The archive serves as a representation regarding the individual intent of the archive, event, etc. This relates back to an earlier discussion in class. Is an archive ever unbiased? These articles are now questioning the archive and the archive as fact. If we look at the horrible event that took place at Hiroshima, there is no denying the event happened. The archive, which up to know has been a question of factual history, can be rearticulated through the interpretation of the event. Meaning, comparative histories from the US and the Japanese perspective of this same event, would interpret this social and historical narrative into very different archives. Relating the Merewether article to the subReal article.
"At the end of modernity archives are, next to and beyond their functional aspect, an embodiment of cultural heritage........ archives do not carry ethical characteristics, they are in that sense amoral. Moral quality is the input of those who access them: people make sense of archives, not the other way around”.
I am likely to question this statement. I do agree that the archive, especially in this instance, becomes an embodiment of cultural heritage (both for the US and Japan). But I disagree that an archive doesn’t carry an ethical characteristic. Again it comes back to the question of an unbiased archive.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment