!: The idea of performance being temporary and “un-archivable” isn’t counter to our Western way of thinking but rather a result of the narrow definition we allot to archive. The memory and body should be investigated as valid forms of history.
“‘ It is in accord with archival logic that performance is given to disappear, and mimesis (always an entangled and complicated relationship to the performative) is, in line with a long history of anti-theatricalism, debased if not downright feared as destructive of the pristine ideality of all things marked ‘original’.” Pg. 102
?: If we redefine what is considered a reputable form of storage, how do we reconcile the common necessity of accuracy in our recording. Why does the author assume that archives and precision are primarily western? That, in a sense, seems like exoticism. This idea of other cultures as spiritual and different, when in fact many cultures value written word and precision. The Chinese had one of the earliest forms of the printing press for example.
!: Birns uses time as a motivator for the banality of evil in reference to place when discussing the history of racial violence that took place at mundane places like storefronts or bridges.
“On November 26, 2001, the site may be an unremarkable spot under cloudy skies, but tracing the history of the place testifies to memories of a very different era.” Pg 20.
?: If it is the natural course for evil to have a half-life in society’s eye, what are the most effective ways we as a society can instill reminders that keep the evil fresh?