Doing thinking: revisiting computing with artistic research and technofeminism

References

• Ahmed, S. 2006. Queer Phenomenology. New York: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ahmed, S. 2007. “A Phenomenology of Whiteness.” Feminist Theory 8 (2): 149–168. doi: 10.1177/1464700107078139
   Google Scholar
• Akrich, M. 1992. “The De-Scription of Technical Objects.” In Shaping Technology/Building Society. Studies in Sociotechnical Change, edited by W. E. Bijker and J. Law, 205–224. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ali, S. M. 2012. “Race: The Difference That Makes a Difference.” tripleC 11 (1): 93–106. doi: 10.31269/triplec.v11i1.324
   Google Scholar
• Baldauf, A., S. Gruber, S. Hille, A. Krauss, V. Miller, M. Verlič, W. Hong-Kai, and J. Wieger. 2016. Spaces of Commoning: Artistic Research and the Utopia of the Everyday, Academy of Fine Ars Vienna. Vienna: Sternberg Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barad, K. 2007. “Meeting the Universe Halfway.” Quantum physics and the Entanglement of matter and meaning, Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barad, K. 2014. “Diffracting Diffraction: Cutting Together-Apart.” Parallax 20 (3): 168–187. doi: 10.1080/13534645.2014.927623
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bardzell, S. 2010. “Feminist HCI: Taking Stock and Outlining an Agenda for Design.” In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI ‘10, edited by E. Mynatt, D. Schoner, G. Fitzpatrick, S. Hudson, K. Edwards, and T. Rodden, 1301–1310. New York: ACM Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bath, C. 2014. “Searching for Methodology. Feminist Technology Design in Computer Science.” In Gender in Science and Technology: Interdisciplinary Approaches, edited by W. Ernst and I. Horwath, 57–78. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Bolt, B. 2007. “Material Thinking and the Agency of Matter.” Studies in Material Thinking 1 (1): 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Braidotti, R. 2006. Transpositions. On Nomadic Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Braidotti, R. 2007. “Feminist Epistemology After Postmodernism: Critiquing Science, Technology and Globalisation.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 32 (1): 65–74. doi: 10.1179/030801807X183623
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coole, D. H., and S. Frost. 2010. New Materialisms. Ontology, Agency, and Politics. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, J. 2009. “Rethinking Cyberfeminism(s): Race, Gender and Embodiment.” Women’s Studies Quarterly 37 (1–2): 101–124. doi: 10.1353/wsq.0.0158
   Google Scholar
• Denning, P. J., and M. Tedre. 2019. Computational Thinking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Draude, C. 2011. “Intermediaries: Reflections on Virtual Humans, Gender, and the Uncanny Valley.” AI & SOCIETY 26 (4): 319–327. doi: 10.1007/s00146-010-0312-4
   Google Scholar
• Draude, C. 2017. Computing Bodies: Gender Codes and Anthropomorphic Design at the Human-Computer Interface. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden Imprint.
   Google Scholar
• Draude, C. 2019. “Everything Will be Screen.” Readdressing Screenness Through Art-Based Experiments.” In Dialogues Between Artistic Research and Science and Technology Studies, edited by H. Borgdorff, P. Peters, and T. Pinch. London: Routledge [forthcoming].
   Google Scholar
• Fernandez, M. 2002. “Cyberfeminism, Racism, Embodiment.” In Domain Errors! Cyberfeminist Practices, edited by M. Fernandez, F. Wilding, and M. Wright, 29–44. New York: Autonomedia. subRosa.
   Google Scholar
• Frost, S. 2011. “The Implications of the New Materialisms for Feminist Epistemology.” In Feminist Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, edited by H. E. Grasswick, 69–83. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Gajjala, R. 2003. “South Asian Digital Diasporas and Cyberfeminist Webs: Negotiating Globalization, Nation, Gender, and Information Technology Design.” Contemporary South Asia 12 (1): 41–56. doi: 10.1080/0958493032000123362
   Google Scholar
• Gibson-Graham, J. K. 2008. “Diverse Economies: Performative Practices for Other Worlds.” Progress in Human Geography 32 (5): 613–632. doi: 10.1177/0309132508090821
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen, M. B. 2006. Bodies in Code: Interfaces with Digital Media. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. 1986. “Donna Haraway Primatology is Politics by Other Means.” In Feminist Approaches to Science, edited by Ruth Bleier. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. 1988. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.” Feminist Studies 14 (3): 575–599. doi: 10.2307/3178066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. J. 2016. Staying with the Trouble. Making kin in the Chthulucene. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayles, N. K. 1999. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hobson, J. 2016. “Black Beauty and Digital Spaces: The New Visibility Politics.” Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media, and Technology (10). https://adanewmedia.org/2016/10/issue10-hobson/.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. G. 2010. “Sorting Out the Question of Feminist Technology.” In Feminist Technology, edited by L. L. Layne, S. L. Vostral, and K. Boyer, 21–58. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kozel, S. 2008. Closer: Performance, Technologies, Phenomenology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lorenz, R. 2017. “Unfinished Glossary of Artistic Research.” In Futures of Artistic Research: At the Intersection of Utopia, Academia and Power, edited by A. Seppä, J. Kaila, and H. Slager, 31–48. Helsinki: Academy of Fine Arts.
   Google Scholar
• Luciano, D., and M. Y. Chen. 2015. “Has the Queer Ever Been Human?” GLQ J Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 21 (2-3): 183–207. doi: 10.1215/10642684-2843215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malpass, M. 2017. Critical Design in Context: History, Theory, Practices. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, R., and P. Thurtle. 2004. “Introduction. Data Made Flesh: The Material Poiesis of Informatics.” In Data Made Flesh: Embodying Information, edited by R. Mitchell and P. Thurtle, 1–23. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Muñoz, J. E. 2009. Cruising Utopia: The Then and There of Queer Futurity. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nakamura, L., and D. Haraway. 2003. “Prospects for a Materialist Informatics: An Interview with Donna Haraway.” In electronic Book Review. 30.08.2003, [online] https://electronicbookreview.com/essay/prospects-for-a-materialist-informatics-an-interview-with-donna-haraway/ Accessed on 05.04.2019.
   Google Scholar
• Nake, F. 1993. Die erträgliche Leichtigkeit der Zeichen: Ästhetik, Semiotik, Informatik. BadenBaden: Agis-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Nake, F. 1994. “Human-computer Interaction: Signs and Signals Interfacing.” Languages of Design 2: 193–205.
   Google Scholar
• Nake, F. 2008. “Surface, Interface, Subface: Three Cases of Interaction and One Concept.” In Paradoxes of Interactivity, edited by U. Seifert, J. Hyun Kim, and A. Moore, 92–109. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Plant, S. 1997. Zeroes + Ones: Digital Women and the New Technoculture. London: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Purple Noise Manifesto. 2018. [online] http://artwarez.org/projects/purplenoise/PurpleNoise_Manifesto.pdf. Accessed 21.07.2019.
   Google Scholar
• Rommes, E. 2002. Gender Scripts and the Internet – The Design and Use of Amsterdam’s Digital City. Twente: Twente University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rommes, E., C. Bath, and S. Maass. 2012. “Methods for Intervention: Gender Analysis and Feminist Design of ICT.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 37 (6): 653–662. doi: 10.1177/0162243912450343
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seppä, A., J. Kaila, and H. Slager. 2017. Futures of Artistic Research. Helsinki: The Academy of Fine Arts, Uniarts.
   Google Scholar
• Spideralex. 2018. “Neue Welten erfinden – mit cyberfeministische Praxen und Indeen.” In Die Schönen Kriegerinnen: Technofeministische Praxis im 21. Jahrhundert, edited by C. Sollfrank, 59–88. Vienna, Linz: Transversal texts.
   Google Scholar
• Tan, P. 2014. “Uncommon Knowledge A Transversal Dictionary”, Eurozine [Online], http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2014-05-30-tan-en.html. Accessed 21.07.2019.
   Google Scholar
• Tsing, A. 2015. Mushroom at the End of the World: On the Possibility of Life in Capitalist Ruins. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tuck, E., and K. W. Yang. 2014. “R-Words: Refusing Research.” In Humanizing Research: Decolonizing Qualitative Inquiry with Youth and Communities, edited by D. Paris, and M. T. Winn, 223–247. Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Tuhiwai Smith, L. 1999. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Vasseleu, C. 2013. “Material-Character Animation: Experiments in Life-Like Translucency.” In Carnal Knowledge. Towards a “New Materialism” Through the Arts London, edited by E. Barrett and B. Bolt, 155–169. New York: I.B. Tauris.
   Google Scholar
• Yatsko, A. 2016. Insight Into Theoretical and Applied Informatics. Berlin: De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Zuse, K. 1993. The Computer – My Life. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
   Google Scholar