С момента своего создания журнал «Экономическая социология», а позднее Лаборатория экономико-социологических исследований (ЛЭСИ) НИУ ВШЭ уделяли серьёзное внимание переводам лучших классических и современных работ. Сообщаем, что сейчас у нас на выходе сразу три важных проекта. Завершается подготовка к изданию книги Фрэнка Доббина «Формирование промышленной политики» («Forging Industrial Policy»), подходит к концу редактирование книги Нила Флигстина «Архитектура рынков» («Architecture of Markets»), переведены все основные тексты для готовящейся хрестоматии «Классика новой экономической социологии», в состав которой вошли основополагающие тексты для ключевых направлений экономической социологии последней четверти XX столетия. В этом номере публикуется один из этих текстов. Все упомянутые книги увидят свет в течение 2013 г., в том числе в серии «Социальная теория», выпускаемой Издательским домом НИУ ВШЭ. Меж тем представляем новый номер нашего журнала. * * * Приятного чтения. И до встречи в мае. 1 Science studies (англ.)-междисциплинарная область исследований науки в её историческом, общественном, культурном контекстах. В качестве отдельных направлений данной области можно указать социологию, антропологию, философию и историю науки. Интервью с Марион Фуркад Дюркгейм и science studies 1 для экономической социологии ИНТЕРВЬЮ ФУРКАД Марион (Fourcade, Marion)профессор социологии Калифорнийского университета в Бёркли (США); директор совместного центра Макса Планка и Sciences Po по борьбе с нестабильностью в рыночных обществах, профессор социологии Института политических исследований Sciences Po (Париж, Франция).

This article starts with a paradox: when an actor simply has power nothing happens and s/he is powerless; when, on the other hand, an actor exerts power it is others who perform the action. It appears that power is not something one can possess -indeed it must be treated as a consequence rather than as a cause of action. In order to explore this paradox a diffusion model of power in which a successful command moves under an impetus given it from a central source is contrasted with a translation model in which such a command, if it is successful, results from the actions of a chain of agents each of whom 'translates' it in accordance with his/her own projects. Since, in the translation model, power is composed here and now by enrolIing many actors in a given political and social scheme, and is not something that can be stored up and given to the powerful by a pre-existing 'society', it follows that debates about the origins of society, the nature of its components, and their relationships become crucial data for the sociologist. It also follows that the nature of society is negotiable, a practical and revisable matter (performative), and not something that can be determined once and for all by the sociologist who attempts to stand outside it (ostensive). The sociologist should, accordingly, seek to analyse the way in which people are associated together, and should, in particular, pay attention to the material and extrasomatic resources (including inscriptions) that offer ways of linking people that may last longer than any given interaction. In the translation model the study of society therefore moves from the study of the social as this is usually conceived, to a study of methods of association.

Science studies has often been against the normative dimension of epistemology, which made a naturalistic study of science impossible. But this is not to say that a new type of normativity cannot be detected at work inscience studies. This is especially true in the second wave of studies dealing with the body, which has aimed at criticizing the physicalization of the body without falling into the various traps of a phenomenology simply added to a physical substrate. This article explores the work of Isabelle Stengers and Vinciane Despret in that respect, and shows how it can be used to rethink the articulation between the various levels that make up a body.

Hal Foster explores the reasons behind the crisis of critical theory. He focuses on the critique levelled against criticism and critics, such as a postmodern depreciation of truth, or the fact that demystification becomes fetishized (Bruno Latour and Jacques Rancière). He argues that these arguments lead to a vicious circle, and that criticism is essentially indispensable for the functioning of art in the contemporary world.

This paper explores one after the other the four difficulties of actor‐network theory, that is the words ‘actor’, ‘network’ and ‘theory’—without forgetting the hyphen. It tries to refocus the originality of what is more a method to deploy the actor's own world building activities than an alternative social theory. Finally, it sketches some of its remaining potential.