13.07.2015 Views

Bruno Latour, Aramis, or the Love of Technology, PDF - Dss-edit.com

Bruno Latour, Aramis, or the Love of Technology, PDF - Dss-edit.com

Bruno Latour, Aramis, or the Love of Technology, PDF - Dss-edit.com

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

"But you pushed a little, didn 't you?""No, I didn't need to push. I found out one day that <strong>Aramis</strong> was beingjettisoned. Matra had decided, <strong>or</strong> <strong>the</strong> RATP technicians . . I'd be interestedto know whose decision it was, actually. My feeling is that Matra made <strong>the</strong>fatal move. In any event, <strong>the</strong> top pri<strong>or</strong>ity now is adding a line that will parallelline A <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> RER. Bef<strong>or</strong>e, we could aff<strong>or</strong>d to experiment with <strong>Aramis</strong>; now wecan't even manage a night on <strong>the</strong> town, as it were."[Settling back m<strong>or</strong>e <strong>com</strong>f<strong>or</strong>tably in his armchair.] "It's extra<strong>or</strong>dinary that<strong>the</strong>y've asked you to do this study! You know what it reminds me <strong>of</strong>? Oedipus'asking <strong>the</strong> soothsayer why <strong>the</strong> plague has <strong>com</strong>e to Thebes! . . . You have <strong>the</strong>answer in <strong>the</strong> question itself They wear blinders. Oh, <strong>the</strong>re's not an ounce <strong>of</strong>ill will among <strong>the</strong> lot <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m, but I've never seen such unpoliticol people. 'Howcould it happen?' <strong>the</strong>y must be wondering. 'How could we make somethingthat w<strong>or</strong>ks, and <strong>the</strong>n it all goes belly-up?' It's touching, really-shows anextra<strong>or</strong>dinary lack <strong>of</strong> awareness. Their own case intrigues <strong>the</strong>m, because <strong>the</strong>ylike sociology . . . <strong>Aramis</strong> is such an intricate mess, incredibly intricate." [no.19]"You see, my friend, hovv precise and sophisticated our inf<strong>or</strong>mantsare," N<strong>or</strong>bert <strong>com</strong>mented as he re<strong>or</strong>ganized his notecards. "They talkabout Oedipus and about proximate causes . . . They know everything.They're doing our sociology f<strong>or</strong> us, and doing it better than we can;it's not w<strong>or</strong>th <strong>the</strong> trouble to do m<strong>or</strong>e. You see? Our job is a cinch. Wejust follow <strong>the</strong> players. They all agree, in <strong>the</strong> end, about <strong>the</strong> death <strong>of</strong><strong>Aramis</strong>. They blame each o<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>of</strong> course, but <strong>the</strong>y speak with onevoice: <strong>the</strong> proximate cause <strong>of</strong> death is <strong>of</strong> no interest-it's just a finalblow, a last straw, a ripe fruit, a mere consequence. As M. Girard saidso magnificently, 'It was built right into <strong>the</strong> nature <strong>of</strong> things.' There'sno point in deciding who finally killed <strong>Aramis</strong>. It was a collectiveassassination. An abandonment, ra<strong>the</strong>r. It's useless to get bogged downconcentrating on <strong>the</strong> final phase. What we have to do is see who builtthose 'things' in, and into what 'natures.' We 're going to have to go backto <strong>the</strong> beginning <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project, to <strong>the</strong> remote causes. And remember,this business went on f<strong>or</strong> seventeen years."

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!