Spaces of Informalisation: Playscapes, Power and the Governance of Behaviour

Abstract

Geographers have contributed a great deal towards an understanding of social control across different spaces and the ways in which power is exercised in the interests of élite groups to the detriment of marginalised ‘others’. Little attention however, has been given to decontrolled spaces: spaces where the standard of conduct expected of previous generations is no longer as rigid and formalised as it once was. This paper draws on the work of Norbert Elias and Cas Wouters in exploring how previously prohibited behaviours become admissible within particular social situations, groups and settings: a process known as informalisation. The informalisation thesis posits that a long-term perspective can elucidate the ways in which gradual changes in expected standards of behaviour are linked to corresponding changes in social habitus and the power differentials that characterise the social relations between élite and outsider groups. The paper contends that a revision of the sociological concept of informalisation, emphasising spatial context and difference, can contribute a great deal to debates in human geography. It is argued that the spatialisation of Elias' work could provide a useful theoretical framework with which to enhance the geographer's understanding of the relationship between group identities, power, social change and governance. Conversely, a focus on the spaces of informalisation may also advance the theory from a sociological perspective. The theory is applied to specific playscapes and highlights the uneven, problematic nature of contemporary governance projects and the related problem of social misdiagnoses in the quest towards the ‘non-antagonistic’ city.

The author would like to thank John Flint, Mark Jayne, Ronan Paddison and two anonymous referees for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

Notes

Space does not permit an exploration of the reasons for this. For a fuller discussion of the resonance and influence of Elias' work, see Arnason, 1987; Goudsblom, 1987; and Kilminster, 1998.

In a book chapter entitled ‘Social theory and human geography’, which explores the relationship between the two, Derek Gregory (1994) makes reference to many social theorists who have influenced human geography to varying degrees. Elias is noticeable by his absence.

The focus on western European societies should not be taken as Elias making normative judgements about the relative degrees or stages of ‘civilisation’ reached by different societies, nations or parts of the world (see Powell and Flint, 2009, for an appreciation of this). Elias' conception of civilisation differs from notions of ‘adaptive capacity’ and modernisation at the political and economic level as instead, Elias considers the changing behaviour of individuals and specifically “the social modelling of affects in everyday life to be the most important explanatory issue in the process of civilization” (Kuzmics, 1988, p. 151), which owes much to Freud (1930/2004). Elias' focus was on western Europe and there is certainly the need for further research on civilising processes beyond this, which we are perhaps seeing the start of now (see Mennell, 2007). Yet, although the context of civilising processes differs across different nations and regions of the world the central tenet—that is, the monopolisation of violence and pacification of society—may be achieved by different means than the development of the absolutist state in Europe, but is still a process undergone in most societies (Mennell, 1990).

Elias draws on a wealth of empirical documentation and goes into great detail about the gradual changes in sensibilities which have come to sanction public behaviours such as spitting, urinating, etc.

The focus here is on informalisation, but for a fuller discussion of decivilising processes see Mennell, 1990; Fletcher, 1997; Pratt, 1998; and Wacquant, 2004.

For instance, the current governmental focus on parenting and family intervention in the UK (for example, parenting orders, punishing parents for their children's truanting) can be seen as an ambitious and targeted response by government to realign the conduct of particular 'deviant' youths through the 'responsibilisation' of parents and communities. This approach, however, is not problematised and is based on short-term considerations shaped by the romantic image of the disciplined nature of previous generations. There is an inherent contradiction here: while society celebrates the advancements in terms of children's power and rights as a hallmark of civilised society, it also vilifies young people and parents for the perceived degeneration of the social order.

In 2006, the UK government established the Respect Task Force aimed at delivering the 'Respect agenda'. This agenda has resulted in a broadening, deepening and furthering of governmental interventions and ambitions through which the scope of anti-social behaviour policy in the UK has extended to a wider attempt to address general incivility within society and to bring about 'cultural shifts' in targeted sections of the population (Powell and Flint, 2009).

These are, of course, general trends towards equalisation at a societal level, with many individual exceptions and should be viewed in long-term perspective. Kitchens provides a good summation of trends in family life contrasting

• earlier times when a rigid discipline and complete agreement to parents' wishes were the order of the day….with family life in the modern era, in which the power of the patriarch is weakened and the rights of women and children are proclaimed (Kitchens, 2007, pp. 460–461).

Spatial dimensions will also interact with temporal ones such as the time of day/night or stage in the life course. For instance, observing someone drinking alcohol in a train station may invoke a different reaction at 9am than it would at 9pm.

I draw upon examples here of the contemporary Western beach, but the same may be true of other beach spaces, although this is not to deny the heterogeneity of the term or its different symbolic meanings across different societies and to different groups (see Preston-Whyte, 2004).