“Literature and Humanist Geography” by J. Douglas Porteous: Summary and Critique

• Conclusion: Porteous concludes that integrating humanist concepts into the geographical interpretation of literature can lead to a more nuanced understanding of literary landscapes. He suggests that this approach complements traditional methods and offers new avenues for exploring the relationship between literature and geography. He asserts, “By developing a humanist approach to the geographical interpretation of imaginative literature, a more balanced assessment of the value of literary landscapes may emerge” (Porteous, 1985, p. 122).
• This humanist approach provides a framework for analyzing literature that considers the emotional and existential dimensions of human experiences in relation to place, offering a more comprehensive understanding of the interplay between geography and literature.

Key Theoretical Contribution:

Porteous engages with phenomenology, particularly Yi-Fu Tuan’s (1977) Space and Place, and Edward Relph’s (1976) Place and Placelessness, to argue that literature should be analyzed not just for its description of places, but for its representation of human experience within place.

How It Contributes:

• He critiques the traditional literary geographic focus on regional novels and suggests a more humanist approach that emphasizes individual experience (Porteous, 1985, p. 118).
• He introduces the insider-outsider dialectic, arguing that literary works should be examined for how characters experience place subjectively, rather than just for geographic accuracy (p. 119).
• Conceptual Framework: The Home/Away and Insider/Outsider matrix (p. 119) mirrors phenomenological inquiries into human perception of place and has applications in interpreting existential displacement in literature.

Intext Reference:

“The emphasis is on human experience, rather than on places themselves” (Porteous, 1985, p. 119).

Theoretical Alignment:

• Phenomenology of Perception (Merleau-Ponty, 1945) – Literary geography should engage with how places are subjectively experienced.
• Topophilia (Tuan, 1974) – Porteous builds on this work to critique the overemphasis on “sense of place” in literary studies (p. 119).

---

2. Existentialism in Literary Studies

Key Theoretical Contribution:

Porteous applies existentialist ideas to literature, particularly the existential outsider, an archetype found in works by Camus (1946) and Wilson (1970).

How It Contributes:

• He argues that geographers should shift focus from static regional descriptions to dynamic existential themes such as alienation, exile, and placelessness (p. 119-120).
• He highlights 20th-century literature’s preoccupation with existential displacement (e.g., The Outsider by Camus, Under the Volcano by Lowry), linking them to rootlessness and placelessness (p. 121).
• His matrix (Figure 1) places alienation and rootlessness at the core of modern literature, encouraging geographers to analyze narratives of exile and anomie (p. 120-121).

Intext Reference:

“Outsideness is a common theme in twentieth-century literature but has received only slight attention from geographers” (Porteous, 1985, p. 119).

Theoretical Alignment:

• Sartre’s Existentialism (1943) – The notion that place is essential for constructing identity, but modern life creates a sense of placelessness.
• Camus’ Absurdism (1942) – Porteous’ description of the Away-Outsider aligns with the existential antihero found in Camus’ and Wilson’s works.

---

3. Spatial Theory and Literary Criticism

Key Theoretical Contribution:

Porteous contributes to Spatial Literary Theory by suggesting that space and place function as narrative structures rather than mere settings.

How It Contributes:

• He critiques geographers’ overemphasis on static landscapes and calls for an analysis of movement, exile, and journey in literature (p. 119).
• His Away-Insider category introduces a nomadic subjectivity, which can be linked to Deleuze and Guattari’s concept of deterritorialization (p. 120).
• He suggests that landscapes in novels act as symbolic, even sentient forces (p. 121), a view compatible with Bakhtin’s (1981) chronotope, where space is an active participant in shaping narrative time.

Intext Reference:

“Literary works must be regarded as dynamic within the matrix… Overlaps abound, and in many cases, authors and protagonists move from one state to another” (Porteous, 1985, p. 121).

Theoretical Alignment:

• Bakhtin’s Chronotope (1981) – The idea that space is a determinant of narrative structure, seen in Porteous’ spatial matrix.
• Deleuze and Guattari’s Nomadology (1986) – The Away-Insider category captures nomadic movement as a transformative experience.

---

4. Postcolonial Theory and the Exile Narrative

Key Theoretical Contribution:

Porteous’ discussion of home-outsiders and rootlessness resonates with postcolonial themes of exile, diaspora, and the colonial subject’s identity crisis.

How It Contributes:

• He identifies a category of displaced individuals who feel alienated from their home even after returning (p. 121).
• He references V.S. Naipaul’s The Mimic Men (1967) as an example of postcolonial exile, where returning colonial subjects become outsiders in their homeland (p. 121).
• His emphasis on literature portraying exile, displacement, and identity crisis links to postcolonial theory’s concerns with belonging and spatial otherness.

Intext Reference:

“Such people readily become strangers in their own lands, for their values and attitudes have changed” (Porteous, 1985, p. 121).

Theoretical Alignment:

• Said’s Orientalism (1978) – The Away-Outsider aligns with the postcolonial subject struggling with identity.
• Bhabha’s The Location of Culture (1994) – Porteous anticipates hybridity and cultural in-betweenness in his discussion of exile.

---

Conclusion: Broader Implications for Literary Theory

Porteous’ Literature and Humanist Geography contributes to literary theory by:

1. Expanding Phenomenology and Existentialism into Literary Geography – He shifts focus from physical landscapes to human experience in place (p. 118-119).
2. Applying Spatial Theory to Narrative – His Home/Away-Insider/Outsider matrix helps analyze mobility, exile, and alienation in literature (p. 119-121).
3. Bridging Literary Geography with Postcolonial Studies – He highlights postcolonial displacement and rootlessness as central literary themes (p. 121).
4. Encouraging Geographers to Study Alienation and Placelessness in Modern Literature – He argues that themes of exile and identity loss are essential for humanist geography (p. 120-121).

Porteous’ work thus serves as a foundational text in Literary Geography, offering conceptual tools that enrich literary analysis beyond traditional geographic interpretation.

---

Key References from the Article:

• Porteous, J.D. (1985). Literature and Humanist Geography. Area, 17(2), 117-122.
• Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness.
• Tuan, Y-F. (1977). Space and Place.
• Camus, A. (1946). The Outsider.
• Naipaul, V.S. (1967). The Mimic Men.
• Bakhtin, M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination.
• Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. (1986). Nomadology.
• Said, E. (1978). Orientalism.
• Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture.

1. Overemphasis on Existentialist and Phenomenological Approaches

• Porteous heavily relies on existentialism and phenomenology (e.g., Relph, Tuan) without fully addressing other theoretical frameworks like Marxist geography, feminist geography, or structuralism.
• Critique: His framework prioritizes individual perception of place over socioeconomic and political structures that shape geographical experiences.

2. Limited Engagement with Postcolonial and Critical Theories

• While he briefly discusses postcolonial displacement (e.g., Naipaul’s The Mimic Men), he does not fully explore colonialism’s role in shaping geographical identity and power dynamics.
• Critique: His Home/Away-Insider/Outsider framework does not account for the forced displacement, imperialist spatial control, or the complexities of hybrid identities in postcolonial literature.

3. Western-Centric Literary Focus

• The examples and references in the article are predominantly Western (e.g., Hardy, Lowry, Orwell, Camus).
• Critique: It lacks engagement with non-Western literary traditions that offer alternative spatial and existential narratives (e.g., Indigenous storytelling, African diasporic literature).

4. Simplistic Categorization in the Home/Away-Insider/Outsider Matrix

• While useful, the four-category framework oversimplifies human relationships with place.
• Critique: It does not account for fluid identities, multiple place attachments, or liminal states where characters exist between categories (e.g., migrants, refugees, diasporic identities).

5. Insufficient Consideration of Urban and Economic Geographies

• Porteous criticizes geographers for focusing on regional novels and landscapes, but his own work does not deeply engage with urban literature or economic geography.
• Critique: He overlooks how capitalism, industrialization, and urban planning contribute to placelessness and alienation in literature.

6. Lack of Empirical Support or Case Studies

• The article presents strong theoretical arguments, but does not include concrete literary case studies or textual analysis beyond broad references.
• Critique: Without deeper engagement with primary texts, his claims about literary geography remain more prescriptive than demonstrative.

7. Absence of Interdisciplinary Methodology

• Although he calls for geographers to engage more with literature, he does not provide a clear interdisciplinary methodology for how geographers should conduct literary analysis.
• Critique: The lack of specific analytical tools limits the practical application of his framework for literary scholars and geographers alike.