Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.

Dialogues and Doings: Sketching the Relationships

Between Geography and Art
Harriet Hawkins*
School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol

Abstract
Geographers have engaged with a huge variety of art practices in the study of a range of different
geographical themes. Using a series of examples including painting, mixed-media art and contem-
porary participatory works this paper explores three of these themes: landscape, critical spatialities
and participation. Two different, although often entwined methodological approaches are set out,
‘dialogues’ whereby geographers interpret and analyse art works, and ‘doings’ in which geogra-
phers become exhibition curators, collaborate with artists and even become creative practitioners
in their own right. During its course the paper considers the potential of the geographical study of
art works to contribute to contemporary disciplinary debates around embodied experience, prac-
tice and more-than-human worlds. The paper also points towards a series of resources to help
guide further study.

Introduction
Why should Geographers study art works? We may decorate our walls with postcards
and prints or take pleasure in a trip to an art gallery or sculpture park, we may enjoy
watching one of the increasing number of art history programs on television, or we
might notice the public art adorning our high streets or shopping centres and we might
even enjoy painting or drawing as a hobby, but why should geographers be interested in
studying, or even making and curating art works? This paper provides an introduction to
some of the ways in which the study of art works can contribute to the development of
geographical themes and practices. This focus on the analysis of art works complements
geographical studies that explore the broader sociologies and economies of the art world,
including the spatialities of networks and clusters, and issues of urban gentrification and
regeneration (e.g. Bin Lee 2009; Florida 2005; Mathews 2010; Thomas et al. 2010).
In 1984 geographer Stephen Daniels observed that between geography and the visual
arts there is ‘common ground that is scarcely surveyed’ (p. 14). This is increasingly occu-
pied terrain, as geographers not only analyse art works but become exhibition curators,
collaborators and even creative cultural practitioners. In turn, art theorists, historians and
practitioners employ geographical theory and methods in their research and practice. The
intention in this paper is not to provide an exhaustive survey of this work, rather I
explore a cross-section of research to examine art’s potential with respect to the
re-visioning of core geographical concepts, most especially here, space and landscape.
Further, these explorations point towards the contribution that studies of art can make to
contemporary geographical debates surrounding the body, experience and non-human
worlds (including animals and objects). By the end of the paper some of the key themes
in the geographical study of art should hopefully be clear, as will a series of methodological
tools for exploring art works (this does not necessarily require the sorts of art historical

ª 2011 The Author

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
 Dialogues and doings 465

knowledge you might think it does) and a number of starting points for further reading
and exploration will have been provided.
Geographers have studied a rich range of art practices, from painting to photography,
public art and sculpture, as well as the maybe less familiar forms of installations, sound art,
and ‘relational’ or participatory works. These different mediums have been enrolled in the
examination of diffuse themes, from ideas of the rural idyll, to formations of national
identity and the politics of commodity chains. This paper develops a series of examples to
explore three of the key themes of geography-art relations. Landscape has a foundational
role in art-geography relations and so begins this discussion, the second section explores
the value of art practices to geographers’ critical thinking about space; this is an important
theme as spatial discourses have formed an important intersection for interdisciplinary dis-
cussions. Finally, the paper develops existing geographies of public art to explore the
potential of participatory and ‘socially engaged’ art practices.
Throughout the thematic discussion two different forms of the relationship between art
and geography are highlighted: ‘dialogues’ and ‘doings’. First, ‘dialogues’ by which I
mean the role geographers take as interpreters of art, analysing art-works to make geo-
graphical arguments about landscape, urban space or nature, for example (Butler 2006;
Cosgrove and Daniels 1988; Daniels 1992, 1993; Gandy 1997; Hawkins 2010a; Merriman
and Webster 2009). Also important here are those discourses of ‘geography’, principally
around space and place, that have spread beyond the discipline itself. Secondly, ‘doings’,
and here I mean the growing body of ‘creative geographies’ where geographers collabo-
rate with artists or curators to make-work, carry out research, develop exhibitions or
practice various different creative techniques (Crang 2010; Daniels 2010; Wylie 2010 for
discussion, and see the following for examples: Alfrey et al. 2004; Bonehill and Daniels
2010; Butler 2006; Cook 2000; Crouch 2010; Driver et al. 2002; Foster and Lorimer
2007; Gilbert 2005; Gilbert and Breward 2006; Lovejoy and Hawkins 2009; Nash 1996a,
Tolia-Kelly 2007a). ‘Dialogue’ is, of course, also a form of ‘doing’, a practice of engage-
ment. And whilst it is important not to overplay the distinction between dialogues and
doings, attending to the different dynamics of geographers’ engagements with art draws
out some of the more distinctive features of recent work. Creative geographies have,
however, a long and under-examined historical precedent (Hawkins 2010b). This ranges
from the place of artists on-board ships in the Age of Discovery and after (Driver and
Martins 2005; Smith 1988), to the relationship of the Situationist artists with French
nineteenth-century geographer Élisée Reclus or twentieth-century spatial theorist Henri
Levebvre (Pinder 1996; Sadler 1998). Despite this, the collaborative relations between
artists and geographers are, in their current iteration, still very much an emergent field.
The richness of this field generates ‘outputs’ that take a range of forms from academic
papers to art works and radio programmes, and it encompasses sites of production and
consumption from gallery spaces and studios, to the internet and community based works.
Therefore, the study of creative geographies demands an expansive understanding of
sources including the interdisciplinary discussions that happen during conferences and
exhibitions, artist-in-residency schemes, and collaborative PhDs with museums and galler-
ies (Cook and Tolia-Kelly forthcoming; Foster and Lorimer 2007).1
Significantly, alongside exploring the geographical ‘work’ that art can do, this paper
reconfigures our understandings of what art ‘is’. Art is explored here as an ensemble of
practices, performances, experiences and artefacts rather than as a singular ‘object’ (a
painting or a sculpture) (Dixon 2008; Hawkins 2010c). This attentiveness to art practices
in addition to the ‘finished’ object points to understandings of ‘art’ as a site where ‘new
multi-dimensional knowledge and identities are constantly in the process of being formed’

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
466 Dialogues and doings

(Rogoff 2000, 20). As such art has much to contribute to the development of geographi-
cal knowledge and to the formation of geographical subjects.

Landscape: From The iconography of landscape to ‘Living Landscapes’?

