Bibliography
Hausse, Heidi. 2019. "The Locksmith, the Surgeon, and the Mechanical Hand: Communicating Technical Knowledge in Early Modern Europe." Edited by Suzanne Moon. Technology and Culture (Johns Hopkins University Press) 60 (1): 34-64.
Review by Michael Beach
In this article, Heidi Hausse looks at a specific case of an artificial prosthetic hand designed by a surgeon named Ambroise Paré. He had a representation drawn in a publication called Oeuvers in 1575 A.D. In order to allow for increased circulation of the design, a wood cutting of the picture was created by a locksmith named le petit Lorrain. The cutting was then used to reproduce the technical drawing in many subsequently published medical books and documents. Hausse takes a look at the imprint made by the wood carving and compares it to similar printed carvings. She also explores what the pictures do and don’t convey, and who might make use of the drawings.
A couple of themes come out in Hausse’s writing. Although one might imagine the drawings would be of interest to other surgeons, in reality “artisans were a crucial audience” (Hausse 2019, 36). The technical knowledge transfer was more about replicating the apparatus than for post amputation recuperation of patients. As a result, “substantive exchanges of knowledge took place between artisans and learned men” (Hausse 2019, 37) that might otherwise not happen due to cultural status difference. “The role of craft production in the initial creation of the image allows us to consider its purpose in Paré’s surgical treatise from the perspective of an artisan” (Hausse 2019, 47).
Another theme relates to how historians sometimes question the effectiveness of the early printing press to convey technical knowledge. “Many historians have been skeptical of the printing press’s impact on the transfer of craft techniques” (Hausse 2019, 52). One reason given is the interspersing of words and numbers to clarify graphics which are readily understood by technicians, but less so for surgeons. Another reason for skepticism is that “manuals contained either too little or too much of the information needed for a task, and often omitted practitioners’ tricks” (Ibid.). Finally, such sketches might contain mistakes. A few numbers pointing to specific parts didn’t match the accompanying terms. Finally, the documents many of the people creating the documents didn’t understand how the apparatus worked. Think of those in the supply chain to bring the documents about such as “translators, editors, artists, and printers” (Hausse 2019, 55).
Some of this same skepticism might be leveled on similar modern technical documents. Perhaps the difference comes in how easy documents can be published, then corrected and republished. One point that is a common argument among sociologists of technology is the need for tacit or practical experience, that written documents are just not enough. Just think about how many times you’ve may have opened a cookbook only to understand that some of the process for adding ingredients is not always clear. Watching videos with chefs creating the same dish can be helpful, but nothing can be a substitute for making it yourself.
Hausse, Heidi. 2019. "The Locksmith, the Surgeon, and the Mechanical Hand: Communicating Technical Knowledge in Early Modern Europe." Edited by Suzanne Moon. Technology and Culture (Johns Hopkins University Press) 60 (1): 34-64.
Review by Michael Beach
In this article, Heidi Hausse looks at a specific case of an artificial prosthetic hand designed by a surgeon named Ambroise Paré. He had a representation drawn in a publication called Oeuvers in 1575 A.D. In order to allow for increased circulation of the design, a wood cutting of the picture was created by a locksmith named le petit Lorrain. The cutting was then used to reproduce the technical drawing in many subsequently published medical books and documents. Hausse takes a look at the imprint made by the wood carving and compares it to similar printed carvings. She also explores what the pictures do and don’t convey, and who might make use of the drawings.
A couple of themes come out in Hausse’s writing. Although one might imagine the drawings would be of interest to other surgeons, in reality “artisans were a crucial audience” (Hausse 2019, 36). The technical knowledge transfer was more about replicating the apparatus than for post amputation recuperation of patients. As a result, “substantive exchanges of knowledge took place between artisans and learned men” (Hausse 2019, 37) that might otherwise not happen due to cultural status difference. “The role of craft production in the initial creation of the image allows us to consider its purpose in Paré’s surgical treatise from the perspective of an artisan” (Hausse 2019, 47).
Another theme relates to how historians sometimes question the effectiveness of the early printing press to convey technical knowledge. “Many historians have been skeptical of the printing press’s impact on the transfer of craft techniques” (Hausse 2019, 52). One reason given is the interspersing of words and numbers to clarify graphics which are readily understood by technicians, but less so for surgeons. Another reason for skepticism is that “manuals contained either too little or too much of the information needed for a task, and often omitted practitioners’ tricks” (Ibid.). Finally, such sketches might contain mistakes. A few numbers pointing to specific parts didn’t match the accompanying terms. Finally, the documents many of the people creating the documents didn’t understand how the apparatus worked. Think of those in the supply chain to bring the documents about such as “translators, editors, artists, and printers” (Hausse 2019, 55).
Some of this same skepticism might be leveled on similar modern technical documents. Perhaps the difference comes in how easy documents can be published, then corrected and republished. One point that is a common argument among sociologists of technology is the need for tacit or practical experience, that written documents are just not enough. Just think about how many times you’ve may have opened a cookbook only to understand that some of the process for adding ingredients is not always clear. Watching videos with chefs creating the same dish can be helpful, but nothing can be a substitute for making it yourself.
| project_muse_719945.pdf |
RSS Feed