URN:NBN:fi:tsv-oa4405 From relations to dissociations in spatial thinking: Sámi ‘geographs’ and the promise of concentric geographies ARI AUKUSTI LEHTINEN Lehtinen, Ari Aukusti (2011). From relations to dissociations in spatial thinking: Sámi ‘geographs’ and the promise of concentric geographies. Fennia 189: 2, pp. 14–30. Helsinki. ISSN 0015-0010. This article critically examines the currently popular renewal in human geogra- phy inspired by relational thinking. Particular emphasis is directed to formula- tions informed by the philosophies of immanence. It is argued that this tendency carries the risk of being narrowed into cursory excursions on the immediate geographies of what happens. The article is consequently concerned about the resulting scholarly indifference when it comes to socio-spatial discontinuities and circles of particularity. It is also shown in what type of settings the ‘imma- nent relationalism’ becomes a too general view to explain satisfactorily the earthly co-being of humans and non-humans, and presents alternative ‘lines of flight’. The case study focusing on the indigenous Sámi in the European North exemplifies the nuances of cultural domination versus decline in a multilingual milieu whereupon some criteria for identifying particular place-making under the general pressures of all-inclusion are formulated. Keywords: Sámi homeland, geographies of difference, comparative reading, ‘geographs’, polyglot interfaces, relational and concentric spaces Ari Aukusti Lehtinen, Department of Geographical and Historical Studies, Uni- versity of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland. E-mail: ari. lehtinen@uef.fi Introduction: geographies of withdrawal Ä´kkel Sámi, one of the Eastern Sámi languages spoken on the Kola peninsula, crossed the thresh- old of extinction in December 29, 2003 when the last native speaker, Marya Sergina, passed away (Rantala 2011: 188). The drama of the event oc- curred without much public attention. Northern- most Europe will experience similar tragedies in the near future, too, as several of the neighbouring Sámi languages are currently only spoken by a few elderly persons. In time, perhaps, only the North- ern Sámi will survive, the language spoken by the most numerous of the Sámi communities, much concentrating in northern Norway. This process is not only a particular phenomenon characterising the extreme North of Europe but is common glo- bally (Howitt 2001; Maybury-Lewis 2003; Heik- kilä 2008; Saugestad 2009). These losses cannot be regarded as natural and unavoidable but rather as consequences of social and environmental changes put forward and accepted by the sur- rounding society. They are thus, undeniably, sup- ported by our silent acceptance, if not ignorance or indifference. By losing minor language communities we also lose affordances for learning from those cosmolo- gies that deviate from the currently vital ones. Their particular geographies are lost. What is also at stake is the gradual erosion of our multilingual affluence, both in general, at the level of humani- ty, and within specific marginal culture milieus, such as the Sámi homeland in Northern Europe, where communication has by necessity, due to lingual fragmentation and heterogeneity, been grounded on polyglot skills. The polyglot commu- nities mirror the geopolitical changes of the past. The surrounding regimes that have come for taxes, natural resources and military strongholds, for ex- ample, have brought along their lingual premises. Human co-being is often characterised at these FENNIA 189: 2 (2011) 15From relations to dissociations in spatial thinking: Sámi … type of cultural interfaces by continuous multilin- gual border-crossing. Vocabularies and modes of expression are enriched by shared inspiration, which can be witnessed, for example, in the high number of loaned words (see e.g. Häkkinen 2004). This co-being also, inevitably, proceeds through frustration: renewed spaces of lingual competence tend to marginalise certain more traditional sec- tions of communities (Bladh 1995; Andersen 2004; Herman 2008; Fryer 2009). In addition, communication often becomes incomplete while, for example, translations only partially catch what is initially intended (Keisteri 1990: 32−47; Haila 1997: 130−133; Häkli 2003; Rautio-Helander 2004; Sidaway et al. 2004; Setten 2006). The occasional comfort achieved through guid- ance from neighbouring languages is thus often in multilingual cooperation accompanied by regret about losing something important when using loaned words. Debate about mistakes and biases in translations frequently arises in literature and toponymic research, for example (see Andersen 2004; Baschmakoff 2007: 12−13; Myers 2009). These types of concerns bear witness to nuances of expression that are at risk of being lost when mov- ing from one lingual domain to another. Some- times, while translating, pleasing conceptual equivalents are almost, if not completely, impossi- ble to find. Moreover, at times dictionaries seem to mislead us in the search for precise correspond- ence. Particular geographs, that is: customary de- scriptions of our surroundings (Dalby 1993, 2002; Häkli 1998; see also Tanner’s 1929a ‘geographical concepts’) simply cannot always be exported. Ge- ographical lexicons and nomenclatures, including the logics of naming and mapping, vary between lingual groups, as does the sense of seeing changes in the environment (Schanche 2002; Ruotsala 2004: 42). Finally, in certain moments of interlin- gual border-crossing, one might sense a meeting of epistemic orientations that do not resonate (Tanner 1929b; Susiluoto 2000: 16; Heikkilä 2008: 58−85). The dialogue between inspiration and frustra- tion is thus a perpetual part of daily communica- tion along polyglot interfaces. Both affections serve as a reminder of discontinuities, or the exist- ence of non-communication (Bateson & Bateson 1987; Ketola et al. 2002), in human co-being. Thus, lingual skills, perhaps the most relational of all human modes of co-being, stand, paradoxical- ly, as proof of radical discontinuities. This remark has, or at least should have, implications in geo- graphical research design. By focusing on these non-linkages we can, for example, highlight events of confusion grounded on a sense of loss due to (partial) non-resonance in multilingual milieus. We then become sensitive to geographies of inco- herence, impairment and withdrawal. This is, as is argued in this article, not easy in contemporary human geography where dissociations tend to be shadowed by those approaches that are attracted by continuous evolution of linkages and relations. In general, and this is what I want to highlight first and problematise below, the broadly shared and celebrated immanent-relational ontology has sys- tematically ignored discontinuities and withdraw- al, if not treated them as anomalies, or remnants from the past, not deserving any proper examina- tion. Therefore, I intend to show where and in what type of settings the relational extensiveness turns too broad and panoramic a view to satisfac- torily explain human co-being on earth. In addition, I will sketch out the contours for an approach that pays attention to those concentric aspects of human co-being that, as I will demon- strate, need to be recognised in order to be able to identify and examine the events of non-communi- cation, annihilation and withdrawal. Consequent- ly, I argue below for more scholarly appreciation when it comes to the corners of particularity; that is: particularities that do not follow the more gen- eral processes which evoke them. Events of non-resonance, traces of withdrawal British sociologist Rowland Atkinson (2009) is concerned about the ignoring of spaces of rest, de- cline, despair and loneliness that lie all around us, but which are partially invisible by virtue of their separateness. He discusses how much of socio- spatial studies, while favouring assumptions about the extensions of connectivity, tend to amplify the marginalisation of those outside these connec- tions. He then, after exemplary illustrations of hu- man isolations, such as secret cities of Russia, use of human disappearances in Latin America as a tool of political terror, missing millions of the 1991 UK census and home withdrawals of teenagers in Japan, concludes by worrying that “there is a dan- ger that the new limits to the world have been de- fined within corporate frames and information technologies” which indicates “social inequalities and an unevenness of distribution which rides past the relevance and presence of those social groups 16 FENNIA 189: 2 (2011)Ari Aukusti Lehtinen and fractions for whom such changes are only per- haps relevant in terms of their potential to exclude. His key question is simply, “[h]ow can we begin to conceptualize non-linkages, absent ties, broken networks and unwired ‘dead’ spaces” (2009: 308−309)? The specific history of geographical thinking ex- plains much of the current omission of socio-spa- tial separation and non-linkages in human geogra- phy. Gradually, while observing the troubles of spatial fetishisms of the past generations of geogra- phers, arguments for the non-existence of any en- closures or outsides (see Massey 2005: 163−176) have gained increasing popularity. Critical reflec- tion of this type of general all-inclusive relational- ism is rare and, when it emerges, it almost in con- cert supports all the central assumptions and premises of relational orientation (see Castree 2004; Sparke 2007; Braun 2008; Gonzales 2009 Jones 2009). The inspiration shared by many rela- tionalists is not always explicit, but it can in many cases be traced down to the philosophies of im- manence, especially those set forward by Baruch Spinoza, Arne Næss and Gilles Deleuze. At the bottom of all this is the commonly held belief that there is no outside. Immanence thinking is an alluring alternative to all those geographers who feel annoyed with the exceptionalist excursions of the disciplinary past, ranging from the development of various types of abstraction, both spatial and social, to studies of regions and scales as such. A clear parting from the disciplinary past, clothed in the promise of profound renewal, is at stake and it is now done through conceptual loans from the philosophers of immanence (see e.g. Hipwell 2004; Braun 2006; Thrift 2008; Jansson 2009). This latest philosophi- cal reflection in geography is challenging, as most renewals are, due to the need for thorough reflec- tion about the associative elements that are brought along with the promises attached to im- ported concepts. Kirsten Simonsen (2004), a Danish geographer, brought up the question of incompatibility while worrying about the renewal in spatial thinking in geography based on a conviction that the fibrous, wiry and capillary-like character of contemporary society cannot be captured by the notions of lev- els, layers, territories, spheres, structures and sys- tems. Current fascination for such spatial concepts as flows and fluids, when raised to the status of ’ontology’, ‘paradigm’, or characteristics of socie- ty, tend to “reimagine spatial form as self-referen- tial and indifferent to social content” (Simonsen 2004: 1337). The new vocabulary has, she admits, added much to the understanding of contempo- rary society by “[p]ointing out the significance of process at the expense of structure, mobility at the expense of embeddedness, and connectivity at the expense of enclosure” (2004: 1335). There is much that is good and supportable here, she ar- gues, but continues with concerns about the non- reflective use of these concepts. According to her, these conceptual loans bring along a naturalisa- tion of spatial processes, underlined, for example, in metaphorical associations with phenomena such as ice flows, waves of water and so forth. This concern, in other words, focuses on discontinui- ties and incompatibilities between textual com- munities, including paradigmatic communities of research: we should not leave them unexamined, Simonsen seems to argue, no matter how passion- ately we head toward progress and the potentials of disciplinary renewal. The new spatial vocabulary, when applied with- out proper reflection regarding its theoretical and political implications, carries according to Si- monsen the risk of guiding geographers toward non-social thinking. Some geographers have warned about the return of flat earth ontology in a similar vein (see e.g. Smith 2005a; Domosh 2010). The reasons for the popularity of non-social think- ing are manifold, but one cannot ignore the Spinozist inspiration, leading geographers toward studies of continuous emergence and mobility within one single world of plenitude. Today, to continue Simonsen’s list of neologisms, geogra- phers identify assemblages (Braun 2002, 2008; Hipwell 2004; McFarlane 2009; Rocheleau & Roth 2007; Thrift 2008; Dalby 2010) or assembla- gescapes (Hadi Curti 2009), planes of immanence (McHugh 2009), forces of affect (Thrift 2008: 220−254), event sites or events of places (Massey 2005: 140), emergent cartographies (Kitchin & Dodge 2007), lines of flight (Doel 1996), mobile associations (Urry 2000; Bæhrenholdt 2007), in- terworlds and immanent spaces (Dewsbury & Thrift 2005), as well as forms of deterritorialisation (Hipwell 2004) and earthly immanencies (Jansson 2009) with high enthusiasm. Geographers are, consequently, increasingly quick to criticise any conceptualisations of social forces behind the flows of the constantly emerging. Simonsen is thus worried about the non-reflec- tion of incoherence inherent in conceptual im- ports. She formulates a problem that is common to FENNIA 189: 2 (2011) 17From relations to dissociations in spatial thinking: Sámi … her in multilingual research settings while linking and comparing Scandinavian, Continental Euro- pean and Anglophone prosodias of communica- tion: particular metaphorical associations cannot fully be acknowledged while leaping across the boundaries of textual and paradigmatic communi- ties. Conceptual loans are often inspirational, as was agreed above, but they can also appear as ex- amples of risky enterprises due to ignored incom- patibilities. For example, research grounded on analogical explanations, which is a manoeuvre imported from modelling approaches influenced by system-type of thinking (see Haila & Dyke 2006), is often problematic as it pushes towards identifying similarities at the cost of differences. When conducted without proper conceptual and political reflection, leaps between particular ap- proaches and lexicons of paradigmatic communi- ties run the risk of becoming indifferent to social content, as Simonsen fears, and, consequently, too general for the purpose of studying the pros and cons of contemporary changes in society. The concern about the return of spatial abstrac- tions, now clothed in conceptual renewals linked to immanent thinking, is further examined below. This is a place to rethink the role of spatial vocabu- lary we have grounded our thinking in human ge- ography. To begin, some key promises and con- straints of the Spinozist geography of immanence relevant in this setting need to be introduced. How has this conceptualisation of one single world of plenitude taken place in human geography? What types of metaphoric associations are brought along while learning to use the new vocabulary? Can this type of geographical rethinking avoid the traps of exclusiveness in its programmatic efforts to fa- vour and celebrate any signs of all-inclusiveness? What are the constitutive strands of geography that emerge from within a systematic, and thus exclu- sive, ignoring of radical difference? Immanence and its limits in geography Immanent thinking in geography is part of the di- versifying debate about the overall changes in life and working conditions due to increasing translo- cal interdependencies characterised by high rates of mobility and unpredictability. Humans, both as embodied individuals and a population in general, have according to this approach become units of immediate social change. Proper geographical categories, such as environment, region or scale, are seen as outdated as they cannot help in clarify- ing the general embodied change, including us all, now and everywhere, in the realm of population (Hänninen & Vähämäki 2000; Braun 2006; Sparke 2008: 427). Nigel Thrift (2008: 2−5), a British ge- ographer, calls this focusing on the geography of what happens: human life is now seen as based on and in movement, and emerging in the ‘onflow’ of daily life. He also asks, “what it means to be hu- man if human is understood now as process of situated flow within which human bodies are just one of the sets of actors” (2008: 226). Thrift specu- lates with the discarding of the notion of the social (2008: 252) and instead formulates a certain atti- tude to life as potential, exemplified by his “over- all goal: to produce a politics of opening the event to more; more action, more imagination, more light, more fun, even” (2008: 20). The emphasis of the potentials of unfolding in everyday life is central in immanent thinking, but it is also concerned with the spreading of the cul- ture of endless contests and comparisons leading toward social uneasiness (Virtanen 2006; Atkinson 2009; Gonzales 2009; Jansson 2009). Individuals are, for example, increasingly at risk of being ran- domly replaced in their work places. Life paths become potentially adventurous, but also inse- cure. Individual humans find themselves incapa- ble of escaping from the threat of continuous un- ruly displacement. Unpredictability is made a standard which offers you both excitement and uneasiness. This drama is seen by immanent think- ers as uniting humans into one universal popula- tion which is disorganised in its endless diversity (Koivusalo 2000; Hipwell 2004). This diversification results in heterogeneity where no continuity of particular human associa- tions exists. Human co-being is then characteristi- cally universal and it does not emerge in the form of territorial formations such as ethnic neighbour- hoods, industrial towns or nation states and it takes neither the shape of social movements nor civic campaigns. Accordingly, the controlling of population is regarded as impossible in territorial terms but it is instead furthered via the flows of the mass media reaching the ‘onflow’ of daily life, stimulating individual human minds and bodies all together (Vähämäki 2000; Thrift 2008). Immanent thinkers see, as shown above, dis- tinct modernist conceptions, such as territory, but also society, environment and nature, as mislead- ing since they lean on abstractions maintaining dualistic ontology. Instead, such conceptions as 18 FENNIA 189: 2 (2011)Ari Aukusti Lehtinen bodies, quasi-objects, non-humans, assemblages, actants, as well as performance, emergence vola- tility and inventiveness are, according to Bruce Braun (2008), a North American geographer, fa- voured because they point out dramatically differ- ent post-dualistic ways of conceiving the world. He also underlines that “[f]or a number of geogra- phers it is precisely the conjunction of radical un- certainty in complex systems and the capacity of bodies for affect” that must inform our coping with contemporary environmental challenges (2008: 676). Braun further specifies that our politics of na- ture must invariably take a form of active experi- mentation due to our unawareness regarding what is about to happen. This type of geography of what happens con- centrates on the immediateness of emerging po- tentials. Immanence thinking aims at identifying the meeting of homogenising and heterogenising currents in all their complexity but does this by excluding any signs of radical dissonance. Discon- tinuities and non-linkages are simply overlooked. Separateness does not exist. In explicit Spinozist framework, difference appears as “the wisdom of the body” in a continuum of an unbounded ‘whole’ (see Hipwell 2004: 359−360). Bruce Braun’s Intemperate Rainforest (2002), which concentrates on the forest conflict in Clayo- quot Sound, British Columbia, provides an exam- ple of the overlooking of the central epistemic dif- ferences attached to the conflict which is, explic- itly, due to a stringent leaning on immanent-rela- tional ontology. The book starts by an introduction to the studied setting by paying attention to dis- parities and divergent interests emerging as part of the conflict. Braun is concerned about what is left out while “multiple voices are made to speak in the name of the One” (Braun 2002: 5). He also remarks how the state’s land use planning has not taken into account the spatial, environmental and economic practices of the indigenous groups liv- ing in the region. He is also convinced that par- ticular concepts of nature, culture, indigeneity, modernity, and progress implicated in state prac- tices have contributed to a series of failures and discursive displacements, that is: epistemic eras- ures, which have made it difficult to recognise the political presence and environmental practices of the indigenous peoples (2002: 7−8). However, soon thereafter, Braun leaves the question of dis- connections aside and concentrates on the colo- nial rhetoric of industrial developers and wilder- ness preservationists. Historical marginalisation of indigenous groups is discussed within the frame- work of expansive geological surveys, forest-in- dustrial development and wilderness tourism. Fur- thermore, details of indigenous modernity are brought up without any serious attempts of dis- cussing about the sensitive setting at the interface between diverging epistemologies. They remain unexamined. This is, strikingly, not far from the omissions of the official planning Braun is criticis- ing. The reason for ignoring the indigenous voices in Braun’s analysis can be derived from his explic- it approach. He leans on immanence thinking while arguing, for example, how metaphors such as “networks”, “assemblages”, “flows” and “inten- sities” are helpful precisely because they force us to think in terms of a web of relations and, moreo- ver, they force us to pay more attention to tempo- ral and spatial connections (2002: 13−20, 263−269). Non-linkages are not discussed here which becomes disturbing when, for example, comparing it to Karen Heikkilä’s (2008) critical analysis of indigenous toponymy in BC under col- onisation and re-colonisation. Contrary to Braun, she is able to find disconnections and withdrawal, but also potentials of seeing, and making things radically differently, from within the indigenous peoples’ everyday settings under the totalising gaze of the (re-)colonists. In general, as was exemplified above, disconti- nuities are frequently left unexamined while con- ceiving the world through attributes informed by immanent thinking. Zones of withdrawal remain broadly unrecognised. Concentrating on problems of fading away is then difficult, as is focusing on discursive displacements that have become fatal to some lingual communities or pushed them to the edge of extinction. We are unable to pay atten- tion to the fact that lingual exterminations are not natural events in human co-being, instead, they result from our ignorance or indifference. Within the framework of immanent geography communi- ties with unique locations and territorial particu- larities cannot be distinguished. There are no tools to identify distinct forums or actors that are linked, but not reducible to the streams of extra-territorial connectivity. Immanence thinking and critical geography Immanent thinking is not only a trend among Spinozist geographers. Similar tendencies can be FENNIA 189: 2 (2011) 19From relations to dissociations in spatial thinking: Sámi … notified in critical leftist tradition in geography. Claiming rights to ‘differential geographies’ is often seen as synonymous to acts of apartheid, as Noel Castree (2004), a UK geographer, demonstrates in his review essay. As part of his sympathetic critique of relational approaches, he examines formula- tions favoured by a few key figures in anglophone critical geography such as Michael Watts, David Harvey and Doreen Massey. The essay grows into a thought-provoking listing of caricature expres- sions of localist dead ends celebrating “mythical internal roots” and “internally generated authen- ticities” (2004: 144−145), “volkisch myth of cul- tural purity” (2004: 152), “closed societies” and “parochial place-projects” (2004: 158), “atavistic autarchy” (2004: 161) and “xenophobic particu- larism” (2004: 163). The list paints in front of us a wilderness of extremists who are at odds with the premises of open and inclusive society. Castree summarises, however, that “defensive localisa- tions”, or “erecting ‘strong’ boundaries around places”, should not necessarily be seen as regres- sive, or deemed acts of geographical folly. On the contrary, he continues in a compromising manner that “it is perfectly possible for inward-looking lo- calisms to be founded on an explicit engagement with extra-local forces” (2004: 163). This type of Manichean listing of localist puzzles might support the construction of reasonable compromises bridg- ing the two extremes but does a major disservice to any particular acts of concentric argumentation. His ‘Differential geographies’ is simply indifferent to geographies of dissonance and withdrawal. Consequently, his indigenous panorama of “some 300 million people worldwide” (2004: 154) seems to treat the indigenous concerns as a means of fur- ther canonising geographical avant-garde ground- ed on relational all-inclusion. Tellingly, moreover, Castree et al. (2008), while presenting their relational interpretation of so- ciospatial difference, concentrate on crossing and bridging difference, even harmonising it (2008: 306). A ‘Politics of propinquity’ can only be under- taken in relation to a ‘politics of connectivity, as they summarise (2008: 310), which claim fully shows their unwillingness to take into considera- tion any aspects of radical difference. These types of academic commentaries, while only producing hegemonic, and blindly concentric generalisa- tions, seem to have no link to the ongoing strug- gles of survival under the shadows of all-inclusion. They themselves are, in fact, proof of radical non- communication. On the other hand, Matthew Sparke (1998, see also 2005: 1−52), a US-based British geographer, while attempting to appropriate deconstructive arguments into a critical reflection of earth-writ- ing, aims at becoming sensitive to ‘other histories’ beyond the hegemonic Metropolitan ones. His contrapuntal cartographies search for the poten- tials of counter-hegemonic cartography and he also, while articulating geographical responsibil- ity, understands that, for example, the First Na- tions resistance can be taken as an example of how to progress in geographical renewal. Sparke’s attempt is brave but in practice it only brings the indigenous issue into the (re)colonial court rooms. The difficulties of translating indigenous means of oral communication into more legitimate map- ping techniques are brought up but without any serious cross-epistemic reflection. The reflection is, instead, saved for the purposes of decolonising the political geography of mapping. Sparke thus simply uses the indigenous issue as a case, or a tool, by which to push forward critical renewal of political geography. The instrumental installation surfaces most clearly in Sparke’s concerns about the colonial conquest that, by manoeuvres of aes- thetic enframing, served “to empty the landscape” (Sparke 1998: 477). The exporting of landscapes into (lingual) communities which are perhaps unaware of any measures of landscaping is a purely colonial act which geographers, over gen- erations, have learned not to question. Land- scapes are thought of as something eternal which can be identified everywhere. Hence, as is appar- ent, Sparke’s is the world of cutting-edge geogra- phers, and their near colleagues, who actively participate in transforming particular interface cultures into geographic monoplanes and who pick up interesting cases to serve as mediums in an academic contest. No serious attempt to un- derstand radical difference, or the degree of non- communication between different histories, is carried out. Later Sparke (2008) formulates his relational-immanent ontology by arguing for “critical responsibility to resist the pathologiza- tion of place” by “exploring the territorial particu- larities in terms of extra-territorial globality” (Sparke 2008: 434). He is, of course, therefore, primarily concerned about the risks of romanti- cizing heroic resistance and autonomous com- munities − which stigmatisation, while resem- bling Castree’s list of spatial closures and Doreen Massey’s tendency to see all signs of non-thrown- togetherness as romance with bounded places 20 FENNIA 189: 2 (2011)Ari Aukusti Lehtinen (Massey 2005: 161−176), makes him oblivious to signs of dissonance and withdrawal. Doreen Massey, a British geographer, has in the 2000s enriched her critical relationalism with as- pects of immanent thinking (see Massey 2005: 20−30). This emphasis is, again, problematic from any particularist or concentric points of view. If we rely on the all-inclusiveness of relational ap- proaches and regard, “space as a simultaneity of stories-so-far” and “places as collections of these stories”, as Massey (2005: 129) does while arguing for positive heterogeneity over negative difference (2005: 12−13), and if we favour coeval coexist- ence at the cost of internal fragmentation (2005: 52), we run the risk of ignoring the contemporary drama of cultural domination versus withdrawal. While celebrating the “coevalness of multiplicity of trajectories” (2005: 154) we simultaneously dis- regard signs of radical difference that could pro- vide alternatives to the all-inclusiveness under the umbrella of positive co-existence (see Massey 2007: 405). In other words, by enthusiastically tracing signs of corresponding co-existence, that is, by systematically ignoring the lost and with- drawing aspects of human co-being, we tend to continue the colonial indifference to contempo- rary signs of difference. By hiding our uneasiness with unevenness and biases of communication, and by focusing on matters that serve our aims to imagine idylls of co-resonance, we contribute to the taming of dissociations. What is at stake then is what we see as shared and overlapping, which echoes in the communicative repertoire we have learned to appreciate. We are then at risk of disre- garding the retreating aspects in our surroundings and, furthermore, we even tend to disregard our own disregarding. Interestingly, Sara Gonzales (2009), while stud- ying the official marketing of Milan, Italy, from within a relational perspective, summarises that the relational script alone leaves little room for al- ternatives (Gonzales 2009: 40). She concludes that an excessive emphasis by the local authorities on global connectivity risks losing sight of the par- ticularities and uniqueness of places. According to her, paradoxically, most Milanese seem to become disconnected from the thoroughly connective gov- erning of their city. Gonzales, a Basque geogra- pher from UK, thus bravely raises the question of concentric co-being, including its radical non- communication with relational spatialities. She also guides the reader to think about the similari- ties between the positive all-inclusiveness of rela- tional geographies and the programmatic open- ness of neoliberal politics of trade. The similarities are striking, if also under-examined by human ge- ographers (see Massey 1999: 15; Castree 2004: 144). Toward concentric geographies Contrary to immanent-relational geographical thinking, detailed studies of non-communication and withdrawal in multilingual milieus can equip us with tools to compete against tendencies of cul- tural standardisation. Reflection of the conse- quences of our decisions within specific zones of intercultural change can deepen our understand- ing of the complex dependencies between domi- nation and withdrawal, which then might help us to formulate tactics of everyday resistance. The multilingual sensitivity favoured here aims at recognising, but not crossing or harmonising, both general dependencies and (local) particulari- ties of social change. This view emphasises the contested nature of human co-being resulting in social mixtures of extensive interconnectedness and radical difference. These mixtures are, as will be shown below, forged by general relational pres- sure of continuous displacement and particular acts of community emplacement (Casey 1997: 16), or implacement (Heikkilä 2008: 7−11), ac- cording to inherited and adopted patterns. Conse- quently, human communities are seen in this view as developing along two complementary, if par- tially non-communicative, routes. First, while following the premises of immanent thinking, human co-being can be seen as evolving along the impulses from within general changes in society. Accordingly, in research, it is central to identify the continuous emergence of potentials and risks in everyday settings. We can call this re- lational displacement. Human co-being, in the form of more or less temporary associations and communities, is simply seen as adapted to, but also adapting, the pulses of the surrounding soci- ety. Forms of human co-being, such as associa- tions and communities, develop according to their own re-actions to the strain and forces of more general origin. Similarly, places become under- stood as “the general conditions of our being to- gether” (Massey 2005: 154), they appear as inter- sections or events of wider trajectories of broader linkages, or they become re-conceptualised, for example, as moments of mobile locations, multi- FENNIA 189: 2 (2011) 21From relations to dissociations in spatial thinking: Sámi … ple nodes, nomadic associations or translocal as- semblages (Bæhrenholdt 2007; Blunt 2007; Ro- cheleau & Roth 2007; McFarlane 2009). Second, human associations and communities can be identified as evolving through the gradual alteration of shared memories and practices grounded on the experience of belongingness. Now the concentric aspects of social change be- come central (Jürgenson 2004; Knuuttila 2005; Schwartz 2006; Baschmakoff 2007; Kurki 2007; Gonzales 2009). Social and spatial differentiation emerges in the diverging acts of participation and dissent which gradually transform the particular conditions of human co-being and communica- tion (Kymäläinen & Lehtinen 2010). This differen- tiation can be documented, for example, by his- torical inter-lingual comparisons, as well as by examining the cultural confusions at the zones of resistance and withdrawal, attached to conceptual renewals and acts of re-naming in our everyday settings. In the concentric view, social and spatial differ- entiation affects and is affected by changes in the communicative routines of communities (see Tan- ner 1929b; Heikkilä 2006: 88−141, 2008: 110−111). Renewal of community lexicons is seen as indelibly bound to the transformations in col- lective imaginary orientations which take shape, for example, via alterations of the central geo- graphs that communities more or less purposefully lean on in their daily practices (Häkli 1998: 131−132; Mustonen 2009: 15−74). Lingual re- newal is now regarded as either purposeful, when it is based, for example, on imported neologisms, or semi-conscious, when it evolves in rituals or by routine-type adaptation of conceptual and syntac- tic reforms (Connerton 1989). Sensitivity to this type of renewal pushes researchers toward com- parative geographic studies that aim at identifying both the relational and concentric aspects of dif- ferentiation in human co-being. Relational and concentric aspects of change are thus treated here as complementary and only par- tially resonating social and spatial categories, or developmental paths, both of which need to be followed if one wishes to understand the zones of resistance and withdrawal at polyglot interfaces. Then, overall stigmatisation of localists as promot- ers of geographical apartheid is simply unfeasible. The relational approach, when considering com- munities as moments of general plenitude, runs the risk of ignoring much of the potential co-en- richment in human co-being while becoming in- different to radical difference. Bypassing the con- centric side of human co-being quickly leads to blindness towards solutions which deviate from the generally agreed upon framework. The innate dynamics of communicative and imaginary inter- action are then simply ignored, or deemed unin- teresting, since the questions binding them have no general bearing. Approaches that favour gen- eral all-inclusiveness are therefore seen here as simply too panoramic to be applied in studies of the pros and cons of human co-being. This article thus argues that the pitfalls of re- flattening our ontological assumptions due to non- social simplifications and crude reduction (bound to the ridiculing of particularisms) can be avoided by approaches which are sensitive not only to res- onating aspects of human co-being but also, and especially, dissociations between concentric and relational spaces in concrete polyglot settings. Signs of concentric unfolding, emerging from within the zones of radical dissonance, can then be treated as the founding events of social renew- al. Communities are thus not only regarded as at- tachments or products of extra-terrestrial impulses but, instead, are seen as actors that are influenced by chains of memories and customs that respect the shared past. Signs of radical dissonance are examined below within the context of Sámi politics and research. Particular attention is paid to concentric aspects of co-being. Difficulties of translation, both lingual and geographic, are underlined in order to clarify the dissociating and non-communicative elements at the specific epistemic interface in the European North. Identifying dissonance: breaks between particular geographs One way to value the necessity of attending to concentric spatialities is to analyse the (mis)match- ing of some central parallel geographs that form the shared and divided ground of spatial imagina- tion among polyglot communities. This is done below by comparing some geographs of Sámi earthviewing to collateral concepts in Western geographic orientation. The aim is also to show specific problems and potentials of the Sámi as in- digenous non-Indo-Europeans in contemporary Europe. The analysis of the Sámi concepts is by necessity constrained to the language of Northern Sámi which is the most widely-dispersed of the 22 FENNIA 189: 2 (2011)Ari Aukusti Lehtinen Sámi languages, having approximately 20 000 speakers in the Nordic countries, mostly in North- ern Norway. The first two comparisons of geo- graphs serve as examples of cultural withdrawal under the influence of contemporary geographic colonialism and the second two illustrate the po- tential of Sámi geographs in questioning the schol- arly canonisations of monoplane human geogra- phy. Nomadic landscapes The history of identifying and founding landscapes is long in the Nordic countries, and the conven- tion has fuelled nation-building in each country, also dividing and assimilating the Sámi homelands (Jones & Olwig 2008). However, no simple equiv- alent to landscape or Scandinavian landskap exists in the Northern Sámi lexicon. One possible trans- lation is guovlu which refers to a region under watch or sight, but which also points to collective land holdings attached to specific identifications of kin and land, emerging, for example, in family- bound regional articulations (Helander-Renvall 2009). Moreover, the concept of siida, which in general refers to the historical Sámi villages sea- sonally moving between summer and winter are- as, and which today refers to local reindeer herd- ing units, partially parallels with the Swedish land- skap which is, for example, a territorial adminis- trative unit. Siida however, while developed as part of seasonal mobility and adjusted to shifting conditions of nature, differs significantly from the landskaps harmonised under state governance (Helander 1999: 19; Heikkilä 2006: 267−287). The Scandinavian landskap is also sometimes regarded as more or less synonymous to eatnam which is the concrete earthly setting, or the even- tual subject of co-being, where the relations be- tween humans and nature evolve, often encircling around rivers, fells or inland lakes. It is also a con- veyor of local kin histories manifested in customs, cultural memorials, oral traditions and place names. In fact, the spiritual sensitivity, together with the intimate relations between humans and nature, makes the eatnam in Sámi geographic thinking the prior subject of land and life (Jernslet- ten 2002; Helander-Renvall 2009). One can thus notice a profound contradiction between the institutions of landscaping and the in- stitutions rooted to indigenous earthviewing and socio-spatial orientation in the Nordic North. In- accuracies of translation exemplify the confusion among the Sámi while adjusting to the premises of landscapes. Adjustment is, however, accelerated by expectations of benefits in the form of official recognition which is often accompanied by a con- firmation of some sort of cultural continuity (see for example Ingold 1976). This learning, accom- panied by an unlearning of the customary man- ners of signification and intent, gradually radically renews the local routines of land and life. The par- ticular articulations of guovlu, siida and eatnam adapt to the more generally applicable decrees of landscaping: they become displaced, and some older layers of earthviewing and earthly co-being gradually fade away. Zones of wilderness, zones of withdrawal The establishment of the wilderness parks in Up- per Lapland, the northernmost Finland, in the ear- ly 1990s brought along environmental concep- tions that were originally created as part of the Anglophone lexicons of wilderness planning. Ac- cordingly, the outer extensions of the siidas under seasonal hunting, gathering and herding customs, that is meahcci in Sámi, were divided into areas of wilderness and commercial forests (Erämaa- komitea 1988; Lehtinen 2006: 231−232; Raitio 2008: 216−222). Meahcci refers to backwoods and wilderness in Northern Sámi. It denotes uninhabited terrains and areas of resources, but it also includes lands away from home that are under regular extensive use. The extension and meaning of meahcci varies ac- cording to what you are after. Ptarmigan lands dif- fer from those preferred for gathering fuel wood, for example. It may, as Elina Helander-Renvall, a Sámi scholar from Upper Lapland, argues, serve as a “stretching of one’s living room, a stronghold of identity maintenance” (Vadén & Tuusvuori 2007: 9). The gradual transformation of meahcci into Western-type wilderness has become, due to the above-documented geographic differences, a cause of confusion in Upper Lapland. The strict territorial definition of official wilderness parks, constituted by specific ecological zones of vulner- ability and including facilities for tourists, has overlooked the vulnerability of reindeer to in- creased pressure by humans and artificial infra- structure (Heikkilä 2006: 287−325). In addition, logging both inside and outside the wilderness parks has significantly weakened the value of cen- tral winter pastures for reindeer (Raitio 2008: FENNIA 189: 2 (2011) 23From relations to dissociations in spatial thinking: Sámi … 211−216; Riipinen 2008: 142−146). The tension between strict territorial governing and specific mobile needs of reindeer units is also exemplified in the difficulties to reach agreements about hunt- ing regulations, concerning wolves and bears in particular, between the European Union and its northernmost provinces. Viewing nature at a dis- tance is difficult for those to whom nature outside humanity is meaningless. Securing indigenous rights to land, which means guarantees that their concerns are not ignored by the cartographers of all-inclusiveness, is a central concern to the Sámi in the wilderness Lapland, and this cannot be sep- arated from their claim for at least some degree of local autonomy, and thus honouring the particu- larities of báiki. Horizontal placing The Sámi báiki is the place that is recognised as one’s home, farm, field or camp. It is a particular place for being safely together. It is an inhabited place that is one’s home. It is also a familiar place where your ancestors have lived before you. Báiki is a territorial and temporal conception developed via kin relations and it contains elements of the familial past (Helander 1999: 11−12; Schanche 2004: 8). Báiki, on the other hand, differs from sadji which refers to a site, location or spot in gen- eral, without necessary denotations of dwelling or home-being. Sadji is also a place to sit or lie down and sleep (Helander 1999: 12). Báiki and sadji correspond to the differentiation between particu- lar home place and placing in general but they also serve as geographs of the horizontal earth- viewing among the Sámi. The horizontal under- standing of land and resources in Sápmi, the Sámi homeland, is grounded on certain rules of hunting and fishing, or practices of bivdit, that have devel- oped symmetrical and reciprocal ties between hu- mans and their surroundings. Baiki refers to a concentric understanding of one’s particular location. Of course, location is re- lational, as taking place in respect to others. The daily báiki is thoroughly linked to the surrounding world. These linkages are, according to Audhild Schanche, the director of the Sámi Institute in Northern Norway, horizontal by character and distinct from the vertical divisions of the Western imagination which lean on “asymmetry, hierarchy, unequal power relation, domination/subordina- tion and supremacy/inferiority” (Schanche 2004: 1−2). Similar type of contrasting remarks of dissocia- tion are made by Tero Mustonen (2009), a Finnish geographer and advocate of the arctic subsistence communities who, in spite of applying Doreen Massey’s relational terminology, identifies indus- trial one-company locations of isolation in the tun- dra. These locations have developed into enclaves of vertical interdependence which are, moreover, at risk of becoming dead spaces of industrial pol- lution. Therefore, Mustonen (2009: 5) concludes, Massey’s approach “falls short of conveying the essentials of localities that are situated far away from power centres”. He identifies the radical dis- sonance between Western post-urban formula- tions of all-inclusiveness and the “amorphous spa- tial understanding” (2009: 5) in particular commu- nities of the extreme North. The dilemma of dead space Sámi dilli, as a translation of space, carries conno- tations to wide and open space but it emphasises the qualitative and potential aspects of human co- being. It emerges in such expressions as til’la, meaning state of health or mood, and dilálašvuohta, referring to pursuit and potential but also to an in- spirational setting suddenly taking shape. It can also be translated as an event, then denoting spe- cial meetings or celebrations. Primarily, however, til’la refers to the state of affairs (Sammallahti 1989, 1993). In general, expressions and modifications of dilli cover a plenitude of meanings that refer to both distances and qualitative features of things, locations and events. Dilli and til’la are old Ger- man imports that originate from Ziel, which means aim or goal in contemporary German (Hirvensalo 1975: 284; Häkkinen 2004: 1313). The fact that dilli is a German loan word which has, over time and space, developed into its cur- rent form exemplifies well the general relational interarticulation of lingual trajectories. The layers of conceptual loans in our daily vocabulary serve as proof of the complexity of the linkages behind our ethno-lingual identification (Häkkinen 2004: 6−16; Saarikivi 2002; Seierstad 2008: 102). Con- tinuous processes of import, and the resulting lin- gual hybrids, become concrete, for example, in intergenerational relations when, at times, com- munication across generations becomes challeng- ing due to diversified adjustments and modifica- tions of our everyday vocabularies (Lehtinen 1993: 24−27; Anthias 2009; Semi 2010 143−145). Expe- riences of this type of difficulties stand as proof of 24 FENNIA 189: 2 (2011)Ari Aukusti Lehtinen lingual dynamics and potentials, but they also ex- pose something about the continuous loss of the more marginal layers of signification. And, of course, they tell us about the dominant directions of conceptual export and import in society. Consequently, to argue for space that is not dead (Massey 2005: 13) is puzzling in the context of Sámi earthviewing. Dilli self-evidently carries promises of renewal, emerging in the qualitative impressions of dilli and from within notions of til´la or dilálasvuohta, leading us to think about spaces as events as well as potentialities. Transla- tion problems such as these serve as reminders of cross-cultural discontinuity and they can be seen as moments of confusion in the zones of conflict in polyglot settings. Tracing participation and withdrawal: three conclusions The preceding excursion through a few central geographs of the Sámi associates this article with particular troubles along the polyglot interface in the Nordic North, but it also serves as an example of both the threats of lingual standardisation and the potentials of co-learning across epistemic di- vides. My first conclusion is simple, but also de- manding: Geographers, if intending to avoid the re-flattening of their ontology, cannot afford being, or becoming, monolingual − neither individually nor within scholarly associations. Instead, contin- uous re-examination of the changes