CONTROVERSY OF MODERN AND POST-MODERN GEOGRAPHERS

Abstract

Giuseppe Dematteis, commenting on some excerpts from Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, wrote that «the belief of a solely physical and human geography, separated from “mental geography”, is not only scarcely useful, but detrimental» and so, conversely, a mental-only geography is also impracticable, because it lacks all those qualities that make geography interesting to humans, «who need a piece of Land to know the invisible». In response to article by Marconi, my impression is that controversies like these, if they have a sense as long as they are developed on the plan of principles, of theoretical conflicts, of conceptual metaphors and rhetorical and persuasive strategies, lose it –or assume another– precisely when we put them in the context of a concrete geography, which is also, apart from mental, physical, and human. I do no intend, therefore, to profess my faith as a post-modern. The same controversy between moderns and post-moderns has grown old precociously (in philosophy we are already talking about nouveau réalisme, cfr. Ferraris, 2012) and as such it should be dismissed. Also in geography.