Seems to me that if there's a "divide" (and I'd rather not see it that way) it is over how we define "place" to begin with. Some are involved here because they write and think about physical places where they live; they are more in the realm of nature writers, or urban sociologists/anthropologists. "Place" is the desert, or the ocean, or the city. Others are coming at "place" from a more metaphorical perspective, and their comfort area tends to be more literary or spiritual, and less, perhaps, biological. But I think those lines are blurry. Isn't it great that we have so many perspectives, and that new people, not necessarily tightly-defined "ecological" or "nature" folks, are considering these topics? I'm also finding reading the comment threads on the various posts very interesting, and it doesn't bother me that there isn't as much discussion going on here. --Beth
Substitute "difference" or "dichotomy" for "divide" if this word seems devisive (and isn't that too many "D" words in one sentence to be legal in some states?) I agree the 'lines' are blurry and I am much more a lumper than a splitter (sorry, biological reference from 'the old days') and am enjoying the different perspectives. I'd be happy to hear some of these points of view elaborated in discussion here, but who am I kidding? If there was a really interesting conversation going on here at Ecotone in recent days, I would be hard pressed to participate; I am thinking of renaming Fragments to "Kibbles and Bits"... know what I mean? -- Fred
There's generally a pretty good view of the landscape from atop a divide. -- Chris C.
I think there's plenty of room in the meaning of "place" to fit an intellectual activity like a blog, and there's ample precedent: You might even say the blogosphere is a sub-universe of cyberspace.
As one who only visits, I can't speak to the psychological status of a blog, but it seems as if most of you (we?) who write about places invest them with meaning beyond their root-and-pebble reality. So it's no surprise that some people also give the blog itself that extra dimension.
Want another challenge? How about coining an arresting, evocative term one could substitute for "blogosphere" -- which suggests "Brigit Jones' Diary" rather more strongly than "Walden." I mean, is a blogosphere more like a billiard ball or an amoeba; do I, as a visitor, orbit it or invade? - P.
This is a discussion I would love to be able to contribute to in more detail – work pressures prevent me from mulling over the points and developing a long argument in support of what I am about to say, but here it is:
There is space, and then, there is place. A space is the same, whether or not we describe it or rhapsodize about it. A place is born in our description of our relations to that space. Place is the story of our relation to the spaces we inhabit.
That is my take on it. Hence my view that, yes, the blogosphere is a place. If place were so independent of our perception of and relation to it, those of us hailing from the same spatial coordinates would be writing much the same thing. My reports of, let’s say New York, would be like that of everyone else who lives in that city.
Okay, this is simplistic, but I wanted to throw into the discussion the notion that place is a relation to space…. -maria
Thanks Maria. I needed clarification on these terms, and hope there will be more to come. Ian also, I think you can contribute to this discussion to educate those of us (at least me) who are less aware of the way these terms are used and how we should understand them in our discussions. -- Fred
![[Home]](../ecotone/wiki/putahpano1b.jpg)