Initially, when reading that “archival footage sits between history and myth…”, I assumed that it would be because of an over saturation and lack of access from the general public, though this was quickly changed. This article sparked many thoughts and questions within my mind around the power of sound. When reading about how severing the sound from its initial image is “forging a new path to signification” it made me think of sound as a potential weapon, something that can alter persuasion. I got thinking thar perhaps the archived footage holds more meaning when its reinstated with all it’s “instability”, as it tells more information within the context of history. We can detract more from the original audio, whether we agree with it or not. Though within a cinematic context, the interference generates perhaps a more emotional or entertaining response. Another thing that really got me thinking, was the implication that altering the sound emphasises the limitation of the footage alone to tell a full story. Finally, by both the potential & the shortcomings of sound being on display means that “dislocation and discord are embedded into the very form of the film.” I think is incredible and adds such a poetic layer of complexity to the film, so much so that I question whether this was fully intended, or is it simply over analysis.