Discourses of rurality: Loose talk or social struggle?

This paper is critical of the existing usage of ‘rural’ and ‘rurality’. It does not simply dismiss the terms as either irrelevant, wrong, or as a chaotic conception. The paper attempts to plot the implications, and account for the existence, of a multiplicity of meanings of the term ‘rurality’. Rath...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of rural studies 1996, Vol.12 (1), p.69-78
Main Author: Pratt, Andy C.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Deconstruction
Discourse Analysis
Gramsci, Antonio
Hegemony
Ideology
Language Usage
Meaning
Methodology (Philosophical)
Postmodernism
Research Problems
Rural Areas
Rural Sociology
Rural Studies
Rurality
Social Change
Terminology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This paper is critical of the existing usage of ‘rural’ and ‘rurality’. It does not simply dismiss the terms as either irrelevant, wrong, or as a chaotic conception. The paper attempts to plot the implications, and account for the existence, of a multiplicity of meanings of the term ‘rurality’. Rather than adjudicating on the ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ use of the term it is suggested that the disputation over the use and meaning of the term ‘rurality’ demonstrates the rupture of sign and signification that has been discussed in debates concerning ideology and hegemony, and more recently post-structuralism. The paper argues in favour of a productive dialogue between Gramscian notions of political struggle and post-structuralist concerns with language and meaning. It is suggested that a more adequate explanation of social change should be sensitive to the multiple discourses that constitute our ‘reality’ (‘urban’ or ‘rural’), and the resources that are mobilised in their favour.
ISSN:0743-0167
1873-1392
DOI:10.1016/0743-0167(95)00046-1