed implicatesa constitutive himto extendthetheoryof momentsfromtheanalof subysis of everydaylife to the understanding lime momentsof revolutionary suchas the fervour, of the Paris Communeor the student declaration The body does not fall undersway of analytic uprisingin 1968. of the cyclicalfrom Thesedifferent ideason temporality areconnectthoughtandits separation the linear.Theunity,whichthatreflection is at ed in Lefebvre's whichis a kindof rhythmanalysis, suchpainto decode,findsrefugein thecryptic phenomenological-hermeneutic of the description andits suropacitythatis the greatsecretof the body.For relationship amongthebody,its rhythms the bodyindeedunitesthe cyclical andthelin- rounding in Prospace.As anidea,it was envisaged ear, combiningthe cycles of time, need and duction of Space, announced as a project in Comdesirewiththe linearities of gesture,perambu- munication in 1985, and publishedin a ratherinlation, prehensionand the manipulationof complete collection after his death (Lefebvre, andab- 1992). Lefebvreheld high hopes for rhythmanalythings- the handlingof bothmaterial stracttools. The body subsistspreciselyat the sis, he imagined a kindof general'rhythmology' aplevel of the reciprocal movement between pliedto thelivingbody andits internal andexternal these two realms;their difference- which is relationships, and he even considered it a possible for psychoanalysis.12 lived, not thought- is its habitat. replacement To take a less ambitiousview, two qualitiesof (Lefebvre,1991, p. 203) First,it tranrhythmanalysis mightbe accentuated. This is why we - as well as the spatial body - can scends any separationbetween space and time. talk abouta temporalbodyliving out the different Rhythmcan be definedas movementsand differof self and society and, in this proc- ences in repetition, as the interweaving of concrete temporalities ess, preservingand developingdifferencewithin times, butit always also implies a relationof time to space or place. Lefebvretalksabouta localized repetition.
8
Geografiska Annaler ? 87 B (2005) ? 1

many forms, such as physical,biological,mental, cosmic,social,cyclicalandlineartime,all of which in everyday life andin the body. we encounter The developmentof a theory and a critiqueof everyday life was one of Lefebvre's lifelong projects,andit is a double-sidedeffortproducing 'at once a rejectionof the inauthenticandthe alienated, and an unearthingof the humanwhich still buriedtherein'(Trebitch,1991). This doubleof daily life; eveness relatesto the temporalities ryday life is made of repetitionsor recurrences, basically of two differentforms, which are irreducible to each other(Lefebvre,1961). Lefebvre somewhatnostalgicallytracesback the firsttype to archaicsocieties in which social life is closely connectedto cosmic cycles andrhythmsof nature and of the body.This cyclical repetitionis organized accordingto phenomenasuch as days and nights, seasons and years,generations,andyouth and age. The othertype of repetitionis linear. It is mechanical, such as a series of gestures, of it is enframed,constrained blows of the hammer; andcolonized by the space of the commodityand the territory of the state;it is the dominant temporality of modernity.Even if linear time has encroachedon the cyclical, however,the latternever Emotions and affections, prifully disappeared. vate life and its symbols cannotsubmitto cumulative and linearprocesses.10 And at the point of intersection betweenthetwo we findeverydaylife and the body:

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE

the spatime or a temporalized place to underline andtheirparticiparealityof rhythms tio-temporal of space. Second,rhythmation in the production of thebodyto sothe centrality nalysisaccentuates cial understanding:

meththe questionon developmentof alternative odologies in orderto graspthe more opaquesides of sociallife. Lefebvrehimselfin a coupleof essays (one of themwithCatherine Regulier)exploresthe of the city - fromflows of bodies, spectarhythms cles and soundsto politicalcentralityand struggle The body's inventivenessneeds no demon- betweenhomogeneityanddiversity(bothin Lefefor the body itself revealsit, and de- bvre, 1996)- thusmakingpreliminary stration, suggestions ploys it in space. Rhythmsin all their multi- as to the directionssuch analyses of temporality In the body and spatialitymighttake. one another. plicity interpenetrate
and around it ... rhythms are forever crossing

