Auratic Geographies: Buffers, Backyards, Entanglements

References

• Agnew, J. 1994. The territorial trap: The geographical assumptions of international relations theory. Review of International Political Economy 1 (Spring):53–80. doi:10.1080/09692299408434268.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, B. 2009. Affective atmospheres. Emotion, Space and Society 2 (2):77–81. doi:10.1016/j.emospa.2009.08.005.
   Google Scholar
• Anzaldúa, G. 1999. Borderlands/la frontera: The new mestiza. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books.
   Google Scholar
• Banner, S. 2008. Who owns the sky? The struggle to control airspace from the Wright brothers on. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barad, K. 2007. Meeting the universe halfway: quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, J. 2010. Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Billé, F. 2014. Territorial phantom pains (and other cartographic anxieties). Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 32 (1):163–78. doi:10.1068/d20112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Billé, F. 2018. Skinworlds: Borders, haptics, topologies. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 36 (1):60–77. doi:10.1177/0263775817735106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Billé, F. 2019a. Doughnut. Theorizing the Contemporary, Fieldsights. Cultural Anthropology website, September 30. https://culanth.org/fieldsights/doughnut
   Google Scholar
• Billé, F. 2019b. Murmuration. Society & Space. http://societyandspace.org/2019/04/09/murmuration.
   Google Scholar
• Billé, F. 2020a. Containment. Somatosphere, April 6, http://somatosphere.net/forumpost/containment
   Google Scholar
• Billé, F. 2020b. Jigsaw: Micropartitioning in the enclaves of baarle-hertog/baarle-nassau. In Voluminous States: Sovereignty, Materiality, and the Territorial Imagination, ed. F. Billé, pp.217–229. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Billé, F. 2020c. Voluminous states: Sovereignty, materiality, and the territorial imagination. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Billé, F., and C. Humphrey. 2021. On the edge: Life along the Russia-China border. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bishop, R. 2020. Frictionless sovereignty: An introduction. Special Issue on Frictionless Sovereignty, ed. R. Bishop, boundary2. http://www.boundary2.org/2020/08/ryan-bishop-frictionless-sovereignty-an-introduction
   Google Scholar
• Bregman, R. 2020. The real lord of the flies: What happened when six boys were shipwrecked for 15 months. The Guardian, May 9, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/may/09/the-real-lord-of-the-flies-what-happened-when-six-boys-were-shipwrecked-for-15-months
   Google Scholar
• Brighenti, A. M., and K. Mattias. 2020. Animated lands: Studies in territoriology. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
   Google Scholar
• Broers, L. 2019. Armenia and Azerbaijan: Anatomy of a rivalry. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, K. 2003. A biography of no place: From ethnic borderland to Soviet heartland. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cocks, J. 2014. On sovereignty and other political delusions. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. J. 2014. Introduction: Ecostitial. In Inhuman nature, ed. J. J. Cohen, pp.i-x. Washington DC: Oliphaunt Books.
   Google Scholar
• Coole, D., and S. Frost. 2010. Introducing the new materialisms. In New materialisms: ontology, agency, and politics, ed. D. Coole and S. Frost, pp.1–43. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coward, M. 2013. Networks, nodes and de-territorialised battlespace: The scopic regime of rapid dominance. In From above: War, violence and verticality, ed. P. Adey, M. Whitehead, and A. J. Williams, 95–117. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, H. 2020. Necrotone: Death-dealing volumetrics at the US-Mexico border. In Voluminous States: Sovereignty, Materiality, and the Territorial Imagination, ed. F. Billé, pp.131–145. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• de Sola-morales Rubio, I. 1995. Terrain vague. In Anyplace, ed. C. C. Davidson, 118–23. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dear, M. 2013. Why walls won’t work: Repairing the US-Mexico divide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dodds, K., and P. Kirby. 2014. Resurrecting the vigilante: Paternal sovereignty, exceptionality and familial security in Taken (2008) and Taken 2 (2013). Critical Studies on Security 2 (3):245–61. doi:10.1080/21624887.2014.887512.
