What do you think?
Rate this book
Non-Places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity
An ever-increasing proportion of our lives is spent in supermarkets, airports and hotels, on motorways or in front of TVs, computer and cash machines. This invasion of the world by what Marc Auge calls ‘non-space’ results in a profound alteration of something we perceive, but only in a partial and incoherent manner. Auge uses the concept of ‘supermodernity’ to describe the logic of these late-capitalist phenomena—a logic of excessive information and excessive space. In this fascinating and lucid essay he seeks to establish and intellectual armature for an anthropology of supermodernity. Starting with an attempt to disentangle anthropology from history, Auge goes on to map the distinction between place , encrusted with historical monuments and creative social life, and non-place , to which individuals are connected in a uniform manner and where no organic social life is possible.
Unlike Baudelairean modernity, where old and new are interwoven, supermodernity is from the motorway or aircraft, local or exotic particularities are presented two-dimensionally as a sort of theme-park spectacle. Auge does not suggest that supermodernity is place still exist outside non-place and tend to reconstitute themselves inside it. But he argues powerfully that we are in transit through non-place for more and more of our time, as if between immense parentheses, and concludes that this new form of solitude should become the subject of an anthropology of its own.
Unlike Baudelairean modernity, where old and new are interwoven, supermodernity is from the motorway or aircraft, local or exotic particularities are presented two-dimensionally as a sort of theme-park spectacle. Auge does not suggest that supermodernity is place still exist outside non-place and tend to reconstitute themselves inside it. But he argues powerfully that we are in transit through non-place for more and more of our time, as if between immense parentheses, and concludes that this new form of solitude should become the subject of an anthropology of its own.
122 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 1992
About the author
Marc Augé
162 books154 followersMarc Augé is a French anthropologist. His career can be divided into three stages, reflecting shifts in both his geographical focus and theoretical development: early (African), middle (European) and late (Global). These successive stages do not involve a broadening of interest or focus as such, but rather the development of a theoretical apparatus able to meet the demands of the growing conviction that the local can no longer be understood except as a part of the complicated global whole.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 155 reviews
June 29, 2023
The premise of the book is interesting: non-places lack the significance to be really considered as spaces; they are spaces that are not, anthropologically, places. However, the book falls short. Auge concentrates on defining what an anthropological space is, although people with even a fairly basic knowledge of anthropology will know this. At the same time he often is vague on the concept of non-places, as a result of which I have so many doubts about the concept that I do not see it as a useful tool. When he writes of airports as non-places, I am reminded of the narrator's discussion of airports in Palahniuk's Fight Club; but then I realize that people work there, and for them it is an anthropological space. Second of all, sticking to the airport, we can easily see it as a anthropological place despite its super-modern qualities. The way airports are divided into different places, the way we interact with security, the VIP lounges and waiting rooms, etc. where interaction takes place, which is characterized by its own rules, and seems to form a place that transcends location.
Taking transit into account, when most of us take a bus, subway or fly somewhere, it is true - we do so in virtual isolation. But think of the field trip, or when a group of people travel together, e.g. annually, to an annual retreat or a business camp, which will result in a completely different way that a given space is used. Similarly the hotel room - it seems a non-place at first, but if we shift our attention to a concrete room, we may find history, e.g. a room once occupied by a well-known person in the Chelsea Hotel. The same could be said about a specific supermarket or shopping center, particularly when it is not used as a place to engage in consumer activity, but a social space. Think of mall rats, who are just there, the young people who redefine these spaces by using them as places to go out for a date. In this context it may make such space seem more like places than a historic tourist attraction, which is approached in the post-/hyper-modern way Auge discusses. Furthermore, the assumption that one is anonymous in such non-spaces, an individual without links to the community seems either myopic or deemphasizing the way a space is used by those visiting it. Even more problematically, this raises questions of the existence of non-places prior to super-modernity. I also have an issue with his view that entering non-places takes away our identity (in the social sense), and we only are identified when entering or exiting a non-place. This argument completely falls apart if you use cash rather than a check or credit card (an issue Auge adroitly avoids, which is problematic in light of the view that we are always observed and never anonymous in a 'panopticonic' world). When one visits a supermarket, or anything else that is deemed a non-place, and meets a colleague, friend, etc. this stops applying. We can say that Auge mentions that the traveler he discusses (and, by extension shopper, or anyone else in a non-place) is alone. However, this is problematic: the same rule seems to apply to many pre-super-modern spaces. This beckons at the old conundrum of the tree falling in the forest with no one there to hear it: if I visit a supermarket, and no one is there to identify me, have I visited the supermarket? Barring the question of self-consciousness (I identified myself in the supermarket), which Auge does by separating an individual from a society, this is not, again, limited only to super-modernity, but to a broader question of how society functions (also think of taboo places that existed, had an anthropological role as myths, but were not ventured into).
Auge is not reckless in his argument, and he mentions (mentions, whereas it should be emphasized) that the status of a non-place is fluid, preparing for such contingencies, but he never seems to give them any thought, as a result of which he creates the impression of being dismissive of them. Furthermore, he draws very heavily on the work of Michel de Certeau, which he simply places in the context of what he calls 'the three excesses of super-modernity', which undermines the originality of his discussion.
Auge tries to place the notion of non-places in the area of politics. This is risky, and I consider it ill-advised. First of all, he sees the status of a non-place as fluid. If it is for this quality that he believes such places are e.g. targets of terrorist attacks (a very problematic statement in this day and age) or lead to the strengthening of nationalist politics, which aim to give places their significance. But if we take his entire argument into account, it seems that they are actually protesting (in his context, as it seems that recent history invalidated parts of this hypothesis) against the way a place is used.
Tentatively I think that the book suffers from comparisons to other anthropological texts, while ignoring western historicity and being vague about a number of differences. I think that it is possible to find examples of non-places in times preceding super-modernity. How does a modern day supermarket differ from a marketplace of 400 years ago? Is a modern mom and pop store a non-place? How does a a modern day passenger differ from a traveler, and why is a 'traditional' train a place, whereas the TGV is not? Auge's text never offers us any insight into these questions, even if he employs them in his text, such as the traveler/passenger or SNCF/TGV dichotomies. By doing so in a seemingly arbitrary manner, he seems to be undermining his own argument.
The book left me nonplussed, but the fact that I wrote such a long (and likely rambling) review shows that it has the potential to challenge certain assumptions, and definitely is thought provoking, despite of its shortcomings.
Taking transit into account, when most of us take a bus, subway or fly somewhere, it is true - we do so in virtual isolation. But think of the field trip, or when a group of people travel together, e.g. annually, to an annual retreat or a business camp, which will result in a completely different way that a given space is used. Similarly the hotel room - it seems a non-place at first, but if we shift our attention to a concrete room, we may find history, e.g. a room once occupied by a well-known person in the Chelsea Hotel. The same could be said about a specific supermarket or shopping center, particularly when it is not used as a place to engage in consumer activity, but a social space. Think of mall rats, who are just there, the young people who redefine these spaces by using them as places to go out for a date. In this context it may make such space seem more like places than a historic tourist attraction, which is approached in the post-/hyper-modern way Auge discusses. Furthermore, the assumption that one is anonymous in such non-spaces, an individual without links to the community seems either myopic or deemphasizing the way a space is used by those visiting it. Even more problematically, this raises questions of the existence of non-places prior to super-modernity. I also have an issue with his view that entering non-places takes away our identity (in the social sense), and we only are identified when entering or exiting a non-place. This argument completely falls apart if you use cash rather than a check or credit card (an issue Auge adroitly avoids, which is problematic in light of the view that we are always observed and never anonymous in a 'panopticonic' world). When one visits a supermarket, or anything else that is deemed a non-place, and meets a colleague, friend, etc. this stops applying. We can say that Auge mentions that the traveler he discusses (and, by extension shopper, or anyone else in a non-place) is alone. However, this is problematic: the same rule seems to apply to many pre-super-modern spaces. This beckons at the old conundrum of the tree falling in the forest with no one there to hear it: if I visit a supermarket, and no one is there to identify me, have I visited the supermarket? Barring the question of self-consciousness (I identified myself in the supermarket), which Auge does by separating an individual from a society, this is not, again, limited only to super-modernity, but to a broader question of how society functions (also think of taboo places that existed, had an anthropological role as myths, but were not ventured into).
Auge is not reckless in his argument, and he mentions (mentions, whereas it should be emphasized) that the status of a non-place is fluid, preparing for such contingencies, but he never seems to give them any thought, as a result of which he creates the impression of being dismissive of them. Furthermore, he draws very heavily on the work of Michel de Certeau, which he simply places in the context of what he calls 'the three excesses of super-modernity', which undermines the originality of his discussion.
Auge tries to place the notion of non-places in the area of politics. This is risky, and I consider it ill-advised. First of all, he sees the status of a non-place as fluid. If it is for this quality that he believes such places are e.g. targets of terrorist attacks (a very problematic statement in this day and age) or lead to the strengthening of nationalist politics, which aim to give places their significance. But if we take his entire argument into account, it seems that they are actually protesting (in his context, as it seems that recent history invalidated parts of this hypothesis) against the way a place is used.
Tentatively I think that the book suffers from comparisons to other anthropological texts, while ignoring western historicity and being vague about a number of differences. I think that it is possible to find examples of non-places in times preceding super-modernity. How does a modern day supermarket differ from a marketplace of 400 years ago? Is a modern mom and pop store a non-place? How does a a modern day passenger differ from a traveler, and why is a 'traditional' train a place, whereas the TGV is not? Auge's text never offers us any insight into these questions, even if he employs them in his text, such as the traveler/passenger or SNCF/TGV dichotomies. By doing so in a seemingly arbitrary manner, he seems to be undermining his own argument.
The book left me nonplussed, but the fact that I wrote such a long (and likely rambling) review shows that it has the potential to challenge certain assumptions, and definitely is thought provoking, despite of its shortcomings.
Read
April 4, 2012Augé, like any number of other "theorists," is almost more of a belle-lettrist than a philosopher or social scientist. These theorists who seem to prioritize elegant writing over systematic knowledge are sometimes brilliant (Benjamin, Barthes) and sometimes blithering (Baudrillard, Certeau). I'm not quite sure which Augé is.
First of all, his definition of "non-places" strikes me as pretty suspect an deeply rooted in some of the more discreditable brands of mid-century structuralist thought. However, a number of ideas he expresses are provocative, even fascinating. I just find it somewhat bothersome that he-- as an anthropological and geographic investigator-- chooses to write his arguments through spiderwebs of Jesuitical axioms and the structure of myth rather than groundwork and legwork. As a connoisseur of spatial thought, I would compare this to Bachelard's Poetics of Space; both are totally fascinating, and almost completely inapplicable, but thought-provoking reads.
First of all, his definition of "non-places" strikes me as pretty suspect an deeply rooted in some of the more discreditable brands of mid-century structuralist thought. However, a number of ideas he expresses are provocative, even fascinating. I just find it somewhat bothersome that he-- as an anthropological and geographic investigator-- chooses to write his arguments through spiderwebs of Jesuitical axioms and the structure of myth rather than groundwork and legwork. As a connoisseur of spatial thought, I would compare this to Bachelard's Poetics of Space; both are totally fascinating, and almost completely inapplicable, but thought-provoking reads.
January 17, 2009
A marvellous discussion of supermodernity, but I'm a little skeptical of the notion of non-spaces. It seems to me that all places are potentially non-places, and all spaces that are framed as non-places in this book are potentially anthropological places too. My friend gave the most amazing example when we were discussing this: an airport is not a non-place for a person who works at the airport and goes there every day. Therefore this is a very loose definition, and to be fair Augé does acknowledge the fluidity of these definitions to a certain extent, but I still feel as though it doesn't suffice to give these loose definitions and leave it at that. I would have expected two or three more chapters in which he'd actually do something with these notions; that would have made this book a much better read.
June 24, 2016
I luoghi antropologici creano un sociale organico, i nonluoghi creano una contrattualità solitaria.
Libro breve ma denso, a tratti addirittura ostico, involuto. Antropologia con tratti esistenzialistici, pervasa da una sensazione di palpabile angoscia, basata sul dato incontrovertibile che la modernità (o surmodernità, come la definisce lui) è sovrabbondante, di una sovrabbondanza isterica e deleteria (strade, svincoli, ipermercati, mezzi di trasporto, i non luoghi, i luoghi di passaggio, di passaggio veloce: treni, metrò, autostrade, aerei, oppure nonluoghi cablati: il web, le comunicazione via cellulari, tv, satelliti di passaggio e interscambio acorporeo) di una sovrabbondanza straniante.
Siamo in contatto con molte più persone di quanto non lo fossero i nostri nonni, i nostri genitori, ma i nostri rapporti sono più superficiali, ci sfioriamo senza toccarci in un mondo espanso, in perenne fuga da un centro (anche esistenziale) che cambia sempre. In questo mondo sostanzialmente liquido (irresistibile il parallelo con l'altro grande sociologo dei nostri tempi: Zygmunt Bauman) espanso fino all'incredibile, dove i luoghi fisici sono, almeno in teoria, più facilmente raggiungibili che in tutti gli altri tempi della Storia, siamo incredibilmente più bloccati: dal tempo (che fugge e a cui occorre dare un senso), dallo sfiorarsi veloce che impone invece un bisogno di fermarsi e toccarsi davvero, di interagire davvero, di esistere davvero. La lezione profonda che ho tratto da questo libricino è che i non luoghi oggi abbondano, ma siamo noi, con la nostra presenza emotiva, con la nostra partecipazione non solo intellettuale ma anche sentimentale, siano noi che possiamo renderli luoghi veri, vivi, riparo dell'essere e dell'esistenza, non semplici zone di passaggio o di interscambio fatuo e superficiale. Sono sempre gli esseri umani, con la loro umanità, a fare la differenza, in ogni tempo.
Libro breve ma denso, a tratti addirittura ostico, involuto. Antropologia con tratti esistenzialistici, pervasa da una sensazione di palpabile angoscia, basata sul dato incontrovertibile che la modernità (o surmodernità, come la definisce lui) è sovrabbondante, di una sovrabbondanza isterica e deleteria (strade, svincoli, ipermercati, mezzi di trasporto, i non luoghi, i luoghi di passaggio, di passaggio veloce: treni, metrò, autostrade, aerei, oppure nonluoghi cablati: il web, le comunicazione via cellulari, tv, satelliti di passaggio e interscambio acorporeo) di una sovrabbondanza straniante.
Siamo in contatto con molte più persone di quanto non lo fossero i nostri nonni, i nostri genitori, ma i nostri rapporti sono più superficiali, ci sfioriamo senza toccarci in un mondo espanso, in perenne fuga da un centro (anche esistenziale) che cambia sempre. In questo mondo sostanzialmente liquido (irresistibile il parallelo con l'altro grande sociologo dei nostri tempi: Zygmunt Bauman) espanso fino all'incredibile, dove i luoghi fisici sono, almeno in teoria, più facilmente raggiungibili che in tutti gli altri tempi della Storia, siamo incredibilmente più bloccati: dal tempo (che fugge e a cui occorre dare un senso), dallo sfiorarsi veloce che impone invece un bisogno di fermarsi e toccarsi davvero, di interagire davvero, di esistere davvero. La lezione profonda che ho tratto da questo libricino è che i non luoghi oggi abbondano, ma siamo noi, con la nostra presenza emotiva, con la nostra partecipazione non solo intellettuale ma anche sentimentale, siano noi che possiamo renderli luoghi veri, vivi, riparo dell'essere e dell'esistenza, non semplici zone di passaggio o di interscambio fatuo e superficiale. Sono sempre gli esseri umani, con la loro umanità, a fare la differenza, in ogni tempo.
January 25, 2023
me ha encantado. creo que leer sobre los no-lugares puede ser una manera en la que poder reconfigurar aquellos espacios por los que transitamos y pasamos día a día sin ser ni estar, propiamente
January 14, 2017
Tedioso coñazo infumable, escrito de la forma más farragosa posible para que el lector tenga la sensación de estar avanzando por una piscina de puré de guisantes. Una orgía de citas encadenadas y embebidas unas en otras y rodeadas por docenas de explicaciones conceptuales redactadas de la forma más complicada permitida por la gramática, todo ello traducido de forma descuidada. Un libro escrito para que otros filósofos digan que lo han leido y le chupen el trasero o pongan a parir a su autor dependiendo de si su director de tesis se lleva bien o mal con él. Dicho esto, resumámoslo dentro de lo posible.
Desde que tengo memoria me han fascinado los lugares impersonales. Nada me satisfacía más que cenar en un área de servicio de la autopista regresando de alguna reunión en un pueblo remoto e improbable de la Cataluña profunda. Primero porque lo pagaba mi empresa, pero sobre todo por el hecho de encontrarme en tránsito; la íntima satisfacción producida por la ilusión de estar yendo a algún sitio que provocan esta clase de lugares.
Los no-lugares de Marc Augé (que los toma de Michel de Certeau, un jesuíta que ya había palmado cuando se publicó este libro) son esta clase de lugares impersonales y uniformizadores. Se define el no-lugar como oposición al "lugar antropológico", es decir el espacio físico donde se lleva a cabo un estudio etnológico. La relación del ser humano con el espacio físico que ocupa es una de las principales tareas de la antropología; los no-lugares no permiten dicha tarea porque son espacios sin pasado, explícitamente utilitarios, en las que una pléyade de identidades se disuelven en el anonimato en el ratito que permanecen allí. Un usuario de un aeropuerto es un número, cuya identidad es importante exclusivamente a la hora de subirse al avión o de pagar el juguete que le ha comprado a su hijo porque se siente culpable por no pasar suficiente tiempo con él.
En esta categoría de no-lugares se incluyen los aeropuertos como ejemplo arquetípico, pero también las estaciones de ferrocarril, las autopistas, los hoteles de grandes cadenas internacionales o los supermercados, pero también los "lugares imaginarios" como son Tahití, Marrakech o Nueva York para alguien que sólo los ha visto en el escaparate de una agencia de viajes.
EL concepto de no-lugar resulta muy atractivo, pero o bien se queda muy corto o bien sobrepasa con creces su propósito original. Los aeropuertos son impersonales para el que pasa por allí camino de otro sitio, pero para los trabajadores del lugar suele ser una especie de catedral. Cada aeropuerto tiene sus particularidades y de hecho en la última década y pico los administradores de muchos de ellos se han esforzado en diferenciarse de alguna manera, en aportarle al viajero algo más que un Starbucks y cintas transportadoras. La existencia de tiendas libres de impuestos donde se vende principalmente alcohol, tabaco, bombones, perfumes y juguetes para niños dice mucho más del ser humano aeroportuario de lo que parece sugerir Augé.
