This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Barnett, C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Ways of relating: hospitality and the acknowledgement of otherness

Faculty of Social Sciences, The Open University, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, UK

This paper considers the relevance of the work of Emmanuel Levinas and Jacques Derrida to geography's engagements with both mainstream moral philosophy and poststructuralist theory. This relevance lies in the way in which their work unsettles the ascription of normative value to relations of proximity and distance. Distance is usually understood to be a medium of moral harm or indifference. In contrast, Levinas presents distance as the very condition of responsibility. Grasping the significance of this argument requires an appreciation of the temporality of responsibility and responsiveness that both Levinas and Derrida emphasize. They present an alternative way of understanding the relationality of subjectivity and social processes. Through a schematic exposition of key themes in Levinas' work, prevalent understandings of the spatiality of relations are shown to harbour their own forms of indifference and moral harm. The full effect of Levinas' reconsideration of the value of relations between proximity and distance is brought out in Derrida's recent writings on hospitality. For both thinkers, there is no natural geographical scene for the cultivation of responsibility. Rather, their shared focus upon temporality emphasizes the degree to which responsibility is motivated in response to the activities of others. The implication of this argument is that critical analysis should be reorientated towards practices that shape individual and collective dispositions to acknowledge the claims of others.

Key Words: acknowledgement • Derrida • hospitality • Levinas • relationality • temporality

Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 29, No. 1, 5-21 (2005)
DOI: 10.1191/0309132505ph535oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. T. Galvin and L. Todres Embodying Nursing Openheartedness: An Existential Perspective J Holist Nurs, June 1, 2009; 27(2): 141 - 149. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Dyer and D. Demeritt Un-ethical review? Why it is wrong to apply the medical model of research governance to human geography Progress in Human Geography, February 1, 2009; 33(1): 46 - 64. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. J. Barnes History and philosophy of geography: life and death 2005--2007 Progress in Human Geography, October 1, 2008; 32(5): 650 - 658. [PDF]

				G. Valentine Living with difference: reflections on geographies of encounter Progress in Human Geography, June 1, 2008; 32(3): 323 - 337. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Madge Developing a geographers' agenda for online research ethics Progress in Human Geography, October 1, 2007; 31(5): 654 - 674. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Popke Geography and ethics: spaces of cosmopolitan responsibility Progress in Human Geography, August 1, 2007; 31(4): 509 - 518. [PDF]

				D. Bell The hospitable city: social relations in commercial spaces Progress in Human Geography, February 1, 2007; 31(1): 7 - 22. [Abstract] [PDF]