Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
transnationality and, at the same time, an increasing number of people are participating
in transnational spaces (see Jackson
et al.
, 2004). Ghosh and Wang (2003: 278) suggest that
the transnational process is essentially individualistic as one composes a sense of multiple or
hybrid selves through 'an abstract awareness of one's self, diaspora and multiple belonging'. As
such, place plays a pivotal role in constructing transnational identities as an individual's total
attachment to a single place loosens, so dividing their attention and presence between two
places or more (Hannerz, 2002; see also Jackson
et al.
, 2004). Whereas migration can be seen
to involve a point of arrival and a point of departure, transnationalism allows for the ongoing
movement between two or more places.
Yet, it is imperative to remember, as Cresswell (2001) points out, that the corporeal mobili-
ties of different groups are embedded in specifi c geographies, networks and economic condi-
tions and that these produce how people move and are received differently across the globe (see
also Gogia, 2006). Not only do tourism geographers need to think around issues of mobility
and immobility but different 'levels' of access to being mobile (whether physically, socially or
virtual, for instance) refl ect differing hierarchical structures and processes and are bound up
with race, gender, age, class and (dis)ability (Tesfahuney, 1998).
There is also the need to consider the 'middle' of transnationalism (Conradson and Latham
2005a, 2005b; see also Clarke, 2005). Even within this 'middle', it is necessary to recognise
concerns that the term 'transnational' seems more often to concentrate on those who have the
freedom, legally, culturally and economically, to move across borders and between cultures,
thus eclipsing the stories of the fi nancially challenged transnational migrants whose limited
resources mean they are embarking on a journey of uncertainty (Ghosh and Wang, 2003). In
numerous case studies, transnational peoples, whether they are migrants, backpackers or
'plain old' tourists, have been shown to construct an intricate, multi-webbed network of
ongoing social relations that span their country of origin and their country (or countries) of
settlement/visitation (Mitchell, 2009). The blurrings between transnationalism, globalisa-
tion, lifestyle, migration and mobilities mean that practices - mobilities - are therefore being
reconfi gured (Hannam, 2008; Quinn, 2007).
Mobilities, backpacking and lifestyle: current research
As Wilson
et al.
(2009: 4) suggest, working holidays - and so the OE and many on gap years
and backpacking - allow a way in which to fuse or blur conventional accounts of travel and
migration. Whilst what a backpacker or someone on a gap year or OE is has been discussed
in the literature (see Inkson and Myers, 2003; Jones, 2004; Loker-Murphy and Pearce, 1995),
the focus here remains on how these types of travel illustrate the ways in which tourism geog-
raphers have engaged and are engaging with mobilities.
Allon
et al.
(2008: 75) say that the contemporary backpacker is 'also often an employee, a
student, a visitor, a seasonal worker, holidaymaker, a semi-permanent resident, and poten-
tially many other roles and identities'. Thus these individuals' working and travelling experi-
ences allow them to explore both the personal and professional possibilities that are bound up
in the broader social networks associated with contemporary practices of mobility (Duncan,
2008). These multiple identities are often born out of awareness of multilocality (Ghosh and
Wang, 2003: 277) and through the spatial and temporal frames in which they are built, they
are or become transnational (see Smith, 2001).
Research suggests that, for many undertaking an OE or gap year, there is a shift towards
developing a more fl exible attitude toward career progression and so defi nitions of self become
about mixed patterns of job and life commitments; where work and leisure complement each
