“Photographing Objects as Queer Archival Practice” is an article written by Ann Cvetkovich which compels an argument for the use of photography as a queer archival practice. She suggests that photography can be used in the creation of alternative archives that are in a position to resist dominant narratives and contribute to a broader understanding of queer history.
Ann Cvetkovich centres her argument around the concept of queer archives. She defines it as artefacts and documents that are collected together to preserve a history of queer life. Traditional archival practices are often exclusionary and do not represent communities which are marginalized, including queer communities, is an argument she points outs. According to her, the loss of important historical knowledge and cultural heritage has resulted from the exclusionary nature of traditional archival practices.
Cvetkovich suggests that using photography as a tool for the creation of archives will be a solution to addressing the problem. She argues that taking photographs is suitable in a unique way for this task since it can help in capturing the essence of queer identity and culture as well as being used in creation of new narrative that challenges dominant cultural norms.
Cvetkovich examines the work of several contemporary photographers who use photography as a tool for queer archival practice as one of the ways she supports her argument. In demonstrating ways in which photography can be used to document and preserve queer histories, she cites photographers works such as Catherine Opie, Zoe Leonard, and Cheryl Dunye.
Furthermore, Cvetkovich elaborates on how the things pictured in this library are of high importance. She argues that the objects of significance are in the archiving processes since they remind of the past and can help in telling stories of people who have been left out of history. Cvetkovich says alternative archives can be made by taking pictures of these things that show how queer communities live and question the dominant cultural stories.
The fact that she talks about the role played by appropriation in queer archival is also of importance in building parts of her case. She says that mainstream society produces a lot of pictures and objects used in queer archives.
In general, Ann Cvetkovich’s point of view in this article is convincing. The articles show how standard archival practices have failed to represent communities which are marginalized, like the queer communities. In her article, she also suggests the use of photography as a better tool than can be used to fix this problem. She further says that we can learn more about queer history and identify if we use photos in making alternative archives that can challenge dominant cultural stories.
Cvetkovich’s case for appropriation as a form of art has important repercussions. Appropriation has been a controversial way to make art in the past, but Cvetkovich says it can be used to challenge dominant cultural narratives and make new ones that reflect the experiences of marginalized groups. Artists can help people learn more about queer history and identity by taking items and images from mainstream culture and using them in queer archival work.
In the end, Ann Cvetkovich’s piece “Photographing Objects as Queer Archival Practice” makes a strong case for using photography as a tool for queer archival practice. Cvetkovich shows how photography can be used to challenge dominant cultural narratives and help us learn more about queer history and identity by looking at how modern photographers are using photography to make alternative archives. Her argument has important implications for appropriation as an artistic technique, suggesting that it can be used to make new stories that represent the experiences of marginalized communities.
References
Cvetkovich, A. (2014). 11 Photographing Objects as Queer Archival Practice. In Feeling photography (pp. 273-296). Duke University Press.
write