The caption suggests archive as a place—yet it does not develop the idea. Why is it a place? What kind of place? How is the image inviting viewers to see it as such? Are we talking about a particular material archive (e.g., a particular Californian archive)? Or archive as a historical figure?
I like the idea, and the image is evocative – but the caption needs to do more work.
The picture does not have an extensive caption, yet it is powerful in itself. It makes me think about the accumulation of evidence, dusty boxes, waxed floors, and unexplored files. I am not sure whether the picture says something about toxicity —it would require the author to guides our analysis with an extensive caption.
Is shows that toxic places are not necessarily contaminated by a physical chemical - but can be toxic because of the absence of something (in this case representation) as well as the presence of something.