Por otro lado, consideramos que una gasolinera o una habitación de hotel son completamente impersonales porque únicamente vemos el final del proceso. La forma en la que están colocados los Donuts y los chicles junto a la caja de la gasolinera son el resultado de cientos de horas de estudio por parte de mentes brillantes. La distribución y la decoración de la habitación de un hotel cualquiera son producto de sesudas investigaciones (y de las limitaciones impuestas por el espacio disponible, claro). Se puede alegar que la despersonalización del lugar y el absoluto desarraigo de los usuarios hacia él es lo que los convierte en no-lugar (no hay relación entre un pasajero de Vueling y el A320 que le transporta más allá de la puramente contractual, que dura lo que dura el vuelo), pero en ese caso el concepto de no-lugar como centro de concentración de anonimatos debe expandirse sobremanera hasta abarcar cualquier lugar cuya génesis se encuentre más allá de los límites del barrio donde se ubica. Es decir, un Starbucks, cualquier discoteca, la playa como destino genérico, un polígono industrial o casi cualquier ejemplo imaginable.
En resumen: leer esto ha sido un puto suplicio y encima no estoy de acuerdo con el autor. Ha sido mi primera experiencia leyendo filósofos franceses contemporáneos y espero que sea la última. Copón ya.
Desde que tengo memoria me han fascinado los lugares impersonales. Nada me satisfacía más que cenar en un área de servicio de la autopista regresando de alguna reunión en un pueblo remoto e improbable de la Cataluña profunda. Primero porque lo pagaba mi empresa, pero sobre todo por el hecho de encontrarme en tránsito; la íntima satisfacción producida por la ilusión de estar yendo a algún sitio que provocan esta clase de lugares.
Los no-lugares de Marc Augé (que los toma de Michel de Certeau, un jesuíta que ya había palmado cuando se publicó este libro) son esta clase de lugares impersonales y uniformizadores. Se define el no-lugar como oposición al "lugar antropológico", es decir el espacio físico donde se lleva a cabo un estudio etnológico. La relación del ser humano con el espacio físico que ocupa es una de las principales tareas de la antropología; los no-lugares no permiten dicha tarea porque son espacios sin pasado, explícitamente utilitarios, en las que una pléyade de identidades se disuelven en el anonimato en el ratito que permanecen allí. Un usuario de un aeropuerto es un número, cuya identidad es importante exclusivamente a la hora de subirse al avión o de pagar el juguete que le ha comprado a su hijo porque se siente culpable por no pasar suficiente tiempo con él.
En esta categoría de no-lugares se incluyen los aeropuertos como ejemplo arquetípico, pero también las estaciones de ferrocarril, las autopistas, los hoteles de grandes cadenas internacionales o los supermercados, pero también los "lugares imaginarios" como son Tahití, Marrakech o Nueva York para alguien que sólo los ha visto en el escaparate de una agencia de viajes.
EL concepto de no-lugar resulta muy atractivo, pero o bien se queda muy corto o bien sobrepasa con creces su propósito original. Los aeropuertos son impersonales para el que pasa por allí camino de otro sitio, pero para los trabajadores del lugar suele ser una especie de catedral. Cada aeropuerto tiene sus particularidades y de hecho en la última década y pico los administradores de muchos de ellos se han esforzado en diferenciarse de alguna manera, en aportarle al viajero algo más que un Starbucks y cintas transportadoras. La existencia de tiendas libres de impuestos donde se vende principalmente alcohol, tabaco, bombones, perfumes y juguetes para niños dice mucho más del ser humano aeroportuario de lo que parece sugerir Augé.
Por otro lado, consideramos que una gasolinera o una habitación de hotel son completamente impersonales porque únicamente vemos el final del proceso. La forma en la que están colocados los Donuts y los chicles junto a la caja de la gasolinera son el resultado de cientos de horas de estudio por parte de mentes brillantes. La distribución y la decoración de la habitación de un hotel cualquiera son producto de sesudas investigaciones (y de las limitaciones impuestas por el espacio disponible, claro). Se puede alegar que la despersonalización del lugar y el absoluto desarraigo de los usuarios hacia él es lo que los convierte en no-lugar (no hay relación entre un pasajero de Vueling y el A320 que le transporta más allá de la puramente contractual, que dura lo que dura el vuelo), pero en ese caso el concepto de no-lugar como centro de concentración de anonimatos debe expandirse sobremanera hasta abarcar cualquier lugar cuya génesis se encuentre más allá de los límites del barrio donde se ubica. Es decir, un Starbucks, cualquier discoteca, la playa como destino genérico, un polígono industrial o casi cualquier ejemplo imaginable.
En resumen: leer esto ha sido un puto suplicio y encima no estoy de acuerdo con el autor. Ha sido mi primera experiencia leyendo filósofos franceses contemporáneos y espero que sea la última. Copón ya.
July 12, 2020
Korisnik nemesta pronalazi svoj identitet tek u trenutku carinske kontrole, naplate drumarine na autoputu ili plaćanja kupljene robe u samoposluzi. U međuvremenu se podvrgava istim pravilima kao svi ostali: beleži iste poruke, odgovara na iste zahteve. Prostor nemesta ne stvara ni lični identitet ni međusobne odnose, već isključivo samoću i sličnost. (98)
May 28, 2014
bunch of babbling and non-sense
August 5, 2020
Gerokai apardo vietos mitologiją, kuria daugybė humanitarų, nuo istorikų iki antropologų dar šventai tiki. Vietoje "įsivietinimo" (toks smarkiai sudievintas terminas lietuvių humanitarikoj) daug dažnesnės ir įdomesnės dabar yra pereinamos, laikinos erdvės, dar ne savos vietos, arba jau ne savos vietos. Įvairiems kultūros tyrinėtojams turėtų būti stalo knyga, bet kažin ar tų laikų sulauksim :)
September 7, 2021
أين أنت حين تكون في الطريق السريع أو في محطة قطار أو في مطار أو في طائرة، أو في فندق أو في موت تجاري أو في مخيم لاجئين؟ أنت في فضاء السرعة والعبور والمؤقت.
أنت لست في مكان وإنما في «اللامكان». المكان، في معناه الأنثروبولوجي، لا يكون مكانا إلا بما ينتج ويثبت فيه من رموز ومعاني، عبر المسارات والعلاقات والأفعال والأحاديث، وما ينبعث فيها من احتمالات.
كل مكان لا هوية له ثابتة، لا تنسج فيه العلاقات ولا تستمر لا ملامح تاريخية له، هو واحد من هذه «اللاأمكنة» التي أنتجتها «الحداثة المفرطة» وجعلتها من سمات هذا العصر.
الحداثة المفرطة» فرضت على أشكال الوعي الفردي أن يختبر تجارب جديدة من العزلة ترتبط، مباشرة، بظهور «اللاأمكنة» وانتشارها. هذه «اللاأمكنة» هي نقيض السكن والإقامة: من يرتادها هو، فيها، وحيد و مشابه للآخرين، في الوقت نفسه . لا يمكنه إخفاء هويته، فيها، إلا بإظهار ما يثبتها (جواز سفر، بطاقة مصرفية، إلخ...). هو، معها، في علاقة تعاقد عابر ينتهي بخروجه منها.
