{"title":"克服我们之间的差异","authors":"Shu-Mei Huang","doi":"10.1177/20438206241253585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this commentary, I respond to Shawn Bodden’s (2023) work ‘Working Through Our Differences’, which discusses the limits of ontology in critical geographical theories. I build upon Bodden's invitation to bring attention to ordinary voices and acts to understand how people place themselves instead of pointing people to their proper place. I echo the proposal and at the same time, suggest that we might want to even follow how people walk with places rather than to places with respect to Indigenous methodologies and critical geographies. To extend the discussion, I suggest a deeper engagement with the potential of walking as an embodied form of working and to see walking in its plural forms. I also found Bodden's critical writing, in line with Clive Barnett and others, offering an opportunity for us to review some of the classical writings on/against cities. Last but not the least, a reconsideration of ‘invitation and hospitality as situated political acts and embodied ethics could prevent us from enclosing politics with particular ontological experimentation’. I conclude by suggesting that not only do we want to work through our differences, as Bodden suggests, but also we wish to walk through our differences.","PeriodicalId":47300,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Human Geography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Walking through our differences\",\"authors\":\"Shu-Mei Huang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20438206241253585\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this commentary, I respond to Shawn Bodden’s (2023) work ‘Working Through Our Differences’, which discusses the limits of ontology in critical geographical theories. I build upon Bodden's invitation to bring attention to ordinary voices and acts to understand how people place themselves instead of pointing people to their proper place. I echo the proposal and at the same time, suggest that we might want to even follow how people walk with places rather than to places with respect to Indigenous methodologies and critical geographies. To extend the discussion, I suggest a deeper engagement with the potential of walking as an embodied form of working and to see walking in its plural forms. I also found Bodden's critical writing, in line with Clive Barnett and others, offering an opportunity for us to review some of the classical writings on/against cities. Last but not the least, a reconsideration of ‘invitation and hospitality as situated political acts and embodied ethics could prevent us from enclosing politics with particular ontological experimentation’. I conclude by suggesting that not only do we want to work through our differences, as Bodden suggests, but also we wish to walk through our differences.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dialogues in Human Geography\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dialogues in Human Geography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20438206241253585\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dialogues in Human Geography","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20438206241253585","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
In this commentary, I respond to Shawn Bodden’s (2023) work ‘Working Through Our Differences’, which discusses the limits of ontology in critical geographical theories. I build upon Bodden's invitation to bring attention to ordinary voices and acts to understand how people place themselves instead of pointing people to their proper place. I echo the proposal and at the same time, suggest that we might want to even follow how people walk with places rather than to places with respect to Indigenous methodologies and critical geographies. To extend the discussion, I suggest a deeper engagement with the potential of walking as an embodied form of working and to see walking in its plural forms. I also found Bodden's critical writing, in line with Clive Barnett and others, offering an opportunity for us to review some of the classical writings on/against cities. Last but not the least, a reconsideration of ‘invitation and hospitality as situated political acts and embodied ethics could prevent us from enclosing politics with particular ontological experimentation’. I conclude by suggesting that not only do we want to work through our differences, as Bodden suggests, but also we wish to walk through our differences.
期刊介绍:
Dialogues in Human Geography aims to foster open and critical debate on the philosophical, methodological, and pedagogical underpinnings of geographic thought and practice. The journal publishes articles, accompanied by responses, that critique current thinking and practice while charting future directions for geographic thought, empirical research, and pedagogy. Dialogues is theoretically oriented, forward-looking, and seeks to publish original and innovative work that expands the boundaries of geographical theory, practice, and pedagogy through a unique format of open peer commentary. This format encourages engaged dialogue. The journal's scope encompasses the broader agenda of human geography within the context of social sciences, humanities, and environmental sciences, as well as specific ideas, debates, and practices within disciplinary subfields. It is relevant and useful to those interested in all aspects of the discipline.