Bodies, Sensations, Space and Time: The Contribution from Henri Lefebvre

Author(s): Kirsten Simonsen

Source: Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, Vol. 87, No. 1 (2005), pp. 1-14
Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3554441 .
Accessed: 22/02/2011 10:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Blackwell Publishing and Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography.

http://www.jstor.org
 BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME:
THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE
by
Kirsten Simonsen
Simonsen, K., 2005: Bodies, sensations, space and time: the con-
tribution from Henri Lefebvre. Geogr. Ann., 87 B (1): 1-14.
ABSTRACT. In geography as well as other human/social scienc-
es, issues on the body and embodiment have increasingly come
to the fore over recent decades. In the same period, and in partic-
ular following the English translation of The Production of Space,
Henri Lefebvre has been a central figure in the geographical dis-
course. However, even though a range of writers on Lefebvre do
acknowledge his emphasis on embodiment, it seems that he has
only partially found his way into the core of the body literature.
The aim of this paper is to explore Lefebvre's contribution to a
geographical theory of the body, in particularwhen it comes to the
conception of a generative and creative social body as an intrinsic
part of social practice. I start by exploring the way in which Lefe-
bvre's conception of the body is developed in creative dialoque
with other philosophers, such as Marx, Heideggger and Ni-
etzsche, and continue by way of an explication of his own contri-
bution. This is done under the headings of 'spatial bodies' and
'temporal bodies', in this way also emphasizing creative, moving
bodies. Instead of a conclusion the paper argues that Lefebvre's
contribution could gainfully interact with later (not least feminist)
approaches, and through such interactions add to current discus-
sions on 'body politics' and 'performativity'.
Key words: body, embodiment, space, time, Lefebvre
Introduction
Inrecentdecadestherehasbeenanoutpouring of lit-
eratureon the importanceof embodimentand the
bodyin (notleastfeminist)geographyas well as oth-
er partsof the humanitiesand social sciences.A
numberof monographs(see e.g. Turner,1984;Shil-
ling, 1993; Butler, 1993; Grosz, 1994; Longhurst,
2001) andcollections(e.g.Feheret al., 1989;Feath-
erstoneet al., 1991; Duncan,1996;Ainley, 1998;
NastandPile, 1998)haveappeared,andin 1995the
journalBody & Societywas established.These at-
temptsto establishthe body in social theoryhave
beenfuelledby a diverserangeof theoreticaltradi-
tions;amongthemostimportant areFrenchfeminist
authorssuch as deBeauvoir,Kristeva,Irigirayand
Cixous;phenomenologicalcritiquesof Cartesian-
ism in theworkof Husserl,HeideggerandMerleau-
Ponty;andhistoriesof thebodyliketheonesof Elias
andFoucault.Few,however,seemto considerLefe-
bvreto be a majorcontributor to theseendeavours,
?Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography, 2005
althoughhe wasveryfirmabouttheneedto reinstate
the body in philosophyandsocialthought:
Westernphilosophyhas betrayedthe body; it
has actively participatedin the great process
of metaphorizationthat has abandoned the
body; and it has denied the body. The living
body, being at once 'subject' and 'object',
cannottoleratesuch conceptualdivision, and
consequentlyphilosophicalconcepts fall into
the categoryof the 'sign of non-body'.
(Lefebvre,1991, p. 407;
emphasisin original)
Probablyone of the reasons why the Lefebvrian
contributionhad not the greatappealfor the early
(mainly sociologist) theoristsof the body is that
when authorslike Featherstoneand Turnerargue
that'we needto developan embodiednotionof the
humanbeing as a social agentandof the functions
of the body in social space' (1995, p. 7), space is
conceived of in a purely metaphoricalsense. To
Lefebvre,on the contrary,theorizingthe body inev-
itablyinvolvesa focus on space,on the body's im-
plicationin and constitutionof a 'sensory-sensual
space'.Later,withmoregeographicalinterventions,
the space-bodyrelationshiphas come much more
into the centreof analysis.All the same, although
quitea few writerson Lefebvrenoticehis emphasis
on embodiment(see Gregory,1994;BlumandNast,
1996; Pile, 1996; Shields, 1998; Merrifield,2000;
Elden,2004), he does not seem to be considereda
majorcontributor to a theoryof the body.
As in manyof his themes,Lefebvre'swritingson
the body-space relationshipinclude a conceptual
as well as a historicalanda politicaldimension,and
his discussionslips in andout of these differentdi-
mensions. Smith, not without some justification,
talks about an unresolvedcontradictionbetween
ontology andhistoryin muchof Lefebvre'svision
(Smith, 1998). But Lefebvre also mindfully de-
ploys these slippages and ambiguitiesin his Ni-
etzsche-inspiredstyle of Anti-Logos,in particular
1
 KIRSTEN SIMONSEN
as performed in The Production of Space (see e.g.
Merrifield, 1995), and his genealogical exploration
of concepts and relations. In his search for a non-
essentialist Marxism, Lefebvre incessantly resisted
even the slightest hint of systematization and foun-
dationalism, and for him the conceptions of body
and space are inseparable both from their history
and the concomitant critique and politics.
Among these dimensions, Lefebvre's contribu-
tion to the understanding of the history of the hu-
man body is the most thoroughly explored, first and
most elegantly by Gregory in his Geographical Im-
aginations (1994). With take-off in The Production
of Space, he identifies one of its major themes to be
a history of the decorporealization of space, thus
establishing an indispensable connection between
the history of the body and the history of space and,
more particularly, comprehending the shift from
'the space of the body to the body-in-space' which
somehow facilitates 'the spiriting-away or scot-
omization of the body' (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 302).
The term is borrowed from psychoanalysis, but is
used here to signal a historical process of abstrac-
tion of the body through an overlapping of the vis-
ual and the linguistic. Gregory (with Lefebvre)
traces this decorporealization of space through the
history of space - from analogical space, over cos-
mological and symbolic space, to abstract space -
and demonstrates it by examples from philosophy
and science, from cities and architecture, and from
art. Here, the body is disdained, absorbed, and bro-
ken into pieces by images:
Picasso's cruelty toward the body, particularly
the female body, which he tortures in a thou-
sand ways and caricates without mercy, is dic-
tated by the dominant form of space, by the
eye and by the phallus - in short, by violence.
(1991, p. 302)
As indicated in this opinion on Picasso, for Lefebvre
other processes or 'histories' accompany the decor-
porealization of space. First and foremost, although
this is less developed in the text, the decorporealiza-
tion of space is paralleledby a decorporealizationof
time. The optical and visual world fetishizes abstrac-
tion and detaches the pure form from its impurecon-
tent - 'from lived time, everyday time, and from
bodies with their opacity and solidity, their warmth,
their life and their death' (1991, p. 97). Furthermore,
the process involves a logic of visualization and one
of metaphorization;living bodies, the bodies of 'us-
ers' are caught up, not only in the toils of parcellized
2 Geografiska Annaler
space, but also in the work of images, signs and sym-
bols. These bodies are transferredand emptied out
via the eyes, a process that is not only abstract and
visual, but also phallocratic. It is embodied in a mas-
culine will-to-power and, metaphorically, abstract
space and its material forms symbolize force, male
fertility and masculine violence.1
For Lefebvre, however, the body serves as a crit-
ical figure too. It is not possible totally to reduce the
body or the practico-sensory realm to abstract
space. The body takes its revenge - or at least calls
for revenge - for example, in leisure space. It seeks
to make itself known, to gain recognition, as 'gen-
erative'. This renders necessary another under-
standing of the body, not only as the subject of his-
torical abstraction and visualization, but also as an
intrinsic partof social practice. It is Lefebvre's con-
tribution to this endeavour, to the conception of the
generative and creative social body - a phenome-
nological body, you could say - that I want to ex-
plore in the remaining part of this article.
Inspiration and dialogue
Lefebvre's interest in the body is founded on a con-
ception of practice that is complex, open-ended and
holding many dimensions. It relates to nature,to the
past and to humanpossibilities, and it ranges in scale
from gestures andcorporeal attitudes,over everyday
activities, to overall social practice in the economic
and political spheres. The considerations on the
body in this connection are formulated in dialogue
with a range of philosophers and social theorists,
only the most importantof whom I will touch upon.
First and foremost, a point of departureis taken
in Marx. It is important to maintain that Lefebvre
was first of all a Marxist philosopher, but also that,
in his view, Marxism should be treated as one mo-
ment in the development of theory and not, dog-
matically, as a definitive theory. From Marx comes
the idea that human beings are characterized by the
way in which - through work - they transform na-
ture and, at the same time, their own nature. In this
process of production - or domination and appro-
priation of nature- both biological (physiological)
and social (historical) dimensions are involved.
Productive activity is always oriented towards an
objective, and during the process bodies, limbs and
eyes are mobilized, involving both 'materials'
(stone, wood, leather) and 'materiel' (tools, lan-
guage, instructions, agendas) (Lefebvre, 1991, p.
71). In this way, a dialectic is established between
social practices (work), bodies and nature.
87 B (2005) ? 1
 BODIES,SENSATIONS,SPACEAND TIME:THECONTRIBUTION
However, Marx's concept of social practice is
not sufficient to an understanding of human beings
and their bodies. The most importantreason for this
is that he reduces human reality to work, to making
tools or to conquering nature. As Lefebvre tells us,
Marx accentuated homo faber, without neglecting
homo sapiens too much; he did not insist on homo
ridens, and also homo ludens was put aside; he also
disregarded death and the consciousness about
death (Lefebvre, 1975, p. 143). In other words, sub-
jectivity was founded in work and partially in
knowledge, while issues such as joy, desire and
play were missing. Shortly, it was reduced to tool-
making and had no right of satisfaction of its own.
Marx therefore was unable sufficiently to integrate
materialism and spiritualism.2 To cope with these
problems and elaborate a richer conception of hu-
man beings, Lefebvre enters into dialogue with oth-
er authors, in particular Heidegger and Nietzsche.
In doing so, however, he makes clear his dissocia-
tion from what he considers the false, fascist inter-
pretation of Nietzsche's thinking and the tendency
in Heidegger towards German chauvinism (Lefeb-
vre, 1975).
Heidegger is probably the twentieth-century
philosopher with whom Lefebvre was most en-
gaged. They shared a number of preoccupations
concerning existence and the world, but did not
come to the same conclusions (see also Elden,
2004). The relationship is most obvious in Lefeb-
vre's trilogy Critique of Everyday Life (1958,
1961, 1981). The concept of everydayness (Lefe-
bvre; Quotidiennete, Heidegger; Alltaglichkeit) in
both authors refers to a theory of alienation, even
if the substance is divergent. In Being and Time
(1962), Heidegger uses the concept to character-
ize the inauthentic existence of Dasein. As every-
day Being-with-one-another, it stands in subjec-
tion to others, not some definite others, but the in-
determinate mass of 'they', of averageness and
publicness. Dasein stops being itself and the as-
cendancy of others rids it of its being. In this way,
everydayness opens the way to a loss of direction,
to dereliction and disquiet. Lefebvre 'marxianiz-
es' these ideas, reformulates them from an exis-
tential critique towards a more social one. He adds
a historical and a utopian dimension and develops
a theory of alienation that is an extension of what
he considers Marx's incomplete one, extending it
from production to the whole range of spheres of
social life.
In this connection Lefebvre also looked to
French phenomenology and existentialism - that
Annaler 87 B (2005) 1
Geografiska
FROMHENRILEFEBVRE
is, besides Heidegger also to Merleau-Ponty and in
particularto Sartre3- in his development of the ac-
tive side of consciousness and sensations in the
process of human becoming. These considerations
also, more or less explicitly, involve the body.
Heidegger himself does not refer explicitly to the
body, but with notions such as 'being-towards-
dead' or 'ready-to-hand' his terminology is highly
suggestive. Lefebvre, then, stresses the fact that,
with his restitution of the practico-sensory realm,
Heidegger continues the work that young Marx
had started (Lefebvre, 1975). He emphasizes
Heidegger's introduction of the question of 'the
thing', not as technical product but as 'the work'
(oeuvre) - as process and result of creative, bodily
activity. In this sense the thing was rich in poetry
(not understood as verbal art, but as the practical
truth of orientated, bodily activity). Lefebvre criti-
cized Heidegger for translating this insight into a
cult of the artisan, touchingly patriarchal and Ger-
manic feeling for the home.4 For him, rather than
the home, it was the city that symbolized a person's
being and consciousness, reflecting a shift from the
individual to the collective level. So when Lefebvre
adopted the existentialist concept of poesis - con-
necting orientated bodily activity with the experi-
ence and creation of human nature - he gave it a
ratherbroad content. It includes the creation of vil-
lages and cities, the formation of territorial groups,
the idea of 'absolute love', psychoanalysis, the de-
cision to change one's life - all connected in the
creative ability of daily life (see also Poster, 1975).
Yet it is importantto maintain the dialectical nature
of everyday life. Poesis cannot be sustained beyond
specific 'moments'; continuous dis-alienation
would be an impossible, utopian condition. It exists
in dialectic with the routinization of everyday life
and the historical process of institutionalization
and stabilization of interaction into systemic do-
mains.
Another important source for the understand-
ing of the body, including sexuality, poetry and
drama, is Nietzsche, whom Lefebvre sought to
conjoin with Marx. Lefebvre (1991) himself de-
clares his critique of philosophy as rooted on the
one hand in social practice (Marx) and on the other
hand in art, poetry, music and drama (Nietzsche)
- and rooted, too, in both cases, in the (material)
body. From Nietzsche comes the idea that prior to
knowledge, and beyond it, is the body and the ac-
tions of the body - suffering, desire and pleasure.
Let Lefebvre himself summarize the consequenc-
es of these ideas:
3
 KIRSTEN SIMONSEN
Spatial practice is neither determined by an
existing system, be it urban and ecological,
nor adapted to a system, be it economic or po-
litical. On the contrary, thanks to potential en-
ergies of a variety of groups capable of divert-
ing homogenized space to their own purposes,
a theatricalized or dramatized space is liable
to arise. Space is liable to be erotisized and re-
stored to ambiguity, to common birthplace of
needs and desire, by means of music, by
means of differential systems and valoriza-
tions which overwhelm the strict localizations
of needs and desires in spaces specialized ei-
ther physiologically (sexuality) or socially
(places set aside, supposedly, for pleasure).
An unequal struggle, sometimes furious,
sometimes more low-key, takes place between
the Logos and the Anti-Logos, these terms be-
ing taken in the broadest sense - the sense in
which Nietzsche used them.
(1991, p. 391)
Lefebvre thus prioritized Eros (erotic knowledge)
over Logos (logical knowledge) in his political
thinking, very much as Nietzsche did with his de-
sire for 'Anti-Logos'. So, even if Lefebvre was al-
ways guarded against the nihilism and anti-democ-
racy involved, the emphasis on the body, desire,
sexuality and not least festivals as 'intense mo-
ments' of everyday life have direct resonance from
Nietzschean thought. As does the above-mentioned
idea that the visual increasingly takes precedence
over elements of thought and action deriving from
other senses - the sense of smell, taste and touch -
and that sexuality and desire are more or less being
annexed by sight.
All these dimensions - work and social practice,
bodily creativity and poetry, Eros, sexuality and de-
sire - are connected in Lefebvre's conception of the
body. Of the utmost importance too, though, is the
intrinsic way in which this conceptualization re-
lates to space and time, or rather to the spatiality
and temporality of the body. In other words, how
bodily practices that give rise to socially construct-
ed modes of space and time are at the same time
definitions of selfhood internalized within the
body. In the following, I will consider the two in
turn. This, of course, should be seen only as an an-
alytical distinction, since in practice spatiality and
temporality is inseparable. Or, with Lefebvre
(1991, p. 175), time is distinguishable but not sep-
arable from space - the two of them manifest them-
selves as different yet inextricable.
