“To be absent is to be missing in both time and space”

Wagner’s book does a brilliant job of showing all the subfields at work in Anthropology. Though her narratives and details are at times a little gruesome and hard to swallow; it was refreshing seeing forensic (biological) anthropology, socio-cultural anthropology, linguistic anthropology and archeology all at work in providing answers after this horrible atrocity. I think as a non anthropology reader it’s easy to see her book as a science(y) historical account of post genocide Srebrenica but it’s so much more than that. Chapters 3 & 4 provided a great understanding of how identifying missing persons through DNA technology actually occurred and how memories/belongings and narratives aided families, scientist & anthropologist in identifying the deceased. Wagner writes, “Forensic anthropologist and archeologists were working at one end of the grave, where the earth was muddy and clung to the skeletons being extracted” (108).  When I began initially reading the book last week, I didn’t realize the value and necessity of these types of anthropologist. Although the DNA scientist were responsible for running the samples and ultimately identifying the body a huge piece of this puzzle was finding the remains and matching them up; which require the skill set of a forensic anthropologist and archeologist. Wagner doesn’t spend a ton of time on this but I wish she had described more in detail about how they matched bones, clothing, and remains when faced with such grave odds. One thing that struck me in Chapter 3 is the immense detail she went into describing how the DNA identification process worked initially. She portrayed it as very complicated and that even she couldn’t even understand it. I appreciated in Chapter 4 (and towards the end of Chapter 3) when she spoke to challenges both socioeconomically and culturally that made genetic testing a challenge. This made me think about or class discussion last week with DNA/race challenges in the US, that have led to misleading assumptions about DNA testing and ancestry roots. How might you compare the average US citizens understanding of genetic testing to an Srebrenican’s understanding of the technologies? One writing technique that I really liked about Wagner’s ethnography is that she provided full dialogue excerpts. Often ethnographers use quotes or paraphrase so having the full conversation was really valuable to understanding and valuing the meaning of a loved one’s clothing/articles, lost & nostalgic memories, and prevailing connections to surviving family members.

Chapters 5 and 8 reinforced the political and social dimensions of genetic testing after the genocides. The involvement of the court system and government are constants in finding answers and identifying remains. However, it seems that the roll of the government/politics often can cause more harm than good for surviving families who are in search of answers and knowledge.  Wagner does a great job of sharing these very lived experiences and not explaining expected behavior from an ethnocentric view but really grapples with why families create dreams and imagines around their lost family. “It is natural therefore, for the surviving families to seek out the where, the how, and the when (if not also why) of their relatives final moments of life and death” (156). I think this quote ties in strikingly to why the US sought immediate assistance from ICMP immediately following 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina. The irony/meaning of the US using ICMP as a resource after the Clinton Administration formed the organization for Bosnia is interesting but what’s more interesting is the speed in which they sought out these organizations for assistance. However, it’s interesting to consider one of Wagner’s questions, “Who will determine which “missing’ are politically salient enough to merit such expenses?” Were the African Americans in the 9^th ward of New Orleans not worthy enough? What political and economic reasons slowed the US from using DNA technology as forcefully and quickly as they did for 9/11? Or did they and the narrative was clouded by political nonsense and media slander?