Advertisement

Relational, Interdependent, Imagined Mobilities

  • Lesley MurrayEmail author
  • Susana Cortés-Morales
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter sets the frame within which children’s mobilities are discussed throughout the book: focusing on the particularities of children’s mobile practices and experiences, while addressing their relationalities and interdependencies in relation to other people’s mobilities, and in relation to time, space and materialities. As childhood is relational and as mobilities are relational, so too are children’s mobilities. By relational, we mean that children’s mobilities are constituted through relations between them and other people, spaces, times, materials, imaginings and so on, with the task of this book being to determine the scope and character of this relationality. This is done so from a mobilities perspectives, understanding mobility not only as children’s corporeal movements but in terms of the intersecting movements of bodies, objects, spaces and ideas through different means, contributing to a broader understanding of children’s mobilities and to a critical understanding of childhood.

References

  1. Barker, J. (2011). ‘Manic mums’ and ‘distant dads’? Gendered geographies of care and the journey to school. Health & Place, 17, 413–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BBC. (2017, November 10). The 13-year-old boy who stole a bus to help his family, BBC Stories.Google Scholar
  3. Buliung, R., Sultana, S., & Faulkner, G. (2012). Guest editorial: Special section on child and youth mobility—Current research and nascent themes. Journal of Transport Geography, 20, 31–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Büscher, M., Urry, J., & Witchger, K. (2010). Mobile methods. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clark, H. M. (2017). Who rides public transportation? Washington: American Public Transportation Association.Google Scholar
  6. Cortés-Morales, S. (2015). From cocooning to Skyping: An ethnographic study of young children’s everyday mobilities in an English town (PhD thesis). University of Leeds.Google Scholar
  7. Cresswell, T. (2006). On the move: Mobility in the modern western world. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Cresswell, T. (2011). Mobilities I: Catching up. Progress in Human Geography, 35(4), 550–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fincham, B., McGuinness, M., & Murray, L. (2010). Mobile methodologies. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gilroy, R., Attuyer, K., Bevan, M., Croucher, K., & Tunstall, R. (2016). Moving between generations? The role of familial inter-generational relations in older people’s mobility. In L. Murray & S. Robertson (Eds.), Intergenerational mobilities. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Hammersley, M. (2017). Childhood studies: A sustainable paradigm? Childhood, 24(1), 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Holdsworth, C. (2013). Family and intimate mobilities. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Holdsworth, C. (2014). Child. In P. Adey, D. Bissell, K. Hannam, P. Merriman, & M. Sheller (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of mobilities. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  15. Jensen, O. B. (2013). Staging mobilities. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kullman, K. (2010). Transitional geographies: Making mobile children. Social and Cultural Geography, 11, 827–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kullman, K., & Palludan, C. (2011). Rhythmanalytical sketches: Agencies, school journeys, temporalities. Children’s Geographies, 9(3–4), 347–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leonard, M. (2016). The sociology of children, childhood and generation. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Mikkelsen, M., & Christensen, P. (2009). Is children’s independent mobility really independent? A study of children’s independent mobility combining ethnography and GPS/mobile phones technologies. Mobilities, 4(1), 37–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mock, B. (2017). Louisville confronts its redlining past and present. Citylab. https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/02/louisville-confronts-its-redlining-past-and-present/517125/. Accessed 17 July 2018.
  21. Murray, L. (2009). Looking at and looking back: Visualization in mobile research. Qualitative Research, 9(4), 469–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nansen, B., Gibbs, L., MacDougall, C.‚ Vetere, F.‚ Ross, N., & McKendrick, J. (2015). Children’s interdependent mobility: Compositions, collaborations and compromises. Children’s Geographies, 13(4), 467–481.Google Scholar
  23. Pink, S. (2007). Doing visual ethnography. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Pink, S. (2015). Doing sensory ethnography (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006). The new mobilities paradigm. Environment and Planning A, 38(2), 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Urry, J. (2007). Mobilities. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Applied Social ScienceUniversity of BrightonBrightonUK
  2. 2.School of EducationUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations