I was really impressed by the quality of all the presentations, which have given me a lot to think about to refine my own work. Here are my comments on three of them.
Georges – Why and how did similar environmental movements develop in the East and West of Europe in the late Twentieth Century?
I really enjoyed your presentation, which was well-structured, clear and honest about your questions and difficulties. Overall, I think that your project has gained so much strength since we discussed it during the unconference.
I like the way in which you manage to contextualise Chernobyl within the Global Sixties: not only does this bring a socio-political perspective which – as you rightly say – greatly complements your initial emotional approach and argumentation, but it also provides a very interesting outlook on the period. I had never thought of seeing it as a series of environmental disasters and of (non)reactions by governments and activists! Has this also provided a way out of your fear of being too Eurocentric?
Methodologically speaking, I think that using micro-histories is very strong. I would nevertheless try to connect them to transnational activist movements in order to depart even more from the individual and national analysis of the impacts of governments’ non-reactions to environmental disasters, however similar they may be across borders.
Lastly, I totally sympathise with your struggle about having to guess the emotional impacts of disasters: I encountered a similar issue as I was trying to understand how fears caused by El Nino events led to wider diffusions of climatic theories. Although I am sure they played a role, I can’t really prove it, so I am only going to use those fears as an element of background.
Looking forwards to hearing/reading more about the development of your work!
Sophie – A transnational liberation: the anti-apartheid movement and the making of human rights in Czechoslovakia and South Africa
I really learned a lot listening to your presentation. As the (little) history I have ever learned about either South Africa or Czechoslovakia has always been absolutely separated, I was compelled by these unexpected connections!
Like for Georges, I think that one of the greatest strengths of your project is that you manage to discuss these connections within a wider context and make some very interesting points about their relations to anti-imperialist struggles.
I am impressed by the diversity of the sources you are using and your analysis of Fordburg Fighter: the journey of an MK volunteer is very insightful. Taking a micro-history approach through memoirs to complement the analysis of high politics is very well-thought: the individual and lived experience perspective usually richly connects processes and ideas otherwise perceived as totally separated.
As I am myself studying the transnational circulation and appropriation of discourses, you have given me a lot to reflect on!
I would be very interested in reading your finished paper!
Will – A Civilization’s Destruction: Examining Rapa Nui and its interactions with the exterior world
Your project looks both fascinating and very complex. If I had to study an entire civilisation over such a long time-period, I would not know where to start from…This is the object of my first question: on what aspects of the Rapa Nui’s civilisation are you focusing (language, art, livelihoods, …)? I would be curious to know how you chose them and what type of primary sources you are using.
My second question relates to the scope of your project: I might not have understood well, but are you studying Rapa Nui for itself or are you using it as a case study to make an argument about imperial domination or the impacts and resistance to colonialism?
I was also interested in the argument you make that labelling Rapa Nui people as ecociders discredits their culture and precipitates its disappearance. I look forwards to learning more about it.