Paper short abstract:

Analyzing interactions between space and society is important to understand power relations. Expressions via landscape and use of landscape can be analyzed through politics of (in)visibilites. This study explores minority strategies on the use of landscapes in peripheral minority towns in Bulgaria.

Paper long abstract:

As Lefevbre (1991) argues, the social (re-)production of urban space is critical to the reproduction of subordination-domination relationships, mostly in favor of the ruling class. Thus, analyzing interactions between space and society is important to understand power relations. Both dominant and subordinate groups use various and multiple symbols to mark their domination, existence, and/or memory claims. Dominant groups usually have a comparative advantage on the usage of “physical icons” to make their identities and claims more visible through landscapes. However, minorities or non-dominant groups may still produce “counter meanings” in and around landscapes (DeCerteau 1998). Minorities are building landscapes to affirm their own identities but doing so without openly challenging the majority. In other words, these minorities express their cultural identity as well as their local socio-political power without provoking a response from the majority. Expressions via landscape and use of landscape require different strategies which can be explained through politics of (in)visibilites. This study focuses on exploring minority strategies on the use of landscapes in peripheral and minority towns in Bulgaria. I investigate why, how, under what conditions and contexts people avoid conflicts in situations that the literature would lead one to expect conflict to occur in the three peripheral minority towns in Bulgaria, namely in Kardzhali, Razgrad, and Smolyan regions.