Symbolic Landscapes

406 Pages·2009·5.802 MB·English

by  Gary Backhaus (auth.), Gary Backhaus, John Murungi (eds.)

Symbolic Landscapes
Gary Backhaus • John Murungi
Editors
Symbolic Landscapes
Editors
Gary Backhaus John Murungi
Department of Philosophy Department of Philosophy
Loyola College in Maryland and Religious Studies
4501 N. Charles Street Towson University
Baltimore, MD 21210-2699 Towson, MD 21252-0001
USA USA
[email protected] [email protected]
ISBN-13:978-1-4020-8702-8 e-ISBN-13:978-1-4020-8703-5
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2008932624
©2009 SpringerScience+BusinessMedia,B.V.
Nopartofthisworkmaybereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmitted
inanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,microfilming,recording
orotherwise,withoutwrittenpermissionfromthePublisher,withtheexception
ofanymaterialsuppliedspecificallyforthepurposeofbeingentered
andexecutedonacomputersystem,forexclusiveusebythepurchaserofthework.
Printedonacid-freepaper
987654321
springer.com
Preface

In planning for our annual conference in 2005 of the International Association for
the Study of Environment, Space, and Place, we decided on the theme, “Symbolic
Landscapes.” This topic emerged through our interest in human/cultural geographi-
cal/environmental study and the research of specific geographers such as D. W.
Meinig, J. Douglas Porteous, Denis E. Cosgrove, and J. B. Jackson, among others.
More broadly, the study of symbolization crosses many disciplines and thus we
believed that we had chosen a conference theme that would be successful in drawing
scholars from the many disciplines. And, indeed, the conference was quite success-
ful, with presenters from philosophy, geography, religious studies, history, literature,
various social sciences, art history, various arts, architecture, musicology, and so
on. We could not know in what direction our preliminary studies and conference-
gathering would lead us in terms of subsequent projects, but we would assuredly
be learning a great deal from each other. What we learned in terms of our editorial
context was that each of the areas had something interesting and exciting to con-
tribute. We became fascinated by the fact that both actual and imaginary land-
scapes were presented, but that both real and ideal components were constitutive
of each. This distinction and its blurring would lead us to organize this volume in
two parts: the first part dealing with “actual landscapes” and the second part dealing
with “imaginary landscapes.” I put quotations around these terms due to our con-
tention that the interrelation of perception and imagination at deeper levels blurs
this distinction.
This edited volume is a subsequent project, but it is not to be construed as con-
ference proceedings. The essays in this volume are invited papers and not all of
them started as a presentation from our conference. Our first task in the creation of
this volume entailed researching an array of literature for the sake of establishing a
basic orientation from which a volume could be organized. Those treatises written
by semioticians that we subsequently read were helpful with their technical distinc-
tions. Nevertheless, they also promoted confusion in that the more fundamental
epistemological and ontological implications were not considered, and the various
positions were contradictory to one another in complex ways such that the notion
of symbol itself became problematic. It was important to us as editors not to accept
the authority of experts and then to proceed, but to critically engage the seminal
works for insights leading to the development of our own position. Moreover, the
v
vi Preface
works by geographers concerning symbolic landscapes are extremely rich in illus-
trations, examples, case studies, and thus served to motivate us to put together an
edited collection. Yet, even according to the admissions of several prominent geo-
graphers, these inquiries were exploratory and provisional without founding a defini-
tive conception of symbolic landscapes. It became apparent that we were not going
to be able to depend on making a critical selection from amongst geographical per-
spectives, but could only depend on them for providing sophisticated presentations
of landscape symbolisms. So the works of geographers revealed themselves to be
of utmost importance as explorations of the topic, yet philosophically unsatisfying.
Still, the geographical corpus did suggest philosophical points of view from which
a deeper grounding might establishment a doctrine. Ernst Cassirer’s work in this
area certainly is philosophically satisfying and quite developed, yet we are not in
agreement with his position. It has been Maurice Merleau-Ponty on whom we
have leaned in order to stake out our philosophical theory.
In terms of creating an edited volume, it was important for us as editors to have
a sense of making a case, of creating a doctrine putting forth a perspective. As al-
ways, we started with our fundamental principle, “geographicity,” literally—earth
inscription, meaning the spatiality of all phenomena. “Phenomena” is then taken to
do with spatial meanings—productions, processes, and structurizations. The principle
of geographicity initiates our transdisciplinary geographical turn. The geographical
turn can be made in all forms of inquiry, which means that the geographicity of
any phenomenon at issue is to be made thematic—framing the spatial dimension
of the phenomenon. We maintain that without the geographical turn, which takes
seriously the spatial characteristics of phenomena as a constitutive agency, an
inquiry remains fundamentally at a greater level of abstraction from the life-world.
But the thematic of symbolic landscapes obviously involves spatiality in the
term “landscape,” and so at first glance the geographical turn does not seem to get
us very far. In other words the sense of the concept seems to engender a thematic
that includes spatiality. We maintain that even so, the geographical turn need not
be made. The key strategy for us in this instance for initiating the geographical
turn had been to inquire after the geographicity of symbol. In our study of semi-
oticians and the philosophy of Ernst Cassierer, we noted the prevalence of an in-
tellectualist bias in the treatment of symbol. By “intellectualist bias” we mean that
the Kantian distinction between form and matter/contents is operative. Symboliza-
tion is treated as a cognitive form that establishes the meaning of the contents: a
cognitive act of symbolizing something results in a symbolized object. A most
egregious example of the intellectualist position is the neo-Kantian position that
envisions the life-world as an inchoate (unstructured/meaningless) reality only re-
ceiving meaning (rational organization) on the basis of socio-cultural cognitive
formations. Symbolization is interpreted as a process that requires a special cogni-
tive act; otherwise then the meaning of something remains non-symbolic. In our
response, we eschew intellectualism as well as the symbolic/non-symbolic distinc-
tion. We were reminded of Merleau-Ponty’s gestural theory of language, which
involves the intentionality of the lived-body and the precognitive gesture, which is
Preface vii
already meaningful and which is the genetic source for language. Symbolic mean-
ing emerges on the level of the human life form, but from the interrelation of the
lived-body with its milieu—the field of spatial productivity or what Merleau-
Ponty calls “behavior.”
We came to the conclusion that language is not the only domain of symboliza-
tion that has its origin in this precognitive spatializing/spatialized field of meaning,
but that all symbolization genetically arises on this basis. Merleau-Ponty, however,
emphasizes the intentional structure of the lived-body, whereas we have made a
case for the co-constitutivity of the lived-body and the EarthBody. EarthBody is
our technical term that refers to the constitutive agency of the earth’s morphologi-
cal structuring—it is correlative with the lived-body. Thus, instead of speaking
about the structures of behavior, as does Merleau-Ponty, we think in terms of
enactive geographicity, which includes the sense of behavior, but is preferred by
us in order to envision the co-constituting spatial event, a field of meaning encom-
passing of the lived-body and the EarthBody. This move does not contradict
Merleau-Ponty, but we believe is a move that is more consistent with his own later
development of the ontology of the flesh.
Thus, we advocate a non-intellectualist, precognitive, embodied (spatializing/
spatialized), genetic theory concerning symbolization. We have sought to begin
development of this theory through this study of “symbolic landscapes.”
We use the word, “advocate,” because, given the nature of an edited volume,
this theory is not given the rigor necessary for a thorough articulation and estab-
lishment. In phenomenological literature much use in titles is made of the notion,
“towards.” “Towards” suggests the opening up of an area, description that clears
the way for a further line of inquiry, initial efforts of examination necessary for
later more refined studies that would not be possible otherwise. Our initial explo-
ration presented here in our two introductions clears the way for a more articulated
and established doctrine concerning symbolic landscapes, but in the meantime it is
supported by no less than the sixteen diverse studies that make up the chapters of
this book. These studies provide instances for thinking about the efficacy of our
proposed theoretical doctrine. They are meant to be read in light of our proposal
and to have been framed with our orientation in mind. Nevertheless as case stud-
ies, each has its own merit and each articulates a particular phenomenon in a rich
and interesting way. The excellence of case studies is their detailed attention to a
particular phenomenon, adding flesh and blood to the bare bones of theoretical
exposition. These studies have tremendous merit even if they are not read on the
basis of supporting a new doctrine. The empirical study of symbolic landscapes
in itself is fascinating because it engenders the most meaningful ways in which
humans engage a milieu.
The co-editors have been co-organizing annual international conferences since
1999 and this is our seventh volume. Each of our publications is progress in our
scientia, which we have named “Geophilia,” and this science employs the geo-
graphical turn and promotes the principle of geographicity. The basis for our termi-
nology and conception is quasi-phenomenological and compatible with the science
viii Preface
of self-organizing systems and open dynamic systems. Each of our works contains
lived geography (spatial experience) as an aspect of our research. This aspect of
the spatiality of lived experience is well represented in this volume as well. The
International Association for the Study of Environment, Space, and Place promotes
development of our scientia, beginning with members making presentations at
our annual conferences. Members of our association contribute to our continual
research and to our edited volumes. Please visit the website: www.towson.edu/
iasesp.
We thank Dr. Rita Marinho (former) Dean of the College of Liberal Arts at
Towson University, for her support of the 2005 conference that served as a neces-
sary step in developing this volume. We appreciate Marion Wielgosz at Loyola
College in Maryland for helping with the word processing and computer prepara-
tion of this volume. We also thank Jeep Watson at Uptown Press in Baltimore,
Maryland for his expertise in improving the quality of the figures and preparing
them to meet specs. We especially thank Maja de Keijzer and Anita Rachmat at
Springer for patiently working with us.

