Thinking Space: McLaughlin Literary Geographies 4(1) 2018 57-61 57 Teaching Literary Geographies in British Classrooms David McLaughlin University of Cambridge dm629@cam.ac.uk _____________________________________ Introduction The success of 2017’s literary geography conference in Cambridge is indicative of the state of this (inter)discipline – my term for this area of research that stands between literary studies and human geography but which is more than a subdiscipline of either (see Hones 2014: 4). The international cohort of delegates brought a variety of research interests to bear on one of literary geography’s current preoccupations: the relations between literary spaces and other kinds of spaces. The range of ideas, from scholars working inside and outside of English-language literary geography, demonstrated that earlier calls from Brosseau (1994), from Ogborn (2005) and from Hones (2014) that literary geographers look seriously at literature, that they consider the relationship between texts and spaces, and that they look beyond English-language scholarship, are being heeded. One question that this conference sparked for Rob Briwa and me is: how can we keep pushing literary geography’s development further? Our answer was to turn to teaching. DeLyser and Rogers argue that ‘teaching is a significant public, accessible, transparent, and interactive way of forwarding one’s own field’ (2010: 186). Here, I will argue that teaching literary geography to university students can encourage them to consider the variety of ways in which they, as readers and as young geographers, approach and create literary spaces. Relatedly, it can help us as practitioners to recognise the variety of voices, both critical and not, that contribute to the creation of literary space and its interactions with other spaces.