Cresswell (2010) states that all humans have the same potential to be mobile, yet there are great inequalities in our actual mobility: who moves furthest, who moves fastest? The focus of this module is on understanding why some people and things are so much more mobile than others. Through investigating the differences between potential and actual movement; differences in how free we are choose to be mobile; and the ways in which mobility is narrated, represented and contested, the module reveals a politics of mobility.

Using case studies and examples ranging from vehicle and object design, blogging, mobile communications and mobility in film the module sheds light on the relevance of mobility as a framework for understanding contemporary relations between economy, society and culture.

1. Recognise the ways in which different forms of contemporary mobility become politicised, moralised and contested
2. Evaluate the contribution of different actors and technologies in producing and mediating forms of mobility
3. Appraise the ways in which mobile technologies are reshaping social relations, norms and policies
4. Analyse symbolic and affective content in cinematic representations of mobility
5. Evaluate the contribution of the mobilities turn to understanding contemporary geographies

The module will be delivered through lectures, seminars, film screenings and workshops.

Lectures will be delivered by the module leader and a small number of guest lecturers. They provide a theoretical framework and case studies to understand contemporary debates and shifts in mobility.

Seminars, workshops and film screenings provide an environment where students can deepen their understanding of specific issues, practice their analysis skills, and critically evaluate academic and policy knowledge.

Subject-related:

• Use case study material and data to explore, illustrate and test theoretical propositions
• Enhance understanding of personal identity and social position in a globalising world

• Understand sources of mobility inequality and critically assess ways in which they can be transformed and reproduced

• Make links between social, cultural and economic phenomena and geographical distributions

Transferable:

• Make links between abstract theoretical knowledge and everyday life

• Handle conceptual and factual material in both oral and written forms

• Write clearly and competently, and make reflective comments upon topics learned
• Gain and articulate knowledge on relevant theoretical, empirical and policy issues through small group discussions and reasoned debate

Values/attitudes:             

• Develop reasoned arguments, both orally and in written form, and demonstrate the ability to critically assess and evaluate evidence and claims
• Develop an active sense of citizenship through group debate and understanding sources of inequality

Type of assessment

%

Contribution

Title

Duration
(if applicable)

Approx. date of Assessment

Essay

50

Mobility and inequality

2000 words

Autumn

Essay

50

Cinematic mobility

2000 words

Autumn

The opportunity for reassessment in this module

Students are permitted to be reassessed in a module which they have failed, in line with the course regulations. The reassessment will usually take place during the summer.

1. Introduction and overview
2. Theorising mobility
3. Making sense of mobility: placing the body and senses in mobilities research
4. Producing (im)mobility (i): disability, gender and accessibility
5. Producing (im)mobility (ii): design and citizenship
6. Mobility and social justice: climate, health and citizenship
7. Movement 2.0? policy blogging and activism
8. Cinematic mobilities (i): representing mobility in popular culture
9. Cinematic mobilities (ii): analysing mobility in film

Clifford, J. (1997) Routes: Travel and translation in the 20^th Century (Harvard University Press, Boston) (Introduction)

Cresswell, T. (2010) Towards a politics of mobility, Environment & Planning D, 28, pp.17-31

Cresswell, T. & Dixon, D. (Eds) (2002) Engaging Film: Geographies of Mobility and Identity (Roman & Littlefield, Maryland US) (Chapters 8, 9 &14)

Imrie, R. (2000) “Disability and discourses of mobility and movement” Environment and Planning A, Vol. 32, p1641-1656

Sheller, M. & Urry, J. (2006) “The new mobilities paradigm” Environment & Planning A, Vol. 38, p207-226

Spinney, J. (2010) Performing resistance? Re-reading urban cycling on London’s South Bank, Environment and Planning A, 42(12), pp. 2914–2937

Urry, J. (2000) Sociology Beyond Societies: mobilities for the twenty-first century (Routledge, London and New York,) (Introduction)

Vigar, G. (2002) The Politics of Mobility: Transport, the environment and public policy (Spon Press, London)

resswell, T. (2006) On the Move (Routledge, Oxford) (Introduction and Chapter 1)

Bordwell, D. (1997) On the History of Film Style (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts)

Longhurst, R. (2013) Using Skype to mother: bodies, emotions, visuality, and screens, Environment and Planning D: Society & Space, 31, pp.664-679

Inventing the Indian (2012) (TV) Cottam, C. (Dir) (UK, BBC) (available here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMDy-1mXw4o)

Merriman, P. (2006) ’Mirror, Signal, Manoeuvre’: assembling and governing the motorway driver in late 1950s Britain Sociological Review, Vol. 54, No. s1 p75-92

Spinney, J. (2006) A place of sense: a kinaesthetic ethnography of cyclists on Mt Ventoux, Environment & Planning D, 24, pp.709-732 (online access available)

Wylie, J. (2002) An essay on ascending Glastonbury Tor Geoforum, Vol. 33, p441-454