Spaces of Representation/Representational Spaces

The terms spaces of representation and representational spaces form part of the spatial theorist Henri Lefebvre's conceptual triad used to distinguish between different types of spaces and the different ways in which space is produced. Representational spaces, or spaces of representation, as the original les espaces de représentation is more commonly translated, is conceptualized as the everyday space that people produce, inhabit, and act within. Similar to the concept of “place,” spaces of representation consist of day-to-day human networks, a diversity of urban aestheticization processes, and the complex symbolisms of the underground and vernacular side of social life. The notion of spaces of representation has been used by cultural geographers in thinking about the production of the urban environment as the manifestation of abstract economic processes as well as the location of social and cultural activities.

Although Lefebvre's triad is a Marxian typology of space, spaces of representation resemble the German phenomenological concept of Lebenswelt, or the “life-world.” Like the life-world, spaces of representation can be thought of, for example, as a composite of the mental maps people carry of their surroundings, the official street signs and place names that provide orientation, and the local graffiti that act as neighborhood landmarks. The unlikely influence of German phenomenology on Lefebvre may be the result of his having read Ernst Cassirer's own tripartite division of spatial experience into organic, perceptual, and symbolic spaces.

Spaces of representation are also called lived spaces (espaces vécus), as they are simultaneously produced and enacted through experience, expression, contestation, contemplation, sensation, imagination, and sociocultural and biological reproduction. This is not to suggest that spaces of representation occupy a privileged position within a hierarchy of space; rather, spaces of representation should be thought of in relation to, or in dialectical tension with, the other two parts of Lefebvre's spatial triad:

• 1.
  Spatial practice, or perceived space: This concept refers to society's organized spaces, which at once establish and connect different locations through transportation infrastructure, as well as physically and ideologically separate places in the built environment. It can also be thought of as absolute, fixed, and framed space, as in David Harvey's (2006) spatial matrix, or as a material “firstspace,” as in Edward Soja's (1996) trialectics of space.
• 2.
  Representations of space, or conceived space: This notion is the abstract, dominant space of a society as conceptualized by planners, technocrats, politicians, and those who wield both power and creative authority. Such authoritative prescriptions for space dictate how environments should look, function, and support particular types of production and consumption. This most closely matches Soja's notion of an imagined “secondspace.”

According to Soja, spaces of representation are the outcome of the first two parts of Lefevbre's triad. Soja sees spaces of representation as a summation of all spatial practices and authoritative representations of space. As part of his explicitly political project, Soja gives analytical priority to spaces of representation, as it is in everyday lived space that society can be investigated, understood, and potentially transformed. This critical “thirdspace,” as he calls it, can be viewed as a postmodern milieu of complexity, diversity, and multiplicity. Because spaces of representation are both “real and imagined,” they demand a nuanced analysis of both abstract and social production of space and an understanding of diverse spatialities.

...