For the contributor, I think the toxicity is in the lack of infrastructure around this type of very important archiving. For me, I actually see some of the toxicity in the wild goose chase that seems to be these documents. The toxicity could also be in the disjointedness of the documents and findings themselves. Also, would be interested in getting Wilma’s story? Is there a form of gender toxicity here too? How did she become a one woman show? That history also seems toxic.
The distance is really genius here, but I wonder if you could use blurring techniques to focus in on Wilma more or even the documents. Or if you could play a bit with the blank wall space off to the left. If the focus is on the sort of lone wolf approach to this archive maybe highlighting WIlma more could be useful too. This juxtaposed with a photo from Wilma’s perspective could be interesting too. Not sure what it would look like, but it would be interesting to see her perspective of the documents.
Photograph. The vantage point of the photo is very interesting.. We can sort of feel the distance between us “the viewer” and Wilma and the heaps of documents that seperate us. Maybe a metaphor for activism work? Or the space between the corporation and X (substitute activists, fenceline communities, workers, etc.). Actually getting to Wilma seems inaccessible via this photograph. Getting to the expert or the expertise. The distance really is the most notable aspect of the photo. The angling is quite genius if the photograph was going for that feeling of disconnection or inability to reach for the end.
My mind is floating to paranoa. The paranoid style—a form of thinking often pushed to the margins—is part and parcel with the epistemology of the humanities and social sciences more generally. AND maybe of tireless researches like Wilma in the photo? Though some are institutionalized for questioning the truth as given, something which is clearly articulated in Jonathan Metzl’s “The Protest Psychosis: How Schizophrenia Became A Black Disease,” others, such as university professors, build their careers off of this skepticism. What are the dynamics at play here? Racialized? Gendered? Nationalized? The paranoid style of thinking exists within different spectrums and exits around the world, but how are we—as a public, as a society, and as academics (aware these are not homogenous categories)—drawn toward paranoid modes of thought? I never thought of myself as a “conspiracy” theorist before, but the more I think about it, the more I think that is in some way what anthropologists are meant to practice: How is the “truth” in some ways even more mind blowing than the fiction? How do we figure out all of the moving parts? How do we take seriously the social implications/consequences of conspiracy theories in our field sites? In the archives? How do we give conspiracy theories and paranoia the in-depth analysis they deserve? Why did a paper trail end here? These questions aren’t looking for simple answers but are rather focused on what this investigation means for our larger political systems.
It seems like “paranoa” might be a good lens to think through for this photo. How a paranoid mode of thinking can actually draw out the repetitions across this mass of documents. Draw out the toxic repetitions..
This visualization conveys ethnographic insight on a variety of levels. Using a photo of a woman’s one-stop archival shop allows the contributor to scale the conversation from these masses of printed paper to larger conversations around archival and data practices in not only environmental justice circles, but also academic spaces. Archival practices and vulnerabilities are in the forefront of this visualization, however, ethnographically, this photo conveys the affect of bureaucratic systems, compartmentalized expertise, and maybe even the repetitive nature of toxicity in its various forms.