CRDM 701

Week 10 - Kathy

Castells (1996) quotes paleontologist Stephen J. Gould as saying that "the history of life... is a series of stable states, punctuated at rare intervals by major events that occur with great rapidity and help to establish the next stable era" (p. 29). Castells discusses the importance of electronic networks in the second Industrial Revolution, in that these networks were necessary for forms that followed, such as telegraph, telephone, and broadcasting. As our world becomes more and more networked, it seems that the electric networks, combined with fiber optic lines, Wi-Fi, and other new technologies, are a major indicator that we are moving into a new phase of the Information revolution - high capacity networks seem (at least for now) to be key to enabling further technological, economic, and cultural developments. We need to understand these networks and the impact that their use and development has on our societies and our lives.

If virtual place has implications for "cognitive, aesthetic, and moral space" (Adams, 1998, p.102), then it is important to look at how these places are constructed through networks and the way that we interact in these places. In Network Topologies and Virtual Place, Adams' topological diagrams of social space and the place archetypes (discussed on p. 92-93) were interesting for me to think about in the context of large networks. After reading that there are 4096 different network patterns when connecting a mere four nodes, I cannot even fathom what a topology of any particular moment of the internet as a whole might look like. This approach to virtual networks might be an interesting way to understand the differences between neutral internet structures and the proposed tiered service models - perhaps a visualization could help think about the ways that these network structures would construct different kinds of social space. Would these topologies still be workable on such a scale?

Adams also writes that "a topological similarity between a place and an electronic communication situation strongly suggests (but does not dictate) a similarity of social structure" (p. 98). What place does a topology of the current "neutral network" look like? What about tiered-service? Would "upgrading" to a tiered model be like knocking down a public library to build a book store? Are we in the midst of witnessing a democratic place become a consumer place?

Switching gears a bit, this week?s reading had me thinking also about the concept of non-humans as actors. After reading The Sociology of the Door Closer this week, I am trying to reconcile the ways that Latour talks about translation and delegation of work to machines and objects with Adams' view that only humans can be actors. Latour further explains the role of non-humans as actors in Reassembling the Social (2005). Actor network theory, which sees sociology as being more useful as a "tracing of associations" rather than a "science of the social" (2005, p. 5), stresses "the specific role granted to non-humans. They have to be actors and not simply the hapless bearers of symbolic projection" (p.10). This seems opposed to Adams' view in The Boundless Self (2005), where he writes that "agency is clearly a part of being human; technologies do not act of their own accord. They may function in society as "congealed ideology"... it makes little sense to attribute agency (the ability to act) to communication technologies" (p. 7-8). I would really like to discuss these opposing views more in class Thursday - of course, right now I feel strongly both ways.

See you all then - and Happy Halloween!

Posted at 03:35PM Oct 31, 2007 by kfoswald in General  |  Comments[0]