{"title":"Response","authors":"M. Sheller","doi":"10.3167/trans.2019.090107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This special section elucidates intersections between the historiography of\nmobilities and the interdisciplinary field of mobilities research. The articles\nhighlight relationships between mobilities and stabilization, circulation and\nplace-making, deterritorialization and reterritorialization. This response essay seeks to dispel three myths about mobility studies: (1) that it is purely about the contemporary world, rather than the historical dimensions of mobile processes; (2) that it focuses solely on material phenomenon of physical transport (i.e., of things and people) and ignores the movement of ideas, knowledge, and culture; and (3) that it is purely about “flows” and “circulation” and has little to teach us about friction, resistances, blockages, or uneven power relations. The most important intersections of the histories of mobilities and the field of mobility studies can be found in the ways in which each emphasizes power differentials, blockages, friction, and the relation between mobilities and immobilities.","PeriodicalId":43789,"journal":{"name":"Transfers-Interdisciplinary Journal of Mobility Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfers-Interdisciplinary Journal of Mobility Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/trans.2019.090107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
This special section elucidates intersections between the historiography of
mobilities and the interdisciplinary field of mobilities research. The articles
highlight relationships between mobilities and stabilization, circulation and
place-making, deterritorialization and reterritorialization. This response essay seeks to dispel three myths about mobility studies: (1) that it is purely about the contemporary world, rather than the historical dimensions of mobile processes; (2) that it focuses solely on material phenomenon of physical transport (i.e., of things and people) and ignores the movement of ideas, knowledge, and culture; and (3) that it is purely about “flows” and “circulation” and has little to teach us about friction, resistances, blockages, or uneven power relations. The most important intersections of the histories of mobilities and the field of mobility studies can be found in the ways in which each emphasizes power differentials, blockages, friction, and the relation between mobilities and immobilities.