Response

M. Sheller
{"title":"Response","authors":"M. Sheller","doi":"10.3167/trans.2019.090107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This special section elucidates intersections between the historiography of\nmobilities and the interdisciplinary field of mobilities research. The articles\nhighlight relationships between mobilities and stabilization, circulation and\nplace-making, deterritorialization and reterritorialization. This response essay seeks to dispel three myths about mobility studies: (1) that it is purely about the contemporary world, rather than the historical dimensions of mobile processes; (2) that it focuses solely on material phenomenon of physical transport (i.e., of things and people) and ignores the movement of ideas, knowledge, and culture; and (3) that it is purely about “flows” and “circulation” and has little to teach us about friction, resistances, blockages, or uneven power relations. The most important intersections of the histories of mobilities and the field of mobility studies can be found in the ways in which each emphasizes power differentials, blockages, friction, and the relation between mobilities and immobilities.","PeriodicalId":43789,"journal":{"name":"Transfers-Interdisciplinary Journal of Mobility Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfers-Interdisciplinary Journal of Mobility Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/trans.2019.090107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This special section elucidates intersections between the historiography of mobilities and the interdisciplinary field of mobilities research. The articles highlight relationships between mobilities and stabilization, circulation and place-making, deterritorialization and reterritorialization. This response essay seeks to dispel three myths about mobility studies: (1) that it is purely about the contemporary world, rather than the historical dimensions of mobile processes; (2) that it focuses solely on material phenomenon of physical transport (i.e., of things and people) and ignores the movement of ideas, knowledge, and culture; and (3) that it is purely about “flows” and “circulation” and has little to teach us about friction, resistances, blockages, or uneven power relations. The most important intersections of the histories of mobilities and the field of mobility studies can be found in the ways in which each emphasizes power differentials, blockages, friction, and the relation between mobilities and immobilities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
响应
这个特殊的部分阐明了流动性史学和流动性研究的跨学科领域之间的交集。文章强调了流动与稳定、流通与场所制造、去地域化与再地域化之间的关系。这篇回应文章试图消除关于流动研究的三个神话:(1)它纯粹是关于当代世界的,而不是关于流动过程的历史维度;(2)它只关注物理运输(即物和人)的物质现象,而忽略了思想、知识和文化的运动;(3)它纯粹是关于“流动”和“循环”,几乎没有告诉我们摩擦、阻力、阻塞或不平衡的权力关系。流动性历史和流动性研究领域最重要的交叉点在于,它们都强调权力差异、阻碍、摩擦以及流动性和不流动性之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
33.30%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Visual and Toponymical Landscape Dreams and Parables of Sustainable Mobilities Migrating Landscapes Absence, Presence, and Mobility English Wetland Immersions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1