from stabilitas loci to mobilitas loci

8/7/2019 from stabilitas loci to mobilitas loci

1/10

From Sfabl/rfasLoci to Mobilitas Loci;NetworkedMobitityand the Transformationof Place l. .RowanWilkenUniversityof Melbourne , ,, .

lntroductionPlaceis a muchmalignednotionwithincontemporarycriticaldiscourse.lt is crit icisedfor itslackof definitionalprecision;it is l inkedto strategiesof exclusion;it is seenasmarginalto modernistconsiderationsof timeandspace;andwiththe emergenceofcyberspaceandvirtualcommunity,it is sdidto be leftbehindor reducedto thestatusofrnetaphor.Yet,placeis a resilientnotionandpersistsin thefaceof allthesecontinuingchal lenges.Butwhatrelevance,if any,doesplacehavein thecontextof networkedmobility?Doesrnobilityrendernotionsof placeobsolete?Or doesplacepersist?And if thelatter,whathappensto the comrronconceptiorrof placeasa 'proper,stable,anddistinctlocation'(Morse,1999:195)as a resultof mobilepractices?Thispaperrespondsdirectlyto thesequestions.lt examinesthenotionof placeinrelationto networkedmobilityandrnobilephoneuse,andthealteredunderstandingsofplacethbtoccurthroughthesetechnologiesandpractices.Throughthisexamination,two keyargumentsaredeveloped.First,it is arguedthatplacedoesindeedpersistinandthroughnetworkedmobility.A usefulwayof understandingthispersistenceisthroughthe'domestication'approachto understandingthedevelopmentandusesofnewtechnologies- as proposedby SilverstoneandHaddon(1996)andextendedbyMorley(2003).Secondly,i t is arguedthatnetworkedmobilityactuallyforcesarenegotiationof place,andleadsto significantlyalteredunderstandingsof placeandplace-making.Thisis theorisedas a shiftfroma traditionalunderstandingof placeasstableand fixed(sfabilifas/oci),to a reconceptualisationof placeas formld in andthroughmobility(mobilitasioci).Thepaper.concludesby sketchingsomeof thepotent ia l ,andpossib lewiderimpl icat ions,thatth isrenewedunderstandingof placemighthavefor futurestudiesof networkedmobility.Io beginthisexamination,whatfotlowsisa briefoutlineof someof theaforementioneddef in i t ionalandotherchal lengesfacingthenot ionof place.Thiscontextualmater ia lservesa twofoldpurpose.By sketchingsomeof thewidelyvaryingunderstandingsofplace,thesenseinwhichthistermis understoodinth ispaperwi l lbecomeclearer.Fufthermore,understandingsomethingofthehistoryof placeasa contestedbutresilientnotionformsan importantbackdropto,or pointof departurefor,examininqtheplaceof placein mobi l i tydebates.De f in ingP lace


2/10

It ln additionto the above,it is alsoimportantto recognisethatwhileplaceis an imprecise: termthatcan be describedas a 'narveandvariableexpressionof geographicali experience'(Relph,1986;1976:4),understandingsandapplicationsof placeareoftendevelopedin complexand sometimescontradictor:yways.Graspingsomethingof this' complexityand contradictionis crucial,as it formsan importantcontextor backgroundi to the laterforegroundfocuson networkedmobilityandplace.; Gontextual is ingPlace

Placehas longbeenconsidereda problematicalnotioninsofaras it isassociatedwith. strategiesof exclusionanddomination.Forexample,it hasbeennotedthat'thedesireI for somesimplereturnto authenticlocalrootsin rplac"has beenshownto beenmeshedin practicesof eulturaldomination'(Dovey,2002:45).l{These arethei precisesentimentsof Jean-LucNancy.In hiscritiqueof community,forexample,Nancy' arguesagainstan understandingof communityas communionbecauseihisunderstandingsuggests'fusioninto'abody'- a monolithicformor identity- whichdeniesdifferenceandothernessandpromotesexclusion(Nancy,1991:xxxvii iand: Passim).I5|He writes:, Thecommunitythatbecomesa singleth ing(body,mind,father land,Leader.. . )necessarilylosesthein of being-in-common.[...](Nothingindicatesmoreclearlywhatthe logicof thisbeingof togethernesscanimplythantheroleof Gemeinschaft,ofcommunity,in Naziideology.)(1991:xxxix) - , : :

As is clearfromthispassage,placeiscentralto hiscritiqueof community,and leavingitbehindis consideredcrit icalif communityis to be reconcei'vedin non-restrictiveterms.As one'commentatornotes:WhatNancy[...]deftlydisconnects,althoughheneversaysso explicitly,is theassumedimmanenceof communalidentitiesto demarcatedgeographicalspacesin theformof towns,landsor nations.ln itsmostvulgarformation,thisrelationappearsofcourseas the nat ional istideologyof b loodandsoi l .(VanDtenAbbeele,1997:15)Phi losophicaldel iberat ionsoncommunityareby no meanstheonlyarenawhereplaceis "disconnected".Thereis,for instance,whatCaseyterms;the'modernistmyththatplacecanbe drscountedandsetasrdeforthesakeofspaceort ime'(Casey,1993:10)rc]Forthemostpart,however.placenranifestsitselfandis understoodin complexandoftencontradictoryways,as is i l lustratedin ManuelCastel ls 'wr i t ingonglobal isat ion.Toci teoneexample,on theonehand,Castel lswri tes:Localitiesbecomedisembodiedfromtheircultural,historicil l,geographicrneaning,andreintegratedintofunct ionalnetworks,or intoimagecol lages,inducinga spaceof f lowsthatsubsi i tu iesforthespaceof places.(Castel ls,1996:375)lZ


3/10

that networkedmobilityhas transformedtheway thatmeetingsare arrangedin urbanspace.'ln the past,landmarks"andtim'eswere.thepointsthatcoordinatedactionandconvergencein urbanspace.Peoplewoulddecideon a particularplaceandtimetorneet,and convergeat thattimesnd:place'(lto,2O03c:9) .Now,however,it is morelikelythatan initialandratherloosearrangementis agreedupon,and'asthemeetingtime nears,contactvia messagingandvoicebecomesmoreconcentrated,eventuallyeulminatingin face-to-facecontact'(lto,2003c:9). lt is alsocommonfor mobilecommunicationto continueevenafterphysicalco-presencehasbeenachievedin thesameurbanspace(lto,2003a).Thiselaborateseriesof micro-coordinationsrevealsacomplexsetof interactionsandnegotiationsbetweenplace,physicalco-presenceand"virtual"presence.Oneresult,i i is suggested,is that'distantothersarealwayssociallyco-present,,dndplace- whereyou locateyourself- hasbecomea hybridrelationbetweenphysicalandwirelessly,co.presentcontext'(lto,2003a).Thiswouldappeartocomplicatethe ideaof a shiftfromplace-to.placeandperson-to-personcommunication.Complementingthesefindingsis Yoon's(2003)studyof mobilephoneuseby SouthKoreanyouth.Thisstudyrevealsothercounter-intuitiveusesof mobiletechnologythatserveto furtherreinforcerather"thandiminishtheimportanceof place.Thisis revealedthroughthepracticeof "immobiling".Yoondevelopsthistermto describecertain^ + . ^ + ^ ^ i ^ a h r , , . , h i ^ h r r ^ r , h ^ m n F r i l a n h n n a c r r c a r c t r i m m n h i l i T e t ' f h e i f m O h i l e n h O n e S i nJ t l a t E v l E J u y Y y r r r v r t y v u l r v t t t v v i i v l i a i v i r v J u J 9 a o i i i i i i r v p ' i r r - v r i i L i i r i i v v r i s y iresponseto perceivedsensitivitiesbetweenpeersconcerningplace,time,etiquette,andcontent(Yoon,2003:334f0.Turningoffthephonealsoconstiiutesan importantway ofdiminishingparentalcontrolbypreventingparentsfrommakingcontactviatextor voicernessage.In bothcases,"immobiling"servesas a keymeansby whichto develop'localgocia l i tV.(329)and,in turn,

' retradi t ional izetheglobal ' (340). .Whatis'interestingaboutthesestudiesandtheirfindingsis thattheyappearto validateBodenandMolotch 's( '1994)cla imthatwe areinf luencedbyan ongoing'compulsionofproximity',and thattechnologiesof distancedo nothingtoobviatetheneedforregularco-presencethroughface-to-faceencounter.ln fact,it hasalsobeensuggestedthat'thosewho makethe mostphonecallsarealsothosewhointeractwiththelargestnumberof peoplefaceto face'(L6vy,1998:32).\Vhatalsoemergesfromthesestudiesis thatplace- especiallylocalplace- is centralto thepracticeandunderstandingof networkedmobility.Buthowplaceisexperiencedthroughnetworkedmobi i i tyisqui teunique.l t is a heavi lymediatedengagement,whereplaceis experiencedvia a complexfilteringor imbricationof theactualwiththevirtual.Thisis a keypoint,andwi l lbeexpandedlaterat length.Mobi leFrivat izat ionand the Domesticat ionof TechnologyTo furtherappreciatethe continuingimportanceof placeto networkedmobility,i t isalsovaluableto consider 'how"nrobi le"tradi t ionsincorporatenewtechnologiesastheydevelop'(Morley,2003:443).The"domesticat ion"model,as developedby RogerSi lverstoneandLesl ieHaddon(1996)andextendedbyDavidMorley(2003),offersausefulframeforunderstandinethisorocess.

I:II


4/10

First,it intersectswith,.orallows,parallelsto b.edrawnrbetween,wider(non-technologicallymediated)csn,sider:ationsof mobilityand the ongoingimportanceof thedomestic.For example;in commentingrenthe defamiliarisingeffectsoftelecommunicationstechnologiesandthe forcesof globalisation,Derridaobservesthattheyleadto a growingand renewed.de,sirefor the "home"- in bothits domesticsenseandin a morethreateningnationalsense:Theglobaland thedominanteffectof television,thetelephone,thefaxmachine,satellites,the acceleratedcirculationof images,discourse,etc.,is thatthe here-and-novybecomesuncertain,withoutguarantee:anchoredness,rootedness,theat-home|echez-soilare radicallycontested.Dislodged.Thisis nothingnew.lt hasalwaysbeenthis way.,Theat-homehas alwaysbeentormentedby the other,theguest,by the threatof expropriation.lt is constituted:onlyin this.,threat.Buttoday,we arewitnessingsucharadicalexpropriation,deterritorialization,delocalization,dissociationof thepoliticalandthe local,of the national,of the nation-stateandthelocal,thattheresponse,orratherthe reaction,becomes:"l wantto be af home,I wantfinallyto be at home,withmyown,closeto my friendsandfamily."[... ]Themorepowerfulandviolentthetechnologicalexpropriation,thedelocalization,the morepowerful,naturally,the recourseto theat-home,the returntowardhome,(Derrida,2002:79-80)Thisformulationof the"at-home"andthe"returntowardhome",aswellu, tor" generalunderstandingsof the"home"andthe"domestic",arebothsignificantinunderstandingthe complexitiesof theinteractionsbetweennetworkedmobiiityandplace.Theimportanceof addressingin tandembothmacroandmicroformsof mobilityandthedomesticin futurestudiesof networkedmobilityisa pointthatwillbetouchedon at theendof th ispaperThesecondbenefitof a moreexpansiveunderstandingof theprocessesoftechnologicalinnovationandconsumptionis thatdomesticationbecomesan elasticconceptwithwideapplicationforunderstandingvariousformsof technologicalinnovationand use,.Thisincludeshowwe,mightunderstandnetworkedmobilityanditsUSES.trorinstance.in advancinghownewtechnologiesaredomesticated,SilverstoneandHaddonarguethatthefunctions"ofcertaintechnologiesmay,whenincorporatedin thehomeor household,be 'somewhatoiffdrentfromthoseintendecjby designersoradvert isers'(1996:64).Theymayalsochangeovert ime(6a).Theyalsonotethathouseholdsare'convent ional lyandhabitual lyqui teadeptata kindof seamlessshif t ingfromonetechnologicalinputandresourceto anotheraswel las beingadeptat theirsimultaneoususe'(66).Bothobservat ionsaresupportedby empir icalresearchintomobi lephoneuse.Unintendedusecanbeobservedinthepract icesof " immobi l ing"observedby Yoon(2003).Shiftingbetweenandsimultaneoususeof varioustechnologicalresourcesis evidentin thewidespreadpracticeof incorporatingbothfixedor landl ineandmobi lephoneconnect ionsintherout inesof everydayl i fe(L ingandHaddon ,2001 . l to ,2003a ,2003b,2003c ' ,Yoon ,2003) .


5/10

Tlreword [eclecticism]had derogatory.implicationsonlya decadeago(architecturewasto be pureanddiscriminating),,butit nowimplies,,a,positiveopennessandabsorptionofanythingthatmightbe.usefulto a projecL(1970:14).This"bricoleur"approachto designis moststronglyfeltin therapiduptakeat thistimeof newbuildingsmaterials(dueto advancesin materialsmanufacturingtechnologies)andengagementwithand"absorption"of telecommunicationsandmediatechnologies(duein largepartto theinfluenceof thewritingsof MarshallMcluhan).The'opportunityof the material'(Cook,1970:55ff)andthe turn'towardstechnologyas a greatforcefora newarchitecture'(30)dovetailin two interconnectedconcernsthat are centraltoCook'sstudy:the firstis the potentialof telecommunicationstechnologiesto transformthe domestichouse;thesecondis an abidinginter,estin mobility(andneo-nomadism).To addressthe firstof theseinterconnectedconcerns,a keyreasonfor sucha strongrenewalof interestin thefunctionandoperationof thehousein 1960sexperimentalarchitecture,beyonddevelopmentsin materialsmassproduction,is foundin Cook'srealisation(afterMcLuhan)thatlcommunicationis becomingas powerfulas tactileorrepresentationalenvironment'(1970:'125).Andin a statementthatarguablyforetellsthesoon-to-be-realityof computer-nrediatednetworkedcommunications,Cookwrites,'weshallreacha pointquitesoonwhererealtimeandimagineddimensioncanbe madetointeract'(126)Commensuratewiththisrealisationis an acknowledgmentof theeffectofcommunicationon thefabricof thetraditionalfamilyunit(128).As t he EnglisharchitectCedricPricewrites,'thehouseis no longeracceptableasa pre-setorderingmechanismforfamilyl i fe '(1984:48).Price'sconcernis inquestioningthetaken-for-grantedfunctionof the fiousein lightof theaforementioneddevelopmentsin massmediatechnologies.Thedomestichousebecomesin Price'sterms'a 24-houreconomiclivingtoy'(aB)- akirrdof miniaturedomestic"funpalace".Price'sconceptionof a technologisedandfunctionallyopenhouseof experimentationdidfindsomeformof architecturalexpressionsometirnelaterin theHouseof theCentury(973) projectby theAnt Farmcollectiveof U.S.architectsandnrediaartists.Thishumorousexperimentin futureliving- describedas a 'ferro-cernentdomicilewithfuturo-phallicfeatures'(Seid,2004;25)-wasconstructedbesideMojoLake,Angleton,Texas,andfeaturedan arrayofelectronicsdevicesandequipmentforthemedia-savvyoccupant.Price'sdomesticvrsionof thehouseas a"24-hour-economicl iv ingtoy'andAntFarm'sattemptto real isesucha visionbothconstituteearlyinstancesof the"electronichouse"andof whatScottMcQuire(2003:103)descr ibesas the 'reposi t ioningof thehomeas an interact ivemediacentre '- a keydevelopmentinthecont inuing"domesticat ionof iechnology".The secondof thetwo interconnectedrealisationsin Cook'sstudyconcernsthe kindsoftechno-socialtransformationsdescribedearlierin thispaper.Thatis,globalnetworkedtelecommunicat ionstechnologies,coupledwithburgeoningglobaltravelandinterconnectedf inancia lmarkets,notonlyincreasethesenseof an increasinglyshrinkingplanet(Mcluhan's"globaivi l lage").buta lsoanimatea shif tf romthetradi i ionalconceptionof a stabilitaslocitowardsa cultureof mobility(mobilitas/oci)(seeUrry,


6/10

Ant Farmalsoshareda deepinteres-tin media,technologiesandassociatedissuesofmediarepresentation.[14;lTheyexplorerthjs.interest.ina numberof projects(includingthe aforementionedHouseof the Century),but especiallyin theirMediaVan(1971):anelectronicallyequippedcustomised1971Chevroletvan inwhichtheartiststoured.AsAnt Farmrecordedat the time,the impetusfor MediaVanwasto 'realizeourown brandof nomadism':'Themediavan ideawason.eof totaldocumentation,so thatwhiletruckingyou havethe capabilityto recordviavideotape,photographs,film,andmentalnoteswhat'sgoingon aroundyou'(Lord,Michels,Schreier,2004:100).ln short,MediaVanutil isenetworkedtelecommunicationstechnologies(includingTV,audio,etc.)todocumentas thoroughlyas possiblethe shiftingandfleetingambiencesof placeastheywereexperiencedthroughmobili iy.Sucha deliberateartisticexercisein spatialand"placial"documentationhasrapidlybecomelargelyroutinepracticefor manyusersofnetworkedtelecommunicationstechnologiS,,spciallythosewithcameraphones.Indeed,so commonplacehasthispr.ocqss,ofdocumentationbecomethatit hasgivenriseto thephenomenonof "life-caching":theuseof digitalcamerasandpicturephonesandsoftwaresuchas Lifeblogto'createdigitaldiaries,scrapbooksandphotoalbumswhichserveas mnemonicdevicesforsiftingthroughandrecollectingdailyexperiences.tl5lThe extentto whichplaceis transformedby mobilitycanbefurlherunderstoodbyconsideringMarcAug6'saccountof "non-places".Accordingto Aug,5,thecontemporaryculturallandscapeof globalisationischaracterisedbyanoverabundanceof informationanda growingtangleof interdependencieswhichleadsto thecreationof an 'excessofspacecorrelativewiththe shrinkingof theplanet'(Aug6,1995).Aug6coinstheterm"non-places"to describethisexpandingexcess."Non-places"arethoseinterstitialzoneswherewe spendan ever-increasingproportionof ourlives:in supermarkets,airports,hotels,cars,on motorways,andin frontofATMs,TVsandcomputers.ForAug6,such"non-places"arethe realmeasureof ourtime.Theextentof whichcan bequanti f ied,Augewri tes,By tota l l ingal ltheair ,ra i landmotorwayroutes,themobi lecabinscal led"meansoftransporl"(aircraft,trainsandroadvehiclqs),theairportsandrailwaystations,hotelchains,le isureparks,largereta i lout lets,andf inal lythecomplexskeinofcableandwirelessnetworksthatmobilizeextraterrestrialspaceforthepurposesof acommunicationso peculiarthatit oftenputstheindividualin contactonlywithanotherimageof h imse l f .(Au96 ,1995:79)ln short,'whatis newincontemporarylifearenottheseinstitutionsof mobilepr ivi t izat ionperse buttheinterpenetrat ionof layeruponlayerof bui l tenvironmentandrepresentat ion.theformativeandderivat ive,theimaginaryandmundane'(Morse,1990:210).Elsewherethissameprocesshasbeendescribedastheoverlayingof a "th irdnature"of informationflowson the"secondnature"of cities,harbours,industry,and sofot1h,creatingan 'informationlandscapewhichalmostentirelycoverstheoldterritories'(Wark ,1994 :120) .


7/10

Mobilitasloci- the renegotiationof placevia ne.tworkedmobility,and the interrogationof 'questionsof place,facility,equipmentandthe idiosyncrasiesof the users'thatthisrenegotiationprompts- generatesman'ifoldQuestionsconoerningthe apprehensionandexaminbtionof placethroughnetworkedmoOitity.Forexample,the increasinglymediatbdnatureof our engagementwithplace- especially'viamobiletelephony-wouldseemto suggesttheneedfor somekindof hybridapproachto visualperception(atveryleast)whichbridgesestablishedunderstandingsof landscapestructureandperception,suchas by Higuchi(1983),withmorerecentanalysesdrawnfromVR,cinemastudies,interfacedesign,andothersources.Morse'snotionof the'copresenceof multipleworldsin differentmodes'experiencedasan 'ontologyof everydaydistraction'is a productivestepin thisdirection.[16]Indeed,whatMorse'sworkhighlightsis theveryimpossibil ityof maintainingan uncomplicateddistinctionbetweenplacein a str ictor "pure"geographicalsenseandmediatedexperience(andconstruction)of it .Forthisveryreasonit isvaluableto recallDerrida'sengagementwiththewholeproblematicof actualityandwhathe seesas its 'twotraits':'afiifactuality'and'actuvirtuality'(Derrida,2002:3ff).Actuality,Derridawrites,' isnotgivenbutactivelyproduced,sifted,invested,performativelyinterpr,etedby numerousapparatuseswhichare factitiousor artificial,hierarchizingandselective[...]'(2002 3); Derridatermsthis'artifactuality'.Thesecondtraitof actuality,is capturedin Derrida'sinsistence"ona .conceptof viftuality(virtualimage,virtualspace,andso virtualevent)thatcan doubtlessno longerbeopposed,in perfectphilosophicalserenity,to actualrealityin thewaythatphilosophersusedto distinguishbetweenpower.andact,dynamisandenergeia',and soforlh(2002:6).Derridacoinstheterm'actuviduality'to describethis'secondtrait.Theimportof thisinsistenceonthe artifactuality/ actuvirtualityof teletechnologicalexperienceis,as Nia l lLucyexpla ins,[... ]to showthatwhatcountsasactualityin thepresentcan no longerbe confinedtotheontologicaloppositionof theactualandthevirtual,despitetheongoingnecessityofthisoppositionto everyformof politics(Lucy,2004:4).Derrida'sresistanceto thetraditionalontologicaloppositionof theactualandthevirtual- andof theactualas the'undeconstructibleoppositeof artificeandtheartefact'(Lucy,2404:4)- is pertinentto manyareasofcriticalconcern,includingthepresentinteresfintheexperienceandconstructionof placethrougnnetworkeomobility.l t is alsowhatconnectsthispresentconcernforthe(largelylocalised)impactof networkedmobilityonplacewithbroadergeopol i t ica lconcerns.For,as Nia l lLucysuggests,notonlydoesartifactualityandactuvirtualitynecessitatea responsibil ityto analysemedia(is Derridaarguesi t does),i t isa lsoa responsib i l i tythatisopento thefutureandopento theother.Lucywrites:Suchanunderstandingof theactualaswhatisalways"act ivelyproduced"and"pei-foi'mativelyinterpreteC"isnotanexcusefordisengagingfrompublici i feor foraffectinga disinterestin real-historicalevents.lf theconditionof actualityis thatit mustbe made,thenit mustbeabletobernadedif ferent ly[ . . . ] .Thatiswhyit 'spossib leto

: l

a:F


8/10

[1] Forinstance,TheAustralian.ConciseOxfordDictio.naryoffersthirteenvariations,whichrangefrom broadreferencep!o spaceand its occuipation,to thedifferentiationoftypesor "sub-categories"of geographicafspace,andthe occupationof thesespaces(including,in orderof increasingexpansion:a residenceor dwelling;a groupof housesin a town;a townsquare;a village,a town,a city;an areaor region)(Hughes,Michell,Ramson,1992:863).Formoredetailedhistoricalbackgroundto the notionof place- atermwhichcanbe tracedbackat leastto earlyGreekphilosophy- seeCasey(1993and1997) .[2]Andthisis preciselywhy Caseyoffersnoconcisedefinitionof place.Hissuggestionseemsto be thatwe reachan understandingof placeonlyby takinga circuitousroute:by studying'theperplexingphenomenonof displacement,rampantthroughouthumanhristoryandespeciallyevidentat thepresenthistorical'moment,onlyin relationto anabidingimplacement'(Casey,1993:xiv).[3]Suchas seemsto be thecasein therhetoricof theCongressof the NewUrbanism,for example.Fora usefulintroductionto theaims,projectsand criticismsof thearchitecturalandplanningphenomenonknownas.theCongressof theNewUrbanism,seeBressi(2OO2).Fora readingof theNewUrbanism'sinterestin therenewalofcommunitythroughplaceas a formof "geographicaldeterminism",seeHarvey(1997).[4]Fora moredetaileddiscussionof thedifficultpoliticsof place,seeMichaelKeithandStevePi le(1996).[5]DerridaconcurswithNancy.He,too,repudiatesthewordcommunitybecauseitsetymologyl inksi t to vio lenceandexclusion(seeDerr ida,1997:13).[6]Fora fullerdiscussionof thisargumentconcerningthesupremacyof spaceoverp lace ,seeCasey(1997 :131-193) .[7]Castellsdefinesthe"spaceof places"as 'thehistoricallyrootedspatialorganizationof ourcommonexperience'(1996:378).$y wayof contrast,he definesthe"spaceof1ows"as a seriesof transformationswhere'societyis constructedaroundflows:flowsofcapital,flowsof information,flowsof technology,flowsof organizationalinteraction,f lowsof images,soundsandsymbols.Flowsarenotjustoneelementof thesocia lorganrzation.theyare theexpi'essionof processesdominatingoureconomic,political,andsymbol icl i fe '(1996:412',or ig inalemphasis).OrasDerr idaputsi t , ' theborderis nolongertheborder,imagesarecomingandgoingthroughcustoms,thel inkbetweenthepoliticalandthe local,thetopopolitical,isas it weredis/ocated(2002:57;emphasisinor ig inal) .[8]As onecri t ichasremarked:" 'Place"and"place-making"in theradical lyimplodedspaceof theglobalcivi l isat ionof theearlytwenty-f i rstcenturyremainssomeof themostproblematicalbutcompel l inghunranconcernswith inthecont inuingexperienceofmoderni ty '(Scr iver,2A02.41.


