movement

esta es mi seccion que mas me interesa y todavia no logro decantar, me falta urry 2007 que adquiri recientemente, obvio no estaba en mi lista de lecturas y es clave para el campo aunque no muy novedoso y Deleuze y guatari que o lo transformaba en algo simpliista o les daba tiempo. como con tdo el bodoque de lecturas estoy dejando que me traspasen a ver que pasa.

Spatial Movement
The growing anthropological literature on space and place has addressed these issues in the concrete dimension of how people experience places and shape them through practice (Gordillo 2004, Moore 1998). The production of place is the result of practices generated from the body (Csordas 1994), and places, in turn, shapes practice and the body (Bourdieu 2000). Bodies themselves are therefore an arena of power relations; they are the point of operation of forms of control as well as a means of escape from them (Aretxaga 1995, Foucault 1985). De Certeau (1984) highlights that it is the body that makes movement possible, and Nelson (1999) -following Foucault- adds that it is also the site of inscription and negotiation of social difference. I will focus on spatialized practices as the sphere of the production of marginal subjectivities, through embodied practices of movement.
This project combines these three perspectives to analyze Toba cultural politics. Specifically, I focus on structured mobilities (Grossberg 1992), that is on how places are made in tension with one another, as they are shaped through people’s spatial trajectories. I will examine mobility as a bodily spatial practice (Lefebvre 1991, De Certeau 1984), which contests a system of alterity that ascribes indigenous people the status of an internal other of the postcolonial nation-state (Alonso 1994, Ramos 2003). Through a variety of forms of discipline, state agencies have historically tried to “fix” these groups in well-bounded places. From that perspective indigenous mobility is a practice that challenges the “sedentary metaphysics” of the state that assumes that people and social groups are attached to fixed locations (Malkki 1997).
However sedentary metaphysics cannot be considered as the only way in which state constitutes power through and over space. It is also through the control of movement rather than is prevention that state constitutes post disciplinarian forms of power. If movement and displacement of population have been a focus of concern among researchers identifying the effects of the globalization of capital this movements do not necessarily and always contradict the logic of the state and its connection to economy. So if the tension between state and globalization has been considered thoroughly to the point of claiming for the possibility of dissolution of the former (Appadurai), in this context sedentary metaphysics could be regarded both as a reactionary movement and as a logic of a power in dissolution. I want to consider it however as one of the necessary dimensions of the logic and the way nations find their materiality. At the same time the propositions of a shift towards a society of control based on constructing subjects in their relation to things in the word in a way in which there is no sanction but the possibility of moving always ithin a given set of possibilities and always being monitored. If this type of power is about the control of the flow then sedentarism is not necessarily a logic contributing to shape this form of power but rather what is condensed in the discourse of flow and flexibility, and not in the logic of a positioning and “fixation”. It can also be regarded as a definition of jurisdictions that makes control and governmental power possible.
Form other perspective sedentary metaphysics can be complicated through a number of cases in which movement back and forth form the “rural” to the “urban” are not challenging but rather part of state projects, for example of indigenous intellectuals education (Grant 1992: 88), of labour migrations (Gidwani ), or within movements of nationalist intellectuals that rather than threatening the state expand and consolidate it (Anderson) just to mention some cases. Of course it would be unfair to attribute to Malkki a totalizing analysis. It is in the multiple dimensions of movement power and subjectivity that I position the present analysis

Place and movement I understand the notion of places according to Doreen Massey’s propositions. For her space, is a series of encounters in an ever-changing flow of spacio-temporal events: “If space is simultaneity of stories-so-far, then place are collections of those stories, articulations within the wider power-geometries of space.”(130) To her definition I prefer to consider trajectories rather than “stories” as the unfolding experiences in space that come together in particular locations, his locations and encounters can sediment as particular habits but cannot be detached from what connects them to other locations and encounters, and generally as part of geographies of power relations. In this way my project searches to make a contribution to the study of place making by engaging in-depth to the experience of movement as a not just a hiatus of in betweeness, which fades under the “concrete” definition of places, but as a significant moment of generative practice which can both recreate and transform the configurations of space. In this sense is that movement can be thought as a “concrete abstraction” in Massumy’s sense, as movement cannot be understood as a collection of positions but has to be understood itself through the trajectory of a moving body in space: “When a body is in motion it does not coincide with itself. It coincides with its transition: its own variation. In motion a body is in an immediate, unfolding relation to its own transition: its own variation. ... In motion a body is in a immediate, unfolding relation to its own nonpresent potential to vary.” (Massumi 2002 :4)
Movement and Difference / Subjectivity If movement is embodied, I seek to contribute to the way which differential forms and access to mobility is intertwined generates with the constitution of differential forms of power. There are at least two dimensions in which we can understand the relation between movement, the prduction of difference and spatial segregation. On the one hand differential mobilities are active in the constitution of both self and place as spatial trajectories are linked to the possibilities of access to places and the way this access is habilitated (Grossberg). Trajectories are demarcated by the possibilities made available to and from particular subject positions. Thus mobility shapes the social positions of marginality and segregated spatial locations active in the production of difference.
In this way Toba people’s everyday movements in between their neighbourhoods, eventual jobs, state institutions, city centre are a dimension in the constitution of their subaltern position. Everyday trajectories in between the neighbourhood and other urban locations define particular access to places and locate people within them in regards to given sets of possibilities and limitations given in a set of habitual practices (Bourdieu Butler). Thus it can be expected that the way people form the neighbourhood move to the city centre, unfold habitual practices in it, in accordance to the possibilities made available to them are not a result of a given indigenous, class or racial positioning but are in themselves producing their subaltern subjectivity as an effect. Habitual movement in and in-between places do not simply recreate a given system of hierarchical differences and spatial structuration of inclusion/exclusion. But offer the possibilities for new configurations to appear, I expect this configurations will point to the recreation of the experience of being indigenous in the city (Tamagno, Peters, Briones, Fogel-Chance) but I expect it will also point to processes in which no definite and articulate identification is brought together. In this I intend to explore the way Toba migrating to the city cannot always be stopped into a position, not even if we consider that position as resulting form and part of process of becoming, or as resulting form hybrid identifications (Canclini, Babha) but rather fail to articulate and fail to assume a location. In this I expect to be able to explore ways in which identities and place making are not enough to understand the experience, but rather there is always something escaping the possibilities of delimitation. To consider movement in itself rather than consecutive positionings, space as a constellation of trajectories, and difference as exceeding the position can be considered as a second perspective on the relation of space, subaltern alterities and movement.
In other scale I am interested in consider mobility not in the sense it has for one of the initial lines of inquiry in studies of globalization that considers the transformations generated by increasing movement of capita commodities and people. Rather following Doreen Massey’s critiques that mobility has not homogeneously increased but conformed as a particular form of power unequally distributed. While it generates trips to be further and quicker to some it generates isolation and slowing down of trips to others (Massey, Creswell, Urry).

This work will draw on issues of the making of indigenous subjectivities in the broader context of the production of a field of subaltern politics (Chakrabarty, ). In this sense I want to question not only how those positions are made and remade within the practices that constantly relocate them, but also the moments in which the positioning is never reached or in which divergent, non articulated directions are taken. In this sense I want to look at both the structured mobilities made available within the broader maps of alterities (Grossberg 1992, Briones 2007) and in which way people’s the positioning as aboriginals is stretched, reconfigured, but also the way it fails to become a position or is even eluded in the particular conjunctures (Li, Pandey). In this I am interested in the processes of becoming rather than in the moment of effective articulation, understanding becomings as something that does not have a prefigured directionality (Massumi) does aboriginality as a complex political positioning is fail to produce a stable positioning.