Ghost Dance
In Archive Fever, Derrida traces the etymology of “archive,” and argues that one of its meanings originates from the Greek word arkheion—referring to magistrate’s or ruler’s house, the place where official documents were stored, and as the locus of authority.[1] Traditionally, the archive, as part of the “commence–command” structure, points to violent, centralized governance and interpretation. However, Derrida points out that the archive is also a dynamic paradox, a specter suspended among past, present, and future. The impulse to archive stems from humanity’s “life instinct” to counteract the transience of life and extend history by preserving objects as tangible memories. Conversely, “death drive” reveals the archive’s self-destructive tendencies.[2] In the cyclical contradiction of ongoing archival construction and destruction, continuous evolution and regeneration of meanings give rise to the “anarchive.” Thus, archive is not a static collection of texts, images, or objects but a state of perpetual transformation, summoning the “ghostly” unfinished. While archives, as carriers of power discourse, obscure marginalized communities, their ongoing evolution may activate alternative narratives to deconstruct themselves as a persistence between life and death, resisting the structural amnesia inherent in the term’s original etymology.
When globalization and modernity lead to the discreteness of time and space, social connections are extended beyond local contexts into vast stretches of time-space by geographical migration and information flow.[3] “Diaspora” becomes a norm, with people scattering, migrating, and resettling in different geographical spaces. Geographer Alison Blunt points out that “diaspora” is essentially a geographical concept, where community diaspora inherently involves a double rupture of identity and geographical space.[4] If this rupture once constructed and nearly realized the globalization dream through transnational flows, in the increasingly polarized world today, fragmented diasporic experiences have, however, turned right into a dual loss of self-identity and geographical belonging. Archival violence festers within the fissures of fragmentation, further silencing the voices of the diasporic to be lost and buried in the shifting fractures of time and space. Yet, the remnants of archive intertwine with memories that have not entirely vanished, coexisting as specters, persistently unsettling the unresolved threads. Revisiting archival and historical sites amid the entanglements of diaspora, archives, and geographical spaces offers an opportunity for an archaeological rediscovery of the past, informed by the understanding of the present. It may traverse time and build a revisitable spatial-temporal site for reconstructing individual and collective narratives, providing a brief respite from the disorientation and unease of migration.
Based on this possibility of dynamic reproduction, artists use images as language and blueprint, re-examine existing archival materials, and enter the fields where the events took place, attempting to link the concretized historical facts with current life, while continuously scrutinizing and inquiring into the dialectical relationship between the two. Starting from a group photo, Lee Kai Chung imagines and weaves the identity dislocation and power dynamics of diasporic history through site visits and filming. In the project A Chinese Question, Andong Zheng continuously visits the relics of the Transcontinental Railroad and mining towns in the American West, using archival research to document and reconstruct the often-overlooked history of Chinese laborers in American society. Juxtaposing official records and family photographs in moving images, Hester Yang reveals the hidden history of the compulsory deportation of Chinese laborers in post-war Liverpool and explores its resulting intergenerational trauma. Carô Gervay connects her photographic practice across Vietnamese archives and social organizations in the UK and France through independent ethnography, exploring the complexity of collective archiving and identity in cross-cultural contexts. Yang-En Hume collects anonymous portraits of women from European flea markets and recreates through hand-sewn collages their obscured features, neglected by history, offering a gentle alternative imagination of diaspora. As these research and creations generate new discourses, the ongoing archiving and overwriting recall and renunciate marginalized narratives, where transcontinental diasporic histories become heterochronic references for the present.
Documentary field and archival studies problematize the gaps in institutional archiving and reveal the inherent power relations of imagery that parallel the archival system. Although photography carries evidential expectations due to its indexical nature of directly recording reality through technology, the photographer always selectively intervenes and reconstructs reality based on his or her role and perception. Images can be reproduced and rearranged in new contexts, given preconceived meanings, and re-involved in specific discourses. When images’ commitment to the authenticity of memory is invalidated, and archives cannot be objectively perpetuated, they can only transform into ghosts wandering between space and time—as both inscription and confiscation of memory, preoccupying the future by confiscating the past.[5]
When artistic deconstruction turns to the medium of imagery itself and takes as its departure an intimate connection across migratory routes, it essentially ruptures the traditional archive to the point of abolishing the meaning of objective reality. Image archive extends from the phenomenology of the hauntological experience of discrete encounters to the spectral nature of the medium itself, evoking an emotional aura for both creator and viewer. Roland Barthes describes “punctum” as a moment of emotional resonance of an image that penetrates the “studium”—the analytical cultural understanding—to the level of irrational perception.[6] Camille Carbonaro and Christine Chung, through their similar collection of family photographs and documents, excavate and imagine genealogical maps, each narrating the hauntological qualities and complex emotions of Mediterranean and East Asian cultures within their lives. Laura Chen weaves into the collage montage of the family album her father’s oral history of her unknown grandfather, tracing her Dutch-Chinese identity where intimate emotions, memories, and narratives of personal archive, along with family history, redefine objective, rational classifications of archiving. At its core, this might not be a subjective reaction to archival violence[7] or deconstruction of power, but it is precisely due to intimate nostalgia and reminiscence, that the amnesia of official records has given rise to contemporary personal archives, wherein subjectively re-archived material and discourse point toward the persistent apparition of future digital ghosts, sustaining emotional connections and memory reconstruction within diaspora experiences.
The memorial reconfiguration of family migration and the self-overwriting of archival images imply the coexistence of spectral experiences in both diasporic experiences and archival mediums. It is not eternal, but rather an enduring iterative haunting of ephemerality. As media archaeologists Garnet Hertz and Jussi Parikka raise the concept of “zombie media”—It never dies, but rather persists as “living-deads”; “They decay, rot, reform, remix, and get historicized, reinterpreted, and collected.”[8] Using archives as blueprints, Ance Janevica expands memories and imaginations of cultural heritage through the multi-sensory experiences promised by contemporary technology, freeing the data regeneration of history from the dual confinement of archival violence and digital rationality.
At the intersection of technology circuits, diasporic experience, and image archives, all that was once inscribed is dismantled into a heterochronic genealogy, living with specters in an anti-archaeological, anti-chronical, and even anti-archival guise—a productive opening of meaning pointing towards an unformulated future.[9] Tianyi Zheng captures the state of existence exiled in the in-between, freezing the suspended identity that drifts between memory and imagined futures. Meanwhile, Beichen Zhang directly features “ghosts” as characters in his film, whose ever-changing appearances in the pursuit of historical questions become the eternal companions of those seeking truth within the cracks of time and space. The image is once again deconstructed and archived, as the inherent archival tendency toward self-forgetting and reconstruction; Dance of ghosts weaves hidden emotional threads from the diasporic schema, where lived experiences transcend time and space, reinterpreted in a silent dialogue.
Ultimately, all the images within archives, or related to archives, will once again form the archive of "Ghosts Dance," with countless perceptions of sound and light transforming into new images and textual data—How will media archaeology, as a dynamic archival medium, archive itself in the post-digital age? As new ghosts wander through the exhibition’s time and space, the archival images oscillating between creation and dissolution, reflect human anxiety about existence while responding to a yearning for the future. Through relentless self-archaeology and regeneration, these images, in their endless dance with ghosts, open up infinite reflections on space-time, memory, and identity.
