Keeping open”

My Microsoft Smart Card
“... to keep unpack­ing, reveal­ing, open­ing and uncon­ceal­ing, we need also to think dif­fer­ently. Along­side unpack­ing and con­nect­ing we need to argue for dif­fer­ent worlds to those which dom­in­ate us.”

I’m delighted to be start­ing a new job this Septem­ber at City, Uni­ver­sity of Lon­don. I’ll be join­ing the lively Centre for HCI Design (HCID). Both Steph and Simone, the centre’s co-directors, have been amaz­ingly gen­er­ous in pre­par­ing me for my new role and dis­cuss­ing the dir­ec­tions we might take things in. I’ve also begun to rough out new lines of research with my soon to be col­leagues and I eagerly anti­cip­ate set­ting things in motion. Nat­ur­ally my chal­lenge will be to keep a lid on my enthu­si­asm, leav­ing the energy to improve my teach­ing and engage a stu­dent cohort in caring about the entan­gle­ments between tech­no­logy and social life — and the thrills and spills that come with such a care.

My Microsoft smart card front

Of course, a decision like this, to leave a work­place I’ve been at for 14 years (almost to the day), comes with a sea of emo­tions. Many will know that over the years I’ve felt a little uneasy at Microsoft, most espe­cially because of my pos­i­tion in an organ­isa­tion that stands as one of the suc­cesses in a troubled time of cap­it­al­ism. But why I joined Microsoft Research and why I stayed so long is for anoth­er time. Here, it is enough to say that for a time, quite a long time in fact, Microsoft Research felt a vibrant place to be. Sur­pris­ing to some, per­haps, it kept the door open to ideas and as I would like to think of it oth­er ways worlds might be made.

What I feel I do owe an explan­a­tion for is what at this moment leads me to return to’ (as I like to think of it) an aca­dem­ic life. I am for­tu­nate enough to have dear friends and col­leagues who would want to know what route I’m hop­ing to trace in leav­ing a richly resourced cor­por­ate research envir­on­ment to take on an aca­dem­ic pos­i­tion full with the duties of teach­ing, fund­ing pro­pos­als, excel­lence frame­works, admin and — where the space can be made — a little research. Many close to me have exclaimed dis­be­lief in even the con­tem­pla­tion of such a move, espe­cially now when aca­demia in the UK is more than ever driv­en (and riv­en) by forces tuned to meas­ure­ment and market-place regimes. And of course, these logics and their accom­pa­ny­ing dis­may are not just per­vas­ive in the UK, as Isa­belle Stengers and Vin­ciane Despret write from their vant­age point in Bel­gi­um:

We have the impres­sion of help­lessly bear­ing wit­ness to the end of an epoch, one where we could be delighted in see­ing young women (and young men as well) acquire a taste for research and ven­ture out wherever their ques­tions would lead them— that is, to become cap­able of this free­dom which we have both profited from.

So, amidst all this, what draws me into the academy and attracts me to HCID at City? Well, it may sound too full of con­tra­dic­tions, but it is the prom­ise, the charged-potential it holds for an intel­lec­tu­al life, a life in which as Stengers and Despret exclaim, we are obliged to think:

think we must!”

I’m under no illu­sion that life as an aca­dem­ic retains much if any­thing of its mon­ast­ic tra­di­tions, and I am hon­estly not at all inter­ested in repro­du­cing the elit­ism that feels inher­ent in those tra­di­tions. The draw for me is the pos­sib­il­ity. With an aca­dem­ic life, I want to believe in an aggreg­ate of rhythms and rela­tion­ships that, no mat­ter how fraught and trouble-prone, have at their core the fos­ter­ing and nour­ish­ing of ideas, and the chance to think and to make a dif­fer­ence for the bet­ter. In this vein, there is so much to inspire me in Sarah Ahmed’s recent book, Liv­ing a Fem­in­ist Life”; while I’m reluct­ant to water-down her power­ful work­ing through of fem­in­ism, I’ve found many things that res­on­ate:

To live a fem­in­ist life is to make everything into some­thing that is ques­tion­able. The ques­tion of how to live a fem­in­ist life is alive as a ques­tion as well as being a life ques­tion.

I am, then, com­pelled by the pos­sib­il­it­ies the academy and my new centre afford to open up spaces for think­ing, to seed schol­arly com­mit­ments, and have bod­ies (of all kinds) become more cap­able. In my stud­ies, writ­ing, teach­ing, ment­or­ing, and yes even in those plen­ti­ful admin­is­trat­ive duties I’ll have to wade through, I want to believe there remains the chance to wil­fully shake the found­a­tions” , to res­ist a sin­gu­lar ver­sion of the world, with its ines­cap­able truths” ; I want to believe there is still the chance to have dif­fer­ent ideas mat­ter, dif­fer­ent val­ues mat­ter, dif­fer­ent bod­ies and voices mat­ter, dif­fer­ent mat­ters mat­ter. I like the way Bev Skeggs re-channels the anger she feels into an expres­sion of hope and pro­ject of dif­fer­ence mak­ing, and it’s a sim­il­ar chan­nel­ing that I want to work with:

I for one am exceed­ingly angry about all the cruelty that is imposed on the poor and vul­ner­able by our cur­rent gov­ern­ment but anger is not enough. For if we are just trapped in neg­at­ive affects how do we live and flour­ish? And I’m not just talk­ing about the ameli­or­a­tions that enable us to cope on a daily basis, or the dis­pos­i­tions of cyn­icism and skep­ti­cism, but those moments when we can envis­age a bet­ter world with bet­ter people, where we care and pay atten­tion and affec­tion to oth­ers.”

From this stand­point, it feels like there might be no bet­ter time to put one’s body into aca­dem­ic life. Under­stand­ably many are tired of the con­di­tions, but for me it seems pos­sib­il­it­ies are being enlivened for more chances, more ways, more means to do oth­er­wise.

So, I sup­pose I find myself embark­ing on a life in the academy — and what feels like com­ing home — because I want to put my weight behind the small but grow­ing call to res­ist, and at the same time — with one-step-at-a-time — work with those build­ing the con­di­tions for repar­a­tion. HCID, with its focus on and involve­ment in design, fits in here because it provides a space for mak­ing mat­ter to think with, and for invent­ing meth­ods that are not just respons­ive but respons­ible. To me, HCID feels open, open to think­ing ima­gin­at­ively with tech­no­lo­gies and open to mak­ing a dif­fer­ence. It’s this keep­ing open” that I see as the invit­a­tion.

There are so many I want to thank for the time they’ve giv­en me, help­ing me either know­ingly or not to make what has been an immense decision. Friends who have helped me dir­ectly include Abi Sel­len, Aman­da Windle, Cecily Mor­ris­on, Daniela Ros­ner, Kenton O’Hara, Nina Wake­ford, Lara Hou­s­ton, Phoebe Sen­gers, Richard Harp­er, Simon Tho­ro­good, and Steve Jack­son.
Pos­sibly less aware of their help, but import­ant to me non­ethe­less have been Abi Dur­rant, Alis­on Marlin, Anab Jain, Anja Thieme, Ari Schle­sing­er, Barry Brown, Byron Cook, Cindy Ben­nett, Dave Kirk, John Helmes, Kat Jun­gknick­el, Kate Craw­ford, Kia Höök, Lucian Leahu, Mark Perry, Mary Gray, Nate Kush­man, Sam­in Ish­tiaq, Silvia Lindtner, Tar­leton Gillespie and Tim Regan.
Finally, I must thank my fam­ily, my patient and ded­ic­ated part­ner, Car­oline, my two chil­dren (who have told me they will sorely miss the Microsoft parties), and my always com­fort­ing can­ine com­pan­ions.


From Joanna Latimer and Bever­ley Skeggs art­icle, The polit­ics of ima­gin­a­tion: keep­ing open and crit­ic­al.
I like the way Anna Tsing talks about liv­ing with cap­it­al­ism, and I sup­pose this could be one way to tell my story at Microsoft: We are stuck with the prob­lem of liv­ing des­pite eco­nom­ic and eco­lo­gic­al ruin­a­tion. Neither tales of pro­gress nor of ruin tell us how to think about col­lab­or­at­ive sur­viv­al. It is time to pay atten­tion to mush­room pick­ing. Not that this will save us — but it might open our ima­gin­a­tions.” 2015: 18.The Mush­room at the End of the World: On the Pos­sib­il­ity of Life in Cap­it­al­ist Ruins. Prin­ceton Uni­ver­sity Press.
Not look­ing for an easy way out, I’ve found anoth­er story to tell through fem­in­ist schol­ar­ship, tra­cing a line through Mar­ilyn Strathern, Donna Har­away, Maria Puig de la Bel­lacasa, and Michelle Murphy. Togeth­er, they remind us there are no inno­cent pos­i­tions we can inhab­it amongst the ruins: “‘Pro­duct­ive doings that sup­port liv­able rela­tion­al­it­ies’ (Puig de la Bel­lacasa, 2011: 93) are not just com­plexly val­ued and deval­ued but are ena- bled through non-innocent his­tor­ic­ally and spa­tially layered dis­tri­bu­tions of belong­ing and ali­en­a­tion, com­fort and unease.”
Women Who Make a Fuss: The Unfaith­ful Daugh­ters of Vir­gin­ia Woolf, by Stengers and Despret, has been a pro­found book for me and will be some­thing I revis­it again and again. I’m espe­cially stuck by the hon­est, per­son­al and spec­u­lat­ive styles Stengers and Despret stay with through­out the text.
Again, from Stengers and Despret’s book Women Who Make a Fuss.
Ahmed presents such an intensely per­son­al account of fem­in­ism in Liv­ing a Fem­in­ist Life”. I’m determ­ined for it to shape both my work and my life. It’s worth keep­ing track of the blog related to the book, Fem­in­ist Kill­joys, as Ahmed is updat­ing it with new work.”
See Ahmed
See Stengers and Despret
I make more than an allu­sion here to the word­ing that I love in Donna Haraway’s recent book Stay­ing with the Trouble”: It mat­ters what mat­ters we use to think oth­er mat­ters with; it mat­ters what stor­ies we tell to tell oth­er stor­ies with; it mat­ters what knots knot knots, what thoughts think thoughts, what descrip­tions describe descrip­tions, what ties tie ties. It mat­ters what stor­ies make worlds, what worlds make stor­ies.”
Bev Skeggs work on value, and as an example this piece Val­ues bey­ond value? Is any­thing bey­ond the logic of cap­it­al?”, have been import­ant for me in under­stand­ing how we might res­ist, and what we are seek­ing to res­ist.
Like Skeggs, Ahmed, reminds us that the ten­sions are what com­pel us to won­der, to pon­der, to think: It is when we are not attuned, when we do not love what we are sup­posed to love, that things become avail­able to us as things to pon­der with, to won­der about.” Anoth­er book that is import­ant in this repar­at­ive pro­ject is The Slow Pro­fess­or, by Mag­gie Berg and Bar­bara See­ber.


After a tre­mend­ous about of work with Lara Hou­s­ton, I’m delighted to have finally gone live with our data policy site: data​-policy​.info. It attempts to detail, in vari­ous formats and cuts, the dis­cus­sions at the day of dia­logues on data, policy and civic life, held at Microsoft Research Cam­bridge. More than this though, we want the site to pro­mote fur­ther dis­cus­sion and expand the ways we might think of the rela­tions between data, social/civic life, and policy. For me, the inspir­a­tion here has been the work a few of us have been doing with Ten­ison Road in cam­bridge and a community’s efforts to make sense of and use its data. I’d like to think some­thing small and loc­al could make a dif­fer­ence in these big dis­cus­sions

Dialogues on data, policy and civic life


Next Tues­day a few of us at Microsoft Research are host­ing a day-long dia­logue to dis­cuss the inter­ming­lings of data and social/civic life. We’re bring­ing togeth­er a mix of social the­or­ists, com­ment­at­ors and policy advisers with the hope of draw­ing out pos­sib­il­it­ies for doing policy mak­ing (as well as tech­no­logy design) dif­fer­ently. Our pre­amble for the event fol­lows (a print­able PDF can be down­loaded here): (more…)

Announcing Tenison Road launch

Finally pos­ted some fly­ers to announce the launch of the big data pro­ject we’ll run for a year. We hope to work with the res­id­ents and pro­pri­et­ors on Ten­ison Road in Cam­bridge to bet­ter under­stand how big data mat­ters and what people on the street want it to be. This is a pro­ject that is aim­ing to get at the inter­ming­lings of data and loc­al­ity, and to inter­vene in the entan­gle­ments in pro­duct­ive ways. That’s the hope! ... Fin­gers crossed.

Changes to FoI Act


Some sig­ni­fic­ant changes to the UK’s Free­dom of Inform­a­tion Act were enacted yes­ter­day that give people to right to request and, crit­ic­ally, reuse data. It’s prob­ably easy to over­look the implic­a­tions of this. The way I see it, every­one (includ­ing com­mer­cial bod­ies) now have the right to access FoI reg­u­lated data and (re-)use it for ana­lys­is, ana­lyt­ics, build­ing apps, etc. Wheth­er that’s good or bad, it seems pretty pro­found to me. See a sum­mary of the changes here on the Inform­a­tion Commissioner’s Office blog.