The readings for this week focus on the alternative ways for the space of appearance and action that rely in the use of different tools like photography and social media and how these complicate the relationship between spectators and political actors. Beltran (2013) examines the new ways of “coming out” that permitted undocumented activists to reclaim agency and not simply be “spoken about” but instead to be “speaking subjects and agents of change” (81). She calls this peer-to peer and social media use for activist participation a “queer” vision of democracy where an open participation becomes more direct and visible and where activists are able to express “more complex and sophisticated conceptions of loyalty, legality, migration, sexuality and patriotism” (81). With the idea of representation, Beltran mentions the shift in “the politics of incorporation and inclusion” (81) that comes with performative acts and gestures that directly criticize the state unjustice. Here, participation in online practices and new forms of media challenge traditional political domains.
Azoulay (2008) discusses the capacity of action of a photograph, which does not end with the photographic act, but rather has an aftermath effect. For the author, the use of photography has the power to expand the space of action and its effect goes beyond territorial spaces; “ The photographer who found a gap in the curfew and pointed his camera towards the soldiers, deviating the sense and direction of their action, thus restored the conditions of plurality to the space of action. Although plurality cannot erase structural inequalities and discrepancies between the different protagonists, the space of plurality undermines the apparently stable conditions of domination.” (133) Here, photography becomes an object of intervention that gives the capacity of action for the spectator and the one holding the camera; “Within a new framework of time and space, the photograph creates new conditions for moral action.” (135)
Rancière (2009) examines photography as a testimony and its dialectic as image; “The stock reaction to such images is to close one’s eyes or avert one’s gaze…For the image to produce its political effect the spectator must be convinced that she is herself guilty of sharing in the prosperity rooted in imperialist exploitation of the world” (85) Here, photography does not merely represent reality or a duplicate, but has also the power to compel message and a call to action. In this sense speech and image, rather than being opposite cane be complementary.The readings complicate the idea of the space of appearance, civic relations, visibility and representation through the use of new technologies that can be used to reclaim rights and citizenship.