Month: September 2017

I found both of the readings for class today to be extremely powerful.  After Barthes’ reading I became aware of the power of photography and how photographs can touch individuals on multiple different levels. Although photos merely represent something that happened in the past, it is clear that they can still heavily influence their observants. This was brought to light in both Sontag and Azoulay’s pieces for today. Both women bring to light the pain and suffering photographs uncover when depicting images of war. These photos are simply documenting the slaughter that occurs, and as Azoulay states, they “restore the atrocity” (Azoulay). Azoulay engages with the viewer and states that the spectator becomes involved with recreating the disaster that these war images are displaying.  Sontag and Azoulay make claims that photographs of war can be just as criminal as war itself, because of the power that these images carry.

From these pieces I came to the understanding that war photographs force us to relive what was happening at the time. Sontag states that “people believed that if the horror could be made vivid enough, most people would finally take in the most outrageous insanity of war.” (Sontag 7) It is through photographs that these horrors are made vivid. These pieces are also in conversation with Barthes claim that photography is death, because war photographs display the deep pain and suffering that occurs during a time of war.

When reading both of these pieces I immediately thought of World War II and the Holocaust specifically. When I think of war images, I think of men and women in concentration camps staring blankly into the camera behind a barbed wire fence. I then thought of the power of war time photos and how they are used heavily as propaganda. Although photos can make people relive the horror of war, I believe that they can also urge people to create horrors as well, just as some of these photos did in Europe during World War II.

I found Hirsch and Barthe’s pieces to not only be intriguing but also very pertinent to our class discussions in the past week. Throughout his piece, Barthes discusses the depth that photography possesses as an art form. He states that photography is in opposition to cinema, because photography represents only one moment in time. He then continues to state that although photographs can represent the same isolated moment infinitely, they can never truly recreate that singular moment because a photograph is that moment’s referent just recreated later in time. Here Barthes is arguing that although we can look at a photograph and see an object, a person, or a place, it is not really that thing we are looking at, but rather just an image of that thing.

Barthes then puts photographs into context with history and starts the conversation about the importance photography holds within a historical event. This builds off of the notion that photos are meant to represent something, something that happened in a specific time and place in the past. He then states that “death is the eidos of photography” ( Barthes 15) which tells us that photos depict a non living, non present object that once existed in the past. This relates to history because history itself is the act of reliving events and people that have died, therefore photos are heavily related to history.

Hirsch takes Barthe’s points about photography and the family and discusses photos’ importance within family life. Just as nations have histories, families have histories as well and Hirsch brings to light how photos can bring back the past and connect us to the present. It is here that Hirsch comments on the notion that photos are everywhere, and they are accessible to the public and the private. She discusses how public and private histories are on display through photographs. Hirsch also discusses the operation of photographs, and how they function within our society. For example, “family photographs can reveal the operation of the familial gaze” (Hirsch 11) which can allow us to look deeper into our familial relationships and learn more about each other.

I enjoyed reading both of these readings right after each other because they not only widened my understanding of photography, but they also pointed my attention towards the areas in our society where photography has a deeper meaning. As a young adult in the 21st century, pictures are all around me whether I am on my phone, my computer, or just walking around school. They have become so mundane that we have begun to take them for granted and forgotten about their true meaning, if we ever knew what that meaning was in the first place. Barthes made me think about the deeper meaning of photography, and changed the way I will look at photos in the future.

One part of Barthes’ piece that I found particularly striking was his discussion on portraits. He states that posing for a photo can change the entire dynamic of a picture because it changes the meaning, the method of its’ production and the message that the subject wants to portray. I think that this is an important notion to keep in mind as I look at portraits in the future, because the message is changed when someone is getting their portrait taken. It is not just a normal photograph, but a formal introduction to that individual.

Although I found Derrida’s piece to be difficult to understand, I think it fit in very well with our previous conversations in class. I think that digging deeper into what an archive is is important to understanding the relationship between memory and history, and how they differ. Another point that I found powerful in Derrida’s piece was his notion that “the citizens who thus held and signified political power were considered to possess the right to make or represent the law.” (Derrida 2) I found this quote to relate directly to our discussions about historical and archival power, and how those in power have the opportunity, ability and privilege to tell history the way that they want to regardless of what others believe. Derrida also mentions the concept of deconstruction and  how the break down of archives can allow us to relearn the meaning of the memory and history.

