Just some reflections on the Critical Geography meeting in
Coventry
Firstly many thanks to Phil Hubbard and Rob Kitchin for an enjoyable
and stimulating day.
A number of issues occurred to me in the wake of our discussions.
1. There are clearly differing views on the extent to which the CGF
should become a more formalised entity. The risk of
becoming more formalised is one of creating hierarchies and
structures which may be resented by some. The risk of not becoming
more formalised is a continuing state of indecisiveness over what it
it is we are and what we should be doing. I am sympathetic to both
arguments here. However, it seems to me that a reasonably informal
CGF may be a useful umbrella under which members can organise
different activities.
2. Much of the discussion seemed to hover around relations with the
RGS (via the Study Groups) and 'procedural' issues over what we can
or cannot do. It seems somewhat ironic that a 'critical' body which
has its origins in breaking away from an established organisation is
still very much pre-occupied with its connections with that
particular body.
3. Many of the seminar sessions revolved around issues of reflexivity
in research. There seemed to be a lot of angst in the air. I wonder
do other disciplines spend so much time in similar debates. I suspect
not - although perhaps they should! Part of me fully acknowledges the
need for such debate but another part of me feels there is a danger
of getting lost in a self-reflective quagmire resulting in what might
be seen by some as a very self-indulgent debate over how we do what
we do.
4. It follows from the above that questions arise over who
critical geographers are actually talking to. Most of the time it
seems to be each other. While internal debate is necesssary, do we
not need to go beyond this? In Coventry, John Bale raised the issue
of school texts and the apparent reluctance of geographers to write
for pre-third level audiences (not sufficient kudos in doing so?).
By the same token we tend not to talk to 'the wider world' via
newspapers etc. Economists and historians seem more willing to engage
in such activities.
5. A danger in all of this is that we assume we have something
worthwhile to contribute. In our internal discussions it is sometimes
easy to lapse into a sense of our own importance . Does the rest of
the world really care what we do or how we do it? In a discussion in
the pub afterwards I was quite struck by the fact that those of us
present (myself included) were unwilling or unable to explain to a
'local' what it is was we had been discussing at our conference.
6. Beyond conferences and seminars what else do critical geographers
have to offer?
Once again thanks to organisers and conributors for generating
discussion (and for giving rise to the above ramblings!)
Dave
Dr. David Storey
Geography Department &
Centre for Rural Research
University College Worcester
Henwick Grove
Worcester WR2 6AJ
England
Tel: 01905 855189
Fax: 01905 855132
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|