Social Space and the Genesis of a Reflexive Sociology: Bourdieu’s Interventions in the Study of Space

Öz

This paper focuses on the concept of “social space,” a key concept developed by Pierre Bourdieu for advancing his sociological research program. In investigating the possible novel venues of sociological inquiry opened up by the intervention provided by Bourdieu’s use of social space, this paper ventures into the archives of International Journal of Urban and Regional Research to understand how Bourdieu’s work was reflected upon within the field of urban research in the last four decades. New urban sociology and Marxist urbanism’s understanding and interpretation of space has changed significantly throughout the years. Yet, Bourdieu had a certain theory effect, and this has acted upon a steady stream of research, especially since the 2000s. IJURR had gone through what we can call a series of theoretical ruptures in the three decades. Hence, while investigating the Bourdieu’s ouevre three important moments are animated here: first, the inherent rupture of the 1960s as a reaction to the Chicago School and its quantitative inheritors are explicated. Second moment requires a critical engagement with the new-born -or, still-birth- new urban sociology and how Manuel Castells’ theoretical approach created a new doxa in the academic field. 1970s and 1980s was a crucial point of transformation for the urbanists. In the third moment, I investigated how Bourdieu’s analysis was appropriated in the symbolic space of the sociological and urban sociological field. Bourdieu’s conceptual framework created a plethora of new approaches, however, their analytical relationship with both Bourdieu’s sociological program and the hitherto prevalent spatial imagination is frequently questioned. Here, I suggested an objectification of the Bourdieu’s theoretical and research work and tried to locate the breaks and continuities.  

Anahtar Kelimeler

• new urban sociology,urban theory,social space,Pierre Bourdieu,social space

Toplumsal Mekân ve Düşünümsel bir Kent Sosyolojisinin İnşası: Bourdieucülüğün Mekâna Müdahalesini Sorunsallaştırmak

Öz

Bu yazı, Pierre Bourdieu’nün “toplumsal mekân” kavramının yeni kent sosyolojisinin en önemli yayın mecraı ve kurumsal yapısı olan International Journal of Urban and Regional Research üzerinden alanı nasıl tanımladığını, hangi kırılma noktalarına hitap ettiğini, bu kırılma noktaları aracılığıyla nasıl bir bilimsel kopuş müdahalesi, benim deyişimle doksaya yönelik bir “huruç,” tertip ettiğini açıklamayı amaçlar. Bunu yaparken IJURR’un son kırk yıldaki arşivini gözden geçirerek Bourdieu’nün kavramlarının kullanımını inceler. Yeni kent sosyolojisi ve Marksist şehirciliğin mekân anlayışı ve yorumu son kırk yılda önemli değişimler geçirdi. Ancak özellikle 2000’li yıllardan itibaren Bourdieu’nün kuramsal etkisi bir dizi araştırmayla kendini göstermeye başladı. Bu etkiyi araştırırken üç farklı durak noktasından geçmemiz gereklidir. Bu yazıda, öncelikle yeni kent sosyolojisinin ve eleştirel kentsel kuramların Chicago Okulu’na bir tepki olarak nasıl ortaya çıktığını incelenmiştir. İkinci durak noktasında, Castells’in kurucu etkisi altında kurulan yeni kent sosyolojisinin 1970’lerden 1980’lere dönüşümünü ele aldım. Üçüncü durak ise yeni kent sosyolojisinin geri çekilme noktasında Bourdieu’nün yapıtının öncelikle Anglofon sosyolojide, sonra da kent sosyolojisinde nasıl temellük edildiğiyle ilgilidir. Burada, 1980’lerden itibaren IJURR’un sayfalarında Bourdieucü sosyolojik programın nasıl ele alındığını çalıştım. Bu önemli durakta, öte yandan Bourdieu’nün metinlerinin toplumsal mekânı nasıl ele aldığı da incelenmiştir. Son kısımda, Bourdieu’nün yapıtının yeniden inşa edilmekte olan bir kent sosyolojisi için sunduğu programın eleştirisi ve kazanımları meta-kuramsal bir çerçeve içinde değerlendirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• yeni kent sosyolojisi,kentsel kuram,toplumsal mekân,Pierre Bourdieu,toplumsal mekân

