Tutorial 3 - Week 4

I was slightly confused by this week's readings and initially thought that actor-network theory looked like this:

Source: http://www.seopher.com/images/internet.jpg

It took a couple of attempts to grasp an understanding of the concepts but hopefully I now have enough of an idea. I did some research to in an attempt to understand more about Actor-Network Theory and found this great video that explains it in "plain English".




The relationships between things, human and non-human, animate and inanimate, have all influenced the history and development of the processes, and ultimately, the assemblage of publishing. Essentially, the question is, which part of publishing can be attributed to social interactions, and which part is attributed to technology and technological advances. Therefore, the process of publishing cannot be considered to be solely social, or solely technological, rather it should be considered to be a combination of both. This also means that one cannot be valued higher than the other; both social implications and technological implications should be viewed as equal entities. Through the interactions between these entities, a network, or assemblage, is created.

As the readings describe, these networks are transient and constantly need to be 'performed' and remodelled otherwise they will dissolve. With that in mind, would it be fair to state that the concern over the disappearance of traditional print publishing is unfounded? If publishing was not re-made for a modern, technologically-savvy audience, then the network of publishing would dissolve completely, would it not? I suppose, however, that the publishing assemblage holds itself together because it is driven by the unquenchable desire people have to constantly make their thoughts, feelings and actions public knowledge.

These networks are involved in a push/pull relationship with the other assemblages and entities around them. In the readings there was mention of some criticism of ANT, and I would essentially argue that whilst the premise of ANT involves the push/pull relationship, without the actions of living things, most of these networks would not exist. How would technology exist in the first place if humans weren't around to create it? Whilst technology does play an important part in the theory of ANT and in the creation of assemblages, I feel that the creation of a network is more in the hands of living things. It's a bit of a chicken and egg situation.  

Hopefully now, ANT looks more like this in my mind:

Source: http://images.wikia.com/psychology/images/6/63/Venn_diagram_cmyk.png