신문화사와 공간적 전환: 로컬리티 연구와 연관시켜 (New Cultural History and Spatial Turn: in its relation to locality)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 문화사학회
· 수록지 정보 : 역사와 문화 / 23호 / 139 ~ 170페이지
· 저자명 : 장세룡

초록

At the present time, ‘Cultural Turn’ in Humanities is disseminated to social science such as sociology, politics and science history etc. And as you know, globalization led to a drastic rescaling and restructuring of the meanings of space at both local and national level. Likewise, numerous disciplines are inclined to reflect on space and place in multi-layerd and multi-scalar dimension. We can call this current 'Spatial Turn'. This article aims to introduce this trend and intensify some of the cultural realities from the perspective of space and place.
In this turn, space and place are not just an object of immutability or a carrier of researchers' own ideas, rather, they have significant meanings as continually mutable or changeable things with consistency.
The current of 'Spatial Turn' shows it stresses 'Linguistic Turn' and 'Cultural Turn' of everyday life, language, culture and space as we could see in the thoughts of Henri Lefebvre, Michel Foucault, Michel de Certeau and George Perec.
New cultural history has an interest mainly in the explanation of language text, linguistic discourse and cultural phenomenon, so, it could result in a superficial approach. At this point, it needs to be approached,not by 'in-space' but by 'through-space' aspect, as showed in the examples of the cultural politics and the political economy of culture. I want to interpret this 'Spatial Turn' with 'the space of candle demonstration' in the year 2008 based on 'Cultural Politics' which would show us the operation of the event.
We could be at risk if we refuse to view the candle space with the interpretation of 'Autonomia Group' who thought of it as a transparent rational space of a collective intellect. However, I think that space can be linked to the 'heterotopia', but not of skepticism of Michel Foucault, rather of a hopeful utopia of Henri Lefebvre in which more elements of ambiguity,interchangeability, subsume and exclusion can get entangled.
Political economy of culture is about the mutual interaction of dialectics of semiotic phenomena and material world. That is, it attempts to examine the dialectics of discourse and materiality and the reproduction of political economy by making semiotic the cultural phenomena including identity,discrimination, network of meaning, limit of rationality, ethical thing and finally try to reconceptualize the politics.
So, political economy of culture is useful to research the symbolic meaning of representation composed by spatial planning of cultural cities or entrepreneurial cities. But Political Economy of Culture itself is also criticised for its tendency to make all the events, processes, trends and structures semiotic and therefore reduce the economy and politics to a simple semiotics.
Focusing on Actor-Network Theory contributes to an opportunity to reflect upon an interactive heterogeneous network space which implies uneven multilayal quality articulated by interconnected human and nonhuman actors. And we expect to build up the possibility of a new interpretation to space and place from a wide-range appropriation of that theory, but it may also have some other limits on the way.

영어초록

At the present time, ‘Cultural Turn’ in Humanities is disseminated to social science such as sociology, politics and science history etc. And as you know, globalization led to a drastic rescaling and restructuring of the meanings of space at both local and national level. Likewise, numerous disciplines are inclined to reflect on space and place in multi-layerd and multi-scalar dimension. We can call this current 'Spatial Turn'. This article aims to introduce this trend and intensify some of the cultural realities from the perspective of space and place.
In this turn, space and place are not just an object of immutability or a carrier of researchers' own ideas, rather, they have significant meanings as continually mutable or changeable things with consistency.
The current of 'Spatial Turn' shows it stresses 'Linguistic Turn' and 'Cultural Turn' of everyday life, language, culture and space as we could see in the thoughts of Henri Lefebvre, Michel Foucault, Michel de Certeau and George Perec.
New cultural history has an interest mainly in the explanation of language text, linguistic discourse and cultural phenomenon, so, it could result in a superficial approach. At this point, it needs to be approached,not by 'in-space' but by 'through-space' aspect, as showed in the examples of the cultural politics and the political economy of culture. I want to interpret this 'Spatial Turn' with 'the space of candle demonstration' in the year 2008 based on 'Cultural Politics' which would show us the operation of the event.
We could be at risk if we refuse to view the candle space with the interpretation of 'Autonomia Group' who thought of it as a transparent rational space of a collective intellect. However, I think that space can be linked to the 'heterotopia', but not of skepticism of Michel Foucault, rather of a hopeful utopia of Henri Lefebvre in which more elements of ambiguity,interchangeability, subsume and exclusion can get entangled.
Political economy of culture is about the mutual interaction of dialectics of semiotic phenomena and material world. That is, it attempts to examine the dialectics of discourse and materiality and the reproduction of political economy by making semiotic the cultural phenomena including identity,discrimination, network of meaning, limit of rationality, ethical thing and finally try to reconceptualize the politics.
So, political economy of culture is useful to research the symbolic meaning of representation composed by spatial planning of cultural cities or entrepreneurial cities. But Political Economy of Culture itself is also criticised for its tendency to make all the events, processes, trends and structures semiotic and therefore reduce the economy and politics to a simple semiotics.
Focusing on Actor-Network Theory contributes to an opportunity to reflect upon an interactive heterogeneous network space which implies uneven multilayal quality articulated by interconnected human and nonhuman actors. And we expect to build up the possibility of a new interpretation to space and place from a wide-range appropriation of that theory, but it may also have some other limits on the way.

참고자료

· 없음