إن المؤلف -وهو أحد أشهر الأنثروبولوجيين المهتمين بالحياة اليومية المعاصرة- يفتح، في هذا الكتاب، آفاقا جديدة لأنثروبولوجيا «الحداثة المفرطة» التي يتوقع أن توجه الباحثين إلى دراسة نمط جديد من الفردانية ومن عزلة الإنسان المعاصر.
أنت لست في مكان وإنما في «اللامكان». المكان، في معناه الأنثروبولوجي، لا يكون مكانا إلا بما ينتج ويثبت فيه من رموز ومعاني، عبر المسارات والعلاقات والأفعال والأحاديث، وما ينبعث فيها من احتمالات.
كل مكان لا هوية له ثابتة، لا تنسج فيه العلاقات ولا تستمر لا ملامح تاريخية له، هو واحد من هذه «اللاأمكنة» التي أنتجتها «الحداثة المفرطة» وجعلتها من سمات هذا العصر.
الحداثة المفرطة» فرضت على أشكال الوعي الفردي أن يختبر تجارب جديدة من العزلة ترتبط، مباشرة، بظهور «اللاأمكنة» وانتشارها. هذه «اللاأمكنة» هي نقيض السكن والإقامة: من يرتادها هو، فيها، وحيد و مشابه للآخرين، في الوقت نفسه . لا يمكنه إخفاء هويته، فيها، إلا بإظهار ما يثبتها (جواز سفر، بطاقة مصرفية، إلخ...). هو، معها، في علاقة تعاقد عابر ينتهي بخروجه منها.
إن المؤلف -وهو أحد أشهر الأنثروبولوجيين المهتمين بالحياة اليومية المعاصرة- يفتح، في هذا الكتاب، آفاقا جديدة لأنثروبولوجيا «الحداثة المفرطة» التي يتوقع أن توجه الباحثين إلى دراسة نمط جديد من الفردانية ومن عزلة الإنسان المعاصر.
April 14, 2012
A little gem of a meditation on the distinction between "anthropological places" formed by social bonds and collective history, and "non-places" of atomized, individual travel and consumption. This is the non-silly vein of French theory, grounded, urbane, a delight to read, crammed with provocative concepts presented in a graceful style.
Quite wonderful.
Quite wonderful.
April 10, 2016
think he should craft aphoristic tweets instead of creating something as odd as a "non-place". the thesis of this book does not make sense, especially when expanded into novella length. irrelevant examples and digressions enter, leading me to imagine the subtle purpose is for pretentious meandering.
March 4, 2018
اللا أمكنة مفهوم يحاول من خلاله مارك أوجيه التفرقة بين المكان الانثروبولوجي الذي يتميز بأنه هوياتي وعلائقي وتاريخي الذي يشتبك مع الأفراد الموجودين داخل حدوده ويدخل في علاقة جدليه معهم بحيث يتمايز ثقافيا واجتماعيا عن غيره مما يجعله صالح كموضوع للإثنولوجي وبين اللأمكنة المعقمة من التاريخ (حسب تعبير المسيري) التي تشئ الأفراد وتطمس هويتهم الفردية حيث لا تهتم بهم إلا أثناء الخروج أو الدخول منها مثل المطارات والمولات والطرق السريعة والتي على عكس المكان الانثروبولوجي التي يتواصل ذاتيا من الأنسان فإنها تلجأ لوسيط كشاشات التلفاز او لو حة الاعلانات من أجل توصيل التعليمات والارشادات لروادها بلغة بسيطة وسطحية
الكتاب جيد ويحتاج قراءة ثانية حيث لا أزعم أني فهمته بالكامل
الكتاب جيد ويحتاج قراءة ثانية حيث لا أزعم أني فهمته بالكامل
December 15, 2021
Marc Augé’s now classic analysis in Non-Places merits regular revisiting, in part because of its clarity and in part because of its careful distinguishing of its concepts. It’s not in any way novel to note that social theory has been marked by a spatial turn, and especially so in the 1990s with the growing awareness of analysts such as David Harvey, Henri Lefebvre and Ed Soja and a growing engagement with spatially oriented post-colonial analyses, such as Gloria Anzaldua’s, linked to notions of borderlands and third space. Some of this work developed relatively novel insights within a wider post- tendency in social theory, in other settings these analysts developed ideas that had been emerging in disciplines such as geography where Yi-Fu Tuan’s notions of placelessness were explored in the context of late capitalism.
Augé’s work remains important in part because he sets up a set of distinctions between history and anthropology as exploring the Other – in time and place, so that anthropology grapples with the Other now, in a distinction he sees as emphasising the near and the elsewhere. The distinction he sets up is not just between place and no-place, but between anthropological place and non-place, where his reading of anthropology is paradoxical. “’Anthropological place’ is formed by individual identities, through complicities of language, local references, the unformulated rules of living know-how; non-place creates the shared identity of passengers, customers and Sunday drivers.” (p101) The paradox of this anthropological place is that discipline’s tendency, as Augé notes, to treat its individuals as representative of all their people – hence the recurrent use of the definite article (as in the Nuer – to invoke Evans-Pritchard).
It’s the particularity and ‘anthropological place’ that Augé highlights in this contrast, where his non-place (and its collective identify of ‘passengers, customers and Sunday drivers’) is marked by three forms of excess – as he calls is an overabundance of events, spatial overabundance and the individualization of referents. These excesses then produce places where individuality and specificity is suspended from the point of entry to the cash register, departure gate or TGV terminal.
It is very much an essay, exploring ideas alluding to De Certeau (often) and some of the classics of anthropology (Marcel Mauss, for instance, and his uncle Emile Durkheim) but intriguingly missing other spatial analysts – Lefebvre among them – and for all its engagements with ideas of the time, sticking clearly to binary logic in building its case (which may explain in part the absence of Lefebvre). As an essay, it is provocative, sowing the seeds of ideas and notions, rather than developing a fully worked through theoretical rethinking. His notion of supermodernity also suggests some discomfort with the powerful postmodern theorising of the early 1990s.
As with any good essay, I’m left with problems, questions, musings – especially as to ways these ideas might have an impact on the ways we think about the conventional objects of anthropology – those colonised Others – in late capitalist, supermodernity with it tendency to the uniformity of identity. Re-visiting after 25 years and in new political and cultural contexts reminds me of the power of a good provocation.
The point is not to condemn supermodernity – this is no jeremiad – or to lament, but to define these new places, to suggest that not only are these spaces becoming more prevalent (a visit to almost any sports stadium will reinforce that) but that we may need to re-think some of our approaches to scholarship and scholarly practice if we want to engage with and make more sense of them. It’s well worth the return.
Augé’s work remains important in part because he sets up a set of distinctions between history and anthropology as exploring the Other – in time and place, so that anthropology grapples with the Other now, in a distinction he sees as emphasising the near and the elsewhere. The distinction he sets up is not just between place and no-place, but between anthropological place and non-place, where his reading of anthropology is paradoxical. “’Anthropological place’ is formed by individual identities, through complicities of language, local references, the unformulated rules of living know-how; non-place creates the shared identity of passengers, customers and Sunday drivers.” (p101) The paradox of this anthropological place is that discipline’s tendency, as Augé notes, to treat its individuals as representative of all their people – hence the recurrent use of the definite article (as in the Nuer – to invoke Evans-Pritchard).
It’s the particularity and ‘anthropological place’ that Augé highlights in this contrast, where his non-place (and its collective identify of ‘passengers, customers and Sunday drivers’) is marked by three forms of excess – as he calls is an overabundance of events, spatial overabundance and the individualization of referents. These excesses then produce places where individuality and specificity is suspended from the point of entry to the cash register, departure gate or TGV terminal.
It is very much an essay, exploring ideas alluding to De Certeau (often) and some of the classics of anthropology (Marcel Mauss, for instance, and his uncle Emile Durkheim) but intriguingly missing other spatial analysts – Lefebvre among them – and for all its engagements with ideas of the time, sticking clearly to binary logic in building its case (which may explain in part the absence of Lefebvre). As an essay, it is provocative, sowing the seeds of ideas and notions, rather than developing a fully worked through theoretical rethinking. His notion of supermodernity also suggests some discomfort with the powerful postmodern theorising of the early 1990s.
As with any good essay, I’m left with problems, questions, musings – especially as to ways these ideas might have an impact on the ways we think about the conventional objects of anthropology – those colonised Others – in late capitalist, supermodernity with it tendency to the uniformity of identity. Re-visiting after 25 years and in new political and cultural contexts reminds me of the power of a good provocation.
The point is not to condemn supermodernity – this is no jeremiad – or to lament, but to define these new places, to suggest that not only are these spaces becoming more prevalent (a visit to almost any sports stadium will reinforce that) but that we may need to re-think some of our approaches to scholarship and scholarly practice if we want to engage with and make more sense of them. It’s well worth the return.
March 3, 2015
Marc Augé’s Non-Places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity is fascinating. His book is useful because it offers a theoretical framework for understanding why we think of some places the way we do, in particular there is a description of places that can put us in contact with a social structure, because there is a very close, consubstantial link between space and social organization.
At the same time, he noticed the proliferation, in the contemporary world, of spaces in which no lasting social relations are established (transit spaces, spaces people pass through), he suggested calling those spaces non-places to suggest that in those contexts there were a total absence of symbolic ties, and evident social deficits.
''Clearly the word ‘non-place’ designates two complementary but distinct realities: spaces formed in relation to certain ends (transport, transit, commerce, leisure), and the relations that individuals have these spaces. Although the two sets of relations overlap to a large extent, and in any case officially (individuals travel, make purchases, relax), they are still not confused with one another; for non-places mediate a whole mass of relations, with the self and with others, which are only indirectly connected with their purposes. As anthropological places create the organically, so non-places create solitary contractuality.''
''If a place can be defined as relational, historical and concerned with identity, then a space which cannot be defined as relation, or historical, or concerned with identity will be a non-place. The hypothesis advanced here is that supermodernity produces non-places, meaning spaces which are not themselves anthropological places and which, unlike Baudelairean modernity, do not integrate the earlier places: instead these are listed, classified, promoted to the status of ‘places of memory’, and assigned to a circumscribed and specific position. A world where people are born in the clinic and die in hospital, where transit points and temporary abodes are proliferating under luxurious or inhuman conditions (hotels chains and squats […]''
At the same time, he noticed the proliferation, in the contemporary world, of spaces in which no lasting social relations are established (transit spaces, spaces people pass through), he suggested calling those spaces non-places to suggest that in those contexts there were a total absence of symbolic ties, and evident social deficits.
''Clearly the word ‘non-place’ designates two complementary but distinct realities: spaces formed in relation to certain ends (transport, transit, commerce, leisure), and the relations that individuals have these spaces. Although the two sets of relations overlap to a large extent, and in any case officially (individuals travel, make purchases, relax), they are still not confused with one another; for non-places mediate a whole mass of relations, with the self and with others, which are only indirectly connected with their purposes. As anthropological places create the organically, so non-places create solitary contractuality.''
''If a place can be defined as relational, historical and concerned with identity, then a space which cannot be defined as relation, or historical, or concerned with identity will be a non-place. The hypothesis advanced here is that supermodernity produces non-places, meaning spaces which are not themselves anthropological places and which, unlike Baudelairean modernity, do not integrate the earlier places: instead these are listed, classified, promoted to the status of ‘places of memory’, and assigned to a circumscribed and specific position. A world where people are born in the clinic and die in hospital, where transit points and temporary abodes are proliferating under luxurious or inhuman conditions (hotels chains and squats […]''
October 29, 2012
Even at 119 pages, the book seems too long for the idea. Most of what is original in the argument comes together in the last quarter, and while it features some interesting embroideries (the textual character of non-places, for example), even that isn't exactly mind-blowingly new stuff.
Of course, the problem might be that I'm just not that concerned with the intra-disciplinary crises of anthropology.
Of course, the problem might be that I'm just not that concerned with the intra-disciplinary crises of anthropology.
February 3, 2019
I thought this was so fun!!!
February 10, 2022
An assigned reading for one of my classes, it reflects on the consequences homogenization can have when applied to the design process of architecture.
December 20, 2021
"What he is confronted with, finally, is an image of himself, but in truth it is a pretty strange image. The only face to be seen, the only voice to be heard, in the silent dialogue he holds with the landscape-text addressed to him along with others, are his own: the face and voice of a solitude made all the more baffling by the fact that it echoes millions of others [...] The space of non-place creates neither singular identity nor relations only solitude and similitude."
