Making sense of ‘maker’: Work, identity, and affect in the maker movement

2020 ◽  
pp. 0308518X2096483
Author(s):  
Steve Marotta

This paper investigates the affective dimensions of entrepreneurial and creative work with the goal of making sense of the emergent collective identity of ‘maker.’ Relying on qualitative research in Detroit, MI, and Portland, OR, with small, entrepreneurial craft producers affiliated with the ‘maker movement,’ I forward two broad suppositions. First, as a work-related identity, ‘maker’ is emergent from a collective frustration with globalization and corporate/professional work. From the perspective of affective labor, the suggestion is that this negative association with globalized forms of work might be productive of a politically oppositional subjectivity. Second, as an identity term ‘maker’ is vague and oftentimes rejected by the people it ostensibly describes, and as such, the politics of ‘maker’ are not oriented toward collective political action. Why does ‘maker’ appear coherent as a response to globalization and corporate culture, but incoherent as a form of solidarity or collective identity? The paper utilizes affect theory to make sense of this contradiction, finding that the ambiguity and negation of ‘maker’ help shape a non-rigid form of belonging that allows makers to express various dissatisfactions (e.g. of globalization) while maintaining feelings of autonomy and avoiding overtly political positions. Lastly, I contend that ‘making’ is an adjustment to the turbulence of capitalism rather than a confrontation against it and is best understood in terms of the sense of mooring and purpose it provides for those within its milieu.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 497-504 ◽  
Author(s):  
IdaMae Louise Craddock

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe the implementation of a mobile makerspace program in a public school setting. Insights, challenges, successes, projects as well as recommendations will be shared. Design/methodology/approach – This paper describes a mobile makerspace program in a public high school in Virginia. It discusses the growth of mobile making, the advantages and disadvantages of mobility, and how the program was implemented. Findings – Mobile makerspaces are a fast-growing manifestation of maker culture. It is possible to have a makerspace in a public school and take the maker culture to other schools in the area. Having a steady supply of students or library interns that are willing to travel to other schools is critical. Originality/value – Makerspaces in libraries is still a relatively new phenomenon. While the research is coming on stationary makerspaces, mobile making is a new horizon for the maker movement. This paper seeks to provide a description of one such program.


Letonica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergejs Kruks

Keywords: discourse analysis, general will, Latvian politics, political representation, Saeima Latvian citizens are characterised by a very low level of political activism. How can this be explained through an understanding of politics? Prior to the 2018 Saeima (Latvian parliament) election, voters were interviewed on Latvian television discussing the pronouncements of various members of parliament. The researcher explores the relationship between the comments of these voters and the way they feel their interests are being represented by the state’s law makers. Throughout the interviews, voters are critical of Saeima, yet they fail to clearly explain their interests. The generally agreed upon duty of MPs is to discover the general will of the people, and attempt to fulfil this will through law making. In Latvia, the concept of forming interest groups representing the desires of various groups of citizens to create public expressions of their opinions is not considered a viable resource for political action. The citizens being interviewed believe that they cannot expect to have their interests represented by Saeima and prefer individual strategies focused on non-political action.


2017 ◽  
Vol 60 (6) ◽  
pp. 783-794 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Langley ◽  
Marthe Zirngiebl ◽  
Janosch Sbeih ◽  
Bart Devoldere

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 311-328
Author(s):  
Pere Franch

This paper analyses the use of storytelling by United States presidents in their war speeches, from the Vietnam War to the War on Terror. The study proposes a dual concept of storytelling in political communication: first, the global story that lies behind the presidential rhetoric aimed at justifying war; and second, the use of a specific technique consisting of inserting particular, personal stories into the speeches in order to communicate specific messages to the audience. The methodology used consists of an in-depth, interpretive, qualitative content analysis of a sample of presidential speeches. The findings confirm, firstly, that US presidents’ war storytelling aims to reinforce the political myth of America’s duty to preserve freedom, an argument that helps make the burden of the war understandable and bearable for the people, thereby reaffirming American collective identity. It is a reductionist narrative, as all wars are presented as having the same causes and goals. Secondly, the presidential use of personal stories is confirmed to have increased exponentially from the Vietnam War era. In most cases, these stories consist of a personification of some basic values attributed to the whole nation, by means of which these values are reinforced: heroism, patriotism, sense of duty, and, above all – again – the defence of freedom. The results also show that, in this aspect of their war rhetoric, the differences between George W. Bush and Barack Obama are at least blurred, despite their ideological and political differences.


Author(s):  
Elisabeth Unterfrauner ◽  
Christian Voigt ◽  
Maria Schrammel ◽  
Massimo Menichinelli

Author(s):  
Ingrid Holmboe Høibo ◽  
Morten Henrik Lerpold

I det digitaliserte samfunnet i dag skjer ei betydeleg endring i læringa sine materielle føresetnader, frå konkrete og analoge læringsmiljø til digitale og virtuelle. Parallelt med den massive digitale satsinga i nordiske utdanningssystem har det vekse fram ei global rørsle kalla the maker movement. Denne artikkelen undersøker korleis rørsla kan bidra til ei breiare og fleirfasettert tilnærming til digital kompetanse i Kunst og handverk (KogH), enn den skjerm­tunge praksisen som til no har dominert. Gjennom studie av læreplanar, læringsteoriar, eigen praksis i feltet, praktiske døme og den stadig veksande ‘makerrørsla’, vert det undersøkt om utdanningssystemet i større grad burde støtte seg til den faglege og forskingsmessige kunn­skapen om kropp og materialet si rolle i barn si læring når viktige avgjersler om skuleutvikling og digitalisering av KogH-faget skal takast. Nøkkelord: Digitale ferdigheiter, handverk, kroppsleg erkjenning, maker movement, demokrati.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
German Molina

<p><b>The fact that comfort is a subjective state of the mind is widely accepted by engineers, architects and building scientists. Despite this, capturing all the complexity, subjectivity and richness of this construct in models that are useful in building science contexts is far from straightforward. By prioritizing usability, building science has produced models of comfort (e.g., acoustic, visual and thermal) that overly simplify this concept to something nearly objective that can be directly associated with people’s physiology and measurable and quantifiable environmental factors. This is a contradiction because, even if comfort is supposed to be subjective, most of the complexity of “the subject” is avoided by focusing on physiology; and, even if comfort is supposed to reside in the mind, the cognitive processes that characterize the mind are disregarded. This research partially mitigates this contradiction by exploring people’s non-physical personal factors and cognition within the context of their comfort and by proposing a way in which they can be incorporated into building science research and practice. This research refers to these elements together—i.e., people’s non-physical personal factors and cognition—as “the mind”.</b></p> <p>This research proposes a new qualitative model of the Feeling of Comfort that embraces “the mind”. This model was developed from the results of a first study in which 18 people—from Chile and New Zealand—were asked to describe “a home with good daylight” and “a warm home” in their own words. These results were then replicated in a second study in which another group of 24 people—also from Chile and New Zealand—described “a home with good acoustic performance”, “a home with good air quality” and “a pleasantly cool home”. The Feeling of Comfort model not only was capable of making sense of the new data (gathered in this second study) but also proved to be simple enough to be useful in the context of comfort research and practice. For instance, it guided the development of a quantitative Feeling of Comfort model and also of a prototype building simulation tool that embraces “the mind” and thus can potentially estimate people’s Feeling of Comfort.</p> <p>This research concludes that embracing “the mind” is not only possible but necessary. The reason for this is that “the mind” plays a significant role in the development of people’s comfort. Thus, theories and models of comfort that ignore it fail to represent properly the concept of comfort held by the people for whom buildings are designed. However, incorporating “the mind” into building science’s research and practice implies embracing tools, research methods and conceptual frameworks that have historically not been used by such a discipline. Specifically, it concludes that building science should normalize a more holistic view of comfort and perform more exploratory and qualitative research.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
German Molina

<p><b>The fact that comfort is a subjective state of the mind is widely accepted by engineers, architects and building scientists. Despite this, capturing all the complexity, subjectivity and richness of this construct in models that are useful in building science contexts is far from straightforward. By prioritizing usability, building science has produced models of comfort (e.g., acoustic, visual and thermal) that overly simplify this concept to something nearly objective that can be directly associated with people’s physiology and measurable and quantifiable environmental factors. This is a contradiction because, even if comfort is supposed to be subjective, most of the complexity of “the subject” is avoided by focusing on physiology; and, even if comfort is supposed to reside in the mind, the cognitive processes that characterize the mind are disregarded. This research partially mitigates this contradiction by exploring people’s non-physical personal factors and cognition within the context of their comfort and by proposing a way in which they can be incorporated into building science research and practice. This research refers to these elements together—i.e., people’s non-physical personal factors and cognition—as “the mind”.</b></p> <p>This research proposes a new qualitative model of the Feeling of Comfort that embraces “the mind”. This model was developed from the results of a first study in which 18 people—from Chile and New Zealand—were asked to describe “a home with good daylight” and “a warm home” in their own words. These results were then replicated in a second study in which another group of 24 people—also from Chile and New Zealand—described “a home with good acoustic performance”, “a home with good air quality” and “a pleasantly cool home”. The Feeling of Comfort model not only was capable of making sense of the new data (gathered in this second study) but also proved to be simple enough to be useful in the context of comfort research and practice. For instance, it guided the development of a quantitative Feeling of Comfort model and also of a prototype building simulation tool that embraces “the mind” and thus can potentially estimate people’s Feeling of Comfort.</p> <p>This research concludes that embracing “the mind” is not only possible but necessary. The reason for this is that “the mind” plays a significant role in the development of people’s comfort. Thus, theories and models of comfort that ignore it fail to represent properly the concept of comfort held by the people for whom buildings are designed. However, incorporating “the mind” into building science’s research and practice implies embracing tools, research methods and conceptual frameworks that have historically not been used by such a discipline. Specifically, it concludes that building science should normalize a more holistic view of comfort and perform more exploratory and qualitative research.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document