Multimodal Ambivalence: A Manifesto for Producing in S@!#t Times

For those of us located in the Global North, 2021 began with a barrage media content documenting coup attempt United States, Kingdom's split from Europe after four years Brexit deliberations, and talk mass vaccinations amid uneven global devastation COVID-19. three us, our connections to South Asia, Latin America, West Africa, current Euro-American mediatized stories were supplemented by ongoing narratives state-sponsored sectarian violence India Brazil, police brutality Nigeria, “Southern” related COVID-19 pandemic its consequences. In each these cases, social has fostered contradictory participatory potentials. On one hand, potential foment creation shared iterative conspiracy theories, disinformation, right-wing plots. From QAnon antimask antivaccine discourses anti-immigrant “Leave.EU” campaigns Kingdom, circulations images, texts, videos have sowed seeds for an amplification white supremacist violence, rejection public health guidance, rearticulation virulent nativist political thought age capitalist dispossession. other just as multimodal making circulation strategies on played role fomenting homicidal they also integral part movements towards justice. Grassroots mobilizations videos, texts collocating collective imaginaries various projects recognition solidarity across Chile, India, Thailand, Argentina, Puerto Rico, give few examples, demonstrate ways which “multimodal” plays important generating visualizing, articulating, conceptualizing different futures, both online off. It is this context that we take up mantle editors Multimodal Anthropologies section American Anthropologist. are thrilled continue work supporting, facilitating, eliciting anthropology “dive into broad range methods doing work” strive “to understand define what counts knowledge production increasingly expansive ways” (Chin 2017). Indeed, last several years, anthropologists embraced multimodality opportunity collaborate invent participants, create alternate pathways anthropological knowledge, and, more broadly, rethink, recalibrate, reimagine ethnography epistemological grounds discipline. already working within strictures visual anthropology, offered bring forms technical conceptual expertise table. growing number adjacent disciplines affirmed expanded extratextual representation, communication, theorization look guidance collaborators. bent activist engaged approaches build earlier imaginings “shared anthropology,” only now there meet participants realms together circulate widely hope, help address pressing challenges time. short, experimentation been continues be edge discipline, hope serve tenure inaugurated under editorial leadership Deborah Thomas curated wonderful unanticipated Samuel Collins, Matthew Durington, Harjant Gill. However, even excited about engendering enacting ambivalent trajectory, given broader media-saturated world-historical living. We particularly wary noncritical engagements digital communications technologies, fetishized foundational medium work. An uncritical engagement new tools at disposal can easily aid reproducing sustaining “bad habitus” capitalism—as it reifies structures inequality (Takaragawa et al. 2019), reinscribes propagates problematic representations so-called Other, incites extreme speech (Pohjonen Udupa 2019) fuel xenophobic nationalist while potentially overshadowing nondigital embodied production. Our ambivalence grounded illusion democratic realm makes easy either embrace romanticism will somehow save (Noble 2018) or amplify anxiety itself root cause rupture (rather than imperial colonial histories foundations condition) (Udupa Dattatreyan, review). Algorithmic orders, make whom close conversation fall never-ending loop, mostly anchored events unfolding reproduce ahistorical geographically limited understandings present. Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “simultaneous attitudes feelings (such attraction repulsion) toward object, person, action.” Paying attention affects linked objects, persons, ideas, so helps orient ourselves differently world (Ahmed 2006). orientation takes seriously one's mixed reminds paint space offer opportunities simplistically “even playing field” dangerous fictions. suggest, keep honest tendencies discipline liberal assumptions, unreflexive understandings, frameworks when practices reimagined grounds. As such, depart Ciara Kierans Kirsten Bell's (2017) ableist “bi-polar” register pits moral imperatives against relativist ones. Instead, turn methodological ethical stance Sara Ahmed (2021) calls “killjoy commitments” engage world-making begins apprehensive but hopeful unequal worlds inherit positions them. Part killjoy commitment constantly remind any endeavor dream must contextualized proliferation fraught “stays trouble” (Haraway 2016) perhaps trouble. Rather pivoting false binaries, recognizes critiques (re)produces neocolonial extraction, exclusion, inequality, representational problematics. Yet, doesn't necessarily stay level critique recognition; seeks open spaces speculative possibility. allows utilize