2004
DOI: 10.1080/0950238042000201464
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The myth of everyday life: Toward a heterology of the ordinary

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0
1

Year Published

2009
2009
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
35
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…rough this distinction, the ordinary is invested with a clear emancipatory signi cation, which consists of resisting the strategies of the societal elites and power blocs. As this semantic strategy again risks introducing a number of too essentialist positions, it remains a necessary condition to embed these concepts within a more constructivist/relationist model, where both the ordinary and ordinariness are seen as uid and contingent (also see Sandywell, 2004). …”
Section: E Ordinary (People)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…rough this distinction, the ordinary is invested with a clear emancipatory signi cation, which consists of resisting the strategies of the societal elites and power blocs. As this semantic strategy again risks introducing a number of too essentialist positions, it remains a necessary condition to embed these concepts within a more constructivist/relationist model, where both the ordinary and ordinariness are seen as uid and contingent (also see Sandywell, 2004). …”
Section: E Ordinary (People)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To put it in other words, this distinction allows one to see emancipation as intrinsically linked to the ordinary and not as something that becomes superimposed by external actors or processes. As this semantic strategy again risks introducing a number of too essentialist positions that ignore the contingent nature of these concepts, it remains a necessary condition to embed them within a more constructivist/relationist model, wherein the ordinary and ordinariness are seen as fluid and contingent (see Sandywell, 2004).…”
Section: The Everydaymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In itself, the tension between institutional structures and the lifeworld has deep theoretical roots, including symbolic interactionism, phenomenological approaches, the critical perspective advocated by Henri Lefebvre, and the Habermasian system/lifeworld model (Highmore, 2002). Yet the recognition of "everyday life" as a site of research has been strenuous: the "everyday" has been described as a realm of the obvious, a "residue" left behind once all specialized activities have been removed, or a "meta-field" enveloping all social activities (Highmore, 2002;Sandywell, 2004;Seigworth & Gardiner, 2004). To a certain extent, the tendency to downplay everyday activities transpires in the interviews conducted here.…”
Section: Understanding Technology In Everyday Lifementioning
confidence: 99%