Embodied experiences in international volunteering: power-body relations and performative ontologies

In this paper we debate the interpretation of embodied experience on international volunteering placements. Drawing on six in-depth interviews with volunteers recently returned from Northern Thailand, we document the affects and emotions that play a key role in the formation of volunteer–host relations. We then present two interpretations of the data, conceptualising power-body relations in two different ways: from power’s affective and emotional literacy, to the body’s autonomous capacities. With these two interpretations at hand we then consider the performative nature of academic labour and make the case, following the work of feminist geographers J.K. Gibson-Graham, for a research praxis that does not set limits on subjectivity but rather excavates – and writes into being – the possible. We therefore argue for a conceptualisation and interpretation of embodied experience in volunteering as a site of potential transformation and transcendence of the inequalities that otherwise set the conditions of the volunteer–host encounter.     

The production, symbolization and socialization of gentrification: impressions from two Berkshire villages

Gentrification has long been the subject of considerable interest and debate amongst geographers. A range of differing ontological and epistemological conceptions of gentrification have been advanced, with attempts often being made to legislate between them to establish some definitive categorizations of gentrification. The majority of gentrification studies are also highly urbanized: gentrification is seen explicitly or implicitly as a phenomenon that occurs in urban space. This paper questions both the legislative and urban foci of gentrification studies, by outlining an interpretative study of material, social and symbolic dimensions of gentrification within two villages in rural Berkshire.     

Understanding interdisciplinarity in its argumentative context: thought and rhetoric in the perception of academic practices

ABSTRACT

The meaning and value of interdisciplinarity can be described in several, at times even contradictory, ways. Yet, little is known about how these play a role in individuals’ argumentation and everyday thinking. Drawing on Michael Billig’s rhetorical psychology, this paper explores how individuals draw on meanings, values, and connotations of interdisciplinarity to construct arguments and counter-arguments about this practice. This approach sheds light on the contradictions that surround interdisciplinarity, and thus on the rhetorical context in which its meaning is constituted. The value of rhetorical psychology for the study of interdisciplinarity is demonstrated through the analysis of the discourse of 27 interviews with researchers and administrators from a large British university. The analysis identifies 12 interpretative repertoires interviewees use to argue and to think about interdisciplinarity. Highlighting these repertoires and the contradictions between them is relevant for stimulating individuals’ reflexivity, critical thought, and decision-making regarding disciplinarity and interdisciplinarity.