the age of data colonialism ( Couldry and Mejias,
2019 ). 5
Wearables are understood as a form of ‘techno-science’ that contributes
to the production of legible, quantifiable and consumable bodies, and which makes
possible ordering practices that are materially productive of aid, but which may
also create new protection needs for the digital/physical beneficiary body ( Asdal et al. , 2007 ; Jacobsen and Sandvik, 2018 ). Little
critical scholarly attention has been
poverty has been evident ( Schwittay, 2011 ). One
register of this has been the rapid growth of commodities, objects and financial products
specifically designed for the precariat ( Cross and Street,
2009 ). With behavioural economics providing a cognitive justification, the goal of
humanitarian innovation is to normalise the application of private sector business models and
smart technology to chronic poverty and disaster vulnerability ( Betts and Bloom, 2014 : 5).
Technoscience is developing a series of add-ons to address the crisis of urban
What does it mean to personalise cancer medicine? Personalised cancer medicine explores this question by foregrounding the experiences of patients, carers and practitioners in the UK. Drawing on an ethnographic study of cancer research and care, we trace patients’, carers’ and practitioners’ efforts to access and interpret novel genomic tests, information and treatments as they craft personal and collective futures. Exploring a series of case studies of diagnostic tests, research and experimental therapies, the book charts the different kinds of care and work involved in efforts to personalise cancer medicine and the ways in which benefits and opportunities are unevenly realised and distributed. Investigating these experiences against a backdrop of policy and professional accounts of the ‘big’ future of personalised healthcare, the authors show how hopes invested and care realised via personalised cancer medicine are multifaceted, contingent and, at times, frustrated in the everyday complexities of living and working with cancer. Tracing the difficult and painstaking work involved in making sense of novel data, results and predictions, we show the different futures crafted across policy, practice and personal accounts. This is the only book to investigate in depth how personalised cancer medicine is reshaping the futures of cancer patients, carers and professionals in uneven and partial ways. Applying a feminist lens that focuses on work and care, inclusions and exclusions, we explore the new kinds of expertise, relationships and collectives involved making personalised cancer medicine work in practice and the inconsistent ways their work is recognised and valued in the process.
This book is about science in theatre and performance. It explores how theatre and performance engage with emerging scientific themes from artificial intelligence to genetics and climate change. The book covers a wide range of performance forms from the spectacle of the Paralympics Opening Ceremony to Broadway musicals, from experimental contemporary performance and opera to educational theatre, Somali poetic drama and grime videos. It features work by pioneering companies including Gob Squad, Headlong Theatre and Theatre of Debate as well as offering fresh analysis of global blockbusters such as Wicked and Urinetown. The book offers detailed description and analysis of theatre and performance practices as well as broader commentary on the politics of theatre as public engagement with science. It documents important examples of collaborative practice with extended discussion of the Theatre of Debate process developed by Y Touring theatre company, exploration of bilingual theatre-making in East London and an account of how grime MCs and dermatologists ended up making a film together in Birmingham. The interdisciplinary approach draws on contemporary research in theatre and performance studies in combination with key ideas from science studies. It shows how theatre can offer important perspectives on what the philosopher of science Isabelle Stengers has called ‘cosmopolitics’. The book argues that theatre can flatten knowledge hierarchies and hold together different ways of knowing.
This book examines the relationship between environmental justice and citizen
science, focusing on enduring issues and new challenges in a post-truth
age. Debates over science, facts, and values have always been pivotal within
environmental justice struggles. For decades, environmental justice activists
have campaigned against the misuses of science, while at the same time engaging
in community-led citizen science. However, post-truth politics
has threatened science itself. This book makes the case for the importance of
science, knowledge, and data that are produced by and for ordinary people living
with environmental risks and hazards. The international, interdisciplinary
contributions range from grassroots environmental justice struggles in American
hog country and contaminated indigenous communities, to local environmental
controversies in Spain and China, to questions about “knowledge justice,”
citizenship, participation, and data in citizen science surrounding
toxicity. The book features inspiring studies of community-based participatory
environmental health and justice research; different ways of sensing,
witnessing, and interpreting environmental injustice; political strategies for
seeking environmental justice; and ways of expanding the concepts and forms of
engagement of citizen science around the world. While the book will be of
critical interest to specialists in social and environmental sciences, it will
also be accessible to graduate and postgraduate audiences. More broadly, the
book will appeal to members of the public interested in social justice issues,
as well as community members who are thinking about participating in citizen
science and activism. Toxic Truths includes distinguished contributing authors
in the field of environmental justice, alongside cutting-edge research from
emerging scholars and community activists.
As opposed to the ‘sciences’ (as conceived, especially, by scientists and philosophers of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries), the ‘technosciences’
do not even attempt to distinguish between theoretical representation of the
world and technical intervention into the world. (Nordmann 2010, 7)
The Large Hadron Collider is a major collective human effort to hold
intervention and representation apart in the production of facts. Hawking’s
commentary and indeed the concept of the spectacle as a whole invoke
what Nordmann (2010, 12) calls the
A tool of environmental justice in Ecuadorian toxic tours
Feminism and Technoscience. New York: Routledge.
Higgins, R. R. 1994. Race, pollution, and the mastery of nature. Environmental Ethics, 16(3),
Kimerling, J. 2006. Indigenous peoples and the oil frontier in Amazonia: The case of Ecuador,
ChevronTexaco, and Aguinda v. Texaco. New York University Journal of International Law
and Politics, 38, 413.
Latour, B. 1986. Visualization and cognition: Drawing things together. Knowledge and
Society, 6, 1–40.
Latour, B. 2004. Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press
glimpse of how a ‘cosmopolitical Parliament’ might be
composed. In this book I have been pursuing her speculative approach
in searching for a certain psychosocial quality in theatrical processes, in
the hope that they might help navigate the rough seas of technoscience
and contribute to creating time and space for cosmopolitics.
1 There are a number of scholarly reviews of Hopkins’s Accidental Trilogy, a
series of performance works created 2004–9 (Alker 2010; Bauerlein 2005;
2 Timothy Morton has influentially tackled the philosophical, political and
science-progress-the-promise-of-urban-informatics.html (accessed 1 August 2015).
Kurgan, L. (2013) Close Up at a Distance: Mapping, Technology and Politics. New York: Zone
Law, J. and Mol, A. (2001) Situating technoscience: An inquiry into spatialities. Environment
and Planning D: Society and Space, 19(5): pp. 609–621.
Law, J. and Ruppert, E. (2013) The social life of methods: Devices. Journal of Cultural
Economy, 6(3): pp. 229–240.
Marres, N. (2012) On some uses and abuses of topology in the social analysis of technology
Dystopian performatives and vertigo aesthetics in popular theatre
scientific rationality from
capitalist reason, concepts which are often equated within narratives of
progress.1 Speculative theatricality achieves such dislocation by expressing popular feelings inspired by such narratives, notably fearful feelings
about the future, as they emerge from the promises or predictions of
technoscience. It also articulates such feelings with popular cultural figures or scenarios that offer alternative narratives. In Urinetown the book
musical as cultural form and mode of production holds together the
contradictions inherent in the politics of