Kaynakça

1. Althusser, L. (1977). For Marx. London: N L B.
2. Althusser, L. (1997). Reading capital. London: Verso.
3. Berry, B. J. L., & Wheeler, J. O. (2005). Urban geography in America, 1950-2000: Paradigms and personalities. Routledge.
4. Bourdieu, P. (1969). Intellectual field and creative project. Information (Interna-tional Social Science Council), 8(2), 89–119.
5. Bourdieu, P. (1970). The Berber house or the world reversed. Information (Inter-national Social Science Council), 9(2), 151–170.
6. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. (Esquisse d’une théorie de la pratique). Transl. by Richard Nice. (Repr.). Cambridge University Press.
7. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Espace social et genèse des “classes”. Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales, 52(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.3406/arss.1984.3327
8. Bourdieu, P. (1985a). The social space and the genesis of groups. Theory and Society, 14(6), 723-744. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00174048

9. Bourdieu, P. (1985b). The social space and the genesis of groups. Information (International Social Science Council), 24(2), 195-220. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901885024002001
10. Bourdieu, P. (1988). Homo academicus. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
11. Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social Space and Symbolic Power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14-25. https://doi.org/10.2307/202060
12. Bourdieu, P. (1991). L’ordre des choses [Entretien avec deux jeunes gens du nord de la France]. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 90(1), 7–19.
13. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Acts of resistance: Against the new myths of our time. Polity Press.
14. Bourdieu, P. (2018). Social space and the genesis of appropriated physical space. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 42(1), 106-114. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12534
15. Bourdieu, P., & Thompson, J. B. (1991). Language and symbolic power: the econo-my of linguistic exchanges. Cambridge: Polity in association with Basil Blackwell.
16. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (2001). Neoliberal newspeak: notes on the new planetary vulgate. Radical Philosophy, (105).
17. Brenner, N., Jessop, B., Jones, M., & Macleod, G. (2008). State/Space: A reader. John Wiley & Sons.
18. Bridge, G. (2001). Estate agents as interpreters of economic and cultural capi-tal: The gentrification premium in the Sydney housing market. Interna-tional Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 25(1), 87-101.
19. Burgess, E. W. (2015). Şehrin büyümesi: Araştırmaya giriş. içinde Şehir: Kent ortamındaki insan davranışlarının araştırılması üzerine öneriler. Ankara: Heretik.
20. Carpenter, J., & Lees, L. (1995). Gentrification in New York, London and Paris: An international comparison. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 19(2), 286-303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1995.tb00505.x
21. Castells, M. (1968). Y a-t-il une sociologie urbaine ? Sociologie du travail, 10(1), 72-90. https://doi.org/10.3406/sotra.1968.1380
22. Castells, M. (1976a). Is there an urban sociology? Içinde C.G. Pickvance (der.) Urban Sociology: Critical Essays. London: Tavistock Publications.
23. Castells, M. (1976b). Theory and ideology in urban sociology. Içinde C.G. Pickvance (der.) Urban Sociology: Critical Essays. London: Tavistock.
24. Castells, M. (1977). The urban question : a Marxist approach. London: Edward Arnold.
25. Castells, M. (2006). Changer la Ville: A Rejoinder. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 30(1), 219-223. https://doi.org/doi:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2006.00654.x
26. Castree, N., & Gregory, D. (2006). David Harvey: a critical reader. içinde Antipode book series. Geliş tarihi gönderen http://www.loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip0513/2005013795.html
27. Cresswell, T. (2002). Bourdieu’s geographies: In memorium. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 20(4), 379-382. https://doi.org/10.1068/d2004t
28. Crysler, C. G. (2003). Writing spaces: discourses of architecture, urbanism, and the built environment, 1960-2000. içinde The Architext series. Geliş tarihi gönderen http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0701/2002153874-d.html
29. de Decker, P., Kesteloot, C., de Maesschalck, F., & Vranken, J. (2005). Revitaliz-ing the city in an anti-urban context: Extreme right and the rise of urban policies in flanders, Belgium. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 29(1), 152-171. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2005.00576.x
30. Dear, M. J., & Scott, A. J. (1981). Urbanization and urban planning in capitalist society. London; New York: Methuen.
31. Degen, M. (2003). Fighting for the Global Catwalk: Formalizing Public Life in Castlefield (Manchester) and Diluting Public Life in el Raval (Barcelo-na). International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 27(4), 867-880. https://doi.org/10.1111/j..2003.00488.x
32. Ducatel, K., & Blomley, N. (1990). Rethinking retail capital. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 14(2), 207. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1990.tb00669.x
33. Durkheim, E. (2002). İntihar. İstanbul: Cem Yayınevi.
34. EBSCO. (2019, Ocak 28). International Journal of Urban and Regional Research [Database]. Geliş tarihi gönderen Sociology Source Ultimate website: https://www.ebsco.com/products/research-databases/sociology-source-ultimate
35. Feagin, J. R. (1987). Urban political economy: the new paradigm matures. JSTOR.
36. Fernández Kelly, M. P. (1994). Towanda’s triumph: Social and cultural capital in the transition to adulthood in the urban ghetto. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 18(1), 88-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1994.tb00252.x
37. Goonewardena, K. (2005). The urban sensorium: Space, ideology and the aes-theticization of politics. Antipode Antipode, 37(1), 46-71.
38. Gottdiener, M., & Feagin, J. (1988). The paradigm shifts in urban sociology. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 24(2), 163-187.
39. Grootaert, C., Narayan, D., Jones, V. N., & Woolcock, M. (2004). Measuring so-cial capital: An integrated questionnaire. The World Bank.
40. Grootaert, C., & Van Bastelar, T. (2002). Understanding and measuring social capital: A multi-disciplinary tool for practitioners. The World Bank.
41. Gülhan, S. T. (2013). Özgürlüğün coğrafyası: Mekânsallığın triyalektik praksi-si ve bütünsellik arayışına dair bir tahlil/geographies of liberation: Tria-lectics of spatial praxis and some ideas on the search for a totality. Mül-kiye Dergisi, 37(1), 31-70.
42. Harvey, D. (1982). The limits to capital. Oxford: Blackwell.
43. Hawley, A. H. (1944). Ecology and human ecology. Social Forces, 22(4), 398-405. https://doi.org/10.2307/2571805
44. Holton, B. (1988). First International conference on the sociology of consumption, University of Oslo, January 1988 (Sy 03091317; s. 636). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1988.tb00101.x
45. Kaika, M., & Swyngedouw, E. (2000). Fetishizing the Modern City: The Phan-tasmagoria of Urban Technological Networks. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 24(1), 120-138.
46. Lefebvre, H. (1969). Les paradoxes d’Althusser. L’Homme et la société, 13(1), 3-37. https://doi.org/10.3406/homso.1969.1227
47. Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford, OX, UK; Cambridge, Mass., USA: Blackwell.
48. Lévi-Strauss, C. (1955). Tristes tropiques. içinde Terre Humaine/Poche. Paris: Plon.
49. Lewis, O. (2011). The Children of Sanchez: Autobiography of a Mexican Family. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
50. Lojkine, J. (1976). Contribution to a Marxist Theory of Capitalist Urbanization. Içinde Urban Sociology: Critical Essays. London: Tavistock.
51. Martin, G. P. (2005). Narratives great and small: Neighbourhood change, Place and Identity in Notting Hill. International Journal of Urban & Re-gional Research, 29(1), 67-88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2005.00570.x
52. Marx, K. (1993). Capital: Volume III: A Critique of Political Economy. Penguin Books.
53. Mayer, M. (2003). The onward sweep of social capital: Causes and conse-quences for understanding cities, communities and urban movements. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 27(1), 110-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00435
54. Merrifield, A. (2002). Metromarxism ; a Marxist tale of the city. New York: Routledge.
55. Milicevic, A. S. (2001). Radical intellectuals: What happened to the new urban sociology? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25(4), 759-783.
56. Mormont, M. (1983). The emergence of rural struggles and their ideological effects. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 7(4), 559. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1983.tb00406.x
57. Mullins, P. (1991). Tourism urbanization. International Journal of Urban & Re-gional Research, 15(3), 326. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1991.tb00642.x
58. Norclilffe, G. (1993). The regulation of Gerland: from mass production to flexi-ble production in tony garnier’s “cité industrielle”. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 17(2), 195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1993.tb00476.x
59. Pahl, R. E. (1969). Urban social theory and research. Environment and Planning, 1(2), 143–153.
60. Pahl, R. E. (1989). Is the emperor naked? Some questions on the adequacy of sociological theory in urban and regional research. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 13(4), 709. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1989.tb00143.x
61. Pahl, Ray E. (1977). Stratification, the relation between states and urban and regional development. International Journal of Urban and Regional Re-search, 1(2), 7.
62. Park, R. E. (2015). Topluluğun örgütlenmesi ve çocuk suçları. içinde Şehir: kent ortamındaki insan davranışlarının araştırılması üzerine öneriler. Ankara: Heretik.
63. Park, R. E., & Burgess, E. W. (2015). Şehir: Kent ortamındaki insan davranışlarının araştırılması üzerine öneriler. Ankara: Heretik.
64. Parsons, T. (1968). The structure of social action: a study in social theory with spe-cial reference to a group of recent European writers. New York: Free press.
65. Pickvance, C.G. (1976). Urban sociology: critical essays. London: Tavistock Pub-lications.
66. Pickvance, C.G. (1978). Marxist approaches to the study of urban politics: Di-vergences among some recent French studies. International Journal of Ur-ban and Regional Research, 2(1), 219-255.
