Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

13
8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 1/13 Practising Interpretative Geography Author(s): Steven Pile Reviewed work(s): Source: Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, Vol. 16, No. 4 (1991), pp. 458-469 Published by: Wiley on behalf of The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/623030 . Accessed: 15/02/2013 09:30 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. . Wiley and The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. http://www.jstor.org

Transcript of Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

Page 1: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 1/13

Practising Interpretative GeographyAuthor(s): Steven PileReviewed work(s):Source: Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, Vol. 16, No. 4 (1991),pp. 458-469Published by: Wiley on behalf of The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/623030 .

Accessed: 15/02/2013 09:30

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Wiley and The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) are collaborating withJSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers.

http://www.jstor.org

Page 2: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 2/13

458

PractisingnterpretativeeographySTEVEN PILELecturern

Geography,chool f

GeographyndPlanning, iddlesex olytechnic,

ueensway,nfield,

Middlesex N3 4SF

Revised S received2May 1991

ABSTRACTQualitative ethods ave een ainingncreasingecognitionngeography. et, nlike uantitativeechniques,here asbeen ittle iscussionmong eographersf the esearchrocessnwhich hey articipate.his s perhaps urprisingbecausehe esearchersntend, yusing ualitative ethods,obe ess uthorial,uthoritativend uthoritarian.pecifi-cally, his aper xplores ssues elating o the power elations etween heresearchernd the researchednd themethodologyf nterpretativeeography.nthis xploration,henotion f researchlliance's ntroducedosuggestthat ower soperatingncomplex ays. imilarly, assess he sefulnessf he oncepts f ransferencend ounter-

transferenceor alkingboutwhat oes n n nterpretativeesearch.owever,n heir wn hesedeas renot nough ocopewith n analysis f power, heymust eembeddedna self-reflexivepistemology,ike scenic nderstanding'.conclude y arguing hat he grounds or n interpretativeeography eedto be shifted nto the ntersubjectiverelationshipetween esearchernd esearched;hus,nterfering ith hat istinction.

KEYWORDS:Quantitative echniques, ualitativemethods, nterpretative eography, ransference, ounter-transference,cenic nderstanding

INTRODUCTION

Geographers have become increasingly oncernedwith the subjective xperience f space and, n the1980s,they have tried oreappraise herelationshipbetween idealist' and 'materialist' hilosophies ntheir earch or lternative odels of society, paceand people (Gregory, 981; Cosgrove, 1983, 1989;Sayer, 1989; Daniels, 1989); they have employedideas that have been developed n other disciplines,such s art history, iterary heory nd social anthro-pology. Taken together, Cosgrove and Jackson(1987) argue, a new cultural geography can beidentified one that s nterested n the historical ndcontextual, heurban nd the rural, he ontingenciesof culture nd space, struggle nd resistance, ndsociety nd subjectivity.

The new cultural eography's oncernwith umanexperience ndmeaning equires ubtle esearch ech-niques, apable of exploring herealities f everydaylives as they re explainedby the people who livethem. This has led to the adoption of qualitativemethods see Eyles,1988a;Eyles and Smith, 988),which re believed to be both empirically ensitive

and politically adical. his argument asbeen mostforcibly ut by Lowe and Short 1990),who arguethat progressive uman eographymust nvolveprogressive methodology. This means expandingqualitative, nterpretative nd ethnographic ethods'to convey the nner ife nd texture f the diversesocial enclaves nd personal ircumstances f socie-ties' (Lowe and Short 1990) p. 7; citing Jackson,1985,p. 157).The intention s to be more ympath-etic to the human eings nvolved'Lowe and Short(1990)(p.7),and this s to be done by using both aplurality f methods nd polyvocal and polylocalstrategies.

Thesearguments

re not new, s Lowe and Short(1990)know; they quote David Smith who arguedmuch he ame hingwhenhe called or ... a peoplegeography bout realpeople, ndfor hepeople ..'(Smith 977,p. 370).Theseare good intentions, utthe consequences have not yet been thoughtthrough. n impasse ppears o have been reached;accordingly, e cannot o beyond being more ym-pathetic, pen nrevealing ersonal xperiences, ndwatchful f our prejudices s we try o capture heeveryday ived experience of other people. This

Trans. nst. r. Geogr. .S. 16:458-469 (1991)ISSN: 0020-2754 Printed n Great Britain

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 3: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 3/13

Practisingnterpretativeeography 459

paper ddresses his lockage nd takes ne possibleroute beyond t, n an attempt oopen up the possi-bility f people geography, ith eople.

Qualitative echniques ave ongbeen establishedoutside eography e.g.Hall et l., 1980;Hammersleyand Atkinson, 983; Walker, 1985; Strauss, 987;Rabinow nd Sullivan, 987),and they have becomeincreasingly egitimate n human geography seeBurgess t l. 1988a;Eyles, 988b).Researchers singqualitativemethods re dealing with host of newissues; uchas the nexus of discourse,meaning ndpower, the applicability f the metaphor f text,drama nd theatre o a range f phenomena seeLey,1985), the authority f the author Cosgrove andDomosh, forthcoming), nd the textual trategies fwriting geography (Gregory, 1989). Innovativewaysof pproaching heworldhavehad to be found:appropriatemodels have been taken rom ymbolicinteractionism Jackson nd Smith, 984),oralhistory(Rose, 1988), iconography Cosgrove and Daniels,1988), ethnography/anthropology Crang, 1990),postcolonial criticism Driver, forthcoming), ost-structuralism Driver, 1985; Philo, 1987, forth-coming), postmodernism Matlass, forthcoming;Doel, forthcoming), nd group psychoanalysis(Burgess t l., 1988a, 1988b). do not wish o under-mine the specific dvantages of these approaches;however do want o talk bout the powerdynamicsin this kind of qualitative research, and theirimplications or the methodology f interpretativegeography.

There re two aspects hatwillbe dealt with: irst,the power relations etween heresearcher nd theresearched; nd, second, the ways in which theserelations hed ight n wider owerrelations perat-ing in society s a whole. Before going on, I mustsay that am not going to tell you how to practiseinterpretative eography. nstead, will ddress omeof the omplications hatwe inevitably acewhenweestablish deep, intensive personal contacts n thecourseof

qualitativeieldwork;

xamplesre drawn

from my personal xperience f qualitative esearchinto farmers' onceptions f their political world(reported lsewhere, ile, 1990a). n the next ection,a few erms eed to be defined.

BETWEENQUANTITATIVE, QUALITATIVEAND INTERPRETATIVERESEARCH

In this paper, have drawn a distinction etween'quantitative', qualitative' and 'interpretative' e-search; this is necessary because these terms re

already burdened with a particular enealogy. Tobegin, t s worth uotingAdorno.

Theopposition f quantitativendqualitativenalysisisnot nabsolute ne: tfinds o ultimateupportn hesubject-mattertself. t s wellknown hat, n order oquantify, nehas lways obegin y gnoringualitativedifferenceetweenhe arious lements;nd very ndi-vidual ocial henomenonearswithintself he eneraldeterminismsowhich he uantitative eneralizationsapply. ut he ategoriesf he atter re hemselvesfcourse ualitativeAdorno, 957p.246).

Adorno's argument uggests hat there s a funda-mental ink etween ualitative nd quantitative x-ploration, ne always nvolves component f theother; hey orm continuum ather han here einga radical pistemological reak etween hem. n thissense, here s ittle o be distinguished etween na-lysing ensus data, historical ocuments, nterviewtranscripts nd newspapers. nd this s the sense nwhich am using hese erms, hile hey re differentthey re related andnecessarily omplementary:

A method hat ailsodo ustice o this ndwhich, orexample,ejectsualitativenalysiss ncompatibleiththe nature f the collective,s doingviolence o itssubject.. (Adorno,957p.246).

However, believe hat nterpretative ork s funda-mentally ifferent rom he quantitative-qualitativecontinuum. his belief inges n the pistemologicaldistinction etween getting nformation nd thentrying o either xplain r understand t quantitative-qualitative esearch),nd an interest n the dynamicsand content f ntersubjective elationshipsinterpre-tative esearch). t the moment he erm qualitative'envelops both quantitative-qualitative nd interpre-tative nquiry ecauseall data s held to be subjecti-vely collected nd nterpretated, ut believe hat he

qualityf he

elationshipetween he esearcher nd

the researchedsquitedifferent n nterpretative ield-work. rom uantitative-qualitative ointerpretativethere s a shift; rom distanced nd abstract esearchposition, owards relationship n which oth nter-viewer and interviewed ry to come to an under-standing f what s taking lacearound hem. n thismodel f nvestigation, he ntention s to develop hetrust hat llowspeopleto share heir xperiences ndfeelings n a safe nd supportive tmosphere or othresearcher nd researched. new anguage sneededif we are able to talk bout this kind f relationship.

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 4: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 4/13

460 STEVENPILE

And think hat usanSmith s alluding o this whenshe states hat

with greater heoreticalnderstandingf he elf, heextent f he nalyst'snterventions mmaterialo ongas t sclearlycknowledgedndbuilt nto he nalysis.(Smith, 988p.26).

In sum, amarguing hat roblematizing he esearchprocessmust be an integral art of any geographythat wants o question ts own power nd enable hepowerof others.

It is now recognised hat here s something erypersonal n what we choose to study nd how wechoose to study t e.g. see Burgess,Goldsmith ndHarrison, 1990). The resulting depth of theresearcher's ntervention when

using qualitativemethods aises set of difficulties, nd many f theseare already appreciated y geographers, s I willshow. However, other problems re ust starting obe noticed. The most mportant f these relate tothe multiple-layered from deeply unconscious ohighly onscious reactions whichwe invoke whileinvolved n nterpretative esearch. hese are highlypersonal elationships hich re both demanding ndrewarding, et our discipline as not developed alanguagewhich llows us not only to talk bout our(anxious, leasurable) esearch xperiences ut lso to

protect urselves, nd the people we talk to, frombecoming ependent n each other.In undertaking nterpretative nalysis, seriesof

power relationships re entered y the nterviewerand the interviewed. nthropologists ike CliffordGeertz 1973,1983)andGeorgeMarcus Marcus ndFischer, 986;Clifford nd Marcus, 986)have triedto exposethe power f he esearcher orepresent heother; oth through heoretical eflection likethickdescription) nd by exploring different extualstrategies. ut, s Edward aid (1989)argues, heseinitiatives ave so far ailed o ive up to their hetoric,

precisely ecauseexperimenting ith textual trat-egies is not enough to disrupt he ethnographer'spower to claim o represent heother Spivak, 985;see Keith, forthcoming). n contrast, eminists ikeAnne Oakley 1981)andDorothy mith 1988)havelong deplored hepower mplicit nresearch, rguingthat nquiry hould be (personally, olitically) om-mitted, non-hierarchical nd interactive see alsoStanley, 1990). Explicit n these arguements s abelief that patriarchal ssumptions f objectivity/subjectivity eform esearch;mplicitly hese ssump-tions are psychological and philosophical. But

nowhere has the relationship etween questioner,questioned nd the lived world been more closelyexamined than in the psychoanalytic iterature(seeCasement, 985; Lomas, 987), nd much f thisdebate concerns power relations n the nexus ofknowing, ommunicating nd the personal. s Craib(1989,p. 92) argues, psychoanalysis rings n extradimension o all of this: we bring ur own internalconflicts, ith all the feelings hey involve, andproject hem nto whatwe study'.

The object f psychoanalytic nowledge s inter)-subjectivity; hechanging nd disjointed xperiencethat we have of ourselves nd our external world.Classically, sychoanalysis as meant o be an im-partial nd scientific ttempt o uncover the rulesgoverning hefunctioning f the mind. n this per-

spective,he

underlying ynamicsf mental ife re

excavated y the ntense nspection f psychologicaland cultural henomena f every kind e.g. dreams,parapraxes, rt, euroses, tc.). t is through heoris-ing the ctivities f desire, s they re distorted nddenied nrepression, hatwecan make ense of eem-ingly nexplicable ehaviour. hus, analysis evealsthe meaningful otivations ndconflicts hat nderlieapparently rrational ndmeaningless uman ctions.

Post-Freudian sychoanalysts ave become muchmore nterested n therapy; nd this has called ntoquestion the relationship etween the analyst nd

the patient, nd the character f intersubjectivity.The next section follows he course of this debate;from reud's cientific pproach hrough is ncorpor-ation of the analyst's eelings nto a still cientificanalysis, o the transformation f psychoanalysis yfeminists nd post-Freudiansnto an intersubjectivetherapeutic lliance.

WHAT HAPPENS BETWEEN THE ANALYSTAND THE PATIENT?As geographers ecome interested n the archae-

ology of knowledge nd anguage, t cannot e longbefore hey urn opsychoanalysis; he archaeologyof the mind' and the talking ure'. Until recently,only few peoplehave talked bout psychoanalysis:as far ack as 1961,David Lowenthalwas drawingwidely on the psychoanalytic iterature n his articleon geography, xperience nd imagination; hileRobert Sack (1980) uses Freud's Interpretation fDreams' n his analysis f subjectivity nd the mean-ing of space.The most mportant xception o thisdeafening ilence s the work f Burgess t l. (1988aand 1988b),who have used group psychoanalytic

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 5: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 5/13

Practisingnterpretativeeography 461

concepts n their tudy f environmental alues. nthis aper, willtakeup the ask f developing omeof the insights f psychoanalysis s they concernqualitative echniques nd nterpretative eography.And, it is the fundamental onnection betweentheory and practice n Freud's approach whichsuggests placefor sychoanalysis na geographicalimagination.

Freuddeveloped psychoanalysis s an instrumentof knowledge apable of exhuming he rchaeologyof the relationship etween ndividual nd society.Hisprojectwas to understand; oconstruct form fanalysis hat ould make sense of people and theirpsyches, nd the social structures n which thosepsyches mature. The task of analysis s to bringinternal onflicts ogether n terms which nable thepatient o strengthen er or his ability o resolvedistressing motions nd behaviour atterns Freud,1933).Analysis s simply irected owards helpingthe patient chievegreater elf-control, ut his snoteasily ttained.

The herapeuticlliance : from ransference..Thecrux f he herapy s the haracter f he elation-shipformed etween he nalyst nd the patient. heextent f the omplicity etween he nalyst nd thepatient has a critical mpact on the progress oftherapy. he patient workswith he nalyst ecauseof the desire to relieve her or his symptoms, ndbecause of the support provided by the analyst;this unspoken nd provisional greement o worktogether s known s the therapeutic lliance'. n thenext section, suggest that there s an analogous,though different, research lliance', nd we can useconcepts developed in the course of therapy oexcavate the multiple-layered nteractions etweenresearcher nd researched. For Freud, it is thetherapeutic lliance hat nables the patient o takeconscious control of an increasing roportion funconscious esires Freud, 937).

Mostimportantly,

heanalyst

and thepatiententer nto a special relationship hat allows deep

emotions f the nalysand ocome to the surface.critical omponent f this elationshipstransference;it s this oncept hat s unique o the psychoanalyticapproach ounderstanding eople, nd thus f mostimportance n helping s to talk bout what goes onduring nterpretative ieldwork. ransferences epro-duce and actualize desires and fantasies directedtowards ther eople past and/or resent) y usingfacsimiles irected owards he nalyst: hus, wholeseries of forgotten xperiences real and fantasized)

arerepeatedly e-enactedn the present, llowing hepeopleto play out repressed motions Freud, 905).More generally, he term an be used 'to describethe way nwhich xpectations erived rom ast ex-perience istort ur appreciation f the present.Wetend to perceivewhat we have been conditioned operceive' Lomas, 987,p. 18).

Originally n Freud's work, ransference as theterrain n which ll the problems f a patient layedthemselves ut: the establishment, orm, nterpret-ation and resolution f the transference efined hetherapy. hus, therapy differs rom ncounters neveryday ife n threeways.

(a)Transference s encouraged nd dependency sdeliberately enerated. he analyst ecomes 'blankscreen' nto which hepatient anproject nything,this ttitude revents he nalysand rom etting oknow he nalyst.

(b)The analyst emains on-directive nd passive,often silent, never giving advice and avoidingunnecessary ontact,while expecting hepatient oreveal everything. fundamental ule in Freud'stherapeutic echniques evenly uspended ttention';the nalyst akesnote of everything hepatient aysor does,but maintains n emotional istance norderto assess the interactions nd the feelings f thepatient, bjectively.

(c)The patient bandons the original ymptomsandgivesthem ew

expressiony

constructingrtifi-

cialneuroses; hese re transference euroseswhichmimic eal neuroses' Freud, 917p. 496).

Therapy inevitably involves a considerableamount of pain, so the patient ries o avoid it byresisting herapy Freud, 913a).Butresistance anbeoutmanoeuvred y supporting nd winning he rustof the patient, nddeploying nterpretations trategi-cally n the battle with he patient's efences. n thecourse f the truggle oturn hysterical isery' nto'common unhappiness', he analyst must be con-stantly ware of what hepatient s feeling nd whatis

goingon between he

nalystnd the

patient.ll

the while, he nalyst akes harge ofboth he patientand her/him elf) in the war against resistance,choosing he ightmoment ocommunicate er r hisinterpretations othe patient Freud, 926,p. 134).

Quite rightly, his role for the analyst has beenrejected. s Chodorow 1978)argues, reud's heoryis patriarchal nd authoritarian: sychoanalysts laythe role of the distant nd powerful ather y beingpresent ut unavailable, ecausetheir nterpretationsare ncontestable, nd because they re the objectofalldesires nd fantasies ut the atisfier f none. The

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 6: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 6/13

462 STEVEN PILE

analyst nterprets, lthough hatknowledgemay notbenefit he patient; xposing the patient's uncon-sciousdesires nd defences ut eavingher r him odeal with hem. Critically, he transference elation-ship shows who has the power the always distantanalyst uses interpretations o effect positive re-sponse n the patient. ltimately, f hetransferencerelationship ecomessufficiently trong, hepatientmay ose contact with eality nd becomedependenton the nalyst: he nalyst somnipotent, aking n aquasi-divine tatus Foucault, 964).

The herapeuticlliance :... to ounter-transferenceLater, ven Freud becameunhappy with his formu-lation because of the strong emotions that wereprovoked between both of the participants n the

therapeuticlliance nd because

therapyouldnot be

separated rom veryday ife, nd so the concept fcounter-transference as developed (Freud, 1910;Lomas, 987).Classically, ounter-transference s thewhole of the analyst's nconscious eactions o thepatient's wn transferences Laplanche nd Pontalis,1973); it is what the analyst feels bout what she/he feels the patient feels. There are three distinctcomponents o this elationship. irst, hetherapist'sunconscious esponses o the client's eelings. t isthe therapists difficult) ask to distinguish etweenher/his wn feelings nd those which re a response

to, and therefore ay something bout, the patientand/or themselves. econd, that it is the directopposite of transference. hus, the analyst bringsunresolved onflicts nd very ntense eelings o theanalytic ituation, where they are focused on thepatient. nd, hird, severything nthe nalyst's er-sonality hat might ffect he treatment. ow, theanalyst's eactions o the patient ave become vitalcluesfor nterpretation n therapy; ut, ven in thisreformulation, t s still p to the nalyst o control hecourse f therapy.

Post-Freudian sychoanalysts ave tried to go

beyond his ormula, yusing ounter-transferencesa way to expose the analyst's wn feelings owardsthe patient; hus, t is an attempt o balance theasymmetrical elationship etween the 'neurotic'patient nd the perfectly alanced' nalyst. As Moi(1989 p. 197) argues, transference nd counter-transference urn he analytic ession nto a spacewhere two participants ncounter ach other n theplace of the Other, n anguage'.From his perspec-tive, intersubjectivity transference nd counter-transference) s the terrain on which problemsbetween he nalyst nd the patient lay themselves

out, nd which efines herapy. nd this s no longerassumed to occur in isolation from wider socialrelationships; ut fundamentally onstituted ithinthem.

This transformation an be rephrased n way thatIwillbeableto use, ater, o nform discussion f he'research lliance'. lassically, hepatient oes to theanalystwith problem, hefocus f the relationshipbetween he analyst nd the patient s the problem.Thisrelationship s not explored, nd the feelings ndfantasies bout ach other nd the power tructure fthe encounter s largely gnored. Now, the thera-peutic lliance etween he nalyst nd the patient sof paramount mportance, eeding areful crutiny.Attention has shifted way from the problem'toward the relationship etween the analyst andthe

patient;rom nother

erspective,he truth f

therapy as shifted wayfrom bjectivity nd ubjec-tivity oward ntersubjectivity1. rucially, nalysishas become ike any other elationship n daily ifewhere people try to find out what is going onbetween hem. he analyst and psychoanalysis isno longer pecial r different.