幽灵舞
德里达在《档案热》中追溯档案的词源，其中一层意义源于希腊语中的 “arkheion”——特指执政官和最高法官的房屋，意味着储存官方文件的地点，亦是权威的起源[1]。传统意义上的档案作为“起源-特权”结构中的一环，指向暴力性、中心化的管理和阐释。但德里达随即指出，档案更是动态的矛盾体，如幽灵悬置在过去、现在和未来之间。记档的冲动来自人类的“生本能 (life instinct) ”，意图通过保留物件作为记忆的实体，对抗生命的消逝，延续历史，而相对的“死亡驱力 (death drive) ”，提示着档案同时也具有自毁倾向[2]。在不断建档和毁灭其物质存在的循环矛盾中，意义生成并迭代，引发“无档案” (anarchive)；由此，档案并非文本、图像与物件的静态组合，而是在永恒的变动中召唤着“幽灵”般的未完成性。若作为权力话语载体的档案将边缘群体隐匿，则其持续的更迭便得以激活替代性的叙事来消解自身，作为一种生与死之间的续存，对原词义带来的结构性失忆形成抵抗。
当全球化与现代性引发时间与空间的分离，地理的迁徙和信息流动将社会联结从地方性的场域中延伸至无限的时空地带[3]，人们在不同的地理空间中分散、迁移和再定居，“离散” (diaspora) 成为一种常态。地理学家艾莉森·布朗特 (Alison Blunt) 指出：“离散”本质上是一个地理概念，社群离散总包含着身份认同与地理空间的双重断裂[4]。如果说这一断裂曾构筑并无限接近了跨国流动的全球化理想，在世界格局日益分化的当下，碎片化的离散经验则右转为自我认同与地理归属的双重迷失。档案暴力便在碎片的罅隙中作祟，越发弱化离散者的声音，直至它遗失湮没于流动的时空断层中。而残存的记档与未曾完全消逝的记忆交织在场，伴生为时空中的幽灵，仍然搅动着未解的线索。在离散、档案、地理空间的纠葛间重访档案与历史现场，基于此刻的认识对过往进行再“考古”，或能以跨越时间的方式，为个体与集体的叙事重构可再访的域限空间，以短暂安置迁移中的迷失与不安。
基于动态再生产的可能，艺术家以影像为语言和蓝本，重新审视现有的档案资料，并进入事件发生的田野，试图链接既定的史实与当下生活，并持续地审视与追问二者的辩证关系。从一张合照出发，李继忠通过实地走访与拍摄，想象并编织出一段离散历史中的身份错置与权力动态。郑安东在项目《中国问题》 (A Chinese Question) 中基于档案研究持续走访美国西部太平洋铁路遗迹与矿业小镇，以影像鉴证并重建华人劳工在美国社会中常被淡化的历史。杨越乔通过动态影像并置官方记录与家庭相片，揭示战后利物浦华人海员遭强制驱逐的被隐史实及其引发的代际创伤。Carô Gervay以摄影串联英法越南档案馆与社会组织的实践，探讨跨文化语境中集体记档与身份认同的复杂关系。Yang-En Hume在欧洲跳蚤市场收集匿名的女性肖像，并由手工缝纫揉合拼接她们因被历史忽视而模糊的面貌，以柔软语调重述对离散的替代性想象。当这些调研与创作催生出新的话语体系，持续的记档与覆写召回并重申了边缘化的叙事，大陆间的离散历史成为此刻经验的异时参考。
纪实性的田野与档案研究问题化了机构存档中的空白，同时揭示了影像内容所固有的、与档案系统并行的权力关系。尽管摄影因为具有通过技术直接记录现实的索引性 (indexical) 而承载着证据性的期待，但拍摄者总是基于其角色与认知选择性地介入和重构现实。影像可以在新语境中被复制、编排，赋予预设意义后再次卷入特定的话语。倘若图像对于记忆真实性的承诺已然失效，档案亦无法客观永续，它们唯有化作徘徊在时空之间的幽灵——是记忆的铭刻，也是记忆的没收，通过收缴过去预先占据未来[5]。
而当艺术解构关注影像媒介本身，并以跨越迁移始末的亲密联结为出发点，它便在本质上与传统档案形成断裂，以至取消了客观真实的意义。影档由离散经验中幽灵体验的现象学蔓延为其媒介本身的幽灵性，唤起创作者和观者的情感灵韵。罗兰·巴特 (Roland Barthes) 用「刺点」 (punctum) 形容图像引发情感共鸣的瞬间，其穿透「知面」 (studium)——即分析性的文化认识，进入非理性的感知层次[6]。Camille Carbonaro与Christine Chung 默契地通过收集家族相片及文件，考古并想象血脉地图，分别叙述了地中海与东亚文化在她们生活中的幽灵属性与对其的复杂情感。Laura Chen将父亲口述的祖父人生经历编织入家庭相片的拼贴蒙太奇，探寻自己的荷籍华裔身份，家庭历史及个人记档中的亲密情感、回忆和叙事重新定义了以客观理性为特点的分类学。其核心并非对过往档案暴力的主观反动和权力解构[7]，但正因亲密的怀旧与惦念，官方记档所引发的失忆 (amnesia) 得以促生当代私人影档，被主观拆解后归档的物证与话语，指向未来数据幽灵的持续显影，维系着离散经验中的情感联结与记忆再生。
