Week Three - Mobilities
Across the literature it is obvious how rapidly the field of study of mobility has been developing and still how much there is to investigate. As we find with current technology trends today, the more one tries to keep up with the newest ?gadgets? the faster new technologies appear ? studies are conducted on the social impact of the first cell phones and before formal publication the technology has been enhanced to the point where the object of study seems now almost, if not totally, obsolete.
As scholars dig their way through the rapid advancements in technology they continue to examine the ?differences in mobility which reflect and reinforce existing social structures? (Wood and Graham, 177), the effects of our global connectivity, and the mobility patterns of our different spaces. Jensen highlights the changes in mobility within the contemporary city by analyzing the ?increased flow of people, symbols, and material goods?the multiple global networks of such flows?[and] the situation of ?accelerating mobility? in the city? (Jensen, 144). In doing so he revisits the work of Simmel and Goffman regarding ?social imagination? and ?sociological questions of trust, place-relation, strangers and norms in the accelerating mobile city? (Jensen, 146).
The topic which struck me most in Jensen?s discussion was Simmel?s review of the inhabitant?s level of intellectual culture (148). Although seemingly harsh, the discussion of ?lonliness in togetherness,? a ?blasé attitude? to new sensations, and ?reacting using his head not heart? are precisely how I would have described my experience in living in a large metropolitan and rapidly mobile city space for almost a decade. Simmel appears to have captured the mode of survival that is necessary to make your way through daily activity and interaction as a member of such a community.
But beyond this somewhat unattractive analysis of how city inhabitants ?cope? is how these concepts then relate directly to the technological tools we have which keep us connected. If available, a person is mobile and ?connected? to others at all times. Are we truly connected if we have become so ?disconnected? in our reactions to situations and face-to-face interactions with others?
Kellerman?s article also points to how the ?well developed virtual mobility of people has, thus, emerged, turning into a dominant aspect of contemporary developed societies? (Kellerman, 73) but notes the possible implications which ensue with more ?dispersed social ties?and increased placelessness? (Kellerman, 99). There is no doubt that technologies have enhanced our physical and virtual mobilities but at what cost to the changing relationships we are experiencing as a result.
Similarly, Sheller and Urry?s new mobilities paradigm offers a thorough examination of the ?mobility turn? in the social sciences and the challenges brought to previous ?social science research [that] ha[d] been a-mobile? (Sheller and Urry, 208). They highlight the theoretical contributions before offering methods for mobilities research and one (of numerous) conclusion about changes in mobilities that have ?demateriali[zed] connections, as people, machines, images, information, power, money, ideas, and dangers are ?on the move?, making and remaking networks at increasingly rapid speed across the world? (Sheller and Urry, 221).
The trend I sense throughout all of this week?s reading is the highlight of just how little we understand about the social implications of the new technologies and mobilities they present. Each article touched on a different aspect of physical and virtual mobilities ? the history and/or the current concepts ? but it still appears to be a field wide open for discovery.
That said, in my opinion, an item of interest in this week?s readings which most strongly warrants additional discussion and research questions is Wood and Graham?s concept of division of classes by technology; ?the tendency towards technological lock-in, which threatens to divide contemporary societies more decisively into high-speed, high-mobility and connected and low-speed, low-mobility and disconnected, classes? (Wood and Graham, 178). If equal access were available would the division of classes cease to exist or would a ?more mobile? class still always emerge who can manipulate the technology better? Isn?t some part of technology?s role in social structures due to user motivation/ability rather then strictly access?