Search

What some might deem as waste, this image centers. It centers foamy water as a site of generational differentiation, engaging ethnographically with the manner in which environmental changes shift peoples' interactions. It represents a sentiment of at once nostalgia, sadness and disgust on the one hand, and edginess, trendiness, and youthfulness on the other. The argument is that toxicity has the potential to shift social dynamics with and within a place.

It would be helpful to learn more about the contextual elements of this place: what are the social dynamics in Bar Elias overall, and how does this influence the dynamics surrounding this river? What kidn of factory is polluting the river? What are the potential connections between this river and the polluter nationally/internationally? How is the split between generations over this river emblematic of overall generational differentiation?

A photo taken by one of the residents of Bar Elias, with the support of the ethnographer (would be interested to know more about this connection to the project listed from 2019). The fact that the photo was taken by a resident is notable because it potentially indicates something that is important to the person who took it. The image is primarily focused on the water itself as opposed to incorporating more of the surrounding area, such as the edge where young people hang out.

I think it might help to see some of the more directly surrounding areas, such as where the young people hang out (the ledge). Just a slight extension might provide some visual context for how to understand the significance of the river. Or perhaps a collage with some accompanying images to get a sense of the place. As of right now, it's a bit difficult to mentally visualize how this river fits physically/geographically within the context of the town. Where is the factory? Where is the town center? 

Not everyone in a particular community necessarily view toxics the same way--whereas older people see the river with trepidation, the young people are drawn to it. The appearance of toxics is not always seen in a solely negative light--there is a sense of fascination in some at the destruction that toxics cause. Soapy water in itself does not have the appearance of something dangerous, but with greater information and context, particularly in light of how the river looked in the past, the seemingly harmless soapy water has the potential to appear sinister to older generations.

The image captures the toxicity of the river. The image alongside the caption conveys the ways in which something toxic can "reconfigure the social life" of a town. 

I would like to understand more about the factory and this history of polluting the river. You discuss how toxicity has reorganized sociality, I wonder what else it has impacted for these people?

The image sounds like it was captured by one of the ethnographer's interlocutors. The image forces you to examine it which generates an affective response from the realization that this is water from a river.

I like this image as is because you are forced to examine it closely in order to figure out what you are actually looking at, which I think creates a particular experience of the image.

This visualization alongside the caption communicates the literal toxicity of a polluted river, and the impacts such toxicities have on social relations.