67. Podmore, J. (1998). (Re)reading the “loft living” habitus in Montréal’s inner city. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 22(2), 283.
68. Portes, A., Castells, M., & Benton, L. A. (1989). The Informal economy: studies in advanced and less developed countries. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press.
69. Preteceille, E. (1981). Left-wing local governments and services policy in France. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 5(3), 411-425.
70. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Jour-nal of democracy, 6, 65–65.
71. Ranciére, J. (2009). Filozof ve yoksulları, çev. Aziz Ufuk Kılıç. İstanbul: Metis.
72. Ranciére, J. (2014). Cahil Hoca. İstanbul: Metis.
73. Savage, M. (2012). The lost urban sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. içinde The New Blackwell Companion to the City (ss. 511-520). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444395105.ch45
74. Sik, E., & Wallace, C. (1999). The development of open-air markets in east-central Europe. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 23(4), 697-716.
75. Slater, T. (2006). The eviction of critical perspectives from gentrification re-search. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 30(4), 737-757. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2006.00689.x
76. Slater, T. (2008). ‘A literal necessity to be re-placed’: A rejoinder to the gentrifi-cation debate. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 32(1), 212-223. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00781.x
77. Small, A. W. (1895). The era of sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 1(1), 1–15.
78. Smart, J., & Smart, A. (1991). Personal relations and divergent economies: A case study of Hong Kong investment in South China. International Jour-nal of Urban & Regional Research, 15(2), 216-233. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1991.tb00631.x
79. Soja, E. (1980). The Socio-Spatial Dialectic. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 70(2), 207-225.
80. Swedberg, R. (2011). The economic sociologies of Pierre Bourdieu. Cultural sociology, 5(1), 67–82.
81. Swyngedouw, E. (2002). The strange respectability of the situationist city in the society of the spectacle. International Journal of Urban and Regional Re-search, 26(1), 153-165. https://doi.org/doi:10.1111/1468-2427.00369
82. Thompson, E. P. (1995). Poverty of Theory. London: Merlin.
83. Thuen, T. (1999). The significance of borders in the East European transition. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 23(4), 738-750.
84. Topalov, C. (1989). A history of urban research: the French experience since 1965. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 13(4), 625-651. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1989.tb00139.x
85. Wacquant, L. (2008). Relocating gentrification: The working class, science and the state in recent urban research. International Journal of Urban & Re-gional Research, 32(1), 198-205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00774.x
86. Wacquant, L. (2018). Bourdieu comes to town: Pertinence, principles, applica-tions. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 42(1), 90-105. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12535
87. Wacquant, L. (1989). Towards a reflexive sociology a workshop with Pierre Bourdieu. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 26-63. https://doi.org/10.2307/202061
88. Wacquant, L. (1993). Urban outcasts: Stigma and division in the black Ameri-can ghetto and the French urban periphery. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 17(3), 366-383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1993.tb00227.x
89. Wallace, C., Shmulyar, O., & Bedzir, V. (1999). Investing in social capital: The case of small-scale, cross-border traders in post-communist central Eu-rope. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 23(4), 751.
90. Warde, A. (1990). Production, consumption and social change: reservations regarding Peter Saunders’ sociology of consumption. International Jour-nal of Urban & Regional Research, 14(2), 228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1990.tb00670.x
91. Watt, P. (2006). Respectability, roughness and ‘race’: Neighbourhood place images and the making of working-class social distinctions in London. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 30(4), 776-797. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2006.00688.x
92. Watt, P. (2008). The only class in town? Gentrification and the middle-class colonization of the city and the urban imagination. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 32(1), 206-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00769.x
93. Weber, M. (1992). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (T. Parsons, Çev.). London and New York: Routledge.
94. White, H. V. (1973). Metahistory: the historical imagination in nineteenth-century Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
95. White, H. V. (1978). Tropics of discourse essays in cultural criticism.
96. Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life. American Journal of Sociology, 44(1), 1-24.
97. Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: Implications for develop-ment theory, research, and policy. The world bank research observer, 15(2), 225–249.
98. Zukin, S. (1980). A Decade of the new urban sociology. Theory and Society, 9(4), 575-601.