Abstract
Considering geography in public debate merits asking what kinds of ‘publics’ geographers engage with and whose interests this serves. In turn, historicizing academic geographers’ reaches and roles beyond the academy casts these questions into starker relief. The case of Isaiah Bowman is instructive in this regard and leads us to consider forms and strategies of geographical engagement and vocation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Harvey
D
(1974 ) What kind of Geography for what kind of public policy? Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers NS 63 : 18 –24 .
2.
Katz
C
(1996 ) Towards minor theory . Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 14 : 487 –499 .
3.
Morin
K
(2012 ) Geographical literacies and their publics: Reflections on the American scene . Progress in Human Geography 37 : 3 –9 .
4.
Murphy
AB
(2002 ) Brussels: Division in unity or unity in division . Political Geography 21 : 695 –700 .
5.
Murphy
AB
(2006 ) Enhancing geography’s role in public debate . Annals of the Association of American Geographers 96 : 1 –13 .
6.
Murphy
AB
(2013 ) Advancing geographical understanding: Why engaging grand regional narratives matters . Dialogues in Human Geography 3 (2 ). doi: 10.1177/2043820613490253
7.
Murphy
AB
de Blij
HJ
Turner
BL
Gilmore
RW
Gregory
D
(2005 ) Forum: The role of geography in public debate . Progress in Human Geography 29 : 165 –193 .
8.
Said
E
(1994 ) Representations of the Intellectual: the 1993 Reith Lectures . London, UK : Vintage .
9.
Sidaway
JD
(2013 ) Geography, globalization, and the problematic of area studies . Annals of the Association of American Geographers 103 : 984 –1002 .
10.
Smith
N
(2003 ) American Empire: Roosevelt’s Geographer and the Prelude to Globalization . Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA : University of California Press .
11.
Stoddart
DR
(1992 ) Geography and war. The ‘New Geography’ and the ‘New Army’ in England, 1899–1914 . Political Geography 11 : 87 –99 .