Reflection on ‘Analysis of Space and Analysis’ by Paula Saukko 

The prospect of analysing space was completely new to me before this reading. Paula Saukko explains space mostly in reference to Castell. What I found interesting about Castell’s trilogy is the ease in which he organises global space. These categories are created through ‘binaries’ and Saukko points out this a ‘problematic feature’ (2003: 162) of Castell’s analysis. This reminds me of the first reading, when Arthur Berger pointed this out too, but not in specific reference to Castell. Not everyone’s research method is perfect, and while Castell has set the stage for studying space, his method is not without flaws. He appeared to have forgotten that the separation of groups of people is not necessarily a good thing, but that also some groups flow between both classifications. Saukko points out that while Castell has a great idea, he misses some of the problems within the realm of reactive and project identities he created. He does not notice the ‘juxtaposition of the ‘reactive’ movement…and the project ones.’ (2003: 161) The ‘reactive’ movement groups are more closed off and secretive whereas the ‘project’ movement groups are supposed to be open to all. All this does however, is pinpoint the steep inequalities between the two groups and bring to light why the groups are so hostile towards each other.

Another interesting part of this reading was third space. This was a notion created by Edward Soja (1996, 2000) and while his work is like Castell’s, he has a more postmodern view. This notion he created allows for a thorough analysis of space, because it offers the multi-perspective viewpoint. There will always be an issue of bias and outside influences that can alter the research collected, but by exploring the multi-perspective views, as a researcher you can gain insights that you might have not considered before. You can begin with an ‘aerial’ view that looks at all space, or you can look from down below in the lived space. The point of this multi-perspectival approach is that it explains that the need for ‘below’ perspective alongside the ‘above’ “may challenge the view from above or the concepts we use to describe space.” (2003: 166) A great analysis needs to take on multiple views and once research is tested in its reliability by another view, it can become all the more valuable and useful.

Bibliography:

Saukko, P. (2003) ‘“Analysis of ‘Reality’ and Space” in Doing Research in Cultural Studies’ London: Sage, pp. 155-176