4 Geografiska Annaler * 87 B (2005) ? 1
Spatial bodies
The relationship between human bodies and space
is most thoroughly explored by Lefebvre in his
'SpatialArchitechtonics' (1991, pp. 169-228), per-
haps the most complex section of The Production
of Space. There Lefebvre describes an anatomy of
space generated by living bodies; at the same time
he makes an ontological claim and establishes a
material basis for the production of space consist-
ing of
... a practical and fleshy body conceived of as
a totality complete with spatial qualities (sym-
metries, asymmetries) and energetic proper-
ties (discharges, economics, waste)
(1991, p. 61).
The emphasis on production is vital because it en-
ables Lefebvre - in critical dialogue with psycho-
analytical assumptions of prohibition - to treat so-
cial space as not only a space of 'no', but also a
space of 'yes', of affirmation of life. An important
precondition of this material production is that each
living body both is space and has its space; it pro-
duces itself in space at the same time as it produces
that space.
Theoretically, then, the body serves both as
point of departure and as destination. It is an in-
trinsic part of the 'lived experience' - an experi-
ence that in modernity, from Lefebvre's point of
view, is exposed to a tendency to be drained of all
content by mechanisms of language, signs and ab-
stractions, but which cannot be totally erased. As
part of the lived experience, the body constitutes a
practico-sensory realm in which space is perceived
through smells, tastes, touch and hearing as well as
through sight. It produces a space which is both bi-
omorphic and anthropological. The physiological
closures of the body imply a conceptual differen-
tiation between internal and external spaces - and
hence of a distinct body - while the external envi-
ronment is perceived through a double process of
orientation and demarcation. Orientation some-
what replicates the structureof the body itself, pro-
jecting into the world pairs of determinants such as
right and left, symmetries and asymmetries, axes
and planes or centres and peripheries. Demarca-
tion adds to this traces and marks that are both
practical and symbolic - directions which not only
act as guidance to the world, but also make it mean-
ingful. All this is connected to a conception of the
spatial body:
 BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE
A body so conceived,as producedand as the
productionof space,is immediatelysubjectto
the determinants of that space ... the spatial
body's materialcharacterderivesfrom space,
fromtheenergythatis deployedandputto use
there.
(Lefebvre,1991, p. 195)
Lefebvre'srepetitivereferencesto theenergyof the
body may seem not only biomorphic,but also al-
mostnaturalisticin character.He refersto livingor-
ganismsthatcaptureenergiesthatareactivein their
vicinity - energiesthatare dedicatedby natureto
productiveexpenditure.5 In the next step,however,
Lefebvre withdrawsfrom any functionalismor
'principleof economy' in relationto that energy,
characterizingit as a low-level principleapplying
only at the level of survival.Again with reference
to Nietzsche,he emphasizesthe Dionysianside of
existence accordingto which play, struggle,art,
festival, sexualityand love - in short,Eros - are
themselvesa necessityanda potentialityof the liv-
ing being. They are partof the transgressiveener-
gies of the body.
In continuationof this, Lefebvrediscusseshow
the relationshipbetween body and space are in-
volvedin theconstitutionof the self. In thisdiscus-
sion,he drawson ideasof themirrorandthemirror-
effect, whichhe relatesto the mathematicaltheory
of symmetry,to Nietzsche and surrealism,and to
psychoanalysis.In an immediatesense, the mirror
extends a repetitionimmanentto the body into
space;in anothersense it presentsthe Ego with its
own materialpresence,with the doublenessof its
absencefromandat the sametime its inherencein
this 'other'space:
Space - my space - is not the context of which
I constitute'textuality':instead,it is firstof all
my body,andthen it is my body'scounterpart
or 'other',its mirror-image or shadow;it is the
shifting intersection between that which
touches, penetrates,threatensor benefitsmy
body on the one hand,andall otherbodies on
the other.
(1991, p. 184;emphasisin original)
A few authors(Gregory,1995; Blum and Nast,
1996;Pile, 1996)have shownhow Lefebvre'sdis-
cussion of the mirroris - among other things - pro-
vokedby Lacan.However,Lefebvre'srelationship
to psychoanalysisis definitelyone of criticaldia-
logue. He criticizedthe psychoanalystsfor over-
Geografiska Annaler 87 B (2005) ? 1
statingthe work of the mirror-effectby demateri-
alizingit andabstractingit outof its spatialcontext
into the form of purely mental 'topologies'. This
objectionis parallelto Lefebvre'sgeneralcritique
of structuralist andpoststructuralistwritingsforre-
ducingspaceto a linguisticmentalspace.Lefebvre
does not deny the importanceof (Lacan's)Imagi-
nary and Symbolic spaces for the constitutionof
the self, buthe wantsto establishtheirmaterialin-
scriptionin social space. He wantsto include the
underlyingmaterial, spatial and political forces
thathavethe possibilityto transcendthe visual do-
main.The most interestingthing aboutthe mirror
is thereforenot so muchthe fact thatit projectsthe
'subject's'image back on the 'subject'as the way
in which it extends a repetitionimmanentin the
body into space. He is interestedin the social rela-
tionshipbetween repetitionand difference,in the
conflictualway in which the productionof social
space is involvedin the constitutionof the self. In
this process,the mirrorworks into social life and
subjectivityin the formof a dualspatiality;a space
thatis imaginarywith respectto originandsepara-
tion,butalso concreteandpracticalwithrespectto
co-existence and differentiation(1991, p. 186).
This meansa shift of emphasisfromthe 'psychic'
towardsthe social and material,to the social rela-
tionshipsin work when the body/subjectis facing
the 'other'as anotherbody.Theserelationshipsin-
cludea set of 'doubles'in time-space,suchas sym-
metry/asymmetry,repetition/differentiation, con-
nection/separation,surface/depth,opacity/trans-
parency,imaginary/real,material/social,and con-
sciousnessof oneself andof the other.
As an illustration,Lefebvre(as one of the very
few places in his text wherehe does so) discusses
therelationshipbetweenthesexes.Herewe findthe
'double' of symmetry and asymmetrybetween
male and female and subsequentlydisplacedillu-
sionaleffects (an oscillationbetweentransparency
andopacity).The otheremergesandturnsoutto be
the same, albeit in an ambiguousand shadowy
manner.Each person seeks him or herself in the
hope of finding the other, while what he or she
seeks in the otheris a projectionof the self. A frag-
mentationensues and,thanksto the oscillationbe-
tween knowingand misapprehending the other,a
will to poweris able to intrudeitself.
The 'socialization'of the mirror-effectis based
on a dual existence of social space relativeto its
participants.On the one hand,Lefebvresays, each
memberof societyrelatesitselfto space,situatesit-
self in it. This is partof the processof constitution
5
 KIRSTEN SIMONSEN
of the self- of designating oneself to an individual
as well as a public identity. On the other hand, space
serves an intermediary or mediating role through
which 'one' seeks to apprehend something or
somebody else. It offers sequences, sets of objects
and concatenations of bodies, giving the impres-
sion of transparency,of the world as reflected with-
in each body in an ever-renewed to-and-fro of re-
ciprocal reflection. Social space itself becomes a
mirror, in a collective and historical sense.
This duality between opacity and transparency,
subjectivity and objectivity, is a point of intersec-
tion between the body and social space. Lefebvre
however also offers more material solutions to the
relationship between the two. More precisely, he
considers the articulation between sensory and
practico-perceptual space on the one hand and spe-
cific or practico-social space on the other. Histori-
cally, sensory-sensual space may be seen as sedi-
ment, destined to survive as one layer or element in
the stratification and interpenetration of social
spaces. But that does not address the issue of more
specific articulations.
One immediate answer given by Lefebvre is a
conception of social practice and its objects as an
extension of the body. Among the last-mentioned
are everyday utensils or tools, which extend the
body in accord with its rhythms, or speech and writ-
ing, which sometimes disclose and sometimes dis-
simulate.6 Practically, this takes place through per-
formance of gestures and development of gestural
systems. Social gestures in Lefebvre's sense consist
of articulated movements mobilizing and activat-
ing the whole body. Their accomplishment implies
the existence of affiliations, of groups (family,
tribe, village, city) and of activity - the most obvi-
ous example being gestures of labour.7Ensembles
of gestures or gestural systems are further invested
with meaning and codes. Like language, they are
made up of symbols, signs and signals. Such codes
are, of course, specific to a particular society:
To belong to a given society is to know and
use its codes for politeness, courtesy, affec-
tion, parley, negotiation, trading, and so on-
as also for the declaration of hostilities.
(1991, p. 215)
What this sentence says is that gestural systems
embody ideology and history and bind them to
practice, thus recalling a spatialized version of
Bourdieu's theory of practice and the body's incor-
poration of history (1977, 1990). The importance
6 Geografiska Annaler
of places and space in gestural systems is obvious.
But organized gestures, which are codified ges-
tures, are not simply performed in space. Bodies
themselves generate spaces, which are produced by
and for their gestures, and this also goes for systems
ranging from the everyday microgestural realm to
the most highly formalized macrogestural one.
Lefebvre sees gestural systems as something that
can connect representations of space and spaces of
representations.
More generally, therefore, the articulation be-
tween bodily practices and social space may be un-
derstood through the way in which the body is in-
volved in the constitution of the dimensions of so-
cial space. In order to consider this, let us very
briefly recapitulate Lefebvre's by now widely dis-
cussed conceptual triad of social space (see e.g. So-
ja, 1989, 1996; Shields, 1998). He introduces it
twice in the introductory chapter of The Production
of Space and even though it is not developed later
in the book, it permeates the whole text.8 Briefly re-
capitulated, the three dimensions are:
1. Spatial practice, which embraces social pro-
duction and reproduction and the particularlo-
cations and spatial forms characteristic of a giv-
en social formation. It would, for example, in-
clude the built environment, urban morphology
and the creation of zones for specific purposes.
Through everyday practices, space is dialecti-
cally created as a human and social space. This
aspect of spatiality helps to ensure continuity
and some degree of cohesion in social configu-
rations. The spatial practice of a society at the
same time propounds and presupposes its space
in a dialectic interaction; it relies on a 'common-
sense' understanding of space including both
the taken-for-granted dimensions of everyday
life and the rationalized institutions and urban
networks that we pass through in our daily rou-
tines. Lefebvre characterizes this space as aper-
ceived space, which embodies the interrelations
between institutional practices and daily expe-
riences and routines.
2. Representations of space are connected with the
dominant 'order' of any society and hence with
its codes, signs and knowledge about space.
These are the forms of knowledge of space in
society, the ideological content and claims of
truth of theories, and the conceptual imagina-
tions of space linked to production relations.
This is a conceived space, conceptualized and
87 B (2005) * 1
 BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE
discursivelyconstructedby professionalsand
technocrats- planners,developers,urbanists,
social engineersand scientists- and mediated
throughsystemsof verbalsigns. If we applya
Foucauldianterm,it is the dominantdiscourses
of space in a given society.These 'representa-
tions'areabstract,buthavea substantialandde-
cisive role in the productionof space through
social andpoliticalpractices.
3. Spaces of representations embody complex
symbolismslinkedto the 'clandestineor under-
ground'side of social life. In this sense, it is a
terrainof struggleon the way to realizingour-
selves as 'totalpersons'andbringingintobeing
alternativeimaginationsof space. This space
embracesplaces andtheirsymbolicvalue,con-
flictingrhythmsof everydaylife, feminine/mas-
culine andso on. It is the livedspace;the space
of inhabitantsand users as well as of some art-
ists andwriters,the spacetheyincessantlyseek
to createthroughappropriation of the environ-
ment.Lefebvrecites Dadaandthe Surrealistsas
examplesof art, literarycommentand fantasy
dealing with other, possible spatialities.The
spacesof representation, Lefebvresays,tendto-
wardsmoreorless coherentsystemsof non-ver-
bal symbols and signs. In some of Lefebvre's
presentations,this categorymayappearin rath-
er comprehensiveoppression/opposition rheto-
ric.However,as I see it, spacesof representation
will also workin moremodesteverydayappro-
priationsof space.
Here,however,the issue at stakeis morethanjust
the productionof space by way of the three ele-
ments,butalso the role of the body in this process.
As an initial point, Lefebvrestresseshow social/
spatialpractice,which is performedat the level of
the perceived,presupposesthe use of thebody- of
the hands,membersand sensoryorgans,perform-
ing gesturesof workorof activityunrelatedto work
(1991, p. 40). As for the conceived- the represen-
tationsof thebody- theyderivefromthe discours-
es of scientificknowledge,fromthe knowledgeof
anatomy,of physiology,of sickness and its cure,
and from the knowledge of the body's relations
withnatureorwithits surroundings or 'milieu'.9In
this way,the body is involvedin the oppositionbe-
tween ourperceptionof space- concreteandma-
terial - and our conception of space - abstract and
mental.In orderto understandthe productionof
space,however,we need to graspthe concreteand
Geografiska Annaler ? 87 B (2005) ? 1
the abstracttogether;we need a dialectic relation
between materialismand idealism.This is where
thenotionof thelivedcomesin - as a thirdtermbe-
tween the poles of perceptionandconception.So-
cially lived space dependson materialas well as
mentalconstructs- andon thebody.Hereagainwe
can see the influenceof both Heideggerand Ni-
etzsche.Theinfluenceof theformermaybe seen in
the emphasison the spatialnotionof 'poeticdwell-
ing' (Lefebvre,1975, 1991, pp. 121, 314): Lefeb-
vre's discussion of the contradictionbetween
habiter(translatedas residence;a bettertranslation
wouldprobablybe dwelling)andhabitat(housing)
suggestsa directlived experience,a bodily embed-
ded understandingof space and place. The Ni-
etzscheaninfluenceis evidenteverytime Lefebvre
arguesthatembodiedlived experiencecomes from
the excessive energies of the body, from creative
activityandfromthe level of affection- involving
need anddesire,passionandsexuality,images and
the spokenword.Furthermore, Lefebvrenotes,the
partof embodiedlived experienceis highly com-
plex, because'culture'interveneshere.Buthe does
not developthis line of thinking;one could proba-
bly do this by way of a dialoguewith the corporeal
elementsin the laterculturalstudies.
Even if the threedimensionsof spatialityenjoy
the same ontological (but not necessarilyhistori-
cal) status,withno one privileged,thereis no doubt
thatthe elementof lived space is centralto Lefeb-
vre's project,from a strategicpolitical viewpoint,
andalso in theoreticalterms.Morethanonce in The
Productionof Space he stressesthat spatialprac-
tices are lived directlybeforethey areconceptual-
ized. The centralitygiven to the body in this dis-
cussion as well as the position of the body in all
threedimensionsof spatialityrenderspossible an
understandingof the body as a mediatorof the re-
lationshipbetweenthe differentdimensions.
Temporal bodies
AlthoughLefebvrenevereffectively producedan
analysesof the productionof time, his analysisof
everydaylife andrhythmanalysesdo yield signifi-
cantinsightson time,multipletemporalitiesandthe
time-body relationship.For Lefebvre, time was
closely connectedwith space and apprehendedin
space,andbothenjoyedthesameontologicalstatus.
He also sketchedout a periodizationof time in so-
ciety(Lefebvre,1970),butdissociatedhimselffrom
a reductionof time to historyor evolution.Time is
also part of the lived experience,and it can take
7
 KIRSTEN SIMONSEN

many forms, such as physical,biological,mental, Lefebvre played with metaphorsof everyday

cosmic,social,cyclicalandlineartime,all of which life. Thereis a cliche, he said,whichcomparescre-
we encounterin everydaylife andin the body. ativemomentsto the mountaintops andeveryday
The developmentof a theory and a critiqueof time to the plains, or to the marshes.He himself
everyday life was one of Lefebvre's lifelong preferredanothermetaphor,comparingeveryday
projects,andit is a double-sidedeffortproducing life to fertile soil. A landscapewithoutflowersor
'at once a rejectionof the inauthenticandthe al- magnificentwoods may be depressingfor the pas-
ienated, and an unearthingof the humanwhich ser-by;but flowers and trees should not make us
still buriedtherein'(Trebitch,1991). This double- forgettheearthbeneath,whichhas a secretlife and
ness relatesto the temporalitiesof daily life; eve- a richnessof its own (Lefebvre1958). The idea of
ryday life is made of repetitionsor recurrences, outstandingcreative moments was however not
basically of two differentforms, which are irre- strange to Lefebvre. Sporadicallyhe developed
ducible to each other(Lefebvre,1961). Lefebvre whathe called a 'theoryof moments'."MIn this he
somewhatnostalgicallytracesback the firsttype interpretedthe moment as fleeting, but decisive
to archaicsocieties in which social life is closely sensationimplicatinga doublerecognitionof the
connectedto cosmic cycles andrhythmsof nature 'other'andthe self. It is a conjunctionof temporal-
and of the body.This cyclical repetitionis organ- ities, a functionof the individual'shistoryand a
ized accordingto phenomenasuch as days and formthatis superiorto andelevatesitself overrep-
nights, seasons and years,generations,andyouth etition and reappearance.Among the 'moments'
and age. The othertype of repetitionis linear. It thatarisefromeverydaylife arelove, games,rest,
is mechanical, such as a series of gestures, of knowledge,poetry andjustice, activitiesthatin a
blows of the hammer;it is enframed,constrained temporalityof ruptureand spontaneitytend to-
andcolonized by the space of the commodityand wardsa unificationof thefestivalandeverydaylife.
the territoryof the state;it is the dominanttempo- For Lefebvre,the momentwas also characterized
rality of modernity.Even if linear time has en- by its orientationtowardsthe realizationof a pos-
croachedon the cyclical, however,the latternever sibility;the possibilityis given, standsthereto be
fully disappeared.Emotions and affections, pri- both uncoveredand achieved,and the realization
vate life and its symbols cannotsubmitto cumu- implicatesa constitutiveaction.This idea allowed
lative and linearprocesses.10And at the point of himto extendthetheoryof momentsfromtheanal-
intersectionbetweenthetwo we findeverydaylife ysis of everydaylife to the understandingof sub-
and the body: lime momentsof revolutionaryfervour,suchas the
declarationof the Paris Communeor the student
The body does not fall undersway of analytic uprisingin 1968.
thoughtandits separationof the cyclicalfrom Thesedifferentideason temporalityareconnect-
the linear.Theunity,whichthatreflectionis at ed in Lefebvre'srhythmanalysis, whichis a kindof
suchpainto decode,findsrefugein thecryptic phenomenological-hermeneutic descriptionof the
opacitythatis the greatsecretof the body.For relationshipamongthebody,its rhythmsandits sur-
the bodyindeedunitesthe cyclical andthelin- roundingspace.As anidea,it was envisagedin Pro-
ear, combiningthe cycles of time, need and duction of Space, announced as a project in Com-
desirewiththe linearitiesof gesture,perambu- municationin 1985, and publishedin a ratherin-
lation, prehensionand the manipulationof complete collection after his death (Lefebvre,
things- the handlingof bothmaterialandab- 1992). Lefebvreheld high hopes for rhythmanaly-
stracttools. The body subsistspreciselyat the sis, he imagineda kindof general'rhythmology' ap-
level of the reciprocal movement between pliedto thelivingbody andits internalandexternal
these two realms;their difference- which is relationships,and he even consideredit a possible
lived, not thought- is its habitat. replacementfor psychoanalysis.12
(Lefebvre,1991, p. 203) To take a less ambitiousview, two qualitiesof
rhythmanalysis mightbe accentuated.First,it tran-
This is why we - as well as the spatial body - can scends any separationbetween space and time.
talk abouta temporalbodyliving out the different Rhythmcan be definedas movementsand differ-
temporalitiesof self and society and, in this proc- ences in repetition,as the interweavingof concrete
ess, preservingand developingdifferencewithin times, butit always also implies a relationof time
repetition. to space or place. Lefebvretalksabouta localized

8 Geografiska Annaler ? 87 B (2005) ? 1

 BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE
time or a temporalizedplace to underlinethe spa-
tio-temporalrealityof rhythmsandtheirparticipa-
tion in the productionof space. Second,rhythma-
nalysisaccentuatesthe centralityof thebodyto so-
cial understanding:
The body's inventivenessneeds no demon- betweenhomogeneityanddiversity(bothin Lefe-
stration,for the body itself revealsit, and de- bvre, 1996)- thusmakingpreliminarysuggestions
ploys it in space. Rhythmsin all their multi- as to the directionssuch analyses of temporality
one another.In the body and spatialitymighttake.
plicity interpenetrate
and around it ... rhythms are forever crossing
and recrossing, superimposing themselves
upon each other, always bound to space....
Such rhythmshave to do with needs, which
may be dispersedas tendencies,or distilled
into desire.If we attemptto specify them, we
find that some rhythmsare easy to identify:
breathing,the hartbreak,thirst, hunger,and
the need for sleep are cases in point. Others,
however,such as those of sexuality,fertility,
social life, or thought,are relativelyobscure.
Some operate on the surface, so to speak,
whereasothersspringfromhiddendepths
(1991, p. 205).
The body,then,representsthe surmountingof di-
visionsbetweenthe sensory,the mentalandthe so-
cial, evenif a tensionbetweenbiologicalandsocial
processesremainsunsolved.
From the startingpoint in the body, Lefebvre
(andCatherineRegulierwithwhomhe wrotea few
of these essays) extendedrhythmanalysis to wider
sociologicalrelationships:
It is on the one handa relationshipof the hu-
manbeing with his own body,with his tongue
and speech, with his gestures, in a certain
place and with a gesturalwhole, and on the
otherhand,a relationshipwiththe largestpub-
lic space,withtheentiresocietyandbeyondit,
the universe.
(LefebvreandRegulier,1996, p. 235)
This extensionis basedon a distinctionanda con-
junctionbetween'rhythmsof the self andrhythms
of the other',of 'the privateand the public', or of
'presenceand representation'.This polaropposi-
tion should however only be seen as a starting
point. Lefebvre emphasizes the relativity of
rhythmsand the multipletransitionsand imbrica-
tions betweenthe spatialitiesandtemporalitiesin-
volved.13Obviously,rhythmanalysis is a ratherun-
finishedprojectfromLefebvre'shand,butit raises
Geografiska Annaler ? 87 B (2005) ? 1
the questionon developmentof alternativemeth-
odologies in orderto graspthe more opaquesides
of sociallife. Lefebvrehimselfin a coupleof essays
(one of themwithCatherineRegulier)exploresthe
rhythmsof the city - fromflows of bodies, specta-
cles and soundsto politicalcentralityand struggle
Perspectives
Above,I havetriedto distilLefebvre'scontribution
to a social understandingof the body,in particular
as it relates to social practiceand everydaylife.
Lefebvredid not deliver a coherenttheoryof the
body;whatwe havegot fromhis handis a concep-
tualeffortcallingattentionto humancapacitiesand
creativitiesinvolvedin an 'authentic'everydaylife,
anda focus on the spatialityandthe temporalityof
thebody.Theseeffortscouldprofitablybe connect-
ed withworkfromotherauthorswho bringtogeth-
er the body andeverydaylife.
