Accountable Digital Geographies
The session recording will be archived on the site until June 25th, 2023
This session was streamed but not recorded
Date: 3/23/2023
Time: 8:30 AM - 9:50 AM
Room: Denver, Sheraton, I.M. Pei Tower, Mezzanine Level
Type: Paper,
Theme: Toward More Just Geographies
Curated Track: Black Geographies Specialty Group Curated Track
Sponsor Group(s):
Digital Geographies Specialty Group, Indigenous Peoples Specialty Group, Latinx Geographies Specialty Group
Organizer(s):
Isaac Rivera University of Washington
Viki Eagle UCLA
Chair(s):
Isaac Rivera University of Washington
Description:
The everywhereness of the digital has resulted in both mass interest, and need, to apprehend the impact of technology on sociospatial relations, resulting in new research frontiers that expand the archive of disciplinary inquiry to the digital as an object and subject of study (Ash et al., 2018). The situatedness of digital technologies in racial capitalism and settler colonialism continues to animate imaginaries and practices of Black and Indigenous dehumanization, including mediated spectacles of police violence, trauma, climate and ecological apocalypse, and more. Following Katherine McKittrick’s (2016) insistence on centering Black and Indigenous livingness, Tiffany King (2019) argues that White cartography did not anticipate Black and Indigenous life, necessitating the techno-production of imaginaries of violence and ‘exterior’ threats to rationalize the project of ‘settling’. Writing to researchers eager to study and do scholarship alongside Indigenous communities, Eve Tuck (2009) calls on researchers to reconsider “damage centered” research used to document legacies of dispossession. Rather than catalog accumulation of data on damage, Tuck (2009) insists on centering the desires of Indigenous communities. This is not to say that tracing the operations of racial capitalism and settler colonialism are not important, particularly given the mass expansion of new surveillance regimes and technologies of dispossession, but to invite collective inquiry on geography’s pedagogical practices in a moment of climate breakdown, state sanctioned mass death and expanding state securitization. Following Candice Fujikane (2021): how will the Earth recognize us? We direct this question to the pedagogies, practices, institutions, and researchers that shape digital practice.
We ask for papers that consider the following questions: How might geographers refuse dehumanizing narratives and center the everyday efforts by social movements for life and self-determination? How does reading for Black and Indigenous livingness reshape genealogies of the digital? How might the practice of digital geographies be enrolled to insist on life everywhere? Following Andrew Curley and Sarah Smith (2021), how might digital geographies center Indigenous land and Land Back into our pedagogical practices?
We invite engagement in the following themes:
Engagements with Black Geographies, Indigenous Geographies, Latinx Geographies, Asian and Oceanic geographies, aimed at shaping frameworks for accountable digital geographies
Abolition Geographies
Accountable digital pedagogies
Black and Indigenous joy
Indigenous Data Sovereignty
Insurgent Aesthetics/Geovisualization
Sonic and Music in Digital Geographies
Queer of color and Trans code studies
Land Back in Digital Geographies
Environmental Justice
Refusal of visual and digital regimes
Counter-cartographies/Counter-Imaginaries
Viral Justice
Visual Sovereignty
Please submit abstracts (250 words or less) to irivera@uw.edu and veagle@g.ucla.edu by Monday October 31, 2022.
References
Ash, J., Kitchin, R., & Leszczynski, A. (2018). Digital turn, digital geographies? Progress in Human Geography, 42(1), 25-43.
Bruno, T., & Faiver-Serna, C. (2022). More reflections on a white discipline. The Professional Geographer, 74(1), 156-161.
Curley, A. S., Sara. (2020). Against Colonial Grounds: Geography on Indigenous Lands. Dialogues in Human Geography.
Daigle, M. (2019). The spectacle of reconciliation: On (the) unsettling responsibilities to Indigenous peoples in the academy. Environment Planning D: Society, Space and culture.
Daigle, M., & Ramírez, M. M. (2019). Decolonial geographies. Keywords in Radical Geography: Antipode at 50, 78-84.
De Leeuw, S., & Hunt, S. (2018). Unsettling decolonizing geographies. Geography Compass, 12(7).
Elwood, S., & Leszczynski, A. (2018). Feminist digital geographies. Gender, Place, & Culture, 1-16.
Fujikane, C. (2021). Mapping Abundance for a Planetary Future: Duke University Press.
King, T. L. (2019). The Black Shoals: Offshore Formations of Black and Native Studies: Duke University Press.
Liboiron, M. (2021). Pollution is colonialism: Duke University Press.
Maynard, R., & Simpson, L. B. (2022). Rehearsals for Living: Haymarket Books.
McKittrick, K. (2006). Demonic grounds: Black women and the cartographies of struggle: University of Minnesota Press.
McKittrick, K. (2021). Dear Science and Other Stories: Duke University Press.
Tuck, E. (2009). Suspending damage: A letter to communities. Harvard Educational Review, 79(3), 409-428.
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, education & society, 1(1).
Presentations (if applicable) and Session Agenda:
Tara Di Cassio |
Imagining/Contesting Futures through Palestinian Wall Art and Digital Archive |
Joyce Percel, University of Calgary |
Between Data Discourses and Liberatory Imaginaries |
Viviana Huiliñir-Curio |
Remembering and Mapping our Territory: Mobilities and Mapuche Territoriality in Wallmapu, Chile. |
Isaac Rivera, University of Colorado - Boulder |
(Re)Mapping Native Denver |
Elspeth Iralu (Discussant) |
Non-Presenting Participants
Role | Participant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accountable Digital Geographies
Description
Type: Paper,
Date: 3/23/2023
Time: 8:30 AM - 9:50 AM
Room: Denver, Sheraton, I.M. Pei Tower, Mezzanine Level
Contact the Primary Organizer
Isaac Rivera University of Washington
irivera@uw.edu