Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
because it locates accurate knowledge with the people, but also recognizes that the
sociopolitical context of power does not have the accurate voice driving it.
Importantly, Justin continues to narrate this issue from a distance. He has not
specifically located himself within the world he is narrating. Sarah in the next utter-
ance notes that Justin has cast this issue on a broader level and wants to bring it back
to the Menominee community specifically, she asks “what about here?” Several
people speak to this question, talking about issues as broad as intellectual property
rights and sharing of information to attitudes conveyed in interactions with decision
makers that leave people feeling like they do not understand what is going on.
Daniel, a community member and a long-time logger of the Menominee forest,
extends the idea presented by Justin by agreeing that the problem is one of commu-
nication. He focuses on the way in which content and naming practices are playing
out in the anxiety filled dynamic Justin has identified.
Daniel:
They're, they're in charge of the forest (MTE). They manage the forest, and some-
times you get the feeling from them that, 'we're managing it, leave us alone'. Don't,
you know, 'we're doing it.' And they're doing
science and technology, different things,
[unknown], and they call it all different names. Now, in the past 10 years when this has all
been really comin' to a head, they're callin' it all different names, and most people don't
understand what's goin' on.
...
Daniel pushes further on Justin's point that there is a problem of communica-
tion. He appears to be struggling with how the larger frame that science is power is
playing out in the day-to-day and moves to discuss this on a more detailed level. At
this point in the conversation the original oppositional binary and the sociohistorical
lens that have been dominating the conversation seem to fade into the background.
The conversation takes on a different focus, one related to day-to-day forestry prac-
tices. Specifically, they focus on the different cuts and the rationales for cuts. Daniel
places himself within the situation, and then projects the voice of those in power.
He also locates the developing tension within a similar time frame as Justin, but
goes on to suggest that there is a deliberate obscuring in the naming practices by
the people in charge of forest management (MTE) over the past decade and that the
naming practices function as a form of domination. Daniel is also critically reading
the practice of scientists and the management of the forest but from a different point
of view.
Sarah:
'Cause they don't let us know.
Sarah apparently sees herself in Daniel's comment “most people don't under-
stand what's goin'on.” She voices anger about the situation, placing her emotionally
in the conversation in a different way than either Daniel or Justin have. In this
comment, Sarah speaks from a position of lack of agency.
Daniel:
Yeah. You know, there's, like we talked before there's seed tree [cuts] and there's
shelterwood [cuts]. They're basically the same thing. But, they're for different trees. It can
look like the same cut. But they'll tell you that it's, 'you know we didn't do a shelterwood,
that's a seed tree.” And, there's regeneration cuts and then there's, uh, conversion cuts, for
clear cuts. There's a whole bunch of different words that they can use, and, the average
person looks at it, and doesn't understand it.
