Archiving has become an increasingly ubiquitous part of everyday life. Every e-mail we receive is instantaneously stored in the cloud, and every Google search we begin is autocompleted by an algorithm that draws on the archive of our past searches, clicks, messages, and purchases. The archive, in other words, not only stores the present even as it unfolds, it also actively produces the present and the future. Such ambient archiving is a far cry from the image we typically associate with archives: that of a stuffy, poorly lit room where our access to written or printed documents is carefully managed and often policed. By becoming part of everyday life, the archive has extended beyond its traditional institutions and users. As much as the shift from analogue to digital modes of registration is crucial in determining the archive’s expansion into the wider culture, recent changes to the archive have not only been technological, but also semantic. In the last few decades of the twentieth century, critical theory unmoored the traditional archive from its precise location and set it adrift with metaphorical meanings, making it both a “physical” and an “imaginative” site, a “conceptual space whose boundaries are forever changing” (Voss and Werner 1). The two unavoidable names in this context remain those of Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida – even if, as the contributions to these two issues make clear, many other scholars have approached the archive in innovative and imaginative ways. A major part of Foucault’s work was based on actual archival research, but he also theorized the archive as something much more encompassing: as the epistemic infrastructure that allows statements to appear as singular events within a wider system of reference. This metaphorical archive, for Foucault, determines the truth value and the import of the statements that it allows. Derrida, for his part, situated the production of the archive in the psychic life of power: torn between a destructive deathdrive and a conservational drive linked to the pleasure principle, our “archive fever” manically records the present to salvage it for an insistent future. As

中文翻译：

---

新档案景观中的文学

归档已成为日常生活中越来越普遍的一部分。我们收到的每封电子邮件都会立即存储在云中，而我们开始的每一次Google搜索都会通过一种算法自动完成，该算法利用我们过去的搜索，点击，消息和购买的档案。换句话说，档案馆不仅在展示时存储礼物，而且还积极地创造现在和未来。这种环境归档与我们通常与档案馆关联的图像相去甚远：一个闷热，光线昏暗的房间，在这里我们对书面或印刷文档的访问进行了仔细的管理，并且经常受到监管。通过成为日常生活的一部分，档案已经超越了传统机构和用户的范围。尽管从模拟注册方式向数字注册方式的转变对于确定档案馆向更广泛文化的扩展至关重要，但最近对档案馆的变更不仅是技术上的，而且是语义上的。在二十世纪的最后几十年中，批判理论使传统档案馆脱离了精确的位置，并使其具有隐喻性的含义，使其成为一个“物理的”和“想象的”场所，一个“概念性的空间，其边界永远存在”。变化”（Voss和Werner 1）。在这种情况下，两个不可避免的名字仍然是Michel Foucault和Jacques Derrida的名字，即使正如对这两个问题的贡献所表明的那样，许多其他学者也以创新和富有想象力的方式访问了档案馆。福柯工作的主要部分是基于实际的档案研究，但他还从理论上将档案库包含在更广泛的内容中：作为一种知识基础结构，该结构允许语句在更广泛的引用系统中显示为单个事件。对于福柯而言，这个隐喻性档案确定了真值和它允许的语句的导入。就德里达而言，他将档案的产生置于权力的精神生活中：在破坏性的死亡驱动力和与享乐原则相关的保守性驱动力之间挣扎，我们的“档案热”狂热地记录了当下的存在，以挽救它，从而实现持久的未来。 。如 确定真值和它允许的语句的导入。就德里达而言，他将档案的产生置于权力的精神生活中：在破坏性的死亡驱动力和与享乐原则相关的保守性驱动力之间挣扎，我们的“档案热”狂热地记录了当下的存在，以挽救它，从而实现持久的未来。 。如 确定真值和它允许的语句的导入。就德里达而言，他将档案的产生置于权力的精神生活中：在破坏性的死亡驱动力和与享乐原则相关的保守性驱动力之间挣扎，我们的“档案热”狂热地记录了当下的存在，以挽救它，从而实现持久的未来。 。如