Building off of Derrida’s argument, Pierre Nora puts memory into context with history and compares the two of them. He discusses the fundamental differences between history and memory, and how history is performed through tradition. I found that this concept also related back to our other discussions, especially our discussion on Connerton’s piece because he talks about how we must constantly perform our histories in order to keep them active.

I enjoyed reading both of these pieces because they helped me further advance my understanding of the complex relationship between memory and history. I know that these two have an intertwined relationship yet it is hard to differ one from the other, because both history and memory act similarly in our lives. The concept of the archive helped me understand how history needs that factual evidence, such as an archive, to survive and live on into the future whereas memory is transmitted orally and can change day to day.

After reading Weld’s piece I found many connections to the points we made in our class discussion on Monday. This piece was based entirely around the act of archiving and the strenuous process of retrieving information and making sure that it is remembered. These archives that were found in Guatemala had a special story because they did not begin with archives. Weld takes the reader through the process of uncovering these articles, and then takes us through the actual process of archiving information, which is an extremely laborious process. This piece shows the difficulty that arises when you are presented with superfluous amounts of information, and how tedious the process of archiving is.

An important characteristic of this information is the power that was laden within it. These articles that were hidden by the Guatemalan government told stories of hundreds of thousands of people who were tortured and murdered, and then had their stories erased by those who killed them. As Weld states: “the police records acquired so much power during the armed conflict and they are being reimagined in a very delicate post war conflict.” (Weld 40) This quote made me think of our discussion on Monday where we discussed the importance of archives and how the medium can be the message. Weld also demonstrates the length and depth to which one must go to when archiving information because you cannot miss anything or else you cannot accurately archive.

I think that reading this piece really helped me understand Derrida’s piece about archiving and the true power of the archive. These archives tell powerful stories of a past that should not be forgotten in Guatemalan or global history. It amazed me that the Guatemalan government was able to hide away these documents for so long without having to face the consequences of what they did. This also made me think of the concept of archival power, and how institutions and those in power have the ability to control the information they want to share with the rest of the world.

For this assignment I chose to examine the letter written by 5 Lafayette students to tell the Marquis de Lafayette that he had been elected to become a member of the Franklin literary society. This letter was written in 1832, 2 years before Lafayette’s death. Although a response from the Marquis was never received, we do know that this letter arrived at his home in France.

Within the first moments of looking at this letter, I could immediately tell that great thought and effort had been put into the calligraphy of this letter and its’ presentation. The words were beautifully written on nice parchment paper. Clearly the students chose only the best to send to their institution’s namesake. In their letter, these 5 students who were current members of the Franklin literary society explicitly state that they would like the Marquis to become a member of their society. These 5 students who wrote the letter to Lafayette were white males who came from Pennsylvania, New York and Maryland.

One of the reasons why I was immediately drawn to this artifact was because it was students of Lafayette College, like myself, who were able to write a letter to a man who had a considerable impact not only on our college, but on our country as well. I found this letter to be powerful because these students are honoring a man who was kind, supportive and fought for equality in a time where that was not many people’s priority. To see that other young men were looking up to him, following in his footsteps resounded with me. Although these students only intended for Lafayette’s eyes to see this letter, the message that is in it can be applied to every Lafayette student, past and present.

When looking closely at this letter, we can see the excitement in the air in the United States while the country was still young and new.   These students were well aware of the role that the Marquis had in America’s fight for freedom. By reading this letter, we can gain a general understanding of America’s youth during the early years of our nation. Although we can use this source to look at our society during this time period, it is difficult to do because this letter focuses on such a small group. The limitations that are presented in letters such as these is that we have no way in knowing what Lafayette’s response was, or why they chose to write to him at that time.

It is imperative that this source continues to be preserved because it is a physical artifact that links us the past to a man whose name we try to live up to. Another reason why I found this letter so interesting is because it shows Lafayette’s true character, one that is benevolent, devoted and philanthropic. Although this can tell us about the other elites of his time, Marquis de Lafayette was different than most of the men of his time. This attests even further to the dignity and honor of Lafayette, thus stressing the importance of the preservation of this letter. This source is being preserved so that 185 years later, and further on into the future, we can remember Marquis de Lafayette and all that he stood for so that we can look up him and act with honor and dignity just as he did.

After reading the letter written to Marquis de Lafayette by these Lafayette students, I saw connections between what the students wrote to Lafayette and what Paul Connerton wrote in his piece How Societies Remember.  Connerton discusses how groups operate within history and the ways in which they access, retrieve and practice their past. I believe that this letter is one way that Lafayette students are trying practice the traditions of their past. By reliving the Marquis’ actions and honoring what he did for our country I believe Connerton would agree with the statement that this is a way to perform the memories of our past.

I enjoyed working on this assignment. I believe that this is a great way to connect the present to the past, especially to a meaningful time in the college’s history. I found that reading the letter written to Lafayette was very moving and powerful, to see that our college’s benefactor had such an admirable character. Reading this letter made me proud to be a Lafayette student and challenged me to live up to the standards of Marquis de Lafayette.

Although these three pieces were tough to read and understand, I enjoyed and appreciated the message that they delivered. I believe that what these three authors have to say is especially pertinent in the 21st century, where most of the people in this world are heavily connected through their devices.  After reading these three pieces I could not help but to think about myself and my own relationship with technology and how it has affected my life and the life of those around me. Technology is a medium that has changed humanity. I felt this especially when reading Heidegger’s piece that discusses the relationship humans have with technology and the different levels that we go through when we interact with technology. Technology has become a way that we communicate, represent and express ourselves. Before technology was invented art was one of the ways through which humans communicated.

In Walter Benjamin’s piece he discusses how art is something that not only reflects, but also affects society as a whole. Just like technology can, art has ways of connecting people. Benjamin also discusses how art is changing, just like society is, therefore the image represents the shift and the effects of modernity. This piece ties together well with the other two pieces because technology has become one of the biggest effects of modernity, and it has affected how humans live their lives.

These pieces helped me understand the true extent technology has on our lives. As a college student in their 20’s, I am a heavy technology user who depends on technology for grades, communication, and just about anything you can think of. I did not explore the depths of the effect technology has on humans and how it acts as  a medium in more ways than one that we are aware of.

 

After reading Michel- Rolph Trouillot’s piece “Silencing the Past”, I was able to understand more fully the ways in which history is controlled by certain members of our society. I felt that this piece elaborated on the differences between a story that is remembered versus historical facts that exist. Just as we have found that statues are ways of recreating history, the Sans Souci palace acts in the same way. The palace is one of the only visible remnants of the events that occurred as a result of the Haitian revolution. The peasant who shows the tourists around takes them here, because he understands that this palace holds an important place in the country’s history.

Along with the history of the palace, the peasant incorporates a story with its’ history. The evidence that exists: “the printed record – the pictures and the words left behind by those who saw Sans Souci and the town of Milot … corroborates the crux of the peasant’s story and some of its amazing details.” (Trouillout 35) The palace is historical artifact but it is also a character in a story. Although it may tell parts of the story, there are many parts that are left out. Sans Souci is one of the many “concrete reminders that the uneven power of historical production is expressed also through the power to touch, to see, and to feel” (Trouillout 45). After reading this line I immediately compared the Sans Souci palace to the plaque that was unveiled in memory of Anthony Crawford. The power of touch and vision is present here, because people can run their hands across the plaque and look at the picture of Anthony staring right back at them.

Throughout his writing, Trouillot goes on to discuss how historical production is facilitated in our society. As we discussed in class on Monday, history can be controlled by those who share and retell it. Trouillot states that “the inequalities experienced by the actors lead to uneven historical power in the inscription of traces.” (48) I agree with this argument that Trouillot makes. As a student, we have grown up reading history textbooks that tell us their version of history, the way they want to tell it. For example, many textbooks omit the true story of Native Americans and the oppression that they experienced once white settlers arrived in America.

I found the rest of Trouillot’s writing to be important for our future. I found his writing to be powerful, because he presents the problems that exist when our history is controlled by those in power. These people have the opportunity to effect our future, and I think that it is important that we are aware of this so we can actively work against it happening.

In his piece “How Societies Remember” Paul Connerton takes the ideas discussed in Halbwach’s piece about group memory and places them in context with history and our society. Not only does he state that “groups provide individuals with frameworks within which their memories are localised” (37), but  Connerton also believes that our memories must be conveyed and sustained through performances with these groups or else they will not be useful to us. Although Connerton states that “our experience of the present very largely depends upon our knowledge of the past” (2), we cannot use this knowledge unless we actively retrieve it and practice it. Connerton then goes on to discuss how this knowledge we have of the past is interwoven with historical reconstruction.

While social memory and historical reconstruction have a strong relationship, history is not dependent on the memories that groups have created. Connerton is careful to state that while emotions and memories can heavily influence the way that history is re read, there is a strong difference between the factual events that occurred and the ways in which they were remembered. Important events that occurred in the past are often going to be tainted by the memories of those retelling those stories.

After reading this section I was immediately reminded about the Vice documentary we had watched in class. The discord that exists over the statues of Confederate officers offers a good example of the issues that lay within historical reconstruction and social memory. While the memory of most southerners place these officers in a good light, historical facts prove otherwise to reveal that these men were slave owners. The followers of the Confederate flag are actively retrieving the memories of their ancestors and thinking back to the pride they had. To them, these men were admirable and honorable. However, when looking back one can easily say that these men were neither of those things. So not only does social memory influence historical reconstruction, but it can also attempt to change the way that history is told.

I found that this piece was helpful in elaborating on Halbwachs piece because I was able to think about group memory in a larger context. I found the comparison between memory and history to be very interesting because I have always known that memory influences history, but I have not thought about the extent to which they are intertwined. Connerton also asked questions about how the individual can retrieve his or her memories and it made me think about things that make me rediscover my own memories.

 

In his piece “On Collective Memory” Halbwachs discusses the role that an individual’s memory plays in their life. One’s memory can amount to significant parts of a person’s identity, for it not only effects the way that they act but also the way that we fit into society. Halbwachs states that “the mind reconstructs its memories under the pressures of society” (51) which attests to the understanding that our memory has the power to drive our actions and steer our morals throughout numerous interactions. Halbwachs presents two worlds to the reader: our present society and our society immersed in thought. He states that each individual is in control of their memories and can manipulate their societies immersed in thought.

Throughout the rest of his piece Halbwachs continues to explain the many ways in which our memory can affect all parts of our life, and most importantly our family life. Just as our personal memory can affect other parts of our lives, “we extend our family memory in such a way as to encompass recollections of our worldly life” (81).  Halbwachs believes that these memories can bring together groups of people who share similar memories, which demonstrate one of the ways in which memory can function in our society. He specifically states that although there are families that can share memories, there are still strong distinctions between each memory an individual family or group can have.

Although at times I found this article abstract and difficult to understand I noticed that there have been countless occurrences in my life where my memory has played a large role in the situation at hand. When Halbwachs discusses the reconstruction of the past and how a book that you read in your childhood can have a completely different meaning in the present than when you first read it. As I get older I have began to notice that not just books, but people and places that I have not seen since I was younger or grew up around have taken on a whole new meaning in my adulthood. This may seem insignificant, but where this happens most is in movies. Movies that I loved to watch when I was younger nowadays feel fake and terribly made movies. When I watch a movie now that I watched over and over again when I was little I can barely even watch it for more than 10 minutes. At first it was saddening because I don’t want to think of something that I remembered so fondly in a bad light.

Another part of Halbwachs piece that I connected with was his section about group memory. I believe that our memories are really important and interconnected with our personalities as a whole, and they allow us to connect with others and find our place within a group. This helped to further my understanding of the ways in which groups and families function within a society, and those functions are also related to that of the individual.