The articles written by Linda McDowell and James Duncan discussed what cultural geography really is and its transformation through time. Linda McDowell’s article was entitled “The Transformation of Cultural Geography” while James Duncan’s article was entitled “The Superorganic in American Cultural Geography.” I find the article of Maxwell more interesting and well-explained than Duncan’s article. The scope of McDowell’s article is more extensive while Duncan’s article is focused on his main argument. McDowell’s article touched more fields that are related and made it easy to comprehend the idea of cultural geography. For example, it conceptualized the link between local and global forces that varies the relationships between identity, meaning and place to analyze cultural geography.
The Transformation of Cultural Geography article reiterated the meaning of culture first before discussing what cultural geography is. It argued culture as socially constructed and a set of spatially rooted practices. Culture is not a totality but a process of reinforcing accepted cultural norms and standards. The question of whether is it the culture that shapes the spatial area? Or the spatial area has something to do with the community’s culture were visible on the article. The article also pointed out the social relations of power into different ideas of space. It also showed that people can adapt to different cultures.
The article showed how the scope of cultural geography has transformed through time. It became broader discussing how Sauer focused on Pre-European America before. He did not perceive the changes on culture through changing spatial relations. It is now transformed through looking on the social, economic and political structures of society.
The article pointed out the significant relationship of social relations on identity, meaning and place. An example is the youth culture. Youth culture can be defined through same style of clothing but they need not...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document