Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.


Durham Research Online
You are in:

Undoing mastery: With ambivalence?

Linz, Jess and Secor, Anna J. (2021) 'Undoing mastery: With ambivalence?', Dialogues in human geography., 11 (1). pp. 108-111.

Abstract

In this commentary, we respond to Derek Ruez and Daniel Cockayne’s article ‘Feeling Otherwise: Ambivalent Affects and the Politics of Critique in Geography’. We do so by picking up ambivalence—or more precisely, ambivalence about ambivalence—as a tool with which Ruez and Cockayne leave us. We find this tool somewhat difficult to grasp, but we understand this as part of its design. Ambivalence undoes the subject’s mastery. In doing so, we find that an airing of ambivalence gives other kinds of entangled, indeterminate, and unknowing relations room to breathe.

Item Type:Article
Full text:(VoR) Version of Record
Available under License - Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial 4.0.
Download PDF
(108Kb)
Status:Peer-reviewed
Publisher Web site:https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820621995626
Publisher statement:This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
Date accepted:No date available
Date deposited:15 November 2021
Date of first online publication:08 March 2021
Date first made open access:15 November 2021

Save or Share this output

Export:
Export
Look up in GoogleScholar