Thirteen years ago in a rural Michigan town just south of a major university, I joined a group of revolutionaries. We were well-trained and generously funded. We were organized and had strong allies in major political parties. We used sophisticated tools and techniques that changed relationships of power and control throughout the United States. We did not organize marginalized social groups through solidarity, or catalyze emerging institutional crises, or lash out at figureheads who represented power imbalances. Instead, we designed industrial automation technologies. As a computer engineer on the front lines of workplace change, I helped develop control systems in various industries from California to Maryland that polished semiconductors, painted automobiles, processed and packaged food, and injected plastic molds. To describe the engineers that I joined as revolutionaries is not entirely accurate. We were not, for example, at risk ourselves. Our design work significantly reinforced relationships of power and control in the workplace rather than disrupted them. And yet, the term revolutionary is at least partly accurate. We often changed everyday work life for people we never met. Our design decisions were decisions about who did what work, and how that work was done. I use the term revolutionary not to exaggerate the importance of my work as an engineer, but to reinforce the idea that the design of common tools, machines, and artifacts is a political act. These technologies are not simply used and set aside, discarded, or forgotten. Their instrumentality is conjoined with patterns of social activity. Design processes and products are situated within social relationships, structures, and meanings, which can be resources for marginalized social groups or their representatives to improve their condition. If these resources play an important social role, then how does it come to pass that they enable particular forms of life over others? 1 In other words, if artifacts, tools, techniques, and machines provide texture for the fabric of everyday social activity-and if design is the process whereby they are configured-then the study of design is likely to reveal opportunities for creating better forms of life. In my own work as an application engineer of machine control products, I did not recognize these opportunities. Perhaps I did not look for them. Or, perhaps I did not imagine how the artifacts, tools, and machines I helped to design could be configLangdon Winner provides an alterna-
Read full abstract