Talk:Non-representational theory

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Geography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Fundamental Problem: This Page Sucks (insert yes vote here)

That is, it says almost exactly absolutely nothing about what non-representational theoretical adherents actually might do, especially in contradistinction to non-non-repersentational theorists, vis-a-vis the actual behaviors, products, or modus operandi of their several disciplines. The only thing which is clear from this article is that it has something to do, or purports to have something to do, with Foucault and others of his kind. Name-dropping is not substantial clarification of content.

Why is non-representational theory important? What are the alternatives? How is it different from those alternatives? What specificially do people claim are the benefits of non-representational theory, and is there any dispute over these claims? What is the nature of such dispute? By whom is non-representational theory promlugated? C'mon, guys.

71.101.163.56 (talk) 17:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

Having read this page carefully, I do not believe I have any better idea of what Non-Representational Theory is. Surely the Wikipedia entry should at the very least consist of a definition, instead of seemingly endless name-dropping. As far as I can tell, this article should not exist, as there is no point to it. Oulipal (talk) 00:52, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No clue here either

Hit this on a random page click, and came to the talk page to see if previous editors had any sense of what this article is about. I'm as baffled as 71.101.163.56 and Oulipa. I tried a quick search to see if I could find something sensible to at least clarify the lead, and just ran into more academic obfuscation: "To put it another way, non-representational theory molecuralises Human Geography's common sense notions of practice, will and hegemony by focusing on agencies, rather than agents, as the primary figures of political action. Unlike a representational economy that views political action through the lens of causality and exchange (as well as their measurable relations), nonrepresentational theory explores the effects of composite intensities which cannot be readily judged as progression, just and/or exploitative.". I would keep hunting but I lack any real interest in the topic. Anyway, the article really needs improvement and I wish luck to any editor who takes it on. Schazjmd (talk) 17:41, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]