and variations of geographs in those lingual communities with which we are interconnected should be seen an integral part of making postcolonial geographies. Ignoring and ridiculing them is not far from paro- chial sectionalism that is considered by the rela- tionalists as non-existing or at least out-dated. Ig- noring and ridiculing them can also be interpreted as an expression of indifference toward those communities and cultures that live today at the edge of existence. Parallelly, disregarding discon- tinuities and non-communicative aspects in our geographic communication and considering par- ticularities simply as moments of the general plen- itude carries signs of determinism that are pro- grammatically fortified against recognising any nuances of radical difference. I cannot distinguish this from the colonial manoeuvres of the past re- gimes of the West. The above conclusion includes the concern that Western, and today: increasingly Anglophone, ge- ographies carry traces of provincialism in their in- wardlooking canonisation of the cutting-edge cur- riculum (about provincialism, see Entrikin 1991: 3−78; Häkli 1998: 132). The nomenclature devel- oped accordingly is not entirely dissimilar from Audhild Schanche’s (2004) sketching of the con- tours of Western geographic imagination, referred to above, which tend to lean on epistemological rankings that, despite ontological emphases on flows and fluidities, produce hierarchy, asymme- try, unequal power relation, domination/subordi- nation and supremacy/inferiority. Schanche’s cri- tique can be read as an expression of the concern that much geographically important information becomes articulated without being recognised by the leading forums and that there is a systematic bias in this respect. This state of affairs was con- firmed in the preceding excursion using Sámi words and concepts. What was also shown, I sup- pose, is that this type of asymmetrical production of scholarly leadership and hierarchy could easily be changed. The margins that are fading away could be included in the disciplinary renewal by simply emphasising those concerns and formula- tions in particular minor forums that share a will- ingness to contribute to the development of geo- graphical curriculum. In any case, we do a major disservice to geographical advancement by ridi- culing or regarding the conceptions and argu- ments that are at odds with the cutting edges of geography as uninteresting because of their differ- ing rationales. Instead, radical differences could be seen as a potential inspiration for epistemologi- cal co-renewal. Language barriers, of course, limit our endeavours but, as was shown above, much of the marginal research on particular geographs is published in English, too, if only occasionally in the most distinguished journals. Especially, signs of discontinuities in polyglot communication can be seen as a central challenge, and direction, of co-studying. Why not aim at learning to learn from those under the threat of extermination, and to participate on this ground in collective efforts to slow down the acceleration of lingual extinctions? This type of reorientation in human geography would significantly enrich our scholarly work and it would also show the areas of non-communica- tion in geographical renewal. As was witnessed in this article, landscapes should not be treated as universally applicable means of regional coping. The Sámi meahcci is not imprisoned by the type of dualisms inherent in wilderness programmes − which only lately have been questioned by hybrid FENNIA 189: 2 (2011) 25From relations to dissociations in spatial thinking: Sámi … geographers. The horizontal constitution of báiki favours concentric thinking that is, as underlined by many leading human geographers referred to in this article, discordant with relational approaches. Finally, the Sámi did not need to spend decades in symposia of critical rethinking to find that space, as dilli, is not dead. If, as was concluded above, some inward-look- ing features of Western-Anglophone geography bear resemblance to provincial defence against multilingual challenges, the same phenomenon, if only in particular contrasting forms, is widely-cul- tivated in the margins. My second conclusion deals with provincialism in the Nordic North which is, as the case studies showed, developed into a means of supporting the dominating or ex- pansive regime. In fact, this type of regime confir- mation comes close to the Latin root of provincial- ism that is etymologically linked to submissive and conceding aspects of conquered territories, de- rived from the Latin pro vincere (Gordon 1980: 69). The case studies in this article showed how wilderness conservation by Finnish environmental authorities promoted Anglophone solutions of wil- derness planning in Sápmi. The ‘Western model’ was a powerful means to overcome the alternative formulations favouring culturally sensitive envi- ronmentalism (see Lehtinen 1991: 135−142). In addition, as illustrated above, seeing some Sámi geographs as ’relatives’ of landscapes was confus- ing, but also alluring for those at the interface be- tween the Sámi and the ‘southerners’ as it helped to become recognised in the forums of the leading regime. This finding gains support from similar dis- coveries by a few critical scholars of the Nordic North. According to Tim Ingold, an anthropologist from the UK, the Scolt Lappish leadership was par- tially questioned by locals due to its too intimate cooperation with the Finnish statecraft (see Ingold 1976: 213−221). Thomas Mathiesen (1982: 83), a sociologist of law and rights from Norway, exam- ined the potentials of the Scandinavian concept of vanmakt, roughly translated as obedience or men- tality of escape, when analysing the background of the conflict between Sámi and the dominating re- gime in the hydroelectric development in Alta, Northern Norway (see also Pehkonen 1999; Howitt 2001: 280−299). Provincial opportunism is, as I would argue, a central constituent in the particular realisation of domination and withdraw- al in the Nordic North. Emphasising provincialism of the margins means focusing on the prevalence of particular opportunistic or phlegmatic, if not cynical, atti- tudes that tend to support the established relations of domination. Changes in the margins cannot be explained by general interdependencies alone. They can, instead, be considered as outcomes of tactics favoured by the provincial actors them- selves. Particular features of adjustment, I dare to summarise, explain much of the speed and direc- tion of general standardisation in contemporary colonies. This conclusion, which critically studies the fea- tures of opportunism among the provincial actors, offers us tools for deepening our understanding of participation and withdrawal in the margins. Pro- vincial attitude, in the form set out here, tends to confirm linkages that strengthen translocally artic- ulated interdependencies. Provincialism favours standard solutions (see Lehtinen 2006: 200−208), which is manifested in the Nordic North in lingual development, but also in landscape design and re- source extraction, as was shown above. The stand- ard North is, if following Mustonen’s (2009) argu- mentation, made of ‘dead spaces’ of industrial en- claves, and it also emerges in wilderness parks and municipal centres where multiculturalism has turned into ethnic decoration. The provincial standardisation is made concrete by folklorising or completely denying the particular pasts and by un- critically welcoming the demands of the dominat- ing regime. From a provincial perspective, when facing the intense pressures of unruly displace- ment, the particular routines of polyglot communi- ties look like remnants form the prehistoric past. My third and final conclusion is inspired by the geographic potentials of particular geographs. By claiming that cultural withdrawal is a central geo- graphical matter and that, due to radical differ- ences between cultural geographs and cosmolo- gies, discontinuities are unavoidable in human communication and earthly co-being, we can be- gin developing post-provincial geographies of multilingual milieus. These claims can help us to look forward to contribute to the opening of the creative potentials of relational and concentric co- being. Place can, for example, be regarded with- out pejorative connotations as a place of one’s own, báiki. Moreover, especially in the previously mentioned concerns of familial well-being, it also extends toward such denotations as ‘moments of denial’ and ‘critical participation’ while purpose- fully avoiding progressions of (self-made) vulnera- bility. The horizontal character of báiki promotes initiatives of co-learning and it simultaneously 26 FENNIA 189: 2 (2011)Ari Aukusti Lehtinen serves as a buffer against the impulses of unruly displacement. Place can therefore grow into a lo- cation of political campaigns, as the metonymic use of Alta in Sámi lexicon shows (see Howitt 2001: 280−299), and it can accordingly turn into a context of standardisation critique. Then it takes on the shape of a critique of continuous colonial domination, but it also self-critically assesses any signs of provincial vanmakt. Placing is now horizontally connected to the potentialities of space as dilli, including both gen- eral and particular qualities. Places are seen as collections of translocal trajectories and events of throwntogetherness, but they are also understood as distinct locations, or settings, that function as emergent entities of their own, not reducible to the general processes contributing to their existence. The simultaneous and only partially resonating co- formation of relational and concentric spatialities is now identified as the founding moment of soci- etal renewal. The differentiation between the two spaces is epistemological by nature. This means, concentric placing includes options for radical cri- tique and alternatives. It is a forum of seeing and doing things