Is it possible to devise a set of concepts that could replace the technology/society divide? This set of new concepts - association and substitution - might help to rephrase some of the traditional questions of social order and especially that of the durability of domination of power. However, instead of using different tools to analyse power and weakness, it is argued that power and domination are simply different values of variables that should be studied in their whole range. By reconstructing networks it is argued that a full description of power and domination may be obtained.

For a long time social theory has been eoneerned with defining power relations (Barnes 1988), but it has always found it difficuIt to see how domination is aehieved. In this paper I argue that in order to understand domination we have to turn away from an excIusive concern with social relations and weave them into a fabric that incIudes non-human actants, actants that offer the possibility of holding society together as a durable whole. To be sure, the distinction between material infrastructure and symbolic superstructure has been useful to remind social theory of the importance of non-humans, but it is a very inaecurate portrayal of their mobilisation and engagement inside the social links. This paper aims to explore another repertoire for studying this process of mobilisation. In the first part, I will use a very simple example to iIIustrate what I believe to be the right focus for detecting the entry point of techniques into the human collective. In the second part, I will analyse the beautiful ease of the Kodak camera studied by R. Jenkins to show how social theory could benefit from history of technology. FinaIly, I will try to explain how stability and domination may be accounted for once non-humans are woven into the social fabric.