IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jculte/v6y2013i3p259-277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Devices As Rituals

Author

Listed:
  • Vicky Singleton
  • John Law

Abstract

In this paper we seek to expand the sense of what a device is. We draw from ethnography about contemporary farming practices, and in particular beef cattle farming, as we explore the craft of farming. Our concern with practices on the farm considers, in particular, the Cattle Tracing System (CTS) of the British Cattle Movement Service (BCMS). The CTS is important - nay financially crucial - to everyone who farms cattle in Britain, and it looks and feels like a metaphorical device. The CTS is systematic and it rests on an elaborate IT database, so it is mechanical or electronic in parts and hence it is machine-like. But are devices necessarily machine-like? We suggest that devices don't have to look or be that way. The Cattle Tracing System is a farming device that divides, separates, and classifies; it's a contrivance that is purposeful. But we also suggest that the work of the farmer in caring for cattle can also be imagined as a device or as a set of devices. In this expanded sense we treat devices as practices of purposive crafting, and our core question is: how is this achieved? One answer is that it depends on mechanisms of repetition. That is, we argue that realities are generated in patterned and repeated practices of purposive crafting. Finally and crucially we argue that while some reality-enacting practices seek to colonise and displace alternative realities, others such as lyricism and refrains work to evade capture and enact alternative realities.

Suggested Citation

  • Vicky Singleton & John Law, 2013. "Devices As Rituals," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(3), pages 259-277, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jculte:v:6:y:2013:i:3:p:259-277
    DOI: 10.1080/17530350.2012.754365
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17530350.2012.754365
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17530350.2012.754365?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael J. Zyphur & Dean C. Pierides, 2017. "Is Quantitative Research Ethical? Tools for Ethically Practicing, Evaluating, and Using Quantitative Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 1-16, June.
    2. Michael J. Madison, 2017. "IP Things as Boundary Objects: The Case of the Copyright Work," Laws, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-44, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jculte:v:6:y:2013:i:3:p:259-277. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJCE20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.