Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 1999.

volume 17, pages 737 760

Governing cities: notes on the spatialisation of virtue

Thomas Osborne Department of Sociology, University of Bristol, 12 Woodland Road, Bristol BS12 1UQ, England; e-mail: thomns.osbornc@bri2u1c.uk Nikolas Rose Department of Sociology, Goldsmiths College, University of London, New Cross, London SE14 6NW, England; e-mail: n.rosc@gokl.nc.uk Received 13 July 1998; in revised form 16 April 1999

Abstract. This paper represents a scries of speculations concerning the imagination of (he city as a space of government, authority, and 'the conduct of conduct*. The authors argue that it is possible to understand the myriad ways in which various authorities have sought to govern the city through an interrogation of the scries of means through which the city has been 'diagrammed1 as a space of power, regulation, ethics, and citizenship. These speculations take a historical but not a historically 'pcriodiscd' form; the authors consider in turn the diagramming of the city in the ancient Greek world, the nineteenth-century liberal diagramming of the city, eugenic models of the city, and latter-day ncolibcral modes of visualising, programming, and governing urban spaces. The aim is neither to'found yet another theory of spatialisation nor to advance a Foucauldian urban sociology but to gauge the parameters which have bequeathed us the contemporary city as a governed and ethically saturated space. In the following notes and reflections, we use the term 'diagram' to try to capture the different ways in which government has been territorialiscd in an urban form.(1) By government, we mean something more than the thoughts, policies, tactics, organisations ... of politicians. In the extended sense that is now becoming familiar, we use the term government to refer to that plane of thinking and acting concerned with the authoritative regulation of conduct towards particular objectives (see Rose, 1999b). Government is not reducible to politics, the economy, or morality: one can never just read off mentalities or strategies of government from the estage of capitalism' or the complexity of social organisation. There is always an element of creativity concerning arts of government; the exercise of government entails the application of thought to particular conditions and situations. How might one analyse our historical archive of such kinds of thought? No doubt there are many ways. In what follows, our concern is not with the history, the sociology, or even the idea of the city, but with the city as a way of diagramming human existence, human conduct, human subjectivity, human life itselfdiagramming it in the name of government. Urban diagrammatics Were the Greeks the first to diagram the city? An image of the Greek city and the Greek citizen certainly acted as something of a retrospective justification for laterespecially Enlightenment and 19th-centuryviews of the city. In this Greek diagram, the city becomes more than just a geographical space, it is a milieu for capturing and shaping forces (human, spatial, and ideological) proper to a particular stylisation of managing or governing conductthe polls. The polis was a spatial milieu of immanence; An earlier and longer version of this paper, with a critical commentary by Engin F Isin and a response by the authors, appeared as part of a working paper in the Urban Studies Programme at York University, Toronto, Canada. The closing section of the paper, on contemporary mentalities of the metropolis, was also drawn upon for the argument presented in Rose (1999a).
(1)

738

T Osborne, N Rose

a self-sufficient spatialisation of authority, where authority was immanent, it grew out of the pleasures and attractions of urban associations, interests, friendships, affects, and passions (Deleuze and Guattari, 1994, page 87; see also Finley, 1971). This idea of the immanent political sociability of the polis has recurred in all city diagrams in 'the West': the city as having the potential to generate that phenomenon which Immanuel Kant called the 'unsocial sociability' of men, a space in which sociability is immanent but antagonistic, and yet in which this antagonistic immanence gravitates towards a kind of equilibrium, a stable mode of functioning. Such immanence embodies a tendency to a 'natural government', a self-government not dependent upon calculated intervention. The idea of urban space is to represent a form of antagonism that in the long run shapes the tendencies of the political order (Kant, 1991, page 44).(2) And yet, from the perspective of those who would govern the city, immanence can take a whole series of less virtuous formsthe vice, the rebellion, the insubordination, the waves of rumour and disorder, of depravity and idleness that are dysfunctional forms of the 'pure sociability' immanent in the city. The vicious immanence of the city is a never-ending incitement to projects of government. Such projects seek to capture the forces immanent in the city, to identify them, order them, intensify some and weaken others, to retain the viability of the socialising forces immanent to urban agglomeration whilst civilising their antagonisms. To think of these projects of government in terms of diagrams is to suggest an activity of thought that is as much technical as cognitive, and is not merely ideological or ideal but functional. Of course, one could be literal about the diagram: there are so many plans, schemes, drawings, stories, myths, and programmes that simultaneously problematise actual life in the city and idealise its potentialsif only this or that were understood, recognised, done, designed, built, demolished, allowed, or forbidden. But the urban diagrams that concern us are to be discerned within all these actual schema, immanent in them, perhaps providing their historical a priori: the various abstract cities which, at different moments, distribute various attempts to understand and intervene into concrete urban space, time, and existence. These diagrams are neither models nor Weberian ideal-types but operative rationales. Each diagram depicts and projects a certain 'truth' of the city which underpins an array of attempts to make urban existence both more like and less like a citymore in that the immanent virtues of the civic will be intensified, less because the immanent dangers of the city will be pacified. If we are warranted in suggesting that one can identify, at certain historical moments, a specifically urban 'will to government', this is simply to the extent that government itself has been animated by a spatial diagram of its objects, its problems, and its means of action which has taken the city for its shape. In part, of course, a diagram is a matter of discourse, of the immanent rules of formationthe regularities and distributionsthat allow things to be said and understood about urban existence. This is what Gilles Deleuze terms "a system of light and a system of language", a way of making things seeable, sayable, and doable (Deleuze, 1988, page 32). But it is more, for such regularities are associated with ways in which form is given to nondiscursive matterthe subjects who can speak or be spoken about; the spaces of workshops, factories, barracks, streets. They are lined up with a whole range of technical devices that, once having been invented, make such associations possiblesewers, electricity, telegraphs. A will to action is immanent to each diagram; forces are diagrammed which seek to impose a certain regularity upon a human multiplicity "distributing in space, laying out and serialising in time, composing in spaceMax Weber was also moved by this aspect of city life, ascribing it to a domain of 'nonlegitimate domination', in contrast to the 'legitimate' domination established by determinant political authorities; charismatics, the State, etc.
(2)

Governing cities: notes on the xpatiulisation of virtue

7M)

time and so on .... The diagram is no longer an auditory or visual archive but a map .... It is an abstract machine. It is defined by its informal functions and matter and in terms of form makes no distinction between content and expression, a discursive formation and a non-discursive formation. It is a machine that is almost blind and mute, even though it makes others see and speak" (1988, page 34). The diagrams of a society, then, are its virtual maps, maps of the codes immanent in forces and their relations, the abstract machines comprising hundreds of little points of emergence, creativity, sodality, or stasis, within which forces are exercised on forces to deduct or combine them, to compose and recompose them, to divide or to isolate, to churn up matter and distribute it in new ways: maps of the intensities pulsing through every relation. But the diagram should not be thought of as an external origin: it is the formation that is immanent within each concrete assemblage, giving form to their fluidity, integration to their local and micropolitical powers, a stability and longevity to that which would otherwise be virtual, potential, fleeting, vanishing, molecular. And, at the same time, the diagram is constantly decomposing and rccomposing, fragmenting, splitting into different lines, some of which will fade away, others of which will stabilise and coalesce into new diagrams. As a result, stasis is a pathological form, one that requires an excess of force to bind and fix the mobility and creativity immanent within the city. We could try to diagnose the diagrams of Greek, Medieval, or Renaissance types of government in urban terms. But we suggest that the basic components of our contemporary diagram of the city as a space of government begin to be discernible in the 19th Century. What is decisive is that from the 19th Century the government of the city becomes inseparable from the continuous activity of generating truths about the city. From that time onwards, we suggest, government gets tied to novel practices of truth that have a spatial character. The Greeks did not tie urban existence to practices of truth in this way. Or, at least, the immanence of the city took, then, primarily a political or ethical form, one which was not attached to a specifically urbanspatialisingwill to truth. From the 19th Century, however, the very existence of the city becomes inseparable from a whole series of initiatives that sought to produce true knowledges concerning the social fabric of the city. The city's immanence becomes inseparable from an ongoingif disparately conceived and realisedlabour of seeking to tell the truth about the city. Urban thought here is technical and practical, not simply dreams of the city but mundane techniques of gathering, organisation, classification, and publication of information. Think, for instance, of social statistics in the early 19th Century; of the exploration of the 'dark continent' of poverty by all those urban social explorers in the second half of the 19th century from Friedrich Engels to Seebohm Rowntree; of the charting of 'community and kinship', from the Chicago school to Michael Willmott and Peter Young; of the emergence in the 1970s of the notion of subculture. Or, for example, think of the collection of statistics of crime and their organisation in police districts that inscribe the city and its topographies and variations into the administrative imagination fully as much as do the writings of the more elevated literary figuressuch as the Baudelaires or the Benjamins. All these are aspects of the role of truth and thought specific to the constitution of the modern urban diagram. Why are they specific? Not because for the first time political thought is urbanthe Greek diagram is evidence enough of this. Rather, because this thought partakes of something newa kind of expertise of the city that is not quite philosophical and not quite political; we might think of it as a savoir of city government. From the classical era in the West, the city had been invoked as a metaphor for good (or bad) government. In Late Antiquity, St Augustine's God governed a heavenlyterrestrial City, the product as much of a political philosophy as it was of a theology

740

T Osborne, N Rose

(Brown, 1972). Closer to the modern era, the theorists of Polizei extended the metaphor of the well-governed urban space to the whole national territory (Foucault, 1991, page 93; Small, 1969). One must govern the territory as one would expect a welladministered city to be governed. "There is an entire series of Utopias or projects for governing territory that developed on the premise that a state is like a large city; the capital is like its main square; the roads are like its streets. A state will be well organised when a system of policing as tight and efficient as that of the cities extends over the entire territory.... The model of the city became the matrix for the regulations that apply to a whole state" (Foucault, 1984, page 242; see also Kendall and Wickham, 1992). But the present is approached on the basis of a double shift. On the one hand, in the moment when the long-standing tactical problem of the government of cities, concerned with the suppression of this or that danger, is succeeded by the strategic dream of a generalised urban governmentality. And, on the other, and perhaps more importantly, when the city moved from being a metaphor adopted as an illustration of good government to become the site of a kind of systematic pragmatism, a concrete milieu of government. The life of the city: governing the urban milieu Of course, as any historian knows, in the 19th Century cities are repetitively problematised in terms of the threats posed by its inabilitythe inability of their inhabitantsto govern themselves. In a thousand waysin novels, paintings, cartoons, newspaper reports, official enquiries, social statistics, philanthropic projects, and political pamphlets the dangerous immanence of the city was portrayed: slums, vice, prostitution, sweated labour, crime, juvenile delinquency, diseases, decay, squalor, gambling, drunkenness, want of employment, degeneration, begging, destitution, and homelessness. These dangers immanent to city life, its immorality and amorality, its streets teeming with all sectors of society promiscuously intermingled, its dark places and secret spaces out of the gaze of civility and orderexercise a powerful attraction on the urban imagination. Historians have spent their lives in these Victorian archives documenting the attempts to suppress, controland sometimes to enjoythese evils; is there anything new to be said? Perhaps one needs merely to contest the view, most clearly expressed by Michel de Certeau, that there is an implacable opposition between an urbanising panoptic strategy of power and the ubiquitous contradictory movements, ruses, and tactics that "counter-balance and combine themselves outside the reach of panoptic power ... without points where one can take hold of them, without rational transparency, they are impossible to administer" (de Certeau, 1984, page 95; see also Donald, 1992). For the urban diagram that took shape in the 19th Century did not program a monotonous and relentless attempt to impose discipline and subordination; it was, rather, composed of a motley of inventive projects intended to make urban existence the site of a certain regulated and civilised freedom. It is in this sense that we describe them as 'liberal' not because of the influence of the philosophers of classical liberalism, but because, at this diagrammatic level, the city was to be the milieu for the regulation of a carefully modulated freedom. As a milieu of liberal government the city becomes a sort of laboratory of conduct. Its government comes to be seen as essentially problematic, so the city becomes a plane of indeterminationa dense, opaque, unknown, perhaps ultimately unknowable space; a domain where the criteria and techniques of good government were no longer selfevident. The work of Thackrah and Engels, the surveys of Arnott, Kay, and Southwood Smith in London, and the later investigations of Mearns, Booth, and Rowntree: all the great empirical excavations of the 19th-century city stem from this point. It seemed that when the social investigators tramped across the city, they were discovering

Governing cittcn: notes on the Mpatiitli.sution of virtue

74!

.society itself, For society becomes an immanent space, separated from the old determinations of status and territory: its clearest manifestations seem to be in the actual geographical space of the city Specification of the social field ceases to be a matter of gatherings of sociability in particular forums (coffee houses, the court* etc) and comes to be a matter of the territory of lives, habits, and mores of a population. Society has become gcnerically spatial (Rabinow, 1989, pages 128 129), and the city has become a privileged milieu (or the empirical exploration of society from the perspective of government. The government of urban space now has to be concerned with the security of these natural processes of society within the unnatural space of the city. In the laboratory of the city, the immanent 'social' processes of population were intensified and confined: they could be isolated, scrutinised, documented, and calculated. Hence the city became the main field of operations for those concerns, which Ian Hacking has summed up under the label of the 'erosion of determinism': statistical investigations of the immanent regularities of crime, degeneracy, poverty, vice (Hacking, 1990). In the city, one could observe a sort of vast natural experiment, disclosing that tendency of our social nature to produce immanent regularities out of the clash of intentions and free wills. "Thus marriages, births and death do not seem to be subject to any rule by which their numbers could be calculated in advance, since the free human will has such a great influence upon them; and yet the annual statistics for them in large countries prove that they are just as subject to constant natural laws as arc the changes in the weather, which in themselves arc so inconsistent that their individual occurrence cannot be determined in advance, but which nevertheless do not fail as a whole to sustain the growth of plants, the flow of rivers, and other natural functions in a uniform and uninterrupted course" (Kant, 1991, page 41). This idea of immanence was not destructive of the will to govern. What was required was action upon those forces that were immanent to the city; to govern through rather than in spite of individual liberty. Writers on political history have pointed to the 'silent revolution' in government during the period from about 1830 to the outbreak of the World War 2. Oliver MacDonagh argued that in the process of the discovery of evils within the city, the invention of practices for regulation of urban life, and the emergence of new bureaucracies, officials, and authorities a new sort of state was being born (MacDonagh, 1958; see also Osborne, 1994). Now it is obviously true that there was a growth and proliferation of expertise at this time. There were inspectors of prisons and schools, of mines and rivers; there were medical officers and colonial administrators; there were census-takers, statisticians, and engineers. But this complex and heterogeneous array of experts was rather loosely assembled together and linked in diverse relations with the formal political apparatus. These officials were joined by a wealth of other experts who owed their status to their role as freelance philanthropist or journalist or popular polemicist. Such activities were regarded as not merely compatible with liberal principles of individual liberty but as key components in the realisation of such a liberal dream. A new kind of state was born, it is true, but this was neither the sleek rationalising implement of Jeremy Bentham's dreams nor a 'cold monster' seeking to dominate and control all that it had power over, infiltrating itself directly into the corpuscles of a population now increasingly concentrated in towns. On the contrary, it was a political configuration that was committed, simultaneously, to the principle of an autonomous public sphere, a set of market relations amongst enterprises, a legal system based on the principle of the liberty of the individual and the rule of law, and to the shaping of these public realms so that they embodied the responsibility that was the sine qua non of liberty. And the privileged site for this complex of relations was the life of the city.

742

T Osborne, N Rose

We can illustrate this rapidly in relation to three interlinked sets of problems: morbid bodies, immoral subjects, and dangerous multiplicities. Morbid bodies There has long been a corporeal vocabulary of the citycities as bodies, with their birth, growth, youth, maturity, sickness and health, decline and death. But if the medical point of view was important for this understanding of the city, this was not initially because of an ideological equation of the city with the notion of a bounded, well-functioning organism. What was at stake was less an understanding of the city as a physiological organism than an understanding of the city as a singular bodily organ. In other words, this organic urban metaphor was initially clinical and empirical rather than biological and functional: the scrupulous collection of individual facts and singular items of data was to give a clinical 'picture' of a diseased state. Some of the earliest 'sociological' accounts of the city themselves specifically related to concerns that were medical in this clinical sense (Higgs, 1991; see also Davison, 1983; Pelling, 1978, page 12). Moreover, medical reason was itself a spatialising and urbanising science; by the 1830s a discourse on the 'medical climatology' of towns had evolved into an empirical medical topography concerned with the mapping of disease in localised spaces (Gilbert, 1958). Paul Rabinow has shown how the cholera epidemic of the early 1830s in France had prompted medical topographers to map the spaces of Paris with a view to controlling possible sites of infection in various unhealthy locales of the city. "A detailed map of each quarter was produced and set within a larger map of the whole city. Mapping facilitated analysis; the whole city, down to the individual buildings on a street, was covered by a standardized spatial grid" (Rabinow, 1989, page 36; see also Delaporte, 1987). In 1839 Ange Guepin, a physician, wrote a comprehensive Histoire de Nantes, a detailed empirical survey of each of the social classes in the city. The coupling of city and sickness has, however, been more than a negative onethe 19th Century sees not only the argument that sickness is a pathology of space that may be governed away by such means as pure water, sewage, disposal of refuse, and the like, but also that this is not a merely negative programme for the elimination of sickness by the regulation of spaceof which quarantine and the plague city might be the key images but that the task of good government of urban space is actually to promote health. Edwin Chadwick's proposals for securing public health through supplies of clean water and a comprehensive system of sewers partook of this aspiration (Osborne, 1996). Here the town emerges as an ethicohygienic space, a particular way of understanding problems of disease and ill health and their moral consequences, to be acted upon spatially. Reciprocally, a particular way of understanding the virtues and vices of the population in hygienic terms'town swamps', 'moral miasma'which themselves come from a spatial vocabulary of diseasecontagion, epidemic, miasmawere hence to be related to the mapping of the town as a moral topography. The language of illness and of medicine, and its spatial organisation, became, here, omni-purpose metaphors for problematising the urban population from the perspective of the threats that it posed and the ways in which they were to be acted upon. The spatial relation of citizen to habitat was turned into one that can and should be governed. The organic metaphor for the city was, in fact, peculiarly appropriate for a liberal mentality of government, in that it stressed that the urban domain was essentially an immanent naturalistic domain; one which, left to itself and with the right conditions, could compose itself as a benign social order. Liberalism was an art of government that posed itself in terms of maintaining and regulating the 'security' of natural domains of population (Gordon, 1991). Victorian urban public health and sanitary

