Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Imag(in)ing Everyday Geographies: A case study of Andrew Buckles’ Why Wait? Project

  • Published:
GeoJournal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article introduces an interdisciplinary collaboration that brings together sympathetic trends in qualitative geographic visualization (from the perspective of one author who is a geographer) and contemporary generative artistic practices (from the perspective of the other author, who is an artist and theorist)—attempting to represent a diverse array of creative and multi-modal data through generative and participatory digital methods. We present how this convergence expands categories of meaning, allowing us to explore experiential/embodied as well as creative/imaginative engagements with everyday geographies distinct to a digital age. The article mediates on the idea of mapping the imagination and the ways we imagine quotidian spaces, as well as possibilities for new methods for the analysis and representation of spatial and emotional complexity. We particularly explore strategies of integrating multiple technologies and multiple-modes of representation for mapping and re-mapping complexities of social and creative living in order to help provide alternate ways to imagine, represent and engage different forms of embodied and imaginative geographies. This article presents a case study with the artist Andrew Buckles, in Seattle, Washington, correlating representational and participatory digital data including geospatial, temporal, audio, video as well as electroencephalography readings from brainwave sensors.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We consider Andrew not only as the subject of the research but also as an active co-contributor to the project.

  2. In the case of Orientalism Said’s notion of imaginative geography is applied to the term ‘Orient.’ For Said the Orient is a European invention “the main thing for the European (coming to the Orient) was a European invention representation of the orient and its contemporary fate, in a way to satisfy special western interest through out the last 300 years.” (Said 1979, 1).

  3. http://store.neurosky.com/products/mindwave-mobile.

  4. Neurosky recently developed a software called MindRDR, an app that allows Google Glass to connect with the Mindwave Mobile EEG biosensor using Bluetooth technology. They claim that it is capable of detecting brain wave and controlling a device just by thinking (Rodriguez 2014).

  5. Recent neuroscience and cognitive research has increased knowledge about the brain and the electrical signals emitted in the brain, providing a general synopsis of common brainwave frequency ranges correlated to different types of activities in the brain: δ (Delta Waves, 0–3 Hz) for deep, dreamless sleep and unconsciousness; θ (Theta Waves, 4–7 Hz) for creativity, spontaneity, imaginary, and day dream; α (Alpha Waves, 8–12 Hz) for relaxed, tranquil, and conscious moment; β (Beta Waves, 13–30 Hz) for relaxed yet focused, thinking, and aware of self and surroundings; γ (Gamma Waves, 31–50 Hz) for high mental activity and perception and learning. Information about brainwaves types is from the Neurosky Research Tools (http://www.neurosky.com), Brain and Health (http://brainandhealth.com/Brain-Waves.html), and Brainworks (www.brainworksneurotherapu.com).

  6. There was a moment when we realized that we are working with a type of Big Data. The Neurosky device records 500 brainwave data points per second. We are consequently dealing with about 1 million points of data for the visualization of a 30-min interview.

  7. Buckles even changed his posture learning toward the camera when he was asked about this question.

  8. We acknowledge that the relationship between geography and arts has a long history, and it is epitomized by maps and mapping practice (Cosgrove 2008; Cosgrove and Daniels 1988; Kanarinka 2009; Wright 1947).

References

  • Aitken, S. C., & Craine, J. (2005). Visual methodologies: What you see is not always what you get. In R. Flowerdew & D. Martin (Eds.), Methods in human geography (pp. 250–269). England: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aitken, S., & Craine, J. (2009). Into the image and beyond: Affective visual geographies and GIScience. In M. Cope & S. Elwood (Eds.), Qualitative GIS: Mixed methods approaches to integrating qualitative research and geographic information systems in practice and theory (pp. 139–156). London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ascott, R. (2007). Telematic embrace: Visionary theories of art, technology and consciousness. Oakland: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baudrillard, J. (1983). Simulations. New York: Semiotext.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bioy Casares, A. (2003 [1940]). The invention of morel. New York: NYRB Classics.

  • Bishop, C. (Ed.). (2006). Participation. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, C. (2012). Artificial hells: Participatory art and the politics of spectatorship. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodenhamer, D. J., Corrigan, J., & Harris, T. M. (2010). The spatial humanities: GIS and the future of humanities scholarship. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boschmann, E. E., & Cubbon, E. (2014). Sketch maps and qualitative GIS: Using cartographies of individuals spatial narratives in geographic research. The Professional Geographer, 66(2), 236–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourriaud, N. (1998). Relational aesthetics. Paris: Les presses du reel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd Davis, S. (2009). Mapping the unseen: Making sense of the subjective image. In C. Nold (Ed.), Emotional cartography: Technologies of the self (pp. 39–59). http://emotionalcartography.net/EmotionalCartography.pdf

  • Buller, H. (2008). The lively process of interdisciplinarity. Area, 41(4), 395–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgett, B., Hillyard, C., Krabill, R., Leadly, S., & Rosenberg, B. (2011). Teaching interdisciplinarity. Pedagogy Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture, 11(3), 465–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cope, M., & Elwood, S. (2009). Qualitative GIS: A mixed methods approach. London: SAGE.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cosgrove, D. (2008). Geography and vision: Seeing, imagining and representing the world. New York: I.B.Tauris & Co Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosgrove, D., & Daniels, S. (1988). The Iconography of landscape. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanzo, M. (2006). MVRDV: Works and project 1991–2006. Italy: SKIRA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, S., DeLyser, D., Entrikin, J. N., & Richardson, D. (2011). Envisioning landscapes, making worlds: Geography and the humanities. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dear, M., Ketchum, J., Luria, S., & Richardson, D. (2011). GeoHumanities: Art, history, text at the edge of place. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkins, J. (2001). Why art can’t be taught. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elwood, S. (2010). Geographic information science: Visualization, visual methods, and the geoweb. Progress in Human Geography, 34(3), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giaccardi, E., & Fogli, D. (2008). Affective geographies: Toward a richer cartographic semantics for the geospatial web. In International conference on advanced visual interfaces (AVI 2008) (pp. 173–180). New York: ACM Press.

  • Goodchild, M. F., & Janelle, D. G. (2010). Toward critical spatial thinking in the social sciences and humanities. GeoJournal, 75(3), 3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, M., & Zook, M. (2013). Augmented realities and uneven geographies: Exploring the geolinguistic contours of the web. Environment and Planning A, 45(1), 77–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, T. M., Bergeron, S., & Rouse, L. J. (2011). Humanities GIS. In M. Dear, J. Ketchum, S. Luria, & D. Richardson (Eds.), geohumanities: Art, history, text at the edge of place (pp. 226–240). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, H. (2012). Geography and art. An expanding filed: Site, the body and practice. Progress in Human Geography, 37(1), 52–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, H. (2013). For creative geographies: Geography, visual arts and the making of worlds. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayles, K. (1999). How we became posthuman: Virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature and informatics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jung, J.-K., & Elwood, S. (2010). Extending the qualitative capabilities of GIS: Computer-aided qualitative GIS. Transactions in GIS, 14(1), 63–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanarinka, (2009). Art and cartography. In R. Kitchen & N. Thrift (Eds.), International encyclopedia of human geography (pp. 190–206). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ketchum, J. (2011). Geoimagery. In M. Dear, J. Ketchum, S. Luria, & D. Richardson (Eds.), GeoHumanities: Art, history, text at the edge of place (pp. 139–142). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroker, A. (2004). The will to technology and the culture of nihilism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroker, A., & Kroker, M. (2010). Code drift: Essays in critical digital studies. Victoria: CTheory Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwan, M.-P. (2007). Affecting geospatial technologies: Toward a feminist politics of emotion. Professional Geographer, 59(1), 22–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nold, C. (Ed.). (2009). Emotional cartography: Technologies of the self. http://emotionalcartography.net/EmotionalCartography.pdf

  • Perec, G. (2010) An Attempt at Exhausting a Place in Paris, M. Lowenthal (Trans), Cambridge: Wakefield

  • Pink, S. (2012). Visual ethnography and the internet: Visuality, virtuality and the spatial turn. In S. Pink (Ed.), Advances in visual methodology (pp. 113–130). London: SAGE.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, S. (2014). London firm creates mind-controlled commands for Google glass. Los Angeles Times. http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-google-glass-mindrdr-20140711-story.html. Accessed July 23, 2014.

  • Said, E. W. (1979). Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sui, D. Z. (2010). GeoJournal: A new focus on spatially integrated social sciences and humanities. GeoJournal, 75(1), 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thien, D. (2005). After or beyond feeling? A consideration of affect and emotion in geography. Area, 37(4), 450–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thien, D. (2011). Emotional life. In V. J. D. Del Casino, M. E. Thomas, P. Cloke, & R. Panelli (Eds.), A companion to social geography (pp. 309–325). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Turkle, S. (1997). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the internet. New York: Simon & Shuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkle, S. (2012). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virilio, P. (1997). The vision machine. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virilio, P. (1999). Politics of the very worst. New York: Semiotext(e).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J. K. (1947). Terrae incognitae: The place of imagination in geography. Annals of Association of American Geographers, 37(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank our co-contributor, Andrew Buckles for his participation in this project. We are also grateful for the insightful comments and guidance from Sarah Elwood, the editor, and anonymous reviewers. This project has been supported by the Simpson Center for the Humanities & the Worthington Fellowship Program at University of Washington.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Washington Bothell, Bothell, WA, USA

    Jin-Kyu Jung & Ted Hiebert

Authors
  1. Jin-Kyu Jung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ted Hiebert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jin-Kyu Jung.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jung, JK., Hiebert, T. Imag(in)ing Everyday Geographies: A case study of Andrew Buckles’ Why Wait? Project. GeoJournal 81, 597–614 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-015-9638-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-015-9638-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation