Emma Cooke Approximately 200 words
INTD 105 Science Writing
Bruno Latour and Sturges Hall
Latour’s job and interests involve science studies which “are talking not about the social contexts and the interests of power, but about their involvement with collectives and objects” (Latour 4). By stating this Latour implies that he sees himself as a “translator”, meaning he understands the ways in which objects and ideas are connected through many disciplines. Therefore, I believe Latour would see Sturges Hall as a hybrid between human and nonhuman. However, he also acknowledges that our world functions best with the existence of both translators and purifiers. Purifiers are those who create zones of human and nonhuman which are distinctly different. To these types of thinkers Sturges Hall is a purely human construct, the controlled growth of the ivy around the windows shows that the ivy is not truly natural. Latour finds it crucial to keep both of these viewpoints distinctive but equally present in our society. In my opinion, what is truly fascinating about Sturges is the reestablishment of the natural world to a man-made structure, a reminder that the human and natural worlds can coexist. This way of thinking acknowledges the human and natural as both separate and connected at once.
Hi Emma, I love how you’re thinking of Sturges as a hybrid here, and you’ve done a nice, careful job of discussing Latour’s notion of translation (you could go more into the stakes of why this is important in your essay). I’m curious as to how you’re seeing the Hall in a way that’s distinct from Latour ideas—if the hall is “a reminder that human and natural worlds can coexist,” how is this coexistence related to Latour’s ideas about translation? I’m not seeing the connection yet, but I know I will as you work to elaborate these ideas further.