Document Type
Article
Abstract
[First paragraph]
Theoretical debates regarding space and place, their usefulness and limits, are complicated by the too often presumed "givenness" of the terms [1]. Despite their slippage into one another—conceptually as well as a result of inconsistent or interchangeable use of space and place—many theorists in several disciplines employ spatial or placial metaphors, even as they undertake a discussion of space and/or place. On the other hand, clear designations between space and place frequently prove overly simplistic. For some, space and place are in direct opposition—Yi-Fu Tuan writes, "Place is security, space is freedom: we are attached to the one and long for the other" (3). For others, space is an expression of place or vice versa—Michel de Certeau defines "space [as] a practiced place" (117, original emphasis). According to the latter definition, then, place is dead, static, and transforms into space when animated.
Repository Citation
Maucione, Jessica. "Locating the Limits and Possibilities of Place." Reconstruction: Studies in Contemporary Culture vol. 14, no. 3, 2014, pp. 1–13. https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/reconstruction/vol14/iss3/7