About

During the conference, we were moved to see the deep and sometimes shallow use of the term decolonization. The conference asked this guiding question that illustrates the importance of effort, of labor in the action of decolonizing: “What kinds of (new) models and methods exist that seek to question archival practices in an effort to ‘decolonize’ the archive?” For our contribution, we offer a short reflection on the
use of terminology related to the decolonial. For us, the effect to decolonize the archive—or any other domain—harkens back to how the efforts to “queer” tended to expand rather than narrow down accompanying methods. It strikes us that to decolonize, like queering, can become used as a “magical term” that has a particular power when invoked by a researcher: it makes the work called for or carried out seem relevant and necessary. At the same time, these concepts often go undefined, and therefore risk being emptied out of meaning and actual critical action. We would like to focus on how concepts, practices, and methods require the trouble of being parsed and reflected on, even when—especially when— the work is tough and troubling.

In positioning our response in this way, we would like to elaborate on the question we asked of ourselves when researching for our presentation: what is the importance of positionality in queer and decolonial practices?