36 Post-Modernism in Geography

Dr. Abhay Singh

Introduction:

According to the Oxford Dictionary of Geography, postmodernism is ‘ philosophical stance which claims that it is impossible to take grand statements – meta-narratives –about the structure of society or about historic causation because everything we perceive, express, and interpret is influenced by our gender, class, and culture and no one interpretation is superior’.

“The ‘Post-modern’ is neither a canon of writers nor a body of criticism, though it is often applied to literature of, the last twenty years. The very term signifies a simultaneous continuity and renunciation, a generation strong enough to dissolve the old order, but too weak to marshal the centrifugal forces it has released. This new literature founder in its own hard-won heterogeneity and tends to lose the sense of itself as a human institution. My account is accordingly a survey of attitudes and tendencies, gestures and drifts, alibis and advertisements, clichés and obfuscations, which comprise an institution without a theory’. – (Newman, 1985) The term Post-modernism is ambiguous and vague. The term in itself is not indicative of what it opens to; however, it becomes a half understood, not clearly deciphered and loosely defined notion. As the name suggests Post-modernism is ahead of modernism, it’s a strong departure from the modernism.

An ambiguous and difficult coinage, the Post-Modernism is an elusive concept, least understood and loosely defined. The pervasive use of the term across, literature, Arts, Social Sciences, and Humanities is in vogue. The scholars and the intelligentsia, which includes academics, are using the term to express various shades and dimensions. A section of scholars and writers take Postmodernism as a cultural system, whereas others undermine it as a mere intellectual discourse one indulges into to satiate his or her own arguments and give a new dimension to their scholarly pursuits. There is also some section of the scholars and academicians who believe post-modernism is a little understood cultural as well as a stimulating intellectual phenomenon, quickly turning into a movement with a potential to alter the way things are being observed and analyzed and interpreted.

The proposed chapter is a small effort to explore and clarify the ambiguity associated with post-modernism and its tacit implication in the fields of contemporary knowledge, particularly geography.

   The chapter unfolds in a systematic manner.

1.1 Postmodernism: Trying to clear the ambiguity is it a departure from or one of the manifestations of Modernism.

1.2. Style and Characteristics of Post-modern Architecture

1.3. Shades/ Dimensions of Post-modern

1.4. Postmodern Geography

1.5. Postmodern Geographer

1.1 Postmodernism: is it a departure from or one of the manifestations of Modernism.

Handling the most ubiquitous pervading and important quest of what exactly is Postmodernism, different shades of postmodernism its implication in Social Sciences in general and Geography in particular. Postmodernism: As stated earlier postmodernism is a concept not very clearly understood is shrouded in ambiguity and completely lacks the objectivity. Eminent contemporary commentators have viewed and understood postmodernism in their own distinct mannerism.

It’s always been difficult to define the Postmodernism and Post-modernity from within its own discourse, it becomes paradoxical as postmodern beliefs in instability of meaning and inherently juxtaposed to regularity and established ‘approved’ notions of modernity. It cannot compartmentalize itself into what it is what it ought to be and what it is supposed to be; Advocates of postmodern pioneered the belief that it is hermeneutics involving literature, arts and other established spheres of knowledge

The views expressed though are subtle and diffused do neither contradict nor substantiate, however, there seems to be an agreement among the contemporary thinkers and writers’ cutting across the boundaries of the disciplines, that ‘postmodernism’ is a strong departure from the modernism. Initially appeared in the writings of Arts and Literature, post-modernity pervades through the other streams of knowledge as well as rather rapidly.

Characterized by order, rules regulations, pattern, and system, post-modernism is scornful of everything which pertains to modernity. Set against the grand narratives and paradigmatic structuration of modern arts and aesthetics, the new ‘postmodern ‘experiments professed an ironic, playful lightness of being, an eclecticism marked by pastiche and in their more extreme expressions, even a certain degree of nihilism, (c. minca).

  Postmodern not only rejects the epistemologies and associated metaphysics of modernity, it creates an intellectual environ where established assumptions and presumptions of representation of ideas are challenged. The frowning upon of modern ideas of order and established notions to the point of completely negating and discarding with nihilism, advocates of postmodern believe summarizes its basic tenets. Postmodernism not only opposes modernity but anything associated with it, the institutions, the ideas, the schematic order and perhaps the mindset itself. The peculiarity about the postmodernism is that it believes in shattering the older notions and order, however, fails to provide for the new. ‘Deconstruction’ became the central or focal theme of the current postmodernism whose origin can be traced during the 1960s as a revolt to modernism. Figuring in literary theory, postmodernism was pitched against modernism and thus triggering a plethora of academic activities. All the arguments for the postmodernism as a new era/ epoch marshaled along with the notion of deconstruction, which Norris,1982, page 3) lucidly exhorts ‘Deconstruction is avowedly post-structuralist’ in its refusal to accept the idea of structure as in any sense given or objectively’ there’ in the text. Above all, it questions the assumption that structures of meaning correspond to some deep-laid mental ‘set’ or pattern of mind which determines the limits of intelligibility. Deconstruction shuns any presumed or taken for the granted notion of communication among mind meaning and concept of method. Though, deconstruction critics, such as Derrida and de Man talked about the writing which according to them with its ‘own dialectic blindness and insight precedes all the categories that conventional wisdom tries to impose on it’ (Norris, 1982), have focused on deconstruction as a hermeneutic device, gels well with grasping the intricacies attached with post-modernism.

Deconstruction as a potent ideological base, a precursor to postmodernism, nevertheless, came a long way in breaking the shackles of norms, values, mindset and modern episteme, created a chasm between what shouldn’t and what should be. The biggest challenge was to reconstruct the edifice of modernism severely challenged and hence obfuscating the clear vision, giving rise to ambiguous and complex mélange of comingling. Postmodernism is a leap from the modernism, yet completely unaware and unclear towards what (at least as its proponents and advocates make us believe). Certainly, this gives rise to some valid skepticism in various academic circles, whether it’s a real departure from modernity or one of the many manifestations of modernism itself, is intellectually stirring the academics across the disciplines. Proponents of postmodernism continually seek out new ideas to replace currently held orthodoxy.

    The proponents of philosophically stronger versions of postmodernism maintain that they do not intend to replace any current orthodoxy but instead wish to destabilize the modernist progression from one orthodoxy to another. (Duncan, Nancy). Destabilizing an established and patterned paradigmatic shift of progression of orthodoxy in a cultural system and social understanding ensemble in the epistemology of a particular historical period sans alternative perspectives is one argument pitched strongly against postmodernism. Some salient characteristics of Postmodernism:

1. Post-modernism sometimes interchangeably yet erroneously taken as post-structuralism as proposed by Jacques Derrida summarily rejects and denounces rationality of human beings and their actions, a central and favorite disposition of modern period.

2. Post-modernism respects heterogeneity and diversities, unlike modernism where the emphasis is on generalization theorization in to simplify the complexities of various human dynamics.

3. Lyotard, who is considered as a pioneer in using the term post-modernism in critical social theories of humanities, social sciences and anthropology were opposed to the ‘ totalizing idea of reason, for he believed that there is no reason but a set of reasons. Every individual tends to observe and perceive independently, may or may not in synchronization with popular and prevalent belief, thus giving intense rise to subjectivity.

4. Modernism harped on unearthing underlying order, pattern and strived for objectivity, however, post modernism, on the other hand, believed in subjectivity and thus didn’t look for order and hence rejected Metanarratives in totality.

5. Postmodernism shuns the postulations of theories and laws or Meta –narratives like Marxism; instead, it insists particularity and plurality of knowledge.

6. It believes that there could be many competing discourses attached to any aspect of social theory/topic, and none of which could be more correct than the other, hence no one explanation or prior basis to decide what is true.

1.2 Style and Characteristics of Postmodern Architecture

The term postmodernism is taken as an architectural departure from the modern style. The spatial expression has again taken a centre stage in the architectural design in postmodernism.

