A solid partner in a uid world and/or line of ight?

Interpreting second
homes in the era of mobilities
KEITH HALFACREE
Halfacree, K. 2011. A solid partner in a fluid world and/or line of flight? Interpreting second homes in the era of mobilities. Norsk
Geografisk TidsskriftNorwegian Journal of Geography Vol. 65, 144153. ISSN 0029-1951.
The article is the product of the authors recent engagements in rural second home research in Norway. Sensing that the
predominant everyday meaning of second homes within Nordic countries generally is markedly different from the UK, the article
draws attention to how they are contextually interpreted. From a focus on everyday life and post-capitalist critique, attention is
given to the diversity of interpretations applicable to second homes consumption. Whilst mainstream interpretations or readings
tend to stress either the elite character of second homes consumption or rootedness within more democratic tradition,
foregrounding the context of the era of mobilities presents two different readings. First, second home consumption appears
congruent with a dynamic heterolocalist existence, whereby home is distributed across places of differing experiential qualities for
the consumer. Second, and more radically, the latter reading can be challenged. It is suggested that instead of being functional for
achieving home within the era of mobilities, second home consumption, not least through association with both representational
and more-than-representational aspects of rurality, traces an attempted line of flight to a heterotopic place and to potentially post-
capitalist existential priorities. The conclusion calls for more in-depth research on second home consumption, whilst noting that
despite any earlier radical message second homes remain elite forms of consumption.
Keywords: consumption, mobilities, reading for difference, rurality, second homes
Keith Halfacree, Geography (College of Science), Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP UK.
E-mail: k.h.halfacree@swansea.ac.uk
Introduction: travel broadens the horizon
Until very recently second homes
1
rarely crossed my
academic radar. When they had I treated them largely in a
critical, even dismissive manner. Second homes were only
for the rich, reflecting their predominant representation
within Britain as an elite form of consumption contributing
to the production of an increasingly elite rural social
geography (compare Coppock 1977; Gallent et al. 2005;
McIntyre 2006; Paris 2011). Search for second homes on
the BBC News website, for example, and overwhelmingly
negative stories immediately appear (Table 1). However,
recent years have opened my eyes to some very different
interpretations and presentations of second homes and it is
this altered perspective that inspired the present article.
In particular, although an initial stimulus to reading
second homes differently was provided by a conference
paper by Nick Gallent (subsequently published as Gallent
2007), since 2008 I have been fortunate enough to have been
able to build upon some established links with both the
Centre for Rural Research and the Department of Geogra-
phy at NTNU, Trondheim, and be exposed to a very
different set of second home experiences, namely those
within the Nordic countries in general and in Norway in
particular. Indeed, the very co-existence of two substantial
research projects on second homes in Norway
2
that had only
limited common academic membership immediately flagged
the clear significance of this topic. This is in stark contrast,
for example, to its much lower UK research profile (Paris
2011). I soon came to agree strongly with Simone Abrams
(2007, 2) observation that One cannot be in Norway for
very long without beginning to appreciate the significance of
holiday homes.
The present article has emerged from these welcome
intellectual and personal perturbations and seeks to promote
readings of second homes and their consumption that are
different from the British norm. It is not a conventional
Norsk Geografisk TidsskriftNorwegian Journal of
Geography article in that it represents my contextually
informed interpretations of second home consumption
inspired by recent developments within social scientific
theory rather than being rooted within detailed empirical
research. However, empirical findings from the two Norwe-
gian projects, whilst not explicitly presented here, have
clearly influenced my ideas. Furthermore, as one referee
astutely observed, much of the theory I use is predominantly
Anglo-American in origin, reinforcing the articles status as
an example of what this same referee described as a
personal journey through a theoretical terrain concerning
how to think differently about current second home
consumption.
The structure of the rest of the article is as follows. First, the
idea of reading differently is introduced through brief
consideration of a body of academic work that both revisits
the taken-for-granted generally and finds within this a critique
of the supposedly all-encompassing character of present-day
capitalist society. Second, this same heterogeneous society is
then styled as expressing an era of mobilities. Heightened
emphasis on movement over stasis throws up newquestions of
home and place with a turn towards what is termed dynamic
heterolocalism. Returning to the desire to read the everyday
for difference, attention is given, thirdly, to how to interpret
second home consumption. After initially suggesting that
seeing it as congruent with consumption under present-day
capitalism is necessary but not sufficient, it is then read in the
context of dynamic heterolocalism. On the one hand, it fits
Norsk Geografisk TidsskriftNorwegian Journal of Geography Vol. 65, 144153. ISSN 0029-1951
DOI 10.1080/00291951.2011.598238 # 2011 Norwegian Geographical Society
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

H
e
l
s
i
n
k
i
]

