reflections from alternator
The relation between the archive and the narratives that start from and refer to the archive is never unilateral.
The archive is more than the crude fact that informs on the narrative; the narrative is something else than the simple interpretation of archive data. It is fair to say that archives and narratives are different enunciating mediums that run parallel to each other and meet in the historic and personal discourse.
Archives spring from the centers of power, they indeed furnish material for the state (or official) knowledge but, in the same time, archives reach deep in the micro-level of our society. Narratives are often individual productions, but their relevance consists in their capacity to engulf large social groups and become hegemonic.
Narratives operate a selection in the bulk of data archive. The selection’s criteria obey the intrinsic rules of narration, which always lead to a recreation of the archive.
Beside the selection of documents, the work of the narrative with the archive involves a plastic element, the tacit interpolation of an artistic modulation in the historic-scientific explanation, which „revives” the archive. The other way around, the archive material poses a constant threat to the narratives, the threat of subverting the narrative’s direction.
This is also true for the archive of the Danube-Black Canal.
The current public narrative about this archive is based on
Such an approach to archive presents a series of methodological shortcomings which arhive-narative.ro indirectly points at.
The site gathers unvisited material (until now) from the second construction stage of the Canal (1975-1989) selected by the Alternator Group from the Archive of the Navigable Canals Administration and combines it with our field research.
The site also presents narrative forms that are obscured in the public narrative about the canal and puts them in relation with the hegemonic narratives.