#actor-network

Bruno Latour’s Actor-Network Theory (ANT) is a complex social theory on networks that takes into consideration both humans “actors” and non-humans “actants”. This way of looking at networks provides a detailed and complex look into relationships and how things came into being by analysing all aspects of influence even those that are non-human “actants”. However this theory has the potential to be overly complex and yet overly simplify information at the same time.

Criticism drawn from this theory notes that it does not take into account aspect such as race, class, gender (Banks 2011) hence is incapable of challenging these issues due to its simplistic analytical vocabulary(which can only describe) yet by doing so we also give the most basic network and links to understand the factors contributing to the network, producing a simplified and easy to understand network.

However at the same time by taking into account both actors and actants we are faced with the possibility of an endless network. That each factor of a network is about to branch of and create its own network of what has factored into making it possible. Here we are faced with the possibility of an over complex and endless amount of information to take into account just to analysis a social network.

Note also in David Bank (2011)’s own example of ANT on wifi to work uses both the same language to describe both actors and actants yet rather than demonstrating the equal contribution between both actors and actants in creating the network it seems to belittle the work of actors. However this maybe be a biased outlook due to the fact that personally we are used to not seeing both humans and non humans being described in the same way.

We should also not these creations of networks are created by the actors only and actants are not able to add themselves into network (Banks 2011), in this case do we as humans create some sort of bias when creating these networks using the ANT which also leaves us to question how correct the information is in using the theory.

The Actor-Network Theory seems to be one that whilst is excellent into taking account all factors (especially if we were to use it to analysis the history of printing and publishing) it seems to also have many loopholes and criticism. Whilst it benefits certain areas it also leaves much behind in taking into consideration social aspects such as race, gender, class etc.

Reference:

Banks, David (2011) ‘A Brief Summary of Actor-Network Theory’, Cyborgology, November 2, <http://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2011/12/02/a-brief-summary-of-actor-network-theory/>