This visualization and caption show how toxics become enfolded within conflicting objectives at different levels of power. It says that the concept of environmental purity can be instrumentalized towards particular ends which may or may not benefit communities most affected by the toxics, or actually address toxic production or contamination.
This image concludes the essay (although labeled visual "3") thus far, and it dwells on the comment of the author's colleague that the region is a "critical" place, or on the tipping point due to multiple stressors (toxicities?) that impact people's bodies and forms of life. It also provides us with a perspective on what leads to the rivers being polluted in particular. The image gives us an (idealized?) view of the gorgeous valley, seemingly pristine, in need of being "saved."
I think either an analysis and integration of this particular image needs to come through in the caption, or a different image should be swapped in to integrate better with the text. The image is a little confusing, because the beauty of the valley makes it hard to connect with all of the stressors discussed in the caption. The caption could perhaps help us understand this seeming disconnect from the bird's eye beauty to the multiple toxicities on the ground.
I think the image itself is solid, just whether it is the right one for this caption is what the question is for me.
It's pulled from campaign materials. What's notable is we get a sense of region more broadly and perhaps the beauty that people are trying to "save".
The overall effect is synthesizing what we have learned from the previous three slides, to consider how multiple toxicities, material and social, compound to make a site "critical" and for people to feel on the brink (of what...breaking?) The image suggests that looks can be decieving or perhaps, provides an idealized opposition to the toxicity that puts in under threat.
I really enjoyed the sentiment of the whole essay - that interesting things are happening in the in between places. Thinking about interstis was particularly interesting, as a friend of mine has just done research on liminality in relation to military deployments and how it affects the individual and their families. I think that this could be another angle to look at perhaps?
Could you explain what the relevance of the image is beyond it being about a religious ordination? How does this relate to toxic places and the military? Who is the individual? Why did you choose him rather than any other Roman Catholic holy man?Could you explain what interstitial time involves in the clergy or in the military?
This is a found image and it contrasts well with the other images in the essay - very different to the Van Gogh painting immediately beforehand and completely different to the other two images at the start of the essay. I feel like I want to know more about the people in the picture - what is happening? Did he have to wait three months between being upgraded (apologies if this is not the right term)?
I wonder if as a way of illustrating the point that you make - whether you could find a ceremony of a military chaplain? As that would bring together the religious aspect, the intertis and the military.
