Conclusion

Abstract

The conclusion details key contributions that Eugene Gendlin’s work can make to geography and beyond, as identified through geographical research into artistic practices. Banfield highlights anticipated contributions to philosophical and methodological debates within non-representational geography, and the emergence of a new terminology and new ways of thinking about geographies of artistic practice. She proposes that this geographical engagement with Gendlin develops recent disciplinary efforts to rethink abstraction affirmatively, and has the potential to enhance the disciplinary capacity to work conceptually with images. She argues that it also: informs evolving disciplinary thinking and practice involving video-based methods; encourages individually tailored research designs to access the affective; and identifies potential means by which we can develop our capacity for working with the pre-reflective intersubjectively.