O imaginaci českých rozvojových inženýrů

Authors

  • Jan Werner Charles University Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46585/cargo.2024.2.139

Keywords:

STS, building design, imagination, imaginaries, architecture, civil engineering, development, development assistance

Abstract

On the imagination of Czech development engineers. When it comes to designing buildings, the architects‘ or civil engineers‘ imagination plays an irreplaceable role. However, it remains a relatively unexplored topic in contemporary anthropology. In this study, I focus on the mobilization of imagination in the context of Czech development engineering, as taught and practised in the broader engineering community centred around the International Centre for Development Projects of the Czech Technical University. Here, imagination allows development civil engineers to replace elements to which they lack access while working on their designs (be it the development needs and characteristics of the target locality or its residents). At the same time, it allows them to test their solutions beforehand by means of thought experiments. Nevertheless, the broad use of imagination within the design process comes at a cost. While development constructions aspire to remain grounded in the local architectural tradition, the overuse of imagination might render such “tradition” a hollow concept. Replacing the local with the imaginary at the designing stage also leads to problems with the subsequent acceptance of the designs by the locals. However, most importantly, by reproducing and widening the divide between donors and recipients, an insufficiently critical deployment of imagination may undermine the main principles which underpin contemporary development engineering.

 

References

Akrich, Madeleine. 1992. The De-scription of Technical Objects. In Wiebe Bijker, John Law (eds.), Shaping Technology Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge: MIT Press: 205–224.

Beisel, Uli a Tillmann Schneider. 2012. Provincialising Waste: The Transformation of Ambulance Car 7/83-2 To Tro-tro Dr. JESUS. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 30: 639–654.

Crewe, Emma a Elizabeth Harrison. 1998. Whose Development? An Ethnography of Aid. Londýn a New York: Zed Books.

de Laet, Marianne a Annamarie Mol. 2000. The Zimbabwe Bush Pump: Mechanics of a Fluid Technology. Social Studies of Science 30 (2): 226–263.

Edensor, Tim. 2005. Waste Matter – The Debris of Industrial Ruins and the Disordering of the Material World. Journal of Material Culture 10: 311–332.

Escobar, Arturo. 1995. Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Fallan, Kjetil. 2008. Architecture in Action: Traveling with Actor-Network Theory in the Land of Architectural Research. Architectural Theory Review 13 (1): 80–96.

Freeman, Scott. 2019. Perfume and Planes: Ignorance and Imagination in Haitiʼs Vetiver Oil Industry. The Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology 24: 110–126.

Gieryn, Thomas F. 2002. What buildings do. Theory and Society 31: 35–75.

Kurokawa, Megumi, Libby Schweber a Will Hughes. 2016. Client Engagement and Building Design: The View from Actor–Network Theory. Building Research & Information 45 (8): 910–925.

Latour, Bruno. 2003. The Promises of Constructivism. In Don Ihde (ed.), Chasing Technoscience: Matrix of Materiality. Bloomington and Indianopolis: Indiana University Press: 27–46.

Latour, Bruno. 2002. Když věci vracejí úder: Co mohou sociálním vědám přinést „vědní studia“. Biograf 29.

Latour, Bruno. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Law, John. 2002. Aircraft Stories: Decentering the Object in Technoscience. Durham a Londýn: Duke University Press.

Law, John. 1992. The Olympus 320 Engine: A Case Study in Design, Development, and Organizational Control. Technology and Culture 33 (3): 409–440.

Law, John a Michel Callon. 1992. The Life and Death of an Aircraft: A Network Analysis of Technical Change. In W. Bijker & J. Law (eds.) Shaping Technology Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge: MIT Press: 21–52.

Mbembe, Achille. 2001. On the Postcolony. Berkeley, Los Angeles a London: University of California Press.

Mjaaland, Thera.2017. Imagining the Real: The Photographic Image and Imagination in Knowledge Production. Visual Anthropology 30 (1): 1–21.

Moser, Ingunn a John Law. 1998. Přechody snadné, přechody nesnadné aneb o heterogenní ekonomii subjektivity. Biograf 15–16: 5–28.

Mosse, David. 2005. Cultivating Development: An Ethnography of Aid Policy and Practice. London a Ann Arbor: Pluto Press.

Murphy, Keith M. 2005. Collaborative Imagining: The Interactive Use of Gestures, Talk, and Graphic Representation in Architectural Practice. Semiotica 156: 113–145.

Rohrer, Ingo a Michelle Thompson. 2023. Imagination Theory: Anthropological Perspectives. Anthropological Theory 23 (2): 186–208.

Salazar, Noel B. 2020. On Imagination and Imaginaries, Mobility and Immobility: Seeing the Forest for the Trees. Culture & Psychology 26 (4): 768–777.

Whitaker, James Andrew. 2015. The Landscape Imagination: Intersecting Historical Ecology and Amerindian Perspectivism. Contigent Horizons: The York University Student Journal of Anthropology 2 (1): 115–129.

Downloads

Published

2024-12-27

Issue

Section

Articles/Články

Deprecated: json_decode(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($json) of type string is deprecated in /home/www/cargojournal.org/www/cargojournal.org/plugins/generic/citations/CitationsPlugin.php on line 68

How to Cite

O imaginaci českých rozvojových inženýrů. (2024). Cargo Journal, 22(2), 53-75. https://doi.org/10.46585/cargo.2024.2.139

Similar Articles

11-20 of 23

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.