FRESH MUSEUM: Socioplastics * Actor-Network Theory

Socioplastics and Bruno Latour’s Actor-Network Theory share a common terrain: both treat reality as composed of heterogeneous actors whose relations generate meaning, stability, and power. ANT flattened ontology, refusing privileged subjects and urging scholars to “follow the actors,” tracing how associations assemble, translate, and hold. In this sense, Socioplastics inherits a decisive insight: infrastructure is never background; agency is distributed; meaning is topological rather than biographical. The shift from narrative subject to relational configuration—what might be called a move from biography to topology—clearly resonates with Latour’s method.

The divergence begins at the question of stability. ANT is primarily descriptive. It traces how networks form and how they temporarily stabilise, but it avoids imposing a sovereign centre. It values symmetry, translation, and fluid association. Socioplastics, by contrast, introduces a deliberate architectural move: after tracing the network, it installs invariance. It does not remain at the level of observation. It hardens a nucleus of operational protocols that remain unchanged across terrains. Where ANT resists closure, Socioplastics engineers it. Where ANT reveals contingency, Socioplastics constructs calibrated persistence. This difference is not a rejection but a post-ANT development. Early distributed phases may resemble rhizomatic emergence, yet consolidation into a governed environment marks a strategic turn. The aim is not merely to describe how networks hold together but to design conditions under which coherence can endure volatility—algorithmic instability, institutional fragmentation, semantic drift. ANT maps associations; Socioplastics builds a chassis. It transforms relational ontology into operational infrastructure. Thus the distinction is clear: ANT follows networks; Socioplastics intervenes within them. ANT privileges trace; Socioplastics adds calibrated invariance. If Latour taught us that reality is assembled, Socioplastics asks how such assemblies can persist without dissolving. It is not an opposition, but a continuation under altered conditions—an architectural response to a relational insight.

DECALOGUE