The visualisation and caption reveal how toxics are unequally distributed in urban spaces according to racial geographies of segregation. It hows how environmental risks disproportionately affect people living in Austin based on a racial geography dating back to the early 20th century.
The image and caption highlight the cyclical nature of public attentiveness to the toxic issue of algal blooms here in a very interesting way. The presence of the worker highlights the labour that goes into managing toxic sites.
The image draws attention to the everyday lives of those who must clean up coastal toxicity/pollution. The caption is short and informative and doesn't get into the details of what is going on and why. There is another caption (not critical commentary) associated with the image that goes into more detail, but could be more concrete in terms of describing what is going on in the image, who the workers are, how the land and sea are affected and why. It feels more descriptive than analytic but nonetheless is very interesting.
This visualization shows how efforts to combat, redress, and prevent the contamination of landscapes can become entangled with/index other forms of social toxicity. In this case, the toxin is white supremacy. The recreation-based struggle to preserve public lands from contamination with fossil fuels simultaneously participates in the exclusion and further subjugation of native populations in the area. Given that these populations have a stronger hold on the discourse, their narrative of fighting the good fight against the fossil fuels "conveniently erases Native histories and much contemporary Native presence," as the author points out.
The picture does not have an extensive caption, yet it is powerful in itself. It makes me think about the accumulation of evidence, dusty boxes, waxed floors, and unexplored files. I am not sure whether the picture says something about toxicity —it would require the author to guides our analysis with an extensive caption.
This image shows how toxic sites can often seem inviting and are often inhabited as places of recreation and fun. The coast, for instance, is a very popular place to both relax and play energetic games like Frisbee. But this particular beach has apparent signs of pollution and toxicity. We also see young children naively frolicking about in close proximity to these toxins. So the combination of risk and vulnerability creates a sense of anxiety and, as the author suggests, of absurdity...
I would like the author to unfold her interlocutor’s affective reference to a “scary” landscape before the arrival of the plant —is no longer scare a prevalent emotion in this place? Aren’t people scared of the toxicity that the plant brings about? Has scare been displaced by other emotions?
I am not sure about the last part of the caption; I think that toxicity is not absent in the picture—it is pretty much there.
I also think that it would be lovely to unpack visibility as bifocality —I see a great opportunity to talk about these two 'economic' practices (fishing and energy production) at the same time.
I like this image. The picture and the caption capture ethnographically two different yet related practices: they are in the same toxic landscape, albeit their relation to toxicity and toxic materials is different. As with the other image, I like the dynamic between dark and light, and this picture is not as obscure as the first one, which is good.
The picture, however, might complicate what the author suggests, that “this sensorial transformation of place, from jackals to smokestacks, is where toxicity becomes visible.” Visibility, as evoked by the image, is more nuanced and oscillating—it seems to be about bifocality.
This visualization shows how people are developing new habits and patterns of behavior in response to a contaminated landscape. Residents are rejecting the official recommendations of local authorities, feeling out for themselves how to cope with living in and near places with uncertain levels of toxicity. The image-text combination seems to suggest a spirit of curiosity, resilience, and playfulness in the face of these challenges.
This is a powerful image. Although a bit dark, it does capture what the caption describes: the way in which fishermen use their body to know and relate with toxicity. Toxicity is immersive.