differently. The politics of place emerge, accordingly, wherever the concern about the conditions of communication and non-com- munication is present. It addresses the place of one’s own that bears continuities through its po- tential to add differentiation. Geographical views sensitive to concentric co- being pay attention to the activity and passivity of individuals and their communities amidst general pressures of standardisation. The transformations of our daily routines are thus not regarded as direct outcomes of broader re-articulations reaching us as necessities, but as acts and events modified by choices in the concentric spheres of the communi- ties themselves. This article has argued that the geographical overplaying with neologisms imported from the Spinozist philosophies of immanence and increas- ingly also followed by critical leftist geographers, partially resulting in ‘flat earth’ descriptions, has limited our ability to identify and respect the shared concerns of land and life taking shape in the routines of general-particular change. This overplaying, if continued, will definitely constrain the development of scholarly co-learning in dia- logue with the particular geographs and geogra- phers of the margins. By systematically ignoring the voices that take place beyond the leading arenas of geographical renewal and by selectively focusing on immediate appearances of ‘geographies of what happens’, as the geographers of immanence recommend, we run the risk of contributing to the degradation of the critical scope and social credibility of geogra- phy. All features of human community-building, including the variations of resistance against standardisation, are then simply drawn under the vision of all-inclusiveness. This type of rhetorical generalisation certainly does not resonate with the questions of participation and withdrawal the communities at the edge of extinction face in their daily routines. Signs of radical difference and re- sistance are therefore mostly ignored by geogra- phers of immanence, if not treated as fascinating cases for paradigmatic canonisation. It seems the perspectives of domination are lost due to an anx- iety of dualisms of any kind. Instead, idylls of co- evals, openings of events and overall inventive- ness are celebrated, as if guidelines for exclusively positive picturing of human and non-human co- being on earth. While surrounded by a myriad of signs of social and ecological crises, both local and global, the geographers of immanent relation- alism seem to remain thrilled of their search for “more action, more imagination, more light, more fun, even”, as Thrift formulated above. Emergence is, of course, “inventive through and through”, thus “[it] must be understood as a prop- erty of the whole that is not shared by, or reduci- ble, to its constituent parts”, as Braun (2008: 669) argues, and underlines this by repeating it word for word a few pages later (Braun 2008: 675). This type of rhetoric, much echoing Spinoza’s (1982: 244−245) views on the whole of nature and its parts, is however strained by the risks of mechani- cal simplification grounded on analogical think- ing, leading us to ignore those features of social change that grow from within the emerging poten- tials of the constituent parts that are not reducible to the broader emergence to which they are inter- linked. The relational renewal remains, to summarise my focal point, elitist in geography if not co-devel- oped in close contact with the drama and the dy- namics of individual human communities in their daily settings. Instead of painting portraits of wish- ful optimism, we need to learn to recognise the differing tactics of participation and denial; dissen- sions in coping with resource exploitation and cli- mate change in the margins (see e.g. Habeck 2002; Howitt & Suchet-Pearson 2006; Kjosavik & Shanmugaratnam 2007; Mustonen 2009), contest- FENNIA 189: 2 (2011) 27From relations to dissociations in spatial thinking: Sámi … ed wisdoms of customary ‘animal geographies’ (see Ingold & Kurttila 2000; Konstantinov 2005; Fryer 2009), differing ‘social natures’ of domesti- cation and exploitation (see Seppänen 1986: 75−102; Lehtinen 1991: 70−71) and dissociations in ‘bioprospecting’ (Nygren 1998). This conclu- sion is a request to all those who have found rela- tional renewal inspiring to once more re-examine the polyhedral invitation inherent in the prelimi- nary sketching of ‘lines of flight’ (Deleuze 1992: 23) and take distance from those academic con- tests motivated by cutting edge rankings and turn toward more participatory studies of particular ge- ographies of dependencies, denials, non-linkages and withdrawals. Finally, it is worth noticing that Mustonen (2009), while emphasising the constant merging of time and space among Arctic subsistence commu- nities, comes close to Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess’ Spinozist elaboration of ‘mixed com- munities’ created in the practical day-to-day bond- ing of humans and non-humans. This type of ‘eth- ics of place’ (see Smith 2001, 2005b) is marked by routines performing due respect and care to all its members, both animate and inanimate. The coop- eration in Naess’ community is not regulated by codified rules or norms but, instead, it takes shape in the daily events and occasions that bring into being what is regarded as ethically right (Naess 1979, 1998). In this way particular placing be- comes the potentia of horizontal co-enrichment, thoroughly linked to the particular understanding of space among the Sámi. The Spinozist renewal in human geography can, and could, thus take shape and re-emerge in various forms and with several differing emphases. It is, however, as wit- nessed above, crucially dependent on the disci- pline and creativity of the scholars leaning on the original inspiration. How well do we know, hon- estly, The Ethics we are promoting? To what de- gree we are aware of the several geographically inspiring Spinozist traditions with radically differ- ing emphases? REFERENCES Andersen S 2004. Saami place names and place- making in a minority-majority context. Died̄ut 3, 122−134. Anthias F 2009. Translocational belonging, identity and generation. Finnish Journal of Ethnicity and Migration 4: 1, 6−15. Atkinson R 2009. The politics of isolation. Geografis- ka Annaler B 91: 4, 299−310. Bærenholdt JO 2007. Coping with distances. Berghahn Books, Oxford. Baschmakoff N 2007. Cultural text, communality and the margin. In Baschmakoff N, Fryer P & Ristolai- nen M (eds). Texts and communities, 9−24. Alek- santeri Institute, Helsinki. Bateson G & Bateson M C 1987. Angel fears: an in- vestigation into the nature of meaning of the sa- cred. Rider, New York. Bladh G 1995. Finskogens landskap och människor under fyra sekler. En studie av samhälle och natur i förändring. Forskningsrapport 95: 11. Högskolan i Karlstad, Karlstad. Blunt A 2007. Cultural geographies of migration: mo- bility, transnationality and diaspora. Progress in Human Geography 31: 5, 684−694. Braun B 2002. The intemperate rainforest. Nature, culture and power on Canada’s west coast. Uni- versity of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Braun B 2006. Global natures in the space of assem- blage. Progress in Human Geography 30: 5, 644−654. Braun B 2008 Environmental issues: incentive life. Progress in Human Geography 32: 5, 667−679. Casey E 1997. The fate of place. University of Califor- nia Press, Berkeley. Castree N 2004. Differential geographies: place, in- digenous rights and ‘local’ resources. Political Ge- ography 23: 2, 133−167. Castree N, Featherstone D & Herod A 2008. Contra- puntal geographies: The politics of organising across sociospatial difference. In Cox KR, Low M & Robinson J (eds). The Sage Handbook of Politi- cal Geography, 305−321. Sage, London. Connerton P 1989. How Societies Remember? Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge. Dalby S 1993. The ‘Kiwi disease’: Geopolitical dis- course in Aotaeroa/New Zealand and the South Pacific. Political Geography 12: 5, 437−456. Dalby S 2002. Environmental security. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Dalby S 2010. Recontextualising violence, power and nature: the next twenty years of critical geo- politics. Political Geography 29: 5, 280−288. Deleuze G 1992. Autiomaa. Gaudeamus, Helsinki. Dewsbury JD & Thrift N 2005. ‘Genesis eternal’: after Paul Klee. In Buchanan I & Lambert G (eds). De- leuze and Space, 89−108. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. Doel M 1996. A hundred thousand lines of flight: a machinic introduction to the nomad and scrum- bled geography of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guat- tari. Society and Space 14: 4, 421−439. Domosh M 2010. The world was never flat: Early glo- bal encounters and the messiness of empire. Progress in Human Geography 34: 4, 419−435. Entrikin N 1991. The Betweenness of Place. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. 