Reem Y.

Reem Y.:

It is appealing to study the interchangeable movements of people within spaces based on the premises of historical knowledge in regards to past events that occurred in those spaces. These movements of performativity determine the kind of interaction between people and spaces. On the subject of Industrial Ruins, my interest leys in comparing the industrial ruins “produced by warfare” with “the depredation wrought by cycles of capitalist reconstruction.” I will draw examples of industrial ruins in Providence that are abandoned due to capitalism and modernity, with the ones resulted from the civil war. These non-places in daily life become sought places in creative disciplines as art, photography, and film. To relate this to archaeology, what kind of movement do archaeologists perform when conducting excavations and research on specific spaces? How different are Archaeologists’ interactions with ruins when they know the history of the site?

Bibliography:

Edensor, Tim; 2005. Industrial ruins: Spaces, aesthetics, and materiality. Oxford; New York; Berg

Forbes, Hamish. 2007. Meaning and Identity in a Greek landscape: An Archaeological Ethnography. Cambridge University Press.

Auge, M.;1995. Non-Place: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity, London: Verso.

Butler, Judith; 1997. Excitable speech: A politics of the Performative.

Roth, Michael S.; 1957. Irresistible decay: ruins reclaimed. Los Angeles: the Getty Research Institute for the History of Art and the Humanities

Elden, Stuart; 1971. Mapping the present: Heidegger, Foucault and the project of a spatial history. London; New York: Continuum

Waldrop, Keith; 1991. The ruins of Providence. OtherWind Press