Gathering #1: Seen/Unseen — The Intimate ArchiveGathering #1: Seen/Unseen — The Intimate Archive

On Thursday 11 February, the first public gathering of Collecting Otherwise took place in the form of an intimate, informal and friendly Zoom chat.

We were warmly welcomed with an atypical yet intriguing introduction: a live reading by Delany Boutkan, researcher at Het Nieuwe Instituut, of A Letter to the Netherlands Architecture Instituut (as Het Nieuwe Instituut was formerly known). This open letter was published in 1989 by the Vrouwen Bouwen en Wonen (VBW; Women Building and Living) network in one of their Bulletin publications (the VBW archive is currently being acquired by Het Nieuwe Instituut and is one of the Collecting Otherwise case studies). Written over 30 years ago, this text addressed institutional responsibilities "in making visible the contributions of women in architecture and urbanism". It still resonates strongly in today's landscape of labour inequality and the lack of visibility that women face in architecture and other fields.

Setareh Noorani, researcher at Het Nieuwe Instituut, moderated this session and started by introducing the other speakers present: in this intimate gathering, members of the Collecting Otherwise working group were to share thoughts and insights from their research. The members of the working group present were Delany Boutkan, Harriet Rose Morley, Isola Tong, Alfred Marasigan, Julius Thissen, Carolina Pinto and Hetty Berens. We were also joined by Lidewij Tummers, architect and member of the Vrouwen Bowen en Wonen network, who is working closely with the institute on the archive acquisition. Alongside these live contributors, we also heard the recorded thoughts of Michael Karabinos and Hannah Dawn Henderson.

The conversation began: we were confronted by the current state of affairs, namely that in the National Collection of Dutch Architecture and Urban Planning, housed at Het Nieuwe Instituut, only 3% is material (co-)authored by women architects, and queer and colonial bodies are either invisible or subjected to a Eurocentric male gaze.

Collecting Otherwise is part of the wider initiative Disclosing Architecture, and co-authored by Het Nieuwe Instituut's R&D and Heritage departments. The research project focuses on a series of case studies as models as a way to give continuity to past projects and include their methodologies within the future heritage practices connected to the institute's collections. The project's goals include focusing its theoretical and practical inquiries on fostering intersectional awareness in the national collection and future acquisitions. By looking at the archives through specifically feminist, queer, and decolonial lenses, Collecting Otherwise aims to highlight the often minority perspectives that are generally obscured by standard architectural and archival practice.

The working group is focusing on specific case studies, that Setareh Noorani briefly introduced: the National Exhibition of Women's Labour 1898, Stichting Goed Wonen/Stichting Wonen (The Good Living Foundation/Living Foundation 1946 - 1988), Vrouwen, Bouwen en Wonen (Women, Building and Living, 1983 - now), the file /"Photos among which furniture, lamps, woodworking, and Dutch East Indies [sic],/" the Berlage archive (trip to Indonesia 1923), the album Keurige Leugens van het Officieel Fatsoen (The Respectable Lies of Official Decency) by Wim den Boon, files in Adolph Eibink's archive, and /"inboorlinge/" (Natives), a document by Koen Limperg. As senior curator Hetty Berens said during the meeting: /"This material is an umbrella for a lot of things that are stored in the archive./"
Collecting Otherwise is a work in progress, an always under construction research endeavour, that is making use of a multi-scalar approach to the archive: from object, to questions, to methodology and tools, and back again.

We would take on this model tonight, together, and further continue Collecting Otherwise's public research process. The first question was presented on our screens: how can we track the visibility of labour (intersectional, international, intergenerational) and their positionalities in the archived projects, considering their contexts in architecture, design, and urban planning? To help answer this question, Lidewij shared her experiences in the VBW network, outlining the efforts to archive female architectural practices and noting what has been achieved and what still needs to be done. Admitting to a feeling of déjà vu, she recalled the efforts made in the 1990s to develop tools and methodologies to tackle issues of inequality. The network recently began to notice the urgency to archive in order to make visible: through the making of their own timelines, analysing their previous work and reflecting on materials and documents, asking: what is important? What was once refused? This latter question is particularly urgent, Lidewij noted, when our efforts are channelled towards uncovering and unfolding alternative narratives. She is also attempting to undertake this in a new project called Cherchez La Femme.

Hetty Berens, archivist at Het Nieuwe Instituut and member of the working group, joined the conversation to reflect on the collection's acquisition policy, one that historically has been mainly passive, and dependent on single author contributions. Not only were few women encouraged to share their archive, but the various roles that they took in building practice were often invisible. With this, Hetty pointed back to acquisition policy in the 1950s. This highlighted the importance of conversations and connections like this one in archiving not only drawings or photographs, but immaterial heritage, such as Lidewij's testimonies and oral histories. At the time of VBW, the personal in the political was much more about space and collective struggles, and the activism brought on by these concerns was first raised by artists or sociologists, and only later by architects. This led the audience to wonder why: was it the lack of female architects, or perhaps the lack of spatial and social connections?

