Bibliography
Latour, Bruno. 1996. Aramis or the Love of Technology. Translated by Catherine Porter. Cambridge & London: Harvard University Press.
Review by Michael Beach
If you’ve ever heard the phrase ‘a solution looking for a problem’ that is the gist of this case study. Bruno Latour walks the read through the idea of creating a new sort of mass transit train in Paris, France. Aramis was an experimental commuter train that was not a train. The project was to form trains from train cars that were not attached to each other. Rather, each car would travel independently of others. Whenever one car approached another on the same track in the same direction, they would communicate with each other and travel like a traditional train but remaining unattached. Each car was small and was to hold only four riders. Given each car’s independent pickup and drop-off location, their routes would connect and disconnect with other equally independent cars.
Latour takes the reader through a project that lasted several decades and never successfully became more than a proof of concept with a handful of cars on an unconnected test track. Depending who was in power at the federal level, the Aramis project varied in funding and progress. People involved were excited about the technical idea then gradually became disillusioned. Others followed later with a similar pattern. Its failure was blamed on everything from lack of vision to the shortcomings of the technical state of the art of the time. Latour also shares how the design itself shifted. The car sizes changed, slowly increasing to look more like a typical train car. The independent start and stop locations became are stations, more like traditional train stations, though greater in number than the normal trains.
In Bruno Latour’s examination of a commuter train project in Paris, France, social forces are examined and their effect on a technical project that eventually was stopped through similar social forces. One example was changing the idea of a train car that held only four people. It became apparent that this approach could lead passengers to become victims of crime. If just a few strangers happened to be on the same car, there would be fewer witnesses for criminals to concern themselves with. That risk led to ever growing numbers of intended passengers. This was a form of scope creep based on a social concern. The result was lower efficiency and less benefit as compared to the traditional train system.
Latour, Bruno. 1996. Aramis or the Love of Technology. Translated by Catherine Porter. Cambridge & London: Harvard University Press.
Review by Michael Beach
If you’ve ever heard the phrase ‘a solution looking for a problem’ that is the gist of this case study. Bruno Latour walks the read through the idea of creating a new sort of mass transit train in Paris, France. Aramis was an experimental commuter train that was not a train. The project was to form trains from train cars that were not attached to each other. Rather, each car would travel independently of others. Whenever one car approached another on the same track in the same direction, they would communicate with each other and travel like a traditional train but remaining unattached. Each car was small and was to hold only four riders. Given each car’s independent pickup and drop-off location, their routes would connect and disconnect with other equally independent cars.
Latour takes the reader through a project that lasted several decades and never successfully became more than a proof of concept with a handful of cars on an unconnected test track. Depending who was in power at the federal level, the Aramis project varied in funding and progress. People involved were excited about the technical idea then gradually became disillusioned. Others followed later with a similar pattern. Its failure was blamed on everything from lack of vision to the shortcomings of the technical state of the art of the time. Latour also shares how the design itself shifted. The car sizes changed, slowly increasing to look more like a typical train car. The independent start and stop locations became are stations, more like traditional train stations, though greater in number than the normal trains.
In Bruno Latour’s examination of a commuter train project in Paris, France, social forces are examined and their effect on a technical project that eventually was stopped through similar social forces. One example was changing the idea of a train car that held only four people. It became apparent that this approach could lead passengers to become victims of crime. If just a few strangers happened to be on the same car, there would be fewer witnesses for criminals to concern themselves with. That risk led to ever growing numbers of intended passengers. This was a form of scope creep based on a social concern. The result was lower efficiency and less benefit as compared to the traditional train system.
RSS Feed