Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
Studies of the social and cultural dimensions of airspace and aerial transportation
have evaded much geographical investigation until recently. While transport
geographers have sought to trace out the economic, political and organisational
dimensions and linkages air-transport creates between places, new scholarship is
beginning to contribute through disparate techniques, theories and methodologies,
more sensitive to social and cultural theory. As this article suggests, however, they
have not gone far enough in exploring both the multiple spatialities of aeromobility
and, furthermore, the spaces in which aeromobilities count most critically for
human life and quality. This article provides a short overview of recent research
that has used a disparate set of approaches to the study of aeromobilities. Issues from
passenger profiling, strategic bombing to extraordinary rendition are explored.
Introduction
In 1955, Possony and Rosenzweig attempted to set out an investigation
of the geography of the air as a new research focus. While at first the
authors limited their scoping of this geography to the physical differences
of the air in various locations and altitudes (Possony and Rosenzweig
1955, 1), the political scientists were more fervently interested in the
implications of this geography for flying and human activity. More specifically,
they wanted to know what that invisible sea in which we live, the air
(Possony and Rosenzweig 1955, 1) meant for international relations, strategy
and foreign policy.
While Possony and Rosenweig (1955) made some interesting observations
and should be applauded for stimulating an awareness of the importance
of air geography or aerogeography, their conception of this geography
was rather unsophisticated. Needless to say, this is really not all that startling
and it would be unfair to suggest otherwise given when the article was
written. The authors set out how the physical characteristics of airspace
constrained and enabled aerial activity, from the simple implications of air
currents, altitudes and temperatures. Deploying a flat and one-dimensional
conception of geography as physical space, their approach lacked a sense
2008 The Author
Journal Compilation 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
that this article seeks to address. Let me outline one major shortcoming
of this work. While air-travel enables societies, it also has the capacity to
disable them. War in the 20th century was war waged predominantly by
the aeroplane. From the air raids of the Blitz to the newest unmanned
reconnaissance aircraft, aeromobilities provide both promise and possibility,
as well as dread, terror, destruction (both urban and environmental) and death.
Furthermore, it is in the spaces of air-travel, where societies are increasingly
regulated and curtailed (Salter 2007a, 2008). As flight becomes a dominant
mode of border crossing, international mobility, and a potential vehicle
for state and terrorist violence, the spaces of air-travel have become some
of the most intensely segregated and hierarchical as well as the most
monitored and controlled (Crang 2002). Simply put, the domains in which
we look at air-travel or aeromobilities needs expanding to the securitised
and militarised contexts from which the technology originally began
and the contemporary contexts to which it is now being put. We cannot
avoid some of the truly scary situations where aeromobilities are
found; how do they involve death, terror, humiliation, fear, destruction,
inequality or discrimination? As Caren Kaplan (2006) recently claims, the
topic of violence remains incredibly elusive from conceptions of mobility,
and thus considerations of the entangled histories of war and mobility
serve as an important corrective (Kaplan 2006, 395; see also Virilio
[1985] 2005).
This article is intended to provide a step in the direction of this kind of
research by providing an overview of what has and is being done. It will
only succeed in presenting a slice of what this kind of geography does and
could look like by presenting exciting research from geographers and
beyond to exploring a set of specific geographies of aeromobilities that
intersect both visual registers and practices.2 At the same time, while the
issues presented above demand an increasingly critical analysis of aeromobilities, it is because of their crucial nature that they have been so difficult
to get at methodologically. This is ironic given that aerial geographies are
usually imperceptible, ephemeral or concealed. The article will also attend
to the mobile methodologies (see Urry 2007) aeromobilities require as their
major issues and implications are exposed.
The article is divided into four key sections that deal with different
various ways that the visual and aeomobilities intersect, cross-cutting several
domains and contexts. The first section looks at the more traditional idea
of the aeromobile cosmic view, I then deal with seeing into the future,
before borders and thresholds and then finishing with more embodied and
anticipatory ways of seeing.
Cosmic Views
The aerial view is often aligned with knowledge. The view from above
has been understood as an epistemological gaze a view that permits
2008 The Author
Geography Compass 2/5 (2008): 13181336, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00149.x
Journal Compilation 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
The reach of the aeromobile gaze allows almost all to be known. For
Graham (2004), this kind of extensibility upturns the telescopic sight
Virilio refers to earlier. Everyday actions on the ground have a vertical
dimensionality, a signature that may be captured from above leaked by
2008 The Author
Geography Compass 2/5 (2008): 13181336, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00149.x
Journal Compilation 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
and Wade (1998), which closely resemble the earlier stratagem of strategic
or moral bombing, shock and awe or rapid dominance is intended as a
strategy to command perception to control the fears, the anxieties the
feelings of the enemy so that it may be catapulted into capitulation. This
targeting was aimed at the visual register, supposedly shocked and awed
by the nightly destruction of Baghdad.
But the visually arresting bombing campaign had a secondary target:
the viewing television audience of the West. The constant exaggeration
of precision by the armed forces and the US administration, indeed, the
brilliance of precision, the extraordinariness of the night attacks was meant
to awe, and thereby legitimate (Grosscup 2006, 6). The visual spectacle
and firework display that lit up the night sky served to communicate back
to the populations sitting behind their televisions screens. As Samuel
Weber writes, we are exhilarated at the sight of such power and control,
we are relieved to be still in one piece (Weber cited in Gregory 2007).
Conclusion: Searching for Aeromobilities
This review was not intended to produce an all-encompassing review of
developments towards the aeromobile in geography and the social sciences.
Rather, I have tried to present a cross section or a thin slicing of pertinent
works. Clearly, this is rather one-sided. It has been a tale of dread, death,
stress and suffering. There is no doubt that aeromobilities are often cast
in quite different ways to this. We know how the aeroplane has been seen
a symbol of promise and a figure of hope. An examination of the joyful
and intense affects of flight would make an interesting study (see McCormacks important forthcoming study on the atmospheric geographies of
balloon flight; or take Bissell 2007 on train travel). And yet, this promise
and hope usually comes with a dark undertone. Saulo Cwerners (2006)
recent study of helicopter travel in So Paulo demonstrates how our initial
excitement at and the lure of vertical mobility actually cloaks quite serious
inequalities of access. The rich users of such transport do so out of
necessity in order to escape the congestion of the city, and out of fear of
being kidnapped for a high-value ransom. I wanted to look at how
geographers and others are dealing with the crucial questions posed
by airspaces and as I have shown aeromobilities; aeromobilities that are
experienced, practiced and anticipated at a visual register with really critical
implications. In this Conclusion, I want to sum up where we have got
to and where further research in this area seems to be moving before
summarising.
The aeromobilities that the article has discussed compose not a singular
aerial geography, but a multiplicity. From terror flights for extraordinary
rendition to the deployment of UAVs, aeromobilities compose many
different kinds of space. In some ways, airspaces may appear to be socially
constructed. Airspaces are formed by legal treaties and by influential
2008 The Author
Geography Compass 2/5 (2008): 13181336, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00149.x
Journal Compilation 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Acknowledgements
Thanks are due to the helpful comments of two referees and suggestions
from Ian Cook. The article has benefited from discussion with Ben
Anderson and a collaboration with Lucy Budd. And questions from audiences
at Bristol and Durham also helped tremendously.
Short Biography
Peter Adey is a Lecturer in the School of Physical and Geographical
Sciences and the Institute for Law, Politics and Justice at Keele University,
Keele, UK. He has published peer-reviewed articles on the topic of
mobility, security and air-travel and sits on the editorial board of the
interdisciplinary journal Mobilities. Peters first book, which traces the
evolution of the concept Mobility, will be published by Routledge in 2009.
Forthcoming with Wiley-Blackwell in 2010, Aerial Geographies will investigate
how the social and material spaces of the aeroplane have transfigured the
human subject.
Notes
* Correspondence address: Peter Adey, Earth Sciences and Geography, Keele University, William
Smith Building, Keele ST5 5BG, UK. E-mail: p.adey@esci.keele.ac.uk.
1
References
Adey, P. (2004a). Surveillance at the airport: surveilling mobility/mobilising surveillance. Environment and Planning A 36, pp. 1365 1380.
. (2004b). Secured and sorted mobilities: examples from the airport. Surveillance and Society
1, pp. 500 519.
. (2006a). Airports and air-mindedness: spacing, timing and using Liverpool Airport
1929 39. Social and Cultural Geography 7, pp. 343 363.
. (2006b). If mobility is everything then it is nothing: towards a relational politics of
(im)mobilities. Mobilities 1, pp. 75 94.
. (2007). May I have your attention: airport geographies of spectatorship, position and
(im)mobility. Environment and Planning D-Society & Space 3, pp. 515 536.
. (2008). Airports, mobility, and the calculative architecture of affective control. Geoforum
39, pp. 438 451.
. (forthcoming). Mobility. London: Routledge.
Adey, P., Budd, L., and Hubbard, P. (2007). Flying lessons: exploring the social and cultural
geographies of global air travel. Progress in Human Geography 31, pp. 773 791.
Agamben, G. (1998). Homo sacer: sovereign power and bare life. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
2008 The Author
Geography Compass 2/5 (2008): 13181336, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00149.x
Journal Compilation 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd