No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
‘We deserve new things’: (anti-)bricolage in Lomé’s makerspaces
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 October 2023
Abstract
This article traces bricolage in the city of Lomé, Togo, as it is given meaning, practised and resisted by the ‘makers’ involved in the city’s makerspaces. While the Lévi-Straussian definition of bricolage as ‘making do’ given limited resources is heralded as an innovative practice in the Euro-American Maker Movement, Lomé’s makers appear to distance themselves from the concept due to its perceived stigmatization in both Lomé and Francophone Africa as a devalued survival practice through improvisation. Through their identification as ‘makers but not bricoleurs’, and their expression ‘we deserve new things’, I unpack the ambiguous relationship Lomé’s makers have with bricolage, and how their disavowal of the concept reveals more about the global infrastructural inequalities that surround it. By foregrounding the critical self-awareness of Lomé’s makers, I explore how ethnography allows for the de-centring and decolonization of foundational concepts and ideologies, as the makers challenge and reclaim bricolage to arrive at a future where it is no longer a necessity but a choice.
Résumé
Cet article décrit le bricolage dans la ville de Lomé (Togo), tel qu’il est interprété, pratiqué et défié par les « makers » qui travaillent dans les « makerspaces » de la ville. Alors que la définition lévi-straussienne du bricolage, à savoir le fait de « faire avec » compte tenu de ressources limitées, est proclamée comme une pratique novatrice dans le mouvement maker euro-américain, les makers de Lomé semblent prendre leurs distances vis-à-vis de ce concept en raison de sa stigmatisation perçue, tant à Lomé qu’en Afrique francophone, comme une pratique dévalorisée de survie par l’improvisation. À travers leur identification en tant que « makers mais pas bricoleurs », et leur expression « on mérite du neuf », l’auteur analyse le rapport ambigu que les makers de Lomé ont avec le bricolage, et comment leur désaveu du concept en dit plus sur les inégalités infrastructurelles globales qui l’entourent. En mettant en avant la conscience critique que les makers de Lomé ont d’eux-mêmes, l’auteur explore la manière dont l’ethnographie permet le décentrage et la décolonisation d’idéologies et de concepts fondateurs, alors que les makers contestent et se réapproprient le bricolage pour arriver à un futur dans lequel il n’est plus une nécessité mais un choix.
Resumo
Este artigo traça a bricolagem na cidade de Lomé, Togo, tal como lhe é dado significado, praticada e resistida pelos ‘makers’ envolvidos nos ‘makerspaces’ da cidade. Enquanto a definição Levi-Straussiana de bricolage, como ‘fazer’ com recursos limitados, é considerada como uma prática inovadora no movimento euro-americano de makers, os makers de Lomé parecem distanciar-se do conceito devido à sua estigmatização em Lomé e na África francófona como uma prática de sobrevivência desvalorizada através da improvisação. Através da sua identificação como ‘makers, mas não bricoleurs’ e da sua expressão ‘merecemos coisas novas’, desvendo a relação ambígua que os makers de Lomé têm com a bricolagem e a forma como o seu repúdio do conceito revela mais sobre as desigualdades infraestruturais globais que o rodeiam. Ao colocar em primeiro plano a autoconsciência crítica dos makers de Lomé, exploro a forma como a etnografia permite a descentralização e a descolonização de conceitos e ideologias fundamentais, à medida que os makers desafiam e reclamam a bricolagem para chegarem a um futuro em que esta deixe de ser uma necessidade e passe a ser uma escolha.
- Type
- Money, class and makers
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the International African Institute
References
Akakpo, Y. (2021) Aménagement du territoire et sentiers d’économie en Afrique: fonction du bricolage technologique. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Alzouma, G. (2005) ‘Myths of digital technology in Africa: leapfrogging development?’, Global Media and Communication 1 (3): 339–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anand, N., Gupta, A. and Appel, H. (2018) The Promise of Infrastructure. Durham NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appadurai, A. (1996) Modernity at Large: cultural dimensions of globalization. Minnesota MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Baker, T. and Nelson, R. (2005) ‘Creating something from nothing: resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage’, Administrative Science Quarterly 50: 329–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bejarano, A., López Juárez, C. L., Mijangos García, M. A. and Goldstein, D. M. (2019) Decolonizing Ethnography: undocumented immigrants and new directions in social science. Durham NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beltagui, A., Sesis, A. and Stylos, N. (2021) ‘A bricolage perspective on democratising innovation: the case of 3D printing in makerspaces’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 163: 120453.10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Çaglar, A. and Glick Schiller, N. (2018) Migrants and City-Making: dispossession, displacement, and urban regeneration. Durham NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corsini, L., Dammicco, V. and Moultrie, J. (2021) ‘Frugal innovation in a crisis: the digital fabrication maker response to Covid-19’, R&D Management 51: 195–210.Google Scholar
Cotnam-Kappel, M., Hagerman, M. S. and Duplàa, E. (2020) ‘La formation bricoleur: un modèle informé par les expériences et voix du personnel enseignant’, Revue des Sciences de l’Éducation 46 (1): 117–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Boeck, F. (2011) ‘Inhabiting ocular ground: Kinshasa’s future in the light of Congo’s spectral urban politics’, Cultural Anthropology 26 (2): 263–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Boeck, F. and Baloji, S. (2016) Suturing the City: living together in Congo’s urban worlds. London: Autograph ABP.Google Scholar
Graham, M. (2019) Digital Economies at Global Margins. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, G. (2018) ‘Relational comparison revisited: Marxist postcolonial geographies in practice’, Progress in Human Geography 42 (3): 371–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houston, L. (2019) ‘Mobile phone repair knowledge in downtown Kampala: local and trans-local circulations’ in Strebel, I., Bovet, A. and Sormani, P. (eds), Repair Work Ethnographies: revisiting breakdown, relocating materiality. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kleinman, J. (2019) Adventure Capital: migration and making of an African hub in Paris. Oakland CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Kostakis, V., Niaros, V. and Giotitsas, C. (2015) ‘Production and governance in hackerspaces: a manifestation of commons-based peer production in the physical realm?’, International Journal of Cultural Studies 18 (5): 555–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kusimba, S. (2018) ‘“It is easy for women to ask!”: Gender and digital finance in Kenya’, Economic Anthropology 5: 247–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindtner, S., Hertz, G. and Dourish, P. (2014) ‘Emerging sites of HCI innovation: hackerspaces, hardware start-ups and incubators’ in CHI ‘14: proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. New York NY: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
MacGaffey, J. (1986) ‘Fending-for-yourself: the organisation of the second economy in Zaire’ in Nzongola-Ntalaja, G. (ed.), The Crisis in Zaire: myths and realities. Trenton NJ: Africa World Press.Google Scholar
Marguerat, Y. (1992) Lomé: une brève histoire de la capitale du Togo. Paris: Karthala.Google Scholar
Mavhunga, C. (2014) What Do Science, Technology and Innovation Mean from Africa? Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Moyo, L. (2018) ‘Rethinking the network society: a decolonial and border gnosis of the digital divide in Africa and the global South’ in Muschert, G. and Ragnedda, M. (eds), Theorising the Digital Divide. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Murphy, L. (2015) ‘A brief history of Le Système D’, Contemporary French Civilization 40
(3): 351–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
N’Diaye-Correard, G., Daff, M., Mbaye, A. and Ndiaye, M. (2006) Les mots du patrimoine: le Sénégal. Paris: AUF/EAC.Google Scholar
Newell, S. (2021) ‘Hackers of the heart: digital sorcery and virtual intimacy in Côte d’Ivoire’, Africa 91 (4): 661–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, K. and Eriksen, T. H. (2022) ‘The problem of power: partial electrification in northern Uganda’, Anthropology Today 38 (4): 15–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osiakwan, E. (2017) ‘The KINGS of Africa’s digital economy’ in Ndemo, B. and Weiss, T. (eds), Digital Kenya. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Piot, C. (2010) Nostalgia for the Future: West Africa after the Cold War. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poggiali, L. (2016) ‘Seeing (from) digital peripheries: technology and transparency in Kenya’s Silicon Savannah’, Cultural Anthropology 31: 387–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pype, K. (2017) ‘Smartness from below: variations on technology and creativity in contemporary Kinshasa’ in Mavhunga, C. C. (ed.), What Do Science, Technology and Innovation Mean from Africa? Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pype, K. (2022) ‘Coding the city: mapping eco-systems and zones of opportunity in Kinshasa’s emerging tech scene’ in Musila, G. (ed.), Routledge Handbook of African Popular Culture. New York NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Resnick, M. and Rosenbaum, E. (2013) ‘Designing for tinkerability’ in Honey, M. and Kanter, D. (eds), Design, Make, Play. New York NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Samarakoon, S., Munro, P., Zalengera, C. and Kearnes, M. (2022) ‘The afterlives of off-grid solar: the dynamics of repair and e-waste in Malawi’, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 42: 317–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheppard, E., Leitner, H. and Maringanti, A. (2013) ‘Provincializing global urbanism: a manifesto’, Urban Geography 34 (7): 893–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simone, A. (2004) ‘People as infrastructure: intersecting fragments in Johannesburg’, Public Culture 16 (3): 407–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D. (2007) A Culture of Corruption: everyday deception and popular discontent in Nigeria. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Swyngedouw, E. (2004) ‘Globalisation or “glocalisation”? Networks, territories and rescaling’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs 17 (1): 25–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsing, A. (2005) Friction: an ethnography of global connection. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van den Broeck, J. (2017) ‘“We are analogue in a digital world”: an anthropological exploration of ontologies and uncertainties around the proposed Konza Techno City near Nairobi, Kenya’, Critical African Studies 9 (2): 210–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Schnitzler, A. (2013) ‘Traveling technologies: infrastructure, ethical regimes, and the materiality of politics in South Africa’, Cultural Anthropology 28 (4): 670–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, J. and Duplàa, E. (2018) ‘Le movement bricoleur et la salle de classe’, Canopé <https://www.reseau-canope.fr/agence-des-usages/le-mouvement-bricoleur-et-la-salle-de-classe.html> (accessed 8 June 2022).+(accessed+8+June+2022).>Google Scholar
Wiredu, K. (1984) ‘How not to compare African thought with Western thought’ in Wright, R. (ed.), Philosophy and an African Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wiredu, K. (2002) ‘Conceptual decolonization as an imperative in contemporary African philosophy: some personal reflections’, Rue Descartes 36: 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar