META: What discourses does the analyst consider/leverage to characterize/theorize collaboration at this research stage? (How) are histories and contextual factors pointed to as shaping the collaborations described here at this research stage?

Enter a comma separated list of user names.
Angela Okune's picture
August 21, 2018
  • AO: Tsing describes a two model binary that distinguishes the kinds of collaborations amongst anthropologists: “big science” model and intimate authorship arrangements. She notes that under “big science” model, collaboration is both a means and a goal. Through collaboration, differences among researchers can be absorbed into the whole; ideally, the research object that emerges should have the multidimen- sionality of the collaborators’ separate forms of expertise without taking up the jarring gaps across them that might interrupt its object status. On the other hand, the other model is of intimate co-authorship which requires a labor of emotional intimacy, entailing close hours and long years of negotiation and great care over procedural matters where no a priori standards set the frame.

  • AO: Tsing uses the following binaries to describe the Matsutake Group’s work: between humans - non-humans, between making knowledge and social practice, and both within and beyond the academy (383).

  • AO: Leverages STS discourse about the interplay of situated and traveling forms of knowledge and value.

Creative Commons Licence