Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 17 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4  - Next
2013 - 4S Annual Meeting Words: 131 words || 
Info
1. Brennen, Jonathan. "Culturing Latour: (Re)Constructing Culture in Latour's Actor-Network Theory" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 4S Annual Meeting, Town and Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, Oct 09, 2013 <Not Available>. 2019-07-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p668118_index.html>
Publication Type: Paper Abstract
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: In recent years, a number of scholars have drawn on Actor-Network Theory (ANT) in communication research. Though ANT-inspired communication work has offered a number of insights, scholars have generally not considered how ANT’s corpus of works fits with the ways that communication researchers have thought about culture. In order to understand better what ANT or ANT-inspired methodologies can offer communication research, this paper explicates Bruno Latour’s treatment of culture. It explores how, in drawing heavily on semiotics, Latour locates culture in meaning-effects generated through localized internal interactions within and among actor-networks. This paper considers three mechanisms through which actor-networks generate meaning-effects: circulating reference, mediation and delegation, and trials of strength. Finally, this paper looks to foundational work in cultural communication theory to reveal limitations to Latour’s material semiotic approach to culture.

2013 - International Communication Association Pages: unavailable || Words: 8126 words || 
Info
2. Brennen, Jonathan. "Culturing Latour: (Re)Constructing Culture in Latour's Actor-Network Theory" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Hilton Metropole Hotel, London, England, Jun 17, 2013 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-07-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p637250_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: In recent years, a number of scholars have drawn on Actor-Network Theory (ANT) in communication research. Though ANT-inspired communication work has offered a number of insights, scholars have generally not considered how ANT’s corpus of works fits with the ways that communication researchers have thought about culture. In order to understand better what ANT or ANT-inspired methodologies can offer communication research, this paper explicates Bruno Latour’s treatment of culture. It explores how, in drawing heavily on semiotics, Latour locates culture in meaning-effects generated through localized internal interactions within and among actor-networks. This paper considers three mechanisms through which actor-networks generate meaning-effects: circulating reference, mediation and delegation, and trials of strength. Finally, this paper looks to foundational work in cultural communication theory to reveal limitations to Latour’s material semiotic approach to culture.

2005 - International Studies Association Pages: 9 pages || Words: 5281 words || 
Info
3. Brown, Robin. "Communications Technologies and the Construction of International Relations: Applying Latour" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Hilton Hawaiian Village, Honolulu, Hawaii, Mar 05, 2005 <Not Available>. 2019-07-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p70226_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: While much of IR has embraced a `constructivist' approach other social science approaches have developed their own specific constructivist approaches that are often more radical than those favoured in IR. This paper uses the work of the French sociologist of technology Bruno Latour to reconsider the intersection between technology and the international. The argument is that this perspective offers valuable new strategies for making sense of the role of media technologies. Latour's work is constructed around a rejection of the opposition between the social and the technological arguing for conceptions of the sociotechnical assemblage, ensemble, collectivities. Latour has argued that what is distinctive about contemporary society is solely the spatial scale of its collectivities. Indeed in his questioning of concepts of progress and reason Latour can be seen as offering a radical realist constructivism.

2010 - The Law and Society Association Words: 495 words || 
Info
4. McLane, Patrick. "Networks, Beliefs, and Decisions: Latour and Derrida on Democracy" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, Renaissance Chicago Hotel, Chicago, IL, May 27, 2010 <Not Available>. 2019-07-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p407436_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: I argue that reading Bruno Latour and Jacques Derrida together provides insights into their distinct theoretical projects and the democratic politics they each cherish.

In his article ‘Force of Law’ Derrida argues that a legal or political system begins when an actor appropriates the sovereign power to decide how the world will be ordered. He notes that such sovereign decision is re-enacted every time anyone applies a law or an interpretive framework to a unique situation. However, in Politics of Friendship, Derrida complicates his position by noting that whenever one speaks of “the decision” one must always add “if there is one.”

Derrida reminds us that to decide is to make a choice which isn’t predetermined. Yet, because any supposed decision can be framed as the result of merely following rules or reacting to circumstances, one cannot prove that there really is such a thing as a decision. In turn, one cannot prove the existence of the free individual supposed by democracy, or the sovereign so often presented as the source of law. When Derrida posits that there may nonetheless be free decisions, individuals and sovereigns he adheres to these notions as a matter of faith. He keeps this faith because it is central to the democratic ideal of self-determination, which respects others as deciders. Holding to this ideal, Derrida argues that as soon as any decision is made it must be questioned in terms of its reliance on prejudices, imperfect laws and self-interests which subject or exclude others.

Latour comes to the questioning of hierarchy, marginalization and exclusion in a different way. He is not interested in decision making individuals but in tracing associations between actors and exposing the ways networks of relations construct facts and values. This focus on relations leads him to characterize the idea of a break with existing conditions (whether in the form of the free decision or the individual) as a myth of modernity. In We Have Never Been Modern Latour contrasts such myth with the enlightenment desire for knowledge. Valorizing this desire, he comes to champion democratic politics as the struggle to represent every actor and relationship present in collective life.

One would point out that this democratic politics of enlightening study requires an account of beliefs in sovereignty, the decision and self-determining individuals because such beliefs are consequential elements within the collective. Indeed, study would ultimately reveal that faith in our ability to decisively shape our world is at the root of the enlightenment project itself.

I contend that Derrida and Latour’s projects travel the same course in opposite directions. Derrida’s faith in decisions and the freedom of the other leads him to the sort of study Latour begins with. Latour’s analysis of networks leads to those elements of faith which underlie the enlightenment attempt to understand collective life. Comparing their projects reveals 1) belief in decisions or the other as decider and 2) the study of associations, as mutually supporting pillars upon which democracy rests.

2012 - 4S Annual Meeting Words: 247 words || 
Info
5. tuters, marc. "Under the Dome of Things: Media Art's Engagement with Bruno Latour (Peter Sloterdijk as best man)" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 4S Annual Meeting, Copenhagen Business School, Frederiksberg, Denmark, Oct 17, 2012 <Not Available>. 2019-07-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p580526_index.html>
Publication Type: Paper Abstract
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: In a recent keynote address to the assembled "Design History Society" in Cornwall --home to "The Eden Project's" spectacular geodesic domes- Bruno Latour (2008) discussed the connections between his project and that of Peter Sloterdijk, the German philosopher and rector of the ZKM (Centre For Media Art) in Karlsruhe. Sloterdijk considers politics as a matter of arranging and assembling artificial "spheres" of safety and immunity, leading him controversially to speak of "cultivating human beings". In this address, Latour defended his colleague against an attack by public sphere theorist Jurgen Habermas, to whom Latour retorted: "when humanists accuse people of 'treating humans like objects', they are thoroughly unaware that they are treating objects unfairly." For Latour, Sloterdijk's Sphere Trilogy (the first volume of which has just been published in English) counters the claims of humanists and phenomenologists alike by revealing the "different envelopes into which humans are thrown". For Latour, both Sloterdijk's sphere's and his own notion of actor-networks provide concepts that bridge the "great divide" between nature and human, science and society, etc. To this end, both thinkers look increasingly towards media art to communicate science to the public. I look at their engagement with new media through Latour's curation at the ZKM in Karlsruhe in 2005 (where Sloterdijk is Chair of Media Theory), in specific those works which illustrate Latour's concept of "the parliament of things", considering how new media art practices see themselves (or at least can be seen) as giving voice to non-human agencies.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4  - Next

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy