ترجمه

دوستان کی میتونه این متنو واسم ترجمه کنه

ممنون میشم

Materiality
To make these qualifications does not diminish the sense in which materiality is entangled in questions of power. Indeed, it arguably allows urban geographers to work towards a more nuanced understanding of the relations between cities, power and materiality. As such, any attempt to 'rematerialise' urban geography cannot simply be a return to some already existing, solid, concrete sense of the material. Materiality is always in process, even if this process unfolds at different speeds.
KEY POINTS
Materiality has often been under-conceptualised within urban geography. Any definition of materiality must not reduce it to brute matter, but recognise that there are many ways in which it can be theorised. Urban geographers and others are beginning to develop an understanding of materiality as a dynamic process rather than a static thing.
FURTHER READING
Loretta Lees (2002) paper, Rematerializing Geography: The 'new' urban geography provides an example of recent efforts by urban geographers to reclaim the material in the wake of what are sometimes perceived as an excessive concern with an 'immaterial' realms of images, texts and representations. Alan Latham and Derek McCormack's (2004) paper Moving cities: Rethinking the materialities of urban geographies builds upon and responds to Lees' argument by outlining a number of empirical and conceptual pathways into how geographers might rethink the materiality of urban geography. In doing so they complicate any attempt to invoke the material in ways that juxtapose it to the immaterial. A good overview of these debates and their wider context is contained in Phil Hubbard's book (2006) City. Other geographers have focused on the materials cultures of cities. The work of Russell Hitchings (2007) provides an interesting example of how geographers are rethinking the nature of urban material cultures: in this case through research into urban gardening.