Michael Pacione. Urban Geography: A Global Perspective.
2009, 3rd edition, Routledge
Contact tarus_ger@hotmail.com
Thanks!
Monday, November 14
Saturday, October 22
Saturday, September 17
Saturday, April 16
Sunday, March 27
Do you see what it reads at the top left hand corner of the page? Got a (un)pleasant shock when I saw it.
'MADE IN DOWNTOWN LA
VERTICALLY INTEGRATED MANUFACTURING'
Ok, pleasant because it's nice that the company feels a need to let its customers know how their clothes probably comes about, well at least to a certain extent.
Unpleasant because I'm actually really supposed to be writing my economic geography essay and not browsing these websites. What a reminder.
Saturday, March 26
It's 12:12am now!
I am so fed up churning out essays and presentation slides that I am going to type nonsensical and trivial things here.
Recently, as in the past year or so, I have been redefining my definitions of what is important in life, and what is the prerequisites to certain statuses in life. Although I'm 22 years of age now, I think I've seen quite a bit and hence me redefining some of those its-just-the-way-it-is things. Sadly, yes, put simply, it just means I'm starting to lose hope in things. And I agree that 22 years is rather early to be experiencing that.
To that point, my mum asked me what happens if I continue to lose hope on more things and my life start to fall apart with me wallowing in self-pity? Putting aside whatever intentions she said that with, I would like to interpret it as a reminder that NO, don't ever let yourself fall down that slippery slope. So stop before you get too far out.
My conclusion is no conclusion; but I would like to think that we should all have goals and that they should be constantly revised or changed when you sense that something isn't quite going the right way. That should keep one sane for some time. =)
Ciaos!
(I think I've lost the ability to write in queen's english, it's like they're only reserved for essays. GAHH.)
I am so fed up churning out essays and presentation slides that I am going to type nonsensical and trivial things here.
Recently, as in the past year or so, I have been redefining my definitions of what is important in life, and what is the prerequisites to certain statuses in life. Although I'm 22 years of age now, I think I've seen quite a bit and hence me redefining some of those its-just-the-way-it-is things. Sadly, yes, put simply, it just means I'm starting to lose hope in things. And I agree that 22 years is rather early to be experiencing that.
To that point, my mum asked me what happens if I continue to lose hope on more things and my life start to fall apart with me wallowing in self-pity? Putting aside whatever intentions she said that with, I would like to interpret it as a reminder that NO, don't ever let yourself fall down that slippery slope. So stop before you get too far out.
My conclusion is no conclusion; but I would like to think that we should all have goals and that they should be constantly revised or changed when you sense that something isn't quite going the right way. That should keep one sane for some time. =)
Ciaos!
(I think I've lost the ability to write in queen's english, it's like they're only reserved for essays. GAHH.)
Monday, March 7
For the longest time.
On April 1st, 2009, I wrote an entry of one of my favourite quotes by Foucault.
"There is no need for arms, physical violence, material constraints. Just the gaze. An inspecting gaze, the gaze which each individual under its weight will end by interiorising to the point that he [sic] is his own overseer, each individual exercising surveillance over and against himself"
(Foucault 1977: 177)
Today, I came across this on my friend's tumblr which says foucault actually demonizes a great idea(of course foucault is much more influential and remembered), but her post is too awesome to miss. I copied the post below:
An Invisible Omniscience
The Panopticon is a type of prison building/layout designed by Bentham, a social theorist in 1785. The design allows an observer to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) prisoners without the latter being able to tell whether they are being watched. Thus, this results in self-regulation and self-discipline by the prisoners, as though they were watched. In Bentham’s words, effectively leaving the watching to the watched. Based on the idea of the Panopticon, Foucault and friends wrote extensively on the idea of a ‘disciplinary gaze’ in society. The heightened sense of possible surveillance in society results in self-regulation in public space, in terms of speech, behaviours and actions.
Today, being my usual nerdy self, I once again attended the visual politics lecture (I’m not a political science student, but seriously this shit is fascinating!). I thought the lecturer raised a great point: The academic work Foucault did was great, and it had indeed raised critical questions about society. However, the whole concept of the Panopticon prison was demonized in the process. Sully (his name is really O’Sullivan) reminded us of the original intentions of the prison - to better the lives of the inmates. English prisons in the 18th century was not fun(anyone who reads Great Expectations can guess that) - it was often under-staffed, unsanitary, overcrowded and disease-ridden. People usually did not get out alive after they were thrown in. Thus, this Bentham fellow came up with an effective way to house the prisoners - by making them watch themselves! Therefore, more funds can then go to bettering the prison environment.
This' from my self-proclaimed nerdy but actually very intellectual friend.
and no, she doesn't read this space. =)
"There is no need for arms, physical violence, material constraints. Just the gaze. An inspecting gaze, the gaze which each individual under its weight will end by interiorising to the point that he [sic] is his own overseer, each individual exercising surveillance over and against himself"
(Foucault 1977: 177)
Today, I came across this on my friend's tumblr which says foucault actually demonizes a great idea(of course foucault is much more influential and remembered), but her post is too awesome to miss. I copied the post below:
An Invisible Omniscience
The Panopticon is a type of prison building/layout designed by Bentham, a social theorist in 1785. The design allows an observer to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) prisoners without the latter being able to tell whether they are being watched. Thus, this results in self-regulation and self-discipline by the prisoners, as though they were watched. In Bentham’s words, effectively leaving the watching to the watched. Based on the idea of the Panopticon, Foucault and friends wrote extensively on the idea of a ‘disciplinary gaze’ in society. The heightened sense of possible surveillance in society results in self-regulation in public space, in terms of speech, behaviours and actions.
Today, being my usual nerdy self, I once again attended the visual politics lecture (I’m not a political science student, but seriously this shit is fascinating!). I thought the lecturer raised a great point: The academic work Foucault did was great, and it had indeed raised critical questions about society. However, the whole concept of the Panopticon prison was demonized in the process. Sully (his name is really O’Sullivan) reminded us of the original intentions of the prison - to better the lives of the inmates. English prisons in the 18th century was not fun(anyone who reads Great Expectations can guess that) - it was often under-staffed, unsanitary, overcrowded and disease-ridden. People usually did not get out alive after they were thrown in. Thus, this Bentham fellow came up with an effective way to house the prisoners - by making them watch themselves! Therefore, more funds can then go to bettering the prison environment.
This' from my self-proclaimed nerdy but actually very intellectual friend.
and no, she doesn't read this space. =)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)