Abstract
In this commentary, I follow up on Chandler and Pugh’s (2021) article, ‘Anthropocene Islands: There Are Only Islands After the End of the World’, to explore two central facets of their argument. First, I explore just why analyses of dynamic patterns of relational entanglements in island environments are particularly detrimental to modernist fantasies of a dichotomous world. Second, I critique whether the frame of ‘the Anthropocene’ is the most accurate way to depict the emerging knowledges of relationality in island (and other) geographies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
