(~H1\P1~ ER FIVE

- ----------------------·-·--~·-

Patchworking Ways of
l(nowing and Making
•• 0 Q

KRISTINA LINDSTRO .M A:ND ASA ST.AHL

''

Calls for new ways of knowing have been articulated across practice-based research,
social-' science and design research in recent years ·(Haraway 1994; Law 2004; Lury and
Wakeford 2012; Savage 2013; Jungnickel and Hjorth 2014; Brandt et al. 2011; Andersen
2012; Buscher et al. 2011). While these calls come from different positions and to some
extent have different objectives, some overlapping concerns are how to know 'mess',
uncertainties and entanglements in technological society. They also put a focus on the
unavoidable world-making of research.
In this chapter we :propose what we articulate as the patchworking ways of knowing,
which partly draws on our art project Threads - A Mobile Sewing Circle. Threads was
touring to rural community centres and other cultural institutions in Sweden between
2010 and 2013. Participants have, during this time, been invited to spend some time
together with others that they did not necessarily know, whHe embroidering their text
messages by hand or with a machine connected to.a mobile phone with bespoke software.
Threads in itself could be seen as a way of patchworking old and new, digital and physical
technologies and ways of meeting. Patchworking can thus be understood as concretely
taking what is at hand and putting it into new relations, for example an embroidery
machine off-the-shelf connected to a mobile phone. Or, when a participant in Threads
sent her first-time-ever text message and then had the SMS embroidered on a piece of
linen fabric that she had kept in her hope chest for decades. She thus re-patterned
materials and mixed temporalities through care and curiosity.
Patchworking, in this context, is thereby not only the making of a textile object, but
the collective making of a patchwork of different kinds of knowledges, experiences,
histories, and anticipations in relation to ways of living with technologies. Staying with,
and knowing over time and through multiple presents is a particularly important ·
aspect of patchworking ways of knowing and we consider it neglected in practice-based
research.
What we propose is that the patchworking ways of know ing is both to make and to ··
know ways of living with technologies. It is both epistemology and ontology - to know
and to make the world in one move . .·
 ,...,
1.R()QUCl~IC>N
IN •
. . . l t' 1 here
~1 d1 sc1p 111 ' . •
h.wc been ongoing c1·
.. . iscll · . .
,J w l•c·(oi11t: . . f knovv111g. Br.me.It et .11. argllc ss1<)n
l.-,H'r ' l rt'-°~ J.:>t9 ·r ~ t 1z1.~s ':k:.i~ner . ,- 011 •1 01•ivcn t bc1p me ~llcj as t •• ·.~
1
1
r.nrt I · w.ns o 1· . 1· tha
l ~. . >lh· Ju1:usc!.> :
t our " h.te ~liJrJ1.f . 1 n •ll rr.11.lic1 ..)11.J . •h t·ren Ji ms ro cur across such pracritts'(gr<ip. hie
• J ' II c1.. ll"-• 1.
\ \ h1.1 ~·~l> -.'.~I~
· · ·c1n.: O
rrt J es1c:n rt:S _'
"ff k' J
. . L. !> between d1 erent lllCiS 0t <lcsjgl)
• er3nrjl
x ttk i:.ie ~ t~ , . . i" "tll1~lltS1llnC"
J "
d rest
ht'.r w::ir ot l is '- ·I Jcr~ it ·11ms to pro uce anc1 what r I arch
. .J .
d,... , ,_gn or r .
. <l f krH)\\· eo,:-.t: ,
er .ti. l tJ 1 .· ~, · . tlt wh.H ktn o . e~1gn
l · 'i) Anot ve d .
111 the early ] 980s, Cross (l 982) arg
tJ b in earn~ . Ju('tt0n. . .. . . lled h
. k l JS in rh1s pro . .
wllud ,._ 1 J' er\ \\or third are.1. <. >f educatton and }· research, 111 Para!J eI w t ath
or . e~ ~I IJ be rrc:.ued a~ 3 h
1 . • • •
t cited scholars on t 11s issue is Frayling (1 it
'"k-,1gn ~ w u .. One of r e mos d . B 993)
~..:1en1..e J.n
. '. d hununines.
. researc on, h for and through estgn. randt er al ()
. . d · · · --011)
·h disrin~uishes hern c:en d . theorv design studies, es1gn science and Prac .
\\ J o L • • b . veen es1gn ., ... h . h . 1· . ttce.
ke che distincnon en h terizes the last approac ts t at, tn ine With rese
m . . ·h \'V'hat c arac . . . arch
!used design reseJrL · .. . crice and auns to explore new terrams for design
r hro U<=> ah desi•.1:11 rJ ' ic starts oft tn pra and

designer.. oducmg . know1eti g e through

... doing and practice . is, of course, norh·1ng
F 11 · rhe tra d.mon
Le:irnrng or pr . o f Dewey (1916/1944) and .American . pragmatism' Sch"on
(new.
1983 o 1987)
owinghas d one ex tens'ive work that articulates/descnbes . . how knowledge is.
roduced' in . pro fess1ona
· 1 prac rices such as design.. One of h.1s. mam arguments
. . is that a
P . . 1. . ·h·ch aims ro produce umversal truths, is only possible if you can
technical ranona It}, w t . . . •• - 'bl b -. . . .
. 1are a pro bl em. In the swamp of pracnttoners
1so . th ts is nor poss1 e Iecause every situation r!f.
.s m
1 · fi nite
· Iy comp lex · 'To
1 ~ avoid drowning ' you need . to be. constant
. y on the move. From nig
the perspective of technical rationality it lo?ks as .tf pracnt10ners do not kn?w .what they fir
are doing. To understand the rational.icy of practtc~ you ha:~ ro engage with tt through
reflection in and on action. This, then, is the reflecttve pract1t10ner.
\Vhile Schon himself d id not conduct practice-based research, his writing has been
widely used by scholars who, through experiments and interventions, aim develop to W(

knowledge on how to improve practices (cf. Eriksen 2012; Brandt et al. 2011; Hallnas ca
and Redstrbm 2006).
fl',
Our own pracrice-b~1sed research is an attempt to contribute to methodological
assemblages in social sciences, design research, humanities and artistic research.
Our practice is Threads - A Mobile Sewing Circle. Ir was a travelling exhibition,
workshop and sewing circle where participants were invited to embroider their text R

messages by h~md or by forwarding them to a mohile phone connected to an embroidery

machine (see Plate 5.1). This took place while there were several other exhibitions in, for
example, Sweden that connected textiles and technologies. 1 Some works were, just like
1hreads dealing with th · fh d · · · ge
. m
publics ~ societal issues e question
·h · to duse · es1gn practices and ob1ects
od ow · to enga
d der
mequalit1es.
. .. sue as mo es ot pro uct1on ' access to informanon an gen
In our thesis (Li d .. d S h · l s'
enaage1n
0 . h ,. ,. ., n strom an , ta I 2014) we have articulated our and on~r
em Wtt 111reads as k d 0 f h king
wavs, of k · . c
now1ng rs, as we will 5h a m Pate
. h" working ways of knowing. The patchwor
. 11 · for
new ways of k · . . ow rn t · is chapter, a lso a response to vanous ca 5
now1ng Within design- . d . . . 1 ·1 these
calls come froin d"1ff .. onente research and the social sciences. W 11 e
erem pos1t1011 · d · some
overlapping conce h s an to some extent have different objecnves, h
0 rns are r e unavo· I bl ft e
w. hrld-inakina
. o of 1
researc 1 and k c Jc a . e - ,and perhaps desirable - consequences 0 s .n
tee nolog1cal society. ' nowing mess', uncertainties and entanglement 1
PA1'CHWORKf,
NG WAYS OF KNOWING AND MAKING 67 '
. ,
·' .l

d, , d these complex and messy sociomaterial entanglements we have turned

T~ un t:rst:Technology studies (STS), actor-network theory (ANT), ANT and after
t
o Soencef an· · t technoscience, matena . l sem1ot1cs,
. . matena . I turn, f emm1st
. . matena. 1·isms,
. . eminis
(ANTa), · ceriaJism and posthumamsm, · · 1mportantly
which · trou ble a b.mary d"iv1·de
w temin1st ma
ne . and culture and treat agency as mutually constituted between humans and
between nature . . . .
f Suchman 2007). Such an understandmg of the world 1mpl1es that ways of
non h umans (c. · . . . .
. . .· h technologies are not determmed m one moment, through design or use, but
Jiving Wit _ . .
· ously remade Not purely as a social construct but also material. Our work
are conrinu · . . . . .
thus positions itself neither in technological determinism norm social, cultu~al or human
determinism. The position thereby has consequences for how to conduct design _work and
w·here and when to draw the boundaries of the design projects that we engage 111.
The patchworking ways of knowing means to know through a collective making. It
rhus intervenes in designerly, artistic and academic practices that localize creativity and
agency in one actor - the bounded actor who can be isolated. It proposes serious
collaboration and relationality and thereby troubles neo-liberal, capitalist ideas of
individuality and discrete entities. Patchiuorking ways of knowing thereby directs attention
towards entanglement of performativity and materiality. Patchworking ways of knowing
also intervenes in and troubles linear, singular storytelling and dualisms. It suggests
narratives with several entry- and exit-points. Furthermore, patchworking ways of
knowing intervenes in the notion that mature and robust knowledge is to be derived
securely from established qualitative or quantitative methodologies. Instead, it suggests
highly localized and situated ways of knowing and forms of expressions of knowledge.
Finally patchworking troubles ways of knowing that are mainly about revealing structures
and norms, and instead proposes a mode of producing knowledge through crafting and
making.
Knowing through crafting and making means that there is a connection between what
we can know, what we are making and how we are making what we try to know. In our
case we have used the patchworking ways of knowing, in one move, to make and know
ways of living with technologies. 2

CALLS FOR NEW WAYS OF KNOWING

Recently there have been various calls for new ways of knowing within art and design (cf.
Hu?hes ~t al. 2011; Hannula et al. 2005; Koskinen et al. 2011; Brandt et al. 2011) and I ,
social .sciences (Law and Urry 2004; Bi.ischer et al. 20J 1; Lury and \'V'ake.ford 2012;
J~ngmckel and Hjorth 2014). Although these calls come from different fields and hav~
shg.htl~ different. objectives, they share an interest in knowing 'mess' (Law 2004) - that '.,
which is contradictory, complex and relational. ·
A consequence of this wish for understanding 'mess' is that we cannot expect to know
what th~ problem is in advance. Instead methods have to be inventive (Lury and Wakeford
2
s 012) ' tn the sense ti1 at t h ey s h ou ld not only aim
· at answering
· a predefined question
· or
1
of ve a predefined problem, but allow for re-articulations of the problem. The inventiveness
0 a method r . . .
a h . ies 1 ~ its capacity to change the problem that it aims to address. What makes
mOOe t) od rnvenrive or not is not pre-given, but is always in-the-making in what Law
(2 4 calls 'm th d l · 1
A e o o og1ca assemblages' that consist of tools, people, context and more.
we ~ong the calls for new ways of knowing it is also argued that method and that which
,v, kaufn to know cannot be separated. For example, in inventive Methods by Lur)' and
wa e ord (2012) · ·
It ts argued that '. .. it is not possible to apply a method as if it were
 • .- -· <.t.~A.J'i1i: ' . .
r · C.t1lr
L~t~
-!dress but that method rn ·
6~ jr seeks tom '. .. list ra I
h. problem · short 111vent1ve methods . t1etb
l ro t e bletn 1n ' l 20 t are w ~
. 1d1ffrrent or external v"1H ro rhe p!r o , (l l.lf}' and \V'akeforc
11 . 2: 2-3). . "rs t"
maule sp~cific an hility
d rt: e ''
. . ro rhe pro
in
b ell1 ,
d probl en1s also ~
imp ies a s t f t f roin do1·11g r
1 · h · v

.nuodnce answera . t' methods an ber of parameters can be cont ese<ltch

i 1 1clJno o . · ,d num ) S } . roll d
This unc erstar s t-where a lt1111re d Rabeharisoa 2003 . uc 1 c1iscussions h e , to
within bhoraton:: ' I • ""ild' (Cal lon an I 2003) which refers to research in ha:ealso
. . r·ons in ne tn)' et a. ' . w Ich
expenmenta ' ·_ \1 de 2 (Nowo .. t. the ivory rower to engage in coll b the
. I red in i v o 1 os1t10n o I. h a Ora .
been arncu a h bservariona P le an EU-level t 11s as been irn ttons
l leaver e o 0 for examp ' P1e
researc 1ers , .d of academia. n , . 11 d Living labs (Uden 2011; Bjorgvins 111ented
with actors outsi e f nds the so-ca e son et al
h money u .
because -~esearc and Reimer 2013). . ple Mode 2, Living labs, citizen scie
?012· Lowgren for exam ' . nee a
- Tl~ere are differences berwee~l not develop here, but tt seems to us that What at· nd
bl'c engagement which we w1 is up questions of how the researcher is inv ltgns
pu 1 '" h that also oper . 1. I Id H o Ved
h mis a type of researc . k ledge but in ma ong t 1e wor . arawa
t e . . . er roducmg now ' ·h id . y calls
not only m unveilmo or P f 1 , 'earcher and the researc war -makmg Uia
. lement 0 t 1e res ' . . raway
this performanve entang . 't'que to compos1t1on .
. h . \' shift from Crt I b h . ') . .
2008), wh1c 11np 1es a H · , y proposes there y as s1m1 ant1es with h
ld k'ng
1 that araw.1 . } . t e
· · -ma · · n that Latour pr oposes· His argument 1s t 1at critique' . .. "ran our
The · wor
composmomst posi~io d' d on the discovery of a true world of realities Iy·
f ,, b cause it was pre icate d tng
o steam _e _ , (Latour 2010 : 4). Instead we nee to engage in composing
behind a veil ot appearances · h h .
. · the important quesnons are not w et. er something
the world. In sue h a practice . is
constructed or not, b ut ·if it is well or badly composed. , Barad aligns. .with Latour,
·
suggestmg: 'C nttque
·· makes. people feel attacked. It doesn t . focus on hvmg together,
hopefully._ living well together and flourishinf (B~rad, quoted by Juleskja~r _a~d
Schwennesen 2012: 16). Instead she seeks to creatively re-pattern the world (ibid,
quoted by Juleskjaer and Schwennescn 2012: 16).
To be part of world-making is however not exclusive to these explicitly compositionist
research positions. For example, Law and Urry (2004) as well as Ruppert et al. (2013)
have argued that all methods participate in making rc.:ilities. To explain this they refer to
public opinion polls, and argue that that these po lls not only provide knowledge about
the public's opinions on specific issues, they also participate in making an opinionated
pu.blic. Methods, as Law and Urry (2004) have put it, are thereby not only about
epistemology but also about ontology.
Our resp?nse to t~ese calls for new ways of knowing is patchworking ways of knowit'.g.
Before we_ discuss this further, we will linger on the area of curiosity_ ways of living with
technologies - that we engage ·th · 'T'h d Tl · · · h · red
. wi m rea s. . 11s is unportant since, as we ave sta '
method and that which we aim to know are already entangled.

