Rancière, political theory and activist community appraisal

IF 1.3 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
M. Howard, K. Jarvie, S. Wright
{"title":"Rancière, political theory and activist community appraisal","authors":"M. Howard, K. Jarvie, S. Wright","doi":"10.1080/01576895.2021.1987938","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Researchers must continually discriminate between competing sources of evidence, knowledge and theoretical justification, selecting who we believe to be credible informants and what we perceive as reliable testimony. In the keeping of records, particularly in the act of appraisal, we utilise methods of evaluation that reflect the social processes, institutional procedures, and interpersonal influences common to our disciplinary milieu. Viewing activist community recordkeeping and archiving through the lens of Rancière and SMT (Social Movement Theory), this article extends theoretical discussion into areas silent in the archival discourse to date. Activists working in radical community recordkeeping environments and archival situations face political and epistemic choices with regard to how and why they represent certain subjects and materials. The authors explore these contentions through the experiences of two such radical archives: Archimovi, an Italian archive of radical social movements; and the archive in a records continuum sense, the radical recordkeeping of animal activist group Direct Action Everywhere, based in the United States.","PeriodicalId":43371,"journal":{"name":"Archives and Manuscripts","volume":"49 1","pages":"208 - 227"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives and Manuscripts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2021.1987938","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Researchers must continually discriminate between competing sources of evidence, knowledge and theoretical justification, selecting who we believe to be credible informants and what we perceive as reliable testimony. In the keeping of records, particularly in the act of appraisal, we utilise methods of evaluation that reflect the social processes, institutional procedures, and interpersonal influences common to our disciplinary milieu. Viewing activist community recordkeeping and archiving through the lens of Rancière and SMT (Social Movement Theory), this article extends theoretical discussion into areas silent in the archival discourse to date. Activists working in radical community recordkeeping environments and archival situations face political and epistemic choices with regard to how and why they represent certain subjects and materials. The authors explore these contentions through the experiences of two such radical archives: Archimovi, an Italian archive of radical social movements; and the archive in a records continuum sense, the radical recordkeeping of animal activist group Direct Action Everywhere, based in the United States.
Rancière,政治理论与活动家社区评价
摘要研究人员必须不断区分相互竞争的证据、知识和理论依据来源,选择我们认为可信的线人和我们认为可靠的证词。在记录的保存过程中,特别是在评估过程中,我们使用的评估方法反映了我们学科环境中常见的社会过程、制度程序和人际影响。本文通过Rancière和SMT(社会运动理论)的视角来看待活动家社区的记录和归档,将理论讨论扩展到迄今为止档案话语中沉默的领域。在激进的社区记录保存环境和档案环境中工作的活动家在如何以及为什么代表某些主题和材料方面面临着政治和认识上的选择。作者通过两个这样的激进档案馆的经历来探讨这些争论:意大利激进社会运动档案馆Archimovi;以及记录连续体意义上的档案,总部位于美国的动物活动家团体“无处不在的直接行动”的激进记录保存。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Archives and Manuscripts
Archives and Manuscripts INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信