Page237

TheIdeaof"Technology"andPostmodernPessimism
LeoMarx
LeoMarxholdsthattheboundlessoptimismthatbolsteredthehopesofAmericans
untiltheSecondWorldWarhasdissipatedinto"widespreadsocialpessimism."The
reasonsforthischangeinattitude,accordingtoMarx,arecomplex.Theyaretobe
foundinspecifictechnologicaldisasters(ChernobylandThreeMileIsland),in
nationaltraumas(theVietnamWar),andmoregenerallyinalossoffaithin
technologyas"thedrivingforceofprogress."Marxplacesthischangeof
expectationsinhistoricalcontextbyexaminingtheroleofthemechanicalartsin
theprogressiveworldviewandshowinghow"boththecharacterandthe
representationof'technology'changedinthenineteenthcentury"fromdiscrete,
easilyidentifiableartifacts(suchassteamengines)toabstract,scientific,and
seeminglyneutralsystemsofproductionandcontrol.Withits"endlessreification"
inthelatenineteenthandearlytwentiethcenturies,thenewlyrefurbishedconcept
of"technology''becameinvestedwitha"hostofmetaphysicalpropertiesand
potencies"thatinvitedabeliefinitasanautonomousagentofsocialchange.By
mystifyingtechnologyandattributingtoitpowersthatborderedonidolatry,mid
twentiethcenturyAmericanssetthemselvesupforafallthatprepared"thewayfor
anincreasinglypessimisticsenseofthetechnologicaldeterminationofhistory."
Marxconcludesthatpostmodernistcriticism,withitsratificationof"theideaofthe
dominationoflifebylargetechnologicalsystems,"perpetuatesthecredibilityof
technologicaldeterminism.
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:26 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page238
Thefactorinthemodernsituationthatisalientotheancientregimeisthemachine
technology,withitsmanyandwideramifications.
ThorsteinVeblen(1904)
1
"TechnologicalPessimism"andContemporaryHistory
"Technologicalpessimism"maybeanovelterm,butmostofusseemto
understandwhatitmeans.
2
Itsurelyreferstothatsenseofdisappointment,
anxiety,evenmenace,thattheideaof"technology"arousesinmanypeople
thesedays.Buttherealsoissomethingparadoxicalabouttheimplicationthat
technologyisresponsiblefortoday'sgrowingsocialpessimism.Themodern
era,afterall,hasbeenmarkedbyaseriesofspectacularscientificand
technologicalbreakthroughsconsidertheastonishingtechnicalinnovationsof
thelastcenturyinmedicine,chemistry,aviation,electronics,atomicenergy,
spaceexploration,andgeneticengineering.Isn'titodd,then,toattribute
today'swidespreadgloomtothepresumedmeansofachievingallthose
advances:anabstractentitycalled''technology"?
Apredictablerejoinder,ofcourse,isthatinrecentdecadesthatsameentity
alsohasbeenimplicatedinaspectacularseriesofdisasters:Hiroshima,the
nucleararmsrace,theAmericanwarinVietnam,Chernobyl,Bhopal,the
Exxonoilspill,acidrain,globalwarming,ozonedepletion.Eachofthesewas
closelytiedtotheuseorthemisuse,theunforeseenconsequencesorthe
malfunctions,ofrelativelynewandpowerfulsciencebasedtechnologies.Even
ifwefullycreditthetechnicalachievementsofmodernity,theirseemingly
destructivesocialandecologicalconsequences(orsideeffects)havebeen
sufficientlyconspicuoustoaccountformuchoftoday's"technological
pessimism.
Onereasonweareambivalentabouttheeffectsoftechnologyingeneralisthat
itisdifficulttobeclearabouttheconsequencesofparticularkindsoftechnical
innovation.Take,forexample,modern
1.ThorsteinVeblen,TheTheoryofBusinessEnterprise(Scribner,1904Mentor,
1932),p.144.
2.Idon'trecalleverseeingtheterminprint,butIdidcontributeapaper,("American
LiteraryCultureandtheFatalisticViewofTechnology")toaconferenceon
"TechnologyandPessimism,"sponsoredbytheCollegeofEngineeringatthe
UniversityofMichigan,in1979.SeeLeoMarx,ThePilotandthePassenger:Essays
onLiterature,Technology,andCultureintheUnitedStates(OxfordUniversity
Press,1988).
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:26 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page239
advancesinmedicineandsocialhygiene.Thisisperhapsthemostwidely
admiredrealmofsciencebasedtechnologicaladvancesnonetheless,itisoften
saidtodaythatthoseallegedadvancesareasmuchacurseasablessing.In
privilegedsocieties,tobesure,medicalprogresshascurbedoreliminated
manydiseases,prolongedlife,andloweredthedeathrateinlargepartsofthe
underdevelopedworld,however,thoseveryachievementshavesetoffa
frighteningandpossiblycatastrophicgrowthinthepopulation,withallitsgrim
ramifications.Isitanywonder,inviewoftheplausibilityofthatgloomyview,
thatadvancesinmedicinemayissueinpessimismaswellasoptimism?
Onreflection,however,suchinconclusiveassessmentsseemcrudeand
ahistorical.Theysufferfromapresentistfallacylikethatwhichcastsdoubton
theresultsofmuchpublicopinionpolling.Itisillusorytosupposethatwecan
isolateforanalysistheimmediate,directresponsestospecificinnovations.
Invariablypeople'sresponsestothenewtochangeseffectedby,say,a
specifictechnicalinnovationaremediatedbyolderattitudes.Whatevertheir
apparentspontaneity,suchresponsesusuallyprovetohavebeenshapedby
significantmeanings,values,andbeliefsthatstemfromthepast.Agroup's
responsestoaninstanceofmedicalprogresscannotbeunderstoodapartfrom
thehistoricalcontext,orapartfromtheexpectationsgeneratedbythebelief
thatmoderntechnologyisthedrivingforceofprogress.
TechnologicalPessimismandtheProgressiveWorldPicture
Thecurrentsurgeof"technologicalpessimism"inadvancedsocietiesisclosely
boundupwiththecentralplaceaccordedtothemechanicartsinthe
progressiveworldpicture.ThatimageofrealityhasdominatedWestern
secularthoughtforsometwoandahalfcenturies.Itsnucleuswasformed
aroundthelateeighteenthcenturyideathatmodernhistoryitselfisarecordof
progress.(Intheculturesofmodernity,conceptionsofhistoryserveafunction
likethatservedbymythsoforiginintraditionalcultures:Theyprovidethe
organizingframe,orbindingmetanarrative,fortheentirebeliefsystem.)Much
oftheextravaganthopegeneratedbytheEnlightenmentprojectderivedfroma
trustinthevirtuallylimitlessexpansionofnewknowledgeofandthus
enhancedpowerovernature.Atbottomthishistoricaloptimismrestedupon
anewconfidenceinhumankind's
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:26 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page240
capacity,asexemplifiedaboveallbyNewtonianphysicsandthenew
mechanizedmotivepower,todiscoverandputtousetheessentialorderthe
basic"laws"ofNature.Theexpectedresultwastobeasteady,continuous,
cumulativeimprovementinallconditionsoflife.Whatrequiresemphasishere,
however,isthatadvancesofscienceandthepracticalartsweresingledoutas
theprimary,peculiarlyefficacious,agentofprogress.
InthediscourseoftheeducatedeliteoftheWestbetween1750and1850,the
ideaofprogressoftenseemstohavebeenexemplifiedbyadvancesinscientific
knowledgeatmorepopularlevelsofculture,however,progressmoreoften
wasexemplifiedbyinnovationsinthefamiliarpracticalarts.Whereas"science"
wasidentifiedwithabodyofcertain,mathematicallyverifiableknowledge
abstract,intangible,andreconditethemechanicartswereassociatedwiththe
commonsensepracticalityofeverydayartisanallifeasrepresentedbytools,
instruments,ormachines.Nothingprovidedmoretangible,vivid,compelling
iconsforrepresentingtheforwardcourseofhistorythanrecentmechanical
improvementslikethesteamengine.
3
Arecognitionofthecentralpartthatthepracticalartswereexpectedtoplayin
carryingouttheprogressiveagendaisessentialforanunderstandingoftoday's
growingsenseoftechnologicaldeterminismandpessimism.TheWest's
dominantbeliefsystem,infact,turnedontheideaoftechnicalinnovationasa
primaryagentofprogress.NothinginthatEnlightenmentworldpicture
prepareditsadherentsfortheshockingseriesoftwentiethcenturydisasters
linkedwithandoftenseeminglycausedbythenewtechnologies.Quitethe
contrary.Withtheincreasinglyfrequentoccurrenceofthesefrighteningevents
sinceHiroshima,moreandmorepeopleinthe"advanced"societieshavehad
toconsiderthepossibilitythattheprogressiveagenda,withitspromiseof
limitlessgrowthandacontinuingimprovementintheconditionsoflifefor
everyone,hasnotbeenandperhapsneverwillberealized.
4
Thesudden
dashingof
3.Thus,Diderot'sEncyclopedia,aworkthatepitomizesEnlightenmentwisdom
andoptimism,isavirtualhandbookoftechnologies,mostofthemofmodern
origin.
4.IntheUnitedStates,politiciansliketocalltheprogressiveagenda"theAmerican
Dream."Itisworthnotingthatinthe1992electioncampaignastockargumentof
theDemocratswasthatthecurrentgenerationmaywellbe"thefirstwhosechildren
aregoingtobelesswelloffthanthemselves."
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:26 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page241
thoselongheldhopessurelyaccountsformuchoftoday'swidespread
technologicalpessimism.
Allofthismaybeobvious,butitdoesnotprovideanadequatehistorical
explanation.Tounderstandwhytoday'ssocialpessimismissocloselybound
upwiththeideaoftechnology,itisnecessarytorecognizehowboththe
characterandtherepresentationof"technology"changedinthenineteenth
century.Ofthetwomajorchanges,onewasprimarilymaterialorartifactualit
hadtodowiththeintroductionofmechanical(and,later,chemicaland
electrical)powerandwiththeconsequentdevelopmentoflargescale,
complex,hierarchical,centralizedsystemssuchasrailroadsorelectricpower
systems.Thesecond,relateddevelopmentwasideologicalitentailedthe
atrophyoftheEnlightenmentideaofprogressdirectedtowardamorejust,
republicansociety,anditsgradualreplacementbyapoliticallyneutral,
technocraticideaofprogresswhosegoalwasthecontinuingimprovementof
technology.Buttheimprovementoftechnologyalsocametobeseenasthe
chiefagentofchangeinanincreasinglydeterministicviewofhistory.
Understandingthesechangesiscomplicated,however,bythefactthatthe
mostfittinglanguagefordescribingthemcameintobeingasaresultof,and
indeedlargelyinresponseto,theseverychanges.
5
Thecrucialcaseisthatof
"technology"itself.Tobesure,weintuitivelyaccountforthecurrencyofthe
wordinitsbroadmodernsenseasanobviousreflexoftheincreasing
proliferation,inthenineteenthcentury,ofnewandmorepowerfulmachinery.
But,again,thattruismisnotanadequatehistoricalexplanation.Itreveals
nothingaboutthepreconditionsthespecificconceptualorexpressiveneeds
unsatisfiedbythepreviouslyexistingvocabularythatcalledforththisnew
word.Suchaninquiryisnottrivial,norisit"merely"semantic.Thegenesisof
thisconcept,asembodiedinitselusive
5.AsRaymondWilliamsfamouslydiscovered,thisdilemmainvariablyaffects
effortstointerprettheculturaltransformationboundupwiththeonsetofurban
industrialcapitalism.Hisownstudyturnedonfivekeywords("culture,"
"industry,""class,""art,"and"democracy'')whosemodernmeaningsand
whosecurrencyderivedfromtheveryhistoricaldevelopmentshewas
interpreting.Thisis,ofcourse,thehistoricalbasisforthe"hermeneutical
circle,"whichsomeregardasvitiatingallresearchinthehumanities.Seethe
prefacetoWilliams'sbookCultureandSociety(ColumbiaUniversityPress,
1960).
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:26 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page242
prehistory,isadistinctivefeatureoftheonsetofmodernity.
6
Notonlywillit
illuminatetheriseof"technologicalpessimism,"butitwillhelpustoseethat
thatphenomenon,farfrombeingadirectreflexofrecentevents,isanoutcome
oftheverydevelopmentsthatcalledintobeing,amongothersalientfeaturesof
modernity,theideaof"technology."
TheChangingCharacterofthe"MechanicArts"andtheInventionof
"Technology"
WhentheEnlightenmentprojectwasbeingformulated,after1750,theideaof
"technology"intoday'sbroadsenseoftheworddidnotyetexist.Foranother
century,moreorless,theartifacts,theknowledge,andthepracticeslatertobe
embracedby"technology"wouldcontinuetobethoughtofasbelongingtoa
specialbranchoftheartsvariouslyknownasthe"mechanic"(or"practical,"or
''industrial,"or"useful")asdistinctfromthe"fine"(or"high,"or"creative,"or
"imaginative")arts.Suchterms,builtwithvariousadjectivalmodifiersof"art,"
thenwerethenearestavailableapproximationsoftoday'sabstractnoun
"technology"theyreferredtotheknowledgeandpracticeofthecrafts.By
comparisonwith"technology,""thepracticalarts"anditsvariantsconstituteda
morelimitedandlimiting,evendiminishing,category.Ifonlybecauseitwas
explicitlydesignatedasoneofseveralsubordinatepartsofsomethingelse,
suchaspecializedbranchofartwas,ascomparedwiththetacituniqueness
andunityof"technology,"inherentlybelittling.Eversinceantiquity,moreover,
thehabitofseparatingthepracticalandthefineartshadservedtoratifyaset
ofoverlappingandinvidiousdistinctions:betweenthingsandideas,thephysical
andthemental,themundaneandtheideal,femaleandmale,makingand
thinking,theworkofenslavedandoffreemen.Thisderogatorylegacywasin
somemeasureerased,oratleastmasked,bythemoreabstract,cerebral,
neutralword"technology."Theterm"mechanicarts"callstomindmenwith
6.Tobesure,theprehistoryofallwords,perhapsespeciallyallnouns,is
elusive,fortheinvestigatormustdevisewaysofreferringtothatforwhich
adequatenameswereconspicuouslylacking.Weneedacomprehensivehistory
oftheword"technology"aprojectthatis,orshouldbe,ofprimaryconcernto
practitionersofthatrelativelynew,specializedbranchofhistoricalstudies,the
historyoftechnology.
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:26 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page243
soiledhandstinkeringwithmachinesatworkbenches,whereas"technology"
conjuresupimagesofclean,welleducatedtechniciansgazingatdials,
instrumentpanels,orcomputermonitors.
