and in the wake of the invitation to write a series of reports documenting the recent 'rise' of public geographies, I decided it would be interesting (if not potentially fruitful!) to consult a 'public' about their perceptions and understandings of 'public geographies'. So I sent email messages out into the ether asking for 'geographers' views upon, and any examples of, apparently 'public'-ly orientated work. 1 This request was fairly open and non-directive in that I genuinely wanted to see how members of lists such as the Critical Geography Forum, LeftGeog, and so on would respond -what they thought 'public geographies' were. The only real hint towards where I thought any discussion might go concerned the suggestion for respondents to think 'beyond (but including) journals, beyond the RAE, beyond the academy, beyond the UK/USA ...'. 2 Responses suggested that 'public geographies' are multi-faceted, multiple, plural, engaged, engaging, amorphous, unbounded, and uncertain. That much is certain. Many argued that 'public geographies' are part of the geographical furniture, a 'fi eld' maybe, but not just a 'fi eld', a tradition, what we all do, from 'where we are at' (of course). Many