Seite - 11 - in Mobile Culture Studies - The Journal, Band 3/2017

Mobile Culture Studies. The Journal 3 2o17 Rainer Kazig, Damien Masson, Rachel Thomas | Atmospheres and Mobility 11 pheric orders. Moreover, how to perform bodily agency as the aforementioned processes are embodied, and consequently not necessarily conscious and defendable? Finally, can atmospheres move? While the possibility of mobility of objects, persons or ideas has often been discussed, little consideration has been given to how atmospheres can be trans- ferred from one place to another, or to how ideal, conceptual atmospheres can be set into place, and with which imaginaries going along. This problem includes the question of the professional conception of atmosphere and its transmission in a built situation. It also includes the question of the dissemination of conceptual models of urban space and of the desired atmospheres these entail. Lastly, at an individual level, it includes the topic of migration and of the mobility of atmospheres as part of the motion of cultures and identity. These objects remain understudied and offer the potential for further research at the intersection of mobility, atmospheres and culture. II Mobility and atmospheres: a cultural matter We want to focus in the following on the culturalisation of the research field at the intersec- tion of the research on atmospheres and mobilities. It is slightly different from the challenges we discussed before because it proposes to link it further to a third field of research. With the concept of cultures of mobility, the culturalisation is well established in the research on transport and mobilities (Lanzendorf 2013, Aldred & Jungnickel 2014), whilst it is – besides of conceptual papers that plead for a further consideration of the cultural (Kazig 2013a, Kazig & Masson 2016) – hardly developed in the field of research on atmospheres. The fact that this issue is published in a journal that is associated to the field of cultural studies gives a perfect frame to highlight the interest for a further “culturalisation” of the research on atmospheres that until now did not find expression in empirical research. We want to stress here, first of all, three perspectives to take cultural concerns into consideration, at the intersection of research on mobilities and atmospheres. Introducing a culturally informed understanding in this field can be useful in order to take into account differences in the experience of atmospheres on the move, a problem that is widely neglected in the existing research. Until now, the majority of empirically based papers are on the contrary oriented on shared experiences (Chelkoff & Thibaud 1997, Kazig 2008, Bissell 2010). However, different authors stress that biography, socialisation, and culture contribute to the development of differentiated sensual dispositions (Löw 2001, Werhahn 2011), with the consequence that atmospheres are not experienced by everyone in the same way. This insight is important for the discussion about the accessibility and the amenity value of public spaces that are, to an important degree, shaped by their atmospheric qualities (Thomas 2005). To focus on this topic does not only mean to advance the research on atmospheres. It also leads to a cultu- rally differentiated understanding of the effects of urban design and urban development on the accessibility of urban spaces, and – by doing so – can contribute to critical urban research in the context of social and cultural diversity. A second perspective focuses on the construction of identities. It is related to the under- standing of mobility as a meaningful practice that contributes to the construction of place and identities. Jensen (2009) developed this research question by linking cultures of movement to the issue of identity formation. He suggests to think the process of identity formation not only