and recrossing, superimposing themselves upon each other, always bound to space.... Such rhythmshave to do with needs, which may be dispersedas tendencies,or distilled to specify them, we into desire.If we attempt find that some rhythmsare easy to identify: thirst, hunger,and breathing,the hartbreak, the need for sleep are cases in point. Others, however,such as those of sexuality,fertility, social life, or thought,are relativelyobscure. Some operate on the surface, so to speak, whereasothersspringfromhiddendepths (1991, p. 205). of dithe surmounting The body,then,represents the mentalandthe sovisionsbetweenthe sensory, cial, evenif a tensionbetweenbiologicalandsocial processesremainsunsolved. From the startingpoint in the body, Lefebvre (andCatherine Regulierwithwhomhe wrotea few to wider of these essays) extendedrhythmanalysis sociologicalrelationships: of the huIt is on the one handa relationship manbeing with his own body,with his tongue and speech, with his gestures, in a certain place and with a gesturalwhole, and on the withthe largestpubotherhand,a relationship lic space,withtheentiresocietyandbeyondit, the universe. (LefebvreandRegulier,1996, p. 235) anda conThis extensionis basedon a distinction of the self andrhythms junctionbetween'rhythms of the other',of 'the privateand the public', or of This polaropposi'presenceand representation'. tion should however only be seen as a starting point. Lefebvre emphasizes the relativity of and imbricarhythmsand the multipletransitions inandtemporalities tions betweenthe spatialities unis a rather volved.13 rhythmanalysis Obviously, finishedprojectfromLefebvre's hand,butit raises
Geografiska Annaler ? 87 B (2005) ? 1

Perspectives Above,I havetriedto distilLefebvre'scontribution to a social understanding of the body,in particular as it relates to social practiceand everydaylife. Lefebvredid not deliver a coherenttheoryof the body;whatwe havegot fromhis handis a concepto humancapacitiesand tualeffortcallingattention creativities involvedin an 'authentic' life, everyday of anda focus on the spatialityandthe temporality be connectthebody.Theseeffortscouldprofitably ed withworkfromotherauthors who bringtogether the body andeverydaylife. is Merleau-Ponty.14Whileboth One suchauthor in the spatiality andtempoauthors wereinterested to addssomething ralityof thebody,Merleau-Ponty Lefebvrewhen it comes to a carefulphilosophical of issues of the body.In his phiworking-through he developeda sensuous losophyof embodiment, of lived experience,locatedin the phenomenology spacebetweenmindandbody,or subjectandobject - the intersubjective space of perceptionand the 1962).Inthis,as in Lefebvre, body(Merleau-Ponty, is not seen as an innerrepresentation of perception the outerworld,butratheras a practical bodily inIt is an activeprocessrelating to ouronvolvement. andpractices. Thismeansthatthehugoingprojects manbodyis uniquein playinga dualrolebothas the vehicle of perceptionand the object perceived,as which 'knows'itself by virthe body-in-the-world, or tueof its activerelation to thisworld.Thisduality is ambiguityof the body as perceiving-perceived centralto Merleau-Ponty's projectand,at the level ideasof the of practice, to Lefebvre's maybe related to thebody,as simuldualityof socialspacerelative of theself andmetaneously partof theconstitution diatorto the perception of somethingelse. too placedthe body in a field of Merleau-Ponty fromthe spatiality of the spaceandtime.He started of how this is not a spatiality body andaccentuated of situation.This situatedposition,buta spatiality ness goes fortimeas well, butwe shouldavoidsee9

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KIRSTEN SIMONSEN

ing it in terms of our bodies being in space, or in time - they inhabit space and time: I am not in space and time, nor do I conceive space and time; I belong to them, my body combines with them and includes them. The scope of this inclusion is the measure of that of my existence. (Merleau-Ponty, 1962, p. 140) This means that the active body, using its acquired schemas and habits, positions its world around itself and constitutes that world as 'ready-to-hand', to use a Heideggerian expression. Lefebvre would agree with such a conception of the spatiality and temporality of the body, but he would find it inadequate. Unique to Lefebvre's contribution to a conception of the body is the way in which he deals with its involvement in different social modalities of space and time. Another author who can add to some of Lefebvre's ideas of the body is Goffman, in particular when it comes to the performance of gestural systems. When Lefebvre writes about gestures and gestural systems and considers the way in which their codifications form the basis of social interaction, he definitely touches on a theme that is more thoroughly worked out by Goffman. Goffman's approach to the body is characterized by three main features: (1) the body is viewed as a material property of individuals, as a resource which both requires and enables people to manage their movements and appearances; (2) meanings attributedto the body are determined by 'shared vocabularies of body idiom' which are not under immediate control of individuals; (3) the body plays an important role in mediating the relationship between people's self-identity and their social identity (Goffman, 1963, 1990). From this he demonstrates, among other things, how social interaction in daily life requires a high degree of competence in controlling the expressions, movements and communications of the body. Such an approach could definitely develop Lefebvre's ideas, and some of the weaknesses of Goffman's analysis - its lack of macro-social connections and its less adequate sense of the body as an integral partof human agency - may be counteracted by the Lefebvrian contribution. Considering the role that Goffman's work (acknowledged or unacknowledged) has achieved in contemporary geographical literature on performativity (see Crang, 1994; McDowell, 1997; Gregson and Rose, 2000), this connection gains particularrelevance.
10

Last but not least, Lefebvre's approach to the body is definitely in need of juxtaposition with some of the extensive feminist literature on the body. I have already touched on the fact that even if Lefebvre in his later writings makes numerous references to male sexuality and its production of spaces and to the symbolic distortion, objectification and control of female bodies, he never seriously engaged with the production and practices of sexualized bodies and their relationship to social space. An interaction between Lefebvre's ideas and those of feminist authors who, like him, are interested in concrete, material bodily practices would therefore stimulate the project. The most obviously relevant contribution for this purpose is Elisabeth Grosz's (1994) corporeal feminism, emphasizing the material and sexed/gendered character of bodies. She has a starting point in psychoanalysis but departs from it by moving the body and sexual difference from the periphery to the centre of analysis, thus considering it the very 'stuff' of subjectivity. Moreover, in a seminal essay she approaches the way in which the modern metropolis assimilates the subject into the space of the city (Grosz, 1992), an approach, however, which in my opinion would benefit from the input of Lefebvre's stronger spatial dialectics. Other possible partners in a marriage between Lefebvre and feminism could be Iris MarionYoung (1990) when she draws on phenomenology to explore the possibility of specifically 'feminist' body comportment in relation to space, or Toril Moi (1998) in her explorations starting from the idea of the body as a 'situation'. These perspectives could in different ways add a much needed genderization/sexualization to Lefebvre's spatio-temporal bodies (see also Simonsen, 2001, 2003). In conclusion, it may be interesting to relate Lefebvre's formulations to a rather dominant tendency in social discussions on the body - a theoretical distinction that is often attributedto the work of Merleau-Ponty and Foucault (Crosley, 1996). On one side of the line stand analyses of the active role of the body in social life, of the body as lived and generative, and on the other side are studies of the body as acted upon, as socially and historically constructed and inscribed from the outside. The interesting point about Lefebvre's discussion of the body is that he transcends this division, and that the means of this transcendence is the production of space. In Fig. 1 I attempt in a very simple manner to illustrate the two sides of Lefebvre's conjunction of body, space and time.
Annaler* 87 B (2005) 1 Geografiska

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE

Fig. 1. Body, space and time.

the disThe upperpartof the figurerepresents cussion primarilyconducted in this essay. It is andcreativesocial body,as it aboutthe generative in a theory of practice.As would be represented partof the lived experience,the body constitutesa in thesparealmthatis performed practico-sensory tio-temporalrhythmsof everyday life. In these rhythms, constituting and constituted, different andsocial temporalmodalitiesof social spatiality as cyclical and linearrepetiity are incorporated, of the perceived,the tions, and as the conjunction conceivedandthe lived.Inthe lowerpartof the figure,Lefebvre'scommoninterestwith Foucaultin To powerandthehistoryof thebodyis represented. thisis abouttheabove-mentioned Lefebvre, history of the decorporealization of increasing abstraction, of spaceandtime.Forbothspaceandtime(andthe body), Lefebvredescribesthis processof abstraction as simultaneouslyone of homogenization, This history fragmentationand hierarchization. differsfrom the one given by Foucaultbecauseof of space.Heretoo Lefeits basis in the production bvretreatsspace as both producingand a product of the humanbody,as a perceptionand a conception, not simply the impositionof a concept,or a space,uponthe body (see also Stewart,1995). As a consequenceof this dualityin Lefebvre's discussionof thebody,it is possibleto arguethathe locateshimself in the centreof two recentdebates The firstof theseis about on thebody in geography. bodypolitics. In the intersectionbetween Lefebvre'ssocial ontologyof the body andhis historyof - a site thebody,thebodyturnsintoa criticalfigure of resistanceandactivestruggle:
Geografiska Annaler 87 B (2005) ? 1

Thanksto its sensoryorgans,from the sense

of smell and from sexuality to sight ... the body tends to behave as a differential field. It

behaves, in other words, as a total body, breakingout of the temporaland spatialshell developedin responseto labour (Lefebvre,1991, p. 384). This meansthatthe body, as a producer of difference (through has rhythms, gestures,imagination),
an inherent right to difference, formulated against

forces of homogenization, and the fragmentation, hierarchicalorganized power. Lefebvre located these strugglesfor the rightto be differentat many scales, but at the scale of the body two aspectsare crucial.One is the 'Festival',as the site of participationandof the possibilityof thepoesis of creatThe fromdesireandenjoyment. ing new situations otheris sexuality,involvingstrugglesof relations betweenthe sexes (a femininerevolt)as well as relationsbetweensexualityandsociety. The seconddebateto whichLefebvre'sconception of the body mightcontribute is the current one on performativity(see e.g. collections edited by Rose and Thrift, 2000, Dewsbury et al., 2002, LathamandConradson, 2003). It has been argued thatthese contributions a turnin cultural represent to pergeographyfrom 'text' and representations formanceandpractices(Nash,2000), andthebody and embodimentare distinctiveelements in this shift. However,besides the above-mentionedinspirationfromGoffman,one of the mainpointsof access to this discussion was Judith Butler's (1990, 1993) Foucauldian feminism in which 11

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KIRSTEN SIMONSEN

identity (and the body) is performative - that is, enacted and inscribed by way of discourse. Another line of work informing this discussion is what has been labelled 'nonrepresentational theory' in geography proposed primarily by Nigel Thrift (e.g. 1996, 2000). Drawing on a whole array of theoretical inspirations - ranging (to mention just a few) from phenomenological (and related) theories of practice through pragmatism and conversational analysis to the emphasis on non-human agency and relational networks in actor network theory and heterogeneous fragments, flows and assemblages in Deleuze and Guattari- nonrepresentational theory concerns practices shaping 'subjects' as decentred, embodied, relational, expressive and involved with others and objects in a world continually in process. Although there is good reason to appreciate the work on bodies and embodiment in these traditions, I think that Lefebvre's both phenomenological, rhythmic and political understanding of the body (whatever romantic bias it might hold) can still inform the discussion and partially counteract Butler's more discursive bodies and the barely living bodies of actor network theory. Notes
1. Throughout Lefebvre's later writings are numerous references to male sexuality and its production of spaces and femininity, exploitation of women in everyday life, and the objectification and control of female bodies. He does not, however, elaborate at length an interpretation of gendered bodies and gender relations. 2. A similar critique may be found in Habermas' work, earliest in Jiirgen Habermas, Erkenntnmsse und Interesse (Frankfurt am Mein: Suhrkamp, 1968) and Jurgen Habermas, Arbeit und Interaktion. Bemerkungen zu Hegels Jenenser 'Philoso-

These ideas seemingly come close to Nietzsche when he talks about the human body or 'organism' in the context of the bodies of all organic beings. 6. The Heideggerian undertones in some of these formulations are obvious. 7. Lefebvre also uses bodily gestures as a critical figure of, and mediation between, distinctions such as inarticulate/articulate, nature/culture or body/mind.

