Abstract
This book offers an ambitious, yet relatively concise, account of the work of Bruno Latour. It is explicitly not an introduction to actor-network theory and as a result moves beyond common caricatures of Latour, teasing out the key characteristics of his intellectual project. As such, it offers a salient reminder of the remarkable scope and ambition of his work. While in no way an idiot’s guide, the book provides a comprehensive tour of Latour’s writings, tracing the development of his ideas from early fieldwork in West Africa to his recent The Making of Law. The inclusion of a brief glossary will be helpful to those less familiar with his work, and a closing brief interview with Latour provides some useful insights into his approach to writing.
The introductory chapter gives an overview of Latour’s academic trajectory, the key influences on his writing and the ‘phases’ his work has moved through. These phases form the structure of the rest of the book. As such, the first substantive chapter deals with Latour as ‘anthropologist of science’, summarizing his early work in Laboratory Life and Science in Action. Further chapters move through the phases of ‘philosophy of modernity’, ‘political ecology’ and ‘sociology of associations’. The authors are at pains to point out that this is not a simple chronological progression – though they also acknowledge that this is largely the outcome – but rather a preliminary attempt at dividing his existing work thematically.
This thematic structure is largely successful; indeed, the clarity with which each theme is explained, combined with the deep understanding of his arguments, is one of the strongest features of this text. A further particularly useful contribution is the discussion of Latour’s intellectual lineage, whether in his coincidental mentoring in anthropology by Marc Augé or through the more formal influences of Deleuze, Whitehead, Dewey and Serres. It is in this sense that the authors come closest to offering a reading of ‘Bruno Latour, the actor-network’ (p. 3).
Such an aim was perhaps over-ambitious. The laudable desire to focus specifically on Latour, rather than ‘actor-network theory’, has the unfortunate effect of near-silencing the influence of his intellectual collaborators and, as such, the authors miss an opportunity to deliver a truly relational study of their subject. Further, the volume is more celebratory than critical, with acknowledgement of any critical reception largely being confined to the concluding pages of each chapter. But there is also little sense of the impact Latour has had across academic disciplines; while there is occasional allusion to Latour’s operations on the sidelines of the social sciences (e.g. p. 129), there is no equivalent reference to the considerable influence he has had on sub-disciplines such as cultural geography. A greater focus on the associations inherent in, and stemming from, his work would have led to a much more rounded volume.
These criticisms should not distract, however, from what is a very well-written guide to the complexities of Latour’s arguments. The book makes a strong case for the re-evaluation of his contribution beyond the confines of science studies, and for acknowledging him as one of the most truly radical and innovative writers living today.