detritus technoscience encourages hack latest advances representations, all staying reflexive knowing are, multiple ways, complicit. produce contends fact neither makers technologies use outside frame imperialism capitalism. Ambivalence, productive techno-material-affective holds helping move past problem “stir same old frame” (Minh-Ha 1992) promotes avoidance comes contending larger power shape objects/tools with. This short essay—written manifesto invitation—engages frames: visual, collaborative, sensorial. means not participate vibrant unfolded over promise invitation you do same. “the manifesto” rhetorical device much call action theorizing affordances limits present conjuncture. follows, briefly mark capacity draw problematics contemporary moment recognizing, simultaneously, tremendous presents imagine believe account creative-critical ways—including deeply embedded complicit them—we possibilities enact otherwise. conclude essay discussing experiments sort review process type work, transparent, dialogic, guided key tenets manifesto. vision builds Gill's interrogation inform scholarship ethnographic filmmaking offers disrupt They state their farewell “encouraged provides reframing disciplinary canons foregrounding does fit feature-length documentary-conventions, authored margins, “celebrate diverse experiences cinematic sensibilities, especially formats evolve rush update collections.” decolonize challenge existing taxonomies sustain regarding so. Such necessitates genres becoming attentive formal language elements All too often, eager cameras focused gathering producing leaves problems aesthetics, technique, form unattended, uncritiqued, and/or undertheorized. contend meaningful interventions, need consider how aspects intrinsic meaning produced, (or aren't) successfully challenged, whether if qualities distinct writing mobilized. Here, maker, own individual facilitators collaborators, requires rigorous exploration why using equipment might structure nontextual arguments inquiries seeing. Relatedly, fearlessly quell iconophobia (Castaing-Taylor 1996) characterized subfield indeed, broadly aesthetics element “can used reconfigure questions, resist translation exist tension forms” (Grimshaw 2011). words, method inquiry product. approach technology—new old—with ambivalence. avoid taking granted break allure always “user-friendly” “intuitive” objects take. Inevitably, scaffolding intuitive easy-to-use interfaces creates materiality produced delimits possibility thinking through something said, explored, contested. drones normalize militarized surveillance god's-eye view platforms prompt compulsively share what's mind, new-media scholar Lev Manovich (2001) computer (and technological matter) asking follow mental trajectory designer. divorced military, surveillance, interests; systems perpetuate based designer's developer's racial, sexual, gender, aporias. witnessed scandal technologists who racism guise neutrality innovation (Benjamin 2019). Each system entrenched capitalism's long history militarization nondesirable Others (see Brown 2015). Tech materialize systems, ease reproduction click button mediations produce. We've seen light sensors soap dispensers could recognize darker skin tones algorithms consistently pornographic Black women self-driving cars don't detect stop people crossing street. obtain value “innovative solutions” seem whiter affluent, actually ones “making” solutions made significant dent myriad inequalities face. media-making ambivalence, let's reframe seeing, hearing, interacting sold suspiciously neutral. Herein lies importance hacking, experimenting order develop deploy being flexible. After all, no matter sophisticated become, coupling human. heed Odell's (2019) activate image reflects “resistance-in-place.” Odell, place oneself cannot appropriated system. unrecognizable needs productivity, revive older tech, radical bricoleurs appropriate designed commandeer techno-praxis shapes. Let's poor image, Steyerl (2009) characterizes “mocks promises technology” violent accelerated images audiovisual capitalism, capitalism banks trades attention. Many areas communities live end divide, where landlines coexist alongside dial-up internet cafes non-smartphones. collaborative spirit multimodality, assemblages resist-in-place interlocutors. Glissant (1997) argues “right opacity,” represent “that reduced” Euro-Western demands transparent knowability. works “an accountability” (Ginsburg developing “prioritize relationship film subjects appear it,” us. collaboration, cardinal potentialities engagement, complex shot dynamics power. Savannah Shange (2016) writes, collaboration term/concept should readily associate discipline's aiding abetting governance, present-day neoliberal university's co-opt impulses goals. The questions collaborating with, ends, conditions necessary “killjoy” 2021). These force confront project conceive others might, enactment circulation, harm, some era beyond imagine, anticipate, collaborators (Stout 2014). importantly, explicitly formulated careful future ownership collaboratively generated material capital generate unequivocally extractive anthropology. imperative collectively iteratively ask utilized projects. But crucially, suggest start ethic whatever banner research has, very least, mutually beneficial vectors (Dattatreyan 2020). Dwight Conquergood (2002) describes entails “caravan” socio-political economic interests. Conquergood's caravan metaphor poignant with/eliciting participation economically, socially, politically positioned placed risk participating If inviting risks associated sharing time, efforts, labor, seems discussions around political, social, endeavor—beyond stipends good feeling together—are had early (Nakamura 2008). Otherwise, journey implies includes potentials decidedly leaving out. defense, kind shielding tactic deflect responsibility. Claire Bishop (2012) argues, art evocation collaboration—particularly involve dispossessed, vulnerable, excluded—can short-circuit aesthetic resonance Similarly, “collaboration” way difficult creative generates, functioning instead ready-made explanation shortcomings, cliched reproductions, political. matter, promised explore affords “study.” Moten Harney (2013), “study” refers intellectuality everyday lives response circumstances inhabit. engages study ground critically creatively find together. Crucially, because simply yield intellectual ideas concerns interlocutors seemingly unique, ontologically exceptional nor impose particular seeing onto collaboration. Rather, crucible deliberation disagreement imperfect expression emerge. acknowledges creating possible want imagine. Recognizing moments refusal, well say pathway Considering inevitable mistakes, misunderstandings, imperfections processes, “bad” collaborations generative critical forms. What processes named evoke participation, left invisible? How think instances interlocutor tells worth time still willing project? track refusal leads introductions unforeseen pathways? Another refusals regards refusals: things emerge meant written visible? Where us? Audra Simpson's (2007) notion “ethnographic refusal” inspired dwell ambivalences see encounter limit Simpson, “calculus know I refuse write in” project. Much like Glissant's right opacity, basis promising starting point embraces expect together, represent. cease vertical them horizontal possible. rejects represents collaborators—and knowledge—as legible bid away built hubris assumes information, data, access, obtain. Moments seek lead frames representation typical dominant render knowable. Reaching there, Simpson exert dominion harm. “Rather stops, impediments knowing, may tell us,” “tell cradle embed … statist recognition” (Simpson 2007, 78). turn, allow otherwise co-creating become. envision sensoria site domination, struggle, resistance. senses centers relativism de facto Boasian imagines diversity vector senses, interested mediates sight, touch, taste—or sensorial configuration therein—and workings. marking sensory constitutive meanings senses” (sight, sound, etc.), sense” (to feel experience desire), understand/make meaning), never unmediated situate curious, creative, desirable quite literally changes see. relies dedication learning sense (with others) anew. words Tina Campt (2017, 8), attune counterintuitive “haptic frequency vibration” moves connects silenced submerged archiving. retraining forces re-ask ourselves: begin recognizing my colonized perceptions, am unable perceive, body perceive surroundings differently? emerges out exploratory product rather uncover pitfalls Instead shying politics pleasure ethnography, dwells tension. re-attune multisensorial audiences deep colonization doubled accrue excess leave uncritiqued. centering approach, advocate crude senses. While join Anthropocenic landscapes inhabit—or, looking ahead (Ingold 2011; Tsing 2015)—we re-attunement self-evident process. successful sensorially immersive virtual reality show—which was initially ironically) defined empathy compassion machine—merely mobilizing decolonial intervention. fact, reinvestment likely colonizing gaze holding fast binary asymmetries symbolized demarcation between front behind camera. Ginsburg (2018), instance, argued stymied slow, painful ethnographers finally understood reveal “aesthetics visible relationships, vulnerabilities, however ethically considered, fraught. rich historically situated knowledge. Sensory critiqued “ocularcentrism” epistemologies, literal figurative primacy eye David Howes (2004), example, ocularcentrism relatedness historical/cultural contexts. That say, entangled influence world. Even Christopher Pinney (2004) “corpothetics,” culturally hits corneas. here, bodily co-mingling cultural contexts reinscription without relations knowledge-power. Pinney's darshan (the divine Hindu ritual practice), his understanding corpothetics rooted fundamentally curiosity savarna (upper-caste) emerged nineteenth century Orientalist Europe. Cultural difference, framework, position sensing then incorporates tethered curiosities (Zurn Shankar Western observer, caste sensibility acceptable becomes stand-in Asian seeing/being, following age-old bounded, typological Other. act predi