Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Anthropological Relocations and the Limits of D...
View graph of relations

Anthropological Relocations and the Limits of Design

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Anthropological Relocations and the Limits of Design. / Suchman, Lucy.

In: Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 40, No. n/a, 10.2011, p. 1-18.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Suchman L. Anthropological Relocations and the Limits of Design. Annual Review of Anthropology. 2011 Oct;40(n/a):1-18. Epub 2011 Jun 29. doi: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.041608.105640

Author

Suchman, Lucy. / Anthropological Relocations and the Limits of Design. In: Annual Review of Anthropology. 2011 ; Vol. 40, No. n/a. pp. 1-18.

Bibtex

@article{85b3c925fa9744ee9b37ce9c874eaf04,
title = "Anthropological Relocations and the Limits of Design",
abstract = "This article takes as a touchstone the concept of location as it has been articulated through anthropology{\textquoteright}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{\textquoteright}s future, I argue instead that it is best positioned as a problematic object for an anthropology of the contemporary. In writing about design{\textquoteright}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.",
author = "Lucy Suchman",
year = "2011",
month = oct,
doi = "10.1146/annurev.anthro.041608.105640",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "1--18",
journal = "Annual Review of Anthropology",
issn = "0084-6570",
publisher = "Annual Reviews Inc.",
number = "n/a",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Anthropological Relocations and the Limits of Design

AU - Suchman, Lucy

PY - 2011/10

Y1 - 2011/10

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

U2 - 10.1146/annurev.anthro.041608.105640

DO - 10.1146/annurev.anthro.041608.105640

M3 - Journal article

VL - 40

SP - 1

EP - 18

JO - Annual Review of Anthropology

JF - Annual Review of Anthropology

SN - 0084-6570

IS - n/a

ER -