Hi everyone
Yes, a very interesting discussion. Any information on what the artist is planning to do with the material post exhibition? I wonder what his future plans are.
Best wishes
Hilary

Sent from EE

[log in to unmask] wrote:

Hi all, v interesting debate.

This comment is practice, rather than theory, -led but as an artist/creative archaeologist I've made several works engaging with the materiality of objects after, and during, trauma.

Out of the work "Leave Home Stay" I have a body of photos from Haiti after the 2010 earthquake, taken at tented villages but only on an early mobile phone and always taken with consent - in fact the Haitians actively wanted me to photograph in, their remade homes. These images were installed at my own home in Kent, and in Bristol, and in Italy with reference to the Abruzzo earthquake of 2009.

In 2012 I helped at a shelter in NYC after Hurricane Sandy at an elderly couple asked to check on their flooded home (and cat) and rescue what I could of their belongings. I photographed the interior of the house to share with them, while recognising the fieldwork-like activity of gathering what was not saturated, and what might have personal value to them.

They asked me to share their story, quite insistently, so I installed these photos in another event at the house in Kent, to coincide with local sea defence works. But it was challenging to curate as the objects I photographed included others I found in the mud or washed up on my way to the house. I did not touch them but was aware I was "possessing" them by framing them in some way. I had no idea I would use them as an art work but the install was challenging. I tried to ask  questions of my practice(s) while I curated the images, and wrote about this for British Journalism Review. 

Both exhibitions were Arts Council England funded, which encouraged me in terms of outside body finding a validity in the material and context.

But what is interesting, in the light of this discussion, is that the material I photographed in both places seemed to move between various states of "ownership" depending on whether I regarded it, or thought about it, or acted on it, as journalism, art, or archaeology.

This is a comment which is practice, rather than theory-led, and but I hope it might add something to this important discussion.

All the best,

Christine
------------------

-----Original Message-----
From:         Paul Graves-Brown <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Discussion List for Contemporary and Historical Archaeology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jan 2017 12:46:02
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:     Paul Graves-Brown <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Gideon Mendel, London, Thursday 2nd.

well to reply to Sara and Dan:

Sara - yes I'd be interested in his responses if these could be elicited.

Dan - I understand, but in the contemp context we aren't working by
"normal" salvage rules as these  are peoples belongings and we don't
know in what context they came to be  where they are - the very use of
"discarded" is an assumption that isn't warranted. wrt flannerie and
ruin archaeology, I think my point is the opposite. If we actually
engage with the issues, then the ownership and meaning to the owners of
artefacts is of importance (contra Buchli and Lucas, and c.f. again
Kathy Fewster's critique thereof). Clearly we need to think about
collection and display as two different issues. I guess there's no
problem with collecting stuff in a "rescue" context, although one might
want to ask if these artefacts, on their own, actually tell us anything
more than we could learn from just photographing them. I'm reminded of
the parallel with Jason's work where he sought to talk to people to
contextualise what the deposits of backpack or water containers actually
meant.

But I think the matter of display is more contentious. We don't usually
confront this in archaeology, except of course in relation to human
remains. I've photographed a lot of stuff left on graves in contemporary
cemeteries but it struck me at some point that I had to exercise care as
to what i did with these images and I don't feel i could use them in
publications. Clearly I couldn't collect stuff in this context either.
To collect and record seems fine if it serves some purpose. But to then
display things, particularly in the way this exhibition does is to
appropriate, and it struck me that the etymological point here is the
derivation from "propre" - i.e. that one is in a sense taking ownership
of things. And again the method used in this exhibition is one which
seems to represent the artist taking ownership of the artefacts.

P G-B

On 31/01/2017 11:38, Dan Hicks wrote:
> Hello Paul, Rachael and Laura -
> What an interesting set of questions this thread raises. Gideon's show is not part of our own Refugee Studies project, but we have been in dialogue with him about his work and that of the Gallery hosting this show (Association of Black Photographers): thinking about what it shares with our approach, and what it doesn't. I've already learned a lot from those conversations, and look forward to continuing these at the CHAT meeting at the gallery on Thursday.
>
> We're still thinking about all these issues as a team, and this discussion is very helpful as we do so. Paul G-B raises some important themes. But I also have the strong sense that there is an ethics to failing to collect, to display, to represent, or to intervene as archaeologists in moments of impermanence. It's the salvage archaeologist in me, probably, but there are direct parallels with the longstanding debate over the ethics of non-intervention in photojournalism. In contemporary archaeology, especially where we so often limit our toolkit to photography, or our field-sites to abandoned places, forensic detachment risks giving way to flānerie or to disinterested "ruin archaeology".
>
> Will look forward to hearing the thoughts of others, both on this list and on Thursday evening.
>
> My seminar at UCL on March 13 will continue the conversation - http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/calendar/articles/2016-17-events/20170313
>
> DH
> --
> Dan Hicks MCIfA, FSA
> University of Oxford
> http://www.arch.ox.ac.uk/DH1.html
>
> --------------------------
> contemp-hist-arch is a list for news and events
> in contemporary and historical archaeology, and
> for announcements relating to the CHAT conference group.
> -------
> For email subscription options see:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/archives/contemp-hist-arch.html
> -------
> Visit the CHAT website for more information and for future meeting dates:
> http://www.contemp-hist-arch.ac.uk
> --------------------------
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

--------------------------
contemp-hist-arch is a list for news and events
in contemporary and historical archaeology, and
for announcements relating to the CHAT conference group.
-------
For email subscription options see:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/archives/contemp-hist-arch.html
-------
Visit the CHAT website for more information and for future meeting dates:
http://www.contemp-hist-arch.ac.uk
--------------------------

--------------------------
contemp-hist-arch is a list for news and events
in contemporary and historical archaeology, and
for announcements relating to the CHAT conference group.
-------
For email subscription options see:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/archives/contemp-hist-arch.html
-------
Visit the CHAT website for more information and for future meeting dates:
http://www.contemp-hist-arch.ac.uk
--------------------------
 -------------------------- contemp-hist-arch is a list for news and events in contemporary and historical archaeology, and for announcements relating to the CHAT conference group. ------- For email subscription options see: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/archives/contemp-hist-arch.html ------- Visit the CHAT website for more information and for future meeting dates: http://www.contemp-hist-arch.ac.uk --------------------------