John Constable’s canonical oil painting The Haywain (1821) (Figure 1)2 was one of a
number of landscape paintings and other cultural forms that were discussed at the Iconogra-
phy in Historical Geography conference in 1984, held in the UK.3 The edited collection
The iconography of landscape (Cosgrove and Daniels 1988) that came from the conference,
together with other notable volumes such as Daniels’ (1993) monograph Fields of Vision
and art historian W. J. T. Mitchell’s (1994) edited collection Imperial Landscapes, are some
of the best ways to explore how the analysis of visual art came to the forefront of debates
about landscape.
Three themes, politics, power and vision, characterised a number of these early studies
and their contributions to theories of landscape. Predominantly based around landscape
painting of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries research explored issues of landscape
and national identity, nature, colonialism and capitalism (Cosgrove 1984, 1985; Cosgrove
and Daniels 1988; Daniels 1984, 1989, 1993; Heffernan 1991). Understanding landscape,
following Marxist Humanists, as a ‘way of seeing’, analysis often proceeded through a rig-
orous ‘contextual politics’, setting these works in their historical context and analysing ‘the
ideas implicated in [their] imagery’ (Cosgrove and Daniels 1988, 2). This methodology
sensitises us to the multiple and mobile geographies of these artworks; the relationships
between the initial time and place of the images’ production, the location and the places
figured within the works, and the endlessly variable arenas through which they circulate
(Nash 1996, 152). Further, these studies emphasise how artists’ geographical imaginaries
extend beyond what landscape ‘means’ or looks like, towards how these aesthetics have
material and social effects, shaping landscapes and lives (Barrell 1980; Berger 1972; Daniels
1993). Such studies of landscape painting form the most coherent group of geographical
studies of art, this discussion builds on these existing studies to examine the relations
between landscape art and current developments in landscape theorisations.

LIVING LANDSCAPES

At the ‘Living Landscapes’ conference, geographers, artists and other practitioners came
together around embodied practices and performances of landscape.4 The main difference
between these perspectives on landscape and those celebrated at the earlier Iconography in
Historical Geography can be summed up simply (perhaps too simply) as a shift from
examining ‘a view on the world’ to exploring a ‘point of view in it’ (Dubow 2000; Mer-
leau-Ponty 1992); a foregrounding of the experience of being-in and moving-through
landscapes rather than understanding their symbolic content.5 Such explorations of
embodied experiences of landscape are becoming increasingly well established within
geography, especially in the UK (Lorimer 2006; Sidaway 2009; Wylie 2002, 2005).
Whilst the use of art in developing these ‘embodied acts of landscaping’ remains
under-developed, the ground is laid by Crouch and Toogood’s (1999) study of the
‘Everyday Knowledge’ of abstract artist Peter Lanyon (Figure 2).6 Lanyon’s expressive
paint work is suggestive of a ‘tactile knowledge’ of the world rather than an ‘explicit
topography constituted through surveillance, perspective and detachment’ (Crouch and
Toogood 1999, 72). These more-than-visual, more-than-representational knowledges
(e.g. the sound of the sea, the feel of the wind on the side of your face) move away the

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
 Dialogues and doings 467

symbolic to draw attention to the experiential, thinking about culture and landscape as
more than ‘mapped objects’ (see also Causey 2006). Weaving together the artist’s bodily
practices and experiences of walking and gliding with explorations of his ‘Cornishness’,
Crouch and Toogood develop the potential of art as constitutive of dynamic processes of
belonging and experiencing place, landscape and subjectivity (see also Mackenzie
2006a,b; Rogoff 2000).
Such a foregrounding of embodied and experiential ‘being-in’ the landscape offers an
implicit critique of the conditions of distance, objectification and control that were central
to the interpretation of classical landscape images like Constables. Geographical analyses of
art forms other than landscape painting have also centralised bodily experience, these
include feminist landscape practices, land art, environmental art practices, sound walks,
optical and installation art (Butler 2006; Cant and Morris 2006; Hawkins 2010c; Matless
and Revil 1995; Nash 1996; Rycroft 2005). Feminist and post-colonial geographers under-
stand these refigured relations between artist, audience, and space as making possible differ-
ent understandings of power and vision in the landscape (Dubow 2000; Nash 1996).
Alongside examining case studies of artistic and literary ways of being-in landscape the
Living Landscapes conference highlighted the emerging importance of a range of first-
hand experiences to the development of landscape theories. In the examples of walking,
running, exploring and mapping landscapes presented at the conference, but also in wider
landscape studies, researchers’ bodies became their research instruments. These ‘embodied
acts of landscaping’ in turn demand new modes of presenting and writing (Crang 2003;
Edensor 2000; Paterson 2009; Pink et al. 2010). Art works here have shifted from being
the focus of study to taking up a place as an output in ‘practice-led’ research. As part of
this trend geographers have worked with and as artists, and have developed critical-
creative writing styles to evoke (rather than simply to describe) the experiences of being-
in and moving-through landscape (e.g. Cant and Morris 2006; Crouch 2010; De Sivley
2005, 2006; Lorimer 2006; Lovejoy and Hawkins 2009; Merriman and Webster 2009;
Wylie 2005).
Lots of questions remain about these emergent ‘creative geographies’ of landscape
including; what is the status of the period spent in the ‘field’? Where is the ‘work’ (artis-
tically and intellectually)? Is it in the ‘practice’ of being-in the landscape, or in the crea-
tive evocations of these experiences? What is lost and gained in these evocations of
personal landscape experience? What is the effect of these losses? What methods could
we use to negotiate this ‘gap’ between our experience and our communication of it?
Finally, and an important question to engage with in the context of the politics of geo-
graphical studies of landscape aesthetics, Where are the politics and ethics of these
embodied acts of landscaping?
Whilst the poetic lyricism and expressive nature of these first-person accounts of being-
in and moving-through landscape has led to charges of apolitical solipsism (Sidaway 2009),
at the heart of these accounts lies an understanding of the human subject whose composi-
tion is conditioned on relations with the world, rather than being understood as separable
from it. This relational ontology builds an ethics of landscape that can only be understood
in terms of human ⁄ non-human relations, a mutual enfolding of self and world that inevita-
bly moves us beyond the singular personal experience (Hinchliffe 2002; Whatmore 1999).
What remains as yet largely unexplored by geographers is the potential of cultural produc-
tion to develop these embodied and relational ethics of landscape and environment, and
the capacity for artistically produced experiences of landscape to ‘contribute to a shift in
[environmental] consciousness’ (Miles 2010:19; although see also Hawkins et al. 2009).

