Actor-network theory and topological concepts of space

The space where we live is constituted of multiple relationships between humanand non-human actors. Thus actor-network theory has much significance at twopoints: that is, this theory leads us to overcome various types of dualism, givingattention to networks or hybrid associations (i.e. assemblages) of human and non-humanactors; and it enables us to think about relational or topological concept ofspace with actor-networks. In particular, suggesting topological concept of space,actor-network theorists have tried to understand multiplicity of social spaces establishedwith actor-networks, considering, for example, 4 types of topology, that is,of region, network, fluidity and fire. Despite some worries about overproducing topologicalconcepts of space, we can elaborate further topological concept of space, byassociating ANT’s topological concept of space with that of other theorists (for example,Deleuze’s topology of rhizome, Agamben’s concept of ‘space of exception’,etc.). In conclusion, it can be argued that the significance of any topological conceptof space would depend on both to what extend it gives heuristic insights for empiricalanalysis, and how much it can pursue practices for forming and transforming ofactor-networks.

keywords: 행위자-네트워크, 아상블라주, 위상학적 공간, 리좀적 위상학, 예외공간, Actor-network, assemblage, topological spaces, topology of rhizome, space of exception

Reference

구양미. 2008. ｢경제지리학 네트워크 연구의 이론적 고찰: SNA와 ANT를 중심으로｣. ≪공간과 사회≫ 30, 36～66쪽.

귄첼(이기홍 역). 2010. 토폴로지: 문화학과 매체학에서 공간 연구 . 에코 리브로(Gunzel, S. 2008. Topologie: Zur Raumbeschrebung in den Kulture-und Medierwissenschaften).

김숙진. 2006. ｢생태 환경 공간의 생산과 그 혼종성에 대한 분석: 청계천 복원을 사례로｣. ≪한국도시지리학회지≫ 9(2), 113～124쪽.

김숙진. 2010. ｢행위자-연결망 이론을 통한 과학과 자연의 재해석｣. ≪대한지리학회지≫ 45(4), 461～477쪽.

김진택. 2012. ｢행위자 네트워크 이론(ANT)을 통한 문화콘텐츠의 이해와 적용－공간의 복원과 재생에 대한 ANT의 해석｣. ≪인문콘텐츠≫ 24, 9～37쪽.

김환석. 2005. ｢행위자-연결망 이론에 대한 이해｣. 한국과학기술협회 강연/강좌자료, 137～157쪽.

김환석. 2011. ｢행위자-연결망 이론에서 보는 과학기술과 민주주의｣. ≪동향과 전망≫, 83, 11～46쪽.

김환석. 2012. ｢‘사회적인 것’에 대한 과학기술학의 도전: 비인간 행위성의 문제를중심으로｣. ≪사회와 이론≫ 20, 37～66쪽.

도엘(최병두 역). 2013. ｢지리학에서 글렁크 없애기: 닥터 수스와 질 들뢰즈 이후의공간과학｣. 크랭 & 스리프트 편. 공간적 사유 . 에코 리브로, 201～232쪽(Doel, M. A. 2000. “Un-glunking geography: spatial acience after Dr. Seuss and Gilles Deleuze.” in Crang, M. and Thrift, N.(eds). Thinking Space, London:Routledge, pp. 117～135).

10.

들뢰즈(박정태 역). 2007. ｢구조주의를 어떻게 인지할 것인가?｣. 박정태 편역. 들뢰즈가 만든 철학사 . 이학사(Deleuze. 2002. “A quoi reconnâit-on le structuralisme?”Ile déserte et autres textes. Minuit).

11.

들뢰즈·가타리(김재인 역), 2004. 천개의 고원 . 새물결(Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 1980. Mille Plateaux. Paris: Les Editions de Minuit).

12.

라투르(홍성욱 역). 2010. ｢행위자네트워크이론에 관하여: 약간의 해명, 그리고 문제를 더 복잡하게 만들기｣. 홍성욱 편. 인간·사물·동맹 . 이음, 95～124쪽(Latour, B. 1997. “On actor-network theory: a few clarifications plus more than a few complications.” http://www.cours.fse.ulaval.ca/edd-65804/latour-clarifications. pdf).

13.

라투르(홍철기 역). 2009. 우리는 결코 근대인이었던 적이 없다 . 갈무리(Latour, B. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).

14.

박경환. 2013. ｢글로벌 시대 창조담론의 제도화 과정: 행위자-네트워크이론을 중심으로｣. ≪한국도시지리학회지≫ 16(2), 31～48쪽.

15.

박경환. 2014. ｢글로벌 시대 인문지리학에 있어서 행위자-네트워크 이론의 적용 가능성｣. ≪한국도시지리학회지≫ 17(1), 57～78쪽.

16.

박성우·신동희. 2015. ｢ANT(행위자네트워크이론)를 통한 사회문화현상에 대한 새로운 담론 분석｣. ≪문화예술교육연구≫ 10(2), 107～126쪽.

17.

빙엄·스리프트(최병두 역). 2013. ｢여행자를 위한 몇 가지 새로운 지침｣. 크랭 & 스리프트 편. 공간적 사유 . 에코 리브로, 469～502쪽(Bingham, N. and Thrift, N. 2000. “Some new instructions for travellers: the geography of Bruno Latour and Michel Serres.” in Crang, M. and Thrift, N.(eds). Thinking Space. London:Routledge, pp. 281～301).

18.

신지영. 2011a. ｢들뢰즈 차이의 위상학적 구조｣. ≪철학과 현상학 연구≫ 50, 109～142쪽.

19.

신지영. 2011b. ｢도시 문화에 대한 위상학적 이해－멈포드, 슈뢰르 등의 사회이론과들뢰즈의 철학적 토대｣. ≪도시인문학연구≫ 3(2), 175～202쪽.

20.

아감벤(박진우 역). 2008. 호모 사케르 . 새물결(Agamben. G. 1995. Homo Sacer, Il potere sovrano e la nuda vita. Giiulio Einaudi editore s.p.a.).

21.

이근용. 2014. ｢행위자 네트워크 이론으로 본 지역성과 지역방송의 역할｣. ≪언론학연구≫ 18(1), 135～164쪽.

22.

이희영. 2014. ｢결혼-관광-유학의 동맹과 신체-공간의 재구성: 아시아 여성 이주자들의 사례 분석을 중심으로｣. ≪경제와 사회≫ 102, 110～148쪽.

23.

장세용. 2012. ｢공간과 이동성, 이동성의 연결망: 행위자-연결망 이론과 연관시켜｣. ≪역사와 경계≫ 84, 271～303쪽.

24.

장세용. 2014. ｢미국-멕시코 국경지대와 밀입국자－‘생명정치’ 개념과 연관시켜｣. ≪역사와 경계≫ 91, 313～351쪽.

25.

칼롱. 2010. ｢번역의 사회학의 몇 가지 요소들－가리비와 생브리외만의 어부들 길들이기｣. 홍성욱 편역. 2010. 인간·사물·동맹 . 이음, 57～94쪽(Callon, M. 1986. “Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay.” in Law, J. (ed.) Power, Action, and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge?, London, Boston and Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 196～33. ).

26.

크랭·스리프트 편(최병두 역). 2013. 공간적 사유 . 에코 리브로(Crang, M. and Thrift, N.(eds). Thinking Space. London: Routledge).

27.

하용삼·배윤기. 2013. ｢경계의 불일치와 사이 공간에서 사유하기－G. 아감벤의 국민, 인민, 난민을 중심으로｣. ≪대동철학≫ 62, 85～108쪽.

28.

홍성욱 편역. 2010a. 인간·사물·동맹 . 이음.

29.

홍성욱. 2010b. ｢7가지 테제로 이해하는 ANT｣. 홍성욱 편역. 2010. 인간·사물·동맹 , 이음, 15～35쪽.

30.

Allen, J. 2011. “Topological twists: power’s shifting geographies.” Dialogues in Human Geography, 1, pp. 283～298.

31.

Allen, J. and A. Cochrane. 2007. “Beyond the territorial fix: regional assemblages, politics and power.” Regional Studies, 41(9), pp. 1161～1175.

32.

Allen, J. and A. Cochrane. 2010. “Assemblages of state power: topological shifts in the organization of government and politics.” Antipode, 42(5), pp. 1071～1089.

33.

Amin, A. 2002. “Spatialities of globalisation.” Environment and Planning A., 34, pp. 385～399.

34.

Bear C. and S. Eden. 2008. “Making space for fish: the regional, network and fluid spaces of fisheries certification.” Social and Cultural Geography, 9, pp. 487～504

35.

Belcher, O., L. Martin, A. Secor. 2008. “Everywhere and nowhere: the exception and the topological challenge to geography.” Antipode, 40(4), pp. 499～503.

36.

Blok, A. 2010. “Topologies of climate change: actor-network theory, relational-scalar analytics, and carbon-market overflows.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 28, pp. 896～912.

37.

Bosco, F. 2006. “Actor-network theory, networks, and relational approaches in human geography.” in Aitken, S. and G. Valentine (eds.). Approaches to Human Geography, London: Sage, pp. 136～146.

38.

Castree, N. 2002. “False antitheses? Marxism, nature and actor-networks.” Antipode, 34, pp. 111～146.

39.

Farias, L. and T. Bender(eds). 2010. Urban Assemblages: How Actor Network Theory Changes Urban Studies. London: Routledge.

40.

Fine, B. 2005. “From actor-network theory to political economy.” Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, 16(4), pp. 91～108.

41.

Hannah, M. 2006. “Torture and the ticking bomb: the war on terrorism as a geographical imagination of power/knowledge.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 96(3), pp. 622～640.

42.

Harvey, D. 1969. Explanation in Geography. London: Edward Arnold.

43.

Harvey, D. 1973. Social Justice and the City. Edward Arnold. London(최병두 역. 1982. 사회정의와 도시 . 종로서적).

44.

Hetherington, K. 1997. “Museum topology and the will to connect.” Journal of Material Culture, 2(2), pp. 199～218.

45.

Hinchliffe S. J. Allen, and S. Lavau. 2013. “Biosecurity and the topologies of infected life: From borderlines to borderlands.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 38(4), pp. 531～543.

46.

Kullman K. 2009. “Enacting traffic spaces.” Space and Culture, 12, pp. 205～217.

47.

Latour, B. 1988. The Pasteurization of France (trans. Alan Sheridan and John Law). Cambridge, MA.: Belknap Press of Harvard U.P.

48.

Latour, B. 2004. Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy. Cambridge MA.:Harvard U.P.

49.

Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. New York:Oxford U.P.

50.

Latour, B. 2009. “Spheres and networks: two ways to reinterpret globalization.” a lecture at Harvard University Graduate School of Design(Feb. 17, 2009).

51.

Latour, B. and S. Po. 2010. “Networks, societies, spheres: reflections of an actor-network theorist.” Keynote speech for International Seminar on Network Theory: Network Multidimensionality in the Digital Age(19th February 2010).

52.

Law, J. 1999. “After ANT: complexity, naming and topology.” in Actor Network Theory and After. Law, J. and J. Hassard (eds). Malden MA.: Blackwell, pp. 1～14.

53.

Law, J. 2002. “Objects and spaces.” Theory, Culture and Society, 19(5/6), pp. 91～105.

54.

Law, J. and A. Mol. 2001. “Situating technoscience: An inquiry into spatialities.”Environment and Planning D: Society & Space, 19, pp. 609～621.

55.

Martin, L. and A. J. Secor. 2013. “Towards a post-mathematical topology.” Progress in Human Geography, 38(3), pp. 420～438.

56.

Massey, D. 1991. “A global sense of place.” Marxism Today (June), pp. 24～29.

57.

McFarlane, C. 2009. “Translocal assemblages: space, power and social movements.”Geoforum, 40(4), pp. 561～567.

58.

Mol, A. and J. Law. 1994. “Regions, networks and fluids: anaemia and social topology.”Social Studies of Science, 24(4), pp. 641～1.

59.

Moreira, T. 2004. “Surgical monads: a social topology of the operating room.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 22, pp. 53～69.

60.

Muller, M. 2015. “Assemblages and actor-networks: rethinking socio-material power, politics and space.” Geography Compass, 9(1), pp. 27～41.

61.

Murdoch, J. 1998. “The spaces of actor-network theory.” Geoforum, 29(4): pp. 357～374.

62.

Murdoch, J. 2006. Post-structuralist Geography: A Guide to Relational Space. London: Sage.

63.

Paasi, A. 2011. “Geography, space, and the reemergence of topological thinking.” Dialogues in Human Geography, 1(3), pp. 299～303.

64.

Secor, A. 2013. “2012 Urban geography plenary lecture: Topological city.” Urban Geography, 34(4), pp. 430～444.

65.

Serre, M. and B. Latour. 1995. Conversations on Science, Culture and Time. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Univ. of Michigan Press.

66.

Shields, A. 2012. “Cultural topology: the seven bridges of Konigsburg, 1736.” Theory, Culture and Society, 29(4/5), pp. 43～57.

67.

Vasantkumar, C. 2013. “The scale of scatter: rethinking social topologies via the anthropology of ‘residual’ China.” Environment and Planning: Society and Space, 31, pp. 918～934.

68.

Whatmore. S. and L. Thorne. 1998. “Wild(er)ness: reconfiguring the geographies of wildlife.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 23, pp. 435～454.

바로가기메뉴

Article Contents

Vol.25 No.3

Actor-network theory and topological concepts of space

Abstract

Reference

Space and Environment