Unit 5: Ritualizing and Archiving the Past
Schneider’s Performance Remains
! : According to Schneider, the body itself “becomes an archive and host to a collective memory” (pg. 103). The idea of a new history being formed from not only different performative practices but also collective memory is intricate and provides context as to how we ourselves create history, not necessarily through strictly written documentation, but with our actions and physical presence. Internal and external histories become part of the archive (act as the archive).
? : How does Schneider’s idea of “retroaction” and rituals of “domiciliation” or “house arrest” (pg. 105) connect to Ralph Lemon’s Counter-Memorials through ritualization? Is what makes the archive a complex “social” performance the diverse backgrounds, pieces of art, and people that partake in crafting a whole archive? Or does it have to do with the societal impact it has on history and new generations that look into these archival performances?
Birns’ Ritualizing the Past
! : Lemon’s practice of “empirical performance formalism” has become an important factor in how his work is portrayed, crafted, and examined (pg. 19). I found the metaphor of these ritualizations to be like diary entries, each being different in their presentation and responses but able to come together to form one cohesive story/archive, to be profound. However, in the end, only the observer on site can “know” the true, untouched history of what was there compared to a historical marker. Even thought the research isn’t completely evident in the final work, it is still deeply rooted in the final product.
? : Toward the end of the article, Birns’ states, “the horror is gone” (pg. 22). However, is the “horror” of the past truly gone? And can one ever completely make “peace?” I am wondering which ways of approaching these histories is the best option for people to initiate reflection, discussion, and action? What kind of “historical experiences” have proven to be most affective? Do memorials actually make us think the past is finished? In essence, which of these experiences help us gain power to construct change and progression forward (and if they all do, how come things are still complacent today)?
Unit 6: The Two Cultures
! : “[Non-scientists] vigorously refuse to be corralled in a cultural box” (Snow, 9). There is an ignorance associated with being a part of one of the two cultures. Certain types of people do not want to communicate or think like the other, but they are placing themselves in secluded box just the same as not wanting to be in the other’s “box.” Each group (scientists and non-scientists) has their own culture that is constantly in action and neither is completely right or wrong. I also found it interesting that morals can be different even though “universal” ethical ideas and foundational laws exist.
? : “Have we crystallized so far that we are no longer flexible at all?” (Snow, 19). How are we stuck in a vacuum? Are people really that different that a bridge cannot fill the gap between the scientists and non-scientists. Is Snow stereotyping and generalizing too much here? I believe the Humanities course at Davidson is bringing us closer to bridging this gap. Is full/complete knowledge even possible anymore?
Theories I recognized:
- Game Theory
- Information Theory
- Spacial Relativity
- Evolution by Natural Selection
- Schrödinger’s Quantum Theory
- Heliocentrism
Experiments I recognized:
- Mendelian Genetics
- Conditioned Reflexes
- Newton Eyes Optics
- Keystone Species
- Marie Curie’s Work Matters
- Robert Millikan’s Charge
Unit 7: Translation of Requiem
My AT group was split on which translation of Requiem was a better fit to Anna Akhmatova’s original piece. I originally felt that Thomas’s translation offered a more accurate depiction of the original work, bringing sophistication and confusion at the same time. It brought up more questioning and analytical thinking than the Anderson piece. However, Anderson’s translation felt more personal and raw, sticking to a rhyme scheme found in most poetry while being more comprehendible to a native English speaking audience. For instance, the opening lines of “not where the sky’s dome….my own people were” was a lot easier to understand in Anderson’s translation, being direct while sticking to classic methods of poetry writing. However, due to the complexity found in Thomas’s translation, I found that one more appealing (ex: “I need to kill and kill again my memory, turn my heart to stone…)” making me think more and longer about each word choice. It felt like free verse and more metaphorical in its prose. Ultimately, Thomas was more professional in his approach while Anderson sought the personal emotion found in Requiem’s original writing.
! Poets held a lot of power politically that is normally unfound in most countries, which lead to a lot of them being held in prisons or killed.
? Where else does art hold a lot of political meaning (other countries and eras) and how how does nonfictional writing/ fictional novels under the social realism compete in accurately depicting these harsh experiences?
Unit 8: Everybody Talks About the Weather
The Lost Honor of Katharina Blum
- !: Terrorism and radicalism were often confused, instilling fear in all citizens due to the political reform and threat of getting attacked in the media or being thrown in prison for any association.
- ?: How far did journalism go in order to break stories? In this film, the reporter made up a lot of information about Katharina Blum, and even misquoted and found her mother. What were the limits? Was this the most profitable professions during the time?
Baader-Meinhof Komplex
- !: Violence escalated when RAF leaders like Baader, Gudrun, and Ulrike were imprisoned and on trial without them having any say about it. The new generation went rouge to make a message. The trial was extremely unfair and led Ulrike to argue with Baaeder and Gudrun, being seen as a traitor and “knife” in the RAF’s back.
- ?: What is the difference between the leaders getting murdered in the eyes of the new factions of RAF versus committing suicide? How does this change the viewpoints and reactionary responses of the new generation of radicals?
“Shadows of the Summit Pointing West” (1960)
- !: German was trying to abolish the little bit of democracy that still remained standing – to rule against the interests and will of the people, especially through attitudes of casting “shadows of an unholy past back on to the walls” of Germany.
- ?: What ended up happening in German later history post-WWII: renewing of guilt or constructive politics of peace? How did the RAF and Ulrike attempt to contribute to fixing/worsening this dilemma?
“Hitler Within You” (1961)
- !: The younger generation must not stay silent nor allow the past to rest, but rather demand answers. In order to define a “new beginning,” one cannot and must not erase the memory of recent decades of history. They must reject ideas and redefine what it means to be German.
- ?: How did young Germans go about creating reconciliation with former opponents and co-exist with other countries so another World War would not occur?
“Everybody Talks About the Weather” (1969)
- !: Women struggled to be perceived as unique or irreplaceable beings in this society even after raising the children who are to take over soon.
- ?: How did these issues get talked about not as the weather would but with real political potency? What transitioned the mindset of the German people, especially in respect to women and children?
“Women in the SDS: Acting on Their Own Behalf” (1968)
- !: Is it not the fault of “women liberationists” but rather a societal failure in recognizing their importance.
- ?: How did women gain a sense of influence in history, purpose, and direction in their work? How did this expand beyond Frankfurt?
“Columnism” (1968)
- !: Profit and prestige factors were vital to how papers gave an “aura” to the audience of importance and truth. However, the claims columnists made reproduced the issues Germans were facing and did not truly seek change in the broken system but rather stabilized it.
- ?: How are news-outlets functioning differently after the RAF? How do these compare with the propaganda of today? How did Ulrike change the way columns were viewed? What did she do differently to appeal to mass audiences and gain a following?