A Home for Science: The Life and Times of Tropical and Polar Field Stations
https://doi.org/10.22394/2074-0492-2021-3-272-297
EDN: XQPFZK
Abstract
The field hospital, being a transitional point between the unified and purified laboratory space and the diverse and unique spaces of the "field", is a controlled, but not clearly defined place where one can access nature and "attach" to it. As housing for visiting scientists, field stations are included both in the routine and rhythm of daily life, as well as in long cycles of living, dilapidation and restoration. This article examines the empirical and conceptual significance of field stations in tropical and polar latitudes as places for scientific work and scientists' lives. The extraterritorial but at the same time homely nature of the field station affects the reliability of knowledge and its dissemination along the frontier of science. The task of creating a home in an extreme field, the everyday experience of expatriation and appropriation determine the special political dynamics of knowledge production in these places. Turning to the field stations, we focus on the images of nature and science that fuel transnational research and reveal the aesthetic and emotional aspects of working and living in these distant homes of science.
About the Authors
Paul W. Geissler
Department of Social Anthropology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
Norway
Norway
Ann Kelly
Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, King's College London, London, UK
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
References
1. Alcayna-Stevens L. (2016) Habituating field scientists. Social Studies of Science, 46 (6):
2. -853.
3. Anderson D.G., Berglund E. (2002) Ethnographies of Conservation: Environmentalism and
4. the Distribution of Privilege, Oxford: Berghahn Press.
5. Anderson D.G., Nuttall M. (2003) Cultivating Arctic Landscapes: Knowing and Managing
6. Animals in the Circumpolar North, Oxford: Berghahn Press.
7. Anderson W. (2009) From subjugated knowledge to conjugated subjects: Science and
8. globalisation, or postcolonial studies of science? Postcolonial Studies, 12 (4): 389-400.
9. Benson K. (2009) Field stations and surveys. P. J. Bowler, J.V. Pickstone (eds) The Cambridge History of Science, vol. 6, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 76–89.
10. Bodenhorn B. (2012) Meeting minds; encountering worlds: Sciences and other expertises on the North Slope of Alaska. M.Konrad (ed.) Collaborators Collaborating: Counterparts in Anthropological Knowledge and International Research Relations, New York:
11. Berghahn Press: 225-244.
12. Bravo M., Rees G. (2006) Cryo-politics: Environmental security and the future of
13. Arctic navigation. Brown Journal of World Affairs,13 (1): 205-215.
14. Bravo M., Sörlin S. (2002) Narrating the Arctic: A Cultural History ofNordic Scientific Practices, Canton, OH: Science History Publications.
15. Campbell M.B. (1999) Wonder and Science: Imagining Worlds in Early Modern Europe,
16. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
17. Candea M. (2010) ‘Ifell in love with Carlosthe meerkat’: Engagement and detachment
18. in human animal relations. American Ethnologist, 37 (2): 241-258.
19. Cannon S. F. (1978) Science in Culture: The Early Victorian Period, Folkestone: Dawson
20. Publishing.
21. Carter P. (2010 [1987]) The Road to Botany Bay: An Exploration of Landscape and History,
22. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
23. Crane J. (2011) Scrambling for Africa? Universities and global health. The Lancet, 377
24. (9775): 1388-1390.
25. Crate S.A., Nuttall M.N. (2009) Anthropology and Climate Change: From Encounters to
26. Actions, Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
27. Cunningham A., JardineN. (eds) (1990) Romanticism and the Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Daston L., Lunbeck E. (eds) (2011) Histories of Scientific Observation, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
29. Didur J. (2013) Guns & Roses: Reading the picturesque archive in Anita Desai’s Fire
30. on the Mountain. Textual Practice, 27 (3): 499-522.
31. Droney D. (2014) Ironies of laboratory work during Ghana’s second age of optimism.
32. Cultural Anthropology, 29 (2): 363-384.
33. Fairhead J., Leach M. (1996) Misreading the African landscape: Society and Ecology in a
34. Forest-Savannah Mosaic, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. Fairhead J., Leach M., Small M. (2006) Where techno-science meets poverty: Medical research and the economy of blood in The Gambia, West Africa. Social Science &
36. Medicine, 63 (4): 1109-1120.
37. Galison P., Thompson E. (1999) The Architecture of Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Geissler P.W. (2015) Whatfuture remains? Remembering an African place ofscience.
39. P.W. Geissler (ed.) Para-States and Medical Science: Making Global Health in Africa, Durham, NC: Duke University Press: 142–178.
40. Geissler P.W., Kelly A. (2016) Field station as stage: Re-enacting scientific work and
41. life in Amani, Tanzania. Social Studies of Science, 46 (6): 912-937.
42. Geissler P.W., Molyneux S. (2011) Evidence, Ethos and Experiment: The Anthropology and
43. History of Medical Research in Africa, Oxford: Berghahn Press.
44. Geissler P.W., Lachenal G., Manton J. et al. (2016) Traces ofthe Future: An Archaeology of
45. Medical Science in Twenty First Century Africa, Bristol: Intellect.
46. Graboyes M. (2015) The Experiment Must Continue: Medical Research and Ethics in East
47. Africa, 1940-2014, Athens: Ohio University Press.
48. Hastrup K. (2013a) Andaman Islanders and Polar Eskimos: Emergent ethnographic
49. subjects c. 1900. Journal of the British Academy, 1: 3-30.
50. Hastrup K. (2013b) Scales of attention in fieldwork: Global connections and local concerns in the Arctic. Ethnography, 14 (2): 145-164.
51. Heggie V. (2014) Why isn’t exploration a science? Isis, 105 (2): 318-334.
52. Heggie V. (2016) Higher and colder: The success and failure of boundaries in high
53. altitude and Antarctic research stations. Social Studies of Science, 46 (6): 809-832.
54. Henke C.R., Gieryn T. F. (2008) Sites of scientific practice: The enduring importance
55. of place. E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska M. Lynch et al. (eds) The Handbook of Science
56. and Technology Studies, 2nd ed., Cambridge, MA: MIT Press: 353-376.
57. Herzig R.M. (2005) Suffering for Science: Reason and Sacrifice in Modern America, New
58. Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
59. Kelly A.H. (2012) The experimental hut: Hosting vectors. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 18: 145-160.
60. Kelly A.H. (2016) Seeing cellular debris, remembering a Soviet method. Visual Anthropology, 29 (2): 133-158.
61. Kelly A.H., Geissler P.W. (2011) The value of transnational medical research. Journal
62. of Cultural Economy, 4 (1): 3-10.
63. Kohler R.E. (2002) Landscapes and Labscapes: Exploring the Lab-Field Border in Biology,
64. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
65. Kuklick H., Kohler R.E. (1996) Introduction: Science in the field. Osiris, 11:1-14.
66. Lachenal G. (2016) At home in the postcolony: Ecology, empire and domesticity atthe
67. Lamto field station, Ivory Coast. Social Studies of Science, 877-893.
68. Larsen E. J. (2011) An Empire of Ice: Scott, Shackleton, and the Heroic Age of Antarctic Science, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
69. Latour B., Woolgar S. (1986) Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts, 2nd ed.,
70. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
71. Livingstone D.N. (2010) Putting Science in its Place: Geographies of Scientific Knowledge,
72. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
73. Lynch M. (1991) Laboratory space and the technological complex: An investigation of
74. topical contextures. Science in Context, 4 (1): 51-78.
75. Martin E. (2013) The potentiality of ethnography and the limits of affect theory. Current Anthropology, 54 (S7): 149-158.
76. MasseyD. (2004) Geographies ofresponsibility. Geograflska Annaler: Series B, Human
77. Geography, 86 (1): 5-18.
78. Mitchell W.T. (2002) Landscape and Power, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
79. Mitman G. (1996) When nature isthe zoo: Vision and power in the art and science of
80. natural history. Osiris, 11: 117-143.
81. Moyi Okwaro F., Geissler P.W. (2015) In/dependent collaborations: Perceptions and
82. experiences of African scientistsin transnational HIV research. Medical Anthropology
83. Quarterly, 29 (4): 492-511.
84. Myers N. (2008) Molecular embodiments and the body-work of modeling in protein
85. crystallography. Social Studies of Science, 38 (2): 163-199.
86. Nielsen K.H., Harbsmeier M., Ries C. (2012) Scientists and Scholarsin the Field: Studiesin
87. the History of Fieldwork and Expeditions, Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.
88. O’Reilly J. (2016) Sensing the ice: Field science, models, and expert intimacy with
89. knowledge. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 22 (S1): 27-45.
90. Oreskes N. (1996) Objectivity or heroism? On the invisibility of women in science.
91. Osiris, 11: 87-113.
92. Palsson G., Hujbens EH (2009) The bog in our brain and bowels: The social attitudes
93. to the cartography of Icelandic wetlands. Environment and Planning D: Society and
94. Space, 21: 296-316.
95. Pearson M. (2004) ‘No joke in in petticoats’: British Polar expeditions and their theatrical presentations. TDR, 48 (1): 44-59.
96. Pollock A. (2014) Places of pharmaceutical knowledge-making: Global health, postcolonial science, and hope in South African drug discovery. Social Studies of Science,
97. (6): 848-873.
98. Raj K. (2007) Relocating Modern Science: Circulation and the Construction of Knowledge in
99. South Asia and Europe, 1650-1900, London: Palgrave MacMillan.
100. Redfield P. (2000) Space in the Tropics: From Convicts to Rockets in French Guiana, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
101. Redfield P. (2002) The half-life of empire in outer space. Social Studies of Science, 32
102. (5-6): 791-825.
103. Roberts P., Paglia E. (2016) Science as national belonging: The construction of Svalbard as a Norwegian space. Social Studies of Science, 46 (6): 894-911.
104. Schaffer S. (1994) From Physics to Anthropology — And Back Again, Cambridge: Prickly
105. Pear Press.
106. Schaffer S. (1997) Metrology, metrication, and Victorian values. B. Lightman (ed.)
107. Victorian Science in Context, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press: 438-474.
108. Schubel J.R. (2015) Some thoughts on keeping field stations and marine labs afloatin
109. turbulenttimes. BioScience, 65 (5): 458-459.
110. Schumaker L. (2001) Africanizing Anthropology: Fieldwork, Networks, and the Making
111. of Cultural Knowledge in Central Africa, Durham, NC; London: Duke University Press.
112. Seth S. (2009) Putting knowledge in its place: Science, colonialism, and the postcolonial. Postcolonial Studies, 12 (4): 373-388.
113. Shapin S. (1988) The house of experiment in seventeenth century England. Isis, 79
114. (3): 373-404.
115. Skrydstrup M. (2016) Of spheres and squares: Can Sloterdijk help us rethink the architecture of climate science? Social Studies of Science, 46 (6): 854-876.
116. Spufford F. (2010) I May Be Some Time, London: Faber & Faber.
117. Street A. (2016) The hospital and the hospital: Infrastructure, human tissue, labour
118. and the scientific production of relational value. Social Studies of Science, 46 (6): 938-
119.
120. Tilley H. (2011) Africa as a Living Laboratory: Empire, Development, and the Problem of
121. Scientific Knowledge, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
122. Tousignant N. (2013) Broken tempos: Of means and memory in a Senegalese university laboratory. Social Studies of Science, 43 (5): 729-753.
123. Weil S. (2002) Gravity and Grace, London: Routledge
Review
For citations:
Geissler P.W., Kelly A. A Home for Science: The Life and Times of Tropical and Polar Field Stations. Sociology of Power. 2021;33(3):282-297. https://doi.org/10.22394/2074-0492-2021-3-272-297. EDN: XQPFZK
Views:
5
Email this article 