Hacking the museum? Practices and power geometries at collections makerspaces in London

This paper examines the recent phenomenon of ‘collections makerspaces’, which are defined for the first time as dedicated public sites in cultural institutions with suites of creative tools aimed at inspiring new engagements with a collection through hands-on making and learning practices. Working from the notion of space as a form of power geometry (Massey 1993), its component parts woven together through an ever-evolving constellation of the overlapping histories, imaginaries and cosmopolitics of myriad actors, the paper begins with a genealogy of shared machine shops in the U.K. as viewed through four cumulative waves of innovation, with collections makerspaces located in a fourth wave that is defined by institutional affiliations. The circumstances of collections makerspace sites situated at three museums in London (Tate, the British Museum and the Wellcome Collection) are then explored through an examination of ethnographic observations of practices that are either canonical or distinctive, and the corresponding geometries of power they reveal. In conclusion, it is argued that the collections makerspace is emerging as a key site of critical institutional inquiry which carries the potential to reframe museum hegemonies through peer production practices

Spiritual experience that crosses religious divisions

‘In Hinduism, in Neoplatonism, in Sufism, in Christian mysticism ... we find the same recurring note, so that there is about mystical utterances an eternal unanimity’, wrote William James in his The Varieties of Religious Experience, which was first published in 1902. Many of the pioneers of the search for interfaith fellowship worked with this assumption that there is a similar underlying experience of the Divine at the heart of every religion. They hoped that members of different religions could go beyond the particular rituals and doctrines which divided them and find a unity in the Spirit. This presupposition is sometimes known as the philosophia perennis, which Aldous Huxley defined as ‘The metaphysic that recognises a divine Reality substantial to the world of things and lives and minds: the psychology that finds in the soul something similar to, or even identical with, divine Reality; the ethic that places man’s final end in the knowledge of the immanent and transcendent Ground of all being – the thing is immemorial and universal.’ In this paper I want to recollect some of my experiences of ‘A presence that disturbs me with the joy of elevated thoughts’. I would regard them as ‘mystical’, but the definition of what constitutes a mystical experience is so debated that my experiences would not fit everyone’s definition. Some of the experiences I shall describe were in the context of sharing in prayer and worship with people of other faiths. This has led me to ask whether a Christian can have a ‘Hindu religious experience’ or has he or she merely had a ‘Christian religious experience’ but in a Hindu setting. Or is the religious adjective irrelevant when applied to a religious experience

Hacking the museum? Collections makerspaces and power in London cultural institutions

What happens when the spaces of grassroots digital subcultures encounter those of institutions? This thesis examines the phenomenon of ‘collections makerspaces’, or public spaces within cultural institutions that encourage experimental interactions with cultural artefacts through digitally-mediated making and learning practices. I begin by working from a genealogical approach to locate collections makerspaces as parts of a wider historical lineage of sociotechnical transformations amongst makerspaces (from hackspaces to media labs) and cultural institutions in the U.K. from the 1970s onward, relations increasingly characterised by institutional partnerships. I engage with a critical theoretical framework of space and power to explore how the spatiality of collections makerspaces is constituted out of the practices, imaginaries and relations of multiple actors. This enables me to situate space-making as a process, which may reinforce or resist institutional logics. I then explore the empirical findings of my fieldwork as researcher-in-residence at four collections makerspaces in London at Tate Britain, Tate Modern, the British Museum and the Wellcome Collection. Working with a qualitative ethnographic and action research methodology, I draw from 255 hours of participant observation, 67 chats with site users, expert interviews with 38 facilitators, and 4 creative interventions to explore the circumstances of each field site, the experiences of those who are involved in it, and how it interacts with its host institution. I conclude by arguing that collections makerspaces provide significant value to cultural institutions and publics alike, because they facilitate new opportunities for the cultural hegemony of museum logics to be examined, contested and transformed through material participation. I propose the spatial frame of ‘decoupaged space’ as a lens to explore the informal cultural production of other kinds of co-creational digital spaces within institutions. This allows me to assert the broader social impacts of sites of this kind, by articulating the powergeometries of agency, access, diversity and mobility that they can reframe

[Introduction] Liberatory technologies for whom? Exploring a new generation of makerspaces defined by institutional encounters

Makerspaces are subjects in a plurality of institutional advances and developments, catching the imaginations of a wide variety of organisations and other actors drawn to a buzz of enticing possibilities. Depending upon the nature of the encounter, makerspaces are becoming cradles for entrepreneurship, innovators in education, nodes in open hardware networks, studios for digital artistry, ciphers for social change, prototyping shops for manufacturers, remanufacturing hubs in circular economies, twenty-first century libraries, emblematic anticipations of commons-based, peer-produced post capitalism, workshops for hacking technology and its politics, laboratories for smart urbanism, galleries for hands-on explorations in material culture... not forgetting, of course, spaces for simply having fun. What kinds of hybrid arrangements emerge through these encounters, and what becomes of the occupied factories for peer production theory? How are institutions reshaping aspirations for autonomous, even democratic, fabrication and experimentation – aspirations that were – and are – important parts of makerspace narratives? And what do these encounters mean for institutions, whether in education, culture, business, development or some other sphere; how are they too evolving through their exposure to grassroots and community making practices