Governing cities: notes on the Hputmltsution of virtue

743

science represented not at all a realisation of liberal philosophy so much as a strategy of security appropriate to a broadly liberal mentality of government. Immoral .subjects In conceptions of the city in the I9th Century there was a clear relationship between, on the one hand, a 'milieu* of the city, and, on the other, the 'character' of the human beings that inhabited it. For the well-to-do, there was a constant concern with the ways in which the effete and artificial life of the city might encourage immoral or loose habits, vice, inebriety, and a general loosening of the controls exercised by the will (Donzelot, 1979). But it was the habits and conduct of the less wealthy and the threat that they posed not to the continuation of a lineage but to the moral order of urban existence that inspired the intensification of a governmental gam This gaze came to be directed at the habits of the peopleboth en masse and differentiated: into men and women, adults and children; amongst the different trades; in relation to the dangerous classes; in the documentation of the lives of thieves, street Arabs, prostitutes, and other infamous types. Observations of these immoral subjects inscribed in a plethora of pamphlets, programmes, demands, solutions, tracts, scientific investigations, bureaucratic documentation, commissions of enquiry, medical reports, and the like focused upon the dangers that life in towns posed to the moral and physical constitution of subjects. There seems to be a negative spiral of interaction between milieu and character. Poor character, which may be inherited from one's forbears, led not only to conduct and ways of living that degraded ones' surrounding milieu; it also led one to gravitate towards a certain kind of milieu, which itself has an effect upon character an effect which, in turn, might be passed down to future generations through a weakened constitution, and through the ways in which one rears one's children and the habits one inculcates into them. Time exacerbated the evil, for bad habits engendered further bad habits. And the urban environment might often be seen as a kind of engine of such bad habits, giving them impetus, exacerbating them, prolonging them, spreading them, "Go to their dwellings ... in the great majority of cases, the scenes of wretchedness which occur in the families of the lower classes are the result of intemperate and improvident habits" (Grant, quoted in Wohl, 1977, page 9). One could put the emphasis upon the reckless dispositions of the poor, or one could place it at the door of the urban environment. For George Godwin, the city became, above all, a domain of mostly unsavoury sensations provoked by an insalubrious environment. The city was a machine for the production of vile sensations, and as sensations were the means of moral education of the human being, exposure to vile sensations turned one's morality in a vile direction. So, in exploring the city, one had to trace the effects of sensations on the cultivation of moral habits. If the habits of those who live in the city are in large part bad habits, then it is necessary not so much to act directly upon those habits themselves but to modify the city so as to induce the right kind of habits. Hence, the need to build what Godwin termed "social bridges"dwellings, nurseries, infant reformatories, ragged schools that will traverse the "town swamps" that give off such a mire of malevolent sensations (Godwin, 1972, pages 3, 16). Moral corruption should not take causal priority over the deficits of socialisation. "The owners of such places say'People of this sort are naturally dirty, and it is useless to do anything with them'. We would ask in reply, 'How is it possible that good habits are to be acquired under such circumstances?'" (1972, page 7). Dangerous multiplicities Some regard the proliferation of expertise and knowledge across the space of the city in terms of the invention, intensification, and dispersion of novel forms of 'social control':

744

T Osborne, N Rose

registration, classification, enumeration, surveillance, cleansing, directing, nurturing, administering, arresting, judging, imprisoning (see du Camp, quoted in Donald, 1995, page 78). The mentalities of urban government in the 19th Century would then be seen as having ambitions that were almost entirely negative, constraining, and designed to eliminate moral danger by the marking out of a series of grids of domination. But this would be to identify only one dimension of these new techniques and the aims that inspired them. For the ambitions of these strategies were not only to constrain, discipline, and pacify, but also to create a certain kind of regulated, civilised subjectivity in the urban population. We see, that is to say, not solely a negative or repressive kind of activity, the focus upon the identification and elimination of sources of conflict within the fabric of urban life, but rather the active attempt to fabricate liberty as a matter of free bodies in the regulated space of the city. The regularisation of liberty was certainly linked to fears of the mob, the mass, and riot. This took different forms: London, despite its urban unrest, was not like Paris in this respect, nor did it call for such a comprehensive replanning in the name of pacification. If plans for urban reconstruction took a governmental form, this was more in relation to anxieties about the demoralising effects of urban immigration especially to the extent that the new town-dwellers congregated in the darkest, densest regions of the town, hidden from the good influences of urban order, steeped in the foul moral miasma of the rookeries. The rerouting of major thoroughfares in London in particular sought to open the most notorious of these dark spaces"cul-de-sacs without any outlet other than the entrance" according to one observer (quoted in Porter, 1994, page 267)to visibility, to light, and to passage. Architecture, too, had its governmental aspect, although it would be absurd to reduce the question of building types to a project of pacification and civilisation, however significant this may be in the disciplinary architecture of prisons, asylums, reformatories, and schools. Nonetheless, new rationales for urban existence do merge with the fabric of public buildings, whether these be hospitals, libraries, or seats of local government. No longer was the effect of such buildings considered to lie solely, or even mainly, in the meanings embodied and radiated by their monumental external design. It was the internal design of the building that was important; they were required not merely to facilitate the flow of large numbers of persons, but to regulate that flow, to civilise it, to shape the relations of perception and vision, of contact and distance, amongst those that are gathered within. In all those large public buildings where persons were brought together in enclosed spacesmuseums, exhibitions, department storesone sees the emergence of new programmes for producing modes of public deportment which throw a web of visibilities and norms over public conduct: something like a calculated administration of shame, designed to link the ethical capacities of citizens to the ends of government (Bennett, 1995; Markus, 1993; Rose, 1992). The body of the urban citizen: governing life itself In the closing decades of the 19th Century, the living body of the citizen became an immediate problem for government. The city became problematised in terms of its own immanent tendencies to engender the degeneration of life within it; immigration into the towns from the country took those of the most robust, sturdy, and adventurous disposition, but the consequences of town lifesqualor, overcrowding, foul miasma, vicious moral climateproduced, within only a couple of generations, a population of weak, tubercular, wanton, inebriate, feckless, and sickly characters. Initially, it appeared that social and moral factors interacted to produce a kind of downward spiral of corruption which, in turn, impacted upon the biological attributes of the urban poortheir constitutionwhich in turn shaped their morality and character (see Lees, 1987,

Governing cities: notes on the spulisilisutton of virtue

745

pages 137- 141; Pick, 1989; Stcdivmn Jones, 1973). The physical capacities of the urban poor, trapped in overcrowded conditions in the shims, were sinking into a mire of degeneracy. The minutiae of urban existence came to he charted in these terms. The dwelling was a prime site of investigation and of government, not merely the domestication of the emotional and sexual economy of procreation and child-rearing, but the home as a site for an individualised btopolitics of the urban citizen as a living creature. This problcmatisation of the vital order of the town could be taken in two interrelated and overlapping but analytically distinct directions. On the one hand, there was something like a eugenic diagram: what one saw was not merely deterioration but degeneration, a progressive weakening of the stock caused not only by the hereditary transmission of constitutions weakened physically and morally by urban existence, but also by differential rates of breeding, such that those from the weakest stock bred the fastestwith their puny offspring protected from the struggle for existence by wellmeaning but misguided philanthropyjust as the more civilised engaged in selfish practices to limit their procreation. On the other hand, there was the social diagram: what one saw was a consequence of the conditions of social life, which had their own laws and regularities of effect upon human beingsand hence could be ameliorated by acting upon the city to amplify its virtuous social forces and to reduce those which were damaging or destructive to human health and morality. It was something like a social diagram that animated the forces that came to focus upon the issue of urban housing. Engcls, Mayhcw, and other investigators of the middle decades of the 19th Century had viewed the dwelling as a machinery of human morality. The dwellings of the poor were condemned not merely because of their squalor but because of the forms of unconscionable sexual liaison which they fostered by the promiscuous comingling of husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, cousins, lodgers, and so forth in the hovels and slums of London and Manchester. By the 1880s, this had stabilised into a novel question: overcrowding. And urban policy was to become directed towards a new emphasis on governing through housing. Whereas previous architectural policy on the poor had related to that apparatus of reformation, the workhouse (Markus, 1993, pages 141 -145), now the aim came to be that of a civilised housing for the poor. Mearns, in 1883, had catalogued the sensational aspects of slumdwelling in London. Whereas for Godwin the problem had been sanitation rather than habitation, for Mearns, and the plethora of urban writings that followed from him, the focus was upon living conditions inside dwellings. Here, the problem is not the open streets but the interior of dwellings: "In one cellar a sanitary inspector reports finding a father, mother, three children and four pigs! In another a missionary found a man with smallpox, his wife just recovering from her eighth confinement, and the children running about half naked and covered with filth. Here are seven people living in one underground kitchen, and a little child lying dead in the same room" (Mearns, 1970, page 5). Instead of the city being understood itself on the model of a kind of organ, or even organism, the city, as it organised the bare life of human beings and their proximities and interminglings, now becomes a malign environment for the organism that is man. Of course, the fate of the urban poor also provided a plane of reference for the discourse of degeneration that would be regularised in the form of eugenics. Clearly, for some proponents of the degeneration thesis, such as Charles Kingsley, what was at stake was a translation of the external racisms associated with Empire into an internal racism directed at those within the national population who formed a distinct and lower race, or who had returned through a combination of inherited stock and immoral habits to an earlier stage in racial development. But it would be a mistake simply to associate a political rationality that centred upon the ethical qualities of human beings

746

T Osborne, N Rose

and their amelioration as being somehow the exclusive property of 'reactionary' forces. In Britain, for example, a quasi-eugenic component was also implicated in the thinking of New Liberals such as Hobhouse, Robertson, Hobson, and Ritchie (Freeden, 1978, page 193; see also Jones, 1983). The New Liberals abandoning the ideology of laissezfaire, recognised, as Hobson put in 1911, "a social property in capital which is held politic to secure for the public use" (quoted in Freeden, 1978, page 42). It would be the role of the state to intervene within the processes of capital in order to secure this social component for the people as a whole. Hence the task of the state becomes "to promote the mental and moral elevation of the people; the chief end of Government being to establish not liberty alone, but every other necessary security or rational progress' (Rae quoted in Freeden, 1978, page 55). One aspect of thisat least as found in some of the earlier writings in the New Liberalismwas the advocacy of parental prudence as a corollary of social reform. As Freeden comments, "Robertson repeatedly recommended the limiting of the birth-rate, which he thought could be attained by state propaganda. Parental prudence sometimes seemed the only way to ensure a permanent amelioration of the condition of the working classes .... Eugenics, as Hobson pointed out, merely extended the question of population to include qualitative and not just quantitative considerations" (1978, pages 186-187). What is significant for our current argument, however, is the way in which these different diagramsthe eugenic and the socialspatialised themselves. For the social diagram, the city is central. Its forces, its attractions and pulls, its consequences and the impulses it produces are the site and mode of action of social laws on the human organism. And the very concentrations of the lives of the urban dwellers in a governable space of the city offers the chance of remedy. Thus, for example, the Inter-Departmental Committee on Physical Deterioration, which reported in 1904, rejected the notion that the race as a whole was unfit or degenerating, and situated the problem firmly in the specific context of the poor in the slums and the question of overcrowding. Hence, by virtue of the possibilities opened by this very concentration, the city could still be the site of a remedy. An apparatus of continuous surveillance could be established in the city slums; a permanent anthropometric survey, a continuous register of sickness, medical officers of health in each district, improved food and milk supply, special schools for retarded children, and so forth. The urban became a valuable field for the deployment of instruments of government that required direct contacts with the lives of urban dwellers themselves. Hence the city was no longer an immanent domain to be regulated through apparatuses of security but the matrix of a permanent and strategically targeted surveillance of individual bodies and their modes of life. For the eugenic diagram, on the other hand, the role of the city was almost accidentalit was merely a space within which natural processes were visible. It is true that the city imposed features of its own as a particular kind of condensed populous space. However, in eugenic discourse, these merely facilitate processes that have nothing intrinsically to do with urban life: the inheritance of particular characteristics. The forces that characterise degeneration are not intrinsic to city life itself, and the city simply exacerbates tendencies that are immanent to particular classes such as criminals or the feeble-minded, rather than immanent to urban life itself. In fact, by the start of the 20th Century, the eugenic discourse is not specifically urban at all: it alights upon the urban only contingently. In Britain, the urban is important for 20th-century eugenics only in so far as it acts as an amplifier of wider tendencies of degradation by virtue of specific process and tendencies which it concentrates. And in the United States, the question is less one of the cities themselves, but of their role as magnets attracting immigration from the southern countries of Europea relation between race and population quality which was never constitutively 'urban' in its texture.

Governing cities: notes on the spntialisntion of virtue

747

The cudncmonic diagram By the end of the 19th Century a rather different diagram of the city was also beginning to take shape, which was characterised by planar geometric images of urban life at some remove from the diagrams of degeneration. This novel diagram invoked the idea of the city as a space of transparency and perfect administration. The city was to be reshaped by an enlightened urban administrative imagination, it was to be a space of happiness and lucidity, it was to become Hooded with a kind of perfect benign light, Many of these concerns seem Utopian. But this urban diagram was less Utopian than cudaemonicw. spatial projection of social happiness. The diagram of the city had begun to emphasise what urban existence might become. The eudaemonic city-image is relational, social, and spatial The city becomes a socio-administrativc domain, with its own proper laws, characteristics, and forms of life, these being understood as being amenable to a 'social' administration. That is to say, the city is to be 'planned* in the light of its specifically social character. This is not merely a governed sociality but an administered one; the city is no longer held to preexist the forms of social administration that give it shape. In this sense, the city has a kind of 'machinic* function in relation to happiness. The image of the city as a space of dangerous delights and unbridled passions no doubt still exists at this time, but it is opposed to another image of the city. This is not as a straight-laced and puritan space, but as a contented space of immanent organic natural sociability. Yet it is also a governmental space, in the sense that the construction of this organic social city and the normal citizen who will inhabit it functions as the regulative ideal of a range of programmes and initiatives within which the normal citizen is the social citizen of what the Tudor Walters Report (1918) on public housing called 'healthy social communities'. A web of socialising technologies begins to be cast across this social space. A network of expertise seeks to educate and nurture the urban dweller as a citizen of a democracy in an intrinsically spatial field. Zoning seeks the separation of quarters, functions, and activities in the name of health and welfare of urban dwellers. Further, this way of thinking entails attempts to invent spatial technologies of the city as a living organism, technologies of its social and mental hygiene. We are now potentially in Hygeia itself. Hence the extraordinary attraction of biological metaphors to describe this kind of urban function in vitalist terms. The spatialisation of the eudaemonic city diagram is structured on the basis of a kind of benign panopticism. Panoptic because the ideal is one of complete transparency and visibility; but benign because what is at stake here is not so much the paranoiac structure of the 19th Century reformatory, with its opaque central control tower, but rather a kind of immanent panopticism, one in which gazes and visibilities are diffused, local, reciprocal, and towards which the end is not contrition and reform but happiness, mutuality, solidarity. The city can be an apparatus for constructing social tranquillity and human happiness out of space itself. Three versions of the eudaemonic city, in spite of their profound and obvious differences, were paradigmatic by the early part of the 20th Century: the colonial city, the garden city, and the zoned city. The colonial city For the colonial city, take the paradigmatic case of Edwin Lutyens's "Anglo-Indian Rome' at New Delhi from 1913. This was to be a city of great radiating routes, laid down on the model of a formal geometry, with housing allocated according to hexagonal grids divided up by race, rank, and socioeconomic status. "From the Viceroy, via the Commander-in-Chief, Members of the Executive Council, senior gazetted officers, gazetted officers, down to superintendents, peons, sweepers and dhobis, a carefully stratified spatial order was integrated both in terms of physical distance and

748

T Osborne, N Rose

spatial division, to the social structure of the city" (King quoted in Hall, 1988, page 188). In short, a city which rendered a social structure on the ground according to entirely abstract principles; a city which is a machine for producing the social field rather than just a spatial milieu for already immanent social processes (Bose, 1974). The garden city The garden city, too, was designed to be a kind of social machine rendered into spatial principles. Although Ebenezer Howard's garden-city vision (in Garden Cities of Tomorrow, 1902) was only realised in a tiny number of instances (classically Letchworth in 1903 and Welwyn Garden City in 1920), as a diagram of urban governmentality it had a lasting effectnot least on the suburbanisation of interwar planning. Howard was a social (and economic) visionary rather than an urban planner; his idea was for a form of urban existence that was to be effectively a third way between capitalism and socialism. His polycentric vision of what he called the 'social city' entailed the establishment of a central city of around 30 000 people (connected up to other satellite social cities by various radial connections), surrounded by a green belt of farms, reformatories, mental hospitals, homes for epileptics and inebriates, and so forth. This city was to be run on associationalist lines, with citizens responsible for establishing their own services, pension funds, etc, without large-scale state intervention. Howard's vision, if outlandish, was not merely a Utopian one in the sense of those entirely imaginary cities that inhabit the pages of science fiction and the brain of Richard Rogers; rather, his work was directed towards producing a kind of blueprint for a spatial machine that would render and regulate human sociality towards particulargovernmentalends. The garden city is itselfthrough its spatial organisationintended to ameliorate social relations; Howard's 'peaceful path to social revolution' entailed the contention that an appropriate style of urban environment could in itself achieve what others hoped from political and economic revolution (see Fishman, 1973). The zoned city Last, consider the zoned city, as illustrated by Daniel Burnham's Chicago Plan of 1909; much of it actually built by 1925. Burnham's aim, after an earthquake and a fire had razed much of the city, was, as he put it, "to restore to the city a lost visual and aesthetic harmony, thereby creating the physical prerequisite for the emergence of a harmonious social order". Burnham's topographic model was Haussman's Paris, but his objective was the spatial invention of happiness; "We float by lawns, where villas, swan-like, rest upon their terraces, and where white balustrades and wood-nymphs are just visible in the gloaming. The evening comes, with myriad coloured lights twinkling through air perfumed with water-lilies, and Nature enfolds us, like happy children" (see Moore, 1921, page 111). And as the Chicago Plan Commission summarised the intentions behind the plan, "Orderliness is one of the best investments a city can make, but the appeal of the Chicago Plan is by no means entirely a commercial appeal. It is a human appeal, a moral appeal, an appeal to make Chicago better, not for the money that is in it, but for the sake of the higher mental, moral and physical people that a perfectly arranged city will produce" (Moore, 1921, page 115). Although Burnham's original plans for Chicago had made little reference to zoning, his radiating grid system enabled a zoning policy to be adopted almost as a natural consequence of the spatial design of the city. In this context, the sociologists of the Chicago School were able to use the spatial infrastructure of the city as a kind of backdrop or precondition for an understanding of the moral morphology of the city as a whole; positing that the spatial zoning of the city had a corollary in a kind of moral zoning of neighbourhoods. "The city plan, for example ... fixes in a general way the location and character of the city's constructions and imposes an orderly arrangement,

