‘Community’ has long been critiqued in academic circles as a social construct with the potential to subsume and exclude individuals under a determination of collectivity. In contrast, community continues to be posed as an ideal in urban policy, particularly in the United Kingdom. In this paper I employ Jean-Luc Nancy's thinking of community as myth and as existential being to interrogate the thorny issue of how community is constructed and the effects of those constructions on being and living in a place. I explore the constitution of collectivities and their interruption by lived existence in an urban regeneration project in north England, where a proposal to demolish and renew housing was contested by local residents. I argue that a Nancian lens provides a nuanced view of how myth and being are entangled and requires one another to ensure a vibrant democratic politics rested on an openness to alterity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenC, 2008Housing Market Renewal and Social Class (Routledge, London).
2.
AminA, 2002, “Ethnicity and the multicultural city: Living with diversity”Environment and Planning A34959–980.
3.
AminA, 2005, “Local community on trial”Economy and Society34612–633.
4.
AsquithP, 2002CPO Report to the First Secretary of State Housing Act 1985, Part IX. Application by the Pendle Borough Council for the confirmation of the Borough of Pendle No.101 (Nelson (West) No.1) Compulsory Purchase Order 2001. Ref HNW/5293/8/67. The Planning Inspectorate, Bristol.
5.
AsquithP, 2003CPO Report to the First Secretary of State Housing Act 1985, Part IX. Application by the Pendle Borough Council for the confirmation of the Borough of Pendle No.101 (Nelson (West) No.1) Compulsory Purchase Order 2001 (Re-opened Inquiry) Ref HNW/5293/8/67. The Planning Inspectorate, Bristol.
6.
AtkinsonRKintreaK, 2000, “Owner-occupation, social mix and neighbourhood impacts”Policy and Politics2893–109.
7.
BeauregardR, 2002, “New urbanism: Ambiguous certainties”Journal of Architectural and Planning Research19181–194.
8.
BinghamN, 2006, “Bees, butterflies, and bacteria: Biotechnology and the politics of nonhuman friendship”Environment and Planning A38483–498.
9.
BluntA, 2005, “Cultural geography: Cultural geographies of home”Progress in Human Geography29505–515.
BowesA MDarN SSimD F, 2002, “Differentiation in housing careers: The case of Pakistanis in the UK”Housing Studies17381–399.
13.
ConnollyW, 1998, “Beyond good and evil: The ethical sensibility of Michel Foucault”, in The Later Foucault. Politics and Philosophy Ed. MossJ, (Sage, London) pp 108–128.
14.
DikeçM, 2005, “Space, politics and the political”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space23171–188.
15.
DuanyAPlater-ZyberkESpeckJ, 2000Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream (North Point Press, New York).
16.
DwyerC, 2000, “Negotiating diasporic identities: Young British south Asian Muslim women”Women's Studies International Forum23475–486.
17.
DykhoffT, 2003, “The bulldozing of Jerusalem”The Times 6 May, page 18.
18.
EasthopeH, 2004, “A place called home”Housing, Theory and Society21128–138.
19.
FainsteinS, 2000, “New directions in planning theory”Urban Affairs Review35451–478.
20.
FeatherstoneD, 2004, “Spatial relations and the materialities of political conflict: The construction of entangled political identities in the London and Newcastle port strikes of 1768”Geoforum35701–711.
21.
FlintJRobinsonD, (Eds), 2008Community Cohesion in Crisis? New Directions of Diversity and Difference (Policy Press, Bristol).
22.
FoucaultM, 1983, “The subject and power”, in Michel Foucault. Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics Eds DreyfusH LRabinowP, (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL) pp 208–226.
23.
FoucaultM, 1991, “Governmentality”, in The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality with two lectures by and an interview with Michel Foucault Eds BurchellGGordonCMillerP, (Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead, Herts) pp 87–104.
24.
FynskC, 1991, “Foreword”, in The Inoperative Community Ed. NancyJ-L, (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN) pp i–xxxv.
25.
GaonS.2005, “Communities in question: Sociality and solidarity in Nancy and Blanchot”Journal of Cultural Research9387–403.
26.
GirlingR, 2004, “Save our streets”The Sunday Times Magazine 19 September.
27.
HarveyD, 1997, “The new urbanism and the communitarian trap”Harvard Design Magazine winter/spring (1) 1–3.
28.
ImrieRRacoM, (Eds), 2003Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community and Urban Policy (Policy Press, Bristol).
29.
JamesI, 2005, “On interrupted myth”Journal for Cultural Research9331–349.
30.
JamesI, 2006The Fragmentary Demand: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Jean-Luc Nancy (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).
31.
KatzP, (Ed.), 1994The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community (McGraw-Hill, New York).
32.
LevitasR, 2000, “Community, utopia and New Labour”Local Economy15188–197.
33.
LevitasR, 2005The Inclusive Society? Social Exclusion and New Labour (Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hants).
34.
Lichfield and Partners2004, “Nelson Area Development Framework: Community engagement programme”, Nathanial Lichfield and Partners, Newcastle upon Tyne.
35.
MasseyD, 1995, “Thinking radical democracy spatially”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space13283–288.
36.
MouffeC, 1995, “Post-Marxism: Democracy and identity”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space13259–265.
37.
MouffeC, 1999, “Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism”Social Research66745–758.
MouffeC, 2005On The Political (Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon).
40.
MulhearnD, 2002, “Rooted to the spot”The Guardian 6 November, page 11.
41.
NancyJ-L, 1991The Inoperative Community (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN).
42.
NancyJ-L, 1993aThe Birth to the Presence (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).
43.
NancyJ-L, 1993bThe Experience of Freedom (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).
44.
NancyJ-L, 2000Being Singular Plural (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).
45.
NatterW, 1995, “Radical democracy: Hegemony, reason, time and space”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space13267–274.
46.
NealP, (Ed.), 2003Urban Villages and the Making of Communities (Spon Press, London).
47.
ODPM, 2003Sustainable Communities: Building for the FutureOffice of the Deputy Prime Minister, London.
48.
PanelliRWelchR, 2005, “Why community? Reading difference and singularity with community”Environment and Planning A371589–1611.
49.
Pendle Borough Council, 2000, “Report of the Management Team to Pendle Services Committee”, Pendle Borough Council, Nelson.
50.
PhillipsD, 2006, “Parallel lives? Challenging discourses of British Muslim self-segregation”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space2425–40.
51.
PhillipsDDavisCRatcliffeP, 2007, “British Asian narratives of urban space”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series32217–234.
52.
PopkeJ E, 2003, “Postructuralist ethics: Subjectivity responsibility, and the space of community”Progress in Human Geography27298–316.
53.
PopkeJ E, 2004, “The face of the Other: Zapatismo, responsibility and the ethics of deconstruction”Social and Cultural Geography5301–317.
54.
RacoM, 2003, “New Labour's community and the future of Britain's urban renaissance”, in Urban Renaissance? New Labour, Community and Urban Policy Eds ImrieRRacoM, (Policy Press, Bristol) pp 235–249.
55.
RacoMImrieR, 2000, “Governmentality and rights and responsibilities in urban policy”Environment and Planning A322187–2204.
56.
RobinsonD, 2005, “The search for community cohesion: Key themes and dominant concepts of the public policy agenda”Urban Studies421411–1427.
57.
RoseG, 1997, “Performing inoperative community. The space and the resistance of some community arts projects”, in Geographies of Resistance Eds PileSKeithM, (Routledge, London) pp 185–202.
58.
RoseN, 2000, “Community, citizenship and the Third Way”The American Behavioral Scientist431395.
59.
RoupaV, 2005, “On politics as effectuation: Jean-Luc Nancy's encounter with the Hegelian Monarch”Journal for Cultural Research9405–420.
SlaterD, 1997, “Spatialities of power and postmodern ethics—rethinking geopolitical encounters”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space1555–72.
62.
SorialS, 2004, “Heidegger, Jean-Luc Nancy, and the question of Dasein's embodiment”Philosophy Today48216–230.
63.
Symonds Group, 1998, “The Borough of Pendle Nelson West Neighbourhood Renewal Assessment, Final Report”, Pendle Borough Council, Nelson.
64.
The Prince's Foundation for the Built Environment, 2005, “Whitefield, Nelson. Enquiry by design”, The Prince's Foundation for the Built Environment, London.
65.
ThriftN, 2005, “But malice aforethought: Cities and the natural history of hatred”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series30133–150.
66.
TunstallR, 2003, “Mixed tenure policy in the UK: Privatisation, pluralism or euphemism?”Housing, Theory and Society20153–159.
67.
WelchRPanelliR, 2007, “Questioning community as a collective antidote to fear: Jean-Luc Nancy's ‘singularity’ and ‘being singular plural’”Area39349–356.
