Three+literatures+db


 * Public Space and Technology-** These are literatures that complicate, interrogate, and otherwise call into question the boundaries between the public and the private in both physical and digital environments (or online and offline states). The literature generally deals with //either// digital networks //or// the physical spaces of urban environments. There is little discussion of the deep and complex cross-overs between online and offline social life. Also, there is little discussion (with the partial exception of Eglash et. al. and Eubanks) of participatory building or making of physical and digital artifacts with non-experts.

Coleman, E. Gabriella. 2013. //Coding Freedom: The Ethics and Aesthetics of Hacking//. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Dobbz, Hannah. 2012. //Nine-tenths of the law: property and resistance in the United States//. Oakland, Calif.: AK Press. Domosh, Mona. 1998. “Those ‘Gorgeous Incongruities’: Polite Politics and Public Space on the Streets of Nineteenth-Century New York City.” //Annals of the Association of American Geographers// 88 (2) (June 1): 209–226. doi:10.2307/2564208. Eglash, Ron, Jennifer Croissant, Giovanna Di Chiro, and Rayvon Fouché. 2004. //Appropriating Technology: Vernacular Science and Social Power//. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Eubanks, Virginia. 2011. //Digital Dead End: Fighting for Social Justice in the Information Age//. 0. The MIT Press. Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. //The structural transformation of the public sphere: an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society//. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Hess, David J. 2011. “To Tell the Truth: On Scientific Counterpublics.” //Public Understanding of Science// 20 (5) (September 1): 627–641. doi:10.1177/0963662509359988. Kelty, Christopher. 2008. //Two Bits//   // : the Cultural Significance of Free Software //. Durham: Duke University Press. Marwick, Alice. 2012. “The Public Domain: Surveillance in Everyday Life.” //Surveillance & Society// 9 (4) (June 20): 378–393. Soja, Edward W. 1989. //Postmodern geographies: the reassertion of space in critical social theory//. London; New York: Verso.


 * Online/Offline-** The boundaries between the online and the offline are linguistically, as well as ontologically complicated. This has always been the case, but theorists are encountering this ambiguity with increasing regularity, because 1) more people are online more of the time, 2) there are more devices and services that allow individuals to get online cheaply and quickly, and 3) increased online social activity means in person communication can (and does) frequently refer back to or is affected by prior online communication. The literature below considers this trend in a variety of social and cultural settings and provides a variety of answers in regard to what online social action is capable of doing and what has changed (or remained the same) in the wake of widespread digital connectivity.

Bennett, W. Lance. 2008. //Civic life online//   // : learning how digital media can engage youth //. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Burrell, Jenna. 2012. //Invisible Users: Youth in the Internet Cafés of Urban Ghana//. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press. Eglash, Ron, and David A. Banks. Forthcoming. “Recursive Depth in Generative Spaces: Democratization in Three Dimensions of Technosocial Self-Organization.” //The Information Society// Jurgenson, Nathan. 2012. “When Atoms Meet Bits: Social Media, the Mobile Web and Augmented Revolution.” //Future Internet// 4 (1) (January): 83–91. doi:10.3390/fi4010083. Philip, K., L. Irani, and P. Dourish. 2012. “Postcolonial Computing: A Tactical Survey.” //Science, Technology & Human Values// 37 (1) (November): 3–29. doi:10.1177/0162243910389594. Slater, Don. 2002. “Social Relationships and Identity Online and Offline.” In //Handbook of New Media: Social Shaping and Consequences of ICTs//, edited by Leah Lievrouw and Sonia Livingstone, 533–546. Sage Publications.


 * Praxis-Based Methods-** STS is moving towards deeply interdisciplinary, and collaborative methods. A large subsection of those methods are praxis-based: producing not only written work but some kind of tangible and/or viewable final product. Sometimes, as is the case with critical making or participatory action research, these finished products are meant more as learning exercises than producers of usable products. In other cases, as with reflective design or critical technical practice, a useful or functioning final product is produced through a process that is explicitly informed by critical theory. Other texts, such as Graeber, Pickering and Arendt serve as guideposts towards a more general movement of social justice-oriented making and researching.

Agre, Philip. 1997. //Computation and Human Experience//. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. http://www.worldcat.org/title/computation-and-human-experience/oclc/34549023&referer=brief_results. Arendt, Hannah. 1969. //The Human Condition//. 5th Impression. University of Chicago Press. Dourish, Paul, and J Finlay. 2004. “Reflective HCI: Towards a Critical Technical Practice.” In //Reflective HCI: Towards a Critical Technical Practice//, edited by Paul (UC Irvine) Dourish, Janet (Leeds Metropolitan University) Finlay, Phoebe (Cornell University) Sengers, and Peter (University of York) Wright. Vienna, Austria. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=986203. Graeber, David. 2004. //Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology//. Prickly Paradigm Press Chicago. http://www.eleuthera.it/files/materiali/David_Graeber_Fragments_%20Anarchist_Anthropology.pdf. Kemmis, Stephen, and Robin McTaggart. 2005. “Participatory Action Research.” In //Handbook of Qualitative Research//, edited by Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, Third, 559–603. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc. http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1990-98965-000. Pickering, Andrew. 1995. //The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science//. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ratto, M. 2011. “Critical Making: Conceptual and Material Studies in Technology and Social Life.” //The Information Society// 27 (4): 252–260. Sengers, Phoebe, Kirsten Boehner, Shay David, and Joseph “Jofish” Kaye. 2005. “Reflective Design.” In //Proceedings of the 4th Decennial Conference on Critical Computing: Between Sense and Sensibility//, 49–58. CC ’05. New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/1094562.1094569. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1094562.1094569.