Identity and Landscapes
Socially Constructed Landscapes
While specific definitions of what ‘identity’ is up for debate, it often widely recognized that identity is socially constructed through means of ethnicity, religion, gender, politics, sexuality, socioeconomic status and other factors. David Arreola, cultural geographer, states “That landscape can have multiple meanings to different groups as well as individuals has been explored, and several geographers have articulated systematically how landscapes can be read, providing insight into place and social situation. Most cultural geographers accept the fact that landscapes are socially constructed…Landscape can act as a signifying framework through which a social system is communicated, reproduced, experienced and explored” (Arreola 2002, 4). Thus, identity can be understood as just one of the ways landscapes are socially constructed. In order to deconstruct these constructed spaces, critical social theory can be applied in order to detect spatial patterns and hopefully gain greater understanding of the reciprocal relationship between humans and the environment. Edward Soja’s theoretical approach, see Figure II, helps invoke this notion that creation of landscapes is a continual dance and interaction, it never remains stagnant. Another concept that relates to the fluidity of landscapes, is the idea of multiple realities- ‘geographies’. |
‘Geographies’
Another manifestation of identity on the landscape is the notion that not only one reality exists. If landscapes are socially created, then in turn, different social realities result in different spatial realities! The idea that one ‘singular’ geography exists can be exclusionary, by denying the existence of power structures and spatial biases. The act of extracting and analyzing the influences of power on the landscape can be extremely informative, “But by always foregrounding the spatial distribution of hierarchical power relations, we can better understand the process whereby a space achieves a distinctive identity as a place” (Gupta & Ferguson 1992, 8). Thus, space reflects and is in turn affected by social characteristics such as ethnicity, gender, class and race. In fact Richard Schein asserts “all American landscapes can be seen through a lens of race, all American landscapes are racialized” (Schein 2006, 4). Schein encourages geographers and other social scientists to critically analyze the everyday landscapes of the United States through a lens of race. Not only the obvious spaces like the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, TN where Martin Luther King Junior was assassinated, but the ordinary spaces that are a part of everyday life for millions of Americans. By Schein’s definition, the rapidly changing demographics of Texas, and Hill Country in particular, make for an interesting critical analysis of racialized spaces. However, in order to understand now ethnicity manifests on the landscape, both physical and perceptual, it is important to first grasp the historical spatial legacy of the Hispanic population in the Hill Country, and the greater United States. |