Some 25 years ago, Nancy Miller and Jason Tougaw stated that we live in “the age of trauma” (Miller/Tougaw, Extremities, 2002). By this, they referred primarily to the aftermath of the war crimes and genocides of the previous century, particularly the Holocaust, which formed the main subject of the first wave of trauma studies. Since then, the world has not become a more peaceful place. Acts of terrorism and newly resurfacing geopolitical conflicts, culminating again in war and genocidal violence, dominate the daily news. Global economic entanglements and the increasing use of digital media ensure that the impact of these atrocities is seen and felt globally more than ever and with greater intensity. At the same time, emancipation movements ensure an ongoing confrontation, not only with the aftermath, but with the actual persistence of long-lasting and abundant atrocities such as colonial, racial, sexual, and gender-related violence. With the spiraling climate crisis on top of all that, it should come as no surprise that “trauma” has become a lens through which an increasing number of people are inclined to view reality.
The increasing awareness of the mechanisms of trauma has the advantage that previously marginalized experiences are cast in a different light and finally receive attention. On the other hand, significant differences between the events and experiences of trauma threaten to be lost from view. When even everyday setbacks are labeled as traumatic, the term loses its weight. It no longer does justice to experiences that pose an existential threat and defy the very limits of representation and understanding. The instrumentalization of trauma in identity politics is yet another complex subject. While it is indispensable for highlighting injustice by generating attention for the precarious past and present of the affected groups, claims of victimhood that become the stake in political power struggles can fuel polarization, and even result in more violence. Second-generation trauma studies therefore caution against essentializing approaches and urge close attention to the multiplicity and specific circumstances of traumatic experiences and events.
Aligning itself with second-generation trauma studies, this research group seeks to investigate how contemporary art thematizes trauma. In close collaboration with artists working in this field, we seek to enable fruitful dialogues between academic research and artistic practice. What idioms and vocabularies emerge at the intersection of current artistic and academic research into experiences and histories of trauma and loss? What kind of encounters and exchanges occur at this interface? And what is their value to survivors and witnesses of unfathomable events? With Donald Winnicott's concept of the "holding environment" in mind, we seek to explore whether art can offer something similar: spaces in which deeply distressing experiences can be addressed, shared and integrated, thereby making it possible to reconnect with life.
We hope that this research project can be relevant in a world that has come to be viewed by an increasing number of people through the lens of trauma. By bringing academic research and artistic practices into dialogue with each other, we aim to explore the role art can play in what has been called “the age of trauma”. Without claiming that art can repair what is broken, we believe that art can offer a counterweight to one-sided, polarizing, and potentially re-traumatizing images and narratives. In close collaboration with artists working in this field, we explore how art can restore the connection with life where it threatened to be lost.
Project Group l Network group l Reading Group
Members of the research group
Internal
External
Sara Blokland, visual artist, curator and researcher, sarablokland.com