Thesechangesintherepresentationoftechnicalpracticesweremadein
responsetoamarkedaccelerationintherateofinitiatingnewmechanicalor
otherdevicesandnewwaysoforganizingwork.Duringtheearlyphaseof
industrialization(ca.17801850inEngland,ca.18201890intheUnited
States),themanufacturingrealmhadbeenrepresentedinpopulardiscourseby
imagesofthelatestmechanicalinventions:watermill,cottongin,powerloom,
spinningjenney,steamengine,steamboat,locomotive,railroad"trainofcars,"
telegraph,factory.Thetangible,manifestlypracticalcharacteroftheseartifacts
matchedthecentralroleaschiefagentofprogressaccordedtoinstrumental
rationalityanditsequipment.Thusthelocomotive(or"ironhorse")oftenwas
invokedtosymbolizethecapacityofcommonsensical,matteroffact,
verifiableknowledgetoharnesstheenergiesofnature.Itwasroutinely
depictedasadrivingforceofhistory.Or,putdifferently,thesenewartifacts
representedtheinnovativemeansofarrivingatasociallyandpoliticallydefined
goal.ForardentexponentsoftherationalEnlightenment,thechiefgoalwasa
morejust,morepeaceful,andlesshierarchicalrepublicansocietybasedonthe
consentofthegoverned.
Asthisindustrialiconographysuggests,themechanicartswerewidelyviewed
asaprimaryagentofsocialchange.Theseiconsoftenwereinvokedwith
metonymicalimporttorepresentanentireclassofsimilarartifacts,suchas
mechanicalinventionsorthereplacementofwoodbymetalconstructionor
thedisplacementofhuman,animal,orothernaturalenergysources(wateror
wind)byenginesrunbymechanizedmotivepowerorsomespecific,
distinctivefeatureoftheera("theannihilationofspaceandtime,""TheAgeof
Steam,")or,mostinclusive,thatfeature'sgeneraluniqueness(the"Industrial
Revolution").Thus,whenThomasCarlyleannouncedattheoutsetofhis
seminal1829essay"SignsoftheTimes"that,ifaskedtonametheoncoming
age,hewouldcallit''TheAgeofMachinery,"hewasnotmerelyreferringto
actual,physicalmachines,oreventothefactoftheirproliferation.
7
Hehadin
mindaradicallynewkindofensembletypifiedby,butbynomeansrestricted
to,actualmechanical
7.ThomasCarlyle,CriticalandMiscellaneousEssays(Bedford,Clark&Co.,
n.d.),III,pp.530.
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:26 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page244
artifacts."Machinery,"asinvokedbyCarlyle(andsoonafterbymanyothers),
hadbothmaterialandideal(mental)referentsitsimultaneouslyreferredto(1)
the"mechanicalphilosophy,"anempiricalmentalityassociatedwithDescartes
andLockeandwiththenewscience,notablyNewtonianphysics(2)thenew
practical,orindustrial,arts(especiallythoseusingmechanizedmotivepower)
(3)thesystematicdivisionoflabor(theworkersascogsintheproductive
machinery)and(4)anewkindofimpersonal,hierarchical,orbureaucratic
organization,allofwhichcouldbesaidtoexhibitthepowerof"mechanism."
Carlyle'sessayisanearly,eloquenttestimonialtotheexistenceofasemantic
voidandtothedesiretofillitwithamoreinclusive,scientistic,anddistinctive
conceptionofthesenewhumanpowersthanwassignifiedbythemost
inclusivetermthenavailable,"themechanicarts."
Duringthenineteenthcentury,discreteartifactsormachineswerereplaced,as
typicalembodimentsofthenewpower,bywhatlaterwouldcometobecalled
"technologicalsystems."
8
Itisevidentinretrospectthatthesteampowered
locomotive,probablythenineteenthcentury'sleadingimageofprogress,did
notadequatelyrepresentthemanifoldcharacterorthecomplexityofthe
mechanicartoftransportingpersonsandgoodsbysteampoweredengines
movingwagonsoverafarflungnetworkofironrails.Torepresentsuch
complexity,thatimageofalocomotivewasnomoreadequatethantheterm
"mechanicart."AsAlfredChandlerandothershaveargued,therailroad
probablywasthefirstofthelargescale,complex,fullfledgedtechnological
systems.
9
Inadditiontotheenginesandother
8.Forthemodernconcept,seeJacquesEllul,TheTechnologicalSystem,J.
Neugroschel(Continuum,1980)forarecentapplicationoftheconceptto
Americanhistory,seeThomasP.Hughes,AmericanGenesis:ACenturyof
InventionandTechnologicalEnthusiasm(Viking,1989).Butsomeearliersocial
theoristswhodidnotusethesametermnonethelessanticipatedmostfeatures
oftheconcept.Fewnineteenthcenturythinkersdevotedmoreattentiontowhat
wecall"technology"thanKarlMarxbutthoughhedescribedindustrial
machineryasembeddedinthesocialrelationsandtheeconomicorganizationof
aneconomydominatedbytheflowofcapital,hestillrelied,aslateasthefirst
(1867)editionofCapital,on"machinery,""factorymechanism,"andother
relicsoftheoldmechanisticlexicon:"Inmanufacturetheworkmenarepartsofa
livingmechanism.Inthefactorywehavealifelessmechanismindependentof
theworkman,whobecomesitsmerelivingappendage."(RobertC.Tucker,ed.,
TheMarxEngelsReader(Norton,1972),pp.296297)
9.RosalindWilliams("CulturalOriginsandEnvironmentalImplicationsof
(footnotecontinuedonthenextpage)
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:26 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page245
materialequipment(rollingstock,stations,yards,signalingdevices,fuel
supplies,thenetworkoftracks),arailroadcomprisedacorporate
organization,alargecapitalinvestment,andagreatmanyspeciallytrained
managers,engineers,telegraphers,conductors,andmechanics.Becausea
railroadoperatedoveralargegeographicalarea,24hoursaday,everydayof
theyear,inallkindsofweather,itbecamenecessarytodevelopan
impersonal,expertcohortofprofessionalmanagers,andtoreplacethe
traditionalorganizationofthefamilyownedandoperatedfirmwiththatofthe
largescale,centralized,hierarchical,bureaucraticcorporation.
Between1870and1920suchlargecomplexsystemsbecameadominant
elementintheAmericaneconomy.Althoughtheyresembledtherailroadin
scale,organization,andcomplexity,manyreliedonnewnonmechanicalforms
ofpower.Theyincludedthetelegraphandtelephonenetworkthenew
chemicalindustryelectriclightandpowergridsandsuchlinkedmass
productionandusesystemsastheautomobileindustry(sometimescalledthe
"American"or"Fordist"system),whichinvolvedtheancillaryproductionof
rubbertires,steel,andglassandwhichwasfurtherlinkedwiththepetroleum,
highwayconstruction,andtruckingindustries.Intheerawhenelectricaland
chemicalpowerwerebeingintroduced,andwhenthesehugesystemswere
replacingdiscreteartifacts,simpletools,ordevicesasthechar
(footnotecontinuedfromthepreviouspage)
LargeTechnologicalSystems,"ScienceinContext6(August1993):75101)
arguesforamuchearlieroriginforthesesystems.Shetracestheirgenesisto
eighteenthcenturyEnlightenmentphilosopherslikeTurgotandCondorcet,
whowerecommittedtothe"ideologyofcirculation."Theyidentifiedthe
Enlightenmentwiththesystemicdiffusionofideasandobjectsinspace:ideas
throughglobalsystemsofcommunication,andobjectsbymeansof
transportation(road)grids,forthecirculationofpeopleandgoods.Whatisnot
clear,however,istheextenttowhichcirculatorysystemsofthiskindareto
bethoughtofasspecificallymodern,specificallytechnological,innovations.
