![]() ![]() At the same specter, the notion of the one and unique homeland, which is to some extend invented by the imaginaries of deterritorialized groups (Appadurai, 2014, p.78), has been questioned and replaced by the viewpoint of a “mobile” homeland, that permit people to “feel like home in more than one places” (Van Boeschoten & Danforth, 2015, p.290-291). ![]() Anthropological studies have examined critically the “home”, away from the sedentarism, emotional approach, where it is understood as “a unique, stable location, a place of birth, connected with parents, childhood and the past” (Van Boeschoten & Danforth, 2015, p.290), claiming that if we consider not only the spatial but also the temporal dimension, the cultural notion, that is attributed to specific places, changes over time. In the modern globalized world, the identifications and the relationships, that migrants construct on the “home” and “homeland” are so complicated that they cannot simply interpreted either as “rooted belonging” or “rootless mobility” (Baker, 2012, p.26). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |