Material Semiotics as a Method: From Uncertainty to Order and Back Again

Abstract

John Law notes that — by the early 1990s — Latour’s approach contained the entirety of the principles of actor-network theory: attention to heterogeneous relations, use of semiotic tools, adherence to symmetry in describing the truth or false statements, performativity of practices, focus on circulations, predisposition to case studies. Expanding the list of approaches and tools used in the ANT, Law turns to material semiotics. He aspires to show it as a set of themes that stimulate the researcher’s sensitivity to the problem of polysemanticity in a particular field. At the same time, his version of material semiotics implicitly contains a critique of the of Greimas’ semiotics developed by Latour. Law’s vision describes practices of producing multiple realities, maintaining uncertainties and the polysemantic. In contrast, Latour’s semiotics are more instrumental, showing how particular actors eliminate multiplicity by creating common rules. The article shows that the contradiction between Latour’s semiotics and Law’s material semiotics is related to the question of tracing the networks’ length created by heterogenous actors. However, this question is empirical. The article explores a particular case of interaction from the practices of a center for the development and socialization of children and adults with mental disabilities. It is shown that the problem of polysemanticity and uncertainties has two solutions: limiting the network through a “shifting in” of the “enunciator” and maintaining polysemanticity through “partial connections”.