Narrow Sense Sociology Space

n a narrow sense, sociology space is concerned social practices, institutional and material forces that influence individuals’ interaction with space. More broadly, the space sociology studies how society, individuals and groups transform human nature spaces, and changing the way they use these spaces; forces and socio-political-economic processes involved in the use and exchange of human spaces; and how these areas affect individuals, communities, processes and social forces. Specifically, sociology space trying to answer two sets of questions: 1) natural and social space have causal power to create social effects? and if so, when, how and why? 2) individuals and social groups can influence natural and social space? and if so, when, how and why? (Gans, 2002, 329). Simply put, sociology investigates space spatial effects on society and the effects of society on space.

Sociological theories of space have their origin in the classical works of Karl Marx (1867, 1877), Frederick Engels (1882), Ferdinand Tönnies (1887), Emile Durkheim (1893), Georg Simmel (1903, 1903b) and Max Weber (1921 ). They studied the social, political and economic transition from traditional society to modern society, of from feudalism to capitalism. The strongest influences on contemporary theories of space they had the works of Karl Marx (1867.1877) and Georg Simmel (1903, 1903b). In short, the classical theorists of sociology space reveal how spatial structures of social organization reflects the historical changes.

1.1.1. Divisions and Lawns – reflects the characteristics of capitalist production mode

Assuming that the existence determines consciousness under the influence of a particular historical context (historical materialism), Marx (1867, 1877 cited in Zieleniec, 2007, 5-2) considers space a fundamental factor in the expansion and perpetuation of capitalism. Space is a productive force as ownership of space, organizing, controlling and influencing its handling of capitalist production. The beginnings of capitalism coincide with the struggle of social relations in rural and urban areas. Separation rural-urban is an important step in the process of division of labor, called spatial division of labor. Concentration in urban centers of labor, means and modes of production and consumption are considered key factors in the emergence and perpetuation of modern capitalism. In turn determines restructuring capitalism traditional cities, the emergence of specialized areas with distinct economic and social functions (areas of trade, financial areas, industrial areas etc.). Capitalism involves circulating assets in space so as to ensure sustainable production and consumption, find the best areas for raw materials, labor and consumer markets. Based on this logic, the circular requires minimizing the cost of production concentration in a few large cities and urban areas adapt to the requirements of capitalist production (transport infrastructure, administrative buildings, factories, residential areas etc.). So Karl Mark (1867, 1877) showed how urban space zoning influences and is influenced by the capitalist mode of production.

1.1.2. Residential segregation – social projection distances between classes

Frederick Engels (1882 cited in Zieleniec, 2007, 24-26, 31; Gottdiener and Hutchison, 2011, 77-78) was concerned with how capitalism creates new production in which the reproduction of relations of production occurs. The space structure reflects the socio-economic structure of society. Capitalist mode of production leaves its mark on the urban space generating capital investment concentration and labor and circulate them because as cities grow industrial investment moves from the center to the periphery. Urbanization and industrialization change the living conditions of the working class, encouraging residential segregation based on class. Thus, there is a hierarchy of residential preferences associated with certain lifestyles. Social distances between classes can be found in spatial distances between residential thereof. For example, the suburbs have emerged as bourgeois strategy of distancing new issues of urban life in the city center pollution, overpopulation, poverty and poor housing conditions in slums etc. Thus was born the concept of uneven development as a result of the fact that public and private investment, which affects the quality of housing conditions are not uniformly distributed in space because not all areas offer the same opportunities to make profit. Continuing the ideas of Karl Mark (1867, 1877), Frederick Engels (1882) showed how the capitalist mode of production and class relations is reflected in structuring its associated residential area.

1.1.3. Urbanization – an expression of social relations rationalization

As Karl Marx (1867, 1877) and Frederick Engels (1882), Max Weber (1921) studied the phenomenon of urbanization in the historical context of the transition from feudalism to capitalism. Unlike them, Max Weber (1921 cited Gottdiener and Hutchison 2011, 77) adopt an interpretive perspective on social reality and thus shows the historical role of Western medieval towns in the emergence of capitalism. The town developed because of its political power, ie due to the independence of its residents and local governments against feudal authority. Early forms of capitalism occurred in late feudalism due to the fact that the merchants and craftsmen have established urban settlements in which they have negotiated protection from kings against local feudal lords. As capitalism developed and modern city arose. Thus, the development of cities was done in three stages from the medieval town, at the industrial and consumer ultimately to town, each producing physical space and social transformations.

According to Max Weber (1921) cities have three characteristics: the sociological point of view favors anonymity in economic centers around a market, and in terms of political and administrative have a physical form occupying a territory under military control. The quoted author conducted a complex conceptualization of cities from the three criteria: economic, political-administrative and community. Economic city is a settlement built around a market. Political-administrative city occupies a well-defined territory, recognize private ownership of land and had previously intended fortress or garrison. Community Cities as ideal type, are rather non-agricultural and trade and contain the following elements: fortifications, market and legislation tribunal own autonomous forms of association, autonomy and autocephalous. As an ideal type, city involves: Authority rational (to the detriment of traditional or charismatic), universal law (not personal), the group of individuals on grounds of class (to the detriment of family or clan), governance through trade groups (and not by religious groups), centering on economic elements of power (not military).

1.1.4. Urbanization – an expression of the emergence of new forms of sociality

By adopting an evolutionary perspective on the development of society, Ferdinand Tönnies (1887) believes that moving the company pre-industrial to industrial society can be conceptualized as a transition to the community (where individuals interact directly and personally, working together and having jobs interdependent) to society (where individuals interact with other individuals that do not know them personally and weak jobs linked). This phenomenon is associated with the weakening of social ties and loss of sense of belonging to a community with respect. Conversely, in the view of Emile Durkheim (1893), industrialization has had positive effects, marking the shift from solidarity mechanical (where individuals are bound together by ties predetermined family relationships that can not be changed) to organic solidarity (where individuals have more freedom to choose their work and interactions based on common affinities). Simplifying, one can say that Ferdinand Tönnies (1887) adopted a negative outlook on the effects of urbanization on the sociability of individuals, while Emile Durkheim (1893), positive.

Starting from the idea that mental structures and consciousness determines existence (interpretative sociology) at the beginning of the twentieth century, Georg Simmel (1903, 137-170) examined the meanings assigned to it in terms of space within social interactions contextualised (interactionism). Area through its physical geographical features is seen as a determinant of social interactions, but by its nature is a consequence of the symbolic meanings that are associated interactions. Many forms of association can not be fully understood unless they are analyzed and spatial context is produced or associated spatial practices. Also cited was concerned about how space experimentation that occurs in daily life, transforming social space configuration and under the impact of modernity and the emergence in the modern period of new cultural forms and social interactions mediated space. Town Simmel becomes the main space for expression of modernity.

Georg Simmel (1903b, 174-185) considers that encourages urban life blase attitude, indifferent, reserved, aversion, and hid suspicion particular manifestation (the eccentricity of the pomp and whims). In other words, urban life has two major consequences on the individual: anonymity and individualization. Under the impact of modern urban experience developing individual relationships increasingly impersonal, rationalized time and money, fragmented and superficial. City dwellers looking for new experiences and new forms of escape from the routine of everyday life and rhythms which stimulates the emergence of new modern premises type of spending leisure travel and new practices. Thus, modern urban landscape are new adventure areas, like islands in the sea of ​​normality and continuity of ordinary life. Another strategy to escape or offset against the pressure of modern life is the entertainment and amusement of his experiences by participating in the fetishization of objects and aesthetic premises. These spatial transformations reveal that urban space becomes increasingly symbolic value being associated with emotions and experiences that prevail on the functional value of its use.

Georg Simmel (1903, as cited Zieleniec 1903b, 2007, 47-57). phenomenology established a socio-spatial processes, highlighting how the peculiarities of modern urban life, especially sensory overstimulation put their imprint on the mental life of city dwellers encouraging socio-psychological distancing. In his view, it accommodates everyday interactions understanding human social construct due to the ability of a symbolic space through interactions and actions modeling, planning, connection and separation areas of physical space (building artifacts, bridges and roads). All these activities is man’s attempt to conquer space, to put anthropogenic and arrange them according to a certain significance attributed to it. Simmel’s analysis (1903) from the individual and the ability to assign meanings space, pointing out how the individual is influenced by social interactions and influences spatial structures.