Postmodern historiographic collage forms a spatial historiography reflecting mental division of labor

Evidence

What one can affirm about this second type (in which the well-known formula is returned to its upright position and the toads again become “real” while the gardens grow imaginary) is that it is very precisely a kind of spatial historiography which has unique things to tell us both about postmodern spatiality and about what happened to the postmodern sense of history in the first place. … Spatiality is here registered, as it were, in second-degree form, as the consequence of some prior specialization — a kind of intensified classification or compartmentalization which I am tempted to describe as a division of labor of the mind and its modes of scanning and mapping the realm. Classical psychic fragmentation — for example, the separation of imagination and knowledge -was always a consequence of the division of labor in the social world; now, however, it is the very rational or knowledge functions of the mind which become somehow internally segmented and assigned to different floors and different office buildings. — Fredric Jameson, Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic…, 788

Categorization

• DEFINE: Names the second historiographic type as ‘spatial historiography’ and defines second-degree spatiality as internalized mental division of labor.
• XREF: This ‘division of labor of the mind’ echoes Jameson’s wider cognitive mapping thread and the reader’s goal of mapping their own position; connects to Smith/Ricardo specialization themes elsewhere.