Based on Reading: Grout, H., 2019. Archiving critically: exploring the communication of cultural biases. Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 4(1), pp.71-75.
“It can be seen that every time an archivist makes a decision they are carrying out a philosophical act, which arises from a cultural context and has cultural implications (Pearce, 1992, quoted in Grout, 2019, p. 73).” It was this sentence that really struck a chord with me as I made my way through this reading.
The reading itself is straightforward; seemingly aimed at contextualising the archival process through the critical lens of bias, inclusion and interpretation. The first half of the reading helped confirm a number of things that I have already been thinking about in my own practice. It’s great to see how the notion of an institution-wide ‘decolonising’ of the curriculum (at UAL), could have such a simple use-case within the process of creating and building an archive. I do think it’s important that we question why material is included in an archive and how it ended up there. The authorship of the material, including its history and provenance become part of the power structures that warrant its inclusion in an archive (Grout, 2019). These were all things that were unsurprising to read about but enlightening nonetheless as an introduction to the thought leadership around archiving.
Going back to the quote itself, it was towards the end of the reading where Hannah starts to talk about cataloguing and how the process of archiving is one of making-meaning, that really got me thinking about my own teaching practice. Hannah talks about this idea of creating relationships between material and/or records (Grout, 2019). This resonated with me on many levels. Often times when we teach workshops on BA Graphic and Media Design, we will start the session by introducing references to interesting practitioners (contemporary or historical). Further, we will build connections and highlight to the students, why we have included these references from the context of the workshop but also the larger context of the brief they would be responding to. What I didn’t realise that I was subconsciously doing was in some way exactly what Hannah talks about; this idea of an active voice that not just presents the relevance of different things but seeks to understand where they overlap and how the inform each other (Grout, 2019). I’m finding this realisation particularly empowering both for myself and in how I continue to create learning for my students. This reading has perhaps helped me articulate (on some level, even just for myself), the context within which we should be presenting the relevance of research and/or archival material.
References:
- Pearce, S. (1992). Museums, objects, and collections: A cultural study. Leicester: Leicester University Press.
- Grout, H. (2019). Archiving critically: exploring the communication of cultural biases. Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 4(1), pp.71-75.