Shop now Shop now Shop Clothing clo_fly_aw15_NA_shoes Shop All Shop All Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop Amazon Fire TV Shop now Shop Fire HD 6 Shop Kindle Voyage Shop Now Shop now
FREE Delivery in the UK.
Temporarily out of stock.
Order now and we'll deliver when available. We'll e-mail you with an estimated delivery date as soon as we have more information. Your account will only be charged when we dispatch the item.
Dispatched from and sold by Amazon.
Gift-wrap available.
Quantity:1
Cultural Geography: A Cri... has been added to your Basket
Condition: Used: Very Good
Comment: This item will be fulfilled same day by Amazon, is eligible for Amazon's FREE Super Saver/Prime Delivery in the UK and 24/7 Customer Service. The book has been read, but is in very good condition. Pages are intact and the spine remains undamaged.
Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

Cultural Geography: A Critical Introduction (Critical Introductions to Geography) Paperback – 22 May 2000


See all formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Paperback
"Please retry"
£27.99
£27.99 £8.59
£27.99 FREE Delivery in the UK. Temporarily out of stock. Order now and we'll deliver when available. We'll e-mail you with an estimated delivery date as soon as we have more information. Your account will only be charged when we dispatch the item. Dispatched from and sold by Amazon. Gift-wrap available.

Special Offers and Product Promotions

  • Save £20 on Amazon.co.uk with the aqua Classic card. Get an initial credit line of £250-£1,200 and build your credit rating. Representative 32.9% APR (variable). Subject to term and conditions. Learn more.

Frequently Bought Together

  • Cultural Geography: A Critical Introduction (Critical Introductions to Geography)
  • +
  • Social Geographies: Space and Society
Total price: £67.98
Buy the selected items together



Product details


More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, and more.

Product Description

Review

"Mitchell has written a significant and provocative book that deserves and rewards serious scrutiny." ANNALS of the Association of American Geographers <!––end––>

" It is an important and timely book, emerging as cultural geography is being reassessed more than a decade after Peter Jackson′s agenda [for the topic]...Overall this is a textbook providing a highyl readable introduction to a social/cultural geography for Undergraduates, very well illustrated with case study material. Mitchell′s provocative style is refreshing ensuring students are forced to engage with his arguments and discuss them"

From the Back Cover

This book provides a critical evaluation of the transformation of cultural geography which has occurred over the past two decades. Cultural Geography explains cultural change in different geographical settings, from the politics of everyday life to the production and consumption of landscapes, to the politics of sexuality, gender, race, and nationality. Using a range of contemporary "culture wars" as examples – ranging from a struggle over public art in Denver to the politics of Jean–Marie le Pen in France – the author illustrates how cultural geographic analysis can be an important tool for understanding, and progressively intervening in contemporary cultural change.

The book is divided into three parts. Part I considers the historical development of cultural geography and the critical examination of cultural theory, both within geography and other fields from which geographers draw.
The second part of the book explores the most traditional of cultural geography′s research foci – the landscape. It examines what a landscape is, what it means, and how we should understand its production and use.
The final part of the book comprises five chapters that explore different aspects of cultural politics. Moving between the practices of control and resistance in each chapter, Mitchell shows how cultural meaning, and the spaces in which we live, are continually struggled over.

Writing with the needs of advanced undergraduates and post–graduates in mind, Mitchell unravels complex ideas, yet at the same time, challenges the reader to think critically about cultural geography and about the cultural geographies that structure our lives.


Inside This Book

(Learn More)
First Sentence
The new Convention Center in downtown Denver, Colorado, like many similar urban revitalization projects, was built by wiping out an existing neighborhood - some of the last low-income housing in the downtown area. Read the first page
Explore More
Concordance
Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
Search inside this book:

What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?

Customer Reviews

There are no customer reviews yet on Amazon.co.uk.
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star

Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)

Amazon.com: 3 reviews
19 of 26 people found the following review helpful
Geographically Irrelevant Theories of a Confused Postmodern Marxist 20 April 2007
By Faruk Ekmekci - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Paperback
Don Mitchell sets out writing his book "Cultural Geography: A Critical Introduction" with an idealistic intention to argue and demonstrate that culture is nothing but what the powerful makes of it. His primary goal is to challenge the `superorganic' view of culture, which regards culture as an instrument that is above the people, and put forward a more socio-economic theory of culture by denaturalizing what is commonly viewed as natural. For Mitchell, culture is "human, all too human"!

Mitchell believes strongly in the ontological nonexistence of culture whatsoever. His motto "there is no such thing as culture -or race, or gender, or nation-" salutes the reader in every page of the book. Culture is not a `thing' per se, but only a realm over which take place continuing battles of political and economic interests, or "culture wars". Therefore, Mitchell asserts that "no decent cultural analysis can draw on culture itself as a source of explanation; rather culture is always something to be explained as it is socially produced through myriad struggles over and in spaces, scales, and landscapes," (p. xvi). Though he opposes to the ontological existence of culture, Mitchell believes in the `idealistic' existence of it: "there is no culture in the world... there is only a powerful idea of culture," (p. 74-5). Therefore, following a Gramscian view, Mitchell maintains that culture is an `ideology' that exists only in the mind of people and that facilitates the pursuit of certain interests. And like all other ideologies, cultural discourse works through "euphemizing" the social relations it is meant to explain by making the socially-constructed phenomena seem natural (p. 52-3). For Mitchell, "culture is politics by another name," (p. 294).

Mitchell's arguments are important not simply because they provide us a `critical' view of culture, but more importantly because they help us see the `social' (read: political-economic) aspects of culture. His approach to culture as an ideology deserves special credit in an age when we are bombarded with culture-based fatalistic arguments as to why certain things happen(ed) the they do (or did). Yet both his problematization of culture's `real' existence and his overemphasizing the influence of capitalist pressures on culture creates problems for a true understanding of what culture is. The next three sections will be on these problems.

Matrix or "How Do You Define Real?"

"They all muddy their waters in order to make them seem deep." Nietzsche, On Poets.

Throughout the book Mitchell uncompromisingly maintains the view that there is no such `thing' as culture -or gender, race, and nation. Yet his arguments to support that view fall short of being convincing and coherent. The first (or basic) problem with Mitchell's argument can be named as the problem of problematization. One can problematize any `abstract' concept if he/she wishes so. This is because all abstract concepts are more or less ambiguous and they all share the problem (?) of `infinite regress.' We have no agreed-upon definitions of democracy, morality, government, love, or even class. However, we do not conclude that these `things' are nonexistent. Whether they are perceived or interpreted differently by different people, they do exist. Yet Mitchell quickly reaches to the conclusion that culture does not exists simply because it is a "confusing" (p. 15) and "ambiguous" (p. 74) concept which is a victim of "infinite regress" (p.76). For Mitchell, thus, culture is made real only when someone stops the infinite regress and says "this is what culture is" (ibid). If approached that way, though, I cannot think of any abstract concept with `real' existence or even correspondence (Can somebody tell definitely what, say, love is?). Mitchell applies the same reasoning on race and nation, though. There is no such biological thing as race because it is a "chaotic concept" (p. 241) and can be identified only through "overlapping classification" (p. 240). In fact, any `abused' concept is a chaotic one and all the classifications we make in theory or practice are actually idealized categorizations of different yet `overlapping' groups. We would end up with very few `real' things if we chased after `mutually exclusive' groupings! Therefore, I do not think that we have the luxury of selectively blaming some concepts for having a shortcoming that is shared by all. We are either to stand in a Nietzschean position "there is no fact, but interpretations," or to assume that "what is perceived is real". Mitchell thinks that most of the postmodernist arguments leads to "academic over-intellectualizing" (p. xvii) and therefore he aims not to engage in them; yet, ironically, most of his arguments are par excellence examples of academic over-intellectualizing of a confused postmodern scholar.

Capitalism: Deus ex Machina?

"To be sure, the use of force by one party in a market transaction in order to improve his price was no invention of capitalism. Unequal exchange is an ancient practice. What was remarkable about capitalism as a historical system was the way in which this unequal exchange could be hidden," - Immanuel Wallerstein, Historical Capitalism

Mitchell's arguments as to what culture is are no less problematic than the ones claiming the nonexistence of it. Culture has a political economy. We live in capitalist ages and no aspect of our social relations is immune to capitalist pressures. Yet Mitchell takes this commonsensical truth to an extreme point as culture is political economy and thus reduces the cultural interactions to mere calculations/contestations of economic and political interests. Mitchell's main mistake, to me, is that he sees capitalism as the creator of our environment and not as a manipulator of it. Thus, he immediately concludes that everything that surrounds us is a result of capitalism. Yet, historically speaking, what capitalism has been most successful in is not the creation of new realms, but the manipulation of the existing ones. Capitalism aims to take advantage of the pre-existing institutions in a society and turn them into profits. To me, culture, gender, race, and nations are to be viewed from this perspective. So far as capitalism is concerned, it is `profit from culture', not `culture as a profit'.

Gender is the area where Mitchell's faulty reasoning strikes the reader most. He asserts that the "sequestering" of women in the home was itself a `product' of changing ideologies of domesticity associated with the "rise of the bourgeoisie" (p. 204). Even if put aside the counter-facts such as the dominance of female labor in the nineteenth-century industrial Britain and in the current maquiladoras in Mexico, there is a fact from which we cannot escape: domesticity of women has long been a historical issue, though its scale displayed some variations throughout. The house was a more feminine place in Hittites, Huns, Romans, Abbasids, Ottomans, and Habsburgs. And the streets of these nations were more masculine places. Denaturalizing everything is not that helpful regarding gender, because maybe there is something `natural' in gender differences. Yet Mitchell still claims that gender is not "possible outside of the structuring pressures of capitalism (or any other political-economic system)" (p. 220) and that gender is a "result" of political economic interests (p. 222). Here, suffice it to say that the Qur'an is the main `source' of female domesticity in Islamic countries. (Islam puts the burden of bread-winning on the shoulders of the husband and thus `allows' the women to stay at home.) Gender has existed prior to and independent of capitalism; what capitalism does is to try to turn it into its own advantage.

The same is true for `nationalism'. True, capitalism and the modern nation-states were not two separate historical inventions; rather, nation-states were "constructed in order to clothe, and enclose, the developing political economy of industrial capitalism." Yet nationalism, which is broadly defined as "a feeling of belonging to a nation" (p. 271), has existed throughout the history in different scales and forms. The wars between Spartans and Athenians or the ones between the Abbasids and the Umayyads, for example, can be read as conflicts between "feelings of belongings" to different groups, tribes, or communities, if not nations. Therefore, so far as the relationship between capitalism and nationalism is concerned, it is more a matter of form than substance.

Geography and Don Mitchell: The Apex of Irrelevance?

Rather than reiterating what I have said above, I prefer to conclude my paper with a comment on the relevance of Mitchell's arguments to geography. In several places Mitchell stresses the importance of `space' for culture. Yet in no chapter but in the one about sexuality he makes a more elaborate case for geography than underlining the mere fact that everything happens in a `space'. A spatial analysis is expected to focus on the interactions between different spaces. Yet Mitchell is more concerned about the universal and ubiquitous influence of capitalism on culture than the local variations of it. Thus, it seems that a title such as "the political economy of culture" would be more appropriate for Mitchell's book than "cultural geography".
0 of 3 people found the following review helpful
Blahhhhh 14 Feb. 2012
By Spencer Anderson - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Paperback Verified Purchase
The book reads ok, but the subject matter is very one sided and blah. There are many good points in the logic of the material, but once again one sided.
7 of 21 people found the following review helpful
Will Marxist geographers ever locate the environment in their work? 5 Oct. 2006
By James Safranek - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Paperback
To their credit, some critical cultural geographers HAVE included a sense of the fragility of the planet in their advanced introductory studies of cultural geography. The Sex Pistols, sexual politics, miserable urban architecture, resistance, labor history, environmental determinism, cultural studies, Sauer's place in geography: all fine subjects for geographers to cover. But this book illustrates that great divide cultural geographes and physical geographers love to maintain: the separation between the physical/natural world and the culture that modern neurotic humans have created, and which geographers can't seem to co-join in their work. This is a book nearly devoid of discussing our dependency on nature (remember PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY?), as though human induced climate change, environmental destruction (and movements against it), and the real threat of human extinction --not to mention current suffering from ecological destruction-- were all far less important than defunct punk bands and museums of labor history. (If you're going to get 'critical', start with our new proto-fascist American empire).

Geographers need to set priorities for a world in shambles when publishing, not push their students to the brink with esoteric cultural subjects for their advanced geography degrees.

We simply don't have the time.
Were these reviews helpful? Let us know


Feedback