     The postmodern as a style is very well reflected in the architectural designs. Postmodern urban landscape is a mosaic of vivid expression spewed upon the spatial spread of the city. The urban space is taken up by architectural designs (particularly in the cities of Los Angeles and Las Vegas) representing their own unique style and identity, painting the large canvas of urban space into a collage of postmodern style of architecture. The building cropping up is having witty and cosmetic embellishment in the traditional design. The iconic building becoming self-referential is actually having a curious mix of traditional modern style and postmodern perspective, both satiating the consumers as well as the minuscule number of architects.

Each unit distinctly different, don’t adhere to and abide by any established standard of architectural design stereotypical of modernism. Though looking for an order and pattern in the postmodern city in itself is paradoxical and contrary to the antifundamentalism of post modernity, the urban mosaic does not paint a chaotic and anarchist picture. The city of Los Angeles, often considered as the laboratory of postmodern architectural design from where lessons were adopted in various urban contexts elsewhere, cannot be bracketed in one singular trajectory or style other than post modern. Looking for a generalized blanket adjective for the architectural design of the urban expression of post modern cities actually, undermines the basic tenets of the post modernity itself.

The study of the postmodern urban landscape by the different social theorists brings forth two distinct approaches of interpreting the post modern as indicated by C. Minca in his postmodernism / postmodern Geography. He maintained that there were two approaches, first post modern as a distinct era/ Epoch as a phase of advanced capitalism. Second is adopting a new postmodern attitude/approach to look at or study the cities, a specific postmodern way of thinking. Interestingly, the first approach tries to assess, interpret and study new urban landscape as a changing urban reality, where the old modern paradigm in architectural advancement is being broken away giving way to something distinct and unique. The uniqueness in itself has become common and is in use quite regularly. The urban neighbourhood and the isolated dwellings (particularly, in the cities of Las Vegas and Los Angeles; representatives of post modernity) do not follow any rhythmic pattern or adhere to any of the established Meta narratives of modern times, are wired into close propinquity over a hyperspace which is fluid and pervading, through high speed internet and things of internet.

The second approach tries to observe urban landscape through post modern perspective. A new adopted attitudinal stance which restricts the ‘observed’ be viewed through a set postmodern perspective, and herein lies the fallacy of post modernity which seems, as many critical social theorists and writers believe to be the pastiche of modernism and histrionics.

Minca very succinctly puts ‘ Post modern urbanism can thus be interpreted as the emergence of new forms of urban development, new urban spaces, as well as a new lens, a new logic within which to interpret the urban.’

First appeared in the writings and works of critics in early 1950s, post modern ideas in the form of unconventional logic and their operational designs, not in accordance with the traditional or modern style, influenced every field of inquiries including the architecture. Post modern urban design is derived and built up upon the departure from strict regulation of modernism from a previous movement called Modern Functionalism, wherein the designs were based upon the utility and feasibility parameters. With the conceptualization of Postmodernism, architects merged arts and functionality in one broad concept.

Renewed emphasis upon the uniqueness of style and form is one of the important aspects of the architectural design of post modern. Anything regardless of pattern and feasibility can be incorporated in post modern building design. The application of ‘Anything you want’ in architecture denounces modern phase designing which operated on well established, highly regulated and prevalent opinionated standards/ parameters of building construction technologies. The post modern city did never try to satiate those Meta narratives of the modernity, but also provided concrete alternatives well reflected in the architecture of the city of Los Angeles.

Even without following the modern pattern and set standards, the post modern urban design does not present a chaotic picture, rather there seems a certain kind of harmony and orderliness sans any order. Paradoxically, not adhering to any systematic and regulated pattern, the urban mosaic of a post modern city reflects a picture having an unusual kind of harmony and perhaps an order without following the rules of orderliness.

Los Angeles is a true representative of a post modern city and it is looked up and analyzed by anybody interested in the study post modern urbanism and urbanization. A few critics considered a separate school of Los Angeles in the study of urban sociology and architecture in line with the Chicago school of thought. The advent of post modern era coinciding with cultural transformation, expressed in a distinct spatial pattern in the urban landscape is ideally represented in the city of Los Angeles. Parallels of post modern urban space were drawn to find similarities in other contemporary cities.

The postmodern cities are hence, addressed through two perspectives as the emergence of altogether a new style or form urban landscape and secondly through postmodern logic itself. Post modern cities as Relph believed are not just about the drastic and fundamental change in the architect, however, it’s an attitudinal change on the part of the citizens as well as the authorities in terms of planning with regards to architectural design, urban gentrification and generation. Preservation of cultural heritage along with monuments also constitutes an integral part of urban designing of post modern era. Furthering the same line of argument as of Relph, Michael Sorkin, 1992, picking up the ‘incongruities’ or say ‘fragments’ declares the demise of traditional old modern cities, characterized by the well planned and chalked out urban designs of the neighbourhood, strong network of lines of communications etc. The emergence of post modern city wired into close propinquity in cyberspace through high-speed internet where spaces fudge and the demarcation between private and public place is blurred. Sorkin highlighted three distinct shades of post modern city.

1. Obliteration and dilution of materials and cultural relations which gave people identity confined/stuck to a specific special location. He fails to further explain this argument.

2. Urban spaces rapidly transforming themselves into specific pockets or enclaves catering to specific identities.

3. Post modern city is infatuated with security concerns and virtual world. Internet and things of the internet have a strong influence on everyday lives, in the post modern cities.

Therefore, Sorkin’s idea of post modern city not only celebrates the departure from modernism, it is nonetheless segregated and sequestered into spaces, superficially public but inherently having specific theme based identities.

1.3. Shades of Post modernism

MJ Dear analyzed three distinct meaning of contemporary post modernism, the Style, Method and post modernism as an Epoch. A significant amount of ambiguity and haze surrounding the post modernism is also because of the use and implication of all three shades of postmodernism simultaneously in the contemporary writings.

     The birth of the current postmodernism occurred in the mid-1960s in literary theory. The revolt against modernism sparked a proliferation of activity, including structuralism and mystique of postmodernism (Berman, 1982).

Post modernism as a method co-opted ‘deconstruction’ as a central core in the endeavour to gain intellectual prominence. Deconstruction, as propounded by Derrida and others, became the spearhead of the intellectual movement marked as a revolt against the modernism. However, the greatest difficulty with the ideas of post-structuralism/ deconstruction was that of reconstruction. The nihilistic approach with utter disdain for and diabolical renunciation of Metaphysics and grand explanations of modernism, without actually offering the alternatives, left the critical social theorists in a fix. The works of the post structuralist / post-Marxist thinkers and writers actually became the precursor for the advent of post modernism. Post modernity as a method gained further prominence, particularly in geography post-1980s.

1.4. Post modernism in Geography:

Postmodernism as an intellectual movement, implications of whose is widely explored by the scholars across in their own respective disciplines are not unanimous in tracing its chronological origin. Postmodernism loosely defined in terms of an era/historical phase, a new cultural and social system and curiously mere intellectual discourse radically denouncing and challenging the Metanarratives of the modernism.

Some social theorists traced the origin of postmodernism way back in the works of Hegel, Nihilism of Nietzsche, whereas social scientists like Habermas believed that the period of ‘Modernism’ which started off as the consequence of Enlightenment Project of the eighteenth century, and therefore, present is the advanced age of modernism, postmodernism is still not on the anvil. Lyotard believed that the postmodernism is actually the nascent stage of modernism, leading to a celebrated debate of Habermas and Lyotard, leading to a new and valid skepticism; whether postmodernism is an actual departure from modernism or it’s an extended or just one of the many manifestations of modernism itself. The debate continued for long and set paving stone in order to clear the ambiguity associated with post modernism as an intellectual movement where different sets of interpretation are in vogue.