Governing cities: notes on the nputitilisation of virtue

749

within the city area, upon the buildings which are erected by private initiative as well as by public authority. Within the limitations prescribed, however, the inevitable processes of human nature proceed to give these regions and these buildings a character which it is less easy to control" (Park, 1967, page 5). The unit of this spontaneity was the neighbourhood and the task of the sociologist was to monitor the threats to an integrated neighbourhood sentiment: "it is important to know what arc the forces which tend to break up the tensions, interests and sentiments which give neighbourhoods their individual character. In general these may be said to be anything that tends to render the population unstable, to divide and concentrate attentions upon widely separated objects of interest" (1967, page 8; see also Burgess, 1967). Unlike the zoned infrastructure, these moral neighbourhoods are in an unstable equilibriumthe task of the sociologist comes to be to restore their homogeneity, to allow the realignment of spatial and moral zones, to return the city to its promise of happiness. Diagramming the contemporary city No doubt the work of the Chicago School will scarcely prove to have been the last model of urban reasoning to have problematised the city in a sociological kind of a way. Nevertheless, contemporary ways of imagining urban spatialisation, though certainly concerned with issues of sociality and community, hardly seem typically to take such a sociological form; and today, in any case, it is not really the sociologistsor even their relatives, the geographers and town plannerswho can lay any exclusive claim to be our contemporary diagrammcrs of urban virtue. What, then, are the more current models of diagramming the city? The prevalancc of cybernetic metaphors in contemporary thought may provide a clue to contemporary diagrams of government/3 ) Information, communication, networks, linkages, nodes, relays, the risks to particular dynamics of turbulence from without, and flaws and glitches from within, which require a perpetual vigilance to error, a strategy of 'work around* and 'botches', of configuring and reconfiguring, flexibility, multiplicity, speed, virtuality, simulation. Whereas social-control theory views control as being the result of an exterior determination over a given domain where specific unwanted phenomena are to be prevented, mastered, or dominated, in the cybernetic sense in which Gilles Deleuze uses the notion, control is a kind of immanent problematic of metastability. Control is the never-finished work of regulation which operates to bring deviations from system requirements back into line. In place of discontinuous 'enclosed' institutions such as the school, the factory, or the prison, in societies of control each plane or apparatus of life itself imposes a continuous modulation of risk, feedback, and equilibrium; any enclosed zone of Anteriority' seems to exist only as a moment constantly affected by a permanent and infinite yet ceaselessly mutating and recombining exterior. In one sense, the city itself is a casualty of this discourse of control in that control operates in relation to a plane of immanence that is coterminous with the connections amongst all information systems and elements connected into networks regardless of their spatial specificity. Yet, again, and precisely for this reason, the city has been a privileged site for the problematisation of control in that, within these broiling, rolling, mutating, branching, and reconnecting flows of speed and information, it marks out a concrete field of localisation and concentration where the exercise of government appears potentially possible.
(3) Norbert Weiner observes of the term cybernetics the following, "Until recently, there was no existing word for this complex of ideas, and in order to embrace the whole field by a single term, I felt constrained to invent one. Hence 'Cybernetics', which I derived from the Greek word Kubernetes or 'steersman', the same Greek word from which we eventually derive our word 'governor'" (Weiner, 1989, page 15).

750

T Osborne, N Rose

For our own purposes, the cybernetic metaphor is symptomatic of a certain way of imagining cities, government, and spaces in the present. We do not live in cybernetic societies, but in societies that are increasingly understood and governed by means of a kind of cybernetic style of thought. In such a cybernetics of the city, intellectual technologies and forms of expertise are not added into the urban 'after the fact', a city as it were existing and then requiring modulation, amelioration, and optimisation. Rather they are designed into the space, time, and serialisation of existence itself, into the very fabric of life in the citythe flows are inescapably lines composed in part of elements of knowledge and competence. During the 19th Century urban authorities statistical societies, doctors, public health officials, architects, engineers, and the like shaped a certain way of problematising the city and invented diverse technical forms that were to intervene into the life of the city. But now new techniques are to allow life in the city to be governed in a new way: telematics and informatics; computerised models of flows of power, water, traffic; new designs of buildings and streets that embody securitisation within them; networks of financial obligation which are essentially flows of information through the setting of budgets and the monitoring of accounts; the proliferation of audit as a link between activity and standards via a set of mobile norms operating in the medium of information flows; the multiple linkages both vertical and horizontal brought into being by the contractualisation of every relation between humans, whether one of authority (doctors and patients) or of affections (domestic partners, parents and children), or the multiplication of sites of dispute resolution via legal and paralegal mechanisms. This is a matter of subjectivity as well as of authority. Cybernetics itself presupposes a particular kind of culture of the self. Weiner states that: "To live effectively is to live with adequate information. Thus, communication and control belong to the essence of man's inner life, even as they belong to his life in society" (1950, page 18). The individual becomes a kind of field of control. But in a sense this is an open field without specific contents. In these new modes of control, it is desirable to refrain as far as possible from imposing moral codes upon individuals 'from above'. One should, instead, establish the general imperative of an ethical relation to self which must be activated and enacted at every moment when a subject is to exert his or her capacities as suchto shop, to travel, to enter or leave a building, etc. In other words, the fabrication of the self is not a onceand-for-all matter, accomplished in family or school, nor does it rely on exterior transcendental sources: it is continuously maintained in the very act of participation in the networks of existence. If the city is a useful milieu for these processes of selffabrication, this is insofar as it is within the city that the networks of association form that will shape and stabilise this relation of the self to itself and to others. 'Advanced' liberal cities In Britain and the United States in the 1980s it became fashionable to interpret the new strategies that were emerging for governing cities in terms of 'neoliberalism'. But subsequent events have shown that these shifts in the rationalities and technologies of government cannot be understood in terms of the temporary dominance of a particular political ideology. What we are seeing here is a much more general transformation in ways of thinking about government and seeking to enact an 'advanced' form of liberalism. These new urban governmentalities are liberal not simply in that they stress the importance of political rule respecting the boundaries of certain zones that are outwith its reach: markets, communities, private life. Rather, they are liberal in that they reawaken and revitalise the scepticism of classical liberalism of the 19th Century over the capacity of political action, informed by political reason and political calculation, to act so as to bring about the good of individuals, populations, and the nation at large.

Governing citicn; notes on the spatialisation of virtue

751

This is not a recipe for political inaction. Like their classical and social liberal predecessors, the advanced forms of liberalism that took shape in the last decades of the 20th Century, in Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdomand which were exported elsewhere by such organisations as the World Bank and the IMFdid not preach policies of political withdrawal and abstentionism. It is true that they attacked *big government': bloated bureaucracies and civil services; complacent and patronising professionals; the fostering of tutelage and dependency; the belief that the state could maximise economic, social, and individual well-being through policies of *tax and spend'. But they did not demand a return to the minimalist 'night-watchman' state imagined by the neolibcral gurus of the 1970s and 1980s. Rather, they sought a new role for the political apparatus as merely one partner in government, facilitating, enabling, stimulating, shaping, and inciting the self-governing activities of a multitude of dispersed entitiesassociations, firms, communities, individualswho would take onto themselves many of the powers and responsibilities previously annexed by *the state'. The characteristics of contemporary strategics for 'reinventing government' are familiar: downsizing the state, decentralising decisionmaking, devolving power to intermediate bodies such as trusts or associations, privatising many functions previously part of the state machinery and opening them up to commercial pressures and business styles of management, introducing managerialism and competitive pressures into the residual state apparatus, displacing the substantive knowledge of the welfare professionals by knowledges of examination, scrutiny, and review undertaken by accountants and consultants. In relation to urban politics, these have entailed something of an assault on the old democratic enclaves of local government, now represented as hidebound by bureaucracy and riddled with nepotism. The tendency is to bypass the traditional democratic mechanisms of the periodic vote for an elected representative with all manner of newer democratic techniquesconsultations, surveys, opinion polls, citizen juries, focus groups, teledemocracy, and the like. Functions of 'democratic' local governmentfrom street cleaning to urban regenerationhave been devolved to a multiplicity of private firms or public - private partnerships. This simultaneously pluralises the agencies and entities involved in governing, involves regulation through the techniques of the 'new public management', and transforms political control, which now operates 'at a distance' through setting budgets, targets, standards, and objectives, all overseen by the ubiquitous techniques of monitoring and audit. These strategies thus involve 'autonomisation' plus 'responsibilisation'. They multiply the agencies of government whilst enwrapping them within new forms of control. The autonomy of political actors is to be shaped and used to govern more economically and more effectively. This is thought to require a reduction in the scope of direct management of human affairs by state-organised programmes and technologies of relation, and an increase in the extent to which the government of diverse domains is enacted by the decisions and choices of relatively autonomous entitieswhether these are firms, organisations such as hospitals, professionals such as doctors, community bodies and associations, or individuals themselvesin the light of their own assessment of their interests, needs, and desires, and the ways in which they may be advanced in a particular environment of rewards and sanctions. Contemporary games of urban citizenship These 'advanced' liberal strategies conceive of citizens, individually and collectively, as ideally and potentially 'active' in their own government. The logics of the market, in which economic agents are viewed as calculating actors striving to realise and actualise themselves through their choices in a lifeworld, according to the information that they

752

T Osborne, N Rose

have at their disposal, are generalised to areas previously thought immuneto all the decisions individuals and groups take about their lives, in relation to the education of their children, the disposal of their income for housing or for pleasure, the investment of their energies in law-abiding enterprise or in crime, and indeed their choices about who should govern them and how. These new forms of government through freedom multiply the points at which the citizen has to play his or her part in the games that govern them. But, inescapably, they also multiply the junctures where these games are opened up to uncertainty and risk, and to contestation and redirection. The multiple projects of contemporary urban government work with presuppositions about urban citizenship in terms of activity and obligation, entrepreneurship and allegiance, in which rights in the city are as much about duties as they are about entitlements. Each tries to govern through a certain kind of citizenship game. Each, by virtue of its dependence on an active practice of citizenship, opens the possibilities for a certain agonism. This political agonism is not a traditional politics of the party, the programme, the strategy for the organised transformation of society, or the claim to be able to implement a programme of better government. Rather, these minor practices of citizen formation are linked to a politics of the minor, of cramped spaces, of action on the here and now, of attempts to reshape what is possible in specific spaces of immediate action, which may connect up and destabilise larger circuits of power. Strategies of governing through citizenship are inescapably open and modifiable because what they demand of citizens may be refused, or reversed and redirected as a demand from citizens for a modification of the games that govern them, and through which they are supposed to govern themselves. Four brief examplesof health, of risk, of enterprise, of pleasuremay clarify this argument. Healthy cities The city has long been imagined in terms of sickness and health. But in recent decades, a new image of the healthy city has emerged: the city as a network of living practices of well-being. This is not a matter of imposing some rational, sterile, planned diagram of sanitary existence. Rather, the aim is to configure the forces immanent to urban life, to shape the ecology of the city in order to maximise the processes that would enhance the well-being of its inhabitants individually and in their 'communities', and to minimise those that would threaten them. All aspects of urban life are now understood as factors that can be mobilised in the name of a norm of well-being: health now appears, simultaneously, as a maximisation of the values of community, public safety, economic development, and family life. Roads, traffic and pollution, zoning, the design of buildings and open spaces, the organisation of shopping locales, and other elements of 'urban design' are to be suffused with this 'ecological' concern for health. Further, the activities of health professionals, in addition to media, local politicians, trades unions, educationalists, representatives of nongovernmental organisations, local community 'grassroots' organisations, and others are brought into an alliance that would perceive and act upon all aspects of urban existencejobs, housing, environment, public safety, diet, transportnot just to ward off sickness but to promote well-being. In the name of well-being, urban communities are to be empowered such that they collectively and individually are made responsible for their own healthiness. In other words, health is not simply a value in its own right, but rather a resource within a whole spiral of positive values that can be made to breed and spread in the urban ecology. In this vision of urban health, the very idea of disease in the city has been transformed. It is no longer imagined in epidemic formthe invasion of the urban milieu by cholera or typhus putting its inhabitants at risk of infection. Rather, disease, and ill health more generally, is imagined in terms of activities (diet and coronary heart

Governing cities: notes on the spatialisalion of virtue

753

disease, smoking and lung cancer, obesity and all manner of threats to health) and relationships (unsafe sex and HIV, rave parties and drugs). We no longer have the sick on the one side of a division, the healthy on the other we are all, actually or potentially, sick, and health is not a state to be striven for only when one falls ill, it is something to be maintained by what we do at every moment of our everyday lives. Threats to well-being are immanent to the life of the active individual: they result from a breakdown of controls on conduct, from the failure to develop a healthy lifestyle, to eat properly, to manage stress. But threats to well-being also inhere in the relations of individuals to their environment, which can exacerbate or minimise the risks, not merely because of the levels of pathogensphysical and psychological- circulating within it, but also because of the styles of living which arc promoted within particular communities. The healthy citizen exercises active self-responsibility in a health-conscious community. This is not only because one can only be responsible on the condition that one possesses the good health to exercise one's responsibility, but also because the health field has itself become an arena of responsibiiisation.Thc domain of health has become a novel and paradigmatic kind of civic space, where the exercise of a popular ascetics of self-control will be implanted and augmented through a community politics of healthy living, by stress clinics and exercise centres, by healthy diets in factory canteens, and local health-promotion campaigns. The imperative of health thus becomes a significr of a widercivic, governmentalobligation of citizenship in a responsible community. The healthy city is not a city of minimal disease and social contentment, it is an active organic striving for its own maximisation against all that which would threaten it including the threats that it secretes as part of its very existence. But as the individual aspirations of citizens to their own health arc enhanced, their complaints, disaffections, and demands achieve a new significance and new points of application and leverage within the practices that seek to govern their conduct in the name of health. Risky cities Since the 19th Century, the criminal diameter of urban space has been charted by the police forces of each nation through the collection, classification, and presentation of the statistics of crime. Perhaps this always gave rise to an image of the city in terms of zones of danger and safety, and a way of living in the city informed by a perception of the relative riskiness of particular zones. Riskiness, of course, was not merely a negative value: risk-taking in the city is a matter not only of an awareness of hazards of assault and robbery, but also of an active pursuit of the prospects of excitement, sexual gratification, debauchery, license, gambling, and the like. But our current image of the criminogenic city governmentalises risk as a spatialisation of thought and intervention. Using techniques pioneered by the commercial demands of insurance and based on informatics and postcode mapping, this spatialisation is now at the molecular level of urban existence. The contemporary city is thus visualised as a distribution of risks: one of those maps with coloured overlays where each layer marks out a particular breed of riskinessof street crime, of sexual assault, of burglary, of car theft, of beggars and marginal persons, of single-parent families and ethnic minorities. Unlike the moral topographies of urban space developed in the mid-19th-Century, the contemporary urban topography of risk indicates less a concrete statistic attached to a locale, more a factor calculated through the amalgamation of a concatenation of 'indicators' to each of which may be attached a certain probability of a less than optimal outcome of an activityshopping, parking a car, buying a house, walking to the shops. Risk is thus as much a feature of spatialisation itself as it is of the particular 'characteristics' of people that inhabit certain zones. It is to be governed through the continual

754

T Osborne, N Rose

monitoring and assessment of risk in relation to urban space and place, and the active adoption of strategies of risk reduction by authorities, communities, and individuals. One vision for urban risk-reduction is animated by the dream of a new separation of the virtuous and the vicious, a new and clear spatialisation of danger into safe zones and risk zones. Fictional representations of urban life capture this well: the so-called 'Blade Runner' scenario in which a division is attemptedand always threatenedbetween the safe spaces of civilityin certain secured zones, policed buildings, civilised communities with their broad boulevards, watered gardens, elegant interiors, and the like and the space lying outside the limits of these secure spaces, full of threat, chaos, and danger but also excitement, seduction, glamour, glitter, drugs, sex, and 'real life': the 'glop', the 'sprawl'. This fictional representation is imitated in real life in a defensive spatialisation that has come to shape city space: shopping malls and shopping centres with their own internal security systems guarded at their perimeters and monitored by closed-circuit TV; 'contractual' communities with walls around them and entrances controlled by security guards, as in the so-called gated communities that have arisen from Istanbul to Islington. Mike Davis is right in one respect to regard these developments as entailing the death of the city: for what would be marked by such developments would be the death of a particular kind of liberal dream of the city as an open, civilised, and civilising habitat for the existence of free citizens (see Davis, 1988, page 87). Hence, it is not surprising that this image of government of risk through spatial separation is increasingly coming under challenge by another, in which security is not thought of in absolute terms. In this image, there can be no inherently safe locales or activities and, in addition, there must be no 'no-go' zones where law-abiding citizens will not venture and where the innocent are effectively held hostage by criminal anticitizens. Risk reduction is to form part of the moral responsibility of urban citizens themselves. This brings into alignment a whole array of discrepant issues within a single programmable domainfrom domestic violence to street crime, from burglary to car theft, from routes for travel to arrangements for children's play areas. Safer Cities initiatives, Neighbourhood Watch, and other Community Safety Programmes work by enrolling citizens in the practices of crime reduction: planning our travelling arrangements, securing our homes and property, instrumentalising our daily activities in the name of our own security, guided by police, community safety officers, and a host of other novel experts of risk. But they also seek to reawaken in citizens their own moral responsibilities to the policing of conduct, in particular, through the popularity of such notions as 'zero tolerance' and the 'broken windows thesis'the argument that toleration of minor breaches of civility sows the seeds of a more dangerous and insidious criminal culture. This new image of citizenship must be understood in relation to that which opposes it, a kind of anticitizen that is the constant enticement, and threat, to the project of citizenship itself. The emergence of the notions of exclusion to characterise those who previously constituted the social problem group defines these noncitizens or anticitizens not in terms of substantive characteristics but in relational terms; that is, it is a question of their distance from the circuits of inclusion into virtuous citizenship. The 'excluded' might make it into citizenship, if they can only be connected up to the right networks of community and the requisite channels of enterprise. Exclusion is imagined in a spatial form, in the form of excluded and marginal spaces within the urban fabric itself, enclosures where the lines of virtuous inclusion have somehow come disconnected and fail to flow. Not so much a ghetto, more a precise localisation of the marginal given the name of an estate, a housing project, an urban enclave: Spitalfields, Broadwater Farm. In these enclaves, the links of citizenship and community have turned against themselves, and all those things which would connect individuals

Governing cities: notes on the spatialisation of virtue

755

into the networks of inclusion have instead produced negative feedback family life, welfare solidarity, and state education are all seen as machines for disconnection rather than for connection. Hence the need to reawaken in these zones the dormant moral energies of those who exist within them: in neighbourhood-based schemes for the reclamation of the streets from drug dealers and prostitutes; in estate-based schemes for regeneration which target the antisocial, name and shame them, refuse to be terrorised by their immoral and criminal conduct, and so forth. Once more, government of risk is to proliferate at a molecular level through the enrolment of the capacities and commitments immanent to citizens themselves.
Cities of enterprise