One suchauthoris Merleau-Ponty.14Whileboth
authorswereinterestedin the spatialityandtempo-
ralityof thebody,Merleau-Ponty addssomethingto
Lefebvrewhen it comes to a carefulphilosophical
working-through of issues of the body.In his phi-
losophyof embodiment,he developeda sensuous
phenomenologyof lived experience,locatedin the
spacebetweenmindandbody,or subjectandobject
- the intersubjectivespace of perceptionand the
body(Merleau-Ponty, 1962).Inthis,as in Lefebvre,
perceptionis not seen as an innerrepresentation of
the outerworld,butratheras a practicalbodily in-
volvement.It is an activeprocessrelatingto ouron-
goingprojectsandpractices.Thismeansthatthehu-
manbodyis uniquein playinga dualrolebothas the
vehicle of perceptionand the object perceived,as
the body-in-the-world, which 'knows'itself by vir-
tueof its activerelationto thisworld.Thisdualityor
ambiguityof the body as perceiving-perceived is
centralto Merleau-Ponty'sprojectand,at the level
of practice,maybe relatedto Lefebvre'sideasof the
dualityof socialspacerelativeto thebody,as simul-
taneouslypartof theconstitutionof theself andme-
diatorto the perceptionof somethingelse.
Merleau-Pontytoo placedthe body in a field of
spaceandtime.He startedfromthe spatialityof the
body andaccentuatedhow this is not a spatialityof
position,buta spatialityof situation.This situated-
ness goes fortimeas well, butwe shouldavoidsee-
9
 KIRSTEN SIMONSEN
ing it in terms of our bodies being in space, or in
time - they inhabit space and time:
I am not in space and time, nor do I conceive
space and time; I belong to them, my body
combines with them and includes them. The
scope of this inclusion is the measure of that
of my existence.
(Merleau-Ponty, 1962, p. 140)
This means that the active body, using its acquired
schemas and habits, positions its world around it-
self and constitutes that world as 'ready-to-hand',
to use a Heideggerian expression. Lefebvre would
agree with such a conception of the spatiality and
temporality of the body, but he would find it inad-
equate. Unique to Lefebvre's contribution to a con-
ception of the body is the way in which he deals
with its involvement in different social modalities
of space and time.
Another author who can add to some of Lefeb-
vre's ideas of the body is Goffman, in particular
when it comes to the performance of gestural sys-
tems. When Lefebvre writes about gestures and
gestural systems and considers the way in which
their codifications form the basis of social interac-
tion, he definitely touches on a theme that is more
thoroughly worked out by Goffman. Goffman's ap-
proach to the body is characterized by three main
features: (1) the body is viewed as a material prop-
erty of individuals, as a resource which both re-
quires and enables people to manage their move-
ments and appearances; (2) meanings attributedto
the body are determined by 'shared vocabularies of
body idiom' which are not under immediate control
of individuals; (3) the body plays an important role
in mediating the relationship between people's
self-identity and their social identity (Goffman,
1963, 1990). From this he demonstrates, among
other things, how social interaction in daily life re-
quires a high degree of competence in controlling
the expressions, movements and communications
of the body. Such an approach could definitely de-
velop Lefebvre's ideas, and some of the weakness-
es of Goffman's analysis - its lack of macro-social
connections and its less adequate sense of the body
as an integral partof human agency - may be coun-
teracted by the Lefebvrian contribution. Consider-
ing the role that Goffman's work (acknowledged or
unacknowledged) has achieved in contemporary
geographical literature on performativity (see
Crang, 1994; McDowell, 1997; Gregson and Rose,
2000), this connection gains particularrelevance.
10
Last but not least, Lefebvre's approach to the
body is definitely in need of juxtaposition with
some of the extensive feminist literature on the
body. I have already touched on the fact that even
if Lefebvre in his later writings makes numerous
references to male sexuality and its production of
spaces and to the symbolic distortion, objectifica-
tion and control of female bodies, he never seri-
ously engaged with the production and practices of
sexualized bodies and their relationship to social
space. An interaction between Lefebvre's ideas
and those of feminist authors who, like him, are in-
terested in concrete, material bodily practices
would therefore stimulate the project. The most
obviously relevant contribution for this purpose is
Elisabeth Grosz's (1994) corporeal feminism, em-
phasizing the material and sexed/gendered charac-
ter of bodies. She has a starting point in psychoa-
nalysis but departs from it by moving the body and
sexual difference from the periphery to the centre
of analysis, thus considering it the very 'stuff' of
subjectivity. Moreover, in a seminal essay she ap-
proaches the way in which the modern metropolis
assimilates the subject into the space of the city
(Grosz, 1992), an approach, however, which in my
opinion would benefit from the input of Lefebvre's
stronger spatial dialectics. Other possible partners
in a marriage between Lefebvre and feminism
could be Iris MarionYoung (1990) when she draws
on phenomenology to explore the possibility of
specifically 'feminist' body comportment in rela-
tion to space, or Toril Moi (1998) in her explora-
tions starting from the idea of the body as a 'situ-
ation'. These perspectives could in different ways
add a much needed genderization/sexualization to
Lefebvre's spatio-temporal bodies (see also Si-
monsen, 2001, 2003).
In conclusion, it may be interesting to relate
Lefebvre's formulations to a rather dominant ten-
dency in social discussions on the body - a theo-
retical distinction that is often attributedto the work
of Merleau-Ponty and Foucault (Crosley, 1996).
On one side of the line stand analyses of the active
role of the body in social life, of the body as lived
and generative, and on the other side are studies of
the body as acted upon, as socially and historically
constructed and inscribed from the outside. The in-
teresting point about Lefebvre's discussion of the
body is that he transcends this division, and that the
means of this transcendence is the production of
space. In Fig. 1 I attempt in a very simple manner
to illustrate the two sides of Lefebvre's conjunction
of body, space and time.
GeografiskaAnnaler* 87 B (2005) 1
 BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE
Fig. 1. Body, space and time.
The upperpartof the figurerepresentsthe dis-
cussion primarilyconducted in this essay. It is
aboutthe generativeandcreativesocial body,as it
would be representedin a theory of practice.As
partof the lived experience,the body constitutesa
practico-sensory realmthatis performedin thespa-
tio-temporalrhythmsof everyday life. In these
rhythms, constituting and constituted, different
modalitiesof social spatialityandsocial temporal-
ity are incorporated,as cyclical and linearrepeti-
tions, and as the conjunctionof the perceived,the
conceivedandthe lived.Inthe lowerpartof the fig-
ure,Lefebvre'scommoninterestwith Foucaultin
powerandthehistoryof thebodyis represented. To
Lefebvre,thisis abouttheabove-mentioned history
of increasingabstraction,of the decorporealization
of spaceandtime.Forbothspaceandtime(andthe
body), Lefebvredescribesthis processof abstrac-
tion as simultaneouslyone of homogenization,
fragmentationand hierarchization.This history
differsfrom the one given by Foucaultbecauseof
its basis in the productionof space.Heretoo Lefe-
bvretreatsspace as both producingand a product
of the humanbody,as a perceptionand a concep-
tion, not simply the impositionof a concept,or a
space,uponthe body (see also Stewart,1995).
As a consequenceof this dualityin Lefebvre's
discussionof thebody,it is possibleto arguethathe
locateshimself in the centreof two recentdebates
on thebody in geography.The firstof theseis about
bodypolitics. In the intersectionbetween Lefeb-
vre'ssocial ontologyof the body andhis historyof
thebody,thebodyturnsintoa criticalfigure- a site
of resistanceandactivestruggle:
Geografiska Annaler 87 B (2005) ? 1
Thanksto its sensoryorgans,from the sense
of smell and from sexuality to sight ... the
body tends to behave as a differential field. It
behaves, in other words, as a total body,
breakingout of the temporaland spatialshell
developedin responseto labour
(Lefebvre,1991, p. 384).
This meansthatthe body, as a producerof differ-
ence (throughrhythms,gestures,imagination),has
an inherent right to difference, formulated against
forces of homogenization,fragmentation,and the
hierarchicalorganized power. Lefebvre located
these strugglesfor the rightto be differentat many
scales, but at the scale of the body two aspectsare
crucial.One is the 'Festival',as the site of partici-
pationandof the possibilityof thepoesis of creat-
ing new situationsfromdesireandenjoyment.The
otheris sexuality,involvingstrugglesof relations
betweenthe sexes (a femininerevolt)as well as re-
lationsbetweensexualityandsociety.
The seconddebateto whichLefebvre'sconcep-
tion of the body mightcontributeis the currentone
on performativity(see e.g. collections edited by
Rose and Thrift, 2000, Dewsbury et al., 2002,
LathamandConradson,2003). It has been argued
thatthese contributionsrepresenta turnin cultural
geographyfrom 'text' and representationsto per-
formanceandpractices(Nash,2000), andthebody
and embodimentare distinctiveelements in this
shift. However,besides the above-mentionedin-
spirationfromGoffman,one of the mainpointsof
access to this discussion was Judith Butler's
(1990, 1993) Foucauldian feminism in which
11
 KIRSTEN SIMONSEN
identity (and the body) is performative - that is,
enacted and inscribed by way of discourse. Anoth-
er line of work informing this discussion is what
has been labelled 'nonrepresentational theory' in
geography proposed primarily by Nigel Thrift
(e.g. 1996, 2000). Drawing on a whole array of
theoretical inspirations - ranging (to mention just
a few) from phenomenological (and related) theo-
ries of practice through pragmatism and conversa-
tional analysis to the emphasis on non-human
agency and relational networks in actor network
theory and heterogeneous fragments, flows and as-
semblages in Deleuze and Guattari- nonrepresen-
tational theory concerns practices shaping 'sub-
jects' as decentred, embodied, relational, expres-
sive and involved with others and objects in a
world continually in process. Although there is
good reason to appreciate the work on bodies and
embodiment in these traditions, I think that Lefe-
bvre's both phenomenological, rhythmic and po-
litical understanding of the body (whatever ro-
mantic bias it might hold) can still inform the dis-
cussion and partially counteract Butler's more dis-
cursive bodies and the barely living bodies of actor
network theory.
Notes
1. Throughout Lefebvre's later writings are numerous refer-
ences to male sexuality and its production of spaces and
femininity, exploitation of women in everyday life, and the
objectification and control of female bodies. He does not,
however, elaborate at length an interpretation of gendered
bodies and gender relations.
2. A similar critique may be found in Habermas' work, earliest
in Jiirgen Habermas, Erkenntnmsseund Interesse (Frankfurt
am Mein: Suhrkamp, 1968) and Jurgen Habermas, Arbeit
und Interaktion. Bemerkungen zu Hegels Jenenser 'Philoso-
phie des Geistes',in Technikund Wissenschaft
als 'Ideolo-
gie' (Frankfurtam Mein: Suhrkamp, 1968), pp. 9-47. But I
think the resulting formulations are quite divergent; partly
because of the more dualist character of Habermas' think-
ing, and partly because of his interest in communication
rather than practice.
3. In the 1940s, Lefebvre had dismissed Sartre's existentialism
in uncompromising hostile terms, characterizing it as femi-
nine - as passive and emotional. These male chauvinist for-
mulations stand in contrast to his own later critique of the
phallocratic character of modernism. With the publication
of Sartre's Critique de la ralson dialectique however, some
rapprochement between the two of them occurred. For a
closer description of these debates see Mark Poster, Existen-
tial Marxism in Postwar France (Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 1975).
4. This parallels Lefebvre's later critique (Production of
Space) of the nostalgic aura in Heidegger's writing. Howev-
er, his own writings of everyday life, especially the early
ones, do not escape a nostalgic glorification of the peasant
community.
12
5. These ideas seemingly come close to Nietzsche when he
talks about the human body or 'organism' in the context of
the bodies of all organic beings.
6. The Heideggerian undertones in some of these formulations
are obvious.
7. Lefebvre also uses bodily gestures as a critical figure of, and
mediation between, distinctions such as inarticulate/articu-
late, nature/culture or body/mind.
8. In his book Thirdspace- Journeysto LosAngelesand oth-
er Real-and-imagined places (Cambridge,MA and Ox-
ford: Blackwell, 1996), Edward Soja interprets this triad
as part of a general strategy in Lefebvre of 'thirding-as-
Othering'.
9. These ideas come close to the ones of Foucault on the dis-
cursive formation of the body, even if Lefebvre several
times throughout The Production of Space dissociates him-
self from Foucault's thinking.
10. Lefebvre at this place refers to Gaston Bachelard for, una-
ware of it himself, having revealed the contradictionbetween
the cumulative and non-cumulative, the linear and the cycli-
cal.
11. As for everyday life, these ideas date back to the 1920s.
Lefebvre developed around 1960 in Critique vol II op.cit.
and in La somme et le reste (2 vols., Paris: La Nef de Paris,
1959), and later he linked moments with the idea of creating
new situations in Les temps de mdprises (Paris: Stock,
1975). In this way, his ideas conjoined with the ones of the
situationist movement, also developed in Paris in the late
1950s.
12. The argument was that rhythm analysis is much more con-
crete than psychoanalysis, closer to a pedagogy of appro-
priation (the appropriation of the body, as of spatial prac-
tice). Instead of some kind of fetishized unconsciousness,
then, the 'space of dreams' should be described as a space
where dispersed and broken rhythms are reconstituted
(Production, op.cit. pp. 205, 208-209). Lefebvre's inten-
tions by these suggestions, however, never become very
clear.
13. In this sense, rhythm analysis may be seen as a social and
philosophical translation of Eisteinian notions of space-
time relativity, as suggested by Kofman and Lebas in their
introduction in Lefebvre (1996).
14. Lefebvre himself was rather critical towards Merleau-Pon-
ty. He criticized him of eclecticism, of conducting a mysti-
fying syncretism between phenomenology, Gestaltism and
organic psychology, and of leaving out history and social
practice in the attempt (Henri Lefebvre, 'M. Merleau-Pon-
ty et la philosophie de l'ambiguite', La Pensde 68, 1956,
pp. 44-58 and 73: 37-52). It seems to me, however, that
overlap in interest occurred, and that in the harsh critique
much was bound up with an ongoing debate in which Mer-
leau-Ponty's increasing scepticism about Marxism was the
issue.
Kirsten Simonsen
Department of Geography and International
Development Studies
Roskilde University
Postboks 260
DK- 4000 Roskilde
Denmark
www.geo.ruc.dk
E-mail: kis@ruc.dk
Geografiska Annaler ? 87 B (2005) ? 1
 BODIES, SENSATIONS, SPACE AND TIME: THE CONTRIBUTION FROM HENRI LEFEBVRE

References LEFEBVRE, H., (1956): 'M. Merleau-Ponty et la philosophie de

l'ambguite', La Pensde, 68: 44-58, 73: 37-52.
AINLEY, R., (1998) (ed.): New Frontiers of Space, Bodies and
LEFEBVRE, H., (1958, 1961, 1981): Critique de la vie quotidi-
Gender. Routledge, London and New York.
enne, vols I, II, III. L'arche, Paris.
BLUM, V. and NAST, H., (1996): 'Where's the difference? The
LEFEBVRE, H., (1959): La somme et le reste. La nef de Paris,
heterosexualization of alterity in Henri Lefebvre and Jacques
Paris.
andPlanningD: SocietyandSpace,14:
Lacan',Environment
LEFEBVRE, H., (1970): Lafin de l'histoire. Anthropos, Paris.
559-580.
LEFEBVRE, H., (1975): Les temps de mdprises. Stock, Paris.
