"toxic fringes, removable subjects"
"toxic fringes, removable subjects"
My sense is that the image shows how, while land becomes toxic, instead of considering the removal of the underlying environmental problem, what is thought of as a solution is the incorporation of “removable subjects” or individuals seen “disposable” to this toxic area.
This image was useful for an exploration of the concept of permeability in relation to visuality and "toxicity." I would be interested in seeing how the "ethnographic message" of this image is connected to the author's own research and interests in self-visualizing narrative making by veterans.
Two opposite phrases were most manifest in her caption: “friendly community engagement” and “extent of police powers.” While the left picture illustrates a bunch of police officers with a smile during their community engagement activities, the right image shows the real state of the power of LASPD that can possibly threaten the safety of the student body.
“Siphoning, economic development, social welfare structure” were the most salient words while I was reading Shannon’s essay. It was incisive to point out that adoption appears to some degree benevolent, but at the rear of it, there was a blueprint of the South Korean government dodging the social infrastructure for vulnerable children. According to Shannon’s account, the South Korean government could save money through international adoptionduring 1960s-70s, when there was rapid economic development in South Korea, instead of constructing a social welfare system.
The detail in this image is overwhelming. I had to sit with it for several minutes as I reordered my lines of sight, making sense of the organization of the chart. As a historian (and thus with little to no background in the sciences, nor with any specialized knolwedge of molecular chemistry), I would have been clueless without your caption. This leads me to ask - how can one alter this image so that it's more readily legilble to non-specialists?