Reflections on geographies of age: a response to Hopkins and Pain
Reflections on geographies of age: a response to Hopkins and Pain
复制标题
对年龄地理的思考：对霍普金斯和疼痛的回应
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Peter Kraftl
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Horton;Peter Kraftl
霍普金斯和佩恩最近（2007）关于“年龄的关系地理学”的论文为许多当代人文地理学的实践和假设提供了清晰、及时和有用的挑战。他们的论文受到了欢迎，因为它对“童年”（例如，Valentine 2003；Vanderbeck，2007）和“老年”（例如，Harper 和 Laws，1995；Pain 等，2000）相关的亚学科问题提出了建设性的批评和主流化。然而，正如 Hopkins 和 Pain (2007, 291-2) 承认的那样，他们的挑战的概念、方法论和认识论含义在很大程度上仍有待确定。因此，面对这一挑战，本评论通过与他们的文章的两次接触，概述了一些额外的、主要是概念性的、对“年龄的关系地理学”的考虑：首先，我们批判性地考虑其中提出的关键概念及其性质和应用；其次，我们反思当代地理工作有关儿童和青年的方向。我们的评论并不是对霍普金斯和佩恩的批评（当然，我们强调了一些概念上的差异），而是对人文地理学中的子学科工作的一系列反思性、批判性和创造性的评论。
Hopkins and Pain's recent (2007) essay on 'relational geographies of age' provides a clear-sighted, timely and useful challenge to the practices and assumptions of much contemporary human geography. Their paper is to be welcomed as a constructive critique and mainstreaming of now-solid subdisciplinary concerns regarding both 'childhood' (e.g. Valentine 2003; Vanderbeck 2007) and 'old age' (e.g. Harper and Laws 1995; Pain et al. 2000). However, as Hopkins and Pain (2007, 291-2) admit, the conceptual, methodological and epistemological implications of their challenge remain, largely, to be mapped. So, taking up this challenge, this Commentary sketches some additional, predominantly conceptual, considerations for 'relational geographies of age', via two engagements with their essay: first, we critically consider the key concepts propounded therein, and their nature and application; second, we reflect upon the direction of contemporary geographical work regarding childhood and youth. Our Commentary is intended not as criticism of Hopkins and Pain (although, certainly, we highlight some conceptual differences), so much as a series of reflexive, critical and creative remarks upon subdisciplinary work within human geography.