Search

This paper offers a theorization of how the state touches. Through an analysis of the extensive 2011 protests over Wisconsin Senate Bill 11, we interrogate the relatively non-violent interactions between police and protesters during the 17-day occupation of the Wisconsin State Capitol building. On display there were diverse police deployments of 'soft' force and haptic touching, technologies that enabled officers to subtly affect the movements and relations of protester crowds without resorting to familiar coercion- and consent-based politics. We offer a pair of concepts, cathexis and l'esprit de l'escalier, to diagram how statist touches were mobilized to catch individuals unawares and momentarily co-opt their bodily affects. These modes of control suggest much greater savvy regarding touch, force, and affect than is often granted in representations of the state apparatus. In light of this, we close with a reflection on the changing tactical grounds for struggle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The macro-micro distinction is one of the most powerful in the human and physical sciences. In this article we challenge the macro by positing an alternative that recognises the intricacies and complexities of material geographies. We employ the Latin proverb – Aquila non captat muscas (Eagles don't catch flies) – to epitomise our position. Instead of looking to general theory – the bird's eye view – we argue for interrogating the ontological and methodological implications of a reciprocal, but antithetical, perspective – that of the flies. We call this alternative the site, an ontology that attempts to account for the different and varying political possibilities – virtually infinite and ‘un-catalogue-able’– constantly at work in the world. The site is a formulation that recognises social life as a realm of infinite singularity and variability, where matter is immanently self-organising and pure difference unfolds. We explore the spatiality of the site through the concepts of topology and difference and then develop four methodological orientations for exploring the terrain of situated practices enmeshed in and unfolding through sites. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Human Geography Without Scale," by John Paul Jones III, Keith Woodward and Sallie A. Marston in the 2005 issue.

The concept of scale in human geography has been profoundly transformed over the past 20 years. And yet, despite the insights that both empirical and theoretical research on scale have generated, there is today no consensus on what is meant by the term or how it should be operationalized. In this paper we critique the dominant – hierarchical – conception of scale, arguing it presents a number of problems that cannot be overcome simply by adding on to or integrating with network theorizing. We thereby propose to eliminate scale as a concept in human geography. In its place we offer a different ontology, one that so flattens scale as to render the concept unnecessary. We conclude by addressing some of the political implications of a human geography without scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]