This artifact challenges the hegemonic ways of visualizing toxic places by highlighting the ways of invisiblizing the toxicities with creation of ordered, sereine and green manicured landscape. Moreover, it shows the toxicity is produced through human practices and assumptions of being different and superior to other forms of being.
Its ethnographic import can be extended by juxtaposing history of evolution of described practices in cemetery. Also, additon of what are extents of the impacts of chemical infiltration in immediate surroundings of the cemetery will enrich the narrative.
It is an image extracted from the works of a professional photographer. The image perfectly captures the scale and expanse of the cemetery, moreover, it illustrates a sense of order and a sense of serenity with which a cemetery is designed and managed.
In its current form, the caption is elaborate enough building connections between the conceptual frameworks and the field site.
This artifact advances way of co-relating visiblity and invisiblity with the visualization of toxic places. It propagates the idea inherent existence of toxcities in our surroundings which are often hidden from our sight.
This image is striking precisely because of how lush green and orderly it looks. This is a great example for the argument the author wants to make about the way in which visual gaze might obscure the hidden forms of toxicity, literally under the surface and often at other scales such as the cellular or microbial. I think the pairing of the lush green image along with the caption does a good job as a whole, in bringing out the forms of toxicity in this story.
I wonder if it would help to show visually, some of the other scales of toxicity which an image like this doesn't help us see. What if you were to show a panel at the bottom half showing different kinds of work--the work of chemicals, microbes etc in making this possible. And what about words at the top to highlight the aesthetic in the lush green--"a perfectly manicured paradise" maybe?
This visualization challenges the usual senses provoked by photo essays and conservative journalism around nuclear disaster sites: that a belligerent nature has once again taken over abandoned ruins of toxic industrialism (such as this National Geographic essay about animals living in radiation ecosystem of Chernobyl), of "life" in post-capitalist (or in some cases, communist or socialist accumulative practices) ruins.
Since this visualization is countering hegemonic visualizations of nonhumans in Chernobyl, as the caption makes it clear, maybe juxtaposing or overlaying it with that hegemonic visualization could be interesting? I would also be interested in knowing more about how people who curate such more-than-human assemblies of vital life say about these hegemonic visualizations, if at all?
This is a created image by the contributor. The little things in this image jump out at me, revealing practices of care and curation: the doll at the bottom, the hat on the dove (is it a military hat or some other type I cannot tell, but the intrigue works), the hanging yellow monkey toy (assuming it is a monkey at all). By calling attention away from nuclear clouds in the sky or haunting abandoned living and working spaces, the little things make more-than-human attachments evocative of memory, yes, but also of possible futures to come.
