Nonrepresentational Theory and Me: Notes of an Interested Sceptic

This is a wonderful, important, and occasionally infuriating book, at least parts of which should be read by anyone with an interest in theory in human (and some physical) geography. As an `old school' cultural geographer (ie, once `new') I have fond memories of edited collections that emerged as cultural geography interfaced with Marxism, feminism, and poststructuralism. They were some of the most important texts for the emergence of a new set of questions, methods, and approaches to doing human geography. The edited collection is out of favour among many publishers, so hats off to Ashgate for publishing thisöin paperback! I have no doubt that this book will be just as treasured a resource now and in years to come as my well-worn copies of WritingWorlds (Barnes and Duncan, 1992) and Place/Culture/Representation (Duncan and Ley, 1993). Edited collections like Taking Place are one sign of a particular set of ideas or theoretical approaches reaching a critical mass. I am reminded, for instance, of the publication of Humanistic Geography: Prospects and Problems (Ley and Samuels, 1978)öan event that signaled the maturity of a set of theoretical approaches in human geography. Nonrepresentational theory (NRT) has become an important focus of debate in human geography and is one of the few theoretical approaches that attracts the kinds of heated debate that were once more familiar. In this review essay I do three entangled things: I provide a review of the book, I provide an account of one sceptic's journey through NRT, and I summarize seven key questions that have been asked (by many geographers including me) of NRTöall of which are addressed in the pages of Taking Place. The book consists of four sections headed `̀ Life'', ``Representation'', `̀ Ethics'', and `̀ Politics'', each with four short chapters. There is also an exceptionally clear introduction and an interlude which provides a revealing interview with Nigel Thrift, the leading figure in NRT. Of the authors fifteen are men and three are women, fifteen are based in the UK and three elsewhere, and eight studied at Bristol's School of Geographical Sciences. Others were supervised or examined by people who had been at Bristol. One day an account will be written of the role of Bristol in this particular episode of the history of geographic thought. I list these figures because, as things stand, NRT appears to have a limited hinterland and audience. It is very British and very male. Its impact in North America, for instance, appears to be limited to a (very) few scholars and, I imagine, to a host of PhD students who will find further inspiration in this book. It is fair to say that the way NRT has been taken up in North America (and the chapters by Keith Woodward and Arun Saldanha are indicative of this) has a slightly more hesitant and less evangelical flavour. The fact that the vast majority of NRT practitioners are male does not necessarily make it masculinist, but the fact that so few women have rallied to the flag does suggest a limited appeal, particularly to feminist scholars who would want to hear more about both gender and power than Review essay Nonrepresentational theory and me: notes of an interested scepticÀ Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 2012, volume 30, pages 96 ^ 105