nav-icons nav-icons
Progress in Political Economy (PPE) Progress in Political Economy (PPE)
LOGIN REGISTER
LOGIN
REGISTER
linklink
  • Home
  • About
  • Manchester University Press Book Series
  • Past & Present Reading Group
  • A Political Economy of Australian Capitalism
  • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • JAPE Issues
    • JAPE Submission Guidelines
    • JAPE Young Scholar Award
  • Australian IPE Network (AIPEN)
  • Forums
    • Forums
    • Debating Anatomies of Revolution
    • Debating Debtfare States
    • Debating Economic Ideas in Political Time
    • Debating Mass Strikes and Social Movements in Brazil and India
    • Debating Social Movements in Latin America
    • Debating The Making of Modern Finance
    • Debating War and Social Change in Modern Europe
    • Feminist Global “Secureconomy”
    • Gendered Circuits of Labour and Violence in Global Crises
    • Scandalous Economics
    • The Military Roots of Neoliberal Governance
    • Politicising artistic pedagogies
  • Literary Geographies of Political Economy
  • Pedagogy
    • Five Minute Honours Theses
    • Piketty Forum
    • Radical Economics Pedagogy
    • Unconventional Wisdom
    • Journal Club
    • Marxism Reading Group
  • Wheelwright Lecture
  • Events
  • Contributors
  • Links
    • Political Economy At Sydney
    • PHD in Political Economy
    • Master of Political Economy
    • Centre for Future Work
    • Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ)
    • Climate Justice Research Centre (UTS)
Roundtable Response on Space, Place and Capitalism
Previous
The Red Taylorist Review
Next

Memorialising Monuments

by Adam David Morton on February 15, 2022

Memorialising Monuments

Adam David Morton | February 15, 2022

Tags: spatial political economy
spatial political economy
| 0 415

Every bit as a poem or a tragedy, a monument transmutes the fear of the passage of time, and anxiety about death, into splendour

— Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space

What if a longstanding monument or a building can slice through history (time) and geography (space) to provide past and present insights on the construction of place?

Essentially this has been a question explicitly carried throughout one aspect of my ongoing research on spatial political economy and the urban question. Namely, my attention over the past decade or so has been grappling with how struggles over space within the urban built environment can be revealed by homing in on monuments, memorials, and statues to reveal something meaningful about struggles in and against state power.

Over this period of time, I have explored these issues both theoretically through the notion of the ‘material structure of ideology’ (in International Studies Quarterly, with Andreas Bieler) as well as empirically through a detailed examination of the Monument to the Revolution in Mexico City (in Journal of Latin American Studies).

Most recently, my contribution to a special journal issue of Art & the Public Sphere brings together my latest statement on monuments in order to consider further the Monument to the Revolution as a socially produced, conflictual, and dynamically changing site in the struggle over public space and its memorialisation. The Mexican artist-architect Juan O’Gorman captures some of this architectural history in the economic and vernacular references to social reform and national character in the set image to this post, ‘Paisaje de la ciudad de México’ [1949].

Since its opening in 1938, the Monument to the Revolution at the Plaza de la República has been a pivotal fulcrum of state power in abetting the changing geography of state space. Equally, the site has experienced contradictions and differences stemming from socially produced space across time, in the form of periods of state crisis and, most recently, state ‘rollback’ and ‘rollout’ under neoliberalisation.

Drawing from Raymond Williams, The Country and the City my article addresses both neoliberalising and differential structures of feeling as they bear on the space at the Monument to the Revolution. It does so by situating the Monument to the Revolution within the urban question and how neoliberalisation has unlocked local and aesthetic meanings that have become commodified, not least through the extraction of monopoly rents. Further, my article spotlights simultaneous contemporary contestations of state power and impulses of socio-spatial struggle over difference articulated in and around Plaza de la República at the monument. In so doing, the hope is that my article contributes an important pedagogical focus to the special journal issue by addressing both homogenising and differential structures of feeling inscribed in spaces of capitalism in the twenty-first century.

My earlier work sought to meaningfully expand on Frederic Jameson’s claim in Architecture Theory Since 1968 that ‘something is to be said for Lefebvre’s call for a politics of space and for the search for a properly Gramscian architecture after all’. My extended purpose in this most recent article is to revisit the ongoing processes of neoliberalisation impacting on the Monument to the Revolution and disclose how some of the most recent developments of urbanism are shaping social space at the site in Mexico City.

Presenting on the Monument to the Revolution as a Visiting Fellow at the Canadian Center for Architecture (CCA) Montréal.

The way meanings and values are lived in actual places and how architecture can be an essential aspect of a structure of feeling in expressing social sentiments is therefore the backdrop to the argument. Equally, my article proceeds to deliver a pedagogical focus on memorialising monuments by, first, detailing some of the forces of state power impacting on the built environment, by drawing inspiration from Walter Benjamin. Monuments may have served as places of pilgrimage and the legitimation of state power but they can variously be perceived anew, through protest and confrontation, by proponents of reform and revolution so that such sites may also become a fulcrum for the rebuke of state power. Hence, citing Benjamin from ‘Paris, the Capital of the Nineteenth Century’, ‘. . . we begin to recognise the monuments of the bourgeoisie as ruins even before they have crumbled’.

The significance of considering the Monument to the Revolution not just as a space of state power but also as a fractured space of difference and ruinous tendency for the capitalist state therefore emerges. To address capitalist space and in order to produce a spatial political economy of place construction, I extend these insights with attention cast towards the urban question, the notion of abstract space, and monopoly rents under neoliberalisation. These aspects act as a pedagogic vector through which to assess the different structures of feeling linked to the ongoing neoliberalisation of the Monument to the Revolution and its contestation.

Spatial political economy—a term coined by Frank Stilwell—necessarily turns our attention to the everyday realm of structures of feeling as an extension and contestation of capitalist social relations of production within abstract space. Across the grid of urban space the street is regarded as a crucial place of movement and circulation, order and resistance and so too is the monument. The construction of monuments can be critically assessed as the seat of abstract space, laden with institutional power and the spatial logistics of the state. The pensador Juan Villoro in his compelling tour through the spaces of Mexico City in El vértigo horizontal, offers a window on the structure of feeling of the Monument to the Revolution and its long architectural tradition. Originally, it was part of ‘a luxurious transitional space’ where people would pass through but not remain. Hence the Monument to the Revolution was regarded as ‘la gasolinero más grande de México’: the biggest gas station in Mexico. But beyond this structure of feeling there have also been past and present struggles over differential space, or spaces of difference, at Plaza de la República. Such struggles over alternative spaces and structures of feeling are also about challenging the state and the violent abstractions of capitalism.

My conclusion is that past spaces of revolution will be at the hub of redemptive movements in the present to produce alternative structures of feeling, all as class struggles in the constitution of future space.

The set image reproduces Juan O’Gorman ‘Paisaje de la ciudad de México’ [1949]

Share this post

  • Tweet
  • Share Post:

Author: Adam David Morton

Adam David Morton is Professor of Political Economy at the University of Sydney. He is author of Unravelling Gramsci: Hegemony and Passive Revolution in the Global Political Economy (2007); Revolution and State in Modern Mexico: The Political Economy of Uneven Development (2011), recipient of the 2012 Book Prize of the British International Studies Association (BISA) International Political Economy Group (IPEG); and co-author of Global Capitalism, Global War, Global Crisis (2018) with Andreas Bieler. The volume Henri Lefebvre, On the Rural: Economy, Sociology, Geography is out in 2022 with University of Minnesota Press, co-edited with Stuart Elden.

Related Posts

 

Milton Santos, The Nature of Space

The Past & Present Reading Group has reengaged its spatial turn since completing Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space; Doreen Massey, Spatial Divisions of Labour; and Jennifer R...

 

Jennifer Robinson, Ordinary Cities: Between Modernity and Development

Over the last year, the Past & Present Reading Group has taken a spatial turn, with a triad of three books of spatial theory from different disciplinary and theoretical...

 

Accumulation in a Post-Industrial Ecology

Review of: Pamela Odih, Adsensory Urban Ecology (2 vols.), Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars, 2019. HB 978-1-5275-2468-2

This is raw political economy. Odih, a ...

 

Doreen Massey: Spatial Divisions of Labour

Discussing the analytical and political challenges

It is important to have a spatial or geographical dimension to political economic analysis, just as it is important...

Comments

Leave a Response Cancel reply


Join our mailing list

© Progress in Political Economy (PPE)

Privacy | Designed by Nucleo | Terms and Conditions

  • Home
  • About
  • Manchester University Press Book Series
  • Past & Present Reading Group
  • A Political Economy of Australian Capitalism
  • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • JAPE Issues
    • JAPE Submission Guidelines
    • JAPE Young Scholar Award
  • Australian IPE Network (AIPEN)
  • Forums
    • Forums
    • Debating Anatomies of Revolution
    • Debating Debtfare States
    • Debating Economic Ideas in Political Time
    • Debating Mass Strikes and Social Movements in Brazil and India
    • Debating Social Movements in Latin America
    • Debating The Making of Modern Finance
    • Debating War and Social Change in Modern Europe
    • Feminist Global “Secureconomy”
    • Gendered Circuits of Labour and Violence in Global Crises
    • Scandalous Economics
    • The Military Roots of Neoliberal Governance
    • Politicising artistic pedagogies
  • Literary Geographies of Political Economy
  • Pedagogy
    • Five Minute Honours Theses
    • Piketty Forum
    • Radical Economics Pedagogy
    • Unconventional Wisdom
    • Journal Club
    • Marxism Reading Group
  • Wheelwright Lecture
  • Events
  • Contributors
  • Links
    • Political Economy At Sydney
    • PHD in Political Economy
    • Master of Political Economy
    • Centre for Future Work
    • Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ)
    • Climate Justice Research Centre (UTS)
 

Loading Comments...