This weeks reading of “Of Other Spaces: Utopias and Heterotopias” by Michel Foucault was one of the most interesting, yet complicated and confusing pieces of text we have read in this class. It requires one to think about things in a new perspective. What exactly is a Utopia or Heterotopia in our society? Does it truly exist, and if so where? How can we justify a space as either of these? And if it is neither, then what is this space?

Before a space can be classified to one of these categories you must understand exactly what a Utopia or a Heterotopia is. Webster’s Dictionary defines a Utopia as an imaginary place in which everything is perfect, though if it is only imaginary and does not exist no space can properly be classified as utopian. So if a space is not utopian is must be heterotopian, but how can we prove this true? A heterotopia is defined by Foucault as space that functions under non-hegemonic conditions; or a space where no one has true control, is not freely accessable, yet serves a function in relation to those in the space.

Foucault gives us six principles that define to us exactly what justifies a heterotopias space. Each principle with its own example and with a quality that makes you wonder what other spaces may have these same qualities. The best example given though to a heterotopias space is a boat. The boat is a space with no true place that exists on its own over time and is not freely accessible to others. The boat serves as a heterotopia floating around in space. But what other space holds these same characteristics as the boat, a space that is separate from space?

However if we take a step back and think about what exactly makes up a heterotopia we can begin to see that almost all space can fit into this classification, an example being a town square. At first we see the square and think that there is no way it is a heterotopia since it is public space, it can be freely accessed, and constitutes as an exact place, where a heterotopia does not. This is where we are wrong; it is not the exact place, but the space within the square that constitutes the heterotopia. Also, even though it seems like a space that may be freely accessable, there is a slight cost to entering the square, ranging from dealing with the propaganda surrounding the square, the other people in the square, there are things that make the space not ideal and is ultimately the cost for entering the space. The Square is also linked to time, meaning that several different heterotopias could all take place within the same square due to different activities occurring in the square at different times. And lastly, there is not one culture or group within the square at a time, staying consistent with the principles that constitute this space as a heterotopia.

We may see a space and not see how it can be classified as anything, but that is not the reality. Though a Utopia may not exist, all other spaces can constitute a heterotopia based on the principles set forth by Foucault. Any and all spaces consist of one or more heterotopias interacting with each other and creating different heterotopias in the space.