Post modernism has risen to prominence just at a time of peculiar ferment in the social sciences. This ferment has two distinct components: first, a concerted general attack on the legitimacy of social sciences; and second a renaissance in the specific realm of social theory. In the social science in general, the pervasive atmosphere of economic crisis and cutback has unleashed a new conservatism in academia. (J. Dear).

This triggered a pruning and downsizing the tertiary and higher education system in many countries. The hunt for Job oriented, market dictated education system hurt the social sciences the most, which was not oriented to directly impart career building or job securing education to its Graduates, hence they felt the heat as they found themselves in a tight corner. The defensive posture or defense mechanism adopted by these social science disciplines created very interesting and curious impact.

The protectionist barriers not only tried to recover the traditional core of the discipline but also gravitated towards the centre to immune the disciplines from being attacked from the outside. Such kind of effort, intellectual and academic maneuvers, along with convergent or centripetal forces also unleashed centrifugal or divergent forces, the origin of the both being the same source of philosophical conservatism. The conservative converging forces sought to protect and keep intact the basic core of the discipline, riding on the centrifugal and divergent waves and owing to self-created doubt, a section of proponents or the practitioners of the discipline advocated for creating a sub-discipline ‘special interest’ groups or turn to other related fields of knowledge (disciplines) for recognition and approval. In such tumultuous academic environs, the disciplinary cores (central ideas and basic tenets) tend to dilute.

In contrast to the social sciences, the specific realm of social theory has gained intellectual and academic prominence, simultaneously undergoing a significant and substantial shift in its discourse. Many practitioners across the several disciplines now believe that their core concern lies in the structure and evolution of society over time and space. This ‘movement’ may have special prominence in human geography and history, the two disciplines with special claims to space and time. But it is also strongly rooted in sociology, some other social sciences, and to a lesser extent in the humanities and some natural sciences. (J. Dear)

The various fields of knowledge including the literary criticism as well as social sciences in the last few decades, particularly post the 1960s, have witnessed an unprecedented and significant innovative and critical shift in the intellectual discourse. These subtle changes in the perspectives, coupled with the pronounced renunciation of the Meta narratives of the modernity, mark a certain departure in the specific realms of social critical theory as well as in conventional disciplines ushered in the epoch of Post modernism. However, the loss of confidence in comprehensive theoretical frameworks, challenging the ‘rationality’, the essential indispensable plate form of the foundation of ‘modernity’, is a most important intellectual movement of the late twentieth century became the precursor to the advent of postmodernism. Like the other disciplines, the Human Geography also didn’t remain unaffected to this intellectual and academically stirring proliferation of postmodernism. Geography a discipline which focuses on the spatial distribution of phenomena or spatial expressions and their representation on the globe also found itself in opposition to the grand narratives of the very principles upon which the whole edifice of modern episteme and thinking is erected. The core foundations of the modernism were radically questioned and Human Geography, with focus on ‘space’, was not to be left out and therefore, geography in general also bracketed under ‘antifoundationalism’ an insignia of the postmodern era.

   It would be interesting to note how the Geographers respond to the post modern. Post-1980s saw distinguished and substantial changes in the subject. These changes were both due to responses to internal development within the subject as well as due to the challenge was thrown at it from the outside of the ambit of the subject.

Last decades of the twentieth century saw a growing opposition to the Geographers associated with the positivists and spatial analysis and interpretation of the subject. However, precisely, around the same time disenchantment among the progressive geographers with radical Marxist theorists, who still had strong belief in the grand explanations and scientific analysis, rooted in modernist tradition. These Marxist / radical critical theorists did give the least importance to ‘subjectivity’, these geographers while furthering the concept of social class and social class struggle tried to universalize it, completely ignoring the context and spatial dimensions/ individual identities.

Such geographers, setting aside the merits of their argument opened the gateway to the post modern debate that seemingly offered alternatives to the structuralism and essentialism of Marxist perspective, through its attention to and valorization of difference in its myriad expressions. The rapid transformation in all realms of the social life also necessitated new conceptual perspective and analytical tools, which expedited the geographical sojourn to post modern epoch.