Afterall,theRomansbuiltsimilarlycomplextransportationandcommunication
networks.Ifthepointmerelyisthateighteenthcenturytheoriesabout
circulatorysystemsanticipatedsomefeaturesespeciallythesystemic
characterofmoderntechnologies,theargumentispersuasive.Butthe
systemsdescribedinthesetheoriesexistedprimarilyinconceptualform,and
sincetheyinvolvednosignificantmaterialorartifactualinnovationsitseems
misleadingtothinkofthemasinnovative"technologicalsystems"suchasthe
railroadwas.Asystemis"technological,"inmyview,onlyifitincludesa
significantmaterialorartifactualcomponent.MichelFoucault,whofirstcalled
attentiontothesetheoriesofcirculation,mayhaveinitiatedthisidealistmodeof
interpretingtheirsignificance.
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:26 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page246
acteristicmaterialformofthe"mechanicarts,"thelattertermalsowasbeing
replacedbyanewconception:"technology."
10
Theadventofthistypicallyabstractmodernconceptcoincidedwiththe
increasingcontroloftheAmericaneconomybythegreatcorporations.In
Westerncapitalistsocieties,indeed,mosttechnologicalsystems(savefor
stateoperatedutilityandmilitarysystems)werethelegalpropertyofwere
organizedasindependentlyownedcorporationsforoperationwithinthe
rules,andforthepurposes,ofminorityownership.Thus,mostofthenew
technologicalsystemswereoperatedwithaviewtomaximizingeconomic
growthasmeasuredbycorporatemarketshareandprofitability.Atthesame
time,eachcorporationpresumablywasenhancingthenation'scollectivewealth
andpower.AlanTrachtenberghasaptlycalledthisfusionofthenation's
technological,economic,andpoliticalsystems"theincorporationof
America."
11
Bythelatenineteenthcentury,ThorsteinVeblen,anexponentof
instrumentalrationality,ruefullyobservedthatundertheregimeoflargescale
businessenterprisetheostensiblevaluesofsciencebasedtechnology(matter
offactrationality,efficiency,productivity,precision,conceptualparsimony)
werebeingsacrificedtothoseoftheminorityowners:profitability,thedisplay
ofconspicuousconsumption,leisureclassstatus,andthebuildingofprivate
fortunes.Buttheabstract,sociologicallyandpoliticallyneutral(onemightsay
neutered)word"technology,"withitstacitclaimto
10.Inexplainingtheoriginofthemodernstyleofcorporatemanagement,Alfred
D.Chandlerdescribesithashavingbeen"demanded"bythe"technological"
characteroftherailroadsystem.Mechanicalcomplexity,andtheconsequent
needforimmensecapitalinvestment,werekeyfactorsincallingforthanewkind
oforganizationandmanagement.Whatrequiresemphasishere,however,isthat
theeffectiveagentofchangeinChandler'swidelyacceptedanalysisthechief
causeoftheshift,asrepresentativeofthetechnical,fromsingleartifactto
systemistheradicallynewmaterial,orartifactual,characteroftherailroad.
(SeeChandler,TheVisibleHand:TheManagerialRevolutioninAmerican
Business(HarvardUniversityPress,1977),p.87ff.andpassim.)Historiansdiffer
intheiraccountsofthegenesisofthenewsystems.ThomasHughes,in
AmericanGenesis(Viking,1989)emphasizeschangesinmodesoforganization
andmanagement(p.184ff.),whereasChandler(whoseexample,therailroad,
belongstotheearliermechanicalphase)emphasizesamaterialorartifactual
change,especiallyfrommechanicaltoelectricalandchemicalprocess.
11.AlanTrachtenberg,TheIncorporationofAmerica(HillandWang,1982).
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:26 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page247
beingadistinctive,independentmodeofthoughtandpracticelike"science,"is
unmarkedbyaparticularsocioeconomicregime.
AlthoughtheEnglishword"technology"(derivedfromtheGreekteckhne,
"art"or"craft")hadbeenavailablesincetheseventeenthcentury,duringmost
ofthenexttwocenturiesithadreferredspecificallyandalmostexclusivelyto
technicaldiscoursesortreatises)
12
Inviewofthewayhistoriansnowroutinely
projectthewordbackintotherelativelyremotepast,itissurprisingto
discoverhowrecentlytoday'sbroadsenseof"technology"achievedcurrency.
Itwasseldomusedbefore1880.Indeed,thefoundingoftheMassachusetts
InstituteofTechnologyin1861seemstohavebeenalandmark,ahalfway
station,initshistoryhowever,theOxfordEnglishDictionarycitesR.F.
Burton'suseof"technology''in1859torefertothe"practicalartscollectively"
astheearliestEnglishinstanceoftheinclusivemodernusage.(Itisimportantto
recognizetheexactnatureofthischange:insteadofbeingusedtorefertoa
writtenwork,suchasatreatise,aboutthepracticalarts,"technology"nowwas
usedtoreferdirectlytotheartsincludingtheactualpracticeand
practitionersthemselves.)
Thatthisbroader,modernsenseof"technology"wasjustemergingatthe
middleofthenineteenthcenturyisfurtherindicatedbythefactthatKarl
Marx
13
andArnoldToynbee,whoweredeeplyconcernedaboutthechanges
effectedbythenewmachinepower,didnotusetheword.Atpointsinhis
influentiallecturesontheIndustrialRevolution(composedin188081)where
"technology"wouldhavebeenapposite,Toynbee,aneconomichistorian,
reliedonotherterms:"mechanicaldiscoveries,""machinery,""mechanical
improvements,""mechanicalinventions,""factorysystem."
14
Yetwithin20
12.TheOEDgives1615asthedateoftheword'sfirstuseinEnglish,meaninga
discourseortreatiseonthearts.See"Technology"inthe1955ShorterOxford
EnglishDictionary.AHarvardprofessor,JacobBigelow,hasbeencredited
withanticipatingthemodernmeaningofthewordinhis1829bookElementsof
Technology,TakenChieflyfromaCourseofLectures...ontheApplicationof
theSciencestotheUsefulArts.(SeeDirkJ.Struik,YankeeScienceinthe
Making(Little,Brown,1948),pp.169170.)Althoughthescopeoftheword's
meaninghasexpandedsteadily,myimpressionisthatitscurrentmeaning
retainsitsessentialetymologicallinkstothepracticalartsandthematerial
world.
13.OnMarx'stechnologicalvocabulary,seenote8above.
14.ArnoldToynbee,TheIndustrialRevolution(Beacon,1960),esp.pp.63
(footnotecontinuedonthenextpage)
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:27 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page248
yearsVeblenwouldbesuggestingthatthe"machinetechnology"wasthe
distinguishingfeatureofmodernity.
15
Myimpressionis,however,that
"technology"intoday'ssingular,inclusivesensedidnotgaintrulywidecurrency
untilafterWorldWarI,andperhapsnotuntiltheGreatDepression.
Theadventof"technology"astheacceptednamefortherealmofthe
instrumentalhadmanyramifications.Itsrelativeabstractness,ascompared
with"themechanicarts,"hadakindofrefining,idealizing,orpurifyingeffect
uponourincreasinglyelaboratecontrivancesformanipulatingtheobjectworld,
therebyprotectingthemfromWesternculture'sancientfearofcontamination
byphysicalityandwork.Anauraofimpartialcerebrationandrational
detachmentreplacedthesensoryassociationsthatformerlyhadboundthe
mechanicartstoeverydaylife,artisanalskills,tools,work,andtheegalitarian
ethosoftheearlyrepublic.Inrecognizingthemasteryofvarioustechnologies
asalegitimatepursuitofhigherlearning,theuniversitiesratifiedthatshiftfrom
thecraftethosofthemechanicartstothemeritocraticaspirationsofthe
engineeringandmanagementprofessions.Thelackofsensuousspecificity
attachedtothenoun"technology,"itsbloodlessgenerality,anditscommonuse
inthemoregeneralizedsingularformmakethewordconducivetoarangeof
referencefarbeyondthatavailabletothehumdrumparticularitiesof"the
mechanicarts"or"theindustrialarts.''Thoseconcretecategoriescouldnot
simultaneouslyrepresent(aseither"technology"or,say,"computertechnology"
cananddoes)aparticularkindofdevice,aspecializedformoftheoretical
knowledgeorexpertise,adistinctivementalstyle,andauniquesetofskillsand
practices.
16
(footnotecontinuedfromthepreviouspage)
66.Toynbeewasnottimidaboutusingneworunconventionalterminology,and
indeedtheselectureswereextremelyinfluentialingivingcurrencytothestill
novelconceptofan"industrialrevolution."Aslateastheeleventh(1911)
edition,theEncyclopaediaBritannica,whichcontainednoseparateentryon
technology,"wasstilloffering"technological"asapossiblealternativetothe
preferred"technical"intheentryfor"TechnicalEducation"(volume26,p.487).
15.Seenote1above.Amongotherobviousindicationsthattheconceptwasthen
initsearly,avantgardestageofdevelopmentisthewayunconventionalwriters
andartistsoftheperiodHermanMelville,HenryAdams,andOswaldSpengler,or
theItalianFuturistsandCubists,or(inthenextgeneration)HartCraneandCharlie
Chaplinusedtechnologicalimagestocharacterizethedistinctivenessof
modernity.
16.Itisinstructivetonoticehowfewofthecommonplacestatementsmade
(footnotecontinuedonthenextpage)
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:27 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page249
Perhapsthecrucialdifferenceisthattheconceptof"technology,"withitswider
scopeofreference,islesscloselyidentifiedwithordefinedbyitsmaterial
orartifactualaspectthanwas"themechanicarts."Thisfactcomportswiththe
materialrealityofthelargeandcomplexnewtechnologicalsystems,inwhich
theboundarybetweentheintricatelyinterlinkedartifactualandother
componentsconceptual,institutional,humanisblurredandofteninvisible.
Whenwerefertosuchsystems,ascomparedwith,say,carpentry,pottery,
glassmaking,ormachinetooloperating,theartifactualaspectisarelatively
smallpartofwhatcomesbeforethemind.Byvirtueofitsabstractnessand
inclusiveness,anditscapacitytoevoketheinextricableinterpenetrationof(for
example)thepowersofthecomputerwiththebureaucraticpracticesoflarge
moderninstitutions,"technology''(withnospecifyingadjective)invitesendless
reification.Theconceptreferstonospecifiableinstitution,nordoesitevoke
anydistinctassociationsofplaceorofpersonsbelongingtoanyparticular
nation,ethnicgroup,race,class,orgender.Acommontendencyof
contemporarydiscourse,accordingly,istoinvest"technology"withahostof
metaphysicalpropertiesandpotencies,therebymakingitseemtobea
determinateentity,adisembodiedautonomouscausalagentofsocialchange
ofhistory.Hencetheillusionthattechnologydriveshistory.Ofallitsattributes,
thishospitalitytomystificationtotechnologicaldeterminismmaywellbethe
onethathascontributedmosttopostmodernpessimism.
FromtheRepublicantotheTechnocraticIdeaofProgress
Asthefirstcomplextechnologicalsystemswerebeingassembled,andasthe
newconceptoftechnologywasbeingconstructed,arelatedchangewas
occurringwithintheideologyofprogress.Itentailedasubtleredescriptionof
thehistoricalroleofthepracticalarts.Originally,asconceivedbysuch
exponentsoftheradicalEnlightenmentasTurgot,Condorcet,Paine,Priestley,
Franklin,andJefferson,innovationsinscienceandinthemechanicartswere
regardedasnecessaryyetnecessarilyinsufficientmeansofachievinggeneral
progress.
17
To
(footnotecontinuedfromthepreviouspage)
nowadaysabouttheimportof"technology"actuallyareapplicabletotheentire
rangeofexistingtechnologiesmedical,military,electronic,domestic,
biogenetic,contraceptive,etc.
17.Noticethetwodistinctusesof"progress"here,eachwithamarkedly
(footnotecontinuedonthenextpage)
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:27 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page250
therepublicanrevolutionariesoftheEnlightenment(especiallytheradical
philosophes),scienceandthepracticalartswereinstrumentsofpolitical
liberationtoolsforarrivingattheidealgoalofprogress:amorejust,more
peaceful,andlesshierarchicalrepublicansocietybasedontheconsentofthe
governed.
18
Theideaofhistoryasarecordofprogressdrivenbytheapplicationof
sciencebasedknowledgewasnotsimplyanotherideaamongmany.Ratherit
wasafigurativeconceptlodgedatthecenterofwhatbecame,sometimeafter
1750,thedominantsecularworldpictureofWesternculture.Thatitwasno
mererationalefordominationbyaprivilegedbourgeoisieissuggestedbythe
factthatitwasasfondlyembracedbythehostilecriticsasbytheardent
exponentsofindustrialcapitalism.MarxandEngels,whodevelopedthemost
systematic,influential,politicallysophisticatedcritiqueofthatregime,were
deeplycommittedtotheideathathistoryisarecordofcumulativeprogress.In
theirview,thecriticalfactorinhumandevelopmentthecounterpartinhuman
historyofDarwiniannaturalselectioninnaturalhistoryisthemoreorless
continuousgrowthofhumanity'sproductivecapacity.Butofcoursetheyadded
apoliticalstipulation,namelythattheproletariatwouldhavetoseizestate
powerbyrevolutionifhumanitywastorealizetheuniversalpromiseinherentin
itsgrowingpowerovernature.TolaterfollowersofMarxandEngels,the
mostaptnameofthatpowerleadingtocommunism,thepoliticalgoalof
progressofhistoryis"technology."
19
Buttheadventoftheconceptoftechnology,andoftheorganizationof
complextechnologicalsystems,coincidedwith,andnodoubt
(footnotecontinuedfromthepreviouspage)
differentscopeofreference:(1)thebounded,internal,verifiable,kindof
improvementachievablewithinaparticularpractice,suchasprogressin
mathematics,physics,medicine,overlandtransportation,ortextileproduction
thecumulativeeffectofsuchmanifoldkindsofprogressdoubtlesscreatedthe
conditionsforusingthewordwithamuchlargerscopeofreference:(2)a
generalimprovementintheconditionsoflifeforallofhumanity,hencea
presumedattributeofthecourseofeventsofhistoryitself.
18.Ihavesummarizedthisunoriginalinterpretationinsomewhatgreaterdetailin
"DoesImprovedTechnologyMeanProgress?"TechnologyReview(January1987):
3371.
19.G.M.Cohen,inKarlMarx'sTheoryofHistory(Clarendon,1978),makesastrong
casefortheviewthatMarx'sconceptionofhistorywasessentiallyaversionof
technologicaldeterminism.
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:27 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page251
contributedto,asubtlerevisionoftheideologyofprogress.Technologynow
tookonamuchgranderroleinthelargerhistoricalschemegrander,thatis,
thantherolethatoriginallyhadbeenassignedtothepracticalarts.Toleaders
oftheradicalEnlightenmentlikeJeffersonandFranklin,thechiefvalueofthose
artswasinprovidingthematerialmeansofaccomplishingwhatreallymattered:
thebuildingofajust,republicansociety.Afterthesuccessfulbourgeois
revolutions,however,manycitizens,especiallythemerchants,industrialists,
andotherrelativelyprivilegedpeople(predominantlywhiteandmale,of
course),tookthenewsociety'sabilitytoreachthatpoliticalgoalforgranted.
Theyassumed,notimplausiblyfromtheirvantages,thatthegoalalreadywas
withinrelativelyeasyreach.Whatnowwasimportant,especiallyfroman
entrepreneurialviewpoint,wasperfectingthemeans.Butthegrowingscope
andintegrationofthenewsystemsmadeitincreasinglydifficulttodistinguish
betweenthematerial(artifactualortechnical)andtheotherorganizational
(managerialorfinancial)componentsof"technology."Atthistime,accordingly,
thesimplerepublicanformulaforgeneratingprogressbydirectingimproved
technicalmeanstosocietalendswasimperceptiblytransformedintoaquite
differenttechnocraticcommitmenttoimproving"technology"asthebasisand
themeasureofasallbutconstitutingtheprogressofsociety.This
technocraticideamaybeseenasanultimate,culminatingexpressionofthe
optimistic,universalistaspirationsofEnlightenmentrationalism.Butittacitly
replacedpoliticalaspirationswithtechnicalinnovationasaprimaryagentof
change,therebypreparingthewayforanincreasinglypessimisticsenseofthe
technologicaldeterminationofhistory.
TheculturalmodernismoftheWestintheearlytwentiethcenturywas
permeatedbythistechnocraticspirit.(Adistinctivefeatureofthetechnocratic
mentalityisitsseeminglyboundless,unrestricted,expansivescopeits
tendencytobreakthroughthepresumedboundariesoftheinstrumentalandto
dominateanykindofpractice.)Thetechnocraticspiritwasmademanifestin
theapplicationoftheprinciplesofinstrumentalrationality,efficiency,order,and
controltothebehaviorofindustrialworkers.Assetforthintheearly
twentiethcenturytheoriesofTaylorismandFordism,thestandardsof
efficiencydevisedforthefunctioningofpartswithinmachineswereappliedto
themovementsofworkersinthenewlargescalefactorysystem.The
technocraticspiritalsowascarriedintothe"fine"artsbyavantgarde
practitionersofvariousradicallyinnovativestyles
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:27 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page252
associatedwithearlymodernism.ThecredooftheItalianFuturiststhevogue
ofgeometricabstractionismexemplifiedbytheworkofMondrianandthe
exponentsof"MachineArt"thedoctrinesofthePrecisionistsandthe
Constructiviststhecelebrationoftechnologicalfunctionalisminarchitectureby
LeCorbusier,MiesVanderRohe,andotherexponentsoftheinternational
styleallthesetendenciesexemplifiedthepermeationofthecultureof
modernitybyakindoftechnocraticutopianism.
Architecture,withitsdistinctivemergingoftheaestheticandthepractical,
providesaparticularlycompellinginsightintothemodernmarriageofculture
andtechnology.TheInternationalStylefeaturedtheuse,asbuildingmaterials,
ofsuchuniqueproductsofadvancedtechnologiesassteel,glass,and
reinforcedconcretenewtechnologiesalsomadeitpossibletoconstruct
strippeddown,sparebuildingswhosefunctioningdependedonstillother
innovativedevices(theelevator,thesubwaysystem,airconditioning).This
minimalist,functionalstyleofarchitectureanticipatedmanyfeaturesofwhat
probablyisthequintessentialfantasyofatechnocraticparadise:thepopular
sciencefictionvisionoflifeinaspaceshipfarfromEarth,whererecycling
eliminatesalldependenceonorganicprocessesandwheretheselfcontained
environmentiscompletelyunderhumancontrol.
PostmodernPessimism
Letusreturnnowtoourinitialquestion:howtounderstandthecurrentsurgeof
technologicalpessimism.Onewaytoaccountforthecollectivedespondency,I
havesuggested,istocharttheadventoftheabstractnounthatnamesa
quintessentiallymodernclass:"technology."Thepointisthattheideaofaclass
called"technology,"initsideologicalinheritancefromthepracticalarts,was
suffusedfromitsinceptionbytheextravagantuniversalistsocialhopesofthe
Enlightenment.Thosehopesweregroundedinwhatpostmodernistskeptics
liketocall"foundationalism":afaithinthehumancapacitytogainaccesstoa
permanent,timelessfoundationforobjective,contextfree,certainknowledge.
ThestunningadvancesofWesternscienceandthepracticalartsseemedto
confirmthatepistemologicalfaith,andwithitacorrespondingbeliefthat
henceforththecourseofhistorynecessarilywouldleadtoenhancedhuman
wellbeing.
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:27 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page253
Intheireuphoricembraceofthatfaith,theutopianthinkersofthe
EnlightenmentinventedahistoricalromancecalledProgress.Inittheyassigned
aheroicroletothemechanicarts.Thatrole,liketheromanceasawhole,
restedontheoldfoundationalistfaithinthecapacityofscientificrationalismto
yieldincontrovertibleknowledge.Butthepartassignedtothemechanicartsin
thoseearlyyears,thoughheroic,actuallywasmodestcomparedwithwhatit
becameonceithadbeenrenamed"technology."Bythe1920s"technology,"
nolongerconfinedtoitslimitedroleasamerepracticalmeansintheserviceof
politicalends,wasbecomingaflamboyant,overwhelmingpresence.Inmany
modernist,technocraticinterpretationsoftheromance,"technology"so
dominatedtheactionastoputmostotherplayersinthewingsinthefinalact,
ahappyendingconfirmedthevauntedpoweroftechnologytorealizethe
dreamofProgress.IntheaftermathofWorldWarII,however,whathadbeen
adissidentminority'sdisenchantmentwiththisoverreachingherospreadto
largesegmentsofthepopulation.Asthevisibleeffectsoftechnologybecame
moredubious,modernismlostitsverveandpeoplefoundtheromancelessand
lessappealing.AftertheVietnamera,therulingthemeofProgresscameto
seemtoofantastic,andadmirersoftheoldEnlightenmentromancenowwere
drawntoanewkindofpostmoderntragicomedy.
Postmodernismisthenamegiventoasensibility,style,oramorphous
viewpointacollectivemoodmademanifestintheearly1970s.Asthe
namesuggests,oneofitsinitialmotiveswasarepudiationoftheearlier,
moderniststyleinthearts,andaconsequentefforttodefineandto
becomeitssuccessor.Thesuccessionistaspectofpostmodernismwasmade
clearearlyonbyaseriesofsudden,sharpattacksonmodernarchitecture,
probablythemostwidelyrecognizedofallstylesofaestheticmodernism.As
earlyas1962,inhisseminalessay"TheCaseAgainst'ModernArchitecture,'"
LewisMumford,aleadingarchitecturalcriticandanexponentofearly
modernism,anticipatedmanythemesofthatpostmodernistreaction.Most
significantherewashisanalysisofthesourcesofmodernism,anarchitectural
stylehetracedtoasetofpreconceptionsaboutthehistoricroleoftechnology.
Chiefamongthem,hewrote,was"thebeliefinmechanicalprogressasanend
initself,"abeliefthatrestedontheassumptionthathumanimprovementwould
occur"almostautomatically"ifwewouldsimplydevoteallourenergiesto
scienceand
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:27 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page254
technology.
20
Asinmostofhiswork,hereMumford'sdisapprovalwasnot
directedattechnologyinanynarroworintrinsicsense,notatthemere
technicalorartifactualaspectofmodernity,butratheratthelargerideological
contextputdifferently,hewasaimingattheimperialdominationof
architecturalpracticebytheoverreachingofthetechnocraticmentality,
wherebythetechnicalmeans,undertheguiseofafunctionaliststyle,had
becomeindistinguishablefromandinfactdeterminedallotheraspectsof
buildingpractice.Histarget,insum,wasthedominatingroleoftheinstrumental
inthelater,technocraticversionoftheprogressiveideologyaversion
characteristicoftheeraofcorporatecapitalism.
Inmakingthisargument,Mumfordalliedhimselfwithadissidentminorityof
writers,artists,andintellectualswhohadopposedthetechnocraticideaof
progressforalongtime.Theywereadherents,indeed,ofacontinuously
critical,intermittentlypowerfuladversaryculturethatcanbetracedbacktothe
"romanticreaction"againsttheeighteenthcenturyscientificandindustrial
revolutions.ButtheculturaldissidentsdidnotabandontheEnlightenment
commitmenttothepracticalartswhattheyrejectedwastheskewed
technocraticreinterpretationofthatcommitment.Whatthey,likeMumford,
foundmostobjectionablewasthetendencytobypassmoralandpoliticalgoals
bytreatingadvancesinthetechnicalmeansasendsinthemselves.Nowhere
wasthiscriticismmadewithgreaterprecision,economy,orwitthaninHenry
DavidThoreau'ssardonicredescriptionoftheera'sboastedmodern
improvements:"Theyarebutimprovedmeanstoanunimprovedend."So,too,
HermanMelvilleidentifiedadeeppsychicrootofthiswarpedoutlookwhenhe
allowedAhab,thetechnicallycompetentbutmorallyincapacitatedcaptainof
thePequod,astunninginsightintohisownpathologicalbehavior:"Now,inhis
heart,Ahabhadsomeglimpseofthis,namely:allmymeansaresane,my
motiveandmyobjectmad."
21
Asthehistoryofthetwentiethcenturyhas
confirmed,hightechnicalskillsmayservetomask,ortodisplaceattention
from,thechoiceofends.If,asin
20.DonaldL.Miller,ed.,TheLewisMumfordReader(Pantheon,1986),p.75.
Theessay,whichfirstappearedinArchitecturalRecord(131,no.4(1962):155
162),anticipatedRobertVenturi'sinfluential1966manifestoforpostmodernism,
ComplexityandContradictioninArchitecture.
21.SeeWalden,chapter1MobyDick,chapter41TheWritingsofThoreau
(ModernLibrary,1949),p.49MobyDick(Norton,1967),p.161.
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:27 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page255
Ahab'scase,theendsaredeformed,amoral,andirrational,suchadisjunction
ofmeansandendsbecomesparticularlyrisky.
Thiskindofflawedtechnocraticmentalitylaterbecameamajortargetofthe
radicalmovementandthecountercultureofthe1960s.Inretrospect,indeed,
thatastonishingburstofpoliticaloutragelookslikealastdesperategaspof
Enlightenmentidealism.Itwasanattempttoputtechnologybackintothe
serviceofmoralandpoliticalends.Itisimportant,ifwearetounderstandthe
genesisofpostmodernism,torecognizethatitappearedimmediatelyafterthe
eventsofMay1968,justastheardentculturalradicalismoftheVietnamera
wascollapsinginfrustrationanddisillusionment.Thus,postmodernism
embodied,fromitsbirth,astrongcurrentoftechnologicalpessimism.
22
Itwas
apessimismwhosedistinctivetenorderivedfromtheadversaryculture's
inability,forallitsastonishingsuccessinmobilizingtheprotestmovementsof
the1960s,todefineandsustainaneffectiveantitechnocraticprogramof
politicalaction.
Inconclusion,letmesuggesttwowaysoflookingatthetechnologicalaspect
ofpostmodernpessimism.Forthosewhocontinuetoadheretothepromiseof
Enlightenmentrationalism,thepostmodernistrepudiationofthatoptimistic
philosophyisboundtoseempessimistic.Postmodernismnotonlyrejectsthe
romanceofProgressitrejectsallmetanarrativesthatostensiblyembody
sweepinginterpretationsofhistory.Forthosewhoaredrawntothe
philosophicskepticismofthepostmodernists,however,therepudiationof
someofthepoliticalhopesthatultimatelyrestedonfoundationalist
metaphysicalassumptionsneednotbetakenaswhollypessimistic.Although
sucharepudiationsurelyentailsadiminishedsenseofhumanpossibilities,the
replacementoftheimpossiblyextravagant
22.Americanpostmodernismis,inmyview,mostpersuasivelyandattractively
representedintheworkofRichardRorty,buthetooismorecompellinginhis
skepticalcritiqueofthephilosophicalmainstreamthaninhismurkyantirealist
epistemology.See,esp.,ConsequencesofPragmatism(Universityof
MinnesotaPress,1982),andContingency,Irony,andSolidarity(Cambridge
UniversityPress,1989).Foranacuteassessmentofthepoliticalweaknesses
inherentinthisoutlook,seeChristopherNorris,What'sWrongwith
Postmodernism,CriticalTheoryandtheEndsofPhilosophy(JohnsHopkins
UniversityPress,1990).Therehavebeenmanyeffortstodefinepostmodernism,
butperhapstheantiEnlightenmentaspectimportanthereismostclearlyset
forthbyDavidHarvey(TheConditionofPostmodernity(Blackwell,1980))and
JeanFrancoisLyotard(ThePostmodernCondition(UniversityofMinnesota
Press,1984)).
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:28 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page256
hopesthathadforsolongbeenattachedtotheideaof"technology"bymore
plausible,realisticaspirationsmay,inthelongrun,becauseforoptimism.
Butthesecondwayoflookingattheroleoftechnologyinpostmodernist
thinkingismuchlessencouraging.Whatmanypostmodernisttheoristsoften
proposeinrejectingtheoldillusionofhistoricalprogressisaredescriptionof
socialrealitythatprovestobeevenmoretechnocraticthanthedistorted
Enlightenmentideologytheyreject.Muchearlypostmodernisttheorizingtook
offfromahostofspeculativenotionsabouttheappearanceofawholly
unprecedentedkindofsociety,variouslycalled"postEnlightenment,""post
Marxist,""postindustrial,"or''posthistoric."Acommonfeatureofthese
theoriesandoftheumbrellaconcept,postmodernismisthedecisiverole
accordedtothenewelectroniccommunicationstechnologies.Theinformation
orknowledgetheyareabletogenerateandtodisseminateissaidtoconstitute
adistinctivelypostmodernandincreasinglydominantformofcapital,a"force
ofproduction,"and,ineffect,anew,dematerializedkindofpower.This
allegedlyistheageofknowledgebasedeconomies.
Therearestrikinglycloseaffinitiesbetweentheboldnewconceptionsofpower
favoredbyinfluentialpostmoderntheoristsIamthinkingofJeanFrancois
LyotardandMichelFoucaultandthefunctioningoflargetechnological
systems.
23
Power,asdefinedbythesetheories,isdynamicandfluid.Always
beingmoved,exchanged,ortransferred,itflowsendlesslythroughsocietyand
culturethewaybloodflowsthroughacirculatorysystemorinformation
throughacommunicationsnetwork.Incontrastwiththeoldnotionof
entrenchedpowerthatcanbeattacked,removed,orreplaced,postmodernists
envisageformsofpowerthathavenocentral,single,fixed,discernible,
controllablelocus.Thiskindofpoweriseverywherebutnowhere.Ittypically
developsfrombelow,atthelower,locallevels,ratherthanbydiffusionfrom
centralizedplacesonhigh.Thebestwaytounderstandit,then,isbyan
ascendinganalysisthatinitiallyfocusesonitsmicro,orcapillary,manifestations.
Themostcompellinganalogyiswiththeforthcomingmodeoffiberoptic
communications,anelectronicsystemthatisexpectedtolinkalltele
23.Lyotard,ThePostmodernConditionandLeDifferends(Universityof
MinnesotaPress,1984)MichelFoucault,Power/Knowledge(Pantheon,1972).
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:28 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page257
phonic,television,andcomputertransmissionandreception,andallmajor
databanks,inasinglenational(andeventuallyglobal)network.
Thisoutlookratifiestheideaofthedominationoflifebylargetechnological
systems,bydefaultifnotbydesign.Theaccompanyingmoodvariesfroma
senseofpleasurablyselfabnegatingacquiescenceintheinevitableto
melancholyresignationorfatalism.Inanyevent,itreflectsafurtherincreasein
thedifficulty,notedearlier,ofdiscerningtheboundarybetweenwhat
traditionallyhadbeenconsidered"technology,"(thematerialorartifactual
armature,whichmaybeanetworkoffilaments)andtheothersocioeconomic
andculturalcomponentsoftheselargecomplexsystems.Inmanyrespects
postmodernismseemstobeaperpetuationofandanacquiescenceinthe
continuousaggrandizementof"technology"initsmodern,institutionalized,
systemicguises.Intheirhostilitytoideologiesandcollectivebeliefsystems,
moreover,manypostmodernistthinkersrelinquishalloldfashionednotionsof
puttingthenewsystemsintotheserviceofalargerpoliticalvisionofhuman
possibilities.
24
Intheirview,suchvisionsareinherentlydangerous,proto
totalitarian,andtobeavoidedatallcosts.Thepessimistictenorof
postmodernismfollowsfromthisinevitablydiminishedsenseofhumanagency.
Ifweentertainthevisionofapostmodernsocietydominatedbyimmense,
overlapping,quasiautonomoustechnologicalsystems,andifthesocietymust
somehowintegratetheoperationofthosesystems,becomingintheprocessa
metasystemofsystemsuponwhosecontinuingabilitytofunctionourlives
depend,thentheideaofpostmoderntechnologicalpessimismmakessense.It
isafatalisticpessimism,anambivalenttributetothedeterminativepowerof
technology.Butagain,the"technology"inquestionissodeeplyembeddedin
otheraspectsofsocietythatitisallbutimpossibletoseparateitfromthem.
Underthecircumstances,itmightbewelltoacknowledgehowconsolingitis
toattributeourpessimismtotheworkingsofsoelusiveanagentofchange.
24.Thisisnottrueofallpostmoderntheorists.Rortyreaffirmsatraditional
liberalperspective,thoughonewhosecapacitytoprovideatheoreticalbasisfor
thecontroloftechnologicallysophisticatedmultinationalcorporationsis
extremelyuncertain.
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:28 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page259
RationalityversusContingencyintheHistoryofTechnology
JohnM.Staudenmaier
AsJohnStaudenmaier'sreferencepointsindicate,thisessayoriginatedasa
summarycommentonthepresentationsmadeatthe1989DibnerInstitute/MIT
workshopontechnologicaldeterminism.Sincerevisedandexpanded,itpointsto
thehistoryoftechnology'svirtualinvisibilitynotjusttothelargerpublicbutalso
toothermembersofthehistoricalprofession.Relativelyfewgeneralhistoriansare
awareofthefield,andthosewhoaretendtoperceiveitasnarrowlyfocusedand
largelyirrelevanttotheir"mainstream"interestsinpoliticsandsociety.
Staudenmaiertracesthesourceofthisproblemtotheuninspiredwayhistoriansof
technology"havehandledthequestionofdeterminisminthepast."Ultimately,he
askspractitionersinthefieldtoreconsidertheirsubjectmattermuchasgeneral
historiansarereconsideringtheirs.Theissueathandistheextenttowhichthe
olderinternalisttraditionwithitswhiggishemphasisonpriorityininventionand
itsinterestinproducingmasternarrativesofprogress,canbemodifiedand
amalgamatedwiththeyoungercontextualtradition,which,likethesocallednew
history,isprimarilyconcernedwithvariouspoliticalandculturalconstituenciesin
thehistoricalprocessandwiththetensionsandconflictsbetweenthem.
Staudenmaierrecognizesthecentralityofartifactstothehistoryoftechnologyand
thepressingneedtopayattentiontothemandunpacktheircomplexmeaningsin
lightofthenewhistory.Whileobservingthatweremain"citizensofthe
Enlightenment"who"onlygingerlyexplorethedomainoftheuncertain,''he
nonethelessisconfidentthatsuchasynthesiscanbemade.Hisisaprovocative
explorationoftheepistemologicalrelationshipsandpsychologicalattitudesthat
underliethesharedconsciousnessofthosewhocurrentlylaborinthefield.
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:28 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030

Page260
Thevolatile,passionate,sometimesacrimoniousdebateabouthistorical
methodpublishedintheJune1989issueoftheAmericanHistoricalReview
hasmuchtoteachhistoriansoftechnology.The"oldhistorynewhistory"
battlewagedbymainstreamhistoriansprovidesaprovocativeframeof
referenceforunderstandingwhatisatstakewhenhistoriansoftechnology
addresstechnologicaldeterminism.Moreimmediatelyinteresting,perhaps,is
thetotalabsenceofhistoriansoftechnologyfromtheAHRdebate.Noneof
theAHRauthorsshowsanyawarenessofthehistoryoftechnology.
Technologydoesnotappear,tociteanobviousinstance,onGertrude
Himmelfarb'slistof"thesubjectsofthenewhistory,"whomsheaccusesof
"'clamoringfor'...notaplaceontheperipheryofhistorythattheyalways
hadbutatthecenter,andnotintermittentlybutpermanently.Whattheyare
allseekingistobe'mainstreamed'intoAmericanhistory...."
1
Virtual
invisibilityinthelargerhistoricalprofession,Iwillargue,hasagreatdealtodo
withhowwehandledthequestionofdeterminisminthepast.
2
Thehistoryof
technology'sversionoftheoldnewtension,however,providesanopeningto
thelargerdebatethatpromisestohelpthesubdisciplineandthebroader
historicalprofessionaswell.
LawrenceLevinesummarizesmuchoftheAHRexchangeinthefollowing
observation:
Thereisoneareaofhistoriographicalunpredictability,however,withwhich
manyhistorianshavenotlearnedtomaketheirpeace.Thisinvolvesnot
changinginterpretationsofwellagreeduponstandardeventsbutchanging
notionsofwhicheventsandwhichpeopleshouldconstitutethefocusof
thehistorian'sstudy.
3
1.Herlist:"blacks,women,Chicanos,AmericanIndians,immigrants,families,
cities."Thisandthequoteappearinherarticle"SomeReflectionsontheNew
History"(AmericanHistoricalReview94,no.3(1989):661670).EvenAllan
MeGill,withhisreferencetopumpsanddikesandhismarvelousZuiderZee
historiographicalmetaphor,showsnoawarenessofasubdisciplinededicatedto
thestudyofsuchthings.Seehis"RecountingthePast:'Description,'
Explanation,andNarrativeinHistoriography,"AmericanHistoricalReview94,
no.3(1989):627653.
2.Theoriginalaudiencefortheseobservationsandmyownprofessionalhomein
theSocietyfortheHistoryofTechnologyleadmetooccasionallyaddressmy
colleaguesas"we."
3.LawrenceW.Levine,"TheUnpredictablePast:ReflectionsonRecentAmerican
Historiography,"AmericanHistoricalReview94,no.3(1989):671679(my
emphasis).
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

1
9
9
4
.

M
I
T

P
r
e
s
s
,


A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t
f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.
EBSCO Publishing - NetLibrary; printed on 5/5/2011 9:01:28 AM via Open University Library (The)- United Kingdom
eISBN:9780262691673; Smith, Merritt Roe : Does Technology Drive History?
Account: -277409030