The Socially Polysemantic Border: Positionality and the Meaning of the Fence
The Middle Ground Journal
World History and Global Studies
recent posts
- “Politics, Protests, and Popular Culture: The Global Legacy of Akira Toriyama and His Dragon Ball”
- “Underprepared but Overperformed: Explaining the Enigma in Study Abroad”
- Review of Chasing Greatness by Anatoly Reshetnikov
- Review of Black Sun by Julia Kristeva
- The Clash of Trade Ideologies: Revisiting the Battle of Liaoluo Bay through the Lens of Hans Putmans’ Interpretation of Vrijen Handel and the Ming Tributary System
- Pursuing the Global in a Local Setting: Particularistic Silences in the Teaching, Deconstructing, Researching, and Writing of Asian History
- South Asian Migration and Colonial Records: Some Challenges in Reconstructing the Bengali Historical Migration
- The First and Second Taiwan Strait Crises in Cold-War Asia: An Overview
The Middle Ground Journal 
2 responses to “The Socially Polysemantic Border: Positionality and the Meaning of the Fence”
Reblogged this on Professor Liang.
“For some, it has been a pursuit that cost their life savings…For most American citizens, it is an annoying inconvenience.” This quote and the idea of US citizens only crossing the border generally for recreational purposes really struck me. Having spent a lot of time focusing on barriers and walls in NI, this was something I never really had to consider as the walls were defining neighborhoods as opposed to countries. There was no border patrol and although there was almost two of everything (one park, school, church, in each neighborhood), there were something’s that had to be shared (train/bus station, supermarket), which forced the two sides to come together. Some of the people I talked to saw the peace lines as being necessary for their safety, and I wish I would have had this piece available when I was there as it provided a different perspective to walls. It would be interesting to talk to people and ask if any at all saw the peace lines as inconvenient.