WAYS OF LIVING WITH TECHNOLOGIES

Welcome to Threads - a m0 b 1·1 · . · d - rom,
have been hosting th' . ~ sewi~g circle! We, Asa St"hl and Kristina Lin st .
I . . is sewmg circle since 2006 . .
n this sewing circle partici . . . f n their
mobile phone_ to ch , pants are invited to embroider a text message roi ake
h oose one out of )] h . d co JTJ<
t e SMS into a messa f a t e messages stored in their mbox an
"ge our o th re d d f b . .
l f you have a look l . a an a nc. . 'oII
l I1 . arounc you . ·11 h· ngwg
cot es lines. These ar ' Wt see already embroidered messages a ·(il1S .
' e message th· I1 l 1re" 1 ·
at ave been shared and embroidered "Y f
 ;_j, .,.
.' ~.
• f.• ~,

PA·i·c·tJ\lC'ORKlNG WAYS OF KNOWING AND MAKING '

~ · 69 ·,.1 I
. participants of t~is sewing circle. On the table, that WC all are gathered around, we
I
have placed fabnc, needles and threads that you are welcome to use, unless you prefer
to use your own. Later on, the table will be set with coffee, tea, and biscuits.
On another table you \:O.' ill find an embroidery machine that is connected to a mobile
phone, through a USB-cord. For those who wish to have their message embroidered
by the machine you are welcome to forward that message to the phone. But please
keep in mind: the machine is slow. It takes about one hour to embroider a foll message,
with 160 characters. It might take even longer to do it by hand.
At the end of the day you can decide whether you want to bring your embroidered
SMS with you or leave it here to travel further. You can also upload a picture of it to
the Threads website. We will have a summing up of the day and we all help to pack the
things into two blue boxes that have been designed in order to make transportation of
Threads easier, so that Threads can continue on its tour around Sweden.

This is .o ne version of how the two of us have invited peop.le to Threads -A Mobile Sewing
Circle. Importantly the invitation has also been performed by a range of other actors, such
as the collaborating partners and local . hosts, and through a range of materialities and
technologies, such as posters, the project website, phone calls, and how the room has
been set up.
The first time we invited participants to embroider text messages from their mobile
phones was in 2006. At the time a developer was trying to connect an embroidery machine
to a mobile phone for us, but the participants of this first sewing circle could only
embroider by hand. As we could take an embroidery machine with a USB-port off the
shelf, another developer could help us reverse engineer it and connect it to a mobile
phone. It thereby became possible to forward an SMS to our mobile phone that was
connected to a computer and to transfer it to the embroidery machine in a file format so
that the embroidery machine could embroider the message. Since then this assemblage
has gone through more iterations. The latest version, a mobile phone d irectly connected
to an embroidery machine, was developed for a collaboration where the sewing circle
went on tour around Sweden between 2010 and 2013 (see Plate 5.2). The partners were
Swedish Travelling Exhibitions, Vi Unga, the National Federation of Rural Community
Centres, StudiefOrbundet Vuxenskolan and M almo University - where we were based.
During this period about 100 sewing circles were hosted, by us and local hosts.
The invitation to Threads was a rather specific one. It was an invitation to look into
your mobile phone in-box, choose a message and a fabric to embroider it on; and it was
also an invitation to sit down for a couple of hours together with other participants that
you might not have met before. The reason for the gathering in Threads is no t that the
participants already belong to a community or share a predefined issue that they want to
solve. For some the invitation sparked curiosity. As time went by and we were hosting
more and more of those sewing circles, we came to think of the invitation as an expression
of an area of curiosity: ways o/ living with technologies.
The expression living with implies an ongoingness, that technologies are always in the
making, and that it is a mutual becoming of technologies and other actors such as humans.
Another emphasis in the living with is that technologies are not .1'.'ade from scratch.
Rather, they are made in relation, with contingent and temporary enttnes and also become
with sedimentations of what has come before them.
· Such understanding of technology is inspired by feminist technoscien~e that rests on
relational ontology and an understanding of agency as mutually constituted between
 ::·::··:- · . ' ._.·.:··' .• '! . ....... ..
\ - .. ' .~ ; ' .· ·

70 . : ·. · · · . . . Barad 2007; Suchman 2007). 1'! ·

994
acrors (Haraway L t'ual constitutions and relational be le \Va.y
d onl1Urna11 ' · · that mu co111·
human an n 1· "k (201 2: 6) put 1t JS b >cl1nolouically determinist. This me 1ngs
d Zy w~ a l r to e te o .. ~ ans h
Kem ber an . I human-cenrrec no f of living but do not determine th t at
t be ne1t 1er . k' u 0 ways ' , . . ern. 1'h'
mean ol .. participate in the ma in.:> . to matter can never tully be anticipated d . ts
rechno og1es h I gy comes . I . ur 10
. , that how a rec no o _. l fumre users, but is a ways reconfigured d . g
also suggests ' d . rs or potcnua Uting
.
a 'project-nme '
, by es1ane
' 0
· kr er al. 20 ) · . 1 ·11:)
. · ·
' -time' (Redstrom 2006; Binc . Is have travelled wJth Threads,3 how it corn
use h ·ame matena . . es to
While more or less t e s, I:\ d differ because of the soetomatenal relatio .
. are ena ") e . l :11 ns It
matter and what agencies . . I Sweden where there IS rnrc y any phone recept'
mple 1.n rura ' I ion,
becomes part of. For exa ' t I tC) use mobile phones as expectec. Some have h d
.. . I ays been ao e a
part1c1pants have n~t aw to be able to forward their messages to hav~ them embroidered
to lean out of the window . b oider an SMS, in other words, IS not located in on
b the machine The capacity to em r . 1: 1 fh e
Y . · h 0 r a machine, but m an assem ) age o uman, phone ·
discrete entity such as a P one l d '
machine, masts, satellites, landscapes, proroco s an more. ..
4 h 1 potentials and these can never be predefined or am1c1pated
Each actor as severa .
since we do not know with what, whom, how and when they will become. Indeed, living
with technologies is unpredictable, and entangles us in a range of issues extended over
time and space. Therefore there is a need for continuous care and curiosity.
Threads for some has been framed as a push towards slowness, mindfulness and
nostalgia. Others have been provoked by the use of machines and have thought that the
electronic devices were undermining the very craftsmanship into which they have invested
considerable time and effort. On the issue of challenged craftsmanship and ways of living
with technologies, we have also been asked if we are Luddites. Regardless of whether we
are Luddites or not, we have, in one of the manuals accompanying Threads during its
~ravels .around SV:eden, written briefly about the Luddites. During the beginning of the
rn~u~tnal revoluti~n the Luddites rebelled against some of the technological changes in
Britain, by destroy·mg· '· ·some of the mat.:'h;.nes. '\v1 h·1
w Le the word Luddite today often is use
· d
as a synonym for technological sc' t' .· , h l · , · ·1 ·
. . ep tcism, t e .udd1tes reactions were not prunan Ya
reaction towards technoloa1es but a !: · ·h
de-skill workers (Fox 200~) d d ~~ncern a )OU t how some of these technologies mig t
mention the Luddites we e, an isrupt .s?me forms of life. In the manual, where wde
' ncourage part1c1pa11 t. · . d an
unfamiliar technoloaies h<)W . s to practise curiosity towar s new .
o ' ever not witho . t . dd1res
were well aware, technologies pa t' . . u caution/hesitation. Since, as the Lu
or worse. r ic1pate lil th
e mak'mg of new ways of living- for better
In our composition of Threads , h . . f
technologies. This assemblage also . we I ave tried to stitch toaether different kinds o
th · invo ves · o I jes
at are perhaps far away. One ma11 in Work and ways of living with techno og
workers. At th · . ' once asked us h . . . Chinese
· fil. e time we did not know 1 w Ywe d1d not JUSt hire some . Al
pro mg But 1ow to . [!OO''
tab! . h one answer could have been l . respond to such a demeamng na lie
' e, we ad almo . h' t 1at Incle ~d . h d at t
mach me . d st ac 1eved what he ' e , 111 recognizing what we a 'd r·}.
an s f ' sugg . d .. "" b 1e
precarious! e:me o t 11e textiles have been mesre : 1 he mobile phones, ern roeJ1 bY .
. changing y ployed workers who Wo k ade, if not hy Chinese workers, t~ d ed
patterns of lif h· r Under h 1n e
show that techn l . . e - w tch bears resen bl arsh conditions that are npJes
and space and aor og1es al re never innocent a11d1 hance to the Luddites. These exa.1 riJ11e
1 .hrough
' e not a wa J t at l ver
0 Lu and. others'ys mac1e public entanglements are mace 0 ·
. . . . .
made ways of livi . . engagement in Th . . . and
. . ng with technologies. In int read~ we have both gotten to. know ~1d .
. ra-acri . . . .ence . . .
. . ·· . · on With femm1st technosci . · ·.
;: : .

. . . 'G W.\YS OF KNOWING AND ~IAKING

p,~TCfiWOIUdN ' · ·
'.~ ..
· , I logic:·1i discussions on new ways of knowing, and we have come ro
.·. . I !ll~crio< o ' ..
· ·. br~~< . , patclnvorking 1vays uf knowmg.
1
,irr1cularc t tc

PATCH\VORKING WAYS OF KNOWING • !·

j l.

. . . ·irt'icubtcd the /)atchworking ways o( knowing we had used the figuration of

Be fore "c · ' . . . . . . .
·f I
, ·k't•tg in seve ral v:mations m our acc1Je1n1c and ;irti~nc practice. For example., we
p~lt1.. l\\i{H • • • • • •• • •

. ..-1 · . whrn ltost1111! senunars, when wntmg rcxts (Lmdstrom and Sti\hl 2012), ),
J1ave h~c1.. 11 ._, . . . . ••.
when hosting sewing circles a11d when wnnng our collabor:anvt' chest~. We h;ive puc the
6•uration to work differemly in differenr contexts. Of interest in relation to the
p;tchworking ways of knowing is that our and others' eng::1gemcnr ~ith wh~t is ar hand
]ms also become ;i way to explore the nm-yet·-ex1st1ng. Or, pm in a shghtly different way,
ro cry ro undersrnnd the world through making new configurnrions of agencies. In line '
I
ii
with much other prn<.:ticc-based resi:arch, patchworking we1ys of knowing thus offers i
·.,- anocher approach compared with, for example, social sciences, which usually answers the
quescion how.
By. putting the focus on the making of the nor-yet-existing, chrough engaging with .
what is ar hand, the patchworking ways of knowing suggesrs a specific engagemcnr with j;

i<:l che world char is closely entangled with multip!e Le111poralities and matcrialiries. For
I.
<t~ ·,;· example, most of the things that are part of Threads, such as mobile phones, re.xt messages, '
'es:~ threads and needles, arc also used in a variety of other conrexrs. In Threads they are pur
)fri -..,, togerher in new relations, like patches in a P<ltchwork. The patchworking that goes on in
:r,, : Threa,/s is, however, far from perfect. The pieces are imperfectly stitched together and are ,.
;
igi ~ cominuouslr reorden:d. Yet another aspect of rhe patchworking ways of knowing is that
it i~ done collectively. 'fo start with, the rwo of us have been pursuing this work together.
and subsequently written this chapter and other texts collaboratively. However, there are .,,
.l
>

tr.i ., also ocher actors, including collaborarms, participants, hosts and technologies, who in ~

!r: ;':.,
different capacities, ar different tirne~ and in different spaces h~ve participated in the
ongoing patchwo·rking. I~1tcbwvrkillg is thus opernring in sociomarerial entanglements,
!.
J
gi·,.
.... -~ mess and complexir.v.
'" ' What we suggest then is that rhe patchworking ways of knowing is interventionist in
;.\
'::
:: the sense thac ic is making relational re-orderings. Furthermore, the parchworking
r~~
·<
,, intervention is a kind of collecrive making. Finally, our :iim is not to so.Ive or resolve
:':: ····t ' something, but r.o stay with the complexities and mess of these collective interventions.
'.i
~· To know through irnerventions is nor unique for the patchworking wttys of k11o·wing,
'.·( !
but has several aspecrs similar to cxperimenrs and explorations, wh.ich are used in practice-
'
~;
.. ,.
bascd research (d. Koskinen cc al. 2012; l.lrnndt et al. 2011 ). Rt!dsrrom (2007) wrices
that the aim of design experiments is tO crearc concrete images of what is possible, rathe~
·,;~
j
rlian making abstract images of the acmal. The aim is thereby not to produce claims of . ,·:

:~
truth, bur to make difference differently. J\y using the word intervention we want to
·«.f
crnphasize that the patchworking ways of knowing is noc .a bouc setting up an experiment
.<~ froll\ scrntd1 in a restricted !ab, bur m engage and inrervcne in niatcrialitil!S, te1i1poralities,
··:;~
:,t' knowledges and more that already exist. Or ro intervene from within. The patchworki11g
: :~
~·~:( ways of knowing does in that sense also have commonalities with research done in the
., . wi/d (Callon and. Rabeharisoa 2003) or in living labs (Uden 20:1 I; .Bjorgvinsson er al.
~ :- 2012; Lowgten and Reimer 2013; Einder er al. 20l:ia) that conduct research outside of I,.
f(.;i ·. Well-confined labs. This mode of research usually also involves a range of actors in the
~, .. ,. · pwduction of knowledge. · · · · · ·

~:.·.1~:·.~ . ·..
~l,,;,> ..
 · ·· : v
o cv ·oi.v·
·..< t
~> ~..). l l
. ·f!J· .
• -·. :... · =-. • · 1 1~
· ' , .. -. •ti~~~( I ~ · jtf
THE HANDBOOK Of"fEXln , . . . ·. I w,. ! .11&} :s' '
-I!. ci11:r .. : ~t f '# ,, v· ;o~ c~
72 ~~ . i111'',pc~.l ilt
P~ ~ tftrS O. frl. •
. . ., . . . !'·1 . }
f 1 patchworkmg ways of kno . .
.
.I .
J rion o r ie ,
our arncu a
.
.
d .h W111g .
collective an stay wit . This is. is lQ ,}rJr
i
. 11
rl"
~i'nCi (,1 ·.
· ruc1a in
Whar 1s c . 1 'e aspects: 111
· tervent10n, I f h
. ·an know but a so or t e World. Otrq~
imp t
l r~ t~oJSr l ''·rll'
rel·
rP
combination of its r ire_not only for how we c, s We kno..'. . ',i ~111''°.J~ . ,i~ , Jlel C
P' i ,r . 0 (l' ~~
i1111 rfi .~1S 11 ; v1· (r .
. h. nsequences . . "
since t is co · 11 rs tbe focus 1s often on the Phase f .
an
d make
. . . .or and senior e t:>
d sian researc e· l
ranee For ex amp e, w 11en we first st
o Ide .
ation
,,~· 11 'iJli
1P1 ,,iO tdCO1. '5 w·r i£l'
1r ·...ill0 i..er
·- rP~r ,,~ere'5e(01'11C 1~
•

. ~ as a rernpora y . 1 d starred Threads, ut unc er a_c i ferent n oUr

AmonastJUDI ll discrete ms . . b :! l'f <lrted '''fut JC
. .:to
r mvennon h d a rea Y ' · a1ne ~1 .i1e
o Jemie research work, we a ch colleague of ours was wonc1enng why We st °'d <" l ' l 1 if! s' 9
~cac I
in or 1er co
llectives. A design resea~
that project se
emed done, finished, over with as a ayed
d . h resear L
l•rPreS~er-aPbtedne . .
•..iJ~ geiv Je /
·..ci~v
~~~ d1''
·'th it To our colleague, . . v1'r· hin for example, es1gn, t e phases befo C11 'r.o rO
w1roj.ect• This is understanda ble since," fren '¥here invent10n . . locate d . We have sereuse,
1s .
~"·
& .c1in
P · . · etc are o •
such as prototyping, ideano_n, b· ·: d research work and we were keen to try sorneth· IS
en th·
uO patchttl
o
also happen in other pracnce- ase ing .e11, 3s. with I

~·hin~ 11 ,4~ogthe vvO

different.
I
.h
.
k' that is ongom
To stay wit ma 11mg_ .
0 f k owma It a1so
.
. g over time and geographical location is ho\"
has
. .
' ··ever
consequences for what we can know. In this cas .'
eIt
v~"
1o
nli~v11
1 riog a~1
..t

not on Ya way . t>> h0 ways of living with rechnologtes becomes over time ad J·1 zi [hUS CO •
becomes a way of know~ng : ' n are dbrtf
1·n use rather than how it was invented. .. L past, an d
h, h 1
Ot ers ave a so reac
ted towards the temporalmes
. I of research.
. Stengers (2011) for
. ' "b1 aki·ng tn. Threa ,5
!'lf:1~i.riesoftue
I h d to· marnstream research r . :iarl~ Ill
examp e, aS atgue f Or what she calls slow scrence. n contrast • )JmU -;I . • nrcame
to
that feeds the current state of knowledge economy, slow science' is meant to be a.ble to ' ir~e:oparnctpa . ex eri·
grapple with complexities of the common world. To allow for ... a reembeddrng of , J-sneaianot bnng Ph
science in a messy world' (Stengers 2011: 10) implies dealing with issues, questions and ~c ,tasanapronthats'
concerns that do not ari~e and become re.lcvant rn · l! .we11.-co~tro11 ed c~nfines
· t he re Iat1ve ·Jiro homherhopechest.
11Jn~lucu
of the lab. Slow science is thus, through its focus on temporalit1es, m dialogue wnh the ~- ./ , Wtext se
· t I1at range f rom d1scuss1ons
·above-mentioned calls f or new ways o f knowmg · . on methoels /Jrorownte
' · ane · .d, ,
(Law 2004), to the positions of researchers (Callon and Rabeharisoa 2003 ). Slow research ootka~on. The text sai :
for us is to stay with the collective intervention of patch working. Staying with, in this iir.i;u:ioo as well as swearii
context, also means not to rush to solutions or to resolve problems, but to stay with ~'\iJtJcomposingand co1nr
something, with complexities, mess and troubles. M~ll(1eePlatP \ ,) \\'I.
What we argue is that patchworking ways of knowing is to know the world thrmwh 'iiii~ilit~h
f
. I ,we t
'J,J_.

making and that this making or intervention is collective. Since issues of living with ~ ~ no ogres, r
teclm0Jog1cs a.re continuous, never fully resolved, we have also ar"ued for staying wit! h..i,~= :,~to do Wit]
such interventions. 0 ai~aai· l tKnown It.
I· ~ng and brin . . I
~rn lhrea~ ging t<
PRACTISING CARE AND CURIOSITY n,~· to ~ b she founc
We_h~ve suggested above that our invit . . . . , esses ~~- tought .
cunos1ty. We engage with · .· h ation to part1c1pate 111 Threads also expr ~1h . int(
. curiosity t rough th h . . I I as not
resulted in any snappy conclLt · . b · e pate Working ways of knO\·Vlllg. t 1 d '~'·tn11~U\J()~)'i
. i11e C...
. s1ons in ullet . f ke co
map, for example, the text . point · orms, although we have been as . b
. wit a
~·1 l~ ~ ataqe . ta_hslh
.
comparative study of different
messagmg of . . .
f
.
part1c1pants 111 order to come up hs ~1~ c%e tized b I '
· ·
instead generated a variety of s't
parts o Sw d · ·
I e en. The Patchworkina ways of knoumtg 'th
· a i\ Pr\\\~is as~Ule ~ ..
te h l ·
c no ogies. But perhaps more 1111
l llatec
· '
lo d «> 1· w1
cate ' partial ·stories of how we ive e
tl
'~1
~aft,~~ ' lQ i1aL · dt•"l~
argue c 1 b POrtantly th k wing, \11 ~ ~~ ~~L· 11~ th··
t h ' an a so ecome a way of pracri· . e Patchioorkini;; ways of no . ..jth q~· 111~ 1 e
'~~ c.1es it .s liw
'
ec nolog . smg care . d . ' f 1· ng ''
y. · · an cunosity towards ways o ivi
For example, before h .
where we h
r I

ostmg Threads We . d stores,

•
~~:i~~ l: '. %e ~~S.~ib1~~
1
. '"l it .. •1! '\ <ti~
Of ave come across and had t 0 h gathered fabrics from second-ban I yers ~), ·q~ . ~~ . ··.t~ ; .
use, or th h c oose b ' · s :i ·\'4/.. · \!' ~II, ·~
ose t at seemed to have b etween buying fabrics with obv1ot1-h ~ing ttJ. ix~ \b~ ~~II-
~~ ~h. ~ ~t4!' ~ t~
J
een tucked er a .
ll
-~"
.•t~ '\ ~
•\·· .'h• ..•f .
~It>. • ~
away in drawers without ev , .~\i.. l ~.~
..._'I•. ~!- : t
·,i.
. '[,
. ·~ ~
'"' .., '·l. ., .t.:
. '(~,,
'ii ~
~
 .. '()RKING WAYS OF KNOWlNC AND MAKING 73
. rxrcHW .
. l We found lots of textiles for everyday use, with carefully embroidered
being .u~e tand
· initials, that cost very little.
· We have wondered if · we cou ]cI bear bringing
· ·
namerags < . • .
rrhreads where rhey would be cut apart to be put into new relations. However,
ili~CWJ • . . h
C hworkin•.. interventtons through Threads are not conceived to preserve but rat er,
rhe par o . . . . . . .
·iae _ ,.1.s Barad speaks ot creativity with d1s/cont111utty:
T
to C11h• o

creativity is not about crafting the new through a radical break with the past. It's a
~~a.rrer of dis/continuity, neither continuous nor discontinuous in the usual sense. It
seems to me that it's important to have some kind of way of thinking about change that
doesn't presume there's either more of the same or a radical break. Dis/continuity is a
curring together-apart (one move) that doesn't deny creativity and innovation but
, I
understands its indebtedness and entanglements to the past and the future.
We\). -Barad, quoted by Juleskjaer and Schwennesen 2012: 16
•..
To crafr things well, as patchworking reminds us, is not about the cult of the new, but
about continuous working with patches that have a genealogy, and through the relational
reordering reconfiguring the world and relations in a responsible way. The interventions
of patchworking are thus to attend with care and curiosity to histories, materials, and
genealogies of the past, and bring these into future configurations.
Similarly, making in Threads has the potential to enact both care and curiosity. For
example, a participant came to Threads without much prior experience of text messaging.
While she did not bring experiences of mobile phone use to Threads, she brought other
things, such as an apron that she had made out of her hand-woven linen cloth that she had
picked up from her hope chest. Since she did not have any text messages to embroider she
i
decided to write a new text, send it to the embroidery machine, and have it embroidered \•
. • Jr

·on the apron·. The text said: 'Svetten lackar', which can be understood as sweating in I '

anticipation as well as sweating because of the hard work. In this case the hard work ,1
( \
included composing and completing her first text message as well as finding reception for
the SMS (see Plate 5.3). We take this to be an example of the co-articulation of an issue
of living witb technologies, made through the practice of making. More precisely, this
•I
co-articulation has to do with how to handle the familiar in combination with the less
known, or not yet known. It is also an example of how making in Threads becomes a way
of practising and bringing together thoughtfulness, care, curiosity and making. ln the
making in Threads she found ways for her hopes from the past and her apprehension of
the new to be brought into the present. Doing so demanded tremendous effort and
courage.
In the book The Craftsman, Sennett describes craftsmanship as a kind of citizenship
which is characterized by ' ... the desire to do a job well for its own sake' (Sennett 2008:
9):' To become a skilled craftsman takes time and practice and is not always an easy and
~: 1.:
joyful process. To have the skills of a craftsman, Sennett argues, is of great importance,
since craftsmanship is a way of knowing the material conditions of the world, a knowing
~hat also makes it possible to engage with and transform it. His support of craftsmanship
15 als? a critique of the separation between making, on the one hand, and thinking,

debating and judging on the other. These schisms can be traced to industrialization. To
avoid this separation, Sennett argues for a kind of craftsmanship that is an ongoing
engagement, that enacts curiosity directed not only to what it is possible to make, but also ~:
'
to address why. We find parts of his work useful as it suggests a temporal shift - from
. an after-the-fact ethics to a more ongoing engagement that involves both curiosity
. and care.
 __
11-Tf'. l·,ANDBOOK
l
OF TEX"ftl"'i:. C"lJ.

. ll't!l\t
. ·raft (cf. Rosner 20] 0)
1akwg, c ' . . • Il <lt1c[
_i 4 . nt:cred Ratto, 111sp1nc )y Latour h
1 II
, as <It,tePaj.'
1 I · · kcrs I -1ve con le 1\1att h . l
' l . g, rarher t an simp Y car •ng b '~ 6l!·~
. r i111
Sevt:rnl (1t it:r. ) with Lare
1 J· ·orn1ng
. ' . f 01· exa!llP
I care
,
~.
fcor sorrier, 111 ·ec oneself as pan of the1 . a
' ans to s . . tssu ,
o~I
'C 1Jen fort ,(. eiweuc er /'or also me, · . ni ng is also Ill line With St he and
I . k. '"" " "" . h reaso '' o
rh<Jt ma ing l1c·re is rhat
.. , Ke
, . onsible. Sue
II resp I sugge' StS that in order to be resP<ln s1b1 .· lan\
b
The dittere1 b ·na parria '! nnbilit)' t 1at . h. extended networks of socio e for
, Isa ci n I . ccou ' I · wit in · tnat .
rhere } a
002) conccp t of locarcc ,1 I
d ro ora re ourse ves .
I w recog . nize what one can . do is to " k hCt1a1
"'so o,
;~:~ly o~ tlesig:~oi
(l we dc.,;gn, we"" . lute conrrol, '"t
,f working relations. While her
;:t;t'.on" Not to seek with thtS set technologies, often made by.
can proceed resp he development I r the everyday demands of l1vi11g .ts
?nebased. primarily
is on r cou Id be said a )OU
. he same IV11n
and eng111eers, r
technologies.

CONCLUSION
h k . . his chapter is. nor only the making ofl ad textile object' bUt
J>are wor . as we. present ir m rhwor k o f different
111g' . kinds of · I e ges,
l know h experiences'
h lie
hr e co .crive makmg . of1a · pateto ways of living with tech . no. ogtes. kn ot der Words,
k What
. h ·es, and hopes
1sron . m re 1 at10natchwor k.
mg ways of knowing IS to ma ekan to now Ways
1
of Jiving with rechnologres. e1rP.ts. both ep1sre
we ave proposed 1s tha .
t t . . mology and ontology - to now and to rnake

. in one
the. world · hrougnL ma k'mg 1·s certainly not unique to our .work. Many others
· k move.
h ot nowmg
fhe. idea • onnectedness
t ' . . betwe en epistemology and ontology.
. .What characterizes
argue
h. tort e same c
hworking ways o nowmg f k . is the corn. bi nation of be mg mterventionist
I h and
collective
r e pa.re and rhc staymg . Wt'th · These charaeterisrrcs, we have arguec, · ·1avef consequences
f I
not only or 1ow we now, k · what we . know. We have • pnman . .y ocused on the
. but also
staymg
· w1 .
'th c .omp, arec·l to rn11ch other practice-based research that puts the focus . . on, for
.
example, ideation phases, to stay with allows us to know how ways of 11v1ng with
technologies become over time through a continuous patchworking.
Howe~er, through the composition of Ibreads we have not aimed at privileging
slowness as a given value. One point with Threads is that the efficiency of industrializatio~
the meditative, the digital, the physical, the here, the now, the past, the human and tht
nonhuman are all gathered at the same table. To be able to handle the co-existence of
various ways of Jivmg With technologies and complex relations that span time and space,
we argu~ that there 1s a need to practise care and curiosity. One way of practising this, we
suggest, is through a continuous patchworking, Without a final solution. This is also to
suggest a way 111 whICh to acknowledge one's ow n respons1·b·1·
societies. . . . technological
1 Htes in

A challenge thar we and other. f · h that

1
taking what is at 1and . s ace IS ow to sensitize oneself to the paradox
as a pate11working 0 f k . uon to
a~~ r~ng excl~
long temporal and spatial netw k t k" no.wing might hold hack the atten d" g
binding to temporal presents s.eoa what IS at hand might seem like an ;,
long networks and mean that th g . g . Phica/ Presence, although we aim to get r e
· · technoscience forces e m,nenals the rnse Ives are never in one time
Feminist . and spac ··
co f
. me rom, how, when
m pra · · b
why~ us to reme1nbe k
A d "f h . r to eep questioning power: w ere
·' · · n 1 t ere is on .
h does'd
d glecte 1
. h ctrce- ased research it is temp 1· . e aspect 10 Particular that we fin ne ·ais
wn wh · 1
Pra ' ora 1ty and . rert'
. . ic i we engage. Threading thes rnu 1t1ple presents of the different ma. of
ctrce. e togeth . fi anon
er rernams for us a potent gur.
 _. HWORt\.ING WAYS OF KNOWING AND MAKING 75
t•ATC .l

NOTES
Threads has been just one among many expressions of an interest in the combination
l. of textiles and computation. In Sweden alone there have been three major exhibitions
ernrh:1sizing slightly diffeQrenr aspects of living with mundane technoiogies and textile
c.:rafr: C:raftwerk 2 .0 (cf. Ahlvik and von Busch 200.9 ; We make money not art 2010),
Open Source Embroidery (cf. Carpenter 2012, n.d.) and Points of departure (cf. Fiber Arr
Sweden n.d.).

2. This chapter is a revised version of chapters in our collaborative thesis, written across the

I
disciplines 'interaction design' and 'media and communication studies' at Malmo University
and published as Lindstrom and St~hl 2014.
3. To make Threads portable we have put together rhe materials chat travel with Threads in
rwo blue cases. T he cases are made so that they can fit into a car and include durable goods
such as needles, fabrics, and threads, an embroidery machine, cable cloths to embroider on,
clothes lines to hang embroideries on and much more.
I
4. We here follow the earlier mentioned ANT(a) (cf. Latour 2005; Law 2009) and feminist
technoscience (cf. Barad 2007; Suchman 2007; Haraway 2008; Lindstr6m and Stahl 2014)
thread, which emphasizes relational and mutual becoming, which means that objects and
subjects are always in the making and become together.
II
5. It is noticeable how scholars and artists in a variety of contexts work with an expansion of "
the category of citizenship. These expansions move beyond citizenship as solely discursive
and parliamentarian by including D IY-citizenship that emerges through direct action and
maker cultures (Ratto and Boler 2014), citizenship pe rformed through sensing technologies
in relation to environmental issues (Gabrys 2013; Pritchard 2013) and various kinds of
material participation in the everyday life (Marres 2012).

REFERENCES
Ahlvik, Clara and von Busch, Otto. 2009. Handarbeta for en biittre viirld. Jonkopings !ans museum.
Andersen, Tariq, Osman. 2012. Prototyping a Collective: On Ethnography_, Design, and Use
of a Personal Health Record. PhD thesis, University of Copenhagen. Retrieved from:
http://curis.ku.dk/ws/filcs/43 997087( fariq_Andersen _PhD_Thesis_2012_Prototyping_a_
Collective_with_papers_1_5_.pdf (accessed 13 August 2015).
Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the Universe H alfway: Quantum Ph) Sics and the En-tanglement of
1

Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Binder, Thomas, Brandt, Eva, Halse, Joachim, Foverskov, Maria and Olander, Sissel. 201 la.
'Living the (Codesign) Lab.' Proceedings of Nordic Design Research Conference. Retrieved
from: www.nordes.org/opj/index. php/n 13/article/ download/108/92 (accessed 13 August
2015).
Binder, Thomas, De Michelis, Giorgio, Ehn, Pelle, Jacucci, Giulio, Linde, Per and Wagner, Ina.
201 lb. Design Things. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bjorgvinsson, Erling, Ehn, Pelle and Hillgren, Per-Anders. 2012. 'Design Things and D esign
Thinking: Contemporary Participatory Design Challenges.' Design Issues 28(3): 101-116.
Retrieved from : http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/ 10.1162/ D ES I_a_OOl 65 (accessed
13 August 2015).
Brandt, Eva, Rec.lstrom, Johan, E;iksen, M ette Agger and Binder, Thomas. 2011. XLAB.
Copenhagen: The Danish Design School Press. .
Buscher, Mon ika, Urry, John and Witchger, Katian. 2011. 'Introduction M obile M ethods.' In
Monika Bi.ischer, john Urry and Katian Witchger (eds), M obile M ethods. London: Routledge.
 .··• =·: . .
·· ....

~t
THE HANDBOOK Or ·n'v·r1
•'\ l.p '
76 b·1 · . . ..... d . C.lJtru
. ) Rt:·p:mmg. . (c·I e1.:·r t«Jllic) vulnera •1I1t1es.
. oLOWar
f s. an t th·lcs of
R..epa1r.
.
C> 11 · l'l·1nc-1 (forrhconung.
m, ' · In• Jv'1ark Ra111ev
. e-\\"t~rc. . R
, . · .•111d 1 hco ' e\'es-Evison (eds), Cu tu1es Londo "'

Pn>emen
· r Books. . Vololoua. 2003 · 'Research "in the wild" and the sh'"" .

C\~
c,llon Michel and Rabehamoai . fodety 25, 193-204. &01
' social identities.' Tee/mo ogyE'." i,. idecy' Cur.nodal Facilitution of Mare<iaj N
Carpenter,
n Ele. 2012. 'O pen Soucce
. ·r. ·tile
Jn wReader. London: Berg. ''"""'·.
. . ( d) The 1e,\ . f . ,
. b .d ry Retrieved rom. wwv..open-sourcc-cn1b .
''•de~·
In Jessica Hemrn111gs e '
Catpent<c, Ele.. n.d. 0 I''" Sou"el"" '°'
. d August
e · 13, 201').
.•
otg.u k/o"mbeoidety. htm (a cm'.'
0
f knowing.' Design Studies 3 (4)' 221-227.
Cto.,, Nigel.
Dewey, John. 1982. 'DeS<gnetly
1916/ 1944. Demoa"way.sy "'"1 Education' Au Introduction to the Phiiosop1ry of
. v1 k· The Free Press. . . . .
Education. New or · . I ,,, tter· in Co-Des1g111ng: Formatting & Stagina with
. • 2012 Matena '"" ' . . .. . "
Eriksen,. Mette
. . Agger.
, .. I· . · Co-des1gn ~
. ·]Jro1·ects, Events & S1tuat1ons. Malmo University. PhD
thesis, MalmoMat'.""'.'"
P'"''"Patmg UmmS<ty, M.i· Imo. .. Retrieved from, http,//dspace.mah.selhandletio43/JJ 1
201 5
F 67
(accessed 11 _ ). d 1.rom.. 11 rtp·//poimsofdcpanure.se
'b A s d. 13 August
d Remeve · • .(accessed
. . . September 4' 20 .
Fox Nicols. 2004. Agamst t e mac me.
1 er rt we t:n. • • • h u h. . The Hidden Luddite Trad1t1on zn Literature, Art and
lndividua/ Lives. Washington, DC Island Press. . , 141
1
fraylrng, C mstop er. 19 .
. . . h 93 'Reseaccb in Art and DeS<gn. Roya/ College of An Resea,eh Pap,,
b J1-s.
Ga l(J):
tys, enm ec. . . .. . s· .d s . s b.
·f· 2013 Ecological Observatories: Fluctuatmg 1tes an ens1ng u Jeers. Jn
...aura JC o , nc erg r -
T • [> I ff. E · h B e and Jierikc Haapoia (eds), Freid notes: From Landscape to
Labomtory. Finnish Society of Bioan. . . .
Hallnas, Lacs and RedscrOm, Johan. 2006. lntemction Des,gn, Foundat•ons, Expenmeuts.
Bonh: Swedish School of Textiles.

Hannula, Mika,
Practices. Suoronca,
Goreborg: Juba and Tece, Va din. 2005. Artistic Resea"h' Theo,ies, Methods "d
ArrMonitor.

Hataway,
Studies.'Donna. 1994. 'A Game
Cunfigurations of Cat's Ctadle, Se;ence Studies, Fe.nin;st Theocy, Cultuml
2( 1): 59-7:1.

way, Donna. 2008. When Species Meet. Minneapnlis and London, University of MinntSOO
Press.
Harn

Hugh.,, Rolf, Dy'8sen, Cathaciua aud Hellmom Reimer, Macia. 2011. 'Konstnficlig forakni"!
i dag oeh i mocgon - en •mnesiivetSikt.' In TotbjOrn Lind (ed), Fo,m och fa,driktni,.g-
strateg;ska frdgo, (6, den konstna,/;ga (orskn ingen. Acsbok KF U 2011. Vetenskapsc!det
0
juleskjaer, Malou and Sehwenuesen, Nere. 2012. 'Intra-active Entanglement" An lntmiew
with Kacen Bmd'. Kv;nde,, Kiin & Forskniug, 1-2, 10-25. Retrieved from, htw//
koensl 0'8kni
13 Augnsr ng.soc.ku.dk!kkf/forsideboksc/nyesrc/lnterview- Karen- Ba tad.pdV (accessed
2015).

)ungnickeJ, Katrina and fljorrh, Larissa. 2014. 'Methodological Entanglements in the Field'
Methods, Transitions and 1Cansmissions.' V;sua/ Studies 29(2), 138-147. ..
Kember, Sarah and
Cambridge, MA:Zylinska, Joanna. 2012. Life aft., New Media, Medfation as a Vital Proceo
MIT Press.

Kos k.·mcn, IlPo, z·tmmermao, John, Bmder,

· Thomas, Redstriim, Johan and Wensveen, Stephan.
organ
Kaufman.
201!. De,,gn Research Th,ough P,actice, from the Lab, field, and Show,oom. MA' M

btour, Brnno.
Oxford: Oxford Reassembling
2005.University Press.the Socio/. An lntmduction to Actor-Net'°ork-Thcort·

-.
- ..
\:,,,.
 . -·HWORKING WAYS OF KNOWING AND ;1'.tAKING 77
PA re

Larour, Bruno. 20 I 0. 'An attempt at writing a "Compositionisr Manifesto".' [M~nuscript for

lecrure at the Nobel Museum, Stockholm, Sweden.] Retrieved from: http://www.
nobclmuseun1. se/si res/nobel m useet.se/ files/ page_ file/ An%20attem pr%20arO/i>20wri ti ng1Mi20
a~o20' Compositionist%20Manifesro'_O.pdf (accessed 13 August 2015).
Law, John. 2004. After Method: Mess m Social Science Research. London: Routledge.
Law, John and Urry, John. 200~. 'Enacting tht: Social.' Economy and Society 33(.3 ): 390-410.
Lindstrom, Kristina and Stahl, Asa. 2012. 'Working Patches'. Studies in Material Thinking 7.
Retrieved from: http://www.materialthinking.org/papers/ 83 (accessed 13 August 2015).
0

LindstrC>m, Kristina and Stahl, Asa. 2014. Patchworking Publics-in-the-Making: Design, Media
and Public Engagement. PhD thesis, Malmo University. Retrieved from: http://muep.mah.se/
handle/2043/ 16093 (accessed 13 August 2015).
Lowgren, Jonas and Reimer, Bo. 2013. Collaborative Media . Production, Consumption and
Design Interventions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lury, Celia and Wakeford, Nina. 2012. 'Introduction. A perpetual inventory.' In Celia Lury and
Nina Wake.ford (eds), Inventive Methods: The Happening of the Social. London: Routledge .
.Marres, Noortje. 2012. Material Participation: Technology, the Environment and Everyday
Publics. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nowomy, Helga, Scott, Peter and Gibbons, Michael. 2003. 'Introduction. "Mode 2" Revisited:
The New Production of Knowledge'. Minerva 41(3): 179-194.
Pritchard, Helen. 2013. 'Thinking with the Animal Hacker, Articulation in Ecologies of Earth
Observation'. In Christian Andersen and Geoff Cox (eds), A Peer Reviewed journal about
Back When Pluto Was a Planet: The Reinvention of Research as Participatory Practice. Berlin:
transmediale/darc (accessed 13 August 2015).
Ratto, Matt and Boler, Megan (eds). 2014. DIY Citizenship: Critical Making and Social Media.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rcdstrom, Johan. 2006. 'Towards User Design? On the Shift from Object to User as the Subject
of Design.' Design Studies 27(2): 123-139.
Redstrom, Johan. 2007. 'En experimenterande designforskning.' In Sara Ilstedt Hjelm, Asa
Harvard, Ulla Johansson, Elisabeth Nino, Lisbeth Svengren Holm, Peter Ullmark & Bo
Westerlund (eds), Under Ytan: en antologi om designforskning. Stockholm: Raster Forlag &
SVID.
Rosner, J?aniela K. 201 O. 'Spyn: Augmenting the Creative and Communicative Potential of Craft.'
Proceedings of the SIG CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Atlanta.
Retrieved from: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id= 1753691 (accessed 13 August 2015).
Ruppert, Evelyn, Law, John and Savage, Mike. 2013. 'Reassembling Social Science Methods:
The Challenge of Digital Devices'. Theory, Culture and Society 30(4): 22-46.
Savage, Mike. 2013. 'The "Social Life of Methods": A Critical Introduction'. Theory, Culture &
Society 30(4): 3-21.
Schon, Donald. 1983. The Reflective Practioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York:
Basic Books.
Schon, Donald. A. 1987. Educating the Reficctive Practitioner: Toward a N ew Design for
Teaching and Learning in the Professions. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Sennett, Richard. 2008 . The Craftsman. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Stengers, Isabelle. 2011. "'Another Science is Possible": A Plea of Slow Science.' [Manuscript
for a lecture.] Retrieved from http://threerottenpotatoes.fi.les.wordpress.com/2011/06/
stengers2011_pleaslowscience.pdf (accessed 13 August 2015).
Suchman, Lucy. 2002. ·Located accoumab[lirics in technology production' . Scandinavian
, . , . Journal of Information Systems, 14(2): 91-:--105.
78 THE HAND BOO!( OF It:)(·
rt Lt
Suchman, Lucy. 2007. Hionan-lv1'1chine Reconfigurations. Cambridge: Cainbri·d C~tl'\;~
Press. ge r,
\Jniv
. /
. . Cl1aIIenged Conunu ~tsi
Uden, ,\faria. 2011. 'Networking for Communicat1ons . . ~
11 1
· C 1·· fl) · I k. IC t1es·n
~.Europe~n Pro!ect Ta.rgenng onc_ 1t'.ons.o ~or o~ ,"_~~ mg T Coverage'. ~.{\ePorqt
Communrty InformatJCs 7(3). Rerneved trom. http./1c1-1ournal.netfind . . lhe Jo 0tii
• r ex. Phi>/ ,· . 11r~qt
view/880/81 O (accessed 13 August 201.)) · cievarticl ·Of
We make monev not arr. 2010. Cra(twerk 2.0: New Household Tactics f. e/
. . ' 1or t 1Je R .
0
Retrieved trom: http://we-makc-money-nor-art.com/archives/2010/0 l/th · Pi1lar Cr
e-craftwerk. ~s.
exhibition-rh.php (accessed 13 August 2015).
2