Title: Non-places: introduction to an anthroplogy of supermodernity
Author:Marc Augé
Pulisher:London, New York:Verso

"Place and non-places are rather like opposes polarities: the irst is never completely erased, the second never totaly completed......"(p79) Augé has coined "non-place" to descibe the "place" which is about overabundance of event, spatial overabundance, the individualization of references and he has called that this is the traits of supermodernity. Modernity is to construct the collective identity by the space, history and other monuments, and supermodernity is about the overabundance of space and time which make individual become a special reference. The former emphasizes the specified time and space, and the latter focus on the specified individual experience.

Augé's "non-place" makes anthropogists reflect the methods to do the fieldwork and locate the "natves". Anthropologists needs to understand how the identity of supermodernity is constructed. "London" can be considered as a place of "non-place" because it is composed by different residents and migrants. with the overabundance of history and geographical origins. It is so unsimilar with traditional anthropological fieldwork and its residents's behaviors are weaved into the structure of the city, such as the Wi-Fi infrastructure. London is not a monument but a window to view the world. The shape of the frame and the clearness of the glass should affect the view and we can observe the traits of non-place by analyzing the place components.

The three accelerated transoformations which are attracting anthropological scrutiny(in other words, a renewed methodlogical reflection on the category of otherness)---p24
The first os concerned with time.-p24
The second figure of excess characteristic of supermodernity, concerns space-p31
The third figure of excess in relation to which the situation of supermodernity might be defined is well known well to us.---p36

This need to give a meaning to the present, if not the past, is the price we pay for the overabundance of events corresponding to a situation we could call 'supermodern' to express its essential quality: excess.---p29

The twenty-first cetury will be anthropological, not only because the three figures of excess are just the current form of a perennial raw material which is the very ore of anthropology but also because in situations of supermodernity (as in the situations anthropology has analysed under the name of 'acculturation') the components pile up without destrying one another.---p41

As if the conservatism of the former and the messianism of the latter were condemned to speak the same language: that of the land and roots. -p35
Three excess: overabundance of events, spatial overabundance, the individualization of refernces.---p40
If a place can be defined as relational, historical and concerned with identity, then a space with can not be defined as relational, or historical, or concerned with identity will be non-place. The hypothesis advanced here is that supermodernity producesnon-places, meaning spaces which are not themselves anthropological places and which, unlike Baudelairean modernity, do not integrate the earlier places: instead these are listed, classified, promoted to the status of 'places of memory', and assigned to a circumscribed and specific position.---p77-78
The distinction between places and non-places derives the opposition between place and place.--p79
The first reference is "in relation to a milieu", the second reference is to words and the act to locution, and third reference is the narrative.---p80
Modernity is the interweaving of old and new. Supermodernity makes the old(history)into a specific spectacle, as it does with all exoticism and all local particularity.