This article takes as a touchstone the concept of location as it has been articulated through anthropology's reflections on its history and positioning as a field, and in relation to shifting engagements with contemporary technoscientific, political, and ethical problems. A second touchstone is one specific anthropological relocation—that is, into worlds of professional technology design. With figures of location and design in play, I describe some perspicuous moments that proved both generative and problematic in my own experience of establishing terms of engagement between anthropology and design. Though design has been considered recently as a model for anthropology's future, I argue instead that it is best positioned as a problematic object for an anthropology of the contemporary. In writing about design's limits, my argument is that, like anthropology, design needs to acknowledge the specificities of its place, to locate itself as one (albeit multiple) figure and practice of transformation.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Adame J. 2002. PARCing problems. IEEE Spectrum Sept. 1: http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/resource/sep02/parc.html [Google Scholar]
  2. Agre P. 1997. Computation and Human Experience New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderson W, Adams V. 2007. Pramoedya's chickens: postcolonial studies of technoscience. The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies E Hackett, O Amsterdamska, M Lynch, J Wajcman 181–204 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 3rd. ed. [Google Scholar]
  4. Appadurai A. 1997. Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization Minneapolis: Univ. Minn. Press [Google Scholar]
  5. Barad K. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  6. Barr A, Feigenbaum E. 1981. The Handbook of Artificial Intelligence Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann [Google Scholar]
  7. Barry A. 2001. Political Machines: Governing a Technological Society London: Athlone [Google Scholar]
  8. Barry A, Slater D. 2002. Technology, politics and the market: an interview with Michel Callon. Econ. Soc. 31:285–306 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bhabha H. 1994. The Location of Culture London: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  10. Brachman R, Levesque H. 1985. Readings in Knowledge Representation Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann [Google Scholar]
  11. Bruce Mau Design, Inst. Without Bound. 2005. Massive change. http://www.massivechange.com [Google Scholar]
  12. Callon M. 1998. An essay on framing and overflowing: economic externalities revisited by sociology. The Laws of the Markets M Callon 244–69 Oxford: Blackwell [Google Scholar]
  13. Clifford J, Marcus G. 1986. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press [Google Scholar]
  14. CSLI. 1987. Fourth Year Report of the Situated Language Research Program Stanford, CA: Cent. Study Lang. Inf. CSLI-87-111 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ellis C, Nutt G. 1980. Computer science and office information systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 12:27–60 [Google Scholar]
  16. Escobar A. 1994. Welcome to Cyberia: notes on the anthropology of cyberculture. Curr. Anthropol. 35:211–31 [Google Scholar]
  17. Fabian J. 1983. Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes its Object New York: Columbia [Google Scholar]
  18. Fischer M. 2007. Four genealogies for a recombinant anthropology of science and technology. Cult. Anthropol. 22:539–615 [Google Scholar]
  19. Garfinkel H, Sacks H. 1970. On formal structures of practical actions. Theoretical Sociology: Perspectives and Development J McKinney, E Tiryakian 337–66 New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts [Google Scholar]
  20. Garvin D. 1995. Leveraging processes for strategic advantage. Harv. Bus. Rev. 73:76–90 [Google Scholar]
  21. Gupta A, Ferguson J. 1997. Anthropological Locations: Boundaries and Grounds of a Field Science Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press [Google Scholar]
  22. Haraway D. 1988. Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Fem. Stud. 14:575–99 [Google Scholar]
  23. Ingold T. 2010. Bringing things to life: creative entanglements in a world of materials Work. Pap. #15. Dep Sociol., Univ. Manch., pp. 1–14 http://www.socialsciences.manchester.ac.uk/realities/publications/workingpapers/15-2010-07-realities-bringing-things-to-life.pdf [Google Scholar]
  24. Latour B. 1996. Aramis, or The Love of Technology Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  25. Lave J. 1988. Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics, and Culture in Everyday Life New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  26. Lave J. 2011. Apprenticeship in Critical Ethnographic Practice. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
  27. Law J. 2004. After Method: Mess in Social Science Research London/New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  28. Margolin V. 2002. The Politics of the Artificial: Essays on Design and Design Studies Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
  29. Nader L. 1974. Up the anthropologist: perspectives gained from studying up. Reinventing Anthropology D Hymes 284–311 New York: Vintage [Google Scholar]
  30. Newman S. 1998. Here, there, and nowhere at all: distribution, negotiation, and virtuality in postmodern ethnography and engineering. Knowl. Soc. 11:235–67 [Google Scholar]
  31. Nobelprize.org. 1978. Press release: Studies of decision-making lead to prize in economics http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/1978/press.html [Google Scholar]
  32. Noble D. 1984. Forces of Production Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  33. Ong A, Collier S. 2005. Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics and Ethics as Anthropological Problems Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell [Google Scholar]
  34. PARC. 2011. Careers & culture http://www.parc.com/about/culture.html [Google Scholar]
  35. Philip K. 2005. What is a technological author? The pirate function and intellectual property. Postcolonial Stud. 8:199–218 [Google Scholar]
  36. Rabinow P, Marcus G, Faubion J, Rees T. 2008. Designs for an Anthropology of the Contemporary Durham, NC/London: Duke Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  37. Redfield P. 2002. The half-life of empire in outer space. Soc. Stud. Sci. 32:791–825 [Google Scholar]
  38. Robbins R. 2008. Inventing oncomice: making natural animal, research tool and invention cohere. Genomics Soc. Policy 4:21–35 [Google Scholar]
  39. Rosenberg D, Harding S. 2005. Histories of the Future Durham, NC/London: Duke Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  40. Simon H. 1969. The Sciences of the Artificial Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Google Scholar]
  41. Smith D. 1990. Texts, Facts, and Femininity: Exploring the Relations of Ruling New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  42. Strathern M. 1995. Shifting Contexts: Transformations in Anthropological Knowledge London: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  43. Strathern M. 1999. Property, Substance, and Effect: Anthropological Essays on Persons and Things London, UK/: New Brunswick, NJ: Athlone [Google Scholar]
  44. Suchman L. 1983. Office procedure as practical action: models of work and system design. ACM Trans. Off. Inf. Syst. 1:320–28 [Google Scholar]
  45. Suchman L. 2002. Located accountabilities in technology production. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 14:91–105 [Google Scholar]
  46. Suchman L. 2007. Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions. New York: Cambridge Rev. ed. [Google Scholar]
  47. Suchman L. 2011. Consuming anthropology. Interdisciplinarity: Reconfigurations of the Social and Natural Sciences A Barry, G Born London: Routledge In press [Google Scholar]
  48. Suchman L, Jordan B. 1988. Computerization and women's knowledge. Women, Work and Computerization K Tijdens, M Jennings, I Wagner, M Weggelaar 153–60 Amsterdam: North Holland [Google Scholar]
  49. Suchman L, Trigg R. 1993. Artificial intelligence as craftwork. Understanding Practice S Chaiklin, J Lave 144–78 New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  50. Suchman L, Trigg R, Blomberg J. 2002. Working artefacts: ethnomethods of the prototype. Br. J. Sociol. 53:163–79 [Google Scholar]
  51. Tsing A. 2005. Friction: An Ethnography of Global Connection Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  52. Verran H. 1998. Re-imagining land ownership in Australia. Postcolonial Stud. 1:237–54 [Google Scholar]
  53. Verran H. 2001. Science and an African Logic Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
  54. Verran H. 2002. A postcolonial moment in science studies: alternative firing regimes of environmental scientists and Aboriginal landowners. Soc. Stud. Sci. 32:729–62 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error