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
468 Dialogues and doings

Critical Creative Spatialities

The second key theme I want to explore is critical creative spatialities, highlighting the
way in which art offers the potential to think (and practice) space differently. The ‘map’
Naked City (1957, Figure 3)7 is made from nineteen cut-out sections of a map of Paris
connected by red arrows. Created by avant-garde practitioners and polymaths Guy
Debord and Asper Jorn it aims to ‘map’ urban space as it is performed and experienced
rather than by using conventional cartographic methods.8 The result is the replacement
of a fixed and static view from ‘above’ with an emancipatory understanding of the city as
subjective, fragmentary and mutable (Cocker 2007). This and other ‘creative mappings’
(see Cosgrove 2005; Pinder 1996, 2007) open up ways for geographers to think about
understandings and experiences of space and place, valuing creative practices for their
ability to, ‘question, refunction, and contest prevailing norms and ideologies, and to cre-
ate new meanings, experiences, relationships, understandings and situations’ (Pinder 2008,
730). Such geographical investigations of space have also offered a major site of interdisci-
plinary interchange, where geography’s specific contribution has been in offering artists
and theorists ‘a rigorous and theoretically informed analysis of the relationship between
spatial and social relations’ (Rendell 2006, 18). Further, this broader spatial turn in the
arts and humanities brought out shared themes of ‘experience, travel, trace and deferral,
mobility, practice and performance’, and a common set of critical spatial thinkers, e.g.
Michel De Certeau, Walter Benjamin and Henri Lefebvre, forming a number of contact
points the potential of which geographers have yet to fully engage (Rendell 2006, 19).

ARTISTS AS URBAN THEORISTS AND REVOLUTIONARIES

Naked City was part of a larger project of radical urbanism, pioneered by the Situationist
International (SI) of which Jorn and Debord were members. This political–aesthetic pro-
ject aimed to establish ‘a new form of geographical investigation that can enable the revo-
lutionary re-appropriation of the landscape’ (Bonnett 1989, 136). As a result SI’s practices
and legacies have formed a point of intersection for geographers and artists around theo-
ries of space, politics and resistance. Studies range from in-depth critiques of practice to
broader discussions in texts by key geographical thinkers such as David Harvey and
Doreen Massey, and key texts produced beyond geography that engage with geographical
discourses (Bonnett 1989, 1992, 2009; Massey 2005; Miles 2004; Pinder 1996; Sadler
1998). Across these texts, SI practices have been enrolled in broader explorations of the
politics of urbanism and the production of social space, developing understandings of
space that resist closure and elude determination and representation.
Revolutionary intent was central to the SI’s project, their ‘interventions’ into urban
space ‘seek[ing] to better understand the city, whilst also changing it’ (Loftus 2009, 329;
Pinder 2008). Through experimental methods like the collaged map of Naked City,
‘detoured’ advertisements, and the practicing of dérive (a mode of experiencing space that
reflects that of the everyday user) the Situationists understood and performed space as a
‘socially produced category where social relations are reproduced’ (McDonough 1994,
66). This contrasted with understandings of space as a fixed and static backdrop that con-
ditioned social relations. Thinking and occupying space in this way gave the SI resources
to challenge the fixity of the ‘spectacle’ of capitalist society and its uneven spatial rela-
tions. A growing body of geographical research has explored the work of contemporary
artists who engage the legacy of SI practices (see Loftus 2009, and a special issue of Cul-
tural Geographies on the ‘Arts of Urban Exploration’, 2005, 12, 4). In these explorations

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
 Dialogues and doings 469

creative practices offer a tactical resource through which to create alternative urban
futures, especially in the context of ‘everyday’ life (Hawkins 2010c; Loftus 2009). As a
result the city becomes a laboratory of experiment with creative practices offering the
means to occupy urban spaces as sites of political responsibility and arenas for political
engagement (Deutsche 1996; Miles 1997, 2004; Pinder 2005a,b; Pinder 2008).

SENSING CITIES, MEMORY AND EMOTIONAL SPACES

Embodied experiences, emotional and affective relations were central to the SI revolution-
ary project: an aesthetics of urban life rather than the anaesthetic of the ‘Society of the Spec-
tacle’ (see discussion in Sadler 1998). For contemporary geographers these experiences
chime with current interests in embodiment, providing access to ‘the imaginative, fantastic,
emotional – the phantasmagoric – aspects of city life’ (Pile 2005, 3), and offer a way to think
about the city as ‘a sensuous realm that is imagined, lived, performed and contested’ (Pinder
2008, 730). Geographers’ studies of SI methods and contemporary artists’ use of them, often
develop lively first-hand accounts of the ‘walks, games, investigations [and] mappings’ and
parades that form the activities of artists’ collectives, activist projects and individual artist’s
works (Battista et al. 2005; Fenton 2005; Hand 2005; Pinder 2001, 2005a,b). These art
works ‘literally take place in the streets, finding meaning through embodied action’ (Pinder
2001, 2) and drawing our attention to the psychogeographical experience of the city – the
flows and currents of feeling in urban space (Coverley 2006; Smith 2010).
Alongside studies of urban politics and experience the legacies of SI work has also
offered geographers the means to extend theories of history and memory through the
study of artistic explorations of the ‘ghosts’ of cities. Through trails, sound works, guide-
books or maps these works ‘explore, excavate and map the hidden spaces and paths in
the city’, charting emotional landscapes that often unsettle previously ‘stable’ narratives of
history (Battista et al. 2005; Pinder 2001, 1). For example, geographers David Pinder and
Toby Butler write about sound walks that complicate singular place-based memories,
drawing our attention to conflicting histories that are at least partially about the person
listening and participating in the walks (Butler 2006; Butler and Miller 2005; Pinder
2001). Set within this analytical frame of space, psycho-geography and practice, studies of
SI’s works, and those of their contemporary artistic followers can contribute to geogra-
phers’ desires to think, write and occupy cities differently.

Participation: Art and ‘Politics in Action’9

In the final of my three themes I want to examine the potential of art as a form of parti-
cipatory, ‘politics in action’ (Toscano 2009). Caravanserai (2008), an artists’ residency pro-
ject coordinated by Annie Lovejoy and Mac Dunlop, could nominally be described as a
piece of ‘public art’ but yet it develops a rather different idea of public art to that of
monuments and statues (see Figure 4).10 Caravanseri, based on Treloan campsite on the
Roseland Peninsula in Cornwall UK, developed from Lovejoy’s semi-permanent resi-
dency on the site, with other artists, writers and myself as a geographer, joining her for
periods of time ranging from a week to a month. ‘Drawing attention to what is on the
doorstep’ (the project logo) Caravanserai was based around a series of activities aimed at
forging relations with and within the community. The project involved camp-site
improvements including establishing a permanent allotment garden and organising a
series of ‘community’ events; boat-building, knitting workshops, wild-herb walks, local
history and story-telling evenings, and the Treloan FEAST (a summer festival). Lovejoy

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
470 Dialogues and doings

Fig 4. Caravanserai, 2009, image taken by Lovejoy.

describes her work as not so much ‘in’ or ‘about’ a place as ‘of it’.11 One of the outcomes
of my own collaboration with Lovejoy was the artists’ book insites that investigated the
relationships between the project and place (see Figure 5).12 The book collaged image and
text to explore the broader project’s relations with and within locality, weaving together
‘local anecdotes and craft processes, instigating environmental practices and discourses in
an organic interlacing of politics, history and poetics’ (Lovejoy and Hawkins 2009).
Lovejoy’s work is part of an expanded field of arts practice variously termed ‘participa-
tory’, ‘community’ or ‘dialogic’ art and sometimes ‘relational aesthetics’, in short, works
that take seriously the audience as the site for the making of the work and its meanings
(Hall 2007; Lacy 1995). I want to end by thinking about issues of public art and the emer-
gent geographies of participatory art practices raised by this and other New Genre Public Art
(Lacy 1995) projects.

GEOGRAPHY AND PUBLIC ART

Discourses of geography and public art have long shared questions of space and commu-
nity. Indeed, studies of public art are a fertile site for the uptake of geographical dis-
courses of space, site and politics by interdisciplinary practitioners and theorists (Deutsche
1996; Rendell 2006). Geographers have examined art works and other forms of urban
aesthetics for; their relationship to their sites; the sorts of histories and memories of the
area they tell; the groups of people they ‘represent’; the potential they offer for social
(and at times economic development); and, the ideas of ‘public’ that they develop (Burk
2006; Degen et al. 2008; Hall 1997; Sharp 2007). However, as Hall (2007) makes clear
geographers have only just begun to attend to New Genre Public Art. This ‘expanded field’
of practices, including works like Lovejoy’s, centralises practices of collaboration, inter-
action and the works’ engagement with context. Often working at sites beyond the art
gallery these artists privilege the creation of social spaces and the engendering of social

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
 Dialogues and doings 471

Fig. 5. Page from ‘Insites: An artists book’, 2009, Lovejoy and Hawkins. Image authors own.

relations, often at the expense of the making of material objects (like the paintings dis-
cussed earlier). Engagement is vital to these practices, ‘good’ examples of these works
emerge through ‘dialogic’ moments between artist, site, and community, the more
involved and engaged the ‘audience’ is and the more the work responds to the site the
better. Indeed for Hall (2007) the primary focus of these works is the audience as the site
of meaning-making.
Geographers have begun to attend to these forms of art work as ‘politics in action’
(Toscano 2009). For example, Ian Cook (2000) analysed the ‘connective aesthetics’ of
Exchange values (1999), a social sculpture by Shelly Sacks. Cook explores the works’ nar-
ration of the stories of banana growers as an aesthetic rendering of his own telling of
commodity biographies, of in his words ‘following the thing’. Through his analysis Sacks’
work constitutes a radical and accessible politics, unveiling the hidden work that goes into
bringing our commodities to us, a form of ‘creative’ public geographies. In a rather dif-
ferent vein Mackenzie explores selected examples and exhibitions of visual art and com-
munity arts projects in the Highlands and Islands in Scotland (Mackenzie 2002, 2006a,b).
In these works, she explores ‘‘‘place as a political project’’ … re-constituted through
visual art as part of a culture of resistance’ (Mackenzie 2006a, 966, 968). Along similar
lines Pollock and Sharp (2007) engage explicitly with ideas of New Genre Public Art to
explore how intersections of art and heritage actively re-create personal and place histo-
ries within contemporary urban landscapes.
Many of these explorations engage in different ways with ‘participation’, meaning that
the idea of a ‘viewer’ or an ‘audience’ is not really adequate here. Art theorists have
pointed towards the need for a more attentive consideration of artist-participant relations,
and the remainder of this section will argue that participatory geographies can offer a
useful frame within which to consider these relations (Bishop 2006). Participatory geog-
raphers have enrolled art in their broader agenda to produce a ‘more relevant, morally
aware and non-hierarchical practice of social geography that engages with inequality to a
greater degree’ (Kindon 2003; Pain 2004, 652; Parr 2006, 2007; Tolia-Kelly 2007b).
Enrolled within participatory narratives art has the potential to develop ‘spaces of

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
472 Dialogues and doings

encounter between ourselves and the communities we study’ (Herman and Mattingly
1999, 219). Understood in this context art is accorded some form of ‘unique communi-
cative and social power’ (Cireri 2004, 2 cited in Pain 2004), offering ‘spaces of self-rep-
resentation and articulation’ for unheard and unseen groups (Herman and Mattingly
1999, 210; Tolia-Kelly 2007b,c). Central to participatory research is a sense of ‘empow-
erment’ of the communities being worked with, and a disruption of ‘privileged’ aca-
demic research positions (although as research points out things are never that simple;
Pain 2004; Parr 2007). Above all what participatory geographies offer the analysis of par-
ticipatory art is an attentiveness to the quality and kind of the relationships these practices
seek to form. Taking up the perspectives offered by participatory geographies develops
lots of useful questions for thinking about how artists relate to the communities in which
they work, how they develop their work, and how much ‘control’ they have in a situa-
tion where their work depends so much on responding to, and engaging with, context.
More generally, guided by the sorts of lessons we can take from participatory geography’s
exploration of the politics of participation, exploring these art practices can provide inter-
esting ways for geographers to examine questions of politics and aesthetics; of the critical
relations of community and society to neo-liberal capitalism; and, of the potential for
aesthetics to offer new sites for the study of the production of social space, for under-
standing community and the politics of difference.

Conclusion and Implications

This paper has explored some of the reasons for and methods by which geographers have
studied art works. Discussion has been guided by the examination of three different
themes: landscape, critical spatialities and participation. In each of these themes, ‘dialogues’
(interpretations of art works by geographers and those who work with geographical ideas)
were brought together with ‘doings’ (examples of creative geographies in which geogra-
phers work with artists). Attention was directed towards both studies of art objects (land-
scape painting) and towards engagements that focus on artworks that are about the
production of social relations and social spaces. Such works, made primarily through
exchanges and relations between people and places, offer much of interest for contempo-
rary geographers. The discussion pulled into focus some important questions about the
geographies of art; drawing our eye to the content of the works but also to their material
form (as paintings, found objects, etc.), we are also directed to consider the different geog-
raphies of arts’ production, consumption and circulation. The analysis of these works
demands attention be paid to questions of iconography and ideology (analysing the signs
and symbols in the work to understand its meaning), but also to the relatively under-
examined questions of practice and embodied experience (of both the ‘artist’ and the
‘viewer’). What becomes clear is the need, as geographers, to explore not only art as a ‘fin-
ished’ object, but also to think about art works as ensembles of practices, artefacts, perfor-
mances and experiences. This paper will close with three discussion points that cut across
all three of the paper’s themes and that relate to geographical work on art more broadly.

EMBODIMENT

Bodily experiences have threaded throughout this paper, from the development of land-
scape understandings, through to the practices of SI and participatory works. In each case
art practices have pointed us towards modes of bodily experience, emotional work and
multi-sensuous being that might otherwise slip past. Broadly speaking artworks described

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
 Dialogues and doings 473

above transitioned from reproducing the visible by painting the landscape, to exploring how
to, in some sense, make visible the experiences of being-in and moving-through the
world. Further, art practice has much to contribute to the emerging body of work on
‘haptic geographies’, and their explorations of how it is that we know and experience
space and place, and also to our emotional engagement with our spaces and landscapes
(Crang 2003; Davies and Dwyer 2007; Hawkins 2010c; Paterson 2009; Tolia-Kelly
2007c). As researchers have pointed out it can be hard to study, and even harder to write
about, these personal and experiential ways of knowing. However, as examples here have
shown thinking and writing about art, and making art, can offer an interesting way to
approach the study of our embodied experiences of the world.

POLITICS

The second set of conclusions relates to the political and ethical potential of geography-
art engagements. As Daniels notes, art is not merely a ‘reflection of, or a distraction from,
more pressing social, economic or political issues; it is often a powerful mode of knowl-
edge and social engagement’ (Daniels 1993, 8). More recently, Dixon (2009) has explored
how aesthetics can configure experiences that create new modes of sense perception and
induce novel forms of political subjectivity. Here I have traced some instances of the pol-
itics and ethics of art practices across geographical research on art, opening up the differ-
ent ways in which art can be political and ethical, from relational subjectivities, to the
politics of capitalism and community. Importantly as these geographical studies have
shown art works can be a form of ‘politics in action’ offering modes of resistance, points
of contestation, and playing a part in the dynamic constitution of communities and rela-
tions between human and non-human.

COLLABORATION AND PRACTICE

Finally, different forms of research practice and of collaboration have woven throughout
the paper, with geographers becoming practitioners, working as curators, and collaborat-
ing with artists. Such collaborations offer a mode of practice-led research opening up the
dialogues between geographers and artists in new and challenging ways. Collaboration is
often not an easy process, in part because it brings to the fore the need for a deal of self-
reflexivity about ones’ skill set and disciplinary positionality; what one brings to the table
(Foster and Lorimer 2007; Lovejoy and Hawkins 2009; Parr 2007). An oft-quoted inter-
disciplinary adage is that ‘good interdisciplinarity requires strong disciplinarity’ (Buller
2009). This is not a disciplinary imperialism, a policing of boundaries, but rather suggests
that disciplinarity can be a requisite for these moments of mutual respect and creative
learning, where what emerges is greater, ideally, than the sum of its parts. It seems, that
knowing from where it is that we speak and practice is both an important part of devel-
oping effective dialogues, but is also in part refined in the course of these engagements.
This paper has understood geography and art as what Rogoff (2000) terms ‘interloc-
turs’, active critical entities, lively things rather than mute objects of study, fixed ‘disci-
plinary structures or objects’. These geographies of art take seriously art as constitutive
rather than reflective of meaning and experience, productive rather than representative of
culture, and think through the challenges that it offers in the move away from essentialist
subject positions. In other words art works can offer us a rich means to destabilise
Cartesian subjectivity, with its separable subjects and objects, in favour of a more inter-
subjective, relational way of understanding art work and world. Understood in this

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
474 Dialogues and doings

way the study of art works offers much potential for thinking and doing geography
differently ‘at another register or through the permissions provided by another angle’
(Rogoff 2000, 78).

Acknowledgement
I would like to gratefully acknowledge the support of the AHRC for funding the PhD
studentship and post-doctoral research that part of the work is based on. I would also like
to thank Stephen Daniels, Nick Alfrey (University of Nottingham) for their advice and
support, and David Harvey (University of Exeter) for reading drafts of this piece, and
Annie Lovejoy for thoughtful discussions and collaborations. Whilst any errors remain my
own, I would also like to acknowledge the hugely valuable comments and advice from
Ian Cook and two anonymous referees.

Short Biography
Harriet Hawkins is currently a Research Associate at the Institute of Geography and
Earth Sciences, Aberystwyth University, working on an AHRC ⁄ NSF-funded project on
Art-Science Collaborations. Before this, she was a Lecturer in Human Geography at the
University of Bristol and a Research Associate at the University of Exeter working on an
AHRC funded project on the Creative Industries and Creative Practices in the South
West of Britain. Prior to taking up that role she did an interdisciplinary PhD (Geography
and Art History) at The University of Nottingham. Her research interests include Art
and Geography, and Creative Geographies. She has written papers exploring the geogra-
phies of installation art, landscape art, and art and urban politics and the politics of dis-
play; she is currently working on a book on Creative Geographies. Art and Visual
Culture play a role in her teaching too, where she explores how cultural practices can
engage with geographical methods and with contemporary debates in human and physical
geography.

Notes
* Correspondence address: Harriet Hawkins, IGES, Aberystwyth University, Wales. E-mail: hah7@aber.ac.uk.

1
See for example the lists of projects found on the following websites ⁄ blogs, some of which relate to conference
sessions, symposiums or workshops that were organised to explore a range of facets of the relationship between
geography, art and creative practices; an online exhibition and discussion of works that bring together art and geog-
raphy, related to sessions at the Royal Geographical Society Annual General Conference; http://www.rgs.org/NR/
exeres/D32AA632–60D8–45B2–83BB-5FEE0BE196DA.htm (last accessed 4 August 2010); a blog that develops
one form of geographical approach to contemporary art criticism http://merlepatchett.wordpress.com (last accessed
5 August 2010); a forum that discusses experimental methods; http://michaelgallagher.co.uk/experimental-methods-
network/ (last accessed 6 August 2010) closely linked into a residential workshop that brought together geographers
and a range of contemporary practitioners; and a blog with a discussion of ‘Creative Public Geographies’ and an
invaluable set of links to other projects and discussions http://engaginggeography.wordpress.com/2-seminars/
creative-public-geographies/ (last accessed 6 August 2010).
2
Please note that it has not been possible to reproduce all figures because of copyright restrictions. Where repro-
duction was restricted URLs of appropriate websites will be provided in footnotes. For Constables’ Haywain (1821),
see http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/john-constable-the-hay-wain (last accessed 16 January 2011).
3
Iconography in Historical Geography was held by the Historical Geography Research Group at Nottingham Univer-
sity in 1984, see account in Cosgrove and Daniels 1988.
4
Living Landscapes, the programme conference of the AHRC Landscape and Environment Programme was held at
the University of Aberystwyth in 2009. The website is: http://www.landscape.ac.uk/ (last accessed 13 July 2010).
It is interesting to note that both this, and the conference in note 3 above, were UK based, this is not to exclude

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
 Dialogues and doings 475

the rich landscape traditions from elsewhere, North America, Italy and Scandinavia, nor to deny the history of geo-
graphical studies and collaborations with artists in these areas (e.g. Cosgrove and Fox 2010; Fox 2007).
5
It is important to appreciate that the inter-relationships between these two different approaches to landscape are
not as black and white as is suggested here and elsewhere. Indeed an interesting area of work that remains to be
done is to use art practices to explore the inter-relations between these two ideas of landscape.
6
Examples of Lanyon’s work can be seen at the Tate Gallery website: http://www.tate.org.uk/servlet/View
Work?cgroupid=999999961&workid=20168&searchid=12364 (last accessed 16 January 2011).
7
The Naked City can be seen at: http://www.museoreinasofia.es/coleccion/coleccion-2/sala-421_en.html (last
accessed 16 January 2011).
8
Situationist Internationals were a group of European Avant-Garde revolutionaries, the movement was founded in
1957, reached its peak with the strikes of May 1968 in France, and was disbanded in 1972.
9
Toscano (2009).
10
For details, see Lovejoy’s website: http://www.caravanserai.info (last accessed 17 February 2010).
11
Quote taken from fieldwork done with the artist June ⁄ July 2009.
12
Insites developed a practice-led research strand of a larger project investigating the relationships between creative
practitioners and the places in which they work. This is an AHRC funded project entitled ‘Negotiating the poetics
and politics of cultural identity in the creative industries in South West Britain’. See http://www.Exeter.ac.uk/
geography/creative industries (last accessed 17 February 2010).

References
Alfrey, N. J., Daniels, S. and Postle, M. (2004). Art of the garden: the garden in British art, 1800 to the present day.
London: Tate Publishing.
Barrell, J. (1980). The dark side of the landscape: the rural poor in English painting, 1730–1840. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Battista, K., et al. (2005). Exploring an area of outstanding unnatural beauty: a treasure hunt around King’s Cross
London. Cultural Geographies 12, pp. 429–463.
Berger, J. (1972). Ways of seeing. London: Penguin.
Bin Lee, C. (2009). Cultural policy as regeneration approach in western cities: a case study of Liverpool’s Rope-
Walks. Geography Compass 3 (1), pp. 496–517.
Bishop, C. (2006). Participation (documents of contemporary art). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bonehill, J. and Daniels, S. (2010). Paul Sandby (1731–1809): picturing Britain. London: Royal Academy.
Bonnett, A. (1989). ituationism, geography, and poststructuralism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 7,
pp. 131–146.
Bonnett, A. (1992). Art, ideology, and everyday space: subversive tendencies from Dada to postmodernism. Environ-
ment and Planning D: Society and Space 10, pp. 69–86.
Bonnett, A. (2009). The dilemmas of radical nostalgia in British psychogeography. Theory Culture Society 26, pp.
45–70.
Buller, H. (2009). The lively process of interdisciplinarity. Area 41, pp. 395–403.
Burk, A. L. (2006). Beneath and before: continuums of publicness in public art. Social & Cultural Geography 7, pp.
949–964.
Butler, T. (2006). Walk of art: the potential of the sound walk as practice in cultural geography. Social & Cultural
Geography 7, pp. 889–908.
Butler, T. and Miller, G. (2005). Cultural geographies in practice: linked: a landmark in sound, a public walk of
art. Cultural Geographies 12, pp. 77–88.
Cant, S. G. and Morris, N. J. (2006). Geographies of art and the environment. Social & Cultural Geography 7, pp.
857–861.
Causey, A. (2006). Peter Lanyon: modernism and the land. London: Reaktion Books.
Cocker, E. (2007). Desiring to be led astray. Papers of Surrealism 6. [Online]. Retrieved on 1 January 2011 from:
http://www.surrealismcentre.ac.uk/papersofsurrealism/index.html.
Cook, I. (2000). Cultural geographies in practice: social sculpture and connective aesthetics: Shelley Sacks’s
‘Exchange values’. Cultural Geographies 7, pp. 337–343.
Cook, I. J. and Tolia-Kelly, D. P. (forthcoming). Material geographies. In: Hicks, D. B. M. (ed.) Oxford handbook
of material culture studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cosgrove, D. (1984). Social formation and symbolic landscape. London: Croom Helm.
Cosgrove, D. (1985). Prospect, perspective and the evolution of the landscape idea. Transactions of the Institute of
British Geographers 10, pp. 45–62.
Cosgrove, D. (2005). Maps, mapping, modernity: art and cartography in the twentieth century. Imago Mundi 57,
pp. 35–54.
Cosgrove, D. and Daniels, S. (1988). The iconography of landscape: essays on the symbolic representation, design and use of
past environments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
476 Dialogues and doings

Cosgrove, D. and Fox, W. (2010). Photography and flight. London: Reaktion Books.
Coverley, M. (2006). Psychogeographies. London: Pocket Essentials.
Crang, M. (2003). Qualitative methods: touchy, feely, look-see?. Progress in Human Geography 274, pp. 494–504.
Crang, P. (2010). Cultural geography: after a fashion. Cultural Geographies 17, pp. 191–201.
Crouch, D. (2010). Flirting with space: thinking landscape relationally. Cultural Geographies 17, pp. 5–18.
Crouch, D. and Toogood, M. (1999). Everyday abstraction: geographical knowledge in the art of Peter Lanyon.
Cultural Geographies 6, pp. 72–89.
Daniels, S. (1984). Human geography and the art of David Cox. Landscape Research 9, pp. 14–19.
Daniels, S. (1989). Marxism, culture, and the duplicity of landscape. In: Thrift, N. and Peet, R. (eds) New models in
geography: the political economy perspective. London: Unwin Hyman, pp. 196–220.
Daniels, S. (1992). Love and death across an English garden: constable’s paintings of his family’s flower and kitchen
gardens. The Huntington Library Quarterly 55, pp. 433–457.
Daniels, S. (1993). Fields of vision: landscape and national identity in England and the United States. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Daniels, S. (2010). Maps of making. Cultural Geographies 17, pp. 181–184.
Davies, G. and Dwyer, C. (2007). Qualitative methods: are you enchanted or are you alienated? Progress in Human
Geography 31, pp. 257–266.
De Sivley, C. (2005). Salvage memory: constellating material histories on a hardscrabble homestead. Cultural Geogra-
phies 14, pp. 401–424.
De Sivley, C. (2006). Observed decay: telling stories with mutable things. Journal of Material Culture 11, pp. 318–338.
Degen, M., DeSilvey, C. and Rose, G. (2008). Experiencing visualities in designed urban environments: learning
from Milton Keynes. Environment and Planning A 40, pp. 1901–1920.
Deutsche, R. (1996). Evictions: art and spatial politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dixon, D. (2008). The Blade and the Claw: science, Art and the creation of the lab-borne monster. Social and Cul-
tural Geography 9, pp. 671–692.
Dixon, D. (2009). Creating the semi-living: on politics, aesthetics and the more-than-human. Transactions of the
Institute of British Geographers 34, pp. 411–425.
Driver, F. and Martins, L. (2005). Tropical visions in an age of empire. Chicago London: University of Chicago Press.
Driver, F., Nash, C., Prendergast, K. and Swenson, I. (2002). Landing eight collaborative projects between artists + geogra-
phers. London: Royal Holloway University of London.
Dubow, J. (2000). ‘From a view on the world to a point of view in it’: rethinking sight, space and the colonial sub-
ject. Interventions: International Journal of Postcolonial Studies 2, pp. 87–102.
Edensor, T. (2000). Walking in the British countryside: reflexivity, embodied practices and ways to escape. Body
Society 6, pp. 81–106.
Fenton, J. (2005). Space, chance, time: walking backwards through the hours on the left and right banks of Paris.
Cultural Geographies 12, pp. 412–428.
Florida, R. (2005). Cities and the creative class. London: Routledge.
Foster, K. and Lorimer, H. (2007). Some reflections on art-geography as collaboration. Cultural Geographies 14, pp.
425–432.
Fox, W. L. (2007). Terra Antarctica: looking into the emptiest continent. London: Counterpoint.
Gandy, M. (1997). Contradictory modernities: conceptions of nature in the art of Joseph Beuys and Gerhard Rich-
ter. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 87, pp. 636–665.
Gilbert, D. (2005). Fertile ground: the art of the garden. Journal of Historical Geography 31, pp. 338–347.
Gilbert, D. and Breward, C. (2006). Fashion’s world cities. Oxford: Berg.
Hall, T. (1997). Images of industry in the postindustrial city: Raymond Mason and Birmingham. Cultural Geogra-
phies 4, pp. 46–68.
Hall, T. (2007). Artful cities. Geography Compass 1, pp. 1376–1392.
Hand, J. (2005). Sophie Calle’s art of following and seduction. Cultural Geographies 12, pp. 463–484.
Hawkins, H. (2010a). Turn your trash into … Rubbish, art and politics. Richard Wentworth’s geographical imagi-
nation. Social & Cultural Geography 11, pp. 805–826.
Hawkins, H. (2010b). Placing art at the Royal Geographical Society. In: Vandana, P. and Cisenos-Ledda, T. (eds)
Creative compass: new mappings by international artists. London: Royal Geographical Society, pp. 7–16.
Hawkins, H. (2010c). The argument of the eye: cultural geographies of installation art. Cultural Geographies 17, pp.
1–19.
Hawkins, H., Thomas, N. and Harvey, D. (2009). Landscape and art: an enduring relation. Paper presented at Liv-
ing Landscapes Conference, Aberystwyth. Draft available from author.
Heffernan, M. J. (1991). The desert in French orientalist painting during the nineteenth century. Landscape Research
16, pp. 37–42.
Herman, T. and Mattingly, D. J. (1999). Community, justice, and the ethics of research: negotiating reciprocal
research relations. In: Proctor, J. (ed.) Geography and ethics: journeys in a moral terrain. London: Routledge, pp.
209–222.

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
 Dialogues and doings 477

Hinchliffe, S. (2002). Inhabiting: landscapes and natures. In: Anderson, K., Domosh, M., Pile, S. and Thrift, N.
(eds) Handbook of cultural geography. London: Sage, pp. 207–225.
Kindon, S. (2003). Participatory video in geographic research: a feminist practice of looking? Area 35, pp. 142–153.
Lacy, S. (1995). Mapping the terrain: New genre public art. Indiana: Bay Press.
Loftus, A. (2009). Intervening in the environment of the everyday. Geoforum 40, pp. 326–334.
Lorimer, H. (2006). Herding memories of humans and animals. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 24,
pp. 497–518.
Lovejoy, A. and Hawkins, H. (2009). Insites: an artists’ book. Penryn: Insites Press.
Mackenzie, A. F. D. (2002). Re-claiming place: the Millennium Forest, Borgie, North Sutherland, Scotland. Envi-
ronment and Planning D: Society and Space 2, pp. 535–560.
Mackenzie, A. F. D. (2006a). Leinn Fhäin am Fearann? (The land is ours): re-claiming land, re-creating commu-
nity, North Harris, Outer Hebrides, Scotland. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 24, pp. 577–598.
Mackenzie, A. F. D. (2006b). Claims to place: the public art of Sue Jane Talyor. Gender, Place and Culture 13, pp.
605–627.
Massey, D. (2005). For space. London: Sage.
Mathews, V. (2010). Aestheticizing space: art, gentrification and the city. Geography Compass 4 (6), pp. 660–675.
Matless, D. and Revill, G. (1995). A solo ecology: the erratic art of andy goldsworthy. Cultural Geographies 2, pp.
423–448.
McDonough, T. F. (1994). Situationist space. October 67, pp. 59–77.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1992). Phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge.
Merriman, P. and Webster, C. (2009). Travel projects: landscape, art, movement. Cultural Geographies 16, pp. 525–
535.
Miles, M. (1997). Art space and the city. London: Routledge.
Miles, M. (2004). Urban Avant-Gardes. London: Routledge.
Miles, M. (2010). Representing nature: art and climate change. Cultural Geographies 17, pp. 19–35.
Mitchell, W. J. T. (ed.) (1994). Landscape and power. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Nash, C. (1996). Reclaiming vision: looking at landscape and the body. Gender, Place and Culture 3, pp. 149–169.
Pain, R. (2004). Social geography: participatory research. Progress in Human Geography 28, pp. 652–663.
Parr, H. (2006). Mental health, the arts and belongings. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 31, pp. 150–
166.
Parr, H. (2007). Collaborative film-making as process, method and text in mental health research. Cultural Geogra-
phies 14, pp. 114–138.
Paterson, M. (2009). Haptic geographies: ethnography, haptic knowledges and sensuous dispositions. Progress in
Human Geography 33 (6), pp. 766–788.
Pile, S. (2005). Real cities: modernity, space and the phantasmagorias of city life. London: Sage.
Pinder, D. (1996). Subverting cartography: the situationists and maps of the city. Environment and Planning A 28,
pp. 405–427.
Pinder, D. (2001). Ghostly footsteps: voices, memories and walks in the city. Ecumene 8, pp. 1–19.
Pinder, D. (2005a). Arts of urban exploration. Cultural Geographies 12, pp. 383–411.
Pinder, D. (2005b). Visions of the city: utopianism, power and politics in twentieth-century urbanism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.
Pinder, D. (2007). Cartographies unbound. Cultural Geographies 14, pp. 453–462.
Pinder, D. (2008). Urban interventions: art, politics and pedagogy. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research
32, pp. 730–736.
Pink, S., Hubbard, P., O’Neill, M. and Radley, A. (2010). Walking across disciplines: from ethnography to arts
practice. Visual Studies 25, pp. 1–7.
Rendell, J. (2006). Art and architecture: a place between. London: IB Tauris.
Rogoff, I. (2000). Terra infirma: geography’s visual culture. London: Routledge.
Rycroft, S. (2005). The nature of Op Art: Bridget Riley and the art of nonrepresentation. Environment and Planning
D: Society and Space 23, 351–371.
Sadler, S. (1998). The situationist city. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sharp, J. (2007). The life and death of five spaces: public art and community regeneration in Glasgow. Cultural
Geographies 14, pp. 274–292.
Sidaway, J. D. (2009). Shadows on the path: negotiating geopolitics on an urban section of Britain’s South West
Coast Path. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 27, pp. 1091–1116.
Smith, B. (1988). European vision and the South Pacific. New Haven and Oxford: Cleredon Press.
Smith, P. (2010). The contemporary derive: a partial review of issues concerning the contemporary practice of
psychogeography. Cultural Geographies 17, pp. 103–122.
Thomas, N., Hawkins, H. and Harvey, D. (2010). Digital media industries in the South West. Geography 35, pp.
14–21.
Tolia-Kelly, D. P. (2007a). SPILL: liquid emotion and transcultural art. SPILL Exhibition Catalogue: SASA Gallery.

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
478 Dialogues and doings

Tolia-Kelly, D. P. (2007b). Participatory art: capturing spatial vocabularies in a collaborative visual methodology
with Melanie Carvalho and South Asian Women in London, UK. In: Kindon, R., Pain, R. and Kesby, M. (eds)
Participatory action research approaches and methods: connecting people, participation and place. New York and London:
Routledge, pp. 132–140.
Tolia-Kelly, D. P. (2007c). Fear in paradise: the affective registers of the English Lake District landscape re-visited.
The Senses and Society 2, pp. 329–351.
Toscano, A. (2009). The sensuous religion of the multitude: art and abstraction in Negri. Third Text 23, pp. 369–
382.
Whatmore, S. (1999). Hybrid geographies: rethinking the human in human geography. In: Massey, D., Allen, J.
and Sarre, P. (eds) Human geography today. Cambridge: Polity, pp. 22–40.
Wylie, J. (2002). An essay on ascending Glastonbury Tor. Geoforum 33, pp. 441–454.
Wylie, J. (2005). A single day’s walking: narrating self and landscape on the South West Coast Path. Transactions of
the Institute of British Geographers 30, pp. 234–247.
Wylie, J. (2010). Non-representational Subjects? In: Anderson, B. and Harrison, B. (eds) Taking-place: geography and
non-representational theory. Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 99–114.

Further Reading
Bermingham, A. (1987). Landscape and ideology: the English rustic tradition, 1760–1860. London: Thames and Hudson.
Bourriaud, N. (2002). Relational aesthetics. Paris: Les Presses du Reel.
Buskirk, M. (2003). The contingent object of contemporary art. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Edensor, T. (2010). Walking in rhythms: place, regulation, style and the flow of experience. Visual Studies 25, pp.
69–79.
Gablick, S. (1995). Re-enchantment of art. London: Thames and Hudson.
Housefield, J. (2007). Sites of time: organic and geologic time in the art of Robert Smithson and Roxy Paine. Cul-
tural Geographies 14, 537–561.
Kester, G. (2004). Conversation pieces: community and communication in modern art. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Krauss, R. (1979). Sculpture in the expanded field. October 8, pp. 30–44.
Latham, A. and Conradson, D. (2003). The possibilities of performance. Environment and Planning A 35, pp. 1901–
1906.
McCormack, D. P. (2004). Drawing out the lines of the event. Cultural Geographies 11, pp. 211–220.
Phillips, P. (2004). Doing art and doing cultural geography: the fieldwork ⁄ field walking project. Australian Geogra-
pher 35, pp. 151–159.
Pollock, G. (1988). Vision and difference. London: Routledge.
Pollock, G. (1996). Generations and geographies: critical theories and critical practices in feminism and the visual arts. London:
Routledge.
Seymour, S., Daniels, S. and Watkins, C. (1995). Picturesque views of the British West Indies. The Picturesque 10,
pp. 22–28.
Yusoff, K. and Gabrys, J. (2006). Time lapses: Robert Smithson’s mobile landscapes. Cultural Geographies 13, pp.
444–450.

ª 2011 The Author Geography Compass 5 ⁄ 7 (2011): 464–478, 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2011.00429.x

Geography Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd