The happy accident: Post-anthropocentric understandings of serendipity in making processes

References

1. Adamson, G.. ( 2013), The Invention of Craft, London:: Bloomsbury Academic;.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Adamson, G., and Bryan-Wilson, J.. ( 2016), Art in the Making, London:: Thames and Hudson;.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Angier, T.. ( 2010), Techne in Aristotle’s Ethics: Crafting the Moral Life, London:: Continuum;.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Baber, C.,, Chemero, T., and Hall, J.. ( 2017;), ‘ What the jeweller’s hand tells the jeweller’s brain: Tool use, creativity and embodied cognition. ’, Philosophy & Technology, 32:3, pp. 283–302, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0292-0.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Barad, K.. ( 2007), Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning, Durham, NC:: Duke University Press;.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Blok, A.,, Farias, I., and Roberts, C.. (eds) ( 2020), The Routledge Companion to Actor-Network Theory, Abingdon:: Routledge;.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bolt, B.. ( 2004), Art beyond Representation: The Performative Power of the Image, London:: I. B. Tauris & Co Ltd;.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bolt, B.. ( 2007;), ‘ Material thinking and the agency of matter. ’, Studies in Material Thinking, 1:1, April, https://textilesandmateriality.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/bolt_material-thinking-and-agency-of-matter.pdf. Accessed 15 January 2023.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Braidotti, R.. ( 2019;), ‘ A theoretical framework for the critical posthumanities. ’, Theory, Culture & Society, 36:6, pp. 31–61, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0263276418771486; https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276418771486. Accessed 28 April 2021.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Brassett, J.. ( 2015;), ‘ Poised and complex: The becoming each other of philosophy, design and innovation. ’, in B. Marenko, and J. Brassett. (eds), Deleuze and Design, Edinburgh:: Edinburgh University Press;, pp. 31–57.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Copeland, S.. ( 2016;), ‘ On serendipity in science: Discovery at the intersection of chance and wisdom. ’, Synthese, 196:6, pp. 2385–406, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1544-3.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Fernie, E.. (ed.) ( 2010), Art History and its Methods: A Critical Anthology, London:: Phaidon Press Ltd;.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Fry, T.. ( 2012), Becoming Human by Design, London:: Berg;.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Gibson, J. J.. ( 1986), The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, London:: Taylor & Francis Group;.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Glaveanu, V. P.. ( 2014), Distributed Creativity: Thinking Outside the Box of the Creative Individual, London:: Springer;.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Halsall, F.. ( 2020;), ‘ Is ANT an artistic practice?. ’, in A., Blok,, I. Farias, and C. Roberts. (eds), The Routledge Companion to Actor-Network Theory, Abingdon:: Routledge;, pp. 200–09.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Hodder, I.. ( 2012), Entangled: An Archaeology of the Relationships between Humans and Things, Chichester:: Wiley-Blackwell;.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Hodder, I.. ( 2016;), ‘ Studies in human-thing entanglement. ’, Researchgate, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297459200_Studies_in_Human-Thing_Entanglement. Accessed 1 June 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Hyde, L.. ( 2008), Trickster Makes This World: How Disruptive Imagination Creates Culture, Edinburgh:: Cannongate;.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Ingold, T.. ( 2010;), ‘ The textility of making. ’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34:1, pp. 91–102, https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bep042.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Ingold, T.. ( 2013), Making, Abingdon:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Jay, M.. ( 2005), Songs of Experience: Modern American and European Variations on a Universal Theme, Berkley, MI:: University of California Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Kirsch, D.. ( 2014;), ‘ The importance of chance and interactivity in creativity. ’, Pragmatics & Cognition, 22:1, https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.22.1.01kir.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Knappet, C., and Malafouris, L.. (eds) ( 2008), Material Agency: Towards a Non-Anthropocentric Approach, New York:: Springer;.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Knies, K.. ( 2014;), ‘ Taking the strict account of techne seriously: An interpretive direction in Plato’s republic. ’, ΣΧΟΛΗ, 8:1, pp. 112–25, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292235573_Taking_the_strict_account_of_techne_seriously_An_interpretive_direction_in_Plato's_Republic. Accessed 12 December 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Knott, S.. ( 2018), Document on Contemporary Crafts: Material Perceptions (eds K. A. Bull, and A. Gali.), Stuttgart:: Arnoldsche Art Publishers;, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329132826_Knut_Astrup_Bull_and_Andre_Gali_eds_Document_on_Contemporary_Crafts_Material_Perceptions. Accessed 1 June 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Landa, M. de. ( 2000), A Thousand Years of Nonlinear History, New York:: Swerve Editions;.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Lane, J.. ( 1996), Apprenticeship in England, 1600–1914, London:: University College London;, https://www.scribd.com/document/373137044/Apprenticeship-in-England-1600-1914-1996#. Accessed 15 January 2023.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Lange-Berndt, P.. (ed.) ( 2015), Materiality, London:: Whitechapel Gallery;.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Latour, B.. ( 2015;), ‘ On actor-network theory: A few clarifications plus more than a few complications. ’, P-67 ACTOR-NETWORK (bruno-latour.fr), http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/P-67%20ACTOR-NETWORK.pdf. Accessed 22 September 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Leach, B.. ( 1976), A Potter’s Book, London:: Faber and Faber;, https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.279419/page/n57/mode/2up. Accessed 1 June 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Maapalo, P., and Østern, T. O.. ( 2018;), ‘ The agency of wood: Multisensory interviews with art and crafts teachers in a post-humanistic and new-materialistic perspective. ’, Education Inquiry, 9:4, pp. 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2018.1424492.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Malafouris, L.. ( 2013), How Things Shape the Mind: A Theory of Material Engagement, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
34. March, P. L.. ( 2019;), ‘ Playing with clay and the uncertainty of agency: A material engagement theory perspective. ’, Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 18:1, pp. 133–51, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-017-9552-9.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Marenko, B.. ( 2015;), ‘ Digital materiality morphogenesis and the intelligence of the technodigital object. ’, in B. Marenko, and J. Brassett. (eds), Deleuze and Design, Edinburgh:: Edinburgh University Press;, pp. 107–38.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Marenko, B., and Brassett, J.. (eds) ( 2015), Deleuze and Design, Edinburgh:: Edinburgh University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
37. McCay-Peet, L., and Toms, E. G.. ( 2015;), ‘ Investigating serendipity: How it unfolds and what may influence it. ’, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66:7, pp. 1463–76, http://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012134645-4/50032-9.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Merton, R. K., and Barber, E.. ( 2006), The Travels and Adventures of Serendipity, Princeton, NJ:: Princeton University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Peterson, S.. ( 1995), The Craft and Art of Clay: A Complete Potter’s Handbook, London:: Laurence King Publishing;.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Pye, D.. ( 1995), The Nature and Art of Workmanship, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Rond, M. de. ( 2014;), ‘ The structure of serendipity. ’, Culture and Organization, 20:5, pp. 342–58, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14759551.2014.967451.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Ross, W., and Vallee-Tourangeau, E.. ( 2020;), ‘ Microserendipity in the creative process. ’, Journal of Creative Behaviour, 55:3, pp. 661–72, http://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.478.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Roudavski, S.. ( 2016;), ‘ Field creativity and post-anthropocentrism. ’, Digital Creativity, 27:1, pp. 7–23, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14626268.2016.1151443.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Sawyer, R. K.. ( 2018;), ‘ How artists create: An empirical study of MFA painting students. ’, Journal of Creative Behaviour, 52:2, pp. 127–41, https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.136.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Sennett, R.. ( 2009), The Craftsman, London:: Penguin Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Smelik, A.. ( 2018;), ‘ New materialism: A theoretical framework for fashion in the age of technological innovation. ’, International Journal of Fashion Studies, 5:1, https://doi.org/10.1386/infs.5.1.33_1.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Spuybroek, L.. ( 2016), The Sympathy of Things: Ruskin and the Ecology of Design, London:: Bloomsbury;.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Sterling, C.. ( 2020;), ‘ Critical heritage and the posthumanities: Problems and prospects. ’, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 26:11, pp. 1029–46, https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2020.1715464.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Stevens, J.. ( 2020;), ‘ Post human craft: A humble attempt to reorient makers to the inevitable. ’, Cubic Journal, 3:3, pp. 150–65, https://doi.org/10.31182/cubic.2020.3.029.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Stiegler, B.. ( 1998), Technics and Time, 1: The Fault of Epimetheus, Stanford, CA:: Stanford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Taylor, L.. ( 2011), Ceramics: Tools and Techniques for the Contemporary Maker, London:: Jaqui Small llp;.
    [Google Scholar]
52. van Andel, P.. ( 1994;), ‘ Anatomy of the unsought finding: Serendipity: Origin, history, domains, traditions, appearances, patterns and programmability. ’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 45:2, pp. 631–48, http://www.jstor.org/stable/687687. Accessed 16 December 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Vennatrø, R., and Høgseth, H. B.. ( 2021;), ‘ Craft as more-than-human: Practice-led research in a posthumanist perspective. ’, Form Academic, 14:2, pp. 1–13, https://journals.oslomet.no/index.php/formakademisk/article/view/4205/3799. Accessed 22 October 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Wilde, D., and Underwood, J.. ( 2017;), ‘ Designing towards the unknown: Engaging with material and aesthetic uncertainty. ’, DanielleWilde.com, http://www.daniellewilde.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Designing-Towards-the-Unknown.pdf. Accessed 16 April 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Wisnowski, B.. ( 2019;), ‘ An aesthetics of everything else: Craft and flat ontologies. ’, Journal of Modern Craft, 12:3, pp. 205–17, https://doi.org/10.1080/17496772.2019.1678867.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Wolfe, C.. ( 2010), What Is Posthumanism?, Minneapolis, MN:: University of Minnesota Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Wopereis, I., and Braam, M.. ( 2018;), ‘ Seeking serendipity: The art of finding the unsought in professional music. ’, in Information Literacy in the Workplace 5th European Conference, ECIL 2017, Saint Malo, France, 18–21 September, Cham:: Springer;, pp. 503–12, http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74334-9_52.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Yaqub, A.. ( 2017), Serendipity: Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory, Brighton:: University of Sussex;, http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/70541/. Accessed 17 January 2023.
    [Google Scholar]
59. Ash, Nigel,, Thompson, Stephen, and Woodward, Martyn. ( 2023;), ‘ The happy accident: Post-anthropocentric understandings of serendipity in making processes. ’, Craft Research, 14:1, pp. 101–15, https://doi.org/10.1386/crre_00096_1
    [Google Scholar]