{"id":607,"date":"2016-11-09T15:25:51","date_gmt":"2016-11-09T15:25:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/sciencecomma\/?p=607"},"modified":"2016-11-09T15:25:51","modified_gmt":"2016-11-09T15:25:51","slug":"we-have-never-been-silent","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/sciencecomma\/2016\/11\/09\/we-have-never-been-silent\/","title":{"rendered":"We Have Never Been Silent"},"content":{"rendered":"

by Daniel Belteki<\/h4>\n

In my research on the history of the Airy Transit Circle, I am attempting to introduce the concept of assemblage to illuminate both the internal and external multiplicity of singularity objects in their material and non-material contexts (not to be confused with interpretive flexibility which highlights the multiplicity of the interpretations of a single object). (Law, 2002, pp.1-11) To put it differently, I am interested in how things (e.g. screws, bolts, wires etc.) and non-material entities (e.g. organisational structures, practices of the users of the instruments etc.) come together to form a coherent (but not stable) whole. Through this theoretical adventure, I am attempting not only to continue with the now signature research direction in history of science that aims at uncovering the hidden actors of events, but also to demonstrate what insights can a historical visualisation of actants as multiples as opposed to isolated \u201cones\u201d can offer us. (Shapin, 1989; Latour, 2005, pp. 4-5) As it was highlighted above, the multiplicity of an actant refers to both its material multiplicity (i.e. being made up of various other material bits and pieces) and to its contextual multiplicity (i.e. being part of a social-cultural network(s) that is made up by other actants). This piece was also inspired by Gaston Bachelard\u2019s poetical vision on open and closed chests, and how both the inside and outside of a chest can be considered to be infinite. (Bachelard, 1994, pp. 85-86)<\/p>\n

What follows is a brief elucidation of my thoughts with the help of two artworks. Damien Ortega\u2019s Cosmic Thing<\/em> has already caught and imprisoned the attention of two major scholars in the field of History of Science, John Tresch and Bruno Latour, and I would like to expand upon their dialogue of the exhibit. Cosmic Thing <\/em>is a Volkswagen Beetle (or \u2018vocho\u2019 as it is called in Mexico) disassembled by the artist (following the manuals of the car) and then suspended with nylon strings from the top of the exhibition gallery room in an exploded view, thus making the various different components which make up the car visible. It is worth quoting the close description of some of the parts offered by Tresch: \u201c[o]n the well-worn seats we see coffee spilled in the dilated present of weekday traffic. Dents on the hanging bumpers inscribe the mass somnambulism of a crowded city. The tread of the tires bears the mark of pavement and dirt road, sudden stops and anxious errands, the grip of open possibility in outward flights. Through the glass we see landscapes approached and left behind, ocean and mountain, skyscraper and brick house; on the faded grey pain are traced the relentless action of sum, dust, rain, and air, alongside residue of bird shit and crushed mosquitoes.\u201d (Tresch, 2007, p.90) The second piece of art is a is a musical composition titled 4\u201933\u2019\u2019 by John Cage (first premiered in 1952) which still tends to startle people\u2019s imagination as the composition consists of 4 minutes and 33 seconds of \u201csilence\u201d.<\/p>\n

\"Dami\u00e1n<\/a>

Dami\u00e1n Ortega – Cosmic Things, 2002<\/p><\/div>\n

As it was mentioned above, scholars in history and sociology of science have already provided their interpretations of Ortega\u2019s artwork. John Tresch used it as an example to illustrate his concept of cosmogram. According to Tresch, the Beetle stands suspended just like an atom or a solar system where each components are being held together through their dynamic (or in the case of the artwork, their frozen) relations to each other. These relations transcend their material boundaries in order to encompass the historical, cultural, economic, social and political entanglements within which it participated. Thus, the object becomes an \u201cexternal depiction of the elements of the cosmos and the connections among them\u201d (ibid, p.92).<\/p>\n

\"Dami\u00e1n

Dami\u00e1n Ortega – Domestic Cosmogon, 2013
Another piece by Dami\u00e1n Ortega exploring the idea of cosmos, and the relations between domestic object.<\/p><\/div>\n

As a response to the interpretation of the artwork offered by Tresch, Bruno Latour characterises Ortega\u2019s work with as a \u201cthin\u201d or idealist description of the Volkswagen Beetle as a thing. Latour criticises extensively Ortega\u2019s view for not offering a thicker representation of the thing due to not exhibiting the actants that were involved in the assembly and production of the different parts of the car. However, this is not the final conclusion that Latour draws from the example. Instead, the French scholar highlights what remains left out in both thick and thin descriptions of things: the process of assembling. (Latour, 2007, p. 140) Similarly to Tresch, Latour evokes the right direction set out by Heidegger in focusing on the assembling, gathering or \u201cthinging\u201d of the elements. By describing the \u201cassembling\u201d process, we are able to demonstrate how things work not when they are suspended in an exploded view or \u201cdrawn in the res extensa mode\u201d, but when the parts hide one another. Furthermore, it relocates power to the very process of assembling that becomes completed\/finished (and thus hidden) once the object is assembled. (Ibid, p. 141)<\/p>\n\n\t\t