Geographies of food: 'Afters'

This third and final ‘Geographies of food’ review is based on an online blog conversation provoked by the first and second reviews in the series (Cook et al., 2006; 2008a). Authors of the work featured in these reviews – plus others whose work was not but should have been featured – were invited to respond to them, to talk about their own and other people’s work, and to enter into conversations about – and in the process review – other/new work within and beyond what could be called ‘food geographies’. These conversations were coded, edited, arranged, discussed and rearranged to produce a fragmentary, multi-authored text aiming to convey the rich and multi-stranded content, breadth and character of ongoing food studies research within and beyond geography.

Two stops in today's new global geographies: shaping novel labor supplies and employment regimes

Includes bibliography

Review of Nineteenth-Century Geographies: The Transformation of Space from the Victorian Age to the American Century, eds. H. Michie and R. Thomas

It is by now a banal observation that published collections of conference papers tend to add up to a whole that is considerably less than the sum of the parts. Nineteenth-Century Geographies, a book that grew out of an interdisciplinary conference held at Rice University in 1998 falls into this category. While assuring my readers that each individual contribution is independently worth a read is likewise a predictable cliché, it is in fact the case that every one of the 17 articles collected here—notwithstanding the rather convoluted Introduction—has much to offer the study, broadly speaking, of ‘cultural spaces’ of British and American imperialisms in the nineteenth century. . . . All of my complaints aside, this turns out to be a much more enjoyable book to read than to review, and I would recommend skimming and dipping at length. I cannot quite imagine when a read-through of this book might be called for, except perhaps in graduate seminars on related topics.

Xinjiang’s geographies in motion

Starting from the idea that places are socially constructed, this essay explores how place is established and lived in Xinjiang by the members of the area’s two largest ethnicities, the Uyghur and the Han. This paper demonstrates that there are differences in the ways Han and Uyghur imagine and ‘live’ Xinjiang. At the same time it asserts that Uyghur and Han do not establish distinct spatial relationships just because of their ethnicity, but also to enhance ethnic solidarity and boundaries vis-à-vis the other. This essay also demonstrates that places are historically contingent, and it discusses the ways in which the influx of Han temporary migrants and settlers—and Han capital—has generated new layers of spatial meaning and new power differentials.