In contrast to the classical liberal diagram, the economic salience of the 'advanced' liberal city has ceased to be thought of simply in terms of a space or a milieu: it is a node within pathways of mobility, a matrix of (lows, a point o( connection and rebranching of lines of activity which connect persons, processes, and things. No doubt mercantilism, capitalism, colonialism, and imperialism were always matters of Hows over distance and concentrations in space: cities as economic concentrations of raw materials, labour power, wealth, a local market; trade routes, exports, imports, competition, and so forth as economic networks into which each was integrated to a greater or lesser degree. But the contemporary images of globalisation and localisation spatialise economic activity in new ways. A growing literature argues that the route to economic success lies in the establishment of entrepreneurial localities, with fluid and flexible internal economic arrangements dependent upon physical proximity, which compete with one another on a world market. The idea of a 'local economy' informs economic policy at the regional level and, increasingly, within urban government itself As the boundaries and unity of national economies are thought to be breached by flows of goods, money, information, expertise, profit, labour, and, around global networks, 'local economies1 are understood as almost the only geographical zones where capital, labour, raw materials, and expertise can be captured and acted upon. Perhaps more significantly, their novelty lies in the relations established between previously nomadic forces, in the attempt to connect up the restless energy of the entrepreneur with more than simply the pursuit of maximum profit. The relation of capital to the urban should be more than that of a raiding party with its prey: it should take a stake in the shaping and destiny of the urban itself, in the reshaping of its decayed Docklands and abandoned factories into shopping malls and waterfronts, in the rebuilding of its concrete and windswept wastelands into shopping malls and markets, in the reconstruction of its estates so that they shift from spaces for the residential storage of labourers en masse and in maximum density into communities of homes that activate the dreams of possession and self-improvement necessary to bind the energies of young men and women into the regimes of civility. There are, of course, different versions of this new economic localism. It can have a left-wing, corporatist formulation as in some arguments on the governmental requirements and interagency relations necessary to promote the interaction, trust, cooperation, and mutual obligation necessary for flexible specialisation. Or it can have an entrepreneurial form, where the city is an entity to be made entrepreneurial in and through acting upon the enterprising capacities of different 'partners' or 'stakeholders', stimulating their competitiveness, their rivalry, their capacity to meet the challenge of economic modernisation in a harsh ecology full of pacific tigers and other voracious beasts in an economic struggle for the survival of the fittest in which cities, rather than nations, are the key actors. It is in these terms that it has now been possible to render the city as an economic subject, not a favourable geographical location on

756

T Osborne, N Rose

coast, river, or trade routes, nor as a milieu within which some prosper and some strive and all benefit from their enterprise, but as itself an economic actor in the world economy of cities, such that one can talk about the remarkable revival of Glasgow, the decline of Sunderland, the reawakening of Baltimore: in each case what is declining or reviving is a kind of ethico-economic character of enterprise imbuing a city as a whole by virtue of the motivation, the sense of pride and competitiveness, the installation of a relentless rivalry between cities and regions mobilised by means of the enterprise of each and of all (see King, 1990; Knox and Taylor, 1995; Sassen, 1991). The urban economy, here, has a kind of quasi-organic life of its own; it can be in health, decline, or recovery, it can be regenerated by calculated means of intervention, it is in competition with other 'local economies', it must therefore have its own peculiarities and advantages that will provide it with a niche within this competitive ecology of local economiesits labour force, its transportation systems, its rates of local tax and subsidy, its skill levels, and so onin order to attract inward investment and the like. Increasingly, and perhaps surprisingly, economic regeneration at this local level is itself understood in terms of new games of citizenship. On the one hand, this is a matter of entrepreneurship, of acting upon the dependency culture fostered in the heart of industrial urban decline, the lack of entrepreneurship which is the legacy of an age of mass factory employment now past. But on the other hand, it is a matter of recreating communities of obligation and allegiance within these zones. The recent upsurge of interest in trust relations as a condition of economic health, the communitarian emphasis upon civic commitment as a key factor in economic development, the arguments of social capital theorists that very local features of moral relations (networks, norms, trust, and so forth) facilitate coordination and cooperation, minimise transaction costs, serve as vital sources of economic information, and so onall these make economic regeneration a matter of local economic citizenship. The immanent productive capacities of the city are to be released by action upon the subjects and agents who make up its economy A whole range of initiatives for economic regeneration have taken shape, which operate through action on the culture of enterprise within cities, and seek simultaneously to maximise the enterprise of these constituents of the labour force now thought of in terms of their location and residence and to maximise the relations of obligation which they feel to others, not in a society or a nation, but in a localised and particular network of commitment, allegiance, and reciprocal responsibility. Cities of pleasure From at least the 19th Century, the city has been represented, in literature and in documentary descriptions, as promoting a certain type of mentality and sociality as a consequence of the kinds of pleasures and stimulations that it offers. These analyses have usually had a negative tone, one modulated according to whether the target was the urban enervation of the civilised or the urban degradation of the sensibilities of the uncivilised. For the latter, the pleasures of the citynotably those of alcohol, vice, gambling, prostitution, and the likeare repetitively implicated in the production of certain degenerate characters: Baudelaire's rag-pickers, Mayhew's costermongers, Booth's forgotten classes, Engels's proletariatin short, misbegotten peoples who have little in common beyond their poverty, exclusion, and the territory they inhabit, and little to lose but their misery. The city becomes a site for investigation of the urban factors that generate these strange, underclasses or nonclasses; like 'darkest Africa', the sights and sensations of the dark continent of the urban poor are to be narrated by intrepid explorers (see Stallybrass and White, 1986). The urban reportage of the 19th Century sought to capture these forms of debased subjectivity secreted by the urban.

Governing cities: notes on the spatialisation of virtue

757

This exploration also represented, for its proponents* a kind of work upon the self, a search for sensation which was made possible by urban existence itself: this is why the urban explorers are so often to be seen taking a walk. Hence the other side of urban sociality which is so often written about: the city as the place where the pleasures may be generated, for good or for ill, by the ever-present possibility of the chance encounter with the unknown. In one version of this argument, the civility produced by the city is itself a kind of alienated sociality. Urban existence sunders social bonds and replaces them by a mass of impersonal relations; the city is the place where there are masses in close, almost paranoiac, contiguity yet where interpersonal relations are cold and artificial. And, at the same time, the city subjects the human psyche to shocks, sensations, impressions, and experiences that arc overwhelming; simultaneously exciting and enervating the character of the urban dweller, producing a particular urban mentality The city may be a generator of delightsno doubt always specific to gender and to rank and wealthbut these delights are dangerous not only in the sense that the pleasure they generate is amplified by the frisson of danger, but also because of the damage they inescapably threaten to those who enjoy themfor there is no pleasure that docs not carry a cost (Walkowitz, 1992). In another versionmade popular from Walter Benjamin to the contemporary postmodern romances of the urban flaneur and flaneuse, of department stores, shopping malls, and the 'public sphere'the dangers of the city are the inevitable other side of its very civility For the city appears the unique generator of civilised pleasures that make up and sustain the very civilised subjects capable of enjoying them. The civilised, quintessential^ civic pleasure of the bohemian promenade, of public life and the encounter of one with another in the civilised spaces of the city centre street with its window displays, its pubs and clubs, its museums and galleries. Yet, at the same time, these civilised pleasures are heightened by their proximity to the transgrcssive pleasure, in which the city is uniquely capable of generating a range of excitements that escape the governmental dream of a purified, hygienic, moral space inhabited by a wellregulated population. Here one finds the images of the opaque, excessive, ungoverned city: a fecund, heterogeneous, spontaneous, dangerous, promiscuous warren of *other spaces' where pleasure is spiced with danger, where desire can run free in alleyways, tenements, clubs, bars, theatres, music halls, and gambling dens (see Donald, 1995). But these conflicting practices of pleasure have not evaded the networks of capture that filiate the advanced liberal city: transgression is itself to be brought back into line and offered up as a package of commodified contentment. The city of pleasure celebrated in poetry, novels, films, and systematised in social theory has itself been fed into the programmatic imagination, in an alliance between city politics and commercial imperatives. A multitude of projects, in almost all major cities, seek to reshape the real city according to this image of pleasure, not least in order to enter into the competitive market for urban tourism. In these programmes and projects, the image of urban space as providing a multitude of spontaneous encounters, of sudden glimpses of architectural oddities and esoteric markets, of bustling yet safe public spaces, this urban experience seen by its celebrants as arising out of the intersection and accumulation of thousands of spontaneous histories and schemes, has been transformed into calculated, rationalised, and repetitive programmes for reshaping waterfronts, dockland areas, sites of old buildings, palaces, warehouses, piers, vegetable markets, and the like into tourist attractions. Urban theme parks, each more hyperreal than real. Disused wharves become craft markets. Victorian structures that accommodated carcasses of sheep and cows on their way to butchers, sacks of potatoes and cauliflower on their way to cornershops are now filled with trendy boutiques and cafes. Sectors of space once occupied, for specifiable economic and other reasons, by people of Chinese extraction

758

T Osborne, N Rose

become 'Chinatown', proclaimed by street signs with elaborate and publicly funded festivals to mark the start of the Chinese Year of a particular animal. Each 'conservation area', each 'heritage trail' is populated not by the spontaneous movements of the urban inhabitants, but by those transported by tour coaches, clutching guidebooks, video cameras, and postcards. The city becomes not so much a complex of dangerous and compelling spaces of promises and gratifications, but a series of packaged zones of enjoyment, managed by an alliance of urban planners, entrepreneurs, local politicians, and quasi-governmental 'regeneration' agencies. But here, once more, urban inhabitants, required to play their part in these games of heritage, not only exploit them commercially through all sorts of tourist dependent enterprises, but also promote their own microcultures of bohemian, gay, or alternative lifestyles, and make their own demands for the rerouting of traffic, the refurbishment of buildings, the mitigation of taxes, and much more in the name of the unique qualities of pleasure offered by their particular habitat. Conclusion Actually existing cities are complex multiplicities of interests, antagonisms, flows of capital, spatial constructions, moral topographies, forms of authority, and ethical stylisations. But however one might want to analyse these multiplicities, we have suggested that, immanent within all attempts to govern existence in urban form, one can diagnose the diagrams that give consistencythough by no means homogeneity to their elements. A diagrammatics of urbanism attends to this planebe this the domain of security in liberalism, the sociospatial topographies of the eudaemonic city, or the virtual plane of control in advanced liberalism (many others could be added). To speak of diagrams is to try to individuate the regularities that are giving form to the multitude of local, fluid, fleeting endeavours, strategems, and tactics that characterise the forces seeking to govern this or that aspect of urban existence. But it is also to point to the constant mobility of such diagrams, which are nothing more than the regularities immanent in their instantiationsthey are internally agonistic, continually fragmenting, splitting off new configurations of forces, generating new potential diagrams, some of which will stabilise, while others decompose. The innovative character of liberal diagrams of urban government has lain in their reluctance to fix the city, their recognition that urban stasis is the enemy of good government, that to govern the city is not to immobilise its energies but to harness them in the interests of each and of all. What is decisive about each diagram of the city are the particular lines of force each diagram imagines between the virtuous and vicious forcesrelations of time and space, forms of life, individual and collective subjectivitiesimmanent to the city. For we have suggested that, from at least the 19th Century to today, these diagrams, over and above their differences, have given form to the city as an autonomous, irreducible domain that is both governable and acts counter to government, that is both naturally, self-governing and requires constant intervention. Hence the life of the city, and life in the city have been the target of a series of strategies of governmentalisation that have sought to preserve this immanence as a resource of power; to convert the unsociable sociability of the city to the ends of government whilst preserving the apparently spontaneous undetermined character of the city itself. It is in this context that one can re-pose the problem of the persistent ungovernability of the city. The city's ungovernability is not exterior to the urban diagram as it exists at any one time. Indeed, it is part of the very character of the citythat it is a domain of unsociable sociability that it should be, in a sense, ungovernable; or rather that its governability should arise out of its spontaneous, ungoverned features. In fact, each diagram presupposes the forms of ungovernability that will preoccupy and disturb it; indeed, the work of

Governing cities: notes on the sputialisation of virtue

759

diagnosis is a kind of reconstruction of the problem spaces to which particular urban diagrams provide different answers. The liberal diagram presupposes the insanitary city; the eugenic diagram presttpposes the degenerating city; the eudaeinonic diagram presupposes the city of deviant, antisocial subcultures; and so on, The forces of ungovernability are not, then, to be romanticised as being somehow outside the urban diagram altogether. On the contrary, urban governmentality uses the insidious ungovernability of the city as a resource and an inspiration, The city, as a domain of immanence, thus remains an open-ended provocation to government.
Acknowledgements. Our thanks to Engin Isin for his kindness and help, and to two referees from this journal for their invaluable comments. References Bennett T, 1995 The Birth of the Museum: History, Theory, Polities (Routlcdgc, Loudon) Bose A, 1974 Studies in India's Urbanisation 1901-1971 (Tate McGraw-Hill, New Delhi) Brown R 1972 Politics and Society in the Age of St Augustine (Faber and Faher, London) Burgess E, 1967, "Can neighbourhood work have a scientific basis?" in The City Eds R Park, E Burgess (Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL) Davis M, 1988, "Urban renaissance and the spirit of postmodernism", in Postmodernism audits Discontents Ed. E A Kaplan (Verso, London) pp 79-87 Davison G, 1983, "The city as a natural system: theories of urban society in early nineteenth century Britain", in The Pursuit of Urban History Eds D Frascr, A Siitcliflfe (Arnold, London) Donzclot J, 1979 The Policing of Families (Macmillan, London) de Ccrtcaii M, 1984 The Practice of Everyday Life translated by S Rcndall (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA) Dclaporte F, 1987 Disease and Civilization translated by A Goldhammer (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Dclcuze G, 1988 Foucault (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN) Dclcuzc G, Guattari F, 1994 What is Philosophy?translated by H Tomlinson, G Burchcll (Columbia University Press, New York) Donald J, 1992, "Metropolis: the city as text", in Social and Cultural Forms of Modernity Eds R Bocock, K Thompson (Polity, Cambridge) Donald J, 1995, "The city, the cinema: modern spaces", in Visual Culture Ed. C Jcnks (Routlcdgc, London) pp 87-104 Donzclot J, 1979 The Policing of Families (Macmillan, London) Finley M, 1971 The Ancient Greeks (Penguin, Harmondsworth, Middx) Fishman R, 1973 Urban Utopians in the Hventieth Century (Basic Books, New York) Foucault M, 1984 The Foucault Reader Ed. P Rabinow (Penguin, Harmondsworth, Middx) Foucault M, 1991, "Govcrnmentality", in The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality Eds G Burchell, C Gordon, P Miller (Harvester-Wheatshcaf, Hcmel Hempstead, Herts) pp87-l04 Freeden M, 1978 The New Liberalism: An Ideology of Social Reform (Oxford University Press, Oxford) Gilbert E, W, 1958, "Pioneer maps of health and disease in England" Geographical Journal 124(4)172-183 Godwin G, 1972 Town Swamps and Social Bridges reprint (Leicester University Press, London) Gordon C, 1991, "Governmentality; an introduction", in The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality Eds C Gordon G Burchell, P Miller (Harvester-Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead, Herts) 1-51 Hacking 1,1990 The Taming of Chance (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) Hall P, 1988 Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design (Blackwell, Oxford) Higgs E, 1991, "Disease, febrile prisons, and statistics: the census as a medical survey, 1841 -1911" Social History of Medicine 4(3) 465-478 Jones G, 1983 Social Hygiene in Twentieth Century Britain (Macmillan, London) Kant 1,1991, "The idea of universal history with a cosmopolitan purpose", in Political Writings Ed. H Reiss (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) Kendall G, Wickham G, 1992, "Health and the social body", in Private Risks and Public Dangers Eds S Scott, G Williams, S Piatt, H Thomas (Archway, Aldershot, Hants)

760

T Osborne, N Rose

King A, 1990 Global Cities (Routledge, London) Knox P, Taylor P, 1995 World Cities in a World System (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) Lees A, 1987 Cities Perceived: Urban Society in European and American Thought, 1820 -1940 (Manchester University Press, Manchester) MacDonagh 0,1958, "The Nineteenth Century revolution in governmenta re-appraisal" Historical Journal 1(1) 52 - 61 Markus T, 1993 Buildings and Power (Routledge, London) Mearns A, 1970 The Bitter Cry of Outcast London (Leicester University Press, Leicester) Moore C, 1921 Daniel Burnham: Architect, Planner of Cities (Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA) Osborne T, 1994, "Bureaucracy as a vocation: governmentality and administration in nineteenthcentury Britain" Journal of Historical Sociology 73 288 - 313 Osborne T, 1996, "Security and vitality: drains, liberalism and power in the Nineteenth Century", in Foucault and Political Reason: Liberalism, Neo-liberalism, Governmentality Eds A Barry, T Osborne, N Rose (UCL Press, London) pp 99-121 Park R, 1967, "The city: suggestions for the investigation of human behaviour in the urban environment", in The City (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL) Pelling H, 1978 The Origins of Modern English Society (Routledge, London) Pick D, 1989 Faces of Degeneration: A European Disorder 1848-1918 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) Porter R, 1994 LondonA Social History (Hamish Hamilton, London) Rabinow P, 1989 French Modern: Norms and Forms of the Social Environment (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Rose N, 1992, "Towards a critical sociology of freedom", inaugural lecture, Goldsmiths College, 5 May; copy available from the author Rose N, 1999a, "Governing cities, governing citizens", in Rights to the City: Citizenship, Democracy and Cities in a Global Age Ed. E Isin (Routledge, London) Rose N, 1999b Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) Sassen S, 1991 The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) Small A, 1969 The Cameralists: Pioneers of German Social Policy (Franklin, New York) Stallybrass P, White A, 1986 The Politics and Poetics of Transgression (Methuen, London) Stedman Jones G, 1973 Outcast London: A Study of the Relationship between Classes in Victorian Society (Arnold, London) Tudor Walters Report, 1918 Report of the Committee... to Consider Question of Building Construction in Connection with the Provision of Dwellings for the Working Classes Cmd 9191 (The Stationery Office, London) Walkowitz J, 1992 City of Dreadful Delight: Narratives of Sexual Danger of Late-Victorian London (Virago, London) Weiner N, 1989 The Human Use of Human Beings (Free Association, London) Wohl A, 1977 The Eternal Slum: Housing and Social Policy in Victorian Britain (Arnold, London)

1999 a Pion publication printed in Great Britain