{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"1dc0854c-957b-4fb1-af9a-bb4fdb76b77e","title":"Time, Consumption and Everyday Life Practice, Materiality and Culture","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"1dc0854c-957b-4fb1-af9a-bb4fdb76b77e","id":"1dc0854c-957b-4fb1-af9a-bb4fdb76b77e","uuid":"1dc0854c-957b-4fb1-af9a-bb4fdb76b77e","title":"Time, Consumption and Everyday Life Practice, Materiality and Culture","normalized_title":"timeconsumptionandeverydaylifepracticematerialityandculture","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"isbns":[],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":236,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/1dc0854c-957b-4fb1-af9a-bb4fdb76b77e","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Time%2C%20Consumption%20and%20Everyday%20Life%20Practice%2C%20Materiality%20and%20Culture","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/1dc0854c-957b-4fb1-af9a-bb4fdb76b77e/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/1dc0854c-957b-4fb1-af9a-bb4fdb76b77e/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/1dc0854c-957b-4fb1-af9a-bb4fdb76b77e","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/1dc0854c-957b-4fb1-af9a-bb4fdb76b77e/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/1dc0854c-957b-4fb1-af9a-bb4fdb76b77e/search"},"page":{"printed_page":43,"pdf_page":48,"physical_index":48,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"d95db6fac73de21a76353e24d3f8f970dcc1bc8416f66073d27becb841e3f322"},"chapter":"List of Tables and Figures","content":"I claimed above that common and shared timespaces arise from (1) the organizations and regularities of practices and (2) common and similar settings. Orchestration, too, reflects these matters. Regardless, for instance, of whether the people meeting at the stairs do so for the same or interdependent ends, their ends are likely circumscribed by whatever practices they are carrying on (e.g. those of courtship, business, conviviality). The flow of events, too, contributes to the existence of shared and orchestrated timespaces. The people meeting at the stairs might be intentionally rendezvousing after bumping into one another earlier in the day or have accidentally run into each other on their way to meeting other people elsewhere. Myriad contingencies contribute to the interwoven timespaces through which actions are coordinated. Absent the interwoven timespaces, however, the coordination would not exist.\n\nCoordination rests on interwoven timespaces. This means that such objective spatial-temporal features of coordinated actions as synchronized in the same location and sequenced in different locations (e.g. meeting someone at the top of the stairs and employees taking particular actions after management has made a decision) also rest on interwoven timespaces. At the same time, the interwovenness of timespaces occurs under the constraints of objective time and space. Nothing known can overcome or contradict the ‘march’ of objective time. Coordination must accommodate the fact of change and also conform to processes that conventionally function as markers of time such as the periodicity of environmental events (sunrises, animal migrations, seasons), the radioactive decay of caesium atoms, the turning of clock hands and the progression of digital numbers. Such processes are timing resources for managing coordination. The interwovenness of timespaces is also constrained by the materiality of things and their geometric distribution. This distribution determines where, in principle, places and paths can be anchored. The materiality and geometric distribution of things also constrains which places can be anchored at specific objects (a place to sleep cannot be anchored at a pen). Of course, within these underlying constraints, the use of objective time and space for purposes of coordination presupposes, and is often mediated by, interwoven timespaces. The use of clocks, for instance, presupposes the existence of temporalspatially interwoven lives whose further coordination it facilitates. Similarly, understanding a sunrise between two stones as seen from a specific vantage in a temple as signifying that people should gather to perform a particular ceremony presupposes common as well as shared futures and pasts.\n\nTo be distinguished from coordination is the phenomenon of harmonization. Harmonization exists when the actions of people who are simultaneously proceeding in the same or connected settings smoothly fit together through the contingent adjustment of each person’s behaviour to what others are doing. Examples are traffic movement, people waiting in a queue to bet, the stream of people from the viewing stands to the betting windows, and the milling about of people who are watching the parade of horses in the interior paddock. One could treat phenomena such as these as instances of coordination. I distinguish them from coordination, however, because they achieve no overall result. Or, rather, the result they achieve is the absence of conflict, in other words, harmony. Regardless of how it is classified, harmonization resembles coordination in depending on interwoven timespaces. In most cases, for example, harmonization rests on common and shared spatialities (e.g. the road as path to work) and shared and common temporalities (e.g. the common futures of getting to one’s destination and doing so safely). These identical spatialities and temporalities so sensitize people to one another that constant mutual adjustment almost automatically follows.\n\nTimespace and the Organization of Social Life\n\n43","previous_page":42,"next_page":44}