Gary Backhaus
Baltimore, Maryland
Table of Contents

Preface…………………………………………………………………………….v

Contributors..........................................................................................................xv

List of Figures………………………………………………………………….xvii

Part One: Places—Worlds

Introduction I: The Problematic of Grounding the Significance
of Symbolic Landscapes.................................................................................3
Gary Backhaus
I.1 Symbol – Landscapes – Symbolic Landscapes.........................................3
I.1.1 Semiotics: The Problematic of Defining ‘Symbol’........................4
I.1.2 Geographical Literature and Symbolic Landscapes.......................7
I.1.3 The Problematic of Defining ‘Landscape’...................................11
I.2 Toward the Geographicity of Symbolic Landscapes:
A Phenomenological Grounding.............................................................12
I.2.1 The Leading Clue: Merleau-Ponty’s
Gestural Theory of Language.......................................................14
I.2.2 Human Behavior: The Field of Meanings that
is the Ontological Source for Symbolism....................................17
I.2.3 Spatiality.......................................................................................20
I.2.4 The Spatiality of Sensation as a Gestural Expression..................22
I.2.5 Symbolic Landscapes...................................................................23
I.2.6 New Trends in Cultural Geography.............................................25
I.3 Conclusion...............................................................................................25
I.4 Overview of Part One..............................................................................26

1 The Road to Indian Wells: Symbolic Landscapes in the California
Desert..............................................................................................................33
Alex Zukas
1.1 Introduction: Symbolic Landscapes........................................................33
1.2 Confronting Postmodern Symbolic Landscapes
in California’s Coachella Valley.............................................................37
ix
x Table of Contents
1.3 Confronting Pre-Modern Symbolic Landscapes
in the Coachella Valley............................................................................47
1.4 Two Ways of Being and Becoming in the California Desert..................53
1.5 Conclusion: Thinking About Landscape.................................................54

2 Wilderness as Axis Mundi: Spiritual Journeys on the Appalachian
Trail................................................................................................................65
Kip Redick
2.1 Introduction..............................................................................................65
2.2 Defining Wilderness................................................................................66
2.3 The Rise of Wilderness as Symbol in the Intertwining
of Lived-Body and Milieu of the Shepherd Nomad................................67
2.4 Wilderness as Axis Mundi in Judaic and Christian Scripture..................68
2.5 Wilderness and the American Milieu......................................................72
2.6 Wilderness and the Sojourner..................................................................74
2.7 Appalachian Trail as a Place of Spiritual Journey...................................76
2.7.1 Historical Background..................................................................76
2.7.2 A Pathway through the Wilderness..............................................76
2.7.3 A Work of Art with Religious Implications.................................77
2.7.4 The Experiential Spirituality of the Appalachian Trail................80
2.7.5 Pilgrims on the Appalachian Trail...............................................80
2.7.6 Communitas and Liminality in the Intertwining
of Lived Body and Milieu............................................................82
2.7.7 Time..............................................................................................85
2.8 Conclusion...............................................................................................86

3 Pu‘u Kohola: Spatial Genealogy of a Hawaiian Symbolic
Landscape......................................................................................................91
RDK Herman
3.1 Introduction..............................................................................................91
3.2 Tides of Time...........................................................................................93
3.3 Layers of Space, Time, and Meaning......................................................94
3.3.1 Physical Geography......................................................................95
3.3.2 Conquest.......................................................................................96
3.3.3 The Hawaiian Kingdom and Westernization...............................98
3.3.4 American Colonization.................................................................99
3.3.5 The Harbor.................................................................................100
3.4 Embodying Transformation...................................................................101
3.5 Navigating the Present...........................................................................105

4 Mythological Landscape and Landscape of Myth: Circulating Visions
of Pre-Christian Athos................................................................................109
Veronica della Dora
4.1 Introduction............................................................................................109
4.2 Xerxes’ Canal.........................................................................................113
4.3 Alexander’s Mountain...........................................................................116
Table of Contents xi
4.4 From Emblem to Field...........................................................................119
4.5 Conclusion.............................................................................................125
4.6 Coda.......................................................................................................126

5 At Home on the Midway: Carnival Conventions and Yard Space
in Gibsonton, Florida..................................................................................133
Charlie Hailey
5.1 Introduction............................................................................................133
5.2 Mediated Yard Spaces...........................................................................134
5.3 Gibsonton’s Boot: Ready-to-Wear Signs and Other
Systems of Symbolism..........................................................................136
5.4 Siting Gibsonton....................................................................................138
5.5 Clearing Space: Town as Midway.........................................................140
5.6 Remaking Yard Space as Carnival Midway..........................................142
5.7 Breaking Camp: Gibsonton as ‘Lived Symbol’ Between
Arriving and Departing..........................................................................147
5.8 Speculative Spaces: At Home in the Front Yard...................................151

6 Crossing the Verge: Roadside Memorial—Perth, Western
Australia.......................................................................................................161
Dennis Wood
6.1 Introduction............................................................................................161
6.2 Location: The Geography of Roadside Memorial Sites........................162
6.3 Excavating the Sites...............................................................................163
6.4 Historical Perspective and the Meaning of Memorials.........................164
6.5 Ritual and Rite of Passage.....................................................................166
6.6 Spontaneity of the Sites.........................................................................169

7 Life on “The Avenue”: An Allegory of the Street in Early Twenty-
First-Century Suburban America.............................................................173
John Srygley
7.1 Introduction............................................................................................173
7.2 From Main Street to Lifestyle Retail Development..............................174
7.3 An Allegory of the Street.......................................................................178
7.3.1 City Monumentality and Urban Amnesia..................................180
7.3.2 Suburban Idealization: The Paradox of Private Public Space...182

8 Metaphor, Environmental Receptivity, and Architectural Design........185
Brook Muller
8.1 Introduction............................................................................................185
8.2 Metaphor: Redesigning Design and Its Culture....................................187
8.3 Organism As Bauplan For Architecture................................................192
8.4 Furnishing Our Primary Inhabitation.....................................................194
8.5 Design as Hinge: The Architectonic of the Intraworldly......................197