top of page

2016

Arkiv for samtidskultur

 

 

 

 

 

Contemporary_culture_axo.png

The Archive of Contemporary Culture

Mari Synnøve Gjertsen

 

 

Culture as a constructed concept, including language and the idea of common decent, has been important in the formation of the nation state as we know it. This is because it gives its existence a reason, beyond the forceful land appropriation of some ruler, and creates a bond between the inhabitants. In believing in shared rituals and history we feel a togetherness that gives us a reason to create a society together. 

 

However it is important not to limit the understanding of culture to the falsely perceived stable condition of similar individuals living within definite geographical limits. Culture contains more than language and common decent and is in no way stable and consistent. With this understanding culture can be used as a backdrop for conflict, implying that people of different cultures have a hard time understanding each other and thereby living together in the world. 

 

In her book The Human Condition Hannah Arendt writes  “The task and potential greatness of mortals lie in their ability to produce things – works and deeds and words – which would deserve to be and, at least to a degree, are at home in everlastingness, so that through them mortals could find their place in a cosmos where everything is immortal except themselves.”1 What she describes here can be understood as culture, something that ties us together beyond our individual lives, and is a part of this everlastingness, or even creates it. In this understanding the objects humans create becomes important as immortal communicators of culture.

 

Today, in the world of internet and social media, infinite information and knowledge is seemingly available to the general public, as well as the possibility to make a statement about everything. This suggests that everyone can choose how to construct their own cultural position and thus curate the public view of their own self. Here we risk loosing the ethical norms that have guided the media for decades. We must also consider that the most used websites are controlled by big businesses that have a great interest in keeping you within their services, in order to make it more profitable. Thereby distorting the idea of freedom inscribed in this global network. This online sphere favours images and words, excluding physical objects, limiting the means of cultural communication. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the archive of contemporary culture every visitor have to make a contribution to the collection in order to be able to enter. This can be a personal object they bring from home or they can create something, i.e. words or images, on their arrival. In the beginning the building will be completely empty and will evolve to a full archive over time. There will be a garden for the plants and seeds people bring with them.

 

The archive also represents a physical embodiment of the act of paying for services with information. Which, as Evgeny Morozov points out, have become a big part of our daily lives, although we are not especially aware of it, through the use of digital platforms such as Google or Facebook.2 In the archive however you are fully aware of the act and are free to choose what information you are willing to give away. 

 

The museum and archive is the architectural embodiment of the idea that human culture can be read through a collection of objects. By curating exhibitions the museum creates a common knowledge among the visitors, based on the ideological beliefs of the curator. Davide Sacconi points to how the project Central Archive of Human Cultures by G. P. Frassinelli and 2A+P/A reveals “how any attempt at preservation and curation is an ideological construction and therefore an act of power over man.”3

 

Every contribution to the Archive of Contemporary Culture will have to be exhibited and thereby be available to the public. The combination of the visitors’ contributions will reflect the mix of individuals living in, or visiting, the area as well as a cultural whole. However the curator will decide by which system the objects will be archived and exhibited and this choice will make a great impact on how the cultural content is perceived. In this way the curators theoretical and cultural background also constitutes a significant part of the archive.

 

 

 

 

 

1 Hanna Arendt, The Human Condition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958) p.19

2 Evgeny Morozov, "Images of Surveillance", at the Goethe-Institut New York, 05.12.2015, viewed Mach 02.2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC-nsO3acCk

3 Davide Sacconi, Savage Architecture, (Milano, Italy: Black Square, 2016), p.63

Contemporary_culture_m_tekst.png
Contemporary_culture_m_tekst.png
Contemporary_culture_illu_1.jpg

© 2023 MARI SYNNØVE GJERTSEN

    bottom of page