Assemblage Theory, or, the Future of an Illusion

Abstract

If the development of assemblage theory does not need to be anchored in the work of Deleuze and Guattari, as increasingly seems to be the case in the social sciences, then cannot one say that the future of assemblage theory is an illusion? It is an illusion in the sense that it continues to act as though the concept was invented by Deleuze and Guattari, but because it does not feel obligated to draw on their work in its actual operation or development, it cannot lay claim to being authentic. That this does not trouble certain scholars in the social sciences is troubling to me. So in this paper I offer first of all critique of this illusory synthetic version of the assemblage and accompany that with a short case study showing what can be gained by returning to Deleuze and Guattari.

Re‐assembling climate change policy: Materialism, posthumanism, and the policy assemblage

“…New materialist ontology, meanwhile, shifts attention away from essentialist concerns with what entities such as bodies, animals, fossil fuels, atmospheric conditions and governments are , toward asking what they can do when engaging with other matter (Delanda, , p. 3; Deleuze, , p. 125). Events and interactions need to be understood as assemblages (Bennett, , p. 445), arrangements or orderings (Buchanan, , p. 465) of matter that are inherently fluid and continually in flux (Deleuze, , p. 128; Lemke, ). In place of “agency,” new materialism considers that all the disparate materialities within an assemblage are affective, meaning they manifest capacities to affect or be affected by other assembled relations (Deleuze, , p. 101): human bodies are no longer the prime movers within events.…”

“…Such a posthuman perspective de‐privileges human interests in relation to those of other animate and inanimate matter, while not denying continuing human involvement in the Earth’s ecosystem. In this view, the environment is an assemblage (Bennett, , p. 445) or arrangement (Buchanan, , p. 465) in which humans are an intrinsic element, rather than separate from or in opposition to it. We use this understanding as the starting point for our analysis of the complex physical, economic, social, and cultural production of anthropocentric climate change.…”

Assemblage Arrangement, or Manuel DeLanda’s Simulation of Ontology

“…С этой точки зрения реальность (вместе с ее объяснением) не может быть поделена по какому-либо признаку (принадлежности, функции), а равно и не может быть принята в качестве простой данности, сводимой к перечню атомарных фактов, чьи значения ясны еще до того, как их начинают объяснять. Однако их подходы отличаются тем, что АСТ реконструирует методы построения объектов, на абстрагировании отдельных черт которых построены теоретические предметности, будь то микробиология в случае Латура и медицинская практика в случае Аннмари Мол [Латур 2015; Мол 2018] [Buchanan 2015[Buchanan , 2017. АСТ, в свою очередь, имеет веские основания сомневаться в такой целостности, однако в не меньшей мере она имеет основания сомневаться в адекватности агрегированного представления объектов.…”

"More than just Space"

“…A creative hub (one thing) is a material form of a co-located space, where its inhabitants gather and collaborate to increase their social capital, exchange knowledge and experiences, experiment, and nurture their nascent companies. What makes this state of affairs function the way it does is its assemblage (another thing) Ð Òthe assemblage is a virtual entity with actual effectsÓ [11]. By suggesting we consider Òcreative hub as assemblageÓ we propose to think about creative hubs beyond their qualities at face value, but also in terms of the components that make them the way they are.…”