Genealogy, culture and technomyth: decolonizing western information technologies, from open source to the maker movement

Western-derived maker movements and their associated fab labs and hackerspaces are being lauded by some as a global industrial revolution, responsible for groundbreaking digital “entanglements” that transform identities, practices and cultures at an unprecedented rate (Anderson 2014; Hills 2016). Assertions proliferate regarding the societal and entrepreneurial benefits of these “new” innovations, with positive impacts ascribed to everything, from poverty to connectivity. However, contradictory evidence has started to emerge, suggesting that a heterogeneous set of global cultural practices have been homogenized. This paper employs a materialist genealogical framework to deconstruct three dominant narratives about information technologies, which we call “technomyths” in the tradition of McGregor et al. After outlining the maker movement, its assumptions are examined through three lesser-cited examples: One Laptop per Child in Peru, jugaad in India and shanzhai copyleft in China. We then explore two preceding technomyths: Open Source and Web 2.0. In conclusion, we identify three key aspects as constitutive to all three technomyths: technological determinism of information technologies, neoliberal capitalism and its “ideal future” subjectivities and the absence and/or invisibility of the non-Western

The Prevalence and Factors Associated with Knee Pain in a sample of Cyclists within the United Kingdom: A Cross Sectional Study

Purpose: The study aimed to determine: (i) the lifetime and period prevalence of knee pain, (ii) the prevalence and nature of medical attention cycling-related injuries, (iii) and the risk factors associated with knee pain and in a sample of competitive and non-competitive cyclists in the UK. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire was used to collect data on knee pain, medical attention injuries, and potential risk factors associated with knee pain. Participants were competitive and non-competitive cyclists aged 18 years and older and were recruited through cycling clubs and online advertisement. Binary logistic regression was used to assess for potential risk factors associated with knee pain. Crude and adjusted odds ratios were reported in staged adjustment models, controlling for potential confounders of age and sex. Keele University Ethics Committee approved this study. Results: A total of 115 respondents completed the questionnaire. Lifetime knee pain prevalence was 48%, with period prevalence 26.1% (past-month) and 18.3% (past-week). Aged 40 and over was the only factor found to be associated with knee pain, although this was no longer significant after adjustment for female sex. The most prevalent site and type of injury was the lower back and fracture (traumatic), respectively. Conclusion: Knee pain prevalence is high in this sample of cyclists, particularly in those aged 40 years and over. Injury prevention strategies should target the lower back and fractures. Longitudinal research is needed to identify if there are modifiable risk factors that may reduce the occurrence of both knee pain and traumatic fractures in cyclists

The Planning Process: Lessons of the Past and a Model for the Future

SUMMARY Development planning, as practised over the last 25 years, has been technocratic, politically isolated and naive. Planners have entered a blind alley, described as ‘narrow?planning’, where professionalisation and division of labour have led to a concentration on documents rather than real?world changes. Narrow?planning is contrasted with ‘broad?planning’, where data collection, the consultation of relevant interest groups, forecasting, the definition of objectives, plan construction, authorisation, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation, are linked, providing a model of a continuous, integrated planning process. The preconditions for the success of this model are discussed, and it is emphasised that planning is essentially a political process. RESUME Le processus de planification: leçons du passé et modele pour I'avenir. La planification du développement, telle que pratiquée au cours des 25 dernières années, a été technocratique, isolée politiquement et naïive. Les planificateurs se sont engagés dans une impasse, qualifiée de “planification étroite”, où la professionalisation et la division du travail a résulté en une concentration sur les documents plutôt que sur les changements du monde concret. A cette forme de planification étroite, l'auteur oppose une “planification large”, où le rassemblement des données, la consultation des groupes d'intérêt appropriés, les prévisions, la définition des objectifs, la mise au point des projets, l'autorisation, la mise en oeuvre, le contrôle et l'évaluation sont des activités liées les unes aux autres, fournissant le modèle d'un processus de planification continu et intégré. L'auteur examine les conditions préalables nécessaires au succès de ce modèle, en soulignant que la planification est essentiellement un processus politique. RESUMEN El Proceso de Planif icación: Las lecciones del pasado y un modelo para el futuro La planificación del desarrollo, según se ha venido practicando durante los ultimos 25 años, ha sido tecnocrático, políticamente aislado y ingenuo. Los planificadores han entrado en un callejón sin salida, que se conoce como “planificación estrecha”, en que el profesionalismo y la división de trabajos han resultado en una acumulación de documentos, pero sin producir cambios reales y prácticos. Se compara la “planificación estrecha” con la “planificación amplia”, en que van unidas la recopilación de datos, la consultación con los diferentes grupos afectados, previsión, la defición de objetivos, la formulación de planes, autorización, implementación, control y evaluación, resultando en un modelo de planificación integrada y continua. Se comenta sobre las condiciones previas para que este modelo resulte un éxito, y se hace hincapié para que la planificación sea básicamente un proceso político