Launching Defiant Objects

We, Tahani Nadim and Rebecca Randall (both Goldsmiths), have begun work on the SHERPA-LEAP project Defiant Objects. See the About page for more details on the project. The first stage comprises what we call the “Literature Review” though it reviews much more than just the literature: Bekky has been looking at digital archives, institutional and otherwise, while Tahani could be found in the stores of Goldsmiths’ Special Collections trying to find difficult objects.

Some of these have now been tamed into this blog’s banner image, which consists of the following materials (from left to right):

I Materials from Stephen Willat‘s Tower Mosaic, a project that ran from 29 April to 12 May 1991 in the Warwick and Brindley Estate in North London. The project included community participation, an evolving installation, participant research materials and methods, photographs, collages, printed ephemera such as “Mosaic sheets” (see first image), posters and invitation cards (see third image).

I The third issue of LTTR journal entitled “Practice More Failure” published 3 July 2004. Put together by the LTTR member Emily Roysdon, Ginger Brooks Takahashi and K8 Hardy, the journal is an assemblage of very many different parts and objects: It comes in an envelope which contains a bound booklet whose pages can be folded out and turned into individual posters. There is also a smaller envelope (see second picture) that includes a poster by Carrie Moyer and a stapled zine as well as an even smaller envelope containing “IOU” cards by Michelle Marchese.

I A programme booklet by artist Emma Hedditch, entitled “A Political Feeling, I Hope So” produced for her “residency” at Cubitt, London. This lists the events, such as a concert, film screenings and open meetings, that were carried out during the three-day residency, from 30 January to 1 February 2004.

The difficulties that arise in relation to the above items when viewed as research outputs for inclusion in institutional repositories are multiple: Is the research output the entire project or does it need disarticulation? If it’s the entire project, what are its parts and should we be comprehensive, i.e. document as many individual aspects as possible? Who are the authors? Who are the contributors? Does it make sense to retain the category of “author”?

These are just some of the ad hoc issues we’re confronted when trying to include such objects in our digital archives. In the course of the project, we’ll attempt to formalise these issues.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: