The Conquest of Mexico signed a new ordering of the geographical space for the Spanish Crown. The Spanish Empire saw a future without comparison at the time Cortes reported his discovery. But the conquest of Mexico was not a journey of a group of Spanish with luck, but in the interactions with the natives, Cortes found the strategy mark of this company, since he understood that without them they not advanced in unknown territory. That advance over an already inhabited territory involved an interaction that defied occupation.
George Simmel explains that the importance of sociability events (positive or negative) is not in the space in which they occur or because of their dimensions, nor are they specific for the remoteness or proximity of the actors, but for “The linkage and connection of the parts of space, produced by spiritual factors.” That is to say that the interactions are not controlled by the places where they occur, but by the same human factor that fills the gap “between” both actors.
One of the characteristics of the space is its relationship with sociological and cultural limits because that give guidelines on the inclusion or exclusion of others. As Michel De Certeau explains, space is a practiced place and every story is a travel story, a practice of space. Many chronicles of the Indies are a definitive example of this idea, like Cortez’s letters, since as the conquest advances over the foreign space, the same thing happens in the story and in the construction of a new space, now its own. That is, it is write while advancing. Movement and writing are simultaneous because the interaction with the new determines it. Thus, in the process of delimitation of space, it recognizes the excess, spillage or overflow of these limits from the notion of “bridge” or “border.” One of the spaces is legitimate and the other is foreign or foreign.
Homi Bhabha conceives the idea of a “third space” as a space of a threshold from the architectural work of the American artist Renée Green. A staircase, a bridge, a portico, a passage or a membrane are some examples of the symbolic interaction between fixed identifications. These interstices set up paths or passages between generally opposite binary systems. Third places or between-places include in themselves the elements that give rise to them. They behave like crosses where two or more different identities are recognized, which become more indefinite, but where new frictions are also generated. These spaces “in between” provide the ground for developing identity strategies and innovative collaboration and questioning sites, in the act of defining the idea of society.
Edward Soja, a political geographer dedicated to postmodernity and his spatial organization, conceives the term third space from the ideas of Henri Lefebvre in The Production of Space 1974 and the relationship between spatiality, historicity and sociability. He propose three dimensions of spatiality, but not separate spheres, but ways of conceiving it from different perspectives. The first space is that of physical-material experiences and relationships; the second, that of mental representations or productions on space. The third space is, then, the congruence of the first two dimensions. It has, then, both material and imaginary experience to produce new subjective understandings and integrates the two previous spaces and extends them in scope, substance and meaning. If the first is the field of perception and the second is the field of conception, the third space is the field of experience.