9/10

lJniversityof CaliforniaPress/ BerkeleyAr t Museumand PacificFilmArchive,2OA4),88-149.Lucy,N.iall.A DerridaDictionary(Oxford:Blackwell,2004).Lukermann,FredE. 'Geographyas a FormalIntellectual,DisciplineandtheWay inwhichit Contributesto HumanKnowledge',CanadianGeographerS.4(1g6a):l;fnZ.Maniaque,Caroline.'SearchingforEnergy',in AntFarm 1968-1g78,eds.ConstanceM.Lewallenand SteveSeid(Berkeley,California:Universityof CaliforniaPressi BerkeleyArt MuseumandPacificFilmArchive,2004),14-21.McQuire,Scott.'FromGlassArchitectureto BigBrother:Scenesfroma CulturalHistoryof Transparency',CulturalSfudiesReview,g.1, May(2003),103-123.Morley,David.what's "Home"Gotto Dowithlt?:contr.adictoryDynamicsin theDomesticationof TechnologyandtheDislocationof Domesticiiy',EuropeanJournalofCulturalSfudies6.4 (2003),435-458.Morse,Margaret.'AnOntologyof EverydayDistraction:TheFreeway,theMalt,andTelevision',in Logicsof Television:Essaysin CulturalCriticism,ed. patriciaMellencamp(BloomingtonandIndianapol is/ London:IndianaUniversi tyPress/ BFIpubl ishing,1990),193-221.\ancy,Jean-Luc(ed.PeterConnor;transPeterConnor,L isaGarbus,MichaelHol land,SimonaSawhney).ThelnoperativeCommunity(MinneapolisandOxford:UniversitvofMinnesotaPress,1991).Norberg-Schulz,Christian.GeniusLoci:Towardsa Phenomenologyof Architecture(London:AcademyEdit ions,1980).Perec,Georges(ed.andtransJohnSturrock).Speciesof SpacesandOtherpieces(Harmondsworth,Middlesex:Penguin,1g9g;1gg7).Relph,Edward.PlaceandPlacetessness,th irdimprint(London:pion,1986;19Z6).Robertson,Roland. 'Glocal izat ion:Time-SpaceandHomogeneity-Heterogeneity ' ,inGlobalModernities,eds.MikeFeatherstone,ScottLash,andRoiandRobirtson(London,ThousandOaks,NewDelhi :Sage,.1gg5),25-44.schof ie ld,Jack.'EveryBreathyou Take',Age,'GreenGuide:Livewire ' ,2 september(2004),2& 6.Scholte,JanAart.Globalization:A Criticallntroduction(Houndmills,Basinqstoke.HampshireandLondon,2000).


10/10

Yoon,Kyongwon.'fejrao.rJionalizingtheMobile:Youngpeople,ssocialityandMobile!sl?yre inseour,southKorea','EuropeanJournat-ofcuituratsdl.es,6.slzooe;,

i .

from stabilitas loci to mobilitas loci

Documents