家庭迁移的回忆重构与档案影像的自我覆写意味着幽灵体验在离散经验与档案媒介中共存，它并非永恒，而是转瞬即逝之物的持续迭代萦绕。如媒介考古学者加内特·赫兹 (Garnet Hertz) 和尤西·帕里卡 (Jussi Parikka) 提出“僵尸媒介” (zombie media) 的概念：它永远不会死亡，而是作为“活死者” (living-dead) ，如幽灵般顽固地续存：“它们会衰败、腐烂、移形、重组，并被历史化、被重新解释、被收集起来[8]。”Ance Janevica以旧档为蓝本，依托当代技术允诺的全方位感官体验拓展有关文化遗产的记忆与想象，历史的数据化再生得以摆脱存档暴力和数字理性的双重禁锢。
在技术回路、离散经验、影像档案的交集之处，曾被铭刻的一切拆散为异时性系谱，以反考古学、反编年史观乃至反档案的样貌与幽灵共存，将意义开放予未定的未来[9]。郑天依以被放逐于中间地带的存在状态，定格在回忆与未来想象间飘荡悬置的身份处境。张北辰则直接将“幽灵”作为影片中的人物，以其在历史追问中不断更替的面貌，成为当下追忆者在时空裂缝中寻求真相的永恒伴随。影像又一次的解构与记档，如档案本身的自我遗忘与重构倾向，幽灵之舞从离散的图谱中勾连起隐秘的情感脉络，跨越时空的生命经历在无声的对话中被重新解读。
而最终，所有档案中的影像，或关于档案的影像，将又一次构成“幽灵舞”的档案，千万种对声与光的感知再度化为新的图像和文字数据——后数字时代下，媒介考古影像作为动态归档的媒介又将如何归档其自身？当新的幽灵于展览的时空中飘荡，在生成与消解间游移的档案影像既映射了人类对存在的焦虑，也回应着对未来的渴望。通过不断的自我考古与再生成，它们在与幽灵共舞的无尽循环中，开启关于时空、记忆与身份的无限反思。
- [1] Jacques Derrida, Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression, trans. Eric Prenowitz (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998), 1-4.[2] Ibid. [3] Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990), 19-21[4] Alison Blunt, “Geographies of Diaspora and Mixed Descent: Anglo-Indians in India and Britain,” International Journal of Population Geography 9, no.1 (2003): 282.[5] De Baecque, Antoine, Thierry Jousse, and Peggy Kamuf. “Cinema and Its Ghosts: An Interview with Jacques Derrida.” Discourse 37, no.1-2 (2015): 39.[6] Roland Barthes, Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography, trans. Richard Howard (New York: Hill and Wang, 1981), 25-6.[7] Derrida, Archive Fever, 7.[8] Garnet Hertz and Jussi Parikka, “Zombie Media: Circuit Bending Media Archaeology into an Art Method,” Leonardo 45, no.5 (2012): 429-30.[9] Colin Davis, “Hauntology, Spectres and Phantoms,” French Studies 59, no.3 (2005): 377, 379.