Four tracks organize the publication around analytics that can be thought of as open questions. We welcome research that also elaborates on the problematics of periphery-center dichotomies by using “embodying the periphery” as an entry point for examining the interconnectedness of urban practices:
1) Embodying the periphery “within”?
As practices deemed peripheral unfold in the center, they raise questions of the (in)visibility of peripheral cultures, the fluidity of urban practices, and the temporal aspect of embodied activities that inhabit the center—temporarily or indefinitely. Through politics of bodily presence in the center, peripheral subjectivities articulate claims, such as the right to the centrality (Lefebvre 1996), advance social projects, and express fragmented dissent. Papers and projects in this track will explore the embodied practices in inner cities, so-called “ghettos,” townships, banlieues and housing projects (Balibar 2006), districts, spaces of urban decay, occupied buildings and infrastructures, homeless camps, ruins, and wounded central areas, among others.
2) Embodying the periphery “in between”
The periphery can act as a space between neighborhoods, cities, urban-rural areas, and nations. It can also be a border area, a margin, and a peripheral frontier exposed to massive migratory movements (Marques and Torres 2005) and where most migrants end up living in conditions of residential illegality and infrastructure deprivation (Holston 2009). Papers and projects in this track will investigate, among others, embodied practices in peri-urban areas, peripheral frontiers, urban/rural translocal topographies, borderlands (Anzaldúa 1987), cultural contact zones (Pratt 1991), refugee camps, sectarian frontiers (Akar 2018), zones of dispossession mapped onto “bodies-in-place” (Butler and Athanasiou 2013), and “hyper-peripheries” where socio-residential inequalities overlap with environmental vulnerability (Marques and Torres 2001).
3) Embodying “peripheral urbanization”
In this prevailing mode of production of urban space in the global South, residents of the peripheries build (D.I.Y.) their houses and neighborhoods while engaging transversally with institutional ways of spatial production, including state directives, lawful tenure, and formal employment (Caldeira 2017). The political significance of these practices is manifold, and concerns residence, the right to the city, citizenship, everyday life, and aesthetic judgments, among others. Papers and projects in this track will examine the embodied practices of autoconstruction in colonias populares, favelas, settlements, urban peripheries, refugee camps, infrastructure, and public spaces, among others.
4) Embodying “cityness”
This track explores the embodiment of “cityness” as the intersection between people, resources, places, and ideas that is invisible to formal rendering (Pieterse 2010, Simone 2010). Cityness denounces the fallacy of possible coherent traceability of movements and behaviors within the urban. Papers and projects in this track will analyze embodied practices in economies of affect, networks of communication and exchange, spaces of expectation and anticipation, bodily circulations, rituals of transgression, “infrastructures of people” (Simone 2010), areas of deprivation and insecurity, fuzzy circuits of association, geographies of the new precariat, and urban undergrounds, among others.
© Giuseppina Forte (top left) | Ralf Korbmacher (top center and right)
Nós, Mulheres da Periferia/Raquel Marques & Carolina Teixeira (bottom left and center)
Coletivo Estética Urbana/Kaio Figueredo (bottom right)