“Let Me Show You”: A Caring Ethnography of Embodied Knowledge in Weaving and Engineering

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter seeks to comprehend and problematize the metaphor of knowledge as weaving as an entrance to critically understand: mediations, inequalities and differences both within technoscientific knowledge production and in its encounters and dialogues with other knowledges. The starting point of the analysis is derived from the ethnographic component of an interdisciplinary project oriented towards the design of a computer interface inspired by calado, a Colombian embroidery craft; which, given the way in which it is performed, can be understood as a form of weaving. The meeting between the knowhow of craft embroiderers, a knowledge situated in their hands, feminized and precarious, and engineering knowledge, with its codified and legitimate expertise, simultaneously entangles and unravels the practices that sustain epistemic and gendered hierarchies and binaries, embedded as they are in particular geopolitical settings, but also enables possibilities for creativity, reparation and the reinvention of these embodied orders, their temporalities and daily concreteness.

Key words

Calado matter-knowing technology design 

References

  1. Ahmed, Fauzia Erfan. 2004. The rise of the Bangladesh garment industry: Globalization, women workers, and voice. NWSA Journal 16(2): 34–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Borgeaud-Garciandía, Natacha. 2009. Dominación laboral y vida privada de las obreras de maquilas textiles en Nicaragua. Trace 55: 76–89.Google Scholar
  3. Cortés-Rico, Laura Juliana. 2015. ApTUI Framework para el Diseño Participativo de Interacciones Tangibles. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. At http://pegasus.javeriana.edu.co/~PI133-03-ApTUI/docs/MemoriasApTUI_LauraCort%C3%A9s.pdf. Accessed 30 November 2015.
  4. Cortés-Rico, Laura Juliana, Sara Márquez-Gutiérrez, and Tania Pérez-Bustos. 2015. Materialidades que se bordan. Diseño de una interfaz tangible de usuario inspirada en el bordado de cartago.Google Scholar
  5. Cunha, Tania Batista da, and Sarita Brazao Vieira. 2009. Entre o bordado e a renda: condições de trabalho e saúde das labirinteiras de Juarez Távora/Paraíba. Psicologia: Ciência E Profissão 29(2):258–275.Google Scholar
  6. Fischer, Berenice, and Joan Tronto. 1990. Toward a feminist theory of caring. In Circles of care: Work and identity in women’s lives, eds. Emily K. Abel and Margaret K. Nelson, 35–62. New York: State University of New York.Google Scholar
  7. Haraway, Donna. 2008. When species meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  8. Haraway, Donna. 2013. Sowing worlds: A seed bag for terraforming with earth others. In Beyond the cyborg: Adventures with Haraway, eds. Margret Grebowicz and Helen Merrick, 137–146. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hughes, Thomas P. 1986. The seamless web: Technology, science, etcetera, etcetera. Social Studies of Science 16(2): 281–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ingold, Tim. 2007. Lines: A brief history. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Kenney, M. 2015. Counting, accounting, and accountability: Helen Verran’s relational empiricism. Social Studies of Science 45(5): 749–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. König, Anna. 2013. A stitch in time: Changing cultural constructions of craft and mending. Culture Unbound. Journal of Current Cultural Research 5: 569–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mountz, Alison, Anne Bonds, Becky Mansfield, Jenna Loyd, Jennifer Hyndman, Margaret Walton-Roberts, Ranu Basu, et al. (2015). For slow scholarship: A feminist politics of resistance through collective action in the neoliberal university. ACME, International E-Journal for Critical Geographies. At http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alison_Mountz/publication/275100129_For_Slow_Scholarship_A_Feminist_Politics_of_Resistance_through_Collective_Action_in_the_Neoliberal_University/links/5532d2a20cf27acb0deda012.pdf. Accessed 30 November 2015.
  14. Pérez-Bustos, Tania. 2014. Feminización y pedagogías feministas: Museos interactivos, ferias de ciencia y comunidades de software libre en el sur global. Bogotá, Colombia: Editorial Javeriana.Google Scholar
  15. Pérez-Bustos, T., Cortés-Rico, L., and Márquez-Gutiérrez, S. 2015. Giving life to a TUI through inspiration from Colombian calado embroidery and its materialities. In Paper presented at the 4S annual meeting). Denver, 1–12.Google Scholar
  16. Pérez-Bustos, Tania, and Manuel Franco-Avellaneda. 2014. Embroidering Self-knowledge. In Proceedings of the 13th participatory design conference on short papers, industry cases, workshop descriptions, doctoral consortium papers, and keynote abstracts – PDC ’14, volume 2. 99–102. New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  17. Portisch, Anna Odland. 2010. The craft of skilful learning: Kazakh women’s everyday craft practices in western Mongolia. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 16: S62–S79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Puig de la Bellacasa, Maria. 2010. Ethical doings in naturecultures. Ethics, Place and Environment 13(2): 151–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Puig de la Bellacasa, Maria. 2011. Matters of care in technoscience: Assembling neglected things. Social Studies of Science 41(1): 85–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Puig de la Bellacasa, Maria. 2012. “Nothing comes without its world”: Thinking with Care. The Sociological Review 60(2): 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Puig de la Bellacasa, Maria. 2015. Making time for soil: Technoscientific futurity and the pace of care. Social Studies of Science 1–26.Google Scholar
  22. Reitsma, Lizette, Andrew Smith, and Elise van den Hoven. 2013. StoryBeads: Preserving indigenous knowledge through tangible interaction design. In 2013 International conference on culture and computing, 79–85. IEEE.Google Scholar
  23. Rosner, Daniela, and Kimiko Ryokai. 2008. Spyn: Augmenting Knitting to Support Storytelling and Reflection. In 10th International conference on Ubiquitous computing, 340–349.Google Scholar
  24. Singleton, Vicky. 2011. When contexts meet: Feminism and accountability in UK cattle farming. Science, Technology and Human Values 37(4): 404–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Suchman, Lucy. 1999. Working relations of technology and use. In The social shaping of technology, eds. Donald Mackenzie and Judy Wajcman, 258–265. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Suchman, Lucy. 2002. Located accountabilities in technology production. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 14(2): 91–105.Google Scholar
  27. Tedlock, Barbara, and Dennis Tedlock. 1985. Text and textile: Language and technology in the arts of the Quiché Maya. Journal of Anthropological Research 41(2): 121–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Verran, Helene. 2001. Science and an African logic. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  29. Watson, Matthew C. 2014. Listening in the Pakal controversy: A matter of care in ancient maya studies. Social Studies of Science 44(6): 930–954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Gender Studies, National University of ColombiaBogotáColombia

Personalised recommendations