BOURDIEU, P., (1977): Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cam-
LEFEBVRE, H., (1975, orig. 1965): Metaphilosophie. Prolegom-
bridge University Press, Cambridge. ena. Suhrkamp, Frankfurtam Main.
BOURDIEU, P., (1990): The Logic of Practice. Polity Press,
LEFEBVRE, H., (1991, orig. 1974): The Production of Space.
Cambridge.
Blackwell, Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA.
BUTLER,J.,(1990):GenderTrouble:FeminismandtheSubver-
sion of Identity. Routledge, New York.
LEFEBVRE,H., (1992): Elementsde ruthmeanalyse: Introdu-
tiona la connaissancedes rythms.Syllepse,Paris.
BUTLER,J.,(1993):BodiesThatMatter:OntheDiscursiveLim-
LEFEBVRE, H., (1996): Writings on Cities. Blackwell, Oxford,
its of Sex. Routledge, New York.
UK, and Cambridge, MA.
CRANG, P., (1994): 'It's showtime: on the workplace geogra-
LEFEBVRE, H. and REGULIER, C., ( 1985): 'Le projet rythman-
phies of display in a restaurantin South East England', Envi-
alytique', Communications, 41: 191-199.
ronmentandPlanningD: SocietyandSpace, 12:675-704.
LEFEBVRE, H. and REGULIER, C., (1996, orig. 1980): 'Rhyth-
CROSLEY, N., (1996): 'Body-subject/body-power: agency, in-
manalysis of MediterraneanCities', in LEFEBVRE, H.: Writ-
scription and control in Foucault and Merleau-Ponty', Body &
ings on Cities. Blackwell, Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA.
Society, 2: 99-116.
R., (2001):Bodies.ExploringFluidBoundaries.
LONGHURST,
DEWSBURY, J.D., HARRISON, P., ROSE, M. and WYLIE, J.,
Routledge, London and New York.
(eds) (2002): 'Enacting geographies', Geoforum, 33, special
issue.
L., (1997):CapitalCulture.Genderat Workinthe
MCDOWELL,
City. Blackwell, Oxford.
DUNCAN, N., (ed.) (1996): BodySpace. Routledge, London and
MERLEAU-PONTY, M., (1962, orig. 1945): Phenomenology of
New York.
Perception. Routledge & Keegan Paul, London.
ELDEN, S., (2004): 'Between Marx and Heidegger: politics, phi-
MERRIFIELD, A., (1995): 'Lefebvre, Anti-Logos and Ni-
losophyandLefebvre'sTheProductionof Space',Antipode, etzsche: An alternative reading of The Production of Space',
36: 86-106.
Antipode, 27: 294-303.
FEATHERSTONE, M., HEPWORTH, M. and TURNER, B.S.,
MERRIFIELD, A., (2000): 'Henri Lefebvre: a socialist in space.'
(1991) (eds): Thebody:Socialprocessand culturaltheory. in CRANG, M. and THRIFT, N. (eds): Thinking Space.
Sage, London.
Routledge, London and New York.
FEATERSTONE, M. and TURNER, B.S., (1995): 'Body & So-
MOI,T., (1998):Hva er en kvinne?Kjonnog kropifeministisk
ciety: An Introduction', Body & Society, 1:1, 1-12. teori. Gyldendal, Oslo.
FEHER, M., NEDDAFF, R. and TAZI, N., (1989) (eds): Frag-
NASH, C., (2000): 'Performativity in practise: some recent work
mentsfor a Historyof theHumanBodyI-III.Zone,New York.
in cultural geography, Progress in Human geography, 24(4):
GOFFMAN,E., ( 1963):BehaviourinPublicPlaces:Noteson the 653-664.
Social Organizationand Gathering.The Free Press, New
NAST, J. and PILE, S., (1998): Places Through the Body.
York.
Routledge, London and New York.
GOFFMAN, E., (1990, orig. 1959): The Presentation of Self in
PILE,S., (1996):TheBodyand the City:Psychoanalysis,Space
Everyday Life. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth. and Subjectivity. Routledge, London.
GREGORY, D., (1994): Geographical Imaginations. Blackwell,
POSTER,M., (1975): ExistentialMarxismin PostwarFrance.
Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA.
Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
GREGORY, D., (1995): 'Lefebvre, Lacan and the production of
ROSE, G. and THRIFT, N., (eds) (2000): 'Theme issue: Spaces
space' in BENKO, G. and STROHMAYER, U. (eds): Geo- of performance, part 1' Environment and Planning D: Society
graphy,Historyand Social Science.Kluver,Dordrecht. and Space, 18:4.
GREGSON, N. and ROSE, G., (2000): 'Taking Butler elsewhere:
SHIELDS,R., (1998):Lefebvre,LoveandStruggle.Spatialdia-
performativities, spatialities and subjectivities', Environment lectics. Routledge, London and New York.
and PlanningD: Societyand Space, 18:433-452.
SHILLING, C., (1993): The Body and Social Theory. Sage, Lon-
GROZS, E., (1992): 'Bodies-cities' in COLOMINA, B. (ed.):
don
Sexuality and Space. Princeton Architectural Press, New
SIMONSEN, K., (2001): 'Rum, sted, krop og k0n - dimensioner
York.
af en geografi om social praksis', in SIMONSEN, K. (ed.):
GROSZ,E., (1994):VolatileBodies:Towardsa CorporealFem-
inism. Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indiana-
Praksis,rumog mobilitet.Socialgeografiskebidrag.Roskil-
de Universitetsforlag, Copenhagen.
polis.
SIMONSEN, K., (2003): 'The embodied city: from bodily prac-
HABERMAS, J., (1968a): Erkenntnisse und Interesse.
tice to urban life', in OHMAN, J. and SIMONSEN, K. (eds):
Suhrkamp, Frankfurtam Main. Voicesfrom the North.New Trendsin NordicHumanGeo-
HABERMAS, J., (1968b): Arbeit und Interaktion. Bemerkungen
zu Hegels Jenenser Philosophie des Geistes. in Technik und graphy. Ashgate, Aldershot.
SMITH, N., (1998): 'Antinomies of space and nature in Henri
Wissenschaft als Ideologie. Suhrkamp, Frankfurtam Main. Lefebvre's ' The Production of Space", in LIGHT, A. and
HEIDEGGER, M., (1962, orig. 1927): Being and Time. Black-
SMITH, J.M. (eds): The Production of Public Space. Philo-
well, Oxford.
sophy and Geography II, Rowman and Littlefield, New York.
LATHAM, A. and CONRADSON, D., (eds) (2003): 'Theme is-
sue: the possibilities of performance', Environmentand Plan-
SOJA,E., (1989):PostmodernGeographies,the Reassertionof
Spacein CriticalSocial Theory.Verso,London.
ning A, 35:11
SOJA,E., (1996):Thirdspace- Journeysto LosAngelesandoth-

Geografiska Annaler ? 87 B (2005) ? 1 13

 KIRSTEN SIMONSEN

er real-and-imagined places. Blackwell, Oxford, UK, and
Cambridge, MA.
STEWART, L., (1995): 'Bodies, visions, and spatial politics: a re-
view essay on Henri Lefebvre's The Production of Space',
Environment
andPlanningD: Societyand Space,13:5,609-
619.
THRIFT, N., (1996): Spatial Formations. Sage, London, Thou-
sand Oaks, CA, and New Delhi.
THRIFT, N., (2000): 'Afterwords', Environment and Planning
D: Society and Space, 18: 213-255.
TREBITCH, M., (1991): 'Preface', in LEFEBVRE, H.: Critique
of Everyday Life, vol I. Verso, London.
TURNER,S., (1984):TheBody&Society:Explorationsin Social
Theory. Blackwell, Oxford.
YOUNG,I.M.,(1990):ThrowingLikea girl and OtherEssaysin
FeministPhilosophyand Social Theory.IndianaUniversity
Press, Bloomington.

14 Geografiska Annaler 87 B (2005) 1