Conceptualising the Sociospatial Diversity of Gentrification: ‘To Boldly Go’ into Contemporary Gentrified Spaces, the ‘Final Frontier’?

gentrified spaces, the `final frontier'? Geographic imaginations of frontiers are profuse within dominant representations of urban gentrification (Wyly and Hammel, 2005), and plentiful within the cultural (eg Ley, 1996) and economic-led (eg N Smith, 1996) theorisations of the phenomenon. As the processes of change have increasingly diversified and transmutated over the past forty years (Lees, 2000), scholars have themselves been forced to embrace the extraordinary, new, and seemingly àlien' spaces of gentrification. These ongoing academic ventures to deepen knowledge of the unknown and unfolding facets of gentrification can be epitomised by drawing parallels with the notorious opening to Star Trek, which, like gentrification, is one of the leading scriptures of post-1960s Western culture, and has a similar historical biography. Indeed, geographic and sociological themes, as well as expeditionary and perilous undertones, reverberate within the monologue, which has endured during the different `generations' of Star Trek since 1966: `̀ Space, the final frontier. These are the voyages . to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man [or woman] has gone before. '' Arguably, the pressing need for scholars of gentrification to readjust their lens of enquiry and analyses is likely to accelerate, in light of recent contentions of a `rupture in the processes of urbanisation'. For example, as Beauregard (2006, page 218) recently notes in an insightful observation of a radical break in late-20th-century urbanisation: `̀ existing urban theories and models of governance have to be discarded and new understandings launched'' (see also Robinson, 2004). According to Beauregard (2006), a central remit here is to ensure that new relations between conceptual frameworks and empirical data are tangible: `̀ evidence must make senseöhave meaningöas part of a more broadly cast conceptual perspective'' (ibid). This challenge clearly has resonance for recent studies which have sought to enhance understandings of new expressions, trajectories, and the diversification of gentrification (Lees, 2003). In this sense, the recent rethinking of the empirical, conceptual, and theoretical nuances of gentrification inherently ties into wider agendas for urban and rural studies. This undoubtedly offers a rich opportunity for studies of gentrification to be more fully informed by, and to inform, other previously disparate strands of the social sciences. Indeed, Beauregard offers some useful possible pointers here, noting: `̀ fragmented spatialities, multiple flows, polyglot socialities, dynamic networks, and spatial and temporal openness'' (ibid). Recent editorial collections by Atkinson (2003), Slater et al (2004), and Atkinson and Bridge (2005) have made significant advances in weaving together the numerous overlaps between gentrification and themes such as globalisation, gated communities, suburbanisation, higher education, edge cities and the changing role of the countryside. Not surprisingly, these developments and the widening of the sociospatial net of gentrification have become tied to a recurrent disruption and reconfiguration of the boundaries of well-established conceptualisations of gentrification (Clark, 2005). As a result, the elasticity of the term is being drawn progressively taut to cover the endless broadening of gentrification (eg Phillips, 2004). Guest editorial Environment and Planning A 2007, volume 39, pages 2 ^ 9