Actor-Network Theory

Introduction: Actor-Network Theory

Actor-Network Theory (ANT), a field of inquiry stemming from science and technology studies, provides a powerful tool for reexamining literary studies. ANT decentralizes traditional notions of human agency, recognizing texts, authors, readers, and even material objects like books and writing implements as interconnected “actants” that dynamically collaborate in generating meaning. Instead of approaching literature as an autonomous realm, this lens emphasizes the intermingling of social, historical, and technological forces within textual environments. Through ANT, literary analysis uncovers complex webs of relations and influences, challenging conventional ideas of artistic production, textuality, and the boundaries between the human and non-human realms.

Origin of Actor-Network Theory

1. Roots in Science and Technology Studies (STS): ANT emerged as a subfield of STS, a scholarly discipline that focuses on the intricate relationships between science, technology, and society.
2. Challenge to Dualisms: ANT critiques traditional binaries such as nature/culture, human/non-human, and subject/object, arguing that these categories are artificial and unhelpful for understanding complex socio-technical systems.
3. Foundational Scholars:
4. Bruno Latour: A prominent French sociologist and anthropologist, Latour’s contributions on actants and network formation are fundamental to ANT.
5. Michel Callon: Callon’s work on translation theory and the sociology of innovation emphasized the dynamic processes through which scientific and technological objects are constructed.
6. John Law: Law explored the concept of ‘heterogeneous engineering,’ proposing that knowledge, tools, and organizational forms are intertwined in shaping scientific and technological systems.
7. Emphasis on Relationality: ANT prioritizes the analysis of connections and interactions between diverse entities, both human and non-human, within ever-evolving networks.

Principals of Actor-Network Theory

ANT Principle	Description	Literary Reference/Application
Symmetry	Humans and non-humans are seen as equally important actors in a network.	A book itself could be an actant, influencing how a reader interprets a work or shaping the physical circulation of literature.
Translation	The process of actors negotiating interests, enrolling allies, and transforming the network to achieve their goals.	An author reworking a draft involves multiple ‘translations’ – interactions with editors, beta readers, or even writing software could influence the final text.
Actants	Everything within a network has the potential to act or influence outcomes, regardless of whether it’s human, technological, or even textual.	A literary trope (e.g., the damsel in distress), once established, has agency beyond individual works, shaping future stories and reader expectations.
Irreducibility	Networks cannot be simplified into single causes or simple explanations. Meaning emerges from the complex interactions of all actors.	Analyzing a classic text like Hamlet necessitates examining printing technologies, historical audiences, and subsequent interpretations as much as the text itself.
Heterogeneous Networks	Networks are composed of disparate elements: people, materials, technologies, ideas, etc.	The book as a physical object exists in a network including author, printers, paper, booksellers, libraries, and even environmental conditions affecting preservation.

Actor-Network Theory: Theorists, Works and Arguments

• Bruno Latour (French sociologist, anthropologist, and philosopher):
  • Notable Works:
    • Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (with Steve Woolgar): This seminal work offers an ANT-infused ethnographic study of scientific fact construction within a laboratory setting.
    • Science in Action: A key introduction to ANT principles, focusing on the development of technologies and scientific disciplines.
    • We Have Never Been Modern: Challenging traditional understandings of modernity, particularly the divisions between nature/culture and human/non-human.
• Michel Callon (French sociologist and engineer):
  • Notable Works:
    • “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay”: Emphasizes the dynamics of ‘translation’ within networks, exploring the processes of negotiation and transformation as disparate actors are aligned toward broader goals.
    • The Laws of the Markets (editor): Examines economic exchanges and market formation through an ANT lens.
• John Law (British sociologist):
  • Notable Works:
    • Organizing Modernity: Emphasizes the concept of ‘heterogeneous engineering,’ arguing that technological systems and their supporting societal structures develop inseparably.
    • After Method: Mess in Social Science Research: Explores the inherent complexities of studying social realities, encouraging methods that embrace messiness and emergent outcomes.

Core Arguments of ANT

• Symmetry between Actants: ANT positions humans and non-humans on equal footing within interconnected networks. Objects, technologies, and conceptual frameworks are treated as ‘actants’, possessing the capacity to shape and influence outcomes.
• Emphasis on Relationality: The focus shifts from discrete entities to their networks of interactions. ANT advocates for analyzing the dynamic interplay between human and non-human actors, seeing these connections as fundamental to understanding and meaning-making processes.
• Translation as a Driving Force: Transformation and action occur through processes of ‘translation.’ This describes how actants navigate networks, negotiate interests, and reshape arrangements to pursue their ends.
• Agnosticism Towards Pre-existing Frameworks: ANT eschews a priori assumptions about power structures, causality, and social organization. This encourages researchers to approach their subjects without preconceptions, allowing the complexities of the network to reveal themselves.

Important Note: Actor-Network Theory offers a nuanced and multi-faceted theoretical framework. For a comprehensive understanding, further exploration of individual theorists and their extensive works is essential.

Criticism Against Actor-Network Theory

1. Anthropomorphism and Agency: Critics question whether ANT extends notions of agency and intentionality too liberally to non-human objects, blurring important distinctions between conscious humans and inanimate artifacts.
2. Underplaying Systemic Inequalities: ANT’s focus on relational networks can downplay existing power structures and systemic social inequalities that heavily influence outcomes.
3. Lack of Normativity: ANT often refrains from making value judgments or prescribing solutions, which some argue limits its ability to address urgent social or political issues.
4. Complexity and Ambiguity: The language and concepts of ANT can be dense and difficult to grasp, potentially hindering clear application and broader understanding.
5. Empirically Challenging: Due to ANT’s wide ontological scope (everything in the network is relevant), scholars may struggle to establish clear boundaries for their studies, making research difficult to design and execute.

Examples of Actor-Network Theoretical Critique

• Hamlet by William Shakespeare:
  • The Ghost’s Agential Role: Investigating the ghost of Hamlet’s father as an actant that exerts influence beyond a mere plot device. Analysis would center on how the ghost shapes Hamlet’s choices, disrupts court dynamics, and foregrounds philosophical questions about justice and vengeance.
  • Materiality of Text and Performance: Focusing on how variations across early printed editions and historical performance conditions create distinct networks of interpretation, reception, and textual authority.
• Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen:
  • Circulation of Texts and Legal Contracts Examining how physical letters and legal documents such as entailments function as actants within the novel’s social networks. These documents could be studied as propellants of romantic misunderstandings, obstacles to agency, or as shaping plot resolutions.
  • Social Spaces as Influential Actants: Analyzing how locations (country estates, ballrooms, carriages) actively function within the networks of social interaction, courtship rituals, and class dynamics.
• Frankenstein by Mary Shelley:
  • Scientific Context as Network: Exploring how the novel’s creation and reception reflect contemporaneous scientific discourses and technological advancements. These influences become network actants alongside characters, influencing possibilities of the Creature’s construction and societal anxieties.
  • The Creature as Constructed Assemblage: Conceptualizing the Creature not as a monolithic being but as a network of assembled body parts, highlighting the entangled medical, ethical, and socio-technical conditions enabling his creation.
• Beloved by Toni Morrison:
  • 124 Bluestone Road as Embodied Agent: Examining the house not just as a passive setting, but as an actant embodying historical trauma, contested memory, and the spectral forces shaping the characters’ lives.
  • Fragmented Narrative as Relational Network: Exploring how Morrison’s non-linear storytelling creates a network where shifting perspectives (readers, characters, fragmented temporalities) actively collaborate in the construction of meaning and collective trauma.

Important Considerations:

• These examples offer starting points for potential ANT-infused literary analysis. A comprehensive ANT critique would demand significantly deeper theoretical engagement.
• ANT’s flexibility allows for multiple entry points – a single work could be examined through diverse ANT lenses focusing on different actants and network configurations.

Keywords in Actor-Network Theory Theory

Keyword	Definition
Actant	Any entity within a network (human, object, concept) that possesses the potential to act and influence outcomes.
Symmetry	The principle of treating human and non-human actants with analytical equality.
Translation	The process of negotiation, enrollment, and transformation through which actants shape the network to achieve their interests.
Network	A dynamic web of connections and interactions between diverse actants.
Heterogeneity	Networks comprise a mix of disparate elements: people, technologies, ideas, material objects, etc.
Irreducibility	Understanding phenomena requires attention to complex network interactions; outcomes cannot be reduced to singular causes.
Assemblage	An entity (an object, text, person) is viewed as a continually shifting result of its networked relations, rather than a stable, pre-existing thing.
Mediation	Actants influence one another indirectly; actions are shaped by intervening materials, relationships, and technologies.
Black Box	A temporarily stabilized element within a network whose complex internal workings are taken for granted at a given analytical moment.
Inscription	Objects/texts embody the actions and interests of past actants, influencing the way new actors within the network may engage with them.

Suggested Readings: Actor-Network Theory Theory

1. Callon, Michel. “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay.” Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? Ed. John Law. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986. 196-229.
2. Harman, Graham. Object-Oriented Ontology: A New Theory of Everything. London: Pelican Books, 2018.
3. Latour, Bruno. Aramis, or the Love of Technology. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1996.
4. Latour, Bruno. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2005.
5. Latour, Bruno. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1987.
6. Law, John. After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. London: Routledge, 2004.
7. Law, John and John Hassard, eds. Actor Network Theory and After. Oxford: Blackwell, 1999.
8. Mol, Annemarie. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham: Duke UP, 2002.
9. Pickering, Andrew. The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1995.