課程資訊
課程名稱
現代性與都市文化
Modernity and Urban Space 
開課學期
105-2 
授課對象
學程  婦女與性別研究學程  
授課教師
黃宗儀 
課號
Geog5105 
課程識別碼
228EU3220 
班次
 
學分
3.0 
全/半年
半年 
必/選修
選修 
上課時間
星期二7,8,9(14:20~17:20) 
上課地點
地理405 
備註
本課程以英語授課。
總人數上限:15人 
Ceiba 課程網頁
http://ceiba.ntu.edu.tw/1052Geog5105 
課程簡介影片
 
核心能力關聯
本課程尚未建立核心能力關連
課程大綱
為確保您我的權利,請尊重智慧財產權及不得非法影印
課程概述

This course focuses on the cultural significance and interpretation of modernity and urban space. Ever since the industrial revolution, new modes of production have led to significant changes in Western urban culture, including migration from rural to urban areas, and new formations in labor culture, consumer culture and citizen-subjects. It is through this historical process that urban space is constantly changing and being reconstituted, a process that is embedded in East-West power structures of imperialist colonial systems by rendering people from various localities with different imaginations of modernity in a global context. The modern phenomenon of urbanization has had an uneven impact on a multifarious citizenry, made up of actors with a range of identities, and therefore has contributed to the diversification of the urban experience and representations of modern life from the 19th century onward. The research topics and assigned readings, including the concept of the flâneur and urban modernity, relations between human and non-human agents, gentrification, public/private space, intimacy, and geopolitics, are interconnected, illuminating the historical trajectory of academic debates. These discussions will help us understand that the formation of modern urban life is a political process in constant flux, and to investigate how capitalism, colonial systems and the global economy shape modern urban societies, cultures and spaces as well as how the lived experiences of urban inhabitants are constantly being reshaped and represented. 

課程目標
By studying and discussing the related scholarship, this course will critically examine ways to represent and interpret modernity and urban landscapes. The main objective is to help students gain a systematic understanding of the interrelationships between urban life and its cultural meanings, informing their critical perspectives while dissecting urban issues. This is a seminar-based discussion class. Students are required to complete all the assigned readings before class and discuss their thoughts with the instructor and peers in class. Through class participation and discussions, students are expected to come up with more critical reflections on urban issues, and acquire the critical skills of reading and analyzing texts, thereby cultivating individual research interests that build up on current scholarship.  
課程要求
The class will be conducted in English, but the final paper can be written in either English or Chinese.
 
預期每週課後學習時數
 
Office Hours
另約時間 
指定閱讀
待補 
參考書目
待補 
評量方式
(僅供參考)
 
No.
項目
百分比
說明
1. 
Class Participation 
10% 
Students are expected to finish assigned readings before class and participate in class discussions.  
2. 
Oral Report 
10% 
Each student is responsible for one oral report on assigned readings. 
3. 
Final Paper 
80% 
A term paper of 8,000 words (English)/ 12,000-15,000 (Chinese) is due by the end of semester. 
 
課程進度
週次
日期
單元主題
第1週
2/21  Course Introduction 
第2週
2/28  Public Holiday: No class 
第3週
3/07  The Flâneur (I)
1. Baudelaire, C. (1995). “The Painter of Modern Life.” In M. Jonathan (Ed.),The Painter of Modern Life and Other Essays (M. Jonathan, Trans.). London: Phaidon Press, pp. 1-40.
2. Benjamin, W. (2009). “On Some Motifs in Baudelaire.” In M. Damon and I. Livingston (eds.), Poetry and Cultural Studies: A Reader. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, pp. 37-55.
3. Benjamin, W. (1983). “The Flâneur.” In W. Benjamin, Charles Baudelaire: a Lyric Poet in the Era of High Capitalism (H. Zohn, Trans.). London: Verso, pp. 35-66. 
第4週
3/14  The Flâneur (II)
1. Buck-Morss, S. (1986). “Flâneur, the Sandwichman, and the Whore: The Politics of Loitering.” New German Critique 39: 99-140.
2. Berman, M. (1988). “Baudelaire: Modernism in the Streets.” In M. Berman, All That Is Solid Melts into Air: the Experience of Modernity. New York: Viking Penguin, pp. 131-172.
3. Tsung-yi Michelle Huang (2001). “Chungking express: Walking with a map of desire in the mirage of the global city.” Quarterly Review of Film and Video 18(2): 129-142. 
第5週
3/21  The Flâneur (III)
1. Wolff, J. (1990). “The Invisible Flâneur: Women and the Literature of Modernity.” In J. Wolff, Feminine Sentences: Essays on Women and Culture. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, pp. 34-50.
2. Wilson, E. (2001). “The Invisible Flâneur.” In E. Wilson, The Contradictions of Culture: Cities, Culture, Women. London: Sage publication, pp.72-89.
3. Nava, M. (1997). “Modernity’s disavowal: women, the city and the department store.” In P. Falk and C. Campbell (eds.), The Shopping Experience. London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, pp. 56-91 
第6週
3/28  Body
1.Sennett, R. (1994). “The Body Set Free.” In R. Sennett, The Flesh and the Stone: The Body and the City in Western Civilization. New York: W.W. Norton, pp. 282-316.
2.Stallybrass, P. and White, A. (2004). “The City: The Sewer, the Gaze and the Contaminating Touch.” In C. Jenks (Ed.), Urban Culture: Critical Concepts in Literary and Cultural Studies. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 193-212.
 
第7週
4/04  Public Holiday: No class 
第8週
4/11  Dirt
1. Pike, D. L. (2005). “Sewage Treatments: Vertical Space and Waste in Nineteenth-Century Paris and London.” In W. A. Cohen and R. Johnson (eds.), Filth: Dirt, Disgust, and Modern Life. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 51-77.
2. McClintock, A. (2000). “Soft-soaping empire: Commodity racism and imperial advertising.” In J. Scanlon (Ed.), The Gender and Consumer Culture Reader. New York: New York University Press, pp. 129-165.
3. Steinbrink, M. (2012). “‘We Did the Slum!’ – Urban Poverty Tourism in Historical Perspective.” Tourism Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism Space, Place and Environment 14(2): 213-234. 
第9週
4/18  Legends/Myths
1. Best, J. and Horiuchi, G. T. (1985). “The Razor Blade in the Apple: the Special Construction of Urban Legends.” Social Problems 32(5): 488-499.
2. Walkowitz, J. (2003). “Jack the Ripper and the Myth of Male Violence.” In J. Chris (Ed.), Culture: Critical Concepts in Sociology. New York: Routledge, pp. 186-214.
3. Huyssen, A. (1981/1982). “The Vamp and the Machine: Fritz Lang’s Metropolis.” New German Critique 24-25: 221-237.
※ Film: Metropolis (Fritz Lang) 
第10週
4/25  Animals
1. Philo, C. (1998). “Animals, Geography, and the City: Notes on Inclusions and Exclusions.” In J. Wolch and J. Emel (eds.), Animal Geographies: Place, Politics, and Identity in the Nature-Culture Borderlands. London and New York: Verso, pp. 51-71.
2. Howell, P. (2000). “Flush and the Banditti: Dog-Stealing in Victorian London.” In C. Philo and C. Wilbert (eds.), Animal Spaces, Beastly Places: New Geographies of Human-Animal Relations. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 35-55.
3. Shukin, N. (2011). “Transfections of Animal Touch, Techniques of biosecurity.” Social Semiotics 21(4): 483-501. 
第11週
5/02  Class and Its Others
1. Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2006). “Class and the Politics of ‘Identity.’” In J. K. Gibson-Graham, The End of Capitalism (As We Knew It): A Feminist Critique of Political Economy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 46-71.
2. Harvey, D. (2003). “The Myths of Modernity: Balzac’s Paris.” In D. Harvey, Paris, Capital of Modernity. New York: Routledge, pp. 23-58.
3. Skeggs, B. (2004). “Representing the Working Class.” In B. Skeggs, Class, Self, Culture: Transformations: Thinking Through Feminism. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 96-118.
 
第12週
5/09  Gentrification and the Right to the City
1. Mitchell, D. (2003). "To Go Again to Hyde Park: Public Space, Rights, and Social Justice.” In D. Mitchell, The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space. New York and London: The Guilford Press, pp. 13-41.
2. Smith, N. (1996). “Is Gentrification a Dirty Word?” In N. Smith, The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Revanchist City. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 30-50.
3. Zukin, S. (2010). “The City That Lost Its Soul”; “How Brooklyn Become Cool”; “Union Square and the Paradox of Public Space.” In S. Zukin, Naked City: the Dearth and Life of Authentic Urban Places. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 1-31, 35-62, 125-158. 
第13週
5/16  Intimacy
1. Pratt, G. and Rosner, V. (2012) “Introduction: The Global and the Intimate.” In G. Pratt and V. Rosner (eds.), The Global and The Intimate: Feminism in Our Time. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 1-27.
2. Ahmed, S. (2010). “Melancholic Migrants.” In S. Ahmed, The Promise of Happiness. Durham: Duke University Press, pp. 121-160.
3. Takeyama, A. (2010). “Intimacy for Sale: Masculinity, Entrepreneurship, and Commodity Self in Japan’s Neoliberal Situation.” Japanese Studies 30(2): 231-246. 
第14週
5/23  Alternative Learning 
第15週
5/30  Public Holiday: No class 
第16週
6/06  Everyday Life
1. Laketa, S. (2016). “Geopolitics of Affect and Emotions in a Post-Conflict City.” Geopolitics 21(3): 661685.
2. Grewal, I. (2012). “Security Moms in Twenty-First-Century U.S.A.: The Gender of Security in Neoliberalism.” In G. Pratt and V. Rosner (eds.), The Global and The Intimate: Feminism in Our Time. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 195-210.
3. Berlant, L. (2011). “Nearly Utopian, Nearly Normal: Post-Fordist Affect in La Promesse and Rosetta.” In Cruel Optimism. Durham: DUKE University Press, pp. 161-189. 
第17週
6/13  Final Project Presentations