Page 220 - Consuming Media
P. 220

01Consuming Media  10/4/07  11:17 am  Page 207










                      ‘representational spaces’ (or ‘space as directly lived through its associated images and symbols’ in
                      everyday life, philosophy and the arts). This trichotomy has been much cited, but to us appears
                      to be more difficult to operationalize, since it does not incorporate any developed understanding
                      of the precise role of culture, communication and mediation.
                    9. Ricoeur (2000/2004: 150f).
                   10. Ricoeur (2000/2004: 153).
                   11. See also Fornäs (2004 and 2006).
                   12. Langer (1953) offers a fascinating theory of virtuality as the basis for cultural imagination (virtual
                      space, time, powers, life, memory, history, etc.), long before the cybercultural inflation of the word;
                      see Fornäs et al. (2002: 29ff).
                   13. Appadurai (1996: 33ff) proposes five dimensions of global cultural flows: ethnoscapes, medias-
                      capes, technoscapes, financescapes and ideoscapes. The suffix ‘-scape’ is supposed to acknowledge
                      both the ‘fluid, irregular shapes of these landscapes’ and their character as being ‘deeply perspectival
                      constructs’.
                   14. Benjamin (1982/1999: 871).
                   15. Ganetz (2001a) makes a contextualizing reading of Solna Centre as a signifying material text.
                   16. Gottdiener (1995) distinguishes ‘High-Tech Urban’ from ‘Olde Towne’ style elements in shopping
                      architecture.
                   17. Benjamin (1950/1999: 423 and 879).
                   18. Lefebvre (1974/1991: 331ff and 399) discusses the dialectic of urban centrality, implying simul-
                      taneity of contradictions in space. On city culture and city images, see Gottdiener and Lagopoulos
                      (1986), Zukin (1995), Balshaw and Kennedy (2000), Blum (2003) and Johansson and Sernhede
                      (2003).
                   19. Amin and Thrift (2002: 23).
                   20. Lash and Urry (1994: 280).
                   21. Appadurai (1996: 188f), Lash and Urry (1994: 307). See also Deleuze and Guattari (1972/1984).
                   22. Goffman (1959/1972).
                   23. Lövgren (2001); the controversy over the benches is also discussed in Chapter 1 above.
                   24. Gustavsson (2001).
                   25. Fornäs (2001c: 396ff).
                   26. Pine and Gilmour (1999) is an often-cited example of this ideology.
                   27. Becker (2004: 161ff), Fornäs (2002a: 331ff). A similar formulation appears on the shopping
                      centre’s home page, in the Retail Awards citation of Solna Centre as Sweden’s 2001 Shopping
                      Centre of the Year: ‘This year’s winner has developed from an ordinary, local town centre to a
                      regional shopping centre of high international quality … without losing its hometown atmosphere’
                      (http://www.solnacentrum.se/info.asp 2004-11-03).
                   28. Rogoff (2000: 8) draws the critical distinction between considering cultural artefacts as reflective
                      vs. constitutive.
                   29. See Drotner (2005) and Livingstone (2005b).
                   30. Bjurström (2001b).
                   31. Appadurai (1996: 181).
                   32. ‘Tre nya biografer i nya filmstaden i Råsunda’, http//www.sf.se/sf/rasundabilder 2004-11-05.
                   33. http://www.gamlafilmstaden.nu 2004-11-05.


                                                                                      Notes  207
   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225