![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Notes
Throughout most of the core literature on ANT, for instance, scholars such as Law, Latour and Thrift have often pointed to the influence on their positions of ‘structuration’ theorists such as Giddens, Elias or Bourdieu (e.g. Law, Citation1992, p. 386).
A good, albeit slightly outdated, companion to the guiding principles of ANT for the non-initiated can be found in Law, Citation1992.
As I noted elsewhere (Acuto, Citation2010), a limited exception can be done for some perhaps conceptually limited contributes (Pluijm and Melissen, Citation2007; Amen et al., Citation2011) or subject-specific theorisations (Betsill and Bulkeley, Citation2006) applying geographical analyses on the ‘borders’ of the discipline.
For instance, in one of the first ANT pieces titled ‘Unscrewing the Big Leviathan’, Callon and Latour provided an example of this twofold (and inherently political) reflexivity. The authors thus set out to illustrate, contemporaneously, both the process through which large-scale orders consist of macro-actors ‘who have successfully “translated” other actors into a single will for which they speak’ and the dynamic by which ‘sociologists help them do so’ (Callon and Latour, Citation1981, p. 277).