This article explores the ontological politics of research in the field of community studies. Focusing on a migrant community in London, UK, it shows how the community is (re)assembled in different ways through the different research practices of academics and practitioners. Guided by a framework based on material semiotics, this article compares the agendas, methods, and representational texts that inform the different research practices. It argues that community studies researchers have an ethical responsibility to acknowledge the particular enactments of communities that emerge through their research and the role that agendas, methods, and texts play in constructing those enactments.
AndersonB. R.1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London, UK: Verso.
2.
BaradK.2003. “Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter.” Signs28:801–31.
3.
BaradK.2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
4.
BaumanZ.2001. Community. Oxford, UK: Polity.
5.
BellC.NewbyH.. 1971. Community Studies. London, UK: Unwin.
6.
BowkerG.StarS. L.. 1999. Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7.
BurawoyM.2005. “Provincializing the Social Sciences.” Pp. 508–25 in The Politics of Method in the Human Sciences: Positivism and its Epistemological Others, edited by SteinmetzG.. Durhman, NC: Duke University Press.
8.
CallonM.1998. “The Embeddedness of Economic Markets in Economics.” Pp. 1–57 in The Laws of the Market, edited by CallonM.. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
CrowG.AllanG.. 1994. Community Life. An Introduction to Local Social Relations. Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
11.
DaviesB.GannonS.. 2005. “Feminist/Poststructuralism.” Pp. 318–25 in Research Methods in the Social Sciences, edited by LewinC.SomekhB.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
DeleuzeG. [1966] 1988. Le Bergsonisme. Translated by TomlinsonHughHabberjamBarbara. Paris, France: PUF.
13.
DeleuzeG. [1968] 1994. Différence et répétition. Transulated by PattonPaul. Paris, France: PUF.
14.
DeleuzeG.GuattariF.. [1982] 1987. A Thousand Plateaus. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
15.
DerridaJ.1982. ‘Differance’, Margins of Philosophy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16.
DirksN. B.2001. Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17.
FoucaultM.1970. The Order of Things. New York: Pantheon.
18.
FoucaultM.1972. The Archaeology of Knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
19.
FransmanJ.2012. “Re-imagining the Conditions of Possibility of a PhD Thesis.” Pp. 138–56 in The Sage Handbook of Digital Dissertations and Theses, edited by AndrewsR.BorgE.Boyd DavisS.DomingoM.EnglandJ.. London, UK: Sage.
20.
FransmanJ.2013. “Enacting ‘Digital Literacy’ through Research: Ontological Politics in a Study on Scholarly Uses of Twitter.” Pp. 27–41 in Literacy in the Digital University, edited by GoodfellowR.LeaM.. London, UK: Routledge.
21.
HallidayM. A. K.HasanR.. 1985. Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
LawJ.UrryJ.. 2004. “Enacting the Social.” Economy and Society33:390–410.
33.
Lenz TaguchiH.2009. “Writing Practices in Swedish Teacher Education and the Inclusion/Exclusion of Subjectivities.” Critical Studies in Education50:144–58.
34.
MayT.2005. Gilles Deleuze: An Introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35.
MitchellT.2002. Rule of Experts: Egypt, Techno-politics, Modernity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
36.
MolA.1999. “Ontological Politics: A Word and Some Questions.” Pp. 74–89 in Actor Network and After, edited by LawJ.HassardJ.. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
37.
MolA.2002. The Body Multiple: Artherosclerosis in Practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
38.
OsborneT.RoseN.. 1999. “Do the Social Sciences Create Phenomena: The Case of Public Opinion Research.” British Journal of Sociology50:3.
39.
RowseT.2009. “The Ontological Politics of Closing the Gaps.” Journal of Cultural Economy2:1–2.
SavageM.2005. “Revisiting Classic Qualitative Studies.” Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung30: 118–39.
42.
SavageM.2010. Identities and Social Change in Britain since 1940: The Politics of Method. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
43.
SeemanM. V.1980. “Name and Identity.” Canadian Journal of Psychiatry25:129–37.
44.
SpivakG.1990. The Post-colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogues. London, UK: Routledge.
45.
St. PierreE. A.2001. “Coming to Theory: Finding Foucault and Deleuze.” Pp. 141–63 in Feminist Engagements: Reading, Resisting, and Revisioning Male Theorists in Education and Cultural Studies, edited by WeilerKathleen. New York: Routledge.
46.
StrathernM.1991. Partial Connections. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
47.
TönniesF.1955. Community and Association. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
48.
van LeeuwenT.2005. Introducing Social Semiotics. London, UK: Routledge.
