Intimate Spaces

Abstract

Any account of family mobility needs to consider when this mobility stops or is suspended. I do not mean by this to infer that there is a distinction between fixity and flow, but rather, echoing Harvey (1990), that places are fixed by relative permanencies and a truce emerges between the opposing sentiments and tendencies to move or remain fixed. Being intimate necessitates being close to others, both physically and emotionally, and being with other people, or by oneself, may be brought about by a suspension of mobility. This desire to cease mobilities, however temporary, or to dwell on it can be taken as a condition of human existence (Urry, 2002). Though as Bissell (2012: 5) discusses, drawing on Heidegger’s discussion of dwelling, ‘dwelling is an active process of accomplishment rather than a given’. One interpretation of mobilities is that it is through movement that spaces for intimacy, belonging and togetherness are created. In other words, we need to take into account the consequences and outcomes of mobility and the meanings of ‘meeting up’ and spending time together. But this suspension of mobility can only be temporary, as when physical mobility comes to a halt it is framed by the desire or need to move on or return.