a
t

0
6
:
1
9

0
4

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1

well with a dynamic heterolocalist existence, with numerous
writers increasingly placing it within the context of more
fluid expressions of home. On the other hand, however, a
more radical reading for difference suggests even this
interpretation is inadequate. Second home consumption
can instead represent a line of flight that betrays the same
dynamic heterolocalist condition through speaking of a
different need for place experiences rooted in both repre-
sentational and more-than-representational encounters with
the rural in particular. The conclusion stresses that second
home consumption within the era of mobilities requires
further research but, however read, remains selective and
should not be seen as any normative consumption blue-
print.
Finally, the article concentrates largely on rural second
homes, as these were the main concern of the two
Norwegian projects and dominate second home research
generally. Nonetheless, although unable to take this further
in the present article, the increasing significance of urban
second homes merits recognition, for both leisure and work
purposes (e.g. Paris 2009; 2011). Their consumption, it is
suggested, can be interpreted similarly to that of the rural
second homes, albeit with the important rural-nature
dimension that underpins the final line of flight reading
substantially excised.
Reading everyday life differently
True to his lifelong spirit of independent iconoclasm
(Merrifield 2006), Henri Lefebvre is now associated with,
amongst other important academic contributions, promot-
ing the problematisation of that most seemingly banal area:
everyday life (Gardiner 2000). Within everyday life the
daily taken-for-granted routines of living all of us engage in
most of the time Lefebvre saw not just a life broken up and
reduced to a set of dull routines underpinned by commod-
ities and exchange values (Lefebvre 1984 [1968]) although
he did see this. Instead, within this alienating milieu he also
acknowledged occasional glimpses of evidence that a
consciousness of alienation is being born, however indirectly,
and that an effort towards disalienation, no matter how
oblique and obscure, has begun (Lefebvre 1991 [1974], 66).
Thus, a task for radical academics was to extract what is
living, new, positive the worthwhile needs and fulfilments
from the negative elements: the alienations (Lefebvre 1991
[1958], 42). In short, Lefebvre clearly acknowledged the
hegemonic power and consequences of what he termed neo-
capitalism but also saw its underpinning of everyday life as
never quite the only game in town.
Since Lefebvres pioneering contributions, and in the same
spirit, a number of writers have pointed out how capitalism
is not quite the totalising force both its proponents and,
crucially, many of its critics depict it as. First, there is the
postmodern Marxism expressed through the partnership of
Katherine Gibson and Julie Graham. For Gibson-Graham
(1996; 2006), the idea that capitalism, no matter how
powerfully it has penetrated all aspects of everyday life, is
all-pervasive is a false ideology. Instead, as Stengers (2008,
55) notes, it is the master illusionist and work must be done
to undo the spells it has cast upon our imaginations.
Specifically, the tendency to separate the political from the
economic and to represent economy as a space of invariant
logics and automatic unfolding that offered no field for
intervention (Gibson-Graham 2006, xxi) is rejected. A
search is made for the grounding of a new political
imaginary (Gibson-Graham 2006, xix) within that which
already exists around the world today. Using the language
of the diverse economy [that] brings into visibility a great
diversity of economic sites and practices in any particular
location (Gibson-Graham 2006, 195), Gibson-Graham seek
to tease out elements, sometimes weakly formed and quite
transient, of a community economy oppositional to the
capitalist mainstream.
Central to Gibson-Grahams affirming constitutive pro-
ject are a range of anti-essentialist thinking techniques
(Gibson-Graham 2006, xxixxxxiii) that help us to read
what is present differently, to break free of the blinkers that
force us to see only the powerful mainstream. A key strategy
is to engage in Reading for difference rather than dom-
inance (Gibson-Graham 2006, xxxixxxii), so as to uncover
what is possible but obscured from view (Gibson-Graham
2006, xxxi). This will allow us to acknowledge future
possibilities [that] become more viable by virtue of already
being seen to exist (Gibson-Graham 2006, xxxi). As
suggested, Gibson-Graham themselves utilise such a per-
spective primarily to examine the economic sphere but the
principle can be extended to investigations of everyday life
generally.
Other writers also suggest the need to identify and
promote Lefebvres signs of dis-alienation. For example,
John Holloway (2010) sees capitalism as profoundly
cracked. In reality it expresses a society of non-correspon-
dence, in which things do not fit together functionally
(Holloway 2002, 187). People around the world in almost
every area of life are screaming against this mainstream
and making smaller or larger attempts at negating that
which exists (Holloway 2002, 23; Solnit 2005; Chatterton &
Pickerill 2010). Critically, these attempts are not about
seizing the state through conventional notions of revolution
and attaining political completion (Chatterton & Pickerill
2010, 479). Instead, there is a more anarchist emphasis on
bypassing both the mainstream and the usually proposed
ways of replacing it, which are all too easily absorbed into
Table 1. Sample of British second home controversies from the BBCs news
website
Headline Date
Battle lines over second homes 16/03/2009
MPs second home profits should be surrendered 16/02/2010
Cornwall MPs urge rethink on second homes 24/02/2010
High house prices creating brain drain across Dorset 12/04/2010
Call to end second home subsidy in Cumbria 16/04/2010
North Cornwall candidates split on second homes issue 19/04/2010
Tory candidate slams Lib Dem second home pledge 04/05/2010
Fears raised on Cornwall second home votes 11/07/2010
Holiday homes targeted by new government tax proposals 11/08/2010
Bishop of Bath and Wells voices concern over rural life 05/11/2010
Source: Simple search for the term second homes on http://search.bbc.co.uk/
undertaken 19 November 2010
NORSK GEOGRAFISK TIDSSKRIFT 65 (2011) Interpreting second homes in the era of mobilities 145
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

H
e
l
s
i
n
k
i
]

a
t

0
6
:
1
9

0
4

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1

the same logic (Stengers 2008), as the experience of so many
failed revolutions attest.
Crucially for the remaining part of this article, Holloways
sense of revolution is rooted very much within the ordinary,
within everyday life what I have called elsewhere the
extraordinary within the ordinary (Halfacree 2007). It
features axiomatically the explicit affirmation in all its
infinite richness of that which is denied (Holloway 2002,
212). In Holloways words:
To break from capital, it is not enough to flee. It is not enough to
scream. Negativity, our refusal of capital, is the crucial starting
point, theoretically and politically. But mere refusal is easily
recaptured by capital, simply because it comes up against the
capitals control of the means of production, means of doing,
means of living. For the scream to grow in strength, there must be
a recuperation of doing, a development of power-to. That implies
a re-taking of the means of doing... [and] the return of the
repressed, the revolt against fetishism... the revolt against the
process of denial. (Holloway 2002, 208, 211, my emphasis)
Consumption practices can be implicated within these
everyday revolts for less alienated everyday life (Halfacree
2010). Whilst consumption of commodities is clearly a
defining feature of any capitalist mainstream, such con-
sumption is not only . . . an aspect of [this] general problem
of commodities (Miller 1987, 189). Instead, the fate of a
commodity can be focused upon and in particular its
entanglement with its consumer following appropriation.
Through doing so, certain forms of consumption practices
may be re-readable as both in part and part of Holloways
revolt against the process of denial. Lefebvre (1991 [1958],
40), for example, saw leisure as both alienated and a revolt
against alienation. Miller (1987, 191192) expresses the
general hypothesis thus: far from being a mere commodity,
a continuation of all those processes which led up to the
object . . . the object in consumption confronts, criticizes and
finally may often subjugate these abstractions in a process of
human becoming.
Bearing in mind this inherent sense of duality within
consumption practices being part of the mainstream, on
the one hand, but also having the potential to become part
of a lived critique of that mainstream, on the other the
article will eventually take the reader to consumption of
rural second homes. This consumption will be read differ-
ently at first as not just a form of elite consumption but as a
means to express issues related to home within an era of
mobilities. Before second homes, however, this mobile
condition must be introduced.
Migration and home in the era of
mobilities
The era of mobilities and human migration
Although near constant change and transformation has
long been acknowledged as a key feature of capitalist
society (e.g. Berman 1983), over the last two decades a
number of writers have elevated mobility more generally
to existential zeitgeist (spirit of the times) status (compare
Clifford 1997; Bauman 2000; Cresswell 2006). As Sheller &
Urry (2006, 207) succinctly put it, All the world seems to
be on the move, with both an experiential and metapho-
rical sense of flux that is almost ubiquitous within everyday
life and consciousness. Humanity has entered an age of
mobility (Rolshoven 2007) or era of mobilities (Halfacree
in press, a).
Sociologist John Urry has probably done more work
than anyone in detailing this era of mobilities, both on his
own and with co-workers (e.g. Urry 2000; 2007; Hannam et
al. 2006; Larsen et al. 2006; Sheller & Urry 2006). This is
not just a task to detail the multiple forms and guises of
mobility present today, itself a major challenge (Urry 2007,
1011), but requires a conceptual re-think. Metaphors of
movement, mobility and contingent ordering need to
replace those of stasis, structure and social order within
a sociology beyond societies (Urry 2000, 18; see also
Miller 2008). A resultant new mobilities paradigm (Sheller
& Urry 2006; Urry 2007) challenges first the predominant
sedentarist tradition within social science (Cresswell 2006)
or the place-fixated paradigm of the modern age
(Rolshoven 2007, 21). This rests on the essentialist assump-
tion that boundedness and authenticity-in-place are foun-
dational to human life.
3
The mobilities paradigm also
challenges sedentarisms equally essentialist nomadic oppo-
site, which often naively exalts the supposed freedom of
lifestyles within liquid modernity (Bauman 2000). Aiming
to transcend sedentarist and nomadic conceptualisations of
place and movement (Sheller & Urry 2006, 214), the new
mobilities paradigm recognises stability-within-movement
and movement-within-stability roots and routes (Clifford
1997).
Unsurprisingly, the era of mobilities accords a central
place for migration or other kinds of semi-permanent
geographical movement (Urry 2007, 8) (see also Cresswell
2006) and it is from such a direction that interpreting second
home consumption in the 21st century can be approached
(Halfacree in press, a). Migrations importance is expressed
in the increased frequency and diversity of migratory
experiences within everyday life. However, such migration
and the more general set of mobility experiences also
impact on the human condition, including issues such as
belonging, community, identity, social-cultural expression,
and home.
Home in the era of mobilities
Surprisingly, whilst the mobilities literature encompasses
migration, it has not engaged much to date with that
conventionally most sedentarist concept of home.
4
Instead,
this issue
5
is often submerged within broader discussions of
the role and status of place (often vis-a`-vis space) in the
context of globalisation. Gustafson (2006, 2122) notes
that a number of authors suggest the experiences of
globalisation, understood broadly as the increasing exten-
sity, intensity, velocity and impact of global processes of
various kinds[, provoke] feelings of insecurity and lack of
control, which in turn give rise to a search for home, roots
and community. Thus, within the second homes literature
146 K. Halfacree NORSK GEOGRAFISK TIDSSKRIFT 65 (2011)
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

H
e
l
s
i
n
k
i
]

a
t

0
6
:
1
9

0
4

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1

Kaltenborn (1998) placed second home consumption in the
context of globalisation inducing a yearning for stability;
stability-within-movement. However, there is usually caution
in how to interpret this search for home: is it validating
traditionalism, chauvinism and xenophobia or expressing a
more radical form of resistance (Gustafson 2006, 22)? This
is an issue Harvey (1989, 292) engages with, for example,
when noting how:
as so often happens, the plunge into the maelstrom of ephemer-
ality has provoked an explosion of opposed sentiments and
tendencies. . . . Deeper questions of meaning and interpretation
. . . arise. The greater the ephemerality, the more pressing the need
to discover or manufacture some kind of eternal truth that might
lie therein. . . . a search for more secure moorings and longer-
lasting values in a shifting world.
To enable us to consider further this search for home in the
era of mobilities and then go on to relate it to second home
consumption, inspiration can be drawn from the transna-
tionalism literature (Gustafson 2006). In brief, transnational
theory developed from anthropologists Basch et al.s (1994)
representation of the multiple place attachments expressed
by international migrants (Levitt & Nyberg-Srensen 2004;
Blunt & Dowling 2006). Basch et al. (1994, 7) went on to
define transnationalism as: processes by which immigrants
forge and sustain multi-stranded social relations that link
together their societies of origin and settlement. . . . An
essential element of transnationalism is the multiplicity of
involvements that transmigrants sustain in both home and
host societies (my emphases). Thus, in contrast to sedentar-
ist perspectives on migration, transnational perspectives
regard migration as an ongoing process (Gustafson 2006,
27), present in a life-world characterized by mobility
(McIntyre 2006, 4). They move firmly towards the idea of
home formation taking place across or through multiple
locations.
Transnationalism encompasses a broad range of connec-
tions between here and there (Waldinger & Fitzgerald
2004, 1177) that are not the preserve of a narrow global
migratory elite. Yet, a transnational sensibility also retains
an emphasis on the continuing significance of home as a key
site of identity formation (Perkins & Thorns 2006; Miller
2008; Lewicka 2010). However, it is now imagined as
distributed across space-time rather than essentially orien-
tated towards and around a single point. Thus, home can
embrace rather than negate mobility (Quinn 2004; Tuulentie
2007). It is a manifestation of how places are . . . central to a
networked social life (Urry 2007, 234), but not just in terms
of their importance for face-to-face meetings.
The transnational literature thus proves a powerful
introduction to how in the era of mobilities work, home
and play are separated in time and place, and meanings and
identity are structured around not one but several places
(McIntyre et al. 2006a, 314). However, it can be brought
closer to home for lives that do not imply experiences of
international migration via Zelinsky & Lees (1998) concept
of heterolocalism. This concept sought to express how
ethnic minority communities in the USA were neither
assimilating fully nor existing as isolated ethno-cultural
islanders, but were adopting dispersed patterns of residential
location whilst retaining strong ethnic community identities.
The communities were expressed as a sequence of spatial
disjunctures (Zelinsky & Lee 1998, 287) between places of
differentiated significance within everyday life. Taking the
concept beyond such ethnic communities, dynamic hetero-
localism (Halfacree in press, a) has wider applicability.
Dynamic is appended, however, to stress how heterolocal-
ism is always shaped by motility or how an individual
appropriates what is possible in the domain of mobility and
puts this potential to use for his or her activities (Kaufmann
2002, 37). In summary, dynamic heterolocalism is concerned
with the multiple ways that identities are forged through
multiple places which do not depend on the axiomatic
sedentarist assumption of single, settled home place.
Dynamic heterolocalism and second home
consumption: towards reading for
difference
In the context of a dynamic heterolocalist condition of
everyday life, the article now turns to consider how one can
read second home consumption. Three perspectives are
given, one rooted within relatively conventional interpreta-
tions and two that read this consumption differently. Both of
the latter centre the dynamic heterolocal context, one seeing
second home consumption as falling in line with it and the
other taking a more critical stance.
Established readings: elite consumption, tradition, and
an escapist perspective
The wide literature on second homes presents a number of
interpretations of this phenomenon that vary according to a
number of criteria. Crucially, as I encountered, readings vary
considerably with nation and culture (Paris 2009; Paris
2011), reflecting the context of differing physical, socio-
economic and cultural geographies, and differing motilities.
This will be shown here by an initial focus on interpretation
rooted in the British experience before interpretations more
embedded in a Nordic context are introduced.
Interpretation of second home consumption rooted within
mainstream readings of consumption practices (Halfacree
2010) returns first to my own earlier expressed prejudices
towards or against British second homes, namely that they
were a form of conspicuous consumption by the rich. In
short, the second home, like the luxury car, expensive
jewellery or finest wines, represents a clear symbol of
economic success, an integral part of the habitus (Bourdieu
1984) of the wealthy. In terms of practical outlay and
consequence they are free to those that can afford it, very
expensive to those that cant
6
(Robinson 1989, 38). They
become objects of consumption just because the purchaser
can afford them (Paris 2009). Interpreted in this way, second
homes are indeed secondary . . . in an elite landscape for the
privileged (McIntyre 2006, 13), an interpretation that is not
only confined to Britain (e.g. Halseth 2004). Furthermore,
through the alleged impacts on local house prices, for
example, elite second home consumption is also associated
NORSK GEOGRAFISK TIDSSKRIFT 65 (2011) Interpreting second homes in the era of mobilities 147
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

H
e
l
s
i
n
k
i
]

a
t

0
6
:
1
9

0
4

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1

with a number of negative socio-economic consequences,
such as raising local house prices, as implied in Table 1
(Coppock 1977; Gallent et al. 2005). Paris (2009; 2011) thus
sees second homes increasingly as a form of gentrification,
for example.
Even in the case of the socio-economic elite, it is
interesting to examine why they partake in second home
consumption and what it provides them. What is the use
value of the second home that has such a high exchange
value? In terms of the available range of normal objects of
consumption, the wealthier the person, the broader this
range will be, so why is the second home purchased beyond
simply being a status symbol? Responding to such questions,
analysis immediately becomes more sophisticated and, in
particular, a distinct sense of escapism comes through.
Escapism can be seen to overlay interpretations of second
homes from, in particular, a Nordic perspective that stresses
their cultural rootedness within tradition less than their
elitism. As numerous authors note, Nordic second homes or
summer cottages express common heritage (Hall & Mu ller
2004a; Mu ller 2007), as part of Finnish (Periainen 2006) or
Norwegian (Abram 2007) national identity, for example.
Within Norway, Bjerke et al. (2006, 87) suggest owning a
cabin . . . seldom needs further explanation, connecting as it
does the increasingly urban Norwegian with friluftsliv
(Abram 2007), an alternative life of outdoor recreation
and simplicity (Vitters 2007). Rooted in tradition, the
second home represents a radical alterity from [the] every-
day working life (Abram 2007, 5) of modernity (Kaltenborn
1998).
Within the contemporary literature, therefore, desire for
escape is widely recognised as a key aspect of second home
consumption (McIntyre et al. 2006b), whether seen as
rooted in tradition or more as expressing class privilege.
Such consumption can thus be interpreted as expressing
attempts at Escaping modernity by seeking refuge in nature
(Williams & Van Patten 2006, 38), seeking a rural bolt-hole
(Halfacree 2010) where one can temporarily drop out
(McIntyre et al. 2006a). From this perspective, almost all
aspects of the second home, from its (typically) rural
location, to its simple design and layout, to the activities
undertaken there, to its association with leisure not work, to
the time-space rhythms of its consumption, can be seen as
opposite to those of the primary home. Hence, perhaps
rather than expressing flight, escape is the negation of the
primary home experience (Garvey 2008).
Whilst this idea of second home consumption as escape
has clear romantic appeal, suggesting a reaffirmation of
life,
7
research has increasingly shown any related sense of
definitive negation is problematic. Almost everything asso-
ciated with the primary home can also be found in the
second home (Perkins & Thorns 2006). For example, second
homes are used for work, gender patterns are often repeated
and even enhanced within them, and many second homes in
both structure and content are far from the simple summer
house of Nordic national ideologies (see case studies in Hall
& Mu ller 2004b; McIntyre et al. 2006b; Mu ller 2007). A
manifestation of this lack of difference is the growth of
commercial, purpose-built second home developments
(Bendix & Lo fgren 2007; Overvag 2009; Paris 2009) in
popular holiday areas which, in contrast to traditional
Norwegian hytter, for example, mark a continuity with
everyday and working life (Abram 2007, 5).
Close analysis of secondary home practices thus soon
leads to the conclusion that the idea that primary and
secondary homes represent distinct worlds a clear expres-
sion of sedentarist assumption (McIntyre et al. 2006a) is
untenable (Paris 2009). Second home consumers rarely
travel without baggage and the content of this baggage is
unpacked at the second home and features in subsequent
place consumption (Halfacree in press, a). Consequently,
the cabin is as much a product of daily life and normative
domesticity as it is a product of its escape (Garvey 2008,
218). However, whilst this metaphor of unpacked baggage
may suggest a machine in the garden (Marx 1964), whereby
opening the baggage will break any escapist spell, the idea of
connection rather than escape can be read differently and
more positively.
Reading differently: a dynamic heterolocalist
complementary perspective
A form of elite and/or traditionally rooted consumption that
strives to provide an escape-through-negation from the
assorted stresses of everyday life is one way in which second
home consumption can be read. Such a reading is a
necessary part of the overall explanatory picture, for
example, in order to recognise the continued selective
consumption of second homes even within relatively egali-
tarian countries (in Norway 40% of the population may have
access to an estimated 420,000 second homes (Overvag
2009), but 60% do not), but it is also inadequate. Instead, as
researchers have increasingly noted, second home consump-
tion can also be seen as a ploy or tactic to engage creatively
and potentially critically with the practice of home within
the era of mobilities.
Philosopher Edward Casey (2001) maintains how place
and self are mutually constitutive the geographical self
(Casey 2001, 683) even when a scattered self of
postmodern society . . . is correlated with the disarray of
place (Casey 2001, 684, emphases removed). Indeed, he
goes on to argue how: the self is [not] merely enfeebled by
nonrobust places . . . [but] can also make a virtue of the
circumstance by becoming more responsive to differences
between places . . . The more places are levelled down, the
more . . . may selves be led to seek out thick places in which
their own personal enrichment can flourish (Casey 2001,
685).
Applying this perspective to the home, whilst (post)mo-
dernity may be seen to thin . . . the primary home of
meaning (Williams & Van Patten 2006, 38), people may be
increasingly seeking out second homes to complete their
sense of both self and home (Tuulentie 2007). Thus, the
second home forms a key node within the dynamic hetero-
localist geographically extended network of social relations
and . . . multiplicity of dispersed people and regions
(Williams & Kaltenborn 1999, 227). Within multilocality
as a way of life (Rolshoven 2007) that links mobility,
materiality and belonging (Bendix & Lo fgren 2007, 15),
148 K. Halfacree NORSK GEOGRAFISK TIDSSKRIFT 65 (2011)
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

H
e
l
s
i
n
k
i
]

a
t

0
6
:
1
9

0
4

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1

the second home supplies aspects or dimensions of lifestyle
that are not offered in [the] primary home or ordinary life
(Bjerke et al. 2006, 88).
Returning to the idea of escape, it may therefore be more
the case that second home consumption represents an
escape for home, not just from home (Crouch 1994, 96,
my emphasis). It comprises an act of connecting rather than
an act of distancing (Rolshoven 2007, 17). Overall, there-
fore, a dynamic heterolocalist reading of second home
consumption promotes the idea that primary and secondary
homes, and lives lived within them, are essentially comple-
mentary and mutually reinforcing (McIntyre 2006; McIntyre
et al. 2006a). In the words of Perkins & Thorns (2006, 80):
Second-home owners escape their primary homes for a
simpler life during their holidays and, once satiated, escape
their second homes to have a more challenging, complex and
stimulating life for the remainder of the time. In this process,
primary and secondary homes become extensions of each
other both in a sense home, and a place of escape.
Interpretation of second home consumption could end
here, with this initial stab at corralling evidence from what is
now a huge range of studies and contextualising it fully
within the era of mobilities; building on the excellent recent
edited collections of Hall & Mu ller (2004b), McIntyre et al.
(2006b) and Brand & Lo fgren (2007). In short, second
homes can be a solid partner in a fluid world
8
expressing
a territory of rootedness (Tuulentie 2006, 148) for those
able and willing to access them. Their rising numbers and
prominence, certainly within Nordic countries (e.g. Bjerke et
al. 2006; Sta 2007; Vitters 2007; Overvag 2009), is thus
readily understandable. However, a more developed sensi-
tivity to reading for difference sharpened by my own need
to read second homes differently through my Norwegian
exposure suggests such a conclusion would still be
inadequate. It is an all too neat and functionalist rendering
of a more confused and less finished picture.
On the one hand, second homes may not complete the self
and/or consolidate home, at least not in any comprehensive
or conclusive manner. To reverse the emphasis given earlier,
whilst Lefebvre recognised spontaneous critique of the
everyday within leisure practices, he also stressed that since
these practices remain in everyday life, they are alienation
(Lefebvre 1991 [1958], 40). One must ask, therefore, whether
and to what extent second home owners are more existen-
tially grounded or fulfilled than those who do not consume
such a commodity. In this respect a personal sense of unease
comes from observations such as family practices being
displaced to the spaces of and around the second home
(Vitters 2007) or Tuulentie (2006, 148) asserting that
Home is not only here and now but, in a contemporary
world of movement, is more and more elsewhere, perhaps
endlessly deferred. Similarly, Bendix & Lo fgren (2007, 8, 14)
write of the threat of a double homelessness, noting the
often challenging practical and emotional divisions of labor
that come from living in two places. Future research clearly
needs to explore such issues, notwithstanding suggestions
returned to below of the restorative potential of Norwe-
gian cabin life (Bjerke et al. 2006), for example.
On the other hand, one can again be more positive and
revisit Millers (1987, 192) object in consumption and
examine what second home consumption does provide. In
Tuulenties (2007, 295) words, Everyday life and the whole
lifespan are narrated when speaking of the second home;
then what more can be read from this story? Williams & Van
Patten (2006, 33) give us an introductory cue or clue:
Globalization appears to have given mobility and rooted-
ness new meaning, paradoxically both by empowering
individuals to create multicentred identities and simulta-
neously imploring them to seek out and protect what remains
of the authentic that modernity makes so elusive (my
emphasis).
Reading still more differently: a line of flight critical
perspective
[A] line of flight does not entail denouncing the territory but
betraying it: bringing into disclosure an ingredient that both
belongs to the territory and connects with an outside against
which this territory protects itself. Such an outside is not an
absolute one that would transcend the territory and allow it
to be defined by what it refuses or protects itself against.
Furthermore, the outside of the territory and the definition of
this outside as dangerous were produced together with the
territorial refrain (ritournelle), shaping both the inside and
what is kept outside. Correlatively, there is no line of flight
that could act as a voie royale, there is no definitive flight, no
model others would have to follow. (Stengers 2008, 42)
Inspired by Stengerss complex exposition, in this section I
argue that second home consumption can be read differently
as a form of line of flight (Deleuze & Guattari 1987) that
betrays the previous dynamic heterolocalist reading. It does
this through unsettling its functionalist (re)integration of the
geographical self the home deferred thus becomes central
in part through returning to some of the escapist and
tradition aspects of the established readings. To get to this
new alliance, the present article considers representational
and then more-than-representational elements of specifically
rural second home consumption.
9
I have already suggested that the second home typically
represents a different everyday life experience than that
obtained at the primary home. Whilst, as noted above,
recent developments in second home production and con-
sumption may be undermining the subsequently experienced
reality of these negations of everyday life, an imagined
vacation from modernity clearly retains broad appeal. This
in itself, again following Lefebvre on leisure, may be seen
as a dissenting commentary on the everyday, part of
Holloways (2002) scream, with its represented space of
critical difference.
On top of this sense of critical differentiation represented
by the second home, the rural location is also far from
incidental. With everyday life now largely urban, the rural
represents not just the Other of the city but also an Other of
everyday life generally. Idyllic rural representations, of which
Bell (2006, 150) recognises three ideal types, namely the
pastoral (farmscapes), the natural (wildscapes) and the
sporting (adventurescapes) position rural places as
relaxed and relaxing, scenic yet human scale, organic and
natural, authentic and rooted, and all-in-all external to or
NORSK GEOGRAFISK TIDSSKRIFT 65 (2011) Interpreting second homes in the era of mobilities 149
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

H
e
l
s
i
n
k
i
]

a
t

0
6
:
1
9

0
4

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1

otherwise distanced from modern society (Short 1991;
Baylina & Berg 2010). Moreover, as Bunce (2003, 15)
suggests: the values that sustain the rural idyll speak of a
profound and human need for connection with land, nature
and community, with these latter three aspects all having
some grounding within material rural reality (Halfacree in
press, b). The representational association between rural and
nature seems especially important, not least given the latters
association with building communities and traditions that
provide an enormously significant sense of meaning and
value in societies struggling to break free from the modern
world (Macnaghten & Urry 1998, 4). As naturalist Richard
Mabey (2005, 19) succinctly expresses it: We constantly
refer back to the natural world to try to discover who we
are.
Besides the representation of the rural second home
speaking of a different everyday reality a heterotopia to
use Foucaults (1986) celebrated expression attention must
be given to how and the extent to which this difference is
actually experienced. Indeed, if second homes are presented
as heterotopic places (Tuulentie 2006), then such an
examination is not only desirable but essential, since
heterotopic places are effectively enacted utopia (Foucault
1986, 24) and not solely imagined (utopic).
First, it must be noted that whether or not differences
represented by a rural second home are actually experienced
is highly variable. This is expressed, for example, by the
already noted convergence of activities and behaviours
within primary and secondary homes, often making strong
distinctions between the two conceptually difficult. None-
theless, and implicit in their continued and growing appeal,
it is also clear that many people do obtain much of what
they anticipate through second home consumption. Studies
generally concur with Stedman (2006, 142) that second
homes hardly appear to be second (see also Rolshoven
2007). Thus, Garvey (2008, 218219) heralds the cabins
place in providing rupture in a life otherwise characterised by
routine and integration . . . in breaking the routine of modern
living, individuals are evaluating the present in different
ways (my emphases). Note here how the emphasised terms
hark back to the escape idea of second home consumption
more than the more integrative and functionalist dynamic
localism interpretation.
It is not just the degree of congruence between represented
and experienced, however, that may be critical to the
success (or not) of second home consumption. Once again,
the rural location appears critical. As already suggested, the
association between representations of rural and land,
nature and community appears especially powerful within
the appeal and consumption of the rural second home (e.g.
see Abram 2007 on the sustained link between hytter and
friluftsliv). This association is enhanced by recognising that
the rural is not just experienced through representations but
also more-than-representationally.
By drawing attention to the more-than-representational, it
is argued that rurality should not be treated as [a] mere
discursive construct . . . [a] product . . . of a mind devoid of
corporeality . . . [since this] is untenable for one reason: we
think, and thus we socially construct, with our bodies
(Carolan 2008, 408). The rural is not a passive preformed
surface (Ingold 2008, 1802), as much of how people know it
comes from their sensing bodies being within it (Casey 2001;
Wylie 2003). Particular attention is drawn to affective
aspects of rurality (Halfacree in press, b), or the feelings,
emotions, and actions brought about through engagement
with the materiality of rural places (Blackman & Venn
2010).
Affective dimensions appear to be of considerable sig-
nificance within second home consumption (Williams & Van
Patten 2006), as is the case with places of attraction
generally (Urry 2007, 253). For example, through a focus
on the restorative and affective benefits of Norwegian cabin
life, Bjerke et al. (2006) drew out the mental and emotional
importance of experiences of nature, and the role played by
such affectively imbued concepts as fascination. As these
authors note, natures restorative potential is widely
acknowledged (e.g. Hartig et al. 1996). It also features
strongly within so-called therapeutic landscapes (Lea 2008)
and in place attachment (Lewicka 2010), such that an
element of the unwinding that typically accompanies
second home consumption surely relates to affective experi-
ences of inhabitation (Ingold 2008). Through the rural
second home place, the body of the second home consumer
both bears the traces of the places it has known (Casey
2001, 688) including the urban primary home place of
everyday life and goes out to meet that place, facilitating a
coming in of places into the body (Casey 2001, 688).
Through a radical reading for difference of the represen-
tational and more-than-representational dimensions of rural
second home consumption, this ongoing practice can be
interpreted as inscribing a metaphorical life raft (Halfacree
2010). The second home forms the nucleus of a heterotopic
space from which critical engagement with a dysfunctional
world can become grounded or emplaced. However, more
than being solely a life-raft inscribed within the contours of
a dynamic heterolocalist condition although it does work
this way rural second home consumption also presents a
line of flight (Stengers 2008) from everyday life. Second
home consumption betrays everyday life, disclosing exis-
tential inadequacies within the latter, not least around
experiencing home, whilst being still grounded within it.
Rurality, both representational and more-than-representa-
tional, appears central to this critical expression. Second
home consumption seeks connection with a more natural,
grounded outside or experience of home that mainstream
everyday life undermines and evicts yet paradoxically also
seeks to re-engage through promoting existentially compen-
satory consumption practices, including those associated
with second homes.
From the line of flight interpretation, second home
consumption is less an attempt to gain a solid partner in
a fluid world than an attempt to temporarily disengage from
a deficient mainstream everyday life, albeit a life that the
consumer nonetheless remains part of and which even
facilitates this same critical consumption practice. Further-
more, whilst second home consumption can thus be inter-
preted as both escapist and complementary, it can also be
seen to maintain a sustained critical stance, as I suggest that
neither escape nor existential completion are ever conclu-
sively attained. It is within this sustained critical perspective
150 K. Halfacree NORSK GEOGRAFISK TIDSSKRIFT 65 (2011)
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

H
e
l
s
i
n
k
i
]

a
t

0
6
:
1
9

0
4

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1

on everyday life that I consider lie the seeds of a radical
political expression within second consumption.
Conclusion: from initial acts of
insurrection
The arguments and suggestions in this article endorse the
frequent call by second home researchers for further
research in this area, not least in terms of how second
homes are consumed after the initial act of purchase (Miller
1987). Perkins & Thorns (2006, 81) call for more grounded
empirical study of the experience of living in the second
home, as part of an anthropology of the home (Miller
2008, 297). Such work particularly needs to focus on issues
such as second home consumers mobility strategies, plans,
and identities (Mu ller 2007, 199) and has begun to be
addressed in publications such as Ethnologia Europaea
(Bendix & Lo fgren 2007). Within such research, I feel that
exploring the rurality of this consumption, including the still
under-researched affective dimensions, merits specific atten-
tion for investigating adequately the presence and strength
of the proposed line of flight reading.
In conclusion, in this article I have presented second home
consumption ultimately in a more radical narrative light
than is conventionally the case. This has been done by
drawing upon a wide range of social scientific literature, as
well as from more personal experiences. The latter comprise
an academically contextualised exposure to a very different
cultural emplacement of second homes to that predominat-
ing within the authors own country of the UK.
First, second home consumption can be interpreted as
providing an important dimension of home within an
increasingly dynamic heterolocalist existence. This reading
clearly also speaks something of personal and political
compromise (Halfacree in press, a), since it is to at least
partially accept the existential dilution of urban everyday life
by accepting a promise of rural re-enchantment (Maffesoli
1987; Thrift 2003).
Second, second home consumption can be interpreted in a
less recuperated manner as expressing a line of flight from
everyday life, challenging the dominant refrain rather than
harmonising with it. Its narrative of rural home/nature/place
together as inhabitation (Ingold 2008) can be seen not only to
present a tactic to complete the geographical self (Casey
2001) but also to express Holloways (2002) revolts against
denial. Nonetheless, despite considerable ongoing growth in
numbers (Paris 2009; 2011), second home consumption
presents no voie royale for all to followin the era of mobilities.
First, it is vital to restate how second homes remain a form of
elite consumption, absolutely when seen globally, certainly
when set in the context of the global North alone, and even
when observed just within countries with strong and broadly
democratic cabin traditions. Second, as the line of light
reading makes clear, there is no definitive flight from either
(capitalist) consumption or the consumers immersion within
Lefebvres everyday life generally. Nevertheless, and to end
on a positive note, if joy is a fine initial act of insurrection
(Solnit 2005, 31), then the often very considerable existential
rewards gained through consuming second homes must not
be gainsaid. Radical critics must thus go on and try to shape
and place them within a broader post-capitalist project to
reclaim and rebalance everyday life generally (Chatterton &
Pickerill 2010).
Notes
1 In terms of what is understood by second home, I initially follow
Shucksmiths (1983, 174) denition of an occasional residence of a
household that usually lives elsewhere and which is primarily used for
recreation purposes. However, as the article progresses this may be seen as
increasingly inadequate. Indeed, attention should be drawn both to the long
global history of second home ownership and the great diversity of forms
and experiences apparent around the world today (Bendix & Lo fgren 2007;
Rolshoven 2007; Paris 2011).
2 The two projects, for which I acted in an advisory capacity, were
Conceptions of centre and periphery and mobilitys transforming power
(Project leader: Winfried Ellingsen) and The second home phenomenon
and new rural conicts. Implications for policies for a rural part-time
repopulation (Project leader: Johan Fredrik Rye).
3 Sedentarism is represented, for example, within the humanistic geography
tradition (Relph 1976), anti-nomadic prejudices (Malkki 1992), and in
census concepts of usual residence (Gustafson 2006; Paris 2009).
4 The home literature has not engaged much with mobilities either, with the
exception of work on transnationalism (Blunt & Dowling 2006). This is
perhaps largely because, as Paris (2009, 295) recently noted, there is an
implicit assumption that there is one such special valued place [home] for
each household.
5 This also applies to the issue of dwelling, which for clarity is largely
overlooked here; see Gallent (2007) and McIntyre (2006) for excellent
considerations of second homes and dwelling.
6 The line is from Bruce Robinsons late 1960s lm Withnail and I (1986) and
refers to the protagonists access to a dilapidated second home in the
English Lake District.
7 Per Pettersons novel Out Stealing Horses (2006) is an interesting expression
of this reafrmation within the Norwegian second homes context.
8 Slogan advertising Fabricom engineering services noted by the author at
Stavanger Airport, 21 March 2010.
9 It is here that interpretation of urban second home consumption (not
covered in this article), is likely to diverge.
Manuscript submitted 15 December 2010; accepted 21 May 2011
References
Abram, S. 2007. Movement and nature: Holiday practices and Norwegian
hytter. Paper presented at the 1st Performing Nature Workshop, Depart-
ment of Social Anthropology, University of Oslo, August 2007. [Unpub-
lished]
Basch, L., Glick-Schiller, N. & Szanton-Blanc, C. 1994. Nations Unbound:
Transnational Projects, Postcolonial Predicaments, and Deterritorialized
Nation-States. Gordon & Breach, Langhorne, PA.
Bauman, Z. 2000. Liquid Modernity. Polity, Cambridge.
Acknowledgements. I wish to thank all those I have met and engaged with in
Norway and elsewhere over the past few years who have had research interests
in rural second homes and related developments. There are too many people
to list individually, but special thanks go to Nina Gunnerud Berg, Winfried
Ellingsen, Svein Frisvoll, Kjell Overvag, Vicent Querol, Mar a Jesu s Rivera
Escribano, and Johan Fredrik Rye. As for the article itself, the usual
disclaimers apply but I very much thank four constructive and insightful
referees.
NORSK GEOGRAFISK TIDSSKRIFT 65 (2011) Interpreting second homes in the era of mobilities 151
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

H
e
l
s
i
n
k
i
]

a
t

0
6
:
1
9

0
4

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1

Baylina, M. & Berg, N. 2010. Selling the countryside: Representations of
rurality in Norway and Spain. European Urban and Regional Studies 17,
277292.
Bell, D. 2006. Variations on the rural idyll. Cloke, P., Marsden, T. & Mooney,
P. (eds.) Handbook of Rural Studies, 149160. Sage, London.
Bendix, R. & Lo fgren, O. 2007. Special Issue: Double homes, double lives?
Ethnologia Europaea 37, 7148.
Berman, M. 1983. All That is Solid Melts into Air. Verso, London.
Bjerke, T., Kaltenborn, B. & Vitters, J. 2006. Cabin life: Restorative and
affective aspects. McIntyre, N., Williams, D. & McHugh, K. (eds.) Multiple
Dwelling and Tourism: Negotiating Place, Home and Identity, 87102.
CABI, Wallingford.
Blackman, L. & Venn, C. 2010. Affect. Body and Society 16, 728.
Blunt, A. & Dowling, R. 2006. Home. Routledge, London.
Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
Bunce, M. 2003. Reproducing rural idylls. Cloke, P. (ed.) Country Visions, 14
30. Pearson, Harlow.
Carolan, M. 2008. More-than-representational knowledge/s of the country-
side: How we think as bodies. Sociologia Ruralis 48, 408422.
Casey, E. 2001. Between geography and philosophy: What does it mean to be
in the place-world? Annals of the Association of American Geographers 91,
683693.
Chatterton, P. & Pickerill, J. 2010. Everyday activism and transitions towards
post-capitalist worlds. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers
35, 475490.
Clifford, J. 1997. Routes: Travel and Translation in the Late Twentieth Century.
Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Coppock, J. 1977. Second Homes: Curse or Blessing? Pergamon, Oxford.
Cresswell, T. 2006. On the Move: Mobility in the Modern Western World.
Routledge, London.
Crouch, D. 1994. Home, escape and identity: Rural cultures and sustainable
tourism. Bramwell, B. & Lane, B. (eds.) Rural Tourism and Sustainable
Development, 93101. Channel View, Clevedon.
Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. 1987. A Thousand Plateaus. University of
Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Foucault, M. 1986. Of other spaces. Diacritics 16, 2227.
Gallent, N. 2007. Second homes, community and a hierarchy of dwelling.
Area 39, 97106.
Gallent, N., Mace, A. & Tewdwr-Jones, M. 2005. Second Homes: European
Perspectives and UK Policies. Ashgate, Aldershot.
Gardiner, M. 2000. Critiques of Everyday Life. Routledge, London.
Garvey, P. 2008. The Norwegian country cabin and functionalism: A tale of
two modernities. Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale 16, 203220.
Gibson-Graham, J.K. 1996. The End of Capitalism As We Knew It. Blackwell,
Oxford.
Gibson-Graham, J.K. 2006. A Postcapitalist Politics. University of Minnesota
Press, London.
Gustafson, P. 2006. Place attachment and mobility. McIntyre, N., Williams,
D. & McHugh, K. (eds.) Multiple Dwelling and Tourism: Negotiating Place,
Home and Identity, 1731. CABI, Wallingford.
Halfacree, K. 2007. Still surprises in store: Revisiting the ordinary in rural
geography. Documents dAna`lisi Geogra`ca 50, 87103.
Halfacree, K. 2010. Reading rural consumption practices for difference: Bolt-
holes, castles and life-rafts. Culture Unbound 2, 241263.
Halfacree, K. In press, a. Heterolocal identities? Counter-urbanisation,
second homes and rural consumption in the era of mobilities. Population,
Space and Place.
Halfacree, K. In press, b. Interpreting rurality in the 21st century: From
effacement to re-invention. Kulcsar, L. & Curtis, K. (eds.) International
Handbook of Rural Demography. Springer, New York.
Hall, C. & Mu ller, D. 2004a. Introduction: Second homes, curse or blessing?
Revisited. Hall, C. & Muller, D. (eds.) Tourism, Mobility and Second
Homes, 314. Channel View, Clevedon.
Hall, C. & Muller, D. (eds.) 2004b. Tourism, Mobility and Second Homes.
Channel View, Clevedon.
Halseth, G. 2004. The cottage privilege: Increasingly elite landscapes of
second homes in Canada. Hall, C. & Mu ller, D. (eds.) Tourism, Mobility
and Second Homes, 3554. Channel View, Clevedon.
Hannam, K., Sheller, M. & Urry, J. 2006. Editorial: Mobilities, immobilities
and moorings. Mobilities 1, 122.
Hartig, T., Bo o k, A., Garvill, J., Olsson, T. & Garling, T. 1996. Environmental
inuences on psychological restoration. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology
37, 378393.
Harvey, D. 1989. The Condition of Postmodernity. Blackwell, Oxford.
Holloway, J. 2002. Change the World Without Taking Power. Pluto, London.
Holloway, J. 2010. Crack Capitalism. Pluto, London.
Ingold, T. 2008. Bindings against boundaries: Entanglements of life in an
open world. Environment and Planning A 40, 17961810.
Kaltenborn, B. 1998. The alternative home: Motives of recreation home use.
Norsk Geogrask Tidsskrift 52, 121134.
Kaufmann, V. 2002. Re-Thinking Mobility: Contemporary Sociology. Ashgate,
Aldershot.
Larsen, J., Urry, J. & Axhausen, K. 2006. Mobilities, Networks, Geographies.
Ashgate, Aldershot.
Lea, J. 2008. Retreating to nature: Rethinking therapeutic landscapes. Area
40, 9098.
Lefebvre, H. 1984 [1968]. Everyday Life in the Modern World. Transaction
Publishers, New Brunswick.
Lefebvre, H. 1991 [1958]. Critique of Everyday Life. Vol. 1. Verso, London.
Lefebvre, H. 1991 [1974]. The Production of Space. Blackwell, Oxford.
Levitt, P. & Norberg-Srensen, N. 2004. The transnational turn in migration
studies. Global Migration Perspectives 6. Global Commission on Interna-
tional Migration, Geneva.
Lewicka, M. 2010. Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40
years? Journal of Environmental Psychology. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.
10.001
Mabey, R. 2005. Nature Cure. Chatto & Windus, London.
Macnaghten, P. & Urry, J. 1998. Contested Natures. Sage, London.
Maffesoli, M. 1987. Sociality as legitimation of sociological method. Current
Sociology 35, 6987.
Malkki, L. 1992. National Geographic: The rooting of peoples and the
territorialization of national identity among scholars and refugees. Cultural
Anthropology 7, 2444.
Marx, L. 1964. The Machine in the Garden. Oxford University Press, New
York.
McIntyre, N. 2006. Introduction. McIntyre, N., Williams, D. & McHugh, K.
(eds.) Multiple Dwelling and Tourism: Negotiating Place, Home and Identity,
314. CABI, Wallingford.
McIntyre, N., Williams, D. & McHugh, K. 2006a. Multiple dwelling: Prospect
and retrospect. McIntyre, N., Williams, D. & McHugh, K. (eds.) Multiple
Dwelling and Tourism: Negotiating Place, Home and Identity, 313322.
CABI, Wallingford.
McIntyre, N., Williams, D. & McHugh, K. (eds.) 2006b. Multiple Dwelling and
Tourism: Negotiating Place, Home and Identity. CABI, Wallingford.
Merrield, A. 2006. Henri Lefebvre: A Critical Introduction. Routledge,
London.
Miller, D. 1987. Material Culture and Mass Consumption. Blackwell, Oxford.
Miller, D. 2008. The Comfort of Things. Polity, Cambridge.
Mu ller, D. 2007. Second homes in the Nordic countries: Between common
heritage and exclusive commodity. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism 7, 193201.
Overvag, K. 2009. Second Homes in Eastern Norway. Doctoral theses at
NTNU 2009:238. Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Trondheim.
Paris, C. 2009. Re-positioning second homes within housing studies: House-
hold investment, gentrication, multiple residence, mobility and hyper-
consumption. Housing, Theory and Society 26, 292310.
Paris, C. 2011. Afuence, Mobility and Second Home Ownership. Routledge,
London.
Periainen, K. 2006. The summer cottage: A dream in the Finnish forest.
McIntyre, N., Williams, D. & McHugh, K. (eds.) Multiple Dwelling and
Tourism: Negotiating Place, Home and Identity, 103113. CABI, Wall-
ingford.
Perkins, H. & Thorns, D. 2006. Home away from home: The primary/
secondary home relationship. McIntyre, N., Williams, D. & McHugh, K.
(eds.) Multiple Dwelling and Tourism: Negotiating Place, Home and Identity,
6781. CABI, Wallingford.
152 K. Halfacree NORSK GEOGRAFISK TIDSSKRIFT 65 (2011)
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

