Page - 152 - in >mcs_lab> - Mobile Culture Studies, Volume 2/2020

152 Mobile Culture Studies. The Journal 6 2o20 (Travel) Birgit Englert | On the (im)possibility of writing a travelogue of his gaze, which he does not attempt to ‘hide’, makes some sketches seem ‘exoticizing’, and the anonymity of most of his subjects raises potentially troubling questions about representa- tion and decolonization. In addition, questions of agency are certainly relevant, and it could be argued that Ramos, while less intruding, is also more hidden when ‘taking’/‘drawing’ his pictures. Those whose faces and bodies he sketched most likely did not notice him or give their consent to having their likenesses published in a book. Their agency in the process of being documented thus seems rather limited. My interest here, however, is how he approaches the problem of the impossibility of conveying the experience of travel in words by creating a second narrative consisting of sketches. The visual component of Ramos’s book does not tell a story chronologically but rather offers different glimpses into his travel experience, allowing the reader to share in the experience of being overwhelmed by visual impressions, of not under- standing, of not knowing. Even more than his written text, the sketches constantly remind the reader of their incompleteness and reconfirm Ramos’s refusal to explain. Conclusion In his attempt to write about his travels, Ramos demonstrates the need to work with visual ele- ments to overcome the limitations of words. Rather than using the visual to prove the ‘authentic- ity’ of his verbal account, however, he understands it as another form of expression, the subjectiv- ity of which is marked by its form: sketches in which the gaze of the creator is inscribed in a way that cannot easily be overlooked, as can happen with photographs, whose promise of ‘authentic- ity’ persists — despite decades of theoretical discussion suggesting otherwise (Cf. Sontag 1977). The strong subjectivity and presence of the author in the travelogue is further strengthened by the written text in the sketches, although at least part of this is the result of Ramos’s multi- ple use of his notebook, the pages of which were used in the final publication. In the English version, Ramos deleted much of this text, thereby bringing the sketches into the foreground, with the consequence, however, that the subjectivity inherent in the sketches, once reinforced by their textual elements, was somewhat reduced. In this article, I have approached Ramos’s oeuvre through the lens of the concept of polygra- phy, arguing that Ramos’s 2018 Ethiopian Travelogue is an interesting example of polygraphic practice, in the sense that it builds on two earlier books in Portuguese on the same journey. Moreover, the lack of relation between the sketches and the written text makes them a case of what I have called ‘internal polygraphy’. By combining the practices of sketching, on the one hand, and polygraphy, on the other, Ramos works against the impossibility of depicting his travel experiences. By combining sketches and text and by revising the book twice, he deals with the limitations that travel writ- ers invariably face in their attempts to have others participate in their experience of mobility. As Ramos shows, writing a travelogue can only ever be an attempt — one that can be repeated again and again, thereby building up layers that contribute to a more complete picture. Such an approach is useful not only in travel writing but also in academia, which we can think of as being characterized by polygraphy as well. For this very reason, I hope to re-think and re-write this article again on another occasion. For now, though, this certainly incomplete approach to Ramos’s oeuvre will have to suffice.