RURAL STUDIES - MODERNISM, POSTMODERNISM AND THE POST-RURAL

In response to Philo [(1992b), Neglected rural geographies: a review. Journal of Rural Studies 8, 193-2071, who calls for rural studies to t ake the study of 'others' more seriously, we argue the need to take po stmodernism more seriously. The paper focuses upon the production of k nowledge about rural areas by academics. In the narrative that we prov ide here, the 'rural' had a strong presence until Pahl's critique of t he rural-urban continuum which both diminished the status of the rural and emphasised the role of class in shaping particular spaces. Newby and his colleagues applied class analysis to agriculture, likewise und ermining the significance of the rural. Further applications of genera l social theory, such as the political economy and restructuring appro aches, show how modernist rural studies seem to be fighting a losing b attle to posit the indispensability of the significance of the urban-r ural division as an explanation; articulating and rearticulating the d ivide within a whole range of processes: economic, social and cultural . Rural social scientists have woven this modernist narrative, but, as Philo shows, one effect has been the neglect of certain social groups , cultures and identities. However, in contrast to Philo, we argue tha t a rather fundamental reassessment of social scientific approaches to the rural is required if these 'neglected others' are to be satisfact orily considered. We believe a 'sociology of postmodernism' would offe r a more reflexive perspective on the processes which give rise to 'th e rural'. We thus call for an end to the use of universal or global co ncepts such as 'rural' (or the 'urban') and for a concern with the way places are 'made'. This will entail a focus on 'power' ascertain acto rs impose 'their' rurality on others. We term this the study of the 'p ost-rural'.