Thanks a LOT, Victor, for the reference. As soon as I get to my campus I'll
check out this book from the library. I'm very much interested in concept of
space and time.
Eugene
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oudeyis [mailto:victor@kfar-hanassi.org.il]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 3:13 PM
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: Re: false consciousness: real and virtual worlds: third space
>
> Gene,
> Your tripartate division of space comes from Lefebvre, Henri(1974) The
> Production of Space , translated by Donald Nicholson-Smith, Basil
Blackwell,
> Oxford, 1991. Interesting book though complex and hard to pin down.
> Lefebvre is a Marxist, though a very singular one. Among the most
peculiar
> and in my view his least successful elements of his theory is an attempt
to
> treat space and time as objects.
> Regards,
> Victor
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eugene Matusov" <ematusov@udel.edu>
> To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 12:28 AM
> Subject: RE: false consciousness: real and virtual worlds: third space
>
>
> > Dear Iraj and everybody-
> >
> > Iraj, I sense that we use the term "space" differently which is good
> because
> > it appears I can learn something new from you. My use of "first space",
> > "second space" and "third space" comes from architecture. I do not have
> > reference with me of who initiated this terminology in architecture
> > (knowledgeable people, please help me!) but the "first space" is
referred
> to
> > "home" (warm, cozy personal dwelling), the "second space" is referred to
> > official (cold), formal public places like office or other
> institutionalized
> > places, and the "third space" is referred to personalized and
> "friendalized"
> > public places (Starbucks cafes want to be such "third space" see
> > http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/05/1031115910533.html).
> >
> > Iraj, can you elaborate how Lefebvre, Soja, Bha Bha, Spivak, bel hooks,
> and
> > Gutierrez use their space terminology and what they mean by that (please
> > give examples if possible)?
> >
> > My "il'enkovized" mind has difficulty to grasp the following paragraph,
> > > yes, the issue, according to Lefebvre and Soja, becomes reality (real
in
> > > space) AND virtuality (imagined in space). The former being what we
> > > experience by our senses outside of our bodies (first space) and the
> > latter
> > > being what we conceive of that experience in our minds (second space),
> > > regardless of any judgement about them being 'real or false.'
> >
> > because experiences given us in our senses are also "idealized",
according
> > to Il'enkov (but also many other philosophers). For Il'enkov "ideal"
does
> > not occupy any space: it is everywhere. We perceive the world
"idealized".
> > We are dealing with "idealized" world and we do not need any other world
> (we
> > are not "trapped"). "Idealization" is not bad subjectivity distorting
> > perception of material world of "the real reality" or "the
> world-out-there"
> > but rather a product of human activities and practices embedded in
social
> > relations. I guess, from Il'enkov's perspective, it is possible to talk
> > about ideal and material aspects of the world but definitely not as
> > "spaces". Did I miss something?
> >
> > Again something like
> >
> > > All these authors used 'third space' as a way out of a trapped set of
> > > practices (first space) and consciousnesses (second space). third
space
> is
> > > about transformation and change in what exists--actual and virtual.
> >
> > does not fit into my "il'enkovized" mind. But I'll try, Iraj, - I
promise.
> >
> > Please help,
> >
> > Eugene
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: IRAJ IMAM [mailto:iimam@cal-research.org]
> > > Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 7:13 PM
> > > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > Subject: false consciousness: real and virtual worlds: third space
> > >
> > > Eugene:
> > >
> > > 'According to Il'enkov, there is not "real" and "virtual" ...
> > consciousness
> > > because by its very nature consciousness is always virtual ...'
> > >
> > > Lefebvre and Soja would agree and that is 'second spaces' to them.
Those
> > > include all forms of mental activities, dreams, consciousness ('false'
> or
> > > otherwise), knowledges, ways of seeing and/or projecting,
> > > propaganda/spin/ad, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > > '(Modern philosopher Zizek (sp?) recently made a similar statement
about
> > > "virtual sex" on the Internet arguing that any sex has its virtual
> > aspect).'
> > >
> > >
> > > Who would doubt that --perhaps women experience a more intense
> virtuality
> > by
> > > closing their eyes?!
> > >
> > > 'Thus, the issue is not "virtuality" versus "reality". '
> > >
> > > yes, the issue, according to Lefebvre and Soja, becomes reality (real
in
> > > space) AND virtuality (imagined in space). The former being what we
> > > experience by our senses outside of our bodies (first space) and the
> > latter
> > > being what we conceive of that experience in our minds (second space),
> > > regardless of any judgement about them being 'real or false.'
> > >
> > > 'I think what makes consciousness "false consciousness" is not the
> nature
> > of
> > > the consciousness itself (e.g., "virtual" vs. "real" artifacts) or the
> > > nature of underlining experiences but rather the nature of social
> > relations
> > > and practices in which the consciousness is embedded in (situated) and
> > > emerge from.'
> > >
> > > And this brings the notion of 'third space' (or lived space,
Lefebvre),
> by
> > > Soja, Bha Bha, Spivak, bel hooks, and GUTIÉRREZ (thanks Mike for the
> > > reference). If I understand Eugene correctly, the assumption is that
> > > consciousness emerges from ' the nature of social relations and
> practices
> > in
> > > which the consciousness is embedded.' I think these above authors
would
> > > agree with that assumption.
> > >
> > > They continue to ask 'so what?' what are we going to do about it? (eg,
> > these
> > > people within these sets of social relations are trapped into these
sets
> > of
> > > consciousnesses). Here is where 'third space' becomes of a
> > > response--production of new space, both actual and virtual in a new
> > > activity. That is a new practice (virtual and actual) which in turn
> allows
> > > for a new consciousness, or learning, to emerge from those activities.
> > >
> > > All these authors used 'third space' as a way out of a trapped set of
> > > practices (first space) and consciousnesses (second space). third
space
> is
> > > about transformation and change in what exists--actual and virtual. In
> > > Lefebvre and Soja, third space is about production of new
> spaces --actual
> > > and virtual--through new activity (lived space). It is close to what
> > Deleuze
> > > called 'line of flight.'
> > >
> > > iraj
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 01 2004 - 01:00:09 PST