These histories are made of the personal, the intimate, that transpires into the archive and into the public, leaving to question how much of this intimacy is seen and should be present. The image that we have of each other is reflected in the archive. How do we care for these objects? As the audience continued to activate the chat as a debate space, we deepened our conversation on intimacy in the archive, particularly when it comes to personal encounters with bodies that did not give permission to be archived, to be captured and collected. What violence comes with this act?

Julius Thissen, a member of the working group, underlined the question launched on Instagram: whether /"using personal documents and photos without being able to ask permission to do so, helps to display their work, impact, and presence./" Thissen reflected on how to think of these presences and of colonial bodies, and whether they should be displayed at all. In capturing personal connections, the archive functions as a director's cut: a specific gaze that directs the narrative. Who gives permission for these intimate archival encounters? What bodies are to be shown or read from the case study material, and how can we reflect on certain positions of reading and being read?

Michael Karabinos, archivist and historian and member of the working group, appeared on our screens to share preliminary findings on Berlage's photo in Indonesia, during one of his trips to the former Dutch colony. A woman sitting on a loom, staring into the distance: how many copies has she been captured in? Karabinos reflects on the notion of institutional supra-archives, and approaches the project with a positive criticality, one in which we can look at the archival creator, donor and subject relationship differently, and build an archive that can be a space for questioning.

The meeting continued with lively conversations about labelling, archiving and collecting. One of the participants pointed out that, /"to explore the gaze in Berlage's photo, it would be really important to see the rest of his photographs, his photo album and writings about the trip& Something happens when you isolate a picture like this too. We now see it digitally, in the context of a Zoom meeting, which adds another layer of meaning and invites new (our) gazes. And how to mediate the researcher's gaze inside and outside? How can we think about the production of space through these gazes?/"

Isola Tong, artist, architect and member of the working group, gave her insights on what this all means when you are in the Global South, as is her case in the Philippines. These places are fed colonial gazes, built based on European body measurements. The violence of erasure is not only enforced but self-imposed, through centuries of colonial power that made native materials disappear, alongside with their archives. Through constructing the notion of architecture itself as concrete (materially and theoretically), ephemeral materials and pre-colonial archives are erased.

Alfred Marasigan, also in the Philippines, pointed to the power in events such as this one: how they reflect an immense amount of agency, through the open questions and caring discussions, and continue to reflect on notions of archiving, while there is a sense of urgency to categorise the archive, to make it neat and organised. The archive is always linked to both a distant past and a distant future. But what about the present? Archiving for today could mean to archive the unseen, the chaotic, the uncatalogued, through moments like these. Clara Balaguer, cultural worker and working group member, mentioned the importance of caring for the process, through secretarial labour. Being alive is different than being kept or archived. We went back to Alfred Marasigan's urgency in archiving for the now: the future is almost too far, let's do it for the present.

Questions from the audience came with concerns regarding this process within our working group, too: who is curating the archive, and who grants access to materials? Furthermore, we wondered about the relationship between accessibility and digitalisation. Hetty Berens responded by pointing out the several initiatives in place to make the archive more open, and providing inventories related to on-going projects. There are also curatorial decisions to be made in making things digital: when going from highlight to highlight, many roles and voices are obscured, and yet, collecting otherwise is more complex and nuanced than simply digitising all women's archives, for instance. Setareh Noorani added that this project will not only uncover the hidden presences in the archive, but will also propose reading the collection and the practice of collecting and archiving from a perspective in line with current societal changes. To do this, Collecting Otherwise will focus on developing alternative methodologies for the acquisition, classification and distribution of heritage.

Intimate, alive and caring discussions fuelled this evening that went by too fast. As Lidewij Tummers typed into our meeting chat: /"The pleasure of the archiving project is to operate in a very positive environment, this time raising curiosity instead of resistance, doubt and scepticism./" Building together along different disciplines, timelines, and environments resulted in rich conversations. We left the Zoom call with a big thank you for all the participants, speakers, listeners.

The next public gathering will be taking place on 27 May, alongside The Critical Visitor's Archival Interaction: [De-]Constructing Heritage, in which we hope to continue fostering connections, reflections, and critical thoughts. Please feel free to continue this conversation in our Collecting Otherwise Etherpad, or simply join us in May.

* always under construction is a term borrowed from working group member Harriet Rose Morley in framing her artistic research practice.