Soothing to encounter by mere accident a book, which captures the feelings of confusion and uneasiness that overcame me when first entering the artificially lit tunnels of the London Underground. Flowing through the motions of the mechanical ballet of anonymous masses during rush hour, who only directed by signposts follow each others movement without paying attention to the other, but in sync, the conceptualization of non-places allowed me to move past semi-accurate reflections of Tube culture as hypercapitalist soulless bullshit, simultaneously reinforcing my silly small-town-woman reflections and putting some perspective into my thinking. An honest relief to a restless mind trying to make sense of the 'urban condition' she finds herself in ((:
Soothing to encounter by mere accident a book, which captures the feelings of confusion and uneasiness that overcame me when first entering the artificially lit tunnels of the London Underground. Flowing through the motions of the mechanical ballet of anonymous masses during rush hour, who only directed by signposts follow each others movement without paying attention to the other, but in sync, the conceptualization of non-places allowed me to move past semi-accurate reflections of Tube culture as hypercapitalist soulless bullshit, simultaneously reinforcing my silly small-town-woman reflections and putting some perspective into my thinking. An honest relief to a restless mind trying to make sense of the 'urban condition' she finds herself in ((:
January 6, 2023
Texto rebuscado podría decir.
Los no lugares, viniendo de la rama de la arquitectura, es un termino conocido para mi y es lo que me llamo la atención este libro.
Me gusta mucho como el autor, describe estos no-espacios desde la perspectiva antropología y social, pero lo veo muy rebuscado a la hora de redactarlo.
Interesante análisis que hace el autor, lo recomiendo, pero ten paciencia al leerlo.
Los no lugares, viniendo de la rama de la arquitectura, es un termino conocido para mi y es lo que me llamo la atención este libro.
Me gusta mucho como el autor, describe estos no-espacios desde la perspectiva antropología y social, pero lo veo muy rebuscado a la hora de redactarlo.
Interesante análisis que hace el autor, lo recomiendo, pero ten paciencia al leerlo.
August 7, 2022
Habrá pues, quizás muy pronto, una etnología de la soledad a partir del acercamiento a los individuos solitarios que pululan en los no lugares.
February 12, 2016
See oli väga huvitav, just ruumi, kohtade ja mittekohtade koha pealt, osa üldisemast modernsuse-ülimodernsuse jutust läks mul vist üle pea, sest ma pole selle aruteluga eriti kokku puutunud.
Kasutasin linnaruumi analüüsiks ühes koolitöös ja siis lugesin niisama veel läbi. Huvitav lugemine, huvitav kaasa mõelda ja erinevalt mõnest sellisest tekstist ka mitte kurnav.
Panen endale siia hoiule mõned tsitaadid:
"Ülimodersus surub individuaalsele teadvusele peale täiesti uusi üksinduse kogemusi ja katsumusi, mis on otseselt seotud mittekohtade ilmumise ja vohamisega" lk 90
"Nõnda nagu antropoloogilised kohad loovad orgaanilist ühiskondlikkust, loovad mittekohad üksildast lepingulisust." lk 91
"Kui antropoloogilise koha moodustavad keelelise vandeseltsluse, maastikumärkide ja igapäevaelu kirjutamata seaduste kaudu üksikisikute identiteedid, siis mittekoha loob läbisõitjate, klientide või pühapäevareisijate ühine identiteet." lk 97
"Mittekoha ruum ei tekita ei ainulist identiteeti ega suhet, vaid üksindust ja ühetaolisust. Seal ei ole ruumi ka ajalool, kui see pole juhuslikult muutunud vaatemängu osaks- enamasti vihjeliseks tekstiks. Mittekohas valitsevad aktuaalsus ja olevikuhetke pakilisus." lk 100
"Välja joonistub tarbimismaailm, mida iga üksikisik võib omaks pidada, sest teda selles lakkamatult kõnetatakse. Eneseimetluse kiusatus on siin seda suurem, sest selles näib väljenduvat üldkehtiv seadus: tee nii nagu teised, et olla sina ise. Teisest küljest, nagu iga teine kosmoloogia, toodab seegi äratundmisefekte. Mittekoha paradoks on järgmine: tundmatule maale eksinud võõras ("läbisõitja") tunneb end seal koduselt üksnes kiirteede, teenindusjaamade, kaubanduskeskuste või hotellikettide anonüümsuses. Kütusefirma logost saab saab tema jaoks julgustav pidepunkt ja supermarketi riiulitelt leiab ta oma kergenduseks rahvusvaheliste kaubamärkide hügieenitooteid, toidu- ja majapidamiskaupu." lk 102
"Ülimodernsuse maailmas ollakse kodus kogu aeg ja eikunagi enam. Piiritsoonid või rajamaad ei ole enam sissejuhatuseks maailmadesse, mid on täiesti võõrad." lk 104
"Niisiis on varsti vaja - või on juba praegugi vaja - midagi seesugust, mis terminoloogiliselt võib näida vastuoluline: üksinduse etnoloogiat." lk 114
Kasutasin linnaruumi analüüsiks ühes koolitöös ja siis lugesin niisama veel läbi. Huvitav lugemine, huvitav kaasa mõelda ja erinevalt mõnest sellisest tekstist ka mitte kurnav.
Panen endale siia hoiule mõned tsitaadid:
"Ülimodersus surub individuaalsele teadvusele peale täiesti uusi üksinduse kogemusi ja katsumusi, mis on otseselt seotud mittekohtade ilmumise ja vohamisega" lk 90
"Nõnda nagu antropoloogilised kohad loovad orgaanilist ühiskondlikkust, loovad mittekohad üksildast lepingulisust." lk 91
"Kui antropoloogilise koha moodustavad keelelise vandeseltsluse, maastikumärkide ja igapäevaelu kirjutamata seaduste kaudu üksikisikute identiteedid, siis mittekoha loob läbisõitjate, klientide või pühapäevareisijate ühine identiteet." lk 97
"Mittekoha ruum ei tekita ei ainulist identiteeti ega suhet, vaid üksindust ja ühetaolisust. Seal ei ole ruumi ka ajalool, kui see pole juhuslikult muutunud vaatemängu osaks- enamasti vihjeliseks tekstiks. Mittekohas valitsevad aktuaalsus ja olevikuhetke pakilisus." lk 100
"Välja joonistub tarbimismaailm, mida iga üksikisik võib omaks pidada, sest teda selles lakkamatult kõnetatakse. Eneseimetluse kiusatus on siin seda suurem, sest selles näib väljenduvat üldkehtiv seadus: tee nii nagu teised, et olla sina ise. Teisest küljest, nagu iga teine kosmoloogia, toodab seegi äratundmisefekte. Mittekoha paradoks on järgmine: tundmatule maale eksinud võõras ("läbisõitja") tunneb end seal koduselt üksnes kiirteede, teenindusjaamade, kaubanduskeskuste või hotellikettide anonüümsuses. Kütusefirma logost saab saab tema jaoks julgustav pidepunkt ja supermarketi riiulitelt leiab ta oma kergenduseks rahvusvaheliste kaubamärkide hügieenitooteid, toidu- ja majapidamiskaupu." lk 102
"Ülimodernsuse maailmas ollakse kodus kogu aeg ja eikunagi enam. Piiritsoonid või rajamaad ei ole enam sissejuhatuseks maailmadesse, mid on täiesti võõrad." lk 104
"Niisiis on varsti vaja - või on juba praegugi vaja - midagi seesugust, mis terminoloogiliselt võib näida vastuoluline: üksinduse etnoloogiat." lk 114
March 11, 2010
Good quote:
-"Everything proceeds as if space had been trapped by time, as if there were no history other than the last 48 hours of news, as if each individual history were drawing its motive, its words and images, from the inexhaustible stock of an unending history in the present" (84)
and
Ethnology of solitude: "The community of human destinies is experienced in the anonymity of non-place and in solitude."
-"Everything proceeds as if space had been trapped by time, as if there were no history other than the last 48 hours of news, as if each individual history were drawing its motive, its words and images, from the inexhaustible stock of an unending history in the present" (84)
and
Ethnology of solitude: "The community of human destinies is experienced in the anonymity of non-place and in solitude."
April 28, 2021
I read this book as part of my research for a big urban landscape photography project. Which I did after lockdown restrictions were lifted in my city.
I was fascinated by the notion of what makes a place and what makes a non-place. However I did get a bit lost in the middle and skipped a few chapters. I felt a bit bad about that. But I’ll reread it all again and hopefully get a better understanding of what he meant.
I was fascinated by the notion of what makes a place and what makes a non-place. However I did get a bit lost in the middle and skipped a few chapters. I felt a bit bad about that. But I’ll reread it all again and hopefully get a better understanding of what he meant.
October 2, 2021
La lectura se me ha hecho confusa por momentos. Creo que hay aspectos sobreexplicados e ideas sobre las que habría que haber insistido más. Lo que más me ha interesado es el concepto de sobremodernidad y las diferencias entre lugar antropológico y no lugar, pero no hace falta leerse todo el ensayo para entender esos conceptos.
December 26, 2022
El concepto de no-lugar ya existía pero fue este texto el que lo terminó de afianzar.
https://liblit.com/marc-auge-los-no-l...
https://liblit.com/marc-auge-los-no-l...
December 19, 2018
It is an interesting introduction to the non-places theme, and not only for anthropologists (mostly, though) but also for laymen, just like me, who are into different themes in literature. I decided to read it as I was studying the literary cartography and the changes of maps throughout the centuries. I especially enjoyed the prologue for the book, which at first confuses and surprises but if you go on reading the book, it all becomes clear. I must say though that it is quite difficult to grasp, especially when one did not study anthroplogy before, as Auge touches upon different anthropologist themes, which I have never encountered before. A good read but a demanding one!
February 6, 2021
Quedé un poco sorprendida de esta aproximación antropológica del espacio. Me inquietó esa lectura de la modernidad que hace Augé o, más esa sobremodernidad que él presenta como una lectura de esta época Contemporánea donde se sobrepone el exceso: el exceso de acontecimientos, el achicamiento del mundo (que multiplica los espacios, multiplica la accesibilidad) y el exceso de individualidad.
En esta sobremodernidad es donde afloran los no lugares: espacios de circulación, de consumo, espacios de confluencia "anónima".
Este libro sin duda es referencia para mis inquietudes filosóficas sobre el espacio.
En esta sobremodernidad es donde afloran los no lugares: espacios de circulación, de consumo, espacios de confluencia "anónima".
Este libro sin duda es referencia para mis inquietudes filosóficas sobre el espacio.
March 26, 2023
A writing style marked by its time: digressions, explored tangents, endless parentheses and interposed sentences. There is a lot of bloat and as a reader you wish Augé would have made the book into an article or worked under a more diligent editor. I say this because some of the parentheses are actually useful explications.
Nevertheless, the concepts of anthropological places, that are invested with meaning through identity, relationality, and historicity, and non-places, turning these aspects into spectacles of signs, are useful. Augé repeats the fluidity of these concepts and that is to the benefit of this work.
Worth the read.
Nevertheless, the concepts of anthropological places, that are invested with meaning through identity, relationality, and historicity, and non-places, turning these aspects into spectacles of signs, are useful. Augé repeats the fluidity of these concepts and that is to the benefit of this work.
Worth the read.
January 13, 2022
مدخل ربما يكون لأهل الاختصاص ،لكثافة المصطلحات والاطروحات المفصلة في المجال ،لكن استمتعت كثيراً بالنقاط الواضحة والموجهة للهواة أمثالي في عالم الانثروبولجيا.
الحداثة المفرطة التي يرى الكاتب أنها آفة العالم المعاصر ،والتي تتمثل في الإفراط في الأحداث أو الوفرة الحدثيّة، والوفرة في المكان، والإفراط في تفريد المرجعيات، إفراط ينتج عنه اللاأمكنة - بين مساحات التواجد والعلاقات والمشاعر الوهمية-، واللاهويات - يجب أن تتصرف كالأخرين لتكون أنت ذاتك -
والجميل هنا هو عرض مفهوم - المكان - بشمولية اجتماعية وسياسية ولغوية وأنثروبولوجية ،ومدى تأثير المفهوم وتأثره مع مرور الزمن في كل جانب من هذه الجوانب.
الحداثة المفرطة التي يرى الكاتب أنها آفة العالم المعاصر ،والتي تتمثل في الإفراط في الأحداث أو الوفرة الحدثيّة، والوفرة في المكان، والإفراط في تفريد المرجعيات، إفراط ينتج عنه اللاأمكنة - بين مساحات التواجد والعلاقات والمشاعر الوهمية-، واللاهويات - يجب أن تتصرف كالأخرين لتكون أنت ذاتك -
والجميل هنا هو عرض مفهوم - المكان - بشمولية اجتماعية وسياسية ولغوية وأنثروبولوجية ،ومدى تأثير المفهوم وتأثره مع مرور الزمن في كل جانب من هذه الجوانب.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 155 reviews