{"id":826,"date":"2020-11-14T13:07:33","date_gmt":"2020-11-14T13:07:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/digitalholocaustmemory.wordpress.com\/?p=826"},"modified":"2020-11-14T13:07:33","modified_gmt":"2020-11-14T13:07:33","slug":"reflections-on-europeana2020","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/digitalholocaustmemorybackup\/2020\/11\/14\/reflections-on-europeana2020\/","title":{"rendered":"Reflections on #Europeana2020"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

November 2020 saw the first online annual conference of Europeana<\/a> due to the Covid pandemic. Usually, I would not be able to attend because this is the middle of term-time, but thanks to research leave and online accessibility to the event, I had the opportunity to engage with <\/strong>policymakers, educators, archivists, technologists, curators, researchers and many other voices within and beyond the GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museum) sector. <\/strong>This week’s blog reflects on my experience at the conference, particularly in relation to its digital <\/strong>thread and the workshop I co-hosted with Tessa Bouwman from the Bergen-Belsen Memorial.<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Europeana’s mission is:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Europeana empowers the cultural heritage sector in its digital transformation. We develop expertise, tools and policies to embrace digital change and encourage partnerships that foster innovation.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The website offers a wide range of resources for those working with and researching digital heritage, <\/strong>and access to a ever-expanding network <\/strong>of professionals. This was the first opportunity I have had to really think about Digital Holocaust Memory <\/strong>beyond the contexts of Holocaust and genocide memory, and media studies (my two familiar fields). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reflections on the conference <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. Establishing play spaces <\/strong>for digital heritage and memory work<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Another tool that was presented <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    All of this left me with a question: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    How confident with digital technologies are heritage and educational professionals working in Holocaust and genocide memory, and those of us researching it in the academy?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    What could happen if rather than depending on external organisations to produce digital initiatives, or researching about them without a solid understanding of how they work technologically, <\/em>we could develop Discovery Labs <\/strong>where we define some questions and take time to explore <\/strong>and play <\/strong>with a specific digital tool, then come back and share our outputs and experiences? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    One conversation that arose in the conference keynote in the morning of Day 3 was about the fear of making mistakes<\/strong>. Of course, museums, archives, libraries, galleries, and research and educational institutions want to present to the public finished, functioning and ‘correct’ content – this reaffirms our authority as places that produce and circulate knowledge. <\/strong>Furthermore, funding, staff time and limited resources all restrict our activities. However, creating Discovery Labs<\/strong> would enable space for playfulness – where the end result is not to produce perfect output that must be presented to funders by a specific deadline. Rather, they would open up opportunities to experiment with possibilities. There are so many free <\/strong>digital tools available, that bar time<\/strong>, such spaces would be light in terms of their resource and financial implications. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    2. Where and what is dark heritage<\/strong>? Are there limits to digital engagement <\/strong>with it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    On the final day of the conference, Tessa Bouwman and I led a workshop on ‘Dark Heritage: Finding the Right Tone Online’. We had originally envisioned the workshop to be for people working in this context (we tried to keep it broad by using the term ‘dark heritage’). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Nevertheless, the audience for the workshop was much broader. This of course brought with it anxieties about how to pitch it to the participants who were there, but also opened up broader questions than I had certainly imagined. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The morning keynote on day 2 of the conference had stirred much backlash on Twitter, and rightly so, for its problematic, racist discourse. I will not repeat it here, but the debate can be followed through this informative thread on Twitter<\/a>. This debate, however, fed into our workshop through thinking about issues related to decolonising heritage practices. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    We had hope our workshop would provoke more questions rather than answers, and start a discussion about dealing with dark heritage online, for which there are currently no comprehensive international standards. The session certainly left me thinking about these questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    1. Are there limits to the uses of digital representation and circulation for dark heritage? <\/strong>

    During the conference I was introduced to various digital tools <\/strong>which could be used to enhance digital collections and encourage participatory co-curation. <\/strong>These included the Exhibit tool<\/a> <\/strong>created by Mnemoscene<\/a> and the University of St Andrews. This allows people to tell stories with 3D-objects. <\/strong>There was also some interesting discussion about materiality, authenticity <\/strong>and 3D graphical representation <\/strong>which particularly resonated with me in the context of Holocaust and genocide memory, where material evidence <\/strong>is so crucial. <\/p>\n\n\n\n