geert lovink on Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:15:42 +0200 (CEST)
|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime-ann> Geocode of Media (conference in Siegen/BRD)
|
.
The Geocode of Media
A position definition of the spatial turn
http://www.spatialturn.de/inner-engl.html
Conference of the Project "Media Geography" at the Collaborative
Research Center "Media Upheavals", University of Siegen, Germany
October 12th to 14th, 2006
As demonstrated by Philosophy Atlas (Holenstein 2004) or automotive
navigation systems, geocoding enables the process of matching maps to a
variety of other data information. Especially because of the freely
accessible and (collaboratively) editable Google maps (mashups) at the
hurricane disaster in the USA, the mapping of geographical data also
gained public recognition in the media in 2005.
In particular during periods of crisis, there obviously exists a basic
need for creating a stable point of communication via spatial
representation (Kuhm 2003). GPS therefore no longer stands for a form
of mobile communications technology alone, but more and more for
spatial, dynamic surveillance, tracking, and navigation systems.
Mapping as the process of creating maps and the transformation of
geographical data opens new perspectives for local search operations on
the internet, as well as the physical exploration of space. The
interactions of virtual and real space in “Augmented Reality” (Frieling
2004), or the recent trend game “geocaching”, serve as an example of
this.
These are only a few indications of the growing phenomenon of a new
spatial paradigm, which meanwhile has become obvious: from social
sciences to historical sciences, urban studies, art history to
literary, cinematographic, and media science, debates are raging on the
conceptualization of space, spatial practices and the so-called
“spatiality” of discourses.
Even if there is no consensus yet on what to label this reversal –
whether “topographical turn” (Weigel 2002), “spatial turn” (Schlögel
2003) or “topological turn” (Günzel 2005) – the first steps in
direction of a multidisciplinary discipline building process
(approximately analog to science) already have been taken
(Kessl/Reutlinger/Maurer/Frey 2005).
Just as clearly, however, criticism of this new paradigm is emerging
already: decades of “spatial obliviousness” in cultural and social
sciences seem to turn into a „spatial obsession”
(Geppert/Jensen/Weinhold 2005), abusing space as a category for
resubstantiation (Köster 2005). Only recently now, are professional
geographers themselves – after having observed for a conspicuously long
time the “cross-over” (Miggelbrink 2005) occurring in other disciplines
– taking action to defend their particular spatial competence in the
discipline against losing its status as a unique characteristic
(Lippuner 2005).
It appears that the question no longer needs to be: do we need a new
space paradigm? But rather: why does a space paradigm exist?
In view of this finding, it seems to be promising, if not even
essential, to gather supporters as well as opponents of the spatial
turn for a joint conference, to debate the advantages and disadvantages
of the new space paradigm. Three central issues appear to be
particularly promising:
1) Is there any common ground for systemizing each individual
scientific explanation of a “spatial turn”?
2) What importances do / should the space concepts have in geography?
So far, discussions between cultural and social scientists with
professional geographers have been neglected. Why? Will the new space
paradigm evolve without the involvement of geographers?
3) How does the increased scientific concern with space relate to
media relations? Can the new paradigm be seen as the reaction to a
dictate, based on media influences, of the „disappearance of space“ in
view of the fundamental changes in communications due to
digitalization? And, if yes, is this reaction already marked by
characteristics of a hypercorrection?
Representatives of all disciplines currently subject to questions of
space and spatiality are invited to participate in the discussion of
these issues. We are looking for presentations not only oriented
towards space theory or the history of paradigm, but that also
demonstrate a material example from one’s own space science research
experience. In addition to hat, we are organizing professionals willing
to serve as respondents to papers of each individual discipline. The
conference itself will have a strong emphasis on debates, with equal
time slots reserved for discussions and individual presentation.
Selected Literature:
Frieling, Rudolf: The Archive, the Media, the Map and the Text. 2004.
Online available: http://www.medienkunstnetz.de, 2006.
Geppert, Alexander/ Uffa Jensen / Jörg Weinhold (Eds.): Ortsgespräche.
Raum und Kommunikation im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Bielefeld 2005.
Günzel, Stephan: Topologie. WeltRaumDenken. November 10, 2005. Online
available: http://www.geophilosophie.de, 2006.
Holenstein, Elmar: Philosophie-Atlas. Orte und Wege des Denkens.
Zürich 2004.
Kessl, Fabian / Christian Reutlinger / Susanne Maurer / Oliver Frey
(Eds.): Handbuch Sozialraum. Wiesbaden 2005
Köster, Werner: Deutschland, 1900-2000: Der Raum als Kategorie der
Resubstanzialisierung. Analysen zur deutschen Semantik und
Wissenschaftsgeschichte. In: TopoGraphien der Moderne. Medien zur
Repräsentation und Konstruktion von Räumen. München 2005, p. 25-72.
Kuhm, Klaus: Telekommunikative Medien und Raumstrukturen der
Kommunikation. In: Funken, Christiane / Martina Löw (Eds.): Raum – Zeit
– Medialität. Interdisziplinäre Studien zu neuen
Kommunikationstechnologien. Opladen 2003, p. 97-117.
Lippuner, Roland: Raum – Systeme – Praktiken. Zum Verhältnis von
Alltag, Wissenschaft und Geographie. Stuttgart 2005.
Miggelbrink, Judith: Die (Un-)Ordnung des Raumes. Bemerkungen zum
Wandel geographischer Raumkonzepte im ausgehenden 20. Jahrhundert. In:
Geppert, Alexander/ Uffa Jensen / Jörg Weinhold (Eds.): Ortsgespräche.
Raum und Kommunikation im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Bielefeld 2005, p.
79-105.
Schlögel, Karl: Im Raume lesen wir die Zeit. Über
Zivilisationsgeschichte und Geopolitik. München 2003.
Weigel, Sigrid: Zum ‚topographical turn‘. Kartographie, Topographie
und Raumkonzepte in den Kulturwissenschaften. In: Kulturpoetik 2
(2002), p. 151-165.
_______________________________________________
nettime-ann mailing list
nettime-ann@nettime.org
http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-ann