1 urge you to begin reading Thirdspace with an open mind on these

debates. At least temporarily, set aside the demands to make an

either/or choice and contemplate instead the possibility of a
both/and also logic, one that not only permits but encourages a creative
combination of postmodernist and modernist perspectives,
even when a specific form of postmodernism is being highlighted.
Singling out . a_ radic postmodern perspective for particular tiention
is not meant exclusive Tivilege in exploring_ and
understanding TMrdspace. It is instead an efficient_ invitation to
erifer a space of extiaordina peimess,a _placef critical exchange
where the geographical imagination canbe,expand to encompass
a multiplicity ,of _perspectives that _have- ronstdereci
by the epistemological referees to. be incompatible,_ uncombinable
is a space where issues of race, class, and gender can be addressed
simultaneously without privileging one over the other; where one
can be Marxist and post-Marxist, materialist and idealist, structuralist
and humanist, disciplined and transdisciplinary at the same time.
Thirdspace as you will soon discover, is rooted in just such a
recombinatorialand radically_ open perspective. In what I will call a
critical strategy A "thirding-as I to open up our spatial...
imagimries.. _ ys_of thinking and politica y .
respond to_all_binarisms, to any attempt to confine thoughtand
political action to oMy two alternatives, by interjecting an-Other set
of choices. In this critical thirding, the original binary choice is not
dismissed entirely but is subjected to a creative process of restructuring
that draws selectively and strategically from the two opposing
categories to open new alternatives. Two of these critical _t dings
have already been introduced . The first revolves around the interjection
of a critical spa tial imagination into the interpretivedualism
that_ has for the past two centuries co ed_how.we,make_pxtical
and theoretical sense of the world primarily, to the lustoncal and
sociological _imaginations. The second has sha ped the preceding discussion
of modernism and postmodernism, creating the possibility possibilityfor a more open and combinatorial
perspective. Still another is implied in this hook's title and subtitle. Thirdspace too can be
described as a creative recombination and extension, one that builds
on a Firstspace perspective that is focused on the "real" material
world and a_Secondspace perspective that interprets this reality
through "imagined" representations of spatiality. With this brief
and, I hope, helpful and inviting introduction, we are ready to begin
our journeys to a multiplicity of real-and-imagined places.

VRNKOV, K., KOY, CH. (eds) Dream, Imagination and Reality in Literature.
South Bohemian Anglo-American Studies No. 1.
esk Budjovice: Editio Universitatis Bohemiae Meridionalis,
2007. ISBN 978-80-7394-006-5
The Heterotopia of Victorian Landscape
Alice Sukdolov
University of South Bohemia
Abstract:
The paper attempts to define the other spaces of Emily Bronts Wuthering Heights and to qualify the difference
between the real and illusory parts of Victorian landscape. It should also hint at the clash between the Romantic
illusions and Victorian values.
I. Foucaults Other Spaces in Victorian Novels
Speaking of places being just the relations between placements of things, Michel Foucault suggests that
there are places that put all those relations they reflect in question. At the same time, however, they are somehow
connected to those places they put in question and, moreover, they deny all other existing places. The first example
of this theory is utopia as a site with no real place. Many literal examples of utopias can be traced in H. G. Wells,
Jonathan Swift, etc. - they demonstrate the social need for utopias as an ideal society reflecting perfection or a
society completely reversed. From the literal examples we can derive the notion that space has basically two
components: the real or particular part and the illusory, or we can say virtual part. Utopia is in fact a place with no
real place because it exists nowhere but at the same time it perfectly resembles any country in its geographical
or physical aspects. Thus we can always find analogy of utopias in our reality. Nevertheless, utopia is always
unreal.
Apart from utopia Foucault among his other spaces mentions the term heterotopia which he sees as created by
every culture and civilization. Those places are real and are formed as the basis of the specific culture. They form a
sort of counter-site of utopia (which is always unreal). The complexity of the term heterotopia is based on the fact
that those sites represent and at the same time deny and reverse all sites we know. It is the other space because it is
out of all sites.
To explain the terms heterotopia and utopia I would use Foucaults example of the mirror, which can be used as a
complex representation of both utopia and heterotopia. Foucault says that the mirror is in fact utopia because it is a
place without a place. In the mirror people can see themselves where they are not, in the unreal, virtual world which
is open behind the surface of the mirror but is it really behind? You see yourself where you are physically not
present, it is just a reflection - but is it real? Or virtual? Is it just an illusion? Those questions are even more
intensified when Foucault explains the heterotopia of the mirror: The mirror is a real, existing thing which exactly
from its point influences the place where you are standing; in that sense illusion influences reality: From the point
of view of the mirror I find my absence in the place where I am because I can see myself in the mirror (Foucault
1986:24). Thus the place where you are standing at the moment you are looking at yourself in the mirror is in one
respect completely real because you are there, physically standing, but at the same time absolutely unreal because to
come to that conclusion that you are there, you have to come through the virtual point in the mirror. Generally
speaking, every space, according to Foucault, seems to have the real and illusory dimension.

107
Originated by Rudolf Clausius, the German pioneer of Thermodynamics, in 1850, entropy is a scientific expression of the
degree of randomness or disorder in any system, zero entropy being a state of perfect order and high entropy being a high
degree of randomness. Since disorder is inefficient, a high degree of entropy indicates the system can do very little work.
The term has thus moved into cybernetics as a measure of the efficiency of any system in communicating information. If a
cable or a machine produces disorder in the data, it is inefficient. The term entropy moved from science into cultural and
literary criticism (notably in the 1970s) to describe states of social and communicational disorder.
entropy measure of disorganization in a closed system an adequate metaphor to apply to certain phenomena in his own
world.