Workshop I: Sensation

Zoom (Global), Mar 10, 2023

Our first workshop focused on issues of sensation: on the connections between the experience of nature and the translation of that experience into that of how we move through archives and collections; on the archive as a site through which nature is encountered; on encountering information in different ways; and on the possibilities and limits of building richer embodied experiences through emerging technologies.

Attendees

Apart from ourselves, Laura Briscoe was also present to give the attendees a quick overview of the background surrounding the Mitten Archives and the importance of moss collections. Our attendees for this workshop were selected from a pool of applicants for their interests working with scientific subjects and histories, and new and emerging media technologies, incorporating both into creative processes, practices and projects.

Karen Holmberg (Archaeologist, interested in volcanism, disaster, perception, and environmental change over longue durées)

Katherine F. Mcleod (Historian, interested in the histories of zoos and ecology in relation to race, immigration and settler colonialism)

Laurel Kaminsky (Biologist, interested in forest health monitory, lichens and mushrooms, storytelling through data)

Luiza Prado (Mixed-Media\Installation Artist, interests in indigenous knowledge, food infrastructures, and plants and reproduction)

Morgan Halane (Biologist, interested in ethnobotany and the study of connections between plants and people across diverse cultures and locations)

Andy Quitmeyer (Digital Naturalist, interests in interaction and interface design, how the creative arts can enhance scientific learning and engagement)

The Workshop

Prior to the workshop day, we sent each of our attendees a set of three texts each of the principal investigators had written thinking about the topic of sensation and experience, as a way to get our attendees thinking and inspire them.

Elaine’s essay, Archives Embodied, Bodies Archived, considers the kinds of Othering imaginaries at play in the work of naturalists like Alfred Russel Wallace and Richard Spruce, imaginaries that reified their own experiences of moss into scientific history in very particular ways while simultaneously erasing the experiences of other racialized and cultural bodies who were a part of those histories. She considers: “how do our own bodies bleed into the collections that we work with?”

In Sensations, Tega considers how processes of documentation using different tools change and structure the world as we encounter and come to know it: “When specimens are digitized, captured as data and stored in databases, how do they change and become something new? She reflects on her experiments with macrophotography and trying to capture the texture of moss and ponders the limits of the imperative to precisely render the world through imaging technologies and visual data.

Lastly, Ahmed’s essay, Thinking with Moss, Thinking Through Atmospheres, moves through the different ways in which German and Japanese philosophy theorize atmosphere. Noting that whereas the former situates atmosphere as emanating from the (human) body, the latter considers it as something produced through inter-species and nonhuman relations, he considers how non-Eurocentric knowledge systems might help us design differently: “the focus in Japan on proper configuration, or the art of setting and cultivating, connects environment to sensation, what, in the design of digital archives, might be the connection between architecture and interface.”

Pre-Workshop Materials

Where and how do the themes we’ve raised (or similar ones) emerge in your own work?

Each attendee was given 20 minutes within which to quickly list down any thoughts on how the issues that we were dealing with in relation to moss and its archives showed up in their own work. Afterwards, we held a 45 minute discussion around what they had put down, and several core themes emerged:

  • The issue of loss, both in terms of what gets lost in preserving and curating dead specimens versus living ones in the wild, as well as issues of the historical erasure and reduction of people, plants, and processes;

  • Practices of collecting, particularly the uses of new tools and technologies of digitization at the point of collection and the possibilities to preserve richer information on site;

  • New metaphors to help us think through processes of collection, curation, and presentation, i.e. (re)mixing, and recipes as a way to ‘make’ archives;

  • Nonhuman perception and phenomenology and thinking about interfaces and interactions that make it possible for people to get closer to how plants are in the world;

  • Pleasure and the libidinal economy and its role in mediating participation; sensual\sexual interfaces incorporating multi-media and multi-modalities as a way to access collections and\or make collections more accessible;

  • The involvement of communities and their consideration in accessing and presenting: communities for whom these plants belong to their lifeworld; communities involved in recreating plants as subjects of archival interrogation; communities who learn from and are audiences for archives

How do we now think about digitization and digital tools, digital archives and collections, and the experience of using them?

The second exercise had participants once again spending 20 minutes putting down their ideas for how they might address the concerns they had raised in the last exercise through new possibilities in designing digital archive experiences. Following this we had another 45 minute moderated discussion, after which we then concluded the workshop. Some of the key observations that came out of the exercise:

  • The universal emphasis in digitized representations on the visual, with all of its limits and issues, i.e. mosses that are easier to digitize are given preference;

  • The consideration of how we might include significant elements of a ‘landscape’ that are not collectable or exhibitable - how we might give more context to audiences;

  • Richer qualitative descriptions or recreations from\of researchers experiences in the field or archives;

  • Thinking about archives as ‘memory-in-practice’; archives that change and mutate just as memories change; adding layers or growing new branches of information over time;

  • The role of audiences, and recording audience experiences for posterity;

  • Considering digitization itself as a colonial practice, the politics of citation and inclusion in the archive; criticality, and raising critical questions for audiences to consider, as a part of design goals; building reflexivity into interfaces.

After a presentation by the principal investigators and Laura Briscoe giving the attendees much-needed context and some background for the project, we had devised two exercises - conducted in Miro - to get discussions going. Over our presentation, we introduced and asked the participants to think through a set of themes and prompts that we had provided:

How do we incorporate different understandings of the gendered, racialized, abled, or nonhuman body into digital archives and collections?

How do we incorporate embodied experiences: sight, smell, sound, and the other senses, into digitization work? What other new materialities might we encode in the design of digital archives?

What new metaphors does the study of the nonhuman lend to us as we think of new kinds of digital architectures, visualizations, interfaces, and interactions?

Workshop Themes & Prompts