Look at this picture.
Look at this archive with all its documents carefully organised and safe. It looks untouched and tidy. Perfect preservation. This images embodies what Ariella Azoulay calls ‘the abstract archive’ in her piece Archive. ‘The abstract archive’ refers to a place devoid of time, politics and humans and embodies the Hegelian concept of ‘Aufhebung’ – simultaneously preserving and canceling. This archive is perfect, but it also does not exist. Instead we have what Azoulay calls ‘material archives’. Archives full of politics and complex systems of power. Who can access the archive? What can be archive? What should not be archive? Who categorises the archive?
I like either of these archives. One of them is super boring and the other can be used as a tool for oppression. I want a fluid archive. An archive that is constantly changing and always questions authority. But isn’t complete chaos, like the internet where everyone can upload anything and also access everything (except in China and North Korea). And where the chaos has to be navigated by algorithms created by unelected power hunger figures (mostly white men) that push certain things to front depending on how much the pay. No not that. Something nicer.
Quick note: I actually wanted to write about back at the beginning of October when I zoomed into the first NYU talk but I kept putting it off because I wanted to write ‘properly’ about it. I think that I need to get into the habit of writing things straight away in order for this website to work as a journey of my work.