5.

- Journeysto LosAngelesand oth8. In his book Thirdspace

und Wissenschaft als 'Ideolophie des Geistes',in Technik

gie' (Frankfurtam Mein: Suhrkamp, 1968), pp. 9-47. But I think the resulting formulations are quite divergent; partly because of the more dualist character of Habermas' thinking, and partly because of his interest in communication rather than practice. 3. In the 1940s, Lefebvre had dismissed Sartre's existentialism in uncompromising hostile terms, characterizing it as feminine - as passive and emotional. These male chauvinist formulations stand in contrast to his own later critique of the phallocratic character of modernism. With the publication of Sartre's Critique de la ralson dialectique however, some rapprochement between the two of them occurred. For a closer description of these debates see Mark Poster, Existential Marxism in Postwar France (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1975). 4. This parallels Lefebvre's later critique (Production of Space) of the nostalgic aura in Heidegger's writing. However, his own writings of everyday life, especially the early ones, do not escape a nostalgic glorification of the peasant community.

er Real-and-imagined places (Cambridge,MA and Oxford: Blackwell, 1996), Edward Soja interprets this triad as part of a general strategy in Lefebvre of 'thirding-asOthering'. 9. These ideas come close to the ones of Foucault on the discursive formation of the body, even if Lefebvre several times throughout The Production of Space dissociates himself from Foucault's thinking. 10. Lefebvre at this place refers to Gaston Bachelard for, unaware of it himself, having revealed the contradictionbetween the cumulative and non-cumulative, the linear and the cyclical. 11. As for everyday life, these ideas date back to the 1920s. Lefebvre developed around 1960 in Critique vol II op.cit. and in La somme et le reste (2 vols., Paris: La Nef de Paris, 1959), and later he linked moments with the idea of creating new situations in Les temps de mdprises (Paris: Stock, 1975). In this way, his ideas conjoined with the ones of the situationist movement, also developed in Paris in the late 1950s. 12. The argument was that rhythm analysis is much more concrete than psychoanalysis, closer to a pedagogy of appropriation (the appropriation of the body, as of spatial practice). Instead of some kind of fetishized unconsciousness, then, the 'space of dreams' should be described as a space where dispersed and broken rhythms are reconstituted (Production, op.cit. pp. 205, 208-209). Lefebvre's intentions by these suggestions, however, never become very clear. 13. In this sense, rhythm analysis may be seen as a social and philosophical translation of Eisteinian notions of spacetime relativity, as suggested by Kofman and Lebas in their introduction in Lefebvre (1996). 14. Lefebvre himself was rather critical towards Merleau-Ponty. He criticized him of eclecticism, of conducting a mystifying syncretism between phenomenology, Gestaltism and organic psychology, and of leaving out history and social practice in the attempt (Henri Lefebvre, 'M. Merleau-Ponty et la philosophie de l'ambiguite', La Pensde 68, 1956, pp. 44-58 and 73: 37-52). It seems to me, however, that overlap in interest occurred, and that in the harsh critique much was bound up with an ongoing debate in which Merleau-Ponty's increasing scepticism about Marxism was the issue.

Kirsten Simonsen Department of Geography and International Development Studies Roskilde University Postboks 260 DK- 4000 Roskilde Denmark www.geo.ruc.dk E-mail: kis@ruc.dk
Geografiska Annaler ? 87 B (2005) ? 1

12

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE

References
AINLEY, R., (1998) (ed.): New Frontiers of Space, Bodies and Gender. Routledge, London and New York. BLUM, V. and NAST, H., (1996): 'Where's the difference? The heterosexualization of alterity in Henri Lefebvre and Jacques

andPlanning D: SocietyandSpace,14: Lacan',Environment

559-580. BOURDIEU, P., (1977): Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. BOURDIEU, P., (1990): The Logic of Practice. Polity Press, Cambridge.

Feminism andtheSubverJ.,(1990):GenderTrouble: BUTLER,

sion of Identity. Routledge, New York.

LEFEBVRE, H., (1956): 'M. Merleau-Ponty et la philosophie de l'ambguite', La Pensde, 68: 44-58, 73: 37-52. LEFEBVRE, H., (1958, 1961, 1981): Critique de la vie quotidienne, vols I, II, III. L'arche, Paris. LEFEBVRE, H., (1959): La somme et le reste. La nef de Paris, Paris. LEFEBVRE, H., (1970): Lafin de l'histoire. Anthropos, Paris. LEFEBVRE, H., (1975): Les temps de mdprises. Stock, Paris. LEFEBVRE, H., (1975, orig. 1965): Metaphilosophie. Prolegomena. Suhrkamp, Frankfurtam Main. LEFEBVRE, H., (1991, orig. 1974): The Production of Space. Blackwell, Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA.

Matter: OntheDiscursive LimBUTLER, J.,(1993):BodiesThat

its of Sex. Routledge, New York. CRANG, P., (1994): 'It's showtime: on the workplace geographies of display in a restaurantin South East England', Envi-

IntroduLEFEBVRE, H., (1992): Elementsde ruthmeanalyse: tiona la connaissance des rythms. Syllepse,Paris.
LEFEBVRE, H., (1996): Writings on Cities. Blackwell, Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA. LEFEBVRE, H. and REGULIER, C., ( 1985): 'Le projet rythmanalytique', Communications, 41: 191-199. LEFEBVRE, H. and REGULIER, C., (1996, orig. 1980): 'Rhythmanalysis of MediterraneanCities', in LEFEBVRE, H.: Writings on Cities. Blackwell, Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA.

andPlanningD: SocietyandSpace, 12:675-704. ronment

CROSLEY, N., (1996): 'Body-subject/body-power: agency, inscription and control in Foucault and Merleau-Ponty', Body & Society, 2: 99-116. DEWSBURY, J.D., HARRISON, P., ROSE, M. and WYLIE, J., (eds) (2002): 'Enacting geographies', Geoforum, 33, special issue. DUNCAN, N., (ed.) (1996): BodySpace. Routledge, London and New York. ELDEN, S., (2004): 'Between Marx and Heidegger: politics, phi-

FluidBoundaries. LONGHURST, R., (2001):Bodies.Exploring

Routledge, London and New York.

at Work Gender inthe MCDOWELL, L., (1997):CapitalCulture.

City. Blackwell, Oxford. MERLEAU-PONTY, M., (1962, orig. 1945): Phenomenology of Perception. Routledge & Keegan Paul, London. MERRIFIELD, A., (1995): 'Lefebvre, Anti-Logos and Nietzsche: An alternative reading of The Production of Space', Antipode, 27: 294-303. MERRIFIELD, A., (2000): 'Henri Lefebvre: a socialist in space.' in CRANG, M. and THRIFT, N. (eds): Thinking Space. Routledge, London and New York.

of Space',Antipode, losophyandLefebvre'sTheProduction
36: 86-106. FEATHERSTONE, M., HEPWORTH, M. and TURNER, B.S.,

(1991) (eds): Thebody:Socialprocessand culturaltheory.

Sage, London. FEATERSTONE, M. and TURNER, B.S., (1995): 'Body & Society: An Introduction', Body & Society, 1:1, 1-12. FEHER, M., NEDDAFF, R. and TAZI, N., (1989) (eds): Frag-

MOI,T., (1998):Hva er en kvinne?Kjonnog kropifeministisk

teori. Gyldendal, Oslo. NASH, C., (2000): 'Performativity in practise: some recent work in cultural geography, Progress in Human geography, 24(4): 653-664. NAST, J. and PILE, S., (1998): Places Through the Body. Routledge, London and New York.

ments for a History of theHuman BodyI-III.Zone,New York. inPublicPlaces:Noteson the GOFFMAN, E., ( 1963):Behaviour and Gathering. Social Organization The Free Press, New
York. GOFFMAN, E., (1990, orig. 1959): The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth. GREGORY, D., (1994): Geographical Imaginations. Blackwell, Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA. GREGORY, D., (1995): 'Lefebvre, Lacan and the production of space' in BENKO, G. and STROHMAYER, U. (eds): Geo-

PILE,S., (1996):TheBodyand the City:Psychoanalysis, Space

and Subjectivity. Routledge, London.

Marxismin PostwarFrance. POSTER, M., (1975): Existential

Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. ROSE, G. and THRIFT, N., (eds) (2000): 'Theme issue: Spaces of performance, part 1' Environment and Planning D: Society

and Social Science.Kluver,Dordrecht. graphy,History

GREGSON, N. and ROSE, G., (2000): 'Taking Butler elsewhere: performativities, spatialities and subjectivities', Environment

and Space, 18:4. LoveandStruggle.SpatialdiaSHIELDS, R., (1998):Lefebvre,

lectics. Routledge, London and New York. SHILLING, C., (1993): The Body and Social Theory. Sage, London SIMONSEN, K., (2001): 'Rum, sted, krop og k0n - dimensioner af en geografi om social praksis', in SIMONSEN, K. (ed.):

and PlanningD: Societyand Space, 18:433-452.

GROZS, E., (1992): 'Bodies-cities' in COLOMINA, B. (ed.): Sexuality and Space. Princeton Architectural Press, New York.

a Corporeal FemE., (1994):VolatileBodies:Towards GROSZ,

inism. Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis. HABERMAS, J., (1968a): Erkenntnisse und Interesse. Suhrkamp, Frankfurtam Main. HABERMAS, J., (1968b): Arbeit und Interaktion. Bemerkungen zu Hegels Jenenser Philosophie des Geistes. in Technik und Wissenschaft als Ideologie. Suhrkamp, Frankfurtam Main. HEIDEGGER, M., (1962, orig. 1927): Being and Time. Blackwell, Oxford. LATHAM, A. and CONRADSON, D., (eds) (2003): 'Theme issue: the possibilities of performance', Environmentand Planning A, 35:11

Praksis,rumog mobilitet. Socialgeografiske bidrag.Roskilde Universitetsforlag, Copenhagen. SIMONSEN, K., (2003): 'The embodied city: from bodily practice to urban life', in OHMAN, J. and SIMONSEN, K. (eds):

Voicesfrom the North.New Trendsin NordicHumanGeography. Ashgate, Aldershot. SMITH, N., (1998): 'Antinomies of space and nature in Henri Lefebvre's ' The Production of Space", in LIGHT, A. and SMITH, J.M. (eds): The Production of Public Space. Philosophy and Geography II, Rowman and Littlefield, New York.

the Reassertion SOJA,E., (1989):Postmodern Geographies, of Verso,London. Spacein CriticalSocial Theory. - Journeys to LosAngelesandothSOJA,E., (1996):Thirdspace

Geografiska Annaler ? 87 B (2005) ? 1

13

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

KIRSTEN SIMONSEN er real-and-imagined places. Blackwell, Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA. STEWART, L., (1995): 'Bodies, visions, and spatial politics: a review essay on Henri Lefebvre's The Production of Space', TREBITCH, M., (1991): 'Preface', in LEFEBVRE, H.: Critique of Everyday Life, vol I. Verso, London.

in Social TURNER, S., (1984):TheBody&Society: Explorations

Theory. Blackwell, Oxford.

Environment andPlanningD: Societyand Space,13:5,609619. THRIFT, N., (1996): Spatial Formations. Sage, London, Thousand Oaks, CA, and New Delhi. THRIFT, N., (2000): 'Afterwords', Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 18: 213-255.

Likea girl and Other YOUNG,I.M.,(1990):Throwing Essaysin FeministPhilosophyand Social Theory.Indiana University
Press, Bloomington.

14

Geografiska Annaler

87 B (2005)

This content downloaded from 128.83.206.93 on Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:59:12 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions