CFP MUSA Workshop - Negotiating Technologies
Type: Call for Papers
Date: July 15, 2016
Location: United Kingdom
Subject Fields: South
Asian History / Studies, Islamic History / Studies, History of Science,
Medicine, and Technology, Colonial and Post-Colonial History / Studies,
Social Sciences
MUSA Workshop – Negotiating Technologies
Jointly organised by SOAS, CEIAS (CNRS-EHESS), Paris, & the Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge
Date: 14 & 15 October 2016
Venue: Trinity College, University of Cambridge
Deadline for abstract submissions: 15 July 2016
The
Muslim South Asia Research Forum (MUSA), a young scholar network based
at SOAS, is organising a workshop on "Negotiating Technologies", to be
held on October 14th and 15th, 2016 at the University of Cambridge. For
more details and submission guidelines, please see the call for papers
below. If you are interested in participating, please send a 300-word
abstract along with a CV to musa@soas.ac.uk before July 15th, 2016.
This
workshop will look at the multiple facets of technology among Muslims
in South Asia. Technologies contribute to reshaping our material
environment as well as our sense of self and the way we relate to
others. While scholars have often examined the role of political,
cultural, and religious changes in the way Muslims defined themselves as
Muslims, they have paid less attention to the impact of technological
change on ‘Muslim societies’ and identities. This workshop aims to look
at the different ways in which South Asian Muslims (broadly defined)
have used, produced and ‘negotiated’ technologies in their daily lives
and how these technologies shape their environment, their sense of self
and their interactions with the wider world. Moreover, it aims to take
into account the recent developments in the field of science and
technology studies which have had an impact across social sciences. One
may think for instance of the works on ‘everyday technology’ as well as
Latour’s contested discussion on modernity, based on the distinction
between ‘nature’ and ‘culture’, ‘human’ and ‘non-human’. By facilitating
a conversation among researchers of different disciplinary backgrounds
on how South Asian Muslims negotiated technologies, we hope to offer
fresh perspectives on the study of Muslim societies as well as
contribute to cultural studies and to the field of science and
technology studies.
If the question of science, technology and
Islam is often at the heart of the debate on Islam and ‘modernity’, or
Islam and ‘the West’, the purpose of this workshop is not to reinforce
these binaries but rather to open up the discussion in order to examine
the multiple aspects of technology and its relations with groups and
individuals who define themselves as Muslim. Hence, the term
‘technology’ is used here in the large sense of the word to include not
only ‘modern’ applications of science for industrial, commercial or
social purposes (for instance, digital and electronic technologies) but
also, more largely speaking, any form of knowledge dealing with the
mechanical arts and applied science as well as the application of such
knowledge for practical purposes.
The workshop will be held at
Trinity College, University of Cambridge (UK) on 14 & 15 October
2016. The papers selected for the workshop will be assessed for a
research publication, to be produced by the Muslim South Asia Research
Forum (SOAS) in collaboration with CEIAS (Centre for South Asian
Studies, CNRS-EHESS, Paris) and the Centre of South Asia Studies
(University of Cambridge).
Topics to be discussed include, but are not limited to:
- Muslims & the Media: New Platforms, New Ideas, New Hierarchies?
Technological
innovations in communications and the media change the way we interact
with each other, impacting what we say, who we say it to, and how we say
it. They shape what constitutes the ‘public’ and the public sphere by
facilitating exchanges and population movements across regions and
national states, contributing to a sense of togetherness and in some
cases, reinforcing a ‘pan-Islamic’ imagination. How do new forms of
transmission, connection and communication redefine sources of religious
authority, and drive towards a more horizontal diffusion of knowledge?
How do these media influence the interpretation and representation of
Islam in South Asia (see for example, Robinson 1993, on the arrival of
the printing press in India and the rise of a ‘scriptural’ and
‘protestant’ Islam)? Taking this further, can we argue that the public
space created by the 'new media' fosters a new geography of the ‘ummah’,
with new centres, new margins, new imaginings (Eickelman &
Anderson 1999)?
In analysing these questions, how can we
adequately take into consideration the users and mediators of
technologies? Salvatore and Eickelman’s (2004) notion of ‘public Islam’
emphasises how new platforms for self-expression and the circulation of
ideas have opened up spaces for discussion and dissent vis-à-vis
‘traditional’ representations or authorities, and led to the emergence
of new actors speaking about what it means to be a ‘good’ Muslim. To
illustrate, Hartung (2013) describes the ‘intellectuals’ as a new social
group in contrast to the traditional ulama in early 19th century India.
Their emergence may be linked with the arrival of the printing press
and associated mass audiences. In contemporary societies, groups such as
the Taliban also enter the fray, using new media to contribute to the
debate over what constitutes ‘true’ Islam.
Other important issues
include that of unequal access to technologies: for example, low
literacy levels, the ‘digital divide’ in contemporary Muslim societies,
and differences of access on the basis of class or gender. Finally, new
media also generate their own hierarchies of power, raising questions
such as who mediates the discourse on the new media, what is being
censored and by whom (consider for instance the fatwas against new media
and the persecution of bloggers in Bangladesh).
Technologies
inform our daily practices, they mediate our relations to our
environment, to other people and to objects. As a result, they
contribute to the way we fashion ourselves as individuals and as members
of society. Instead of adopting a state-centric approach, which regards
technology as a tool of conquest, exploitation and control in colonial
and postcolonial states, new scholarly works invite us to examine the
ways in which ‘mundane’ technologies are consumed and re-appropriated as
‘local goods’, how these technologies come to assume specific
significance in local settings, and how they reshape individuals’ daily
lives, their ‘bodily’ practices as well as their aspirations,
imaginations and sense of self (Arnold and De Wald, 2012). Drawing
inspiration from these new approaches, we can ask: how do technologies
impact the ways in which Muslim individuals define themselves as
Muslims? How, for instance, do they practice their faith on a daily
basis? To what extent do new technologies affect existing religious
practices (e.g. prayer, predication) or lead to the emergence of new
practices? In what ways do these technologies shape individuals’
environment and redefine their horizons?
To understand the impact
of ‘everyday technologies’ on Muslims’ sense of self as Muslims, one
further needs to take into account the gender-differentiated effects of
technologies. How has technological change influenced the redefinition
of masculine and feminine roles among Muslims? To what extent do new
technologies (such as in-vitro fertilisation) challenge Islamic beliefs
and practices and affect notions of family and kinship (Inhorn 2012,
Clarke 2011)? In what measure do they provide new platforms for those
who challenge heteronormative frameworks among Muslims? Bearing in mind
the fact that access to technology is often gender-differentiated, one
may further ask to what extent have technologies opened up new
opportunities (e.g. entrepreneurship, work at home, online networks) or,
conversely, new forms of coercion.
- The Debate on Modernity: Making ‘Modern’ Muslims
The
debate on Muslims and modernity in South Asia has mostly revolved
around Muslim responses to colonialism. Many scholars have used the
categories ‘traditionalists’ and ‘modernists’ to put forward the
diversity of these responses, which touch upon private matters as well
as the public sphere, politics and religion. The attitude towards
‘modern’ science and technology appears, at first sight, as an important
factor to demarcate those who embraced ‘Western-style’ modernity from
those who turned away from it. For instance, ‘modernists’ who, like Syed
Ahmad Khan, were keen to establish privileged relations with colonial
rulers, often stressed the compatibility between Islam and ‘modern’
science and technology. In doing so, they challenged the idea that Islam
as a religion or Muslims as a religious or cultural group were
inherently ‘anti-modern’. Yet, as several scholars have shown,
resistance to colonial rule did not necessarily entail a rejection of
‘Western’ technologies. In fact, as Robinson and Metcalf have shown,
reformist movements often adopted technological innovations to pursue
their own goals, outside the realm of colonial rule. How can we then
conceive the relationship of such religious reform movements to
technological innovation beyond the usual categories of traditionalist,
reformist and modernist?
Moreover, the idea of modernity need not
be associated with a ‘Western’ legacy. Drawing influence
from Eisendstadt’s notion of ‘multiple modernities’, many scholars have
questioned the Eurocentric framework that the idea of a uniform
‘modernity’ entails. To deepen the understanding of the relationship
between Muslims - as individuals and as members of a ‘community’ - and
what constitutes modernity, one has to consider the different meanings
attributed to modernity over time. Some, like Sanjay Subrahmanyam have
argued that modernity, far from being a European product, arises from
cross-cultural, cross-regional interactions. In this context, we can
ask: in what ways did South Asian Muslims contribute to shaping
‘alternative modernities’ (Gaonkar, 2001)? How have South Asian Muslims
proposed ‘their own modernity’, to use Partha Chatterjee's terms? What
has been considered 'modern'? What has constituted accepted forms of
modernity? What are the influences, besides colonialism, that have
shaped South Asian Muslims’ ideas of modernity?
In addition, the
distinction between culture and nature, that is, between human and
non-human, lies at the foundation of the Western concept of modernity
(Latour 1993, Descola 2013). While the relation of various communities
to their environment has been examined, this question has not been
linked with Islam and being Muslim. How has the connection between
nature and culture been conceptualized by South Asian Muslims and how
has it affected their relationship with technological change?
Finally,
modern nation-states have often stressed technological innovation and
industrial development as a way to ‘progress’, including in South Asia –
think, for instance, of the Nehruvian ‘developmental state’
(Visvanathan 1987, Khilnani 1999). How, then, have South Asian Muslims
taken part in such state-led projects? Science and technology have been
broadly analysed as
instruments of colonial control and as tools
used by nationalists to imagine and build the nation (Arnold 2000). How
has technology been used to promote certain ideas of the state and the
nation among South Asia’s Muslims? What has been the role of Muslim
scientists, engineers in these processes? How has public sector
scientific education, such as that promoted by engineering colleges,
forged Muslim ideas of the nation-state?
- South Asian Muslims & the History of Science & Techniques
The
narrative locating the birth of modern science in the European
‘scientific revolution’ of the 16th and 17th centuries has long been
challenged. Many, like Joseph Needham on China or Seyyed Hossein Nasr on
the Muslim world, have highlighted that other parts of the world were,
at particular times in history, more advanced technologically than
Western Europe. To disprove Western claims of superiority, the role of
Muslims in the preservation of Greek knowledge or in mathematical and
technological innovation – think of the astrolabe – is often contrasted
to the situation in medieval Europe. Such visions, framed in
civilisational terms, led to the famous ‘Needham Question’, now largely
deemed irrelevant: why did the scientific revolution not take place in
China? While noting that such a question has never really been asked
about South Asia, let us also consider more recent approaches, which
moved away from ascertaining civilisational claims on technological and
scientific inventions to focus on networks and circulations (see for
instance Raj 2006).
Precisely because it always involves networks
and circulations of people and goods, knowledge production is the result
of multiple encounters and cannot be reduced to a single person, group
or culture. How can we position South Asian Muslims in such networks of
scientific and technological production and exchanges? How have South
Asian Muslims – whether erudite or illiterate, princely counsels or
craftsmen – taken part in knowledge production, not as isolated
inventors, but as persons both inscribed in a social setting and yet
connected much beyond it?
We also welcome decolonial perspectives
on this theme. How can studying both every day and authoritative
histories of science and technology in Muslim South Asia contribute to
global theory-making? Or, considering the fact that knowledge under
colonialism was unequal but was not unidirectional, have these
indigenous histories already been formative to global thought, but
without attribution?
Submission Guidelines
We request
contributions from PhD students in advanced stages of their research
(within 1 year of final submission and at least 6 months after
completion of field-work, if applicable) and early career scholars
(within 5 years post PhD).
Please submit your abstracts to musa@soas.ac.uk
by 15 JULY, 2016 by 12:00am (GMT). Abstracts should be no more than 300
words and should include up to 5 keywords. Please also state your name
and current institutional affiliation. In addition, please provide an
updated CV.
All files should be in word document format and entitled ‘YOUR NAME - Abstract’ and ‘YOUR NAME - CV’.
References
Arnold, David. Science, technology and medicine in colonial India. Vol. 5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Arnold,
David, and Erich De Wald. "Everyday Technology in South and Southeast
Asia: An introduction." Modern Asian Studies 46, no. 01 (2012), 1-17.
Clarke,
Morgan, and Marcia C. Inhorn. "Mutuality and immediacy between Marja’
and Muqallid: Evidence from male in vitro fertilization patients in
Shi’i Lebanon." International Journal of Middle East Studies 43, no. 03
(2011), 409-427.
Descola, Philippe, Beyond Nature and Culture, University of Chicago Press, 2013.
Eickelman,
Dale F., and Jon W. Anderson. New media in the Muslim world: The
emerging public sphere. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2003.
Gaonkar, D.P. (ed.), Alternative modernities, London: Duke University Press, 2001.
Hartung,
Jan-Peter. What Makes a “Muslim Intellectual”? On the Pros and Cons of a
Category. Middle East - Topics and Arguments, 1 (2013)
35-45.
Inhorn, Marcia Claire. The new Arab man:
emergent masculinities, technologies, and Islam in the Middle East.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012.
Khilnani, Sunil. The idea of India. London: Penguin Books, 1999.
Latour, Bruno, We have never been modern, Harvard University Press, 1993.
Raj,
Kapil. Relocating modern science: circulation and the construction of
knowledge in South Asia and Europe, 1650-1900. Delhi: Permanent Black,
2006
Robinson, Francis. "Technology and religious change: Islam
and the impact of print." Modern Asian Studies 27, no. 01 (1993),
229-251.
Salvatore, Armando, and Dale F. Eickelman, eds. Public Islam and the common good. Vol. 95. Leiden: Brill, 2004.
Visvanathan, Shiv. “From the annals of the laboratory state.” Alternatives XII