A landscape cannot be a homeland

John Wylie

Landscape Research, 2016, vol. 41, issue 4, 408-416

Abstract: What is the problem for which landscape is the answer? In this paper, I offer a response to this question, first posed at a meeting of landscape researchers in Brussels in 2011. I argue that the problem can be defined as ontopology, or what I call here homeland thinking, and I propose that a landscape cannot be a homeland. The salience of landscape as a critical term instead involves modes of thinking and feeling that chafe against invocations of homeland as a site of existential inhabitation, as a locus of sentiment and attachment, and a wellspring of identity. The paper explores the connections between ideas of landscape and homeland through discussions of the European Landscape Convention, phenomenology and the term homeland itself. I conclude by arguing that a landscape must be understood as a kind of dislocation or distancing from itself. There are, after all, no original inhabitants.

Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01426397.2016.1156067 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:clarxx:v:41:y:2016:i:4:p:408-416

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/clar20

DOI: 10.1080/01426397.2016.1156067

Access Statistics for this article

Landscape Research is currently edited by Dr Anna Jorgensen

More articles in Landscape Research from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().