However, it is now an established fact that geographers are the late comers to the post modern debate, during the 1970s and early 1980s when postmodernism debate was raging through the other disciplines; geography was engulfed by the legacy of Marxist perspectives and post-Marxist critiques of structuralism. It was only after the sneak of post-structuralism in the ambit of Anglo –American geography that prepared the ground for initiation of post modern debate on the subject. The successive Marxists critiques of post modern ideas or even the wholesale rejection of post modern perspective on the part of some Marxist’s Geographers – came to be considered, paradoxically enough as the some of the most influential works on Postmodern Geography. David Harvey’s ‘conditions of post modernity’ is a case in point a work that was explicitly anti- postmodern but that came to be considered by many as the foundational text of this new wave of postmodern geography. (C. Minca).

The early years of post modern geography were punctuated with a fresh focus on new sets of research questions; one such emerging field was in the field of urban architecture or design, later came to be known as post modern city. Ideally represented through the manifestation of new urban landscape and distinct urban mosaic, the post modern city of Los Angeles of western United States of America, became the new foci of research in urbanization and urbanism. The curious phenomenon is no longer be seen through the perspective of singular logic encompassing one exclusive definition of the city style; instead ‘Post modern urbanism’ conceived city as a complex set of socio-spatial identity represented through architectural designs in complete departure from the established norms, standards and engineering technologies representing the modern and post-structural age.

Along with interest in the city (and its transformations), geographers trained their focus of research on the broader changes occurring in the new age society and hypothesized the advent of post modern era. Post modern period or epoch is characterized by new cultural logic and a radical reconfiguration of the concept of space. Post modernity, therefore as C. Minca in his Postmodernism/ post modern Geography reiterates ‘is not seen as singular manifestation, awaiting discovery and description by geographers: it was envisioned, rather, as a complex of diverse perspective, processes, and objects, a confused and convoluted collage of people and objects undecipherable with the analytical tools of the past.’

The role of mass media and representation along with the changing dynamics of consumption were investigated by the new age geographers. Interestingly not only the places of consumption as well as the places being consumed, both were among the focal themes of the post modern geographers. In the context socio-spatial identity of the urban landscape, a specific relationship between post modern style, taste and urbanism and urbanization, were also contemplated about in the research articles and sporadic unstructured writings by the geographers.

It is not that that the advent of post modernism was thoroughly welcomed with open arms by the geographers into their domain of enquiry, but in general, the post modern turn was accepted with a pinch of salt, where many geographers found its innovation as inspirational and challenging. Post modernism brought with it a number of important consequences for Human Geography. In the name of resistance proponents of post modernism in geography were scorned of and frowned upon by a small section of post structuralist Marxist geographers who saw post modern as a threat and menace to the well-being and identity of the subject itself.

Nevertheless, the resistance from a certain section of the academia/geographers didn’t deter post modernity from blossoming and establishing firm roots in the field of Geographical enquiry and subsequently became a disciplinary ‘tradition’ in the decades that followed.

1.5. Post modern Geographers:

Two important moments are recognized in the growth of post modern geography, roughly divided as one before and after the year 1988. This chronological time span divided by 1988 saw the publication of a wide range of write-ups pertaining to the post modernism. The Journal ‘Environment and Planning D. Society and Space, published first in the year 1983 gradually, which gradually became a rallying plate form for the post modernist social critics in geography, took another three years to have first exclusively post modern theme dedicated write-ups Post modern Urban planning and Los Angeles’ Post modern’ spatialities, by Dear and Soja, respectively, contributed a lot in post modern intellectual discourse. Other contributions of noteworthy significance of the period were David Harvey’s ‘Post modernism and the American city’ in Antipode, David Ley’s ‘Post modern urbanism in Vancouver’ in Historical Geography and Dear’s ‘Post modern Challenge: restructuring of human Geography’ in Transaction and Derek Gregory’s ‘Areal differentiation and Post modern Geography’ in Horizons of Human geography, tried to further establish Postmodernism as a tradition of enquiry in Geography.

The year 1989 could be seen as the watershed year in firmly establishing the footholds of postmodernism as a method as well as an epoch, for it saw the publication of two seminal works on the theme of post modernism in geography. First was the ‘Post modern Geographies’ by Edward Soja, the book highly influenced by the work of hennery Lefebvre and M. Foucault. The book coloured by the Marxist ideology is taken as a milestone in the journey of post modernism in geography.

He maintained in his book that a new focus on ‘space’ along with geographical materialism is required to be laced with contemporary social critical theories in vogue. Soja is credited with bringing spatial back into the focus in social theories. His chapters ( empirical) on post modern urbanism of Los Angeles, further speaks volumes about his contributions in the pioneer study of Post modern urbanism and urbanization. The second work of eminence in the same year was by David Harvey’s ‘The condition of post modernity’. Interestingly, Harvey work is considered as one of the fundamental text on Post modernism, is, in reality, is a truly anti post modernist in its outlook.

In his critical appraisal of contemporary post-Fordism, Harvey provided a scathing analysis of the new global regime of flexible accumulation, as well as of the ‘postmodern culture’ dictated by the market, a culture based on a problematic elision between the profit imperative and artistic production, between fiction and reality. Harvey’s critique is quite distinct from other postmodern interpretations: the contemporary historical phase was, in his view, to be located (and understood) within a broader periodization of capitalism, characterized by ever-increasing time-space compression. ‘The condition of post modernity’ thus follows the spirit of Marxist critiques of the postmodern, of which the author would become one of the most authoritative interpreters. (Minca, C.)

The aforementioned works gave a kind of legitimacy to the postmodern reflection in Anglo American geography which gradually proliferated to other geographical communities in different parts of the globe, though at a relatively slower pace. Similarly, focus on post modern city also percolated to the various aspects of geography and the production of geographical knowledge. This included the study of analysis of various deconstruction /Post structural approaches like the cartographical part of the geography. Post-1990s many writings and overviews appeared, indicating sustained interest and curiosity in post modernism discourse in geography. Edward Soja another seminal work the ‘Third Space’ published in 1996, where he departed from the approach he adopted in his work ‘Post modern Geographies’. In this work, he harped upon ‘critical Post modernism’ where he tries to fill the gap between post colonial theory and post modern geography, using the idea of Third space. The ‘postmodern’ perspective rejects, a priori, any paradigmatic closure and is, therefore, more usefully conceived as a particular way of understanding geographical thought, rather than a specific, alternative methodological apparatus. For this reason, the very proliferation of approaches in contemporary human geography can be considered in itself a direct consequence of the postmodern turn.

Claudia Minca’s 2001 edited collection ‘post modern Geography: Theory and Practice’ talked about controversies and debates in geography which creeped in with along with the postmodernism. Most of such controversies over a period of time established themselves as distinct position or stance in the geography.

After examining and reexamining the upheavals along with various trajectories which swept geography and spatial field of enquiry over a period of at least 20 years, one can assume with confidence that post modernism has now become the integral and indispensable part of Geography.

References

1. Newman C, 1985The Post Modern Aura : the act of fiction in an age of inflation , Northwestern University Press, Evanston, IL
2. Minca C, 2009 ‘Post modernism/ Post Modern Geography’ University of London, Egham, UK and Elsevier Ltd.
3. Norris C, 1982 Deconstruction: Theory and Practice, Mathuen, Andover, Hants.
4. Duncan Nancy, 1996 “Postmodernism in Human Geography’ in C Eagle, K Mathawson & MS Martin Eds, Concepts in Human Geography, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Little field , 1996
5. Dear Michael, 1986, ‘Post Modernism and Planning, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space
6. Soja Edward, 1989, ‘Postmodern Geographies The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory’ London, Verso.
7. Berman M, 1982 All that is Solid Melts into Air : The Experience of Modernity ,New York: Simon and Schuster; also 1983, London Verso.
8. Jameson F, 1985, ‘Postmodernism and consumer society’ in Postmodern Culture Ed. H. Foster, Pluto press, London.