This week’s viewings inspired me: they were all articulate, multi-layered approaches to capturing the nuance of deeper stories, issues, and places. Like most of us, I was enthralled by Bear 71, but personally, I enjoyed it most because it used an incredibly unique approach to explore a serious issue. I would like to understand war zones in such a way, and I think the power of linking history with facts, larger commentary, and all the nuts and bolts of multi-media, is the direction that storytelling for complex issues should move.
I was struck, however, by the Triangle Fire project. Unlike Localore and Bear 71, it didn’t curate real stories, but rather created a (lost) story from curated objects. The virtual objects in the Triangle Fire project are symbolic memories shards pieced together –and like memory, some of what is remembered isn’t “real.” The picture of a sprinkler, for example, wasn’t one of a sprinkler head that was in the fire, but rather an example of one that was NOT —offered up by someone to bring attention to the fact that there weren’t sprinklers because the bosses were greedy. Another picture was of a woman’s needlepointed name, made by a woman today who had looked up the names of the dead and learned about their lives. These mementos, created from imagination and in modern times, are offered up alongside actual pictures and marriage certificates from the time. What is interesting to me about this is that the story is created not just from actual historical evidence, but from inspiration objects, and newly made items. The virtual nature of the project puts all of them on equal terms: we are all potential creators in the story of the Triangle Fire, because the story only lives on through our current memory of it.
What do people think about the interactive nature of this archival project? If virtual objects, or objects created in modern times, are given equal value with historical evidence, does this shift the narrative of the fire? Who determines what objects are included or not included in the virtual narrative? If all voices are included, are we subtly rewriting the narrative of an historic event? How does the interactive nature of this archive add to or detract from the actual story of the fire?
I think you bring up a really interesting idea about preservation. I believe that part of preservation is also continuing the story and certainly, this is one of the main aims of the Triangle project. The inclusion of personal narratives and objects from today helps point out the personal nature of the tragedy, but also helps point out that tragedies like the Triangle Fire are still happening around the world. For me, the addition of virtual objects and objects created in modern times enhances the actual story of the fire.
I hope we can continue the discussion around Triangle Fire (which, in full disclosure, I have written about)–its simplicity is deceptive. There is an URGENCY to its momentum…the 100th anniversary of the Fire that was almost comparable (not exactly though) to 9-11 for Labor in the US. Think about how the project lives both online and in the public world of an exhibition. How it invites participation from citizens to find objects, stories, videos, memorabilia and offer them to this archive. How we as visitors can re-tell stories and rethink their historical meanings!
I wrote:
“. From a group photo: why does Triangle Fire survivor and anarchist Mary Domsky live in exile in Mexico in the 1930s? From a staged portrait and family commentary: how do the living descendants of teenage factory seamstress and Triangle Fire victim Rosie Weiner keep her memory alive as a real girl with hopes and dreams? From multiple video clips, art works and news items: what can this 1911 labor tragedy signify 100 years later in the global struggle to protect worker and immigrant rights – especially those of the most vulnerable in the workplace – women?