Digital storytelling Antarctica
Over the past two decades, and not unlike other Southern Ocean rim countries, Chile has experienced a series of fundamental changes in its engagement with the Antarctic. This article provides an exploration into how these changes are shaping the formation of new local and national Antarctic social i...
| Published in: | Critical Arts |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
South Africa, UniSA Press
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://handle.uws.edu.au:8081/1959.7/uws:33487 https://doi.org/10.1080/02560046.2015.1125087 |
| Summary: | Over the past two decades, and not unlike other Southern Ocean rim countries, Chile has experienced a series of fundamental changes in its engagement with the Antarctic. This article provides an exploration into how these changes are shaping the formation of new local and national Antarctic social imaginaries. Through an account of a digital storytelling project carried out in the Antarctic Peninsula in 2012 and 2013 with young Chilean students, the article first examines cultural production processes at play in the configuration of a contemporary Antarctic national imaginary in Chile, arguing that such processes operate through a set of overlapping symbolic and material arrangements. Second, it reflects on how a performative focus on the experiences of young people doing science in Antarctica provides an innovative shift for understandings digital storytelling not only in terms of media democracy, but also rethinking its expediency as a novel mode of science diplomacy and democratisation of science. Third, and in framing the creative engagement process, the article considers the importance of bringing attention to thinking about globalism from the southern hemisphere in the context of the increasing significance that the Antarctic region holds for Southern Ocean rim countries. By highlighting the challenge of developing science–citizens interfaces, the article concludes by suggesting that we consider the complex entanglements between geopolitics, science and citizenship in a broader setting if we are to acknowledge that citizens’ engagement with critical scientific debates and decisions that affect their futures is today more pertinent than ever. |
|---|