H
e
l
s
i
n
k
i
]

a
t

0
6
:
1
9

0
4

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1

Petterson, P. 2006. Out Stealing Horses. Vintage, London.
Quinn, B. 2004. Dwelling through multiple places: A case study of second
home ownership in Ireland. Hall, C. & Muller, D. (eds.) Tourism, Mobility
and Second Homes, 113129. Channel View, Clevedon.
Relph, E. 1976. Place and Placelessness. Pion, London.
Robinson, B. 1989. Withnail and I. Bloomsbury, London.
Rolshoven, J. 2007. The temptations of the provisional: Multilocality as a way
of life. Ethnologia Europaea 37, 1725.
Sheller, M. & Urry, J. 2006. The new mobilities paradigm. Environment and
Planning A 38, 207226.
Short, J. 1991. Imagined Country. Routledge, London.
Shucksmith, M. 1983. Second homes a framework for policy. Town Planning
Review 54, 174193.
Solnit, R. 2005. Hope in the Dark. Canongate, Edinburgh.
Stedman, R. 2006. Places of escape: Second-home meanings in northern
Wisconsin, USA. McIntyre, N., Williams, D. & McHugh, K. (eds.) Multiple
Dwelling and Tourism. Negotiating Place, Home and Identity, 129144.
CABI, Wallingford.
Stengers, I. 2008. Experimenting with refrains: Subjectivity and the challenge
of escaping modern dualisms. Subjectivity 22, 3859.
Sta, E. 2007. Urban cottages rural homes? Changing home cultures:
Challenges towards sustainable development. Paper presented at European
Network for Housing Research International Conference, Sustainable
Urban Areas, Rotterdam. www.enhr2007rotterdam.nl/documents/W15_
paper_Stoa.pdf (accessed December 2009).
Thrift, N. 2003. Still life in nearly present time: The object of nature. Cloke, P.
(ed.) Country Visions, 308331. Pearson, Harlow.
Tuulentie, S. 2006. Tourists making themselves at home: Second homes as a
part of tourist careers. McIntyre, N., Williams, D. & McHugh, K. (eds.)
Multiple Dwelling and Tourism: Negotiating Place, Home and Identity, 145
157. CABI, Wallingford.
Tuulentie, S. 2007. Settled tourists: Second homes as a part of tourist life
stories. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 7, 282301.
Urry, J. 2000. Sociology beyond Societies. Routledge, London.
Urry, J. 2007. Mobilities. Polity, Cambridge.
Vitters, G. 2007. Norwegian cabin life in transition. Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism 7, 267281.
Waldinger, R. & Fitzgerald, D. 2004. Transnationalism in question. American
Journal of Sociology 109, 11771195.
Williams, D. & Kaltenborn, B. 1999. Leisure places and modernity: The use
and meaning of recreational cottages in Norway and the USA. Crouch, D.
(ed.) Leisure/Tourism Geographies: Practices and Geographical Knowledge,
214230. Routledge, London.
Williams, D. & Van Patten, S. 2006. Home and away? Creating identities and
sustaining places in a multi-centred world. McIntyre, N., Williams, D. &
McHugh, K. (eds.) Multiple Dwelling and Tourism Negotiating Place, Home
and Identity, 3250. CABI, Wallingford.
Wylie, J. 2003. Landscape, performance and dwelling: A Glastonbury case
study. Cloke, P. (ed.) Country Visions, 136157. Pearson, Harlow.
Zelinsky, W. & Lee, B. 1998. Heterolocalism: An alternative model of the
sociospatial behaviour of immigrant ethnic communities. International
Journal of Population Geography 4, 281298.
NORSK GEOGRAFISK TIDSSKRIFT 65 (2011) Interpreting second homes in the era of mobilities 153
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

H
e
l
s
i
n
k
i
]

a
t

0
6
:
1
9

0
4

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1