Critical making

Coined by Matt Ratto in the late 2000s to describe a mode of engagement bridging creative physical and conceptual exploration.

Process-oriented. Material engagement with technologies as a supplement to critical reflection?

Links with [[project-based-learning]], where the process of making is as important as the outputs.

• [&] Unlike bogostian carpentry, the prototypes here are a means to an end? They’re providing a surface and foci for a practice-based engagement with specific questions and issues.

Using a shared process of making as a common space for experimentation encourages the development of a collective frame while allowing disciplinary and epistemic differences to be both highlighted and hopefully overcome. — Matt Ratto, “Critical Making: Conceptual and Material Studies in Technology and Social Life” (2011)

A critical making project involves three stages, analytically though not functionally separable. The project may start from any of these. One stage involves the review of relevant literature and compilation of useful concepts and theories. This is mined for specific ideas that can be metaphorically “mapped” to material prototypes, and explored through fabrication. In another stage, groups of scholars, students, and/or stakeholders jointly design and build technical prototypes. Rather than being purposive or fully functional devices, prototype development is used to extend knowledge and skills in relevant technical areas as well as to provide the means for conceptual exploration. A third stage involves an iterative process of reconfiguration and conversation, and reflection begins. This process involves wrestling with the technical prototypes, exploring the various configurations and alternative possibilities, and using them to express, critique, and extend relevant concepts, theories, and models. — Matt Ratto, “Critical Making: Conceptual and Material Studies in Technology and Social Life” (2011)

Backlinks

: Bogostian carpentry : Critical technical practice