Throughout this article, I argue that within the mainstream field of urban education, “the urban” is floating face down, lifeless, and devoid of significant meaning. “City” and “urban” function as taken-for-granted variables that stand in the rightful place of rich explanations, based in theory and evidence, of the city and its intersection with cultural transformations, pedagogies, movements, and knowledge(s) that comprise educational processes. To resurrect the urban concept, I present an overview of urban perspectives in two categories: old school (passive spatial theories) and new school (instrumental spatial theories). I highlight four recent urban education publications that reflect an emerging scholarly cypher on what I refer to as the urban education question. I then outline four spatial dimensions of hip hop and use these as a springboard for arguing that hip-hop pedagogues are uniquely positioned to be resurrectors of the urban concept. I conclude by exploring what such a theoretical pivot entails.
AminA. (2007). Re-thinking the urban social. City, 11, 100-114.
2.
BrennerN. (2007). What is critical urban theory?City, 13, 198-207. doi:10.1080/13604810902996466
3.
BuendiaE. (2011). Reconsidering the urban in urban education: Interdisciplinary conversations. The Urban Review, 43, 1-21. doi:10.1007/s11256-010-0152-z
4.
CastellsM. (1979). The urban question: A Marxist approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
CramptonJ. (2001). Maps as social constructions: Power, communication, and visualization. Progress in Human Geography, 25, 235-252. doi:10.1191/030913201678580494
6.
de CerteauM. (1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.
7.
DeweyR. (1960). The rural-urban continuum: Real but relatively unimportant. American Journal of Sociology, 66, 60-66.
8.
EasterL.ShultzE.NeyhartT.ReckU. M. (1999). Weighty perceptions: A study of the attitudes and beliefs of preservice teacher education students regarding diversity and urban education. Urban Review, 31, 205-221. doi:10.1023/A:1023287608741
9.
FeaginJ. (1998). The new urban paradigm: Critical perspectives on the city. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.
10.
FormanM. (2002). The hood comes first: Race, space, and place in rap and hip-hop. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
11.
GottdienerM.FeaginJ. (1988). The paradigm shift in urban sociology. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 24, 163-187. doi:10.1177/004208168802400201
12.
HarveyD. (1973). Social justice and the city. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
13.
HaymesS. (1995). Race, culture, and the city: A pedagogy for Black urban struggle. Albany: State University of New York Press.
14.
IrbyD.Bernard HallH. (2011). Fresh faces, new places: Moving beyond teacher-researcher perspectives in hip-hop based education. Urban Education, 46, 216-240.
15.
KatzM. (Ed.). (1993). The “underclass” debate: Views from history. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
KelleyR. (1997). Yo mama’s disfunctional: Fighting the culture wars in urban America. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
17.
LefebvreH. (1991). The production of space (Nicholson-SmithD., Trans.). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
18.
LipmanP. (2011). The new political economy of urban education: Neoliberalism, race, and the right to the city. London, England: Routledge.
19.
MarstonS. A. (2000). The social construction of scale. Progress in Human Geography, 24, 219-242. doi:10.1191/030913200674086272
20.
MasseyD. (2005). For space. London, England: SAGE.
21.
MilnerR. (2012). But what is urban education?Urban Education, 47, 556-561. doi:10.1177/0042085912447516
22.
PahlR. (1970). Whose city? And other essays on sociology and planning. London, England: Longmans.
23.
ParkR. (1952). Human communities. New York, NY: Free Press.
24.
ParkR.BurgessE.McKenzieR. (1967). The city. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1925)
25.
RoseT. (1994). Black noise: Rap music and Black culture in contemporary America. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
26.
SassenS. (2000). New frontiers facing urban sociology at the Millennium. British Journal of Sociology, 51, 143-159. doi:10.1111/j.1468-4446.2000.00143.x
27.
SassenS. (2006). Cities in a world economy (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
28.
SaundersP. (1986). Social theory and the urban question (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
29.
SayerR. (1979). Understanding urban models versus understanding cities. Environment and Planning, 11, 853-862. doi:10.1068/a110853
30.
SojaE. (2000). Postmetropolis: Critical studies of cities and regions. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
31.
SojaE. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
32.
TonkissF. (2005). Space, the city, and social theory: Social relations and urban forms. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
33.
TönniesF. (1887). Gemeinschaft und gesellschaft [Community and society] (LoomisC. P., Trans., 1957). Leipzig, Germany: Fues’s Verlag.
34.
ValentineG. (2007). Theorizing and researching intersectionality: A challenge for feminist geography. The Professional Geographer, 59, 10-21. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9272.2007.00587.x
35.
WilliamsR. (1975). The country and the city. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
36.
WoodsC. (2007). Sitting on top of the world: The challenges of blues and hip-hop geography. In McKittrickK.WoodsC. (Eds.), Black geographies and the politics of place (pp. 46-81). Cambridge, MA: South End Press.