28 FENNIA 189: 2 (2011)Ari Aukusti Lehtinen Erämaakomitea 1988. Erämaakomitean mietintö. Ko- miteanmietintöjä 39. Valtion Painatuskeskus, Hel- sinki. Fryer P 2009. Urfolks rättigheter och rättvisa på Kola- halvöns landsbygd. In Elenius L & Ericsson L (eds). Är vi inte alla minoriteter i världen?, 183−198. Ordfront, Stockholm. Gonzales S 2009. (Dis)connecting Milan(ese): Deter- ritorialised urbanism and disempowering politics in globalising cities. Environment and Planning A 41: 1, 31−47. Gordon C (ed) 1980. Power and Knowledge. Select- ed interviews and other writings by Michel Foucault, 1971−1977. Pantheon, New York. Habeck JO 2002. How to turn a reindeer pasture into an oil well, and vice versa: transfer of land, com- pensation and reclamation in the Komi Republic. In Kasten E (ed). People and the land. Pathways to reform in post-Soviet Siberia, 125−147. Dietrich Reimer Verlag, Berlin. Hadi Curti G 2009. Beating words to life: subtitles, assemblage(s)capes, expression. GeoJournal 74: 3, 201−208. Haila Y 1997. ’Wilderness’ and the multiple layers of environmental thought. Environmental History 3: 2, 129−148. Haila Y & Dyke C 2006. What to say about nature’s speech. In Haila Y & Dyke C (eds). How nature speaks: the dynamics of the human ecological condition, 1−48. Duke University Press, Durham. Heikkilä L 2006. Reindeer talk. Acta Universitatis Lapponiensis 110, Rovaniemi. Heikkilä K 2008. Teaching through toponymy. VDM Verlag, Saarbrücken. Helander E 1999. Sámi subsistence activities – spatial aspects and structuration. Acta Borealia 16: 2, 7−25. Helander-Renvall E 2009. Personal information, May 22 [mimeo]. Herman D 2008. The aloha state: Place names and the anti-conquest of Hawai´i. In Berg L & Vuol- teenaho J (eds). Critical toponymies: The contest- ed politics of place-naming, 101−135. Ashgate, Farnham. Hipwell WT 2004. A Deleuzian critique of resource- use management politics in industria. The Cana- dian Geographer 48: 3, 356−377. Hirvensalo L 1975. Suomi-saksa-suomi. WSOY, Hel- sinki. Howitt R 2001. Rethinking resource management. Justice, sustainability and indigenous peoples. Routledge, London. Howitt R & Suchet-Pearson S 2006. Rethinking the building block: ontological pluralism and the idea of ‘management’. Geografiska Annaler B 88: 3, 323−335. Häkkinen K 2004. Nykysuomen etymologinen sana- kirja. WSOY, Helsinki. Häkli J 1998. Manufacturing provinces. In Tuathail G & Dalby S (eds). Rethinking geopolitics, 131−151. Routledge, London. Häkli J 2003. To discipline or not to discipline, is that the question? Political Geography 22: 6, 657−661. Hänninen S & Vähämäki J (eds) 2000. Displacement of politics. SoPhi, Jyväskylä. Ingold T 1976. The Scolt Lapps Today. Cambridge University Press, London. Ingold T & Kurttila T 2000. Perceiving the environ- ment in Finnish Lapland. Body & Society 6: 3−4, 183−196. Jansson K 2009. Tillsammans. Bidrag till den etniska boendesegregationens geofilosofi. Geografiska re- gionstudier 81. Uppsala University, Department of Social and Economic Geography, Uppsala. Jernsletten J 2002. Sørsamisk landskapsforståelse i et religionsvitenskapelig perspektiv. Died̄ut 1, 107−114. Jones M 2009. Phase space: geography, relational thinking, and beyond. Progress in Human Geog- raphy 33: 4, 487−506. Jones M & Olwig K (eds) 2008. Nordic Landscapes. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Jürgenson A 2004. On the formation of the Estonians’ concepts of homeland and home place. Pro Eth- nologia 18: 1, 97−114. Keisteri T 1990. The study of changes in cultural landscape. Fennia 168: 1, 31−115. Ketola K, Knuuttila S, Mattila A & Vesala KM 2002. Puuttuvat viestit. Gaudeamus, Helsinki. Kitchin R & Dodge M 2007. Rethinking maps. Prog- ress in Human Geography 31: 3, 331−344. Kjosavik D & Shanmugaratnam N 2007. Property rights dynamics and indigenous communities in Highland Kerala, South India. Modern Asian Stud- ies 41: 6, 1183−1260. Knuuttila S 2005. Samankeskinen paikallisuus. In Häyrynen S (ed). Kulttuurin arviointi ja vaikutus- ten väylät, 51−65. Kulttuuripoliittisen tutkimuk- sen edistämissäätiö (Cupore) 12, Helsinki. Koivusalo M 2000. Biopolitical displacement and an- tinomies of biopolitical reason. In Hänninen S & Vähämäki J (eds). Displacement of politics, 116−159. SoPhi, Jyväskylä. Konstnatinov Y 2005. From ‘traditional’ to collectiv- ized reindeer herding on the Kola Peninsula: con- tinuity or disruption? Acta Borealia 22: 2, 170−188. Kurki T 2007. Historical prose and emergent com- munity in Soviet Karelia. In Baschmakoff N, Fryer P & Ristolainen M (eds). Texts and communities, 39−48. Aleksanteri Institute, Helsinki. Kymäläinen P & Lehtinen AA 2010. Chora in Current Geographical Thought. Geografiska Annaler B 92: 3, 251−261. Lehtinen AA 1991. Northern natures. Fennia 169: 1, 57−169. Lehtinen AA 1993. The fall of the forest villages. En- vironmental Policy and Society 1. Uppsala Uni- versity, Uppsala. Lehtinen AA 2006. Postcolonialism, multitude, and the politics of nature. University Press of America, Lanham. FENNIA 189: 2 (2011) 29From relations to dissociations in spatial thinking: Sámi … Massey D 1999. Power-geometries and the politics of space-time. University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg. Massey D 2005. For Space. Sage, London. Mathiesen T 1982. Makt och motmakt. Korpen, Gothenburg. Maybury-Lewis D (ed) 2003. The Politics of Ethnicity. Indigenous Peoples in Latin American States. Har- vard University Press, Cambridge, MA. McFarlane C 2009. Translocal assemblages: space, power and social movements. GeoForum 40: 4, 561−567. McHugh K 2009. Movement, memory, landscape: an excursion in non-representational thought. Geo- journal 74: 3, 209−218. Mustonen T 2009. Karhun väen ajast-aikojen avartu- va avara. Tutkimus kolmen euraasialaisen luon- taistalousyhteisön paikallisesta tiedosta pohjoisen ilmastonmuutoksen kehyksessä. Publications in Social Sciences 92. University of Joensuu, Joen- suu. Myers GA 2009. Naming and placing the other: pow- er and the urban landscape in Zanzibar. In Berg L & Vuolteenaho J (eds). Critical toponymies, 85−100. Ashgate, Aldershot. Naess A 1979. Self-realization in mixed communities of humans, bears, sheep, and wolves. Inquiry 22: 1−4, 231−241. Naess A 1998. Livsfilosofi. Universitetsforlaget, Oslo. Nygren A 1998. Environmental discourse: searching for sustainable development in Costa Rica. Envi- ronmental Values 7: 2, 201−222. Pehkonen S 1999. “Tänne, muttei pidemmälle!” Alta- kamppailu ja Pohjois-Norjan monikulttuurinen maisema. Rauhan- ja konfliktintutkimuskeskuk- sen tutkimuksia 88, Tampere. Raitio K 2008. ”You can’t please everyone”. Conflict management practices, frames and institutions in Finnish state forests. Publications in Social Sci- ences 86. University of Joensuu, Joensuu. Rantala L 2011. Story of the Ä´kkel (Akkala) Sámi. In Mustonen T and Mustonen K (eds). Eastern Sámi Atlas, 188−191. Snowchange, Kontiolahti. Rautio-Helander K 2004. Treatment of Sámi settle- ment names in Finnmark in official Norwegian place name policy. Died̄ut 3, 102−121. Riipinen M 2008. Sosiaalisen pääoman skaalaus. Nordia Geographical Publications, Oulu. Rochelau D & Roth R 2007. Rooted networks, rela- tional webs and power connection: rethinking hu- man and political economies. Geoforum 38: 3, 433−437. Ruotsala H 2004. In the reindeer forest and the tun- dra. Pro Ethnologia 18: 1, 23−48. Saarikivi J 2002. Kieli suojelee luontoa. Vihreä Lanka 7, 10. Sammallahti P 1989. Sámi-suoma sáthegirji. Jorga- leaddjiu, Ohcejohka. Sammallahti P 1993. Saamelaissuomalainen sanakir- ja: Sámi-suoma-sámi. Jorgaleaddjiu, Ohcejohka. Saugestad S 2009. Besvärliga urfolksrättigheter i Af- rika – fallet Kalahari. In Elenius L & Ericsson L (eds). Är vi inte alla minoriteter i världen?, 168−182. Ordfront, Stockholm. Schanche A 2002. Meahcci – den samiske utmarka. Died̄ut 1, 156−172. Schanche A 2004. Horizontal and vertical percep- tions of Saami landscapes. Died̄ut 3, 1−10. Schwartz K 2006. Nature and National Identity after Communism. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pitts- burgh. Seierstad Å 2008. Groznyin enkelit. WSOY, Helsinki. Semi J 2010. Sisäiset sijainnit. Tutkimus sukupolvien paikkakokemuksista. Dissertations in Social Sci-sertations in Social Sci- ences and Business Studies 2. University of Eas-University of Eas- tern Finland, Joensuu. Seppänen M 1986. Mikä luonnoista luonnollisin? Ih- misen ”kolme luontoa” Keski-Andeilla keramii- kan keksimisestä conquistadoreihin. Kehitysmaan- tieteen yhdistyksen toimitteita 16. Helsingin yli- opisto, Helsinki. Setten G 2006. Fusion or exclusion? Reflections on conceptual practices of landscape and place in human geography. Norsk Geografisk Tidskrift 60: 1, 32−45. Sidaway JD, Bunnel T, Grundy-Warr C, Mohammed R, Park BG & Saito A 2004. Translating political geographies. Political Geography 23: 8, 1037−1049. Simonsen K 2004. Networks, flows, and fluids – re- imagining spatial analysis? Environment and Plan- ning A 36: 8, 1333−1340. Smith N 2005a. Neo-critical geography, or, the flat pluralist world of business class. Antipode 37: 5, 887−899. Smith M 2005b. Citizens, denizens and the Res Pub- lica: environmental ethics, structures of feeling and political expression. Environmental Values 14: 2, 145−162. Sparke M 1998. A map that roared and an original atlas: Canada, Cartography, and the Narration of nation. Annals of the Association of American Ge- ographers 88: 3, 463−595. Sparke M 2005. In the space of theory: postfounda- tional geographies of the nation-state. University of the Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Sparke M 2007. Acknowledging Responsibility For Space. Progress in Human Geography 31: 3, 395−402. Sparke M 2008. Political geography – political geog- raphies of globalization III: resistance. Progress in Human Geography 32: 3, 423−440. Spinoza B 1982. To the most honourable and learned Henry Oldenburg from Benedict de Spinoza, let- ter 32, in part (written in November 20, 1665). In Feldman S (ed). The Ethics and selected letters, 244−246. Hackett Publishing Company, Indiana- polis. Susiluoto P 2000. Suomen ajan ihmismaantiedettä Petsamosta. In Susiluoto P (ed). Väinö Tanner. Ih- mismaantieteellisiä tutkimuksia Petsamon seudul- ta, 3−17. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura, Hel- sinki. 30 FENNIA 189: 2 (2011)Ari Aukusti Lehtinen Tanner V 1929a. Petsamon alueen paikannimiä (Ré- sumé: Les noms de lieux du territoire de Petsamo). Fennia 49: 3, 1−36. Tanner V 1929b. Antropogeografiska studier inom Petsamo-området I. Skolt-Lapparna. Fennia 49: 4, 1−416. Thrift N 2008. Non-representational theory. Routledge, London. Urry J 2000. Sociology beyond societies. Routledge, London. Vaden T & Tuusvuori JS 2007. Lappi paljastaa Suo- men. Niin & Näin 14: 4, 7−10. Virtanen A 2006. Taloudellinen elämä. In Jakonen M, Peltokoski J & Virtanen A (eds). Uuden työn sana- kirja, 125−129. Tutkijaliitto, Helsinki. Vähämäki J 2000. Displacing the means of political control. In Hänninen S & Vähämäki J (eds). Dis- placement of politics, 46−64. SoPhi, Jyväskylä.