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, E., and J. Cons. 2014. Aleatory sovereignty and the rule of sensitive spaces. Antipode 46 (1):pp.92–109. doi:10.1111/anti.12028.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunne, A. 2006. Hertzian tales: Electronic products, aesthetic experience, and critical design. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Easterling, K. 2014. Extrastatecraft: The power of infrastructure space. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Finn, R. 2013. The great air race. The New York Times, February 22, https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/realestate/the-great-race-for-manhattan-air-rights.html
   Google Scholar
• Fishel, S. R. 2017. The microbial state: Global thriving and the body politic. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Giraud, E. H. 2019. What comes after entanglement? Activism, anthropocentrism, and an ethics of exclusion. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodman, J. D. 2019. How much is a view worth in Manhattan? Try $11 Million. The New York Times, July 22, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/22/nyregion/manhattan-real-estate-views-air-rights.html
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S. 2016. Vertical: The city from satellites to bunkers. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Green, Sarah 2012. “A Sense of Border” in A Companion to Border Studies, eds. Thomas M. Wilson & Hastings Donnan. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell
   Google Scholar
• Grosz, E. 1994. Volatile bodies: Toward a corporeal feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Günel, G. 2017. Electric. Theorizing the contemporary, fieldsights, Cultural Anthropology website, October 24. https://culanth.org/fieldsights/electric
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. 1992. The promises of monsters: A regenerative politics for inappropriate/d others. In Cultural Studies, ed. L. Grossberg, C. Nelson, and P. Treichler, 295–337. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Herships, S. 2013. The air up there. Marketplace, November 7, https://www.marketplace.org/2013/11/07/air-there
   Google Scholar
• Immerwahr, D. 2019. How to hide an empire: A history of the greater United States. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, Eleana J. 2018. „Flyways.„ Theorizing the Contemporary, Fieldsights, June 27. https://culanth.org/fieldsights/flyways
   Google Scholar
• Kirk, T. 2020. ‘Draw the blinds’: Flat owners lose court fight over Tate platform. Evening Standard, February 12, https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tate-modern-residents-high-court-appeal-a4360096.html
   Google Scholar
• Kopela, S. 2009. “The ‘territorialisation’ of the exclusive economic zone: Implications for maritime jurisdiction. Paper presented at the 20th Anniversary Conference of the International Boundaries Research Unit on the State of Sovereignty, Durham University, United Kingdom, April 1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Krasner, S. D. 1999. Sovereignty: Organized hypocrisy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leshem, N., and A. Pinkerton. 2016. Re-inhabiting no-man’s land: Genealogies, political life and critical agendas. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 41:41–53. doi:10.1111/tran.12102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludden, D. 2003. Presidential address: Maps in the mind and the mobility of Asia. The Journal of Asian Studies 62(4):1057–78. November. doi: 10.2307/3591759.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lung-Amam, W. S. 2017. Trespassers? Asian Americans and the Battle for Suburbia. Oakland: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maçães, B. 2018. The Dawn of Eurasia: On the trail of the new world order. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mikhailova, E. 2019. Broadcast. Society and Space 37:367–84. Volumetric Sovereignty forum. March 3. http://societyandspace.org/2019/03/03/broadcast
   Google Scholar
• Miller, T. 2019. Empire of borders: The expansion of the US border around the world. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Min, L. S.-M. 2020. Echolocation: Within the sonic fold of the Korean demilitarized zone. In Voluminous states: sovereignty, materiality, and the territorial imagination, ed. F. Billé, pp.230–242. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, A. B. 2013. Territory’s continuing allure. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 103 (5):1212–26. doi:10.1080/00045608.2012.696232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oduntan, G. 2012. Sovereignty and jurisdiction in the airspace and outer space: Legal Criteria for spatial delimitation. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ong, A. 2008. Graduated sovereignty in South‐East Asia. In Anthropologies of modernity: Foucault, governmentality, and life politics, ed. J. X. Inda, 81–104. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Ong, A. 2020. Buoyancy: Blue territorialization of Asian power. In Voluminous states: Sovereignty, materiality, and the territorial imagination, ed. F. Billé, pp.191–203. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Partem, M. G. 1983. The buffer system in international relations. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 27(1):3–26. March. doi: 10.1177/0022002783027001001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, I. G. R. 2016. Predator empire: Drone warfare and full spectrum dominance. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sheldrake, M. 2020. Entangled life: How fungi make our worlds, change our minds, and shape our futures. New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Tawil-Souri, H. 2017. Spectrum. Theorizing the contemporary, fieldsightsCultural Anthropology, October 24. https://culanth.org/fieldsights/spectrum
   Google Scholar
• Thrift, N. 2008. Non-representational theory: Space | politics | affect. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Toal, G. 2017. Near abroad: Putin, the west, and the contest over Ukraine and the Caucasus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tsing, A. L. 2015. The mushroom at the end of the world: On the possibility of life in capitalist ruins. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Uebel, M. 1996. Unthinking the monster: Twelfth-century responses to saracen alterity. In Monster theory: Reading culture, ed. J. J. Cohen, 143–67. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Valeriano, B., and J. Van Benthuysen. 2012. When States die: Geographic and territorial pathways to state death. Third World Quarterly 33 (7):1165–89. doi:10.1080/01436597.2012.691826.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vila, P. 2005. Border Identifications: Narratives of religion, gender, and class on the U.S.-Mexico border. Austin: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weizman, E. 2007. Hollow land: Israel’s architecture of occupation. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar