Geographies of Mobilities: Practices, Spaces, Subjects Janeiro 11, 2013Posted by paulo jorge vieira in geografias, teoria e epistemologia da geografia.
Tags: geography, mobility, mobility turn, peter merriman, tim cresswell
(um livro recém saído que gostaria de ler: “Geographies of Mobilities: Practices, Spaces, Subjects” – Edited by Tim Cresswell, Royal Holloway, University of London, UK and Peter Merriman, Aberystwyth University, UK, Ashgate, 2013)
“What can geography offer to a ‘new mobilities paradigm’ (Sheller and Urry 2006)? The very question suggests that geography needs to embrace mobility. Sociology, anthropology and other disciplines across the social sciences and the humanities have gone mobile (Urry 2007; Urry 2000; Clifford 1997; Kaufmann 2002). Why not follow suit? In many ways, of course, we have. Geographers are leading contributors to and editors of the journal Mobilities. We have our own mobilities text book (Adey 2009) and monographs on mobility in general (Cresswell 2006) and specific forms of moving (Merriman 2007). Our conferences are jam packed with sessions with mobility or mobilities in the title. Equally, it could reasonably be argued that we have no need to embrace a ‘new mobilities paradigm’ because we have always had mobility as a central focus of work in human geography. Indeed, a call for a new mobilities paradigm in our discipline has often been repeated. in 1938, for instance, the scottish geographer percy crowe, in an argument for a ‘progressive geography’, suggested that we had become too focused on fixed things and needed to pay attention to process and circulation (Crowe 1938). Geographers, he argued, had ‘advanced a static geography … incapable of seeing movement except as pattern’, but a future ‘dynamic’ geography must adjust its focus to study ‘men and things moving’ (Crowe 1938, 14)”