In recent writings the concept of absence has been used to question the reach of phenomenological accounts of the human-world relation from a deconstructionist perspective. This article argues that absence is rooted in the corporeal embeddedness of human beings in the world that surrounds them. This is the case although absences refer to entities that are not present. Discussing the absence-presence relation, it is made clear that the simultaneity of absence and presence is not paradoxical, because the absence of presence and the presence of absence refer to different entities. Contrary to the connotation of absence with Derrida, the spectral and hauntings, absences are experienced in a wide variety of practices that are both extraordinary and mundane. A detailed investigation into the processes in which absences are experienced then shows how an experience of absence comes into being and what affects the power of the experience. The article argues that the experience of absence is stronger when it refers to practices, emotions and corporal attachments that have been deeply ingrained into those who experience the absence. Since materiality, embodiment and (the lack of) resistance play a crucial role in the actual experience of absences, the conceptualization of absence should reflect these qualities. It is precisely because absence is rooted in processual corporality that absence can unfold such disturbing power. Those who experience something as absent have to fill the void that they experience with their own emotions, they have to bridge the emptiness that threatens their established expectations and practices. Accordingly, absence is presented as a phenomenologically grounded concept that gains its epistemological and experiential quality through its connection to the corporal body, its senses and emotions, and the world around it.

No abstract

What are the limits of resistance in public spaces? Academic representations of acts of resistance often exclusively look at the acts themselves, focusing on performers or participants, but neglecting passers-by. How do these passers-by connect (or not) to these acts and their aesthetics? What about after the action is over and the participants have left? What about effects at sites distant from where the practices of resistance took place? This article uses the works of Michel de Certeau, Pierre Bourdieu, and Jacques Rancière to discuss the restrictions and the potential resistance in public spaces. We investigate the limitations of everyday practices of resistance in public spaces and suggest that future research can better understand the limits of practices of resistance by taking into account three distinct aspects: distinction, duration, and extension. We use Rancière’s understanding of aesthetics and the sensible to link accounts of resistance that focus on political subjectivities and those that focus on actual practices of resistance.

Focusing on the multi-dimensionality of interactional settings, this study analyzes how the material world is a significant factor in the sequential co-production of the video-taped doctor—patient interactions. The analysis shows how a material artifact, the patient's file, is relevant in two ways: a) as a device which is employed in the sequential organization of the interaction. The patient's file is being used in the contexts of topic development and topic change. b) The file with its specific physical and symbolic features is being co-produced and contested by both actors as a knowledge reservoir. Further inspection of the interactions in concert with theoretical reflections of the role of space and materiality suggests that interactions should be interpreted as happening in spatially arranged constellations of material objects and actors. In these both rigid and flexible constellations boundaries are established, access is distributed, and meaning is solidified.

From demonstrations, jaywalking, and graffiti to guerrilla gardening, public space can be used to stage multiple forms of resistance. These practices oppose dominant orders and the rules of established structures. They range from the micropolitical and ephemeral, such as revisualizing space through artistic work (Murphy & O'Driscoll, 2015), to more permanent restructurings of the material and political orders of public spaces. Acts of resistance carry very different personal risks for the activist and can even result in torture or even death. Examples of the homeless who challenge rules by occupying public spaces (Casey, Goudie, & Reeve, 2008) or by establishing temporary dwellings (Meier & Frank, 2016) can show the limits of resistance. The homeless might get chased away, demonstrations eventually end, and graffiti can be removed. While traces of previous resistance might remain and be remembered by some, the afterlife of instances of resistance is often obscure and not accessible to everyone in a diverse society (Frers, 2016). This special issue focuses on the limits of resistance in public space. With the exception of one theoretical article which suggests a threefold approach to examine practices of resistance, the articles in this special issue use concrete examples to explore the manifestation of resistance in public places and to examine where it fails to bridge sociocultural divisions. This issue analyses the manner in which the limits of resistance establish themselves and raises the possibility of expanding these limits. At the same time, however, since such an expansion might also mitigate the intended effect or even just the performance or act in and of itself, its desirability is open to debate. In short, the articles in this special issue go beyond a mere description and praise of acts of resistance to advance a more critical consideration of the ambivalence of resistance. Unlike the products of academic practices, characterized by Latour (1986) as immutable mobiles, acts of resistance are often very difficult to transport and "consume" in other places. To investigate their mobility and immobility, this volume addresses questions dealing with how acts of resistance are affected by the role of recording techniques, different media, and by the everyday use of public spaces. It also seeks to determine the limits of different kinds of metaphors such as the public space as stage, theatre, or gallery. Other issues include the difference between the event or spectacle and the everyday, the nature of the "claim," and different issues of ownership in reclaiming the streets and occupation scenarios. To this end, the contributors to this issue explore a range of highly significant and diverse cases in depth-diverse both in a geographic sense, as well as with a perspective that goes beyond the usual focus on Western cultures, and in relation to the actors and policies involved, from the negotiation of the bodies of pregnant women and images of abortion on sidewalk spaces to large-scale protests in places like T...