Postyapısalcı ve İlişkisel Coğrafyalarda Bir Tarz Olarak Temsil Ötesi Teori(ler)
1990’lardan sonra Thrift’in çalışmaları ile ortaya çıkıp daha sonra özellikle İngiltere’de yaygınlaşan temsil ötesi teori, mekânın temsillere indirgenmesini ve özellikle yeni kültürel coğrafyanın temsil politikalarını eleştirmektedir. Bir diğer eleştiri ise kartezyen mantığın düalistik yapısıdır. Temsil ötesi teoriler doğa/kültür, zihin/beden, fail/yapı gibi ayrımlardan birini diğerine tercih etmeyip böylesi bir ikiliğin ötesine geçmeye çabalamaktadır. Postyapısalcı, ilişkisel coğrafyacıların düşüncelerini, farklı nispetlerde buluşturan temsil ötesi teori, bu özelliğinden dolayı içinde birçok teori ve yaklaşımı barındıran bir ‘şemsiye’ ya da ‘çatı’ olarak kabul edilmektedir. Bu çalışmada, ilk olarak, temsil ötesi teorinin ne olduğu, nasıl ortaya çıktığı ve hangi düşüncelerden etkilendiğinin izi sürülmüştür. İkinci olarak, temsil ötesi teorinin ilkeleri üzerinde durulduktan sonra teorinin yeni bir biçim ya da tarz olan yönü irdelenmiştir. Ayrıca, çalışmada temsil ötesi teoriye karşı yapılan eleştiriler incelenmiştir. Anglo‐amerikan coğrafyalardaki temsil ötesi teoriler tartışılırken ve Türkiye’ye aktarılırken, aktarma eyleminin de eleştirel bir bakışa ihtiyacı vardır. Bu eleştirel bakış çerçevesinde çalışmanın bir diğer amacı ise, temsil ötesi teorinin Türk coğrafyasındaki teorik ve metodolojik tartışmalara sunabileceği katkı ve imkânları ele almaktır.
Non‐representational Theory(ies) as a Style in Poststructuralist and Relational Geographies
Non-representational theory, which emerged in the 1990s through the study of Thrift, has criticized the representation of space and the new cultural geography, which obsessively focuses on the politics of representation. Additionally, non-representational theory has criticized the dualism of Cartesian logic, which is based on binary oppositions such as nature/culture, mind/body, agent/structure, and has attempted to go beyond such binary constructions. In other words, non-representational theory might be seen as an “umbrella” or a “framework” that houses several distinct approaches, including phenomenology, structuralism, feminism and post-structuralism. Thus, rather than calling it non-representational theory, one may call it non-representational theories, plural. The first aim of this paper is to cover the nature and emergence of the theory as well as the impact of the aforementioned intellectual traditions. The second aim of this paper is to highlight the main aspects and principles of non-representational theory. Finally, this paper aims to examine the critique of non-representational theory. In this respect, it is notable to mention that this paper offers a critique as well. This paper will also provide a critical overview of the intellectual activities which attempt not just to understand nonrepresentational theory in Anglo-American geographies but to transfer it into the Turkish academy in a critical fashion. In parallel, the possible contributions of the theory to the theoretical discussions in the Turkish academy will be considered briefly at the end of this essay.
___
- Adey, P. (2006) Airports and air‐mindedness: spacing, timing and
using the Liverpool airport, 1929–39. Social and Cultural
Geography 7, 343–63.
- Anderson, B. (2009) Affective atmospheres. Emotion, Space and
Society 2(2): 77–81.
- Anderson, B. (2009), ‘Affective atmospheres’, Emotion, Society
and Space 2(2), 77‐81.
- Anderson, B. and Harrison, P. (2010) The promise of nonrepresentational
theories, Anderson, B. and Harrison,P. (eds)
Taking Place: Non‐Representational Theories and
Geographyiçinde (s. 1‐34), London: Ashgate.
- Binnie, J., Edensor, T., Holloway, J., Millington, S. and Young, C.
(2007) Mundane mobilities, banaltravels. Social and Cultural
Geography 8, 165–74.Ashgate, 1–36.
- Bissell, D. (2010) Passenger mobilities: Affective atmospheres
and the sociality of public transport, Environment and Planning
D: Society & Space 28(2): 270–289.
- Buser, M. (2014) Thinking through nonrepresentational and
affective atmospheres in planning theory and practice, Planning
Theory, 13(3), 227‐243.
- Büscher, M. (2006) Vision in motion. Environment and Planning
A 38, 281–99.
- Cant, S. and Morris, N. (2006) Geographies of art and the
environment. Social and Cultural Geography 7, 857–61.
- Clough, P. (2007) Introduction, Clough PT and Halley J (eds)
Affective Turn: Theorizing the Socialiçinde (s. 1–33). Durham,
NC: Duke University Press.
- Colls, R. (2004) ‘Looking alright, feeling alright’: emotions, sizing
and the geographies of women’s experiences of clothing
consumption. Social andCultural Geography 5, 583–96.
- Cresswel, T. (2013) Geographic Thought A critical Introduction,
West Sussex, Wiley‐Blackwell.
- Doel, M. (2007) Post‐Structuralist Geography: A Guide to
Relational Space by Jonathan Murdoch. Annals for the
Association of American Geographers, 97, 809–810.
- Doel, M. (2010) Representation and difference, B. Anderson and
P. Harrison (eds), Taking Place: Non‐Representational Theories
and Geography içinde (s. 117‐145).Ashgate, Farnham, pp. 117–
130.
- Edensor, T. (2007) Mundane mobilities, performances and
spaces of tourism. Social and Cultural Geography 8, 199–215.
- Horton, J. and Kraftl, P. (2005) For more‐than usefulness: six
overlapping points about children’s geographies. Children’s
Geographies 3, 131–43.
- Horton, J. and Kraftl, P. (2006) What else? Some more ways of
thinking and doing children’s geographies. Children’s
Geographies 4, 69–95.
- Ingold, T. (2011) Being alive, London: Routledge.
Jones, P. (2005) Performing the city: a body and a bicycle take on
Birmingham, UK. Social and CulturalGeography 6, 813–30.
- Kaygalak, İ. (2011) Postmodern eleştirilerin coğrafî düşünce ve
yeni mekân kavrayışları üzerine yansımaları, Coğrafi Bilimler
Dergisi, 9(1),1‐10.
- Kraftl, P. (2006) Building an idea: the material construction of an
ideal childhood. Transactions of the Institute of British
Geographers NS 31, 488–504.
- Kraftl, P. (2015) Geographies of alternative education; Diverse
learning spaces for children and young people, Bristol: Policy
Press University of Bristol.
- Lassen, C. (2006) Aeromobility at work, Environment and
Planning A 38, 301–12.
- Latham, A. (2003) Research, performance, and doing human
geography: Some reflections on the diary‐photograph diaryinterview
method. Environment &Planning A, 35 , 1993–2017.
- Lorimer, H. (2005) Cultural geography: The busyness of being
“more‐thanrepresentational.” Progress in Human Geography, 29
, 83–94.
- Lorimer, (2006) Herding memories of humans and animals.
Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 24, 497–518.
- Lorimer, H. (2008) Cultural geography: Non‐representational
conditions and concerns, Progress in Human Geography, 32 ,
551–559.
- Manning, E. (2015) Against Method, Vannini P (eds) Non‐
Representational Methodologies Re‐Envisioning Research
içinde, London, Routledge.
- McCormark, P.D. (2005) Diagramming practice and
performance, . Environment and Planning D: Society and Space
23, 119‐147.
- Massey, D. B. (2005) For Space, Sage, London
Murdoch, J. (2006) Post‐Structuralist Geography: A Guide to
Relational Space, Sage, London.
- Normark, D. (2006) Tending to mobility: intensities of staying at
the petrol station. Environment andPlanning A 38, 241–52.
- Özgüç ve Tümertekin (2014) Coğrafya: Geçmiş, Kavramlar,
Coğrafyacılar, İstanbul, Çantay Kitabevi
- Öztürk, M. ve Karadağ, S. (2013) Coğrafyada Paradigmalar,
Journal of European Education, 3,1: 1‐32.
- Paterson, M. (2005) The forgetting of touch, Angelaki: Journal of
the Theoretical Humanities 10, 115–32.
- Pinder, D. (2005) Arts of urban exploration, Cultural Geographies
12, 383–411.
- Revill, G. (2004) Performing French folk music: dance,
authenticity and nonrepresentational theory, Cultural
Geographies 11, 199–209.
- Rose, M. and Wylie, J. (2006) Animating landscape, Environment
and Planning D: Society and Space 24, 475–79.
- Rose, M. (2006) Gathering ‘dreams of presence’: a project for the
cultural landscape. Environment andPlanning D: Society and
Space 24, 537–54.
- Scott, H. (2006) Rethinking landscape and colonialism in the
context of early Spanish Peru. Environment and Planning D:
Society and Space 24, 481–96.
- Sheller, M. (2007) Bodies, cybercars and the mundane
incorporation of automated mobilities, Social andCultural
Geography 8, 175–97.
- Sihirlow, P. (2002) Representation, Gallahe C, Dahlman C,
Gilmartin M, Mountz A ve Shirlow P (eds),Key Concepts in
Political Geography içinde (s. 308‐318), London, Sage
Publications.
- Spinney, J. 2006: A place of sense: a kinaesthetic ethnography of
cyclists on Mont Ventoux. Environmentand Planning D: Society
and Space 24, 709–32.
- Tekeli, İ. (2012) Türkiye'de coğrafyacıların çok paradigmalı bir
bilim dünyasında yaşamayı öğrenmesi gerekiyor, TÜCAUM VI.
Coğrafya Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı içinde (s.348‐354).
Ankara: TÜCAUM.
- Thrift, N. (2008) Non‐Representational Theory:
Space/Politics/Affect, London, Routledge
Unwin,P.T.H. 1992 The Place of Geography, Longman Scientific
& Technical, Harlow.
- Uysal, A. (2016) Londradaki Türkiyeli çocukların ulusaşırı
mekanlarda duygusal coğrafyaları, Göç Dergisi, 3:1, 99‐119
Vannini P (2015) Non‐Representational Methodologies Re‐
Envisioning Research, London, Routledge.
- Waitt, G. and Lane, R. (2007) Four‐wheel drivescapes: embodied
understandings of the Kimberley, Journal of Rural Studies 23,
156–69.
- Whatmore, S. (2002) Hybrid Geographies: Natures, Cultures,
Spaces, London, University of Oxford.
- Wylie, J. (2006) Depths and folds: on landscape and the gazing
subject. Environment and Planning D:Society and Space 24, 519–
35.