A bricolage of space

Just kind of a random thought, but it seems like maybe to solve the problem of modeling some of the interpenetrating, complex, and non-cartesian spaces we've been studying, (language games, spaces of production, class structure) you could start to look at the logic behind manifolds from math/physics. I don't know all that much about them beyond that they're important in modern physics, and what it says on the Wikipedia page , so it would be very cool for someone with a more developed background in physics or math to chime in. It seems however that maybe some of these principles, developed for describing complicated structures and spaces, would be useful in making some sense of the fragmented spacial metaphors that describing postmodern society seems to dictate. Reading Habermas's thesis in Anderson about the failure of modern architecture as a project, particularly about the splintering of proletariat housing into "an ungraspable, featureless, maze" since it "could never be integrated into the metropolis", also made me wonder about whether trying to describe this urban/class geography in terms of interconnected manifolds would allow for a more productive analysis than to regard this situation as an example of insurmountable fragmentation. Returning to language games, perhaps describing local geometries and then finding connections, instead of trying to achieve a totalizing understanding of all language games as a unified field (and thus invoking all the problems of legitimating the meta game and its dominance), could be helpful. It strikes me as similar to Derrida's bricolage in that it hangs onto older methods and schemas while trying to innovate and avoid as much as possible their known problems. I am not sure, however, how you would go about doing this. My guess is that you would have to approach things from the perspective of simply trying to design rules for translation, and not uncovering principles that apply to each. Does anyone think you could go anywhere with this or is it just too separate a concept?

I like your question as to "whether trying to describe this urban/class geography in terms of interconnected manifolds would allow for a more productive analysis than to regard this situation as an example of insurmountable fragmentation." In fact, I'm inclined to render it even more general: is it more productive to conceptualize fragmentation as a "loss" or a "gain," i.e. as the condition of possibility of coherent, reflexive struggle on the local level, or, rather, as the condition of impossibility of legitimate global change? Questions concerning Utopia - whether its seeming untenability is liberating or defeatist, and moreover, whether its redemptive spark can be "revived" in the postmodern period - are generally at stake in discussions of agency and systemic complexity. I don't have the math/physics background to speak to your specific question re: "spatial bricolage," but I think the meta-level question, i.e. might the insurmountable fragmentation be understood as desirable in its own right?, presents some interesting analytical possibilities.