I like this too.
David
>>> Paul Bevan <[log in to unmask]> 08/16/02 03:06pm >>>
It's interesting to see the discussion on non-place prompted by our AAG call
for papers. We outlined three forms of place (physical place, cyberspace and
non-place) in the call to show how places can be differently constituted and
categorised. This suggests that different places have varying effects on
methodological practices.
The utility of non-place as a nomenclature is highly debateable: its
strength is that it is broad but in this breadth lies its weakness. We used
it as a short hand to distinguish geographical locations at a superficial
level but at once also problematizing differences between places and how
they are conceptualised, and the implications that this has.
If place is not simply thought of as geographical location, but also as
experience, then non-place (for example) becomes a subjectively experienced
phenomenon rather than rigidly located. A non-place for one is a place for
another.
We hope the session will offer an opportunity to engage with this wider
discussion on place in relation to its agency within qualitative
methodologies.
Paul, Jon & Pete
|