Skip to main content
Log in

Five Gazes on the Border: a Collective Auto-Ethnographic Writing

  • ARENA OF AUTO ETNOGRHAPHY
  • Published:
Human Arenas Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The article presents a collective and interdisciplinary academic writing about an itinerant field work in three different sites/areas with the distinct identities of the Estonian territory, in particular the Estonian-Russian border zones. The authors had traveled for 1 week in three different Estonian border areas to observe the everyday life of people. The different perspectives of cultural psychology and human geography illuminate the multifaceted nature of borderscapes and the special processes of meaning-making that take place on the border.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anzaldúa, G. (1987). Borderlands. La frontera. The new mestiza. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkart, T., & Weggen, J. (2015). Dialogic introspection: a method for exploring emotions in everyday life and experimental contexts. In H. Flam & J. Kleres (Eds.), Methods of exploring emotions (pp. 101–111). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Español, A., Marsico, G., & Tateo, L. (submitted). Maintaining borders: from border guards to diplomats. Journal of Borderlands Studies.

  • Ferrer-Gallardo, X. (2008). The Spanish-Moroccan border complex: processes of geopolitical, functional and symbolic rebordering. Political Geography, 27, 301–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2007.12.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermans, H. J. M., & Hermans-Konopka, A. (2010). Dialogical self theory: positioning and counter-positioning in globalizing society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kullasepp, K. (2008). Are you like this...or just behave this way? International Journal for Dialogical Science, 69–92.

  • Marsico, G. (2011). The “non-cuttable” space in between: context, boundaries and their natural fluidity. IPBS: Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 45(2), 185–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-011-9164-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsico, G. (2013). Moving between the social spaces: conditions for boundaries crossing. In G. Marsico, K. Komatsu, & A. Iannaccone (Eds.), Crossing boundaries. Intercontextual dynamics between family and school (pp. 361–374). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsico, G. (2016). The borderland. Culture & Psychology, 22(2), 206–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X15601199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsico, G., & Tateo, L. (2017). Borders, tensegrity and development in dialogue. Integrative Psychological and Behavioural Sciences, 51(4), 536–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-017-9398-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palang, H., Semm, K., & Verstraete, L. (2009). Time boundaries: change of practice and experience through time layers. Journal of Borderland Studies, 24(2), 92–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2009.9695730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, A. (2007). Absent environments: theorising environmental law and the city. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, A. (2013). Atmospheres of law: senses, affects, lawscapes. Emotion, Space and Society, 7(2013), 35–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Printsmann, A., & Palang, H. (2016). Vegetable garden as a source of identity. In T. Collins, G. Kindermann, C. Newman, & N. Cronin (Eds.), Landscape values place and praxis (pp. 298–303). Galway: National University of Ireland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, O. (2012). An anthropologist on Mars: Seven paradoxical tales. New York: Vintage.

  • Tateo, L. (2016). Toward a cogenetic cultural psychology. Culture & Psychology, 22(3), 433–447. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X16645297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tateo, L. (2018). Affective semiosis and affective logic. New Ideas in Psychology, 48, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2017.08.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tateo, L., & Marsico, G. (2014). Open complementarity in cultural psychology. In B. Wagoner, N. Chaudhary, & P. Hviid (Eds.), Culture psychology and its future: complementarity in a new key (pp. 77–91). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valsiner, J. (2014). An invitation to cultural psychology. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study has been made possible thanks to the financial support of the Grant F5316 by Tallinn University Research Fund (Tallinna Ülikooli uuringufond), by the Estonian Research Agency grant IUT3-2 and by Niels Bohr Professorship Grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luca Tateo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tateo, L., Español, A., Kullasepp, K. et al. Five Gazes on the Border: a Collective Auto-Ethnographic Writing. Hu Arenas 1, 113–133 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42087-018-0010-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42087-018-0010-1

Keywords

Navigation