Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Space, body, embodiment, bordering, othering, and the ritual sacralisation of space
Eliade’s (1959:172) body-house-cosmos schema and Tuan’s (2008:34) assertion that the body is an “object rather than an animated and animating being,” an “it,” which is “in space or takes up space,” makes the concept body a crucial subject in discussion of critical spatial theory. Knott (2005b:156) points to the inseparable link between critical spatiality and the human body when she says:
The first principle of a spatial approach for the location of religion is the foundational role of the body for our experience and representation of space, and – because spatial metaphors are central for cognition and representation… for talking about our environment, the nature of our society and relationships, time and progress, and the sacred.
According to Knott (2005b:157), the three basic spatial dimensions or regions of space, namely “front and back,” “left and right,” and “above and below,” are described in relation to the body. She argues that “the different positions, parts, regions of space are understood relationally by way of our bodies,” and “the way we orient places physically and mentally derives from our asymmetrical bilaterality” (Knott, 2005b:157). Davidson and Milligan (2004:523) assert that …our first and foremost, most immediate and intimately felt geography is the body, the site of emotional experience and expression par excellence. Emotions, to be sure, take place within and around this closest of spatial scales.
Low (2003:9) agrees that the body is “an integral part of spatial analysis.” Tuan (2008:34) observes that “the posture and structure of the human body, and the relationships (whether close or distant) between human beings” are “fundamental principles of spatial organization.” For every human being, his/her body “is at the center of his world, and circumambient space is differentiated in accordance with the schema of his body” (Tuan, 2008:41).104 According to Lefebvre (1991:405), “the whole of social space proceeds from the body.” Low (2003:14) describes the body as “‘a mobile spatial field’ that can be understood as a culturally defined, corporeal-sensual field stretching out from the body at a given locale or moving through locales.” The body is a space that simultaneously exists and functions in space. In Section 2.3.2 the concept of the female Muslim body as a “mobile spatial field” functioning on different levels in the context of al-Islām as an ecological system has already been addressed. The concept will be elucidated again in Section 3.3.2.3 and in Chapter 4.
The body is a microcosm (Eliade, 1959:165), in terms of critical spatiality at the same time a first-, second-, and thirdspace (Adendorff, 2016:45). The body is a “physical location proper” (i.e., a firstpace). It is open to “individual cognitive associations” (i.e., a secondspace). It is accorded “cultural meanings that are explored in terms of the social dynamics that occur within it subjectively and reflectively” (i.e., a thirdspace) (Adendorff, 2016:29). The notions of subjectivity and reflectivity will become important in the analysis of the ḥijāb as a spatial boundary.105 To regard the ḥijāb as a boundary is a thirdspatial construction. Adendorff (2016:30) states that “the place and location of the body is given meaning both by the self of the person whose body it is, as well as by the other people in the society within which that body functions.” Any critical spatial analysis of the concept body is at the same time an ecological systems reflection on the meanings and functions of the body in the context of its complex, bi-directional connections in its ecological system.
Worldview(s) and spatial orientation
A critical spatial analysis of the concept body illustrates the importance of the body as a central point of orientation in human existence and any human being’s worldview.116 When the concepts of worldview and spatial orientation are discussed in this section, it is not intended to be an ontological exposition of contemporary theories on the state of the universe. The researcher uses the term worldview to indicate an individual or society’s “particular philosophy of life or conception of the world.”117 The researcher departs from the following remark by Bloomer (1975:8):
Body experience provides us with a matrix by which we order our essential perception of space, a matrix which is more complex and naturally knowable than the mathematical matrices we so often employ as design tools. From birth the body learns to operate within a body-dependent “sphere” of space which is richer in texture and more sophisticated geometrically than we generally allow.
This observation implies that worldview(s) and spatial orientation are not determined only by firstspace realities, but by secondspace conceptions and thirdspace experiences with the individual human body – or body image – as the central point of orientation. Bloomer (1975:8) states that “centricity is fundamental in the spatiality of the body image.” According to Bloomer (1975:8), body image can be defined as follows:
A body image is a gestalt. It is a whole percept that one has of one’s own body, and necessarily, therefore, a percept of the space in which one’s body operates.
Tuan (2008:35) argues as follows:
Among mammals the human body is unique in that it easily maintains an upright position. Upright, man is ready to act. Space opens out before him and is immediately differentiable into front-back and right-left axes in conformity with the structure of his body. Vertical-horizontal, top-bottom, front-back and right-left are positions and coordinates of the body that are extrapolated onto space.
According to Bloomer (1975:8), a psychic boundary surrounds the physical body. This boundary “has elastic, abstract and extendable qualities. That psychic boundary unconsciously separates and defines inside personal space from outside, extra-personal space.” Bloomer (1975:8) postulates as follows:
The space within the psychic boundary is far more vast, complex and influential on our perception of the world than we normally allow in conscious thought.
Al-Islām: a critical-spatial perspective
Following Shepard’s (2009:2) multidimensional definition of the term Islām referred to above,119 a holistic analysis of al-Islām as a religious and cultural system calls for an analysis of its firstspace realities, secondspace abstractions and thirdspace experiences all at the same time.
Al-Islām: first space realities
There is no denying the fact that al-Islām is a firstspace reality (Soja, 1996:66-67). Esposito (1988:3) states that al-Islām “is indeed a world presence and force.” Following Lefebvre (1991:19), al-Islām can consequently be described in physical terms as a perceived space which “can be comprehended empirically by measurable configurations” (Schreiner, 2016:346). Its origin and development can be traced from its modest beginnings in the seventh century CE to the global religion and culture it has become in the twenty-first century. The aim of the present section is to briefly trace that development and reflect on al-Islām as a firstspace reality.
Ahmed (2002a:1) states:
The twenty-first century will be the century of Islam. Muslim civilization will be central to understanding where we will be moving in the future. Consider the facts: a population of 1.3 billion and growing; 55 states – and one of them nuclear; about 25 million living permanently in the West and many of them now making an impact on social, political, and economic life; and a religion that comes with commitment and passion.
Understanding Islam is therefore imperative to anyone wanting to make sense of living in the twenty-first century.
The prediction that al-Islām is growing fast is confirmed by recent statistics. According to a report published by the Pew Research Center, “The Future of World Religions: Population Growth Projections, 2010-2050” (Pew Research Center, 2015), an estimated 1.6 billion people in the world belonged to the Muslim faith in 2010 and the numbers were expected to increase to 2.8 billion by 2015. About 23% of the world population currently belongs to the Muslim faith, and the percentage is expected to increase to 30% by 2050. Consequently, in another report published recently by the Center, significantly titled “The Changing Global Religious Landscape” (Pew Research Center, 2017) it is argued that al-Islām is currently the fastest-growing religion in the world. By 2035, the number of babies born to Muslims is expected to exceed births to Christians by a small margin.
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND ORIENTATION
1.1 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
1.2 A CLARIFICATION OF TERMINOLOGY USED FOR FEMALE DRESS
1.2.1 Ḥijāb
1.2.2 Niqāb
1.2.3 Jilbāb
1.2.4 Khimār
1.2.5 ʿAbāya
1.2.6 Shaylā
1.2.7 Al-Amīra
1.2.8 Chādor
1.2.9 Burquʿ
1.3 A BRIEF LITERATURE REVIEW
1.3.1 Looking at the ḥijāb from a geopolitical point of view
1.3.2 Looking at the ḥijāb from a social point of view
1.3.3 Looking at the ḥijāb from a fashion point of view
1.3.4 Looking at the ḥijāb from a religious and cultural point of view
1.3.5 In search of a holistic interpretation of the ḥijāb
1.4 RESEARCH PROBLEM, RESEARCH QUESTION AND RATIONALE OF THE STUDY
1.5 RESEARCH APPROACH
1.6 BRIEF REFLECTIONS ON THEORY: ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS THEORY AND CRITICAL SPATIALITY
1.6.1 Ecological systems theory
1.6.2 Critical spatial theory
1.7 AIM AND OBJECTIVES
1.8 OUTLINE OF THE STUDY
1.9 PRACTICAL MATTERS
1.10 CONCLUDING REMARKS
CHAPTER 2: THE ḤIJĀB AS BORDER OF CLOTH: AN ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS THEORY PERSPECTIVE
2.1 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
2.2 ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS AND BORDERS AND BOUNDARIES: THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES
2.2.1 Ecological systems theory
2.2.2 Theoretical perspectives on borders and boundaries
2.3 AL-ISLĀM AS AN ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM
2.3.1 Al-Islām as a religious and cultural ecological system
2.3.2 The female Muslim as a focal individual in al-Islām as an ecological system
2.4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 3: THE ḤIJĀB AS BORDER OF CLOTH: TOWARDS ISLAMIC CONSTRUCTIONS OF SACRED SPACE
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ON PLACE, SPACE AND SPATIAL ORIENTATION
3.2.1 Critical spatiality: Brief reflections on theory
3.2.2 (Not so) binary classifications of space
3.2.3 Space, body, embodiment, bordering, othering, and the ritual sacralisation of space
3.2.4 Worldview(s) and spatial orientation
3.3 ISLAMIC CONSTRUCTIONS OF SPACE AND PLACE
3.3.1 Al-Islām: a critical-spatial perspective
3.3.1.1 AL-ISLĀM: FIRST SPACE REALITIES
3.3.2 Reflections on Islamic constructions of lived space
3.3.3 Islamic worldview and spatial orientation towards a single cosmic centre
3.4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 4: THE ḤIJĀB AS BORDER OF CLOTH: TOWARDS ISLAMIC CONSTRUCTIONS OF THE FEMALE BODY AS SACRED SPACE
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 A FEMALE’S STATUS IN AL-ISLĀM: PRINCIPLES AND PERSPECTIVES FROM THE QURʾĀN
4.3 SECONDSPATIAL REPRESENTATIONS: THE ḤIJĀB ACCORDING TO AL-ISLĀM’S FORMATIVE TRADITION
4.3.2 Broadening the horizons: ḥijāb and libās
4.3.3 Female clothing practices in the four Sunnī schools of Islamic jurisprudence
4.3.4 Secondspatial perspectives on the Muslim female body as sacred space: A synthesis
4.4 THIRDSPATIAL APPLICATIONS: THE ḤIJĀB AS SYMBOL OF SACRED SPACE
4.4.1 The ḥijāb as symbol of sacred space: Deconstructing stereotypes
4.4.2 The ḥijāb as symbol of sacred space: Like a bride
4.4.3 The ḥijāb as symbol of sacred space: Appreciating metaphors
4.5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 5 THE ḤIJĀB AS BORDER OF CLOTH: REVISITING, REFLECTING, AND REVISIONING
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 THE ḤIJĀB AS BORDER OF CLOTH: REVISITING THE RESEARCH REPORT
5.3 THE ḤIJĀB AS BORDER OF CLOTH: REFLECTING ON THE RESEARCH THEME AND RESEARCH APPROACH
5.4 THE ḤIJĀB AS BORDER OF CLOTH: REVISIONING A RELIGIOUS AND CULTURAL PHENOMENON
5.5 THE ḤIJĀB AS BORDER OF CLOTH: A FINAL WORD
BIBLIOGRAPHY
