Emotions and affect in recent human geography (2009) Steve Pile
"Sharp points out 'the emphasis on the political manipulation of emotion/affect is key, and indeed offers a necessary line of examination for geography (2009:78)" p.6
Sharp, J. Geography and gender: what belongs to feminist geography? Emotion, power and change, Progress in Human Geography 33, 74-80.
----------------
"There is a potential for disagreement here, as emotional geography emphasises the significance of expressed emotions while non-representational theory emphasises the importance of inexpressible affects." p.7
----------------
"Affect is 'a transpersonal capacity which a body has to be affected (through an affection) and to affect (as the result of modifications)' (Anderson, 2006: 735) (it's better to use Spinoza quote...)
Anderson, B. (2006) Becoming and being hopeful: towards a theory of affect, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 24, 733-52.
-----------------
Pile (2009) argues that the object of analysis of affectional geography, namely the affect, can not be shown or understood and he blames affectual geographers of being hypocrites, because of representing something (the affect), which is claimed to be non-representative. p.17
Pile problematizes the body (unconscious) and cognition (conscious) partition, which he attributes to the ontological model of affectual geography and which renders the connection between affect and thought impossible. According to Pile, splitting of thought from affect is the central fault line that distinguishes emotional geography (EG) from affective geography (AG). While the subject of EG is a psychological one (which can reach the pre-cognitive feelings and represent them), the subject of AG is a non-psychological one (where affects are independent from psychological processes).
--------------------
"Thrift argues that affect is being actively engineered, such that it is becoming increasingly akin to the networks of pipes and cables that are already part of the technological unconscious of the city (Thrift 2004a:58;2004b)." p.12
"He cautions that emotional vocabularies only express affects that have already been engineered by the powerful." p.12
Thrift, N. (2004a) Intensities of feeling: towards a spatial politics of affect, Geografiska Annaler, 86B, 57-78
Thrift, N. (2004b) Remembering the technological unconscious by foregrounding knowledges of position, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 22, 175-90
Barnett, C. (2008) Political Affects in public space: normative blind-spots in non-representational ontologies, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 30, 433-48.
------------------> Thien, D. criticizes the engineering argument p.13
"In this topographic, the unconscious is not separable from consciousness, nor a layer beneath or behind or beyond people's awareness, it's under people's noses (Thomas, 2004; Hook, 2005; Kingsbury, 2007)." p.14-15 ---> might be related with banal nationalism
---------------------
Three ways to represent the in-between space between bodies: circulation, transmission, contagion. p.15-16
Sharp, J. Geography and gender: what belongs to feminist geography? Emotion, power and change, Progress in Human Geography 33, 74-80.
----------------
"There is a potential for disagreement here, as emotional geography emphasises the significance of expressed emotions while non-representational theory emphasises the importance of inexpressible affects." p.7
----------------
"Affect is 'a transpersonal capacity which a body has to be affected (through an affection) and to affect (as the result of modifications)' (Anderson, 2006: 735) (it's better to use Spinoza quote...)
Anderson, B. (2006) Becoming and being hopeful: towards a theory of affect, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 24, 733-52.
-----------------
Pile (2009) argues that the object of analysis of affectional geography, namely the affect, can not be shown or understood and he blames affectual geographers of being hypocrites, because of representing something (the affect), which is claimed to be non-representative. p.17
Pile problematizes the body (unconscious) and cognition (conscious) partition, which he attributes to the ontological model of affectual geography and which renders the connection between affect and thought impossible. According to Pile, splitting of thought from affect is the central fault line that distinguishes emotional geography (EG) from affective geography (AG). While the subject of EG is a psychological one (which can reach the pre-cognitive feelings and represent them), the subject of AG is a non-psychological one (where affects are independent from psychological processes).
--------------------
"Thrift argues that affect is being actively engineered, such that it is becoming increasingly akin to the networks of pipes and cables that are already part of the technological unconscious of the city (Thrift 2004a:58;2004b)." p.12
"He cautions that emotional vocabularies only express affects that have already been engineered by the powerful." p.12
Thrift, N. (2004a) Intensities of feeling: towards a spatial politics of affect, Geografiska Annaler, 86B, 57-78
Thrift, N. (2004b) Remembering the technological unconscious by foregrounding knowledges of position, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 22, 175-90
Barnett, C. (2008) Political Affects in public space: normative blind-spots in non-representational ontologies, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 30, 433-48.
------------------> Thien, D. criticizes the engineering argument p.13
"In this topographic, the unconscious is not separable from consciousness, nor a layer beneath or behind or beyond people's awareness, it's under people's noses (Thomas, 2004; Hook, 2005; Kingsbury, 2007)." p.14-15 ---> might be related with banal nationalism
---------------------
Three ways to represent the in-between space between bodies: circulation, transmission, contagion. p.15-16
Comments
Post a Comment