Self-reflection y the nalyst s critical: o-onehasthe right oanalyse nyone lse without uestioningthemselves and their emotional attitudes andresponses.More than his, hese oncepts owallowthe analyst nd patient o (self-)reflect,ogether, n

what s going on between hem nd around hem.This process is built on the terrain f the inter-subjective relationship etween the analyst andpatient, nd this now becomes he rena f nterpret-ation. Analysisno longer helps the patient dapt toeveryday ife, ut ncludes hepossibility hat ivedexperience, nwhich he nalyst nd therapy s mpli-cated, s itself hallenged y both the analyst ndpatient Gallop, 982).From his erspective, herapyseeks o interpret nd deconstruct hefamiliar cenesof understanding n which therapy tself s built(Ingleby, 1977). Thus, therapy ries to grasp the

reality of power, which derive from wider socialstructures utwhich ecome nstituted n the processof therapy.

In the next ection, will ry o show how geogra-phers using ualitative echniques an earn rom herecognition f the power relationships etween heanalyst nd analysand n therapeutic iscourse. ndeploying hese deas, eographers ay ffer ays nwhich power may be subverted, enegotiated rturned gainst tself, n a way that llows the sub-ject(ed)more control. n this ccount, nterpretativegeography ecomes not only a sense of the ways

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 7: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 7/13

Practisingnterpretativeeography 463that things re, but also a means of providing hesubject(ed)with voice.

A word of warning before go on: I am notsuggesting that geographers become, or behavelike,post-Freudian sychoanalysts. he therapeuticalliance/situation s. not the same as the researchalliance/situation, o the power relationshipsinvolved, hough nalogous, re quite distinct. ammerely uggesting hat heir deas might nform heway we use qualitative methods by amending hegrounds n which we explore,write nd validate ninterpretative eography.

THE RESEARCH PROCESS:THE RESEARCHALLIANCE,(COUNTER) TRANSFERENCEAND SCENIC UNDERSTANDING

So far, believe, humanistic nd qualitative eogra-phy has not comevery far n exploring herelation-ship between observer and observed. As Smith(1988)points ut, he esearcher roduces hemapofthe social world and the mplications f this re asimportant s the interviewees map of the socialworld. All interpretative ieldwork nvolves powerrelations, oth socially and intersubjectively. sSusanSmith rgues 1988,p. 22)interms f herwork,

any ttempt n the art f ananalyst geographer]oenter he ife-worldf thers sabove ll, trategic.. itmakes oth moral nd anlytical enseto exposethepower elationsnherent n ethnography t an earlystage f he esearch... nd he ame nalogy ffers hemost ppropriateormnwhich oplay ut, nd onvey,the rocess.

I could not agree more; and I deal at length withSmith's aperprecisely ecause she goes furthest nexposing these power relations; ointing ut thatplaying the research game 'revolves around aninterest n realizing, ugmenting r maintaining he

balance of power in a relationship' 1988, p. 24).However, mith's xplicit se of a 'game'metaphor-concept to speak about the process of negotiatingentry o people's socialworld, nd later 'drama'metaphor-concept oexplore heprocesses f every-day interaction ead her to understand ower as theability o learn nd manipulate ocialrules, r socialscripts. onsequently, mith's way of undercuttingthis power-play' elies on omnipotence. Accord-ingly, he observer xploits makes powerful) heirown weakness, y acknowledging heir dependencefor nformation nd guidanceon those the studied

public)with uperior esources in this ase,knowl-edge about the commonsense wisdom surroundingthe race ndcrime' ebate)' 1988,p. 25).Thereferee-ing of the game, or the directing f the drama,between bserver nd observed as been eft ntirelyto the bserver. his sparticularly he ase npartici-pant observation;where researchers it uncomfort-ably nside nd outside nd so cannot be placed inrelation o 'the other', which they try to captureusing a poetics of reportage see Atkinson, 990,pp. 18-21).

The metaphors f game and drama contain asurplus:while usefully ighlighting ertain spectsof power relationships oth n everyday nteractionand in the research rocess, heyhide others. heseconcepts enable an exploration f the role of the

symbolics a medium f

power, hroughhich nter-

action nevitably akes lace;but hey imultaneouslyunderplay hematerial nd the fantasized spectsofinteraction nd power.And this s precisely hepointat which sychoanalytic iscourse nd especially heconcepts of the research lliance, counter) ransfer-ence and scenic understanding ecome mportant ointerpretative eography; hey restore he relation-ship between the material, he fantasized nd thesymbolic n everyday nteraction. oreover, o takeIrigaray's omments 1989, p. 128) out of context,these deas re lso awayofundercutting he nflated

power of geography] hich esults rom he silenceshrouding tspractice'.

The esearchllianceClassically, ngeographical esearch, he esearcherspresumed o be in control f the nquiry, nd every-thing hat happens n the study s supposed to in-crease hat ontrol. he observer emains mysterious,distant nd silentwhile he ubject isclosesmore ndmore nformation: heresearched s highlighted ndthe researcher idden, and everything hat theobserved says is scrutinised or ts meaning. JohnEyles (1988b, pp. 7-8) epitomises this when hesuggests normatively) hat, n nformal nterviewing,

the nterviewerries o tailor he wording f the ues-tions o each articularndividualnd sk he uestionsin n order ppropriateothe nterviewee.he ims reto ensure hat he uestions ave he amemeanings orallrespondentsnd o engagen conversation'o et herespondent t ease.

Eylescompounds stress n the control nd objec-tivity f the observer with a mystification f his

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 8: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 8/13

464 STEVENPILE

abilities; heresearcher sassumed o be able to makebetter enseof the ubject han he ubject an.

Such nterviewingequires reat kill n the esearcherwhomust ot nly e anempatheticistener ut goodconversationalist,ble okeep he ialogue oing, ndsocialtheorist, inking esponses nd meanings o abroad ody fknowledge.

With such a checklist f qualities, he successfulresearchermight be forgiven or thinking imselfomnipotent. ere, am deliberately uggesting hatthis s a masculineway of ordering he world seeSeidler, 989).

Against his, mith rgues, uite rightly, hat heresearch ituation s structured y both the inter-viewer nd the nformant, nd that his ffects hatarises from ny study. But Smith's ame and dramaanalogiesprevent er aking his rucial oint, boutthe complexity f the power relations nvolved, nyfurther. will try odo this: irst, y ntroducing henotion of the 'research alliance'; and, later, bydescribing 'scenic' nderstanding.

Allparticipantsn n nterpretative tudy re mpli-cated n the research lliance'; ut the structures fpower between he nterviewer nd the nterviewedare complex nd unstable. sually ngeography, heresearcher oes to the nterviewee ith question,

the nterviewee grees ohelp or not), nd the ques-tion becomes the focus of the relationship etweenthem. There is an unspoken ontract etween thequestioner who usually grees to write n honest,though partial, ccount) and the questioned whousually grees otell n honest, hough artial, tory).There may be no common grounds on which theparticipants gree to the research lliance, ut theymake this ontract ecause they hare belief n theneed to tell the story; hough heymight ot agreewhat hat tory s or how or why t shouldbe told.

Analysis does not take place in a socialvacuum;

other things' re lwaysgoing on.Alongmany ines,there re fractures n this osy agreement: xamplesinclude ender, lass,race, ge, etc..Thismeans hatthere s, more often hannot, a conflict f nterestsbetween the interviewer nd the interviewed, utthese differences re provisionally gnored. n myown experience, t was a very different xperiencetalking o officials n the ivil ervice, nion epresen-tative's nd farmers. ivil servants old an officialstory, nion epresentatives resented iewschargedwith political hetoric nd the farmers ried o getacross he way they elt hingswere.Of course, hey

are lltelling particular tory, particular ccount fthe way things re meant obe).

But there re many cenes through hich toriesare being told: people are playing highly onsciousroles 'acting as' researcher, ivil servant, unionrepresentative, armer but other parts are lessconscious 'behaving-as' man of reason, player nthe game, renegade, entrepreneur, ruthsayer/soothsayer, ndividual, oner and others re deeplyunconscious as willoutline n re-assessment f herelationships etweenmyself nd the farmers talkedwith).Allthese spects elate o the network f trans-ferences hat we brought o the research ituation;whatweexpect f, ndfrom, achother, ndwhatwewant o say or find ut. t s the unspoken ontract nthe research lliance that allows the study o take

place.The terms f his

greementeedto be

spoken.(Counter)ransferenceThe analysis f the emotional, ower)relationshipbetween the interviewer nd interviewed as notbeen brought within he imits f the geographicalimagination. nd - I stress I am as guilty f thisas anyone. Now, I believe that an analysis of themultiple-layered etwork of transferences n myrelationship ith the farmers interviewed ouldhave been one way to ground he nterpretationsprovided the therwouldhavebeenthe use of cenic

understanding). ransference elationships re notspecial o the herapeutic ituation; e all transfer' nthe course of our everyday ives, and it occurs ninterpretative esearch hether e admit t or not.believe that the (counter) ransference f feelingsshould, nstead f beinghidden, nform ur nalyses.

An example s provided by Burgess,Goldsmith,Harrison nd Limb's xploration f the meanings ndvalues people attach to open spaces, where theyadopted the principles nd practices of GroupAnalysis to run in-depth iscussion groups withmembers f the public. As the conductor f the

groups, Burgesswas sensitive o issues of transfer-ence and counter-transference hich would in-evitably rise ver he ife f eachgroup seeBurgesset al., 1990,pp. 153-6). In particular, he was awarethat members f the group might ehave as if theywere n a parent/childhood elationshipseealsomyexperience nterviewing armers elow). n this ase,Burgess ot only had to encourage he adult' n themembers f the group, but also guard against the'parent' herself. llowing the parent/child elation-ship to develop would have been fraught ith un-forseeable) angers, or oth her nd the members f

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 9: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 9/13

Practisingnterpretativeeography 465the group. nstead articipants n the tudy wereputon an 'equal footing' with Burgess,while Burgesswatched ut for hese nd other ransferenceelation-ships: or xample, nxiety, ear, n over-exposure fintense motions, nd a desire opleaseand hold theacademic n awe. This example uggests hat hera-peutic iscoursewas able to provideBurgesswith heunderstanding he needed to provide nd protectsafe and supportive etting n which people couldshare heir ived xperiences.

Thus, heconcept f counter) ransference ouldbecome one key component of an interpretativegeography which nstalls particular ind of self-reflexivity nd cknowledges urpower ocreate ndmould the course of the study. The term self-reflexivity s not of course new, and neither s thedemand hat eographers houldbe more elf-aware.The sense in which self-reflexivitys used here isdistinctive n woways. irstly, he erm suallymeansa reflection n the self, ut this requires distancebetween he bserver inreflection) nd the bserved(the elf). psychoanalytic iewregards his istanceasimpossible;nstead, eflections seen s profoundlyintersubjective,perating ot nlywithin he elation-ship between he researcher nd the researched utalso within wider social and personal relationships(seeGallop,1988).Secondly, n account f counter)transference rovides languagewith which o talkabout what is going on in the research ituation.Thisredefinition enounces he distance etween heself nd reflection y locating elf-reflectionn theintersubjectivity f he research lliance.

Thus, before urning o another spect of under-standing he structures f power in the researchprocess scenicunderstanding I would ike ust tosummarise he ways in which notions of (counter)transference ould help both describe he researchexperience ndground nterpretation. here re threedistinctmodes through hich counter) ransferencemight id self-reflectionn nterpretative eography.

First, n terms f the researcher's nd thesubject'sresponses o each other. We must think nd write

about all of the feelings nd emotions that areprovoked during ieldwork, nd this account mustinclude their nterpretations. n my own work,treated he farmers interviewed ery differently.This realise ad to do with heir ge;moreprecisely,those of my age I treated s if heywere my friends,those in their fifties treated s if they were myfather's riends, hosewho were older treated s ifthey were my step-father. ow, it might avebeenpossible to see how these (counter) ransferences

affected hat went on in each interview y talkingwith hem bout t.

Second, neither he researcher or the subjectis passive,both bring range of emotions o theresearch ituation, nd these becomefocused n theother participant. hat s felt n the ife outside ofthe study an easily be taken nto the research itu-ation, nd thought f s if t were omething oing onin the tudy. or xample, oing PhD in three earsbuilds p all sorts f stresses, nd t would be easy tothink hat your' nterviewees ere feeling hesamekind f pressure; r an nterviewee ight ssume hatthe researcher as overly un)sympathetic.

And, third, and this has alreadybeen noted) theresearcher as her/his wn personality nd set ofexperiences which will affect he research. Thisrelates o who we are,who the nterviewee hinks eare, nd who we think we are and how we behave.Here, amthinking ot only f what s considered obe personal npersonality like eing 'good' listeneror conversationalist) ut also public spects of our-selves likegender, lass, tatus, ge, race, thnicity,able-bodiedness, tc.). hese ssumptions anonlyberecovered y talking bout them.

If hat were not enough, nconscious antasies realsoacted ut n heoretical riting, ffecting hewayin which he ocialworld s conceived nd portrayed.When writing, esearch xperiences need 'to be

exploredwithin heir tructural ontext nd with

close appreciation f the subtle processesof groupdynamics nd group communication' Burgess t al.,1988a, p. 312). In empirical nvestigations, henotions of counter-transference uggest more thanmerewatchfulness, penness nd sympathy; t makesthe awareness both of ('our-their') eelings ndmotives nd of 'our-their') eanings nwhat s goingon - the errain f n interpretative eography.

Scenic nderstandingHowever, t s not enough imply obe explicit bout

what we (researcher nd subject) hink s going on;there must e another imension nwhich he naly-sis of power must operate n interpretative eogra-phy nd, gain,Adomo hit henailon the headwhenhe argued hat n empiricalnvestigation hat gnorestheory nd

contents tself ith methodologicalluralism, hichit then ustifies ith uchthreadbarend nadequateconcepts s induction nddeduction,olsters pwhatexists hroughtsover-zealousttempts odescribet.(Adorno, 957, .246).

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 10: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 10/13

466 STEVEN PILEAt this point, t s necessary o look more losely tFreud'smethod f nterpreting he ivedworld.Andthis is where it is possible to look beyond theresearcher/researched ialetic, and provide anaccount of the way in which power relations recreated, ustained nd reproduced neveryday ife. nFreud's nalyses f un)civilisationfor xample reud1913b, 1921, 1930,1939),he suggested hat here sa hidden pathology n collectivebehaviour. This,Freud believed,occurred t three evels: anguage,behaviour social action), nd social structures seeHabermas, 970).In this way, Freud ried o recog-nise the reality' f power relations which derivefrom inguistic, ehavioural nd social tructures. hisformulation llows the articulation f a method,which anbe called cenic nderstanding2.

Here,Freud's evelshavebeenreconceptualized

sscenes because levels' implies system f auton-omous hierarchies, hereas scenes' mpliesboth aco-presence nd interrelatedness f hierarchies ndthat those hierarchies re socially constructedthrough many systems f power. The use of theterm cene s also a way of extending mith's ramametaphor-concept, ecause scenes are not onlyconsciously cted n and created s sites for ction(theatre, lace,context) ut also are constitutive four ives nd the unconscious ircumstances f ction(landscape, eography, istory).

From this perspective, he process of socialreproduction ccurs simultaneously hrough hese'scenes'. t must e stressed hat hese cenes re onlythematically eparate; together they allow theresearcher o place what is said and done in itssurroundings. nd,by using his onceptualization,am arguing hat he meaningful ontent f anguagecannot be 'understood' nless t is possible, t thesame time, o 'explain' their ontext by analysingthese cenes.Thus,psychoanalysis an be used as amodel for interpretative ieldwork; ne whichdeploys both explanation and understanding n

interpreting he processes of social reproduction,which occur n three scenes' see Habermas, 987,pp. 137-41).

First, he semantic cene: this cene describes heregimes f signification f culture n which he onti-nuity f tradition nd a coherence f knowledge ssecured. t concerns he ways in which people talkabout,give meaning oand take meaning rom, heirlives nd theirworld.

Secondly, the socio-spatial scene: this is thescene of socially nd spatially rganised ollectivebehaviour, n which ndividuals re taught o behave

in their nvironment nd they re forced o conformto collective ways of ife. he integration f peopleinto ociety though sually ood enough isneverperfect, hus allowing the possibility f resistanceand change. This scene relates to the ways inwhich people behave, explain and rationalise heirbehaviour.

And thirdly, he socio-historical cene: this isthe scene of successive enerations, n which ocialreproduction s secured by regulating nterpersonalrelationships nd stabilising roup identities. hisscene s about the production, ransmission nd re-production f socialstructures; hiscan only occurthrough eople'sbehaviour nd beliefs, hough heydo not act ncircumstances f their wn choosing.

Scenicunderstanding san ntersubjective rocess,and so there re two sides to scenic

understanding:first, cenes represent he interactions etweenpeople, nd, econd, hey epresent he ontext f heinteractions etweenpeople.Moreover, heprocessofgaining cenic nderstanding stablishes n equiv-alence f ignificancebothmeaning nd mportance)between he hree imensions f the ived xperienceof everyday ife: he semantic cene language), hesocio-spatial scene (behaviour) and the socio-historical cene (social structure). hus, throughscenicunderstanding, e can produce hick escrip-tions f the ubjectiveworld nd ts dense networks

of meaning, hich re ocated within heir hanginghistorical ndgeographical ircumstances. oreover,structures f signification an only be uncoveredintersubjectively, hatever the medium throughwhichmeaning s expressed: or xample, exts, rt,language, or social actions, ocial institutions, ndsocialnetworks, r the products f abour.Thus, heresearcher annot nterpret eaning ndependentlyof the scenes n which eoplecommunicate r nde-pendently f people's own understanding f thosescenes; rucially, his ersion f cenic nderstandingattempts o voice people's experience n our-their

own words.In this paper, have suggested hat geographershave paid scant ttention o the emotional, ower)relationships ncountered n qualitative esearch; utmy argument nevitably and deliberately) ontainssilences. Most problematically, aising questionsabout the power between the researcher nd thesubject also problematizes he different, omplexpower relationship nvolved n interpretation ndauthorship, roblems have not separately labor-ated. Nevertheless, am extremely oncerned boutthese ssues. o,by way of onclusion, would ike o

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 11: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 11/13

Practisingnterpretativeeography 467

suggest hat he author must elinquish heclaim orepresent ther eople, nd also concede o them hespaceto speakfor, nd to be, themselves.

CONCLUDING ARGUMENTSTo sum up, geographers aveactedas if they tandoutside he specific istoricity nd geographicity ftheir ubjects; hishas enabled hem o comment nthe eality f he ubject's iewof heir wn situation,while not allowing the subject's equally validversions f reality. uite content o criticise truc-tures of power operating n society, geographershave avoided confronting hepower relations ponwhich geographical esearch elies nd thrives. heresearcher onstantly lips out of the analysis, ndis never rescued; rucially, he distinction etweenobserver and observed always remains ntact. norder o go beyond this position, have argued formore than ust bringing heresearch lliance withininterpretative eography, uggesting hat t shouldbe the grounds n whichwe write eographies.

Interpretative eography questions the splitbetween ctive ubject observer) nd passiveobject(observed).Here, there s also the possibility fsubverting he active subject= male' and 'passiveobject female' quations seeLloyd, 984;Mulvey,1989). If this form f geography ffers o firmlyestablished inary pposites, t may not be genderedas either masculine r feminine. hus, it offerschance oescape the patriarchal yranny f thoughtby sexual nalogy' afterMoi, 1989, p. 198).

During the course of interpretative esearch, heinterviewer ot only listens to and accepts thescenes of the nterviewed, ut also assesseswhat sgoing on between hem transference nd counter-transference and around hem scenicunderstand-ing. This form f nterpretative eography must bevalidated not only in terms f the relevance ndcogencyof the theoretical easoning ehindwhat s(objectively, ubjectively) resented as argued byMitchell, 983),but lso in terms f the presentationof the intersubjective esearch lliance. This mayunsettle ny clear-cut ppostion etween ubject ndobject, elf nd other, nowledge ndnon-knowledgein what we write by allowing n interference romwithin heresearch lliance.

It might e useful f suggest wo research rojectsthat, when taken ogether, llustrate hispoint: PaulWillis's Learning o Labour and Christine Griffin'sTypicalGirls? ide by side, Willis and Griffin how

how these inary ppositions ecomeunstable, ffer-ing the possibility hat he ubject an nterfere iththe text. Both Willis nd Griffin ere attempting oadmit he ntersubjective elationship etween hemand the schoolchildren hey alked o. In their writ-

ings, heydid this y using ranscript aterials romtheir fieldwork; ut the transcripts o not simplyfunction s evidence ubordinated othe ogicof thenarrative; hewords f the hildren onstantly ounda discordancewith the authors' oice. As a conse-quence, anguage s never reated nproblematically,instead t s used to place the research' n a contextriddenwith orms f power.Thecombined ffect stocreate differencenthe reader's esponses o,on theone hand, what s said n the nterviews nd, on theother, hat hewriter elieves s going on. Allowingmany voices nto the text undermines heauthorityof the uthor.

By admitting to) the idea of transference ndcounter-transference nd by assuming that thesubject an make s much ense s the researcher, ecan refuse he objectiveof capturing he other. nscenic understanding, esearchbecomes an inter-subjective process; the researcher nd researchedusing their eadsand their earts o understand hequestion under scrutiny, s they nteract t manydifferent evels.And, to anticipate criticism; hisdoes not reducegeographical esearch o a meetingbetween two (or more) people, but constructs twithin third register' the social and signifyingorder overning veryday ife. inally, nterpretativegeographical esearch emains onstantly ubversiveand questioning ecausethe researcher ever has theability o claim he truth. nstead, he im s to enablethe ubject osay what has previously eensilenced.Research o longer laims oarticulate hereality fthe subject, ut, by admitting ts voice,attempts oparticipate n tsrecovery.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank Jacquie urgess, lison Kaye,Mike Keith,Hugh Prince, illianRose,Susan Smithand Ann Taket or heir omments n earlier ersionsof this aper.

NOTES

1. This relationship arallels hedistinction drew earlierbetween he quantitative-qualitativeontinuum ndinterpretativeesearch.

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 12: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 12/13

468 STEVENPILE2. This method s internally elated to 'depth hermen-

eutics', a term used by Habermas 1971, p. 271) todescribe reud's method. t could be argued hat cenicunderstanding s not empirically emonstrated; ut theconceptual differences etween scenic understanding

and depth hermeneutics escribe an advance on analready empirically emonstrated method, depth her-meneutics see Pile,1990a and 1990b).

REFERENCES

References o Freud n either he Penguin Freud Library(Penguin, armondsworth) PFL)or the tandard ditionof the Complete Works of Sigmund Freud HogarthPress, ondon) SE).

ADORNO, T. (1957) 'Sociologyand empirical esearch',in CONNERTON, P. (ed) Critical ociologyPenguinHarmondsworth)

p.23 7-5 7

ATKINSON,P. (1990)The thnographicmaginationextualconstructionsfreality Routledge, ondon)

BURGESS,J., OLDSMITH,B. andHARRISON,C.(1990)'Pale shadows for policy reflections n the Greenwichopen space project', n BURGESS,R. G. (ed) Studies nqualitativemethodology, olume (JAI Press, London)pp. 141-67

BURGESS,J., IMB,M. and HARRISON,C. M. (1988a)'Exploring nvironmental aluesthrough hemedium fsmall groups. Part One: theory nd practice', nviron.Plann.A 20: 309-26

BURGESS,J., IMB,M. and HARRISON,C. M. (1988b)

'Exploring nvironmental aluesthrough hemedium fsmall roups. art Two: illustrations f group t work',Environ. lann.A 20:45 7-76

CASEMENT, P. (1985) On learning rom the patient(Tavistock, ondon)

CHODOROW, N. (1978) The reproductionf mothering:psychoanalysisnd the ociologyf gender University fCalifornia ress, erkeley)

CLIFFORD,J. and MARCUS, G. (1986) (eds) Writingcultures: he oeticsnd politics f thnographyUniversityof California ress, erkeley)

COSGROVE, D. (1983) 'Towards a radical culturalgeography', ntipode 5:1-11

COSGROVE, D. (1989) 'Historical considerations fhumanism, istorical materialism nd geography', nKOBAYASHI,A. and MACKENZIE,S. (eds)Remakinghuman eographyUnwinHyman, oston)pp. 189-205

COSGROVE,D. and DANIELS,S. (eds) (1988) The cono-graphy of landscape Cambridge University Press,Cambridge)

COSGROVE,D. andDOMOSH,M. forthcoming)'Authorand authority: writing he new cultural geography',in DUNCAN,J. nd LEY,D. (eds)RepresentingulturalgeographyUnwinHyman, ondon)

COSGROVE,D.andJACKSON,P. 1987) New directionsin cultural eography', rea 19: 95-101

CRAIB,. (1989)Psychoanalysisnd social heoryHarvesterWheatsheaf, emelHempstead)

CRANG,P. (1990) Contrasting magesof the new servicesector', rea22:29-36

DANIELS,S.(1989) Marxism, ulture nd the duplicity f

landscape', n PEET,R.and THRIFT,N. (eds)Newmodelsin geography, olume : Thepolitical-economyerspective(UnwinHyman, ondon)pp. 196-220

DOEL,M. (forthcoming) Installing econstruction: trik-ing out the postmodem', nviron. lann. : Soc.Space10

DRIVER,F. (1985) 'Power, pace and the body: a criticalassessment f Foucault's Disciplinend Punish', nviron.Plann. : Soc. Space : pp. 425-46

DRIVER,F. forthcoming)Geography's mpire: istories fgeographical nowledge', nviron. lann. : Soc. pace 0

EYLES,J. ed) (1988a) Researchn human eographyBasilBlackwell, ondon)

EYLES,J. 1988b) 'Interpreting he geographical world:

qualitative pproaches ngeographic esearch',nEYLES,J. nd SMITH,D. M. (eds)Qualitative ethodsn humangeographyPolity ress, ambridge) p. 1-16

EYLES,J. and SMITH, D. M. (eds) (1988) Qualitativemethodsnhuman eographyPolity ress, ambridge)

FOUCAULT,M. (1964)Madness nd civilisation: historyof nsanity n an age of reason Tavistock Publications,London)

FREUD,S. (1905) 'Fragment f an analysis of a case ofhysteria 'Dora')'(1977,PFL8)pp. 35-164

FREUD,S.(1910) The future rospects f psycho-analytictherapy' 1955,SE11)pp. 144-45

FREUD,S.(1913a) On beginning hetreatment' 1955,SE

12)pp. 121-44FREUD,S. (1913b) 'Totem and taboo' (1985, PFL 13)pp. 49-224

FREUD,S. (1917) Introductory ecture n psychoanalysis(1974,PFL1)

FREUD,S. (1921)'Group psychology nd the analysis fthe go' (1985,PFL12)pp. 95-178

FREUD,S. (1926) Thequestion f ay analysis', nFREUD,S. Twoshort ccounts f psychoanalysis1962, Penguin,Harmondsworth) p.89-170

FREUD,S. (1930) 'Civilisation nd its discontents' 1985,PFL12)pp. 251-340

FREUD,S.(1933)New ntroductoryecturesnpsychoanalysis(1973,PFL2)FREUD,S. (1937) 'Analysis erminable nd interminable'(1955,SE23)pp. 209-53

FREUD,S.(1939) Mosesand monotheism' 1985,PFL13)pp. 243-386

GALLOP, J. (1982) Feminism nd psychoanalysis: hedaughter'seductionMacmillan, ondon)

GALLOP,J. 1988) Thinking hrough hebody ColumbiaUniversity ress,New York)

GEERTZ,C. (1973) The interpretation f cultures: electedessaysBasicBooks,New York)

GEERTZ,C.(1983)Localknowledge:urther ssaysn nterpre-tative nthropologyBasicBooks,New York)

This content downloade d on Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:30:2 7 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 13: Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

8/13/2019 Steve Pile Practising Interpretative Geography

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/steve-pile-practising-interpretative-geography 13/13

Practisingnterpretativeeography 469GREGORY,D. (1981) Human gency nd human eogra-

phy', Trans. nst. r. Geogr. .S. 6: 1-18GREGORY, D. (1989) 'Areal differentiation nd post-

modem human geography', n GREGORY, D. andWALFORD, R. (eds) Horizons n human geography(Macmillan, ondon)pp. 67-96

GRIFFIN, . (1985)Typical irls? oungwomen rom choolothe obmarket Routledge nd KeganPaul,London)

HABERMAS,J. (1970) 'On systematically istortedcommunication',nquiry 3:205-18

HABERMAS,J. (1971) Knowledge nd human nterests(Heinemann, ondon)

HABERMAS,J. 1987) Thetheory f communicativectionVolume . Lifeworldnd system: critique ffunctionalistreasonPolity ress, ambridge)

HALL, S., HOBSON, D., LOWE,A. and WILLIS,P. (eds)(1980)Culture, edia, anguageHutchinson, ondon)

HAMMERSLEY,M. and ATKINSON,P. (1983)Ethnogra-phy: rinciples npracticeTavistock, ondon)

INGLEBY,D. (1977)'The ambivalence f psychoanalysis',Radical cience 5: 39-71

IRIGARAY,L. (1989) 'The gesture n psychoanalysis', nBRENNAN,T. (ed)Between eminismnd psychoanalysis(Routledge, ondon)pp. 127-38

JACKSON,P. (1985) 'Urban ethnography', rog. n Hum.Geogr. : 157-76

JACKSON,P. and SMITH,S. (1984)Exploringocial eogra-phy Allen nd Unwin, ondon)

KEITH,M. (forthcoming) Angry writing: re)presentingthe unethical orld f the thnographer', nviron. lann.D: Soc.Space

LAPLANCHE,J. nd PONTALIS,J.B. 1973)The anguageof sychoanalysis1988,Kamac Books and the nstitute fPsychoanalysis, ondon)

LEY, D. (1985) 'Cultural/humanistic eography', Prog.Hum.Geogr. : 157-76

LLOYD,G. (1984)Themanof reason: male' nd female' nwestern hilosophyMethuen, ondon)

LOMAS,P. (1987)The imits f nterpretation: hat'swrongwith sychoanalysis?Penguin, armondsworth)

LOWE,M.S.and SHORT,J.R. 1990). Progressive umangeography', rog. um.Geogr. 4: 1-11

LOWENTHAL,D. (1961) 'Geography, xperience ndimagination: owards a geographical epistemology',Ann.Ass.Am.Geogr. 1:241-60

MARCUS,G. E. and FISCHER,M. M. (1986)Anthropologyas cultural ritique: n experimental oment n the humansciencesUniversity f ChicagoPress,Chicago)

MATLASS,D. (forthcoming)Postmodemism, r the and-scapeof talo Calvino',Environ. lann. : Soc.Space10

MITCHELL,J. C. (1983)'Case and situation nalysis', heSociologicalev.31: 187-211

MOI, T. (1989) 'Patriarchal hought nd the drive forknowledge', n BRENNAN,T. (ed)BetweeneminismndpsychoanalysisRoutledge, ondon)pp. 189-205

MULVEY, L. (1989) The Visual and Other Pleasures(Macmillan, ondon)

OAKLEY, A. (1981) 'Interviewing women: a contra-diction n terms', n ROBERTS,H. (ed) Doingfeministresearch (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London)pp. 30-61

PHILO,C.(1987) Thesame nd the other: n geographies,madness nd outsiders' OccasionalPaper 12, Dept. ofGeogr., University f Loughborough)

PHILO,C. (forthcoming)Foucault's eography', nviron.Plann. : Soc.Space10

PILE,S.(1990a)Theprivate armer: ransformationnd egiti-mation n dvanced apitalist gricultureDartmouth ress,Aldershot)

PILE,S. (1990b) 'Depth hermeneutics nd critical umangeography', nviron. lann. : Soc.Space : 211-32

RABINOW, P. and SULLIVAN,W. (1987) Interpretativesocial cience: secondook University f California ress,

Berkeley)ROSE,G. (1988) 'Locality, olitics, nd culture: oplar nthe 1920s',Environ. lann.D:Soc.Space : 151-68

SACK,R. D. (1980)Conceptionsf pace nsocial hought:geographicerspectiveMacmillan, ondon)

SAID, E. (1989) 'Representing he colonized: anthro-pology's nterlocutors', ritical nquiry 5:205-25

SAYER,A.(1989) On the dialogue etweenhumanism ndhistoricalmaterialism n geography', n KOBAYASHI,A. and MACKENZIE,S.(eds)Remaking uman eography(UnwinHyman, oston)pp. 206-26

SEIDLER,V. (1989) Rediscovering asculinity: eason,languagend exualityRoutledge, ondon)

SMITH,D. E. (1988) Theeveryday orld s problematic:feminist ociology Open University Press, MiltonKeynes)

SMITH,D. M. (1977)Human eography: welfarepproach(EdwardArnold, ondon)

SMITH, S. (1988) 'Constructing ocal knowledge: theanalysis f elf neveryday ife', nEYLES,J. nd SMITH,D. M. (eds) Qualitative methods n human geography(Polity ress, ambridge) p.17-38

SPIVAK,G. C. (1985) 'Can the subaltern peak? Specu-lations on the widow sacrifice', n NELSON, C. andGROSSBERG,L.(eds)Marxism nd the nterpretationfculture: imits, rontiers, oundaries 1988, Macmillan,London)pp. 271-313

STANLEY,L. (ed) (1990) Feminist raxis: esearch,heoryand epistemology n feminist ociology Routledge,London)

STRAUSS,A. (1987)Qualitative nalysis or ocial cientists(Cambridge niversity ress, ambridge)

WALKER,R. ed) 1985)Applied ualitative esearchGowerPress,Aldershot)

WILLIS,P. (1977)Learning o abour: owworking lasskidsgetworking lassobs Gower Press, Aldershot)