Cities beyond compare? (18564)
Calls for more substantively multipolar, comparative and cosmopolitan modes of urban-theory making have been circulating for more than a decade now, and they have begun to spawn a range of alternative approaches to urban studies. But the challenge of more worldly, comparative theorization has been unevenly met, often more through difference-finding and deconstructive maneuvers than through projects of urban-theoretical reconstruction. The provisional outcome has been interpreted as an impasse in urban theory; some are even reporting its death. While these reports are surely premature, there are risks as well as opportunities in the embrace of particularism and polycentrism in urban studies, especially if these impede theoretical dialogue.