Pub Date : 2023-08-01DOI: 10.1177/17506980231176043
Marta Caravà
Current Controversies in Philosophy of Memory is a specialist book that aims to offer to researchers, teachers and students an ‘up-to-date discussion of some of the main theories, arguments, and problems’ in the philosophy of memory (p. 3). To this end, the editors have selected only contributions on episodic memory, that is, the ability to remember past events or experiences. In my view, this selective focus is reasonable and justified. There is increasing interest in episodic memory in philosophy, but several important questions have not received enough attention in the growing literature on the topic. This book investigates some of these previously underexplored questions, each addressed by two authors offering different perspectives on them. In addition to the editors’ introduction, which carefully contextualises these questions in the broader literature, the book has six parts, each including two chapters, a list of further readings and a final section with study questions. Part 1 of the volume addresses the question: What is the relationship between memory and imagination? This question is central to the debate between two prominent theories of memory: the causal theory and the simulation theory. The causal theory holds that remembering requires a causal connection to a past event via a memory trace – a brain modification caused by an experience – while the simulation theory claims that this requirement is not necessary. Because of their different takes on this causal requirement, the causal theory is usually associated with the idea that memory and imagination are two different things, while the simulation theory is associated with the idea that remembering is a form of imagining. Part I evaluates whether this presentation of this debate is accurate. In chapter 1, Peter Langland-Hassan uses the notion of constructive imagination to investigate the constraints that different types of memory traces impose on remembering. He explains how, by adopting the prop theory of memory traces, we can explain remembering as a form of constructive imagination while endorsing the causal theory. César Schirmer dos Santos, Christopher McCarroll and André Sant’Anna take a different stance on this debate (chapter 2). They claim that it is not all about descriptions of the mechanisms of remembering but is rather prescriptive in character: it is about the right concepts we should use to track memory and imagination. According to the authors, whether memory and imagination are the same thing depends on the prescriptive concepts of memory and imagination we endorse. These chapters do not solve the current debate on the relationship between memory and imagination but certainly advance it. They show that so far it has implied too sharp distinctions between the causal theory and the simulation theory and that, with proper conceptual analysis, we can identify what is at stake in this debate more clearly. 1176043 MSS0010.1177/17506980231176043Memory StudiesBook review
《记忆哲学中的当前争论》是一本专业书籍，旨在为研究人员、教师和学生提供记忆哲学中“一些主要理论、论点和问题的最新讨论”(第3页)。为此，编辑们只选择了关于情景记忆的贡献，即记住过去事件或经历的能力。在我看来，这种选择性的关注是合理和正当的。哲学中对情景记忆的兴趣越来越大，但是有几个重要的问题没有得到足够的关注。本书调查了这些以前未被充分探讨的问题，每个问题都由两位作者提供了不同的观点。除了编辑的引言，它仔细地将这些问题置于更广泛的文献中，这本书有六个部分，每个部分包括两章，一个进一步阅读的清单和一个研究问题的最后部分。这本书的第一部分回答了这个问题:记忆和想象之间的关系是什么?这个问题是两个著名的记忆理论:因果理论和模拟理论之间争论的核心。因果理论认为，记忆需要通过记忆痕迹(一种由经历引起的大脑修改)与过去的事件建立因果联系，而模拟理论则声称这一要求是不必要的。因为他们对因果要求的不同理解，因果理论通常与记忆和想象是两码事的观点联系在一起，而模拟理论则与记忆是一种想象的观点联系在一起。第一部分评估这一辩论的表述是否准确。在第一章中，彼得·朗兰-哈桑使用建设性想象的概念来研究不同类型的记忆痕迹对记忆的限制。他解释说，通过采用记忆痕迹的prop理论，我们可以在支持因果理论的同时，将记忆解释为一种建设性想象的形式。csamar Schirmer dos Santos、Christopher McCarroll和andr Sant’anna在这场争论中持不同的立场(第二章)。他们声称，这并不完全是关于记忆机制的描述，而是在本质上是规定性的:这是关于我们应该用来追踪记忆和想象的正确概念。根据作者的说法，记忆和想象是否是同一件事取决于我们认可的记忆和想象的规范性概念。这些章节并没有解决当前关于记忆和想象之间关系的争论，但肯定会推进这一争论。他们表明，到目前为止，它暗示了因果理论和模拟理论之间过于明显的区别，通过适当的概念分析，我们可以更清楚地确定这场辩论的利害关系。1176043 mss0010 .1177/17506980231176043记忆研究书评书评2023
{"title":"Book review: Current Controversies in Philosophy of Memory","authors":"Marta Caravà","doi":"10.1177/17506980231176043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231176043","url":null,"abstract":"Current Controversies in Philosophy of Memory is a specialist book that aims to offer to researchers, teachers and students an ‘up-to-date discussion of some of the main theories, arguments, and problems’ in the philosophy of memory (p. 3). To this end, the editors have selected only contributions on episodic memory, that is, the ability to remember past events or experiences. In my view, this selective focus is reasonable and justified. There is increasing interest in episodic memory in philosophy, but several important questions have not received enough attention in the growing literature on the topic. This book investigates some of these previously underexplored questions, each addressed by two authors offering different perspectives on them. In addition to the editors’ introduction, which carefully contextualises these questions in the broader literature, the book has six parts, each including two chapters, a list of further readings and a final section with study questions. Part 1 of the volume addresses the question: What is the relationship between memory and imagination? This question is central to the debate between two prominent theories of memory: the causal theory and the simulation theory. The causal theory holds that remembering requires a causal connection to a past event via a memory trace – a brain modification caused by an experience – while the simulation theory claims that this requirement is not necessary. Because of their different takes on this causal requirement, the causal theory is usually associated with the idea that memory and imagination are two different things, while the simulation theory is associated with the idea that remembering is a form of imagining. Part I evaluates whether this presentation of this debate is accurate. In chapter 1, Peter Langland-Hassan uses the notion of constructive imagination to investigate the constraints that different types of memory traces impose on remembering. He explains how, by adopting the prop theory of memory traces, we can explain remembering as a form of constructive imagination while endorsing the causal theory. César Schirmer dos Santos, Christopher McCarroll and André Sant’Anna take a different stance on this debate (chapter 2). They claim that it is not all about descriptions of the mechanisms of remembering but is rather prescriptive in character: it is about the right concepts we should use to track memory and imagination. According to the authors, whether memory and imagination are the same thing depends on the prescriptive concepts of memory and imagination we endorse. These chapters do not solve the current debate on the relationship between memory and imagination but certainly advance it. They show that so far it has implied too sharp distinctions between the causal theory and the simulation theory and that, with proper conceptual analysis, we can identify what is at stake in this debate more clearly. 1176043 MSS0010.1177/17506980231176043Memory StudiesBook review","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":"16 1","pages":"1020 - 1023"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47020200","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-29DOI: 10.1177/17506980231188478
Birgit Bräuchler
The way conflicts are remembered is crucial for the prevention of future violence, and digital technologies play increasing roles in processes of remembering. This article looks at memory work conducted in a YouTube video featuring two former child soldiers in Maluku, Eastern Indonesia, and their story from mutual hatred and war to friendship and peace. Analysing and comparing the video and the related English and Indonesian video commentaries, this article asks how the Moluccan violence is remembered, how that memory travels and how it is translated and received among different audiences. It investigates how connectivity and creativity open up new memory spaces and how, within these digital spaces, transcultural memory tropes and political and cultural contexts of social media users can both solidify hegemonic memory narratives and transform traumatic memories into hope and peace.
{"title":"‘I can’t remember how many I killed’. . .: Child soldiers and memory work in YouTube","authors":"Birgit Bräuchler","doi":"10.1177/17506980231188478","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231188478","url":null,"abstract":"The way conflicts are remembered is crucial for the prevention of future violence, and digital technologies play increasing roles in processes of remembering. This article looks at memory work conducted in a YouTube video featuring two former child soldiers in Maluku, Eastern Indonesia, and their story from mutual hatred and war to friendship and peace. Analysing and comparing the video and the related English and Indonesian video commentaries, this article asks how the Moluccan violence is remembered, how that memory travels and how it is translated and received among different audiences. It investigates how connectivity and creativity open up new memory spaces and how, within these digital spaces, transcultural memory tropes and political and cultural contexts of social media users can both solidify hegemonic memory narratives and transform traumatic memories into hope and peace.","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45200695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-29DOI: 10.1177/17506980231188481
Liz Hallgren
I engage in a discourse analysis of National Geographic’s docuseries “9/11: One Day in America” to argue that the series’ multi-layered effort at commemoration, geared as a long-awaited “full” telling of the 9/11 story, but committed to honoring a specific group of victims and survivors, is enabled by a disorienting temporality that raises questions about the role of national memorials and archives at this moment. Temporality is essential to the development of narrative, and with narrative a central element in the making of memory worlds, temporality cannot be underestimated as a key factor in how memories take shape. “One Day” depends on structural instantiations of time to develop its narrative as authentic memory, reflecting a paradoxical linear yet circular pattern that simultaneously authenticates and undermines the veracity of the story it tells. “One Day” transports viewers into lower Manhattan and through the events of 9/11 via a vividly illustrated timeline. But while a linear version of time in “One Day” supports the telling of survivor stories and the memorialization of the dead, the overarching effect of the timeline for viewers is circular, transporting viewers back in time to 2001 and a state of fear and confusion, forcing collective memory to exist in a repetitive temporality that excuses a turn away from history and consequences. The resulting circular mechanism for commemoration allows cultural institutions, like the ones represented in “One Day,” to emphasize the past at the expense of more critical understandings of both history and the future.
我对《国家地理》的纪录片《9/11:One Day in America》进行了话语分析，认为该系列的多层次纪念活动，旨在对9/11故事进行期待已久的“全面”讲述，但致力于向特定的受害者和幸存者群体致敬，这是由一种迷失方向的时间性所促成的，这引发了人们对国家纪念馆和档案馆在这一时刻的作用的质疑。时间性对叙事的发展至关重要，叙事是记忆世界形成的核心元素，时间性是记忆形成的关键因素，不容低估。《一天》依赖于时间的结构性实例化，将其叙事发展为真实的记忆，反映了一种矛盾的线性但循环的模式，这种模式同时验证并破坏了它告诉故事的真实性。《一天》通过生动的时间线将观众带入曼哈顿下城，并通过9/11事件。但是，尽管《一天》中的线性时间版本支持讲述幸存者的故事和纪念死者，但时间线对观众的总体影响是循环的，将观众带回了2001年以及恐惧和困惑的状态，迫使集体记忆存在于一种重复的时间性中，这为人们远离历史和后果提供了借口。由此产生的循环纪念机制允许文化机构，如《一天》中所代表的文化机构，以牺牲对历史和未来的更批判性理解为代价，强调过去。
{"title":"Race against time: “9/11: One Day in America” and the amnesia of America’s archive","authors":"Liz Hallgren","doi":"10.1177/17506980231188481","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231188481","url":null,"abstract":"I engage in a discourse analysis of National Geographic’s docuseries “9/11: One Day in America” to argue that the series’ multi-layered effort at commemoration, geared as a long-awaited “full” telling of the 9/11 story, but committed to honoring a specific group of victims and survivors, is enabled by a disorienting temporality that raises questions about the role of national memorials and archives at this moment. Temporality is essential to the development of narrative, and with narrative a central element in the making of memory worlds, temporality cannot be underestimated as a key factor in how memories take shape. “One Day” depends on structural instantiations of time to develop its narrative as authentic memory, reflecting a paradoxical linear yet circular pattern that simultaneously authenticates and undermines the veracity of the story it tells. “One Day” transports viewers into lower Manhattan and through the events of 9/11 via a vividly illustrated timeline. But while a linear version of time in “One Day” supports the telling of survivor stories and the memorialization of the dead, the overarching effect of the timeline for viewers is circular, transporting viewers back in time to 2001 and a state of fear and confusion, forcing collective memory to exist in a repetitive temporality that excuses a turn away from history and consequences. The resulting circular mechanism for commemoration allows cultural institutions, like the ones represented in “One Day,” to emphasize the past at the expense of more critical understandings of both history and the future.","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47865239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-26DOI: 10.1177/17506980231184563
Sydney Goggins
This article examines scholarship on public forgetting and its implications for post-disaster recovery and policy learning to theorize how tendencies toward structural amnesia risk limit policy learning as the Covid-19 pandemic continues to unfold and as the climate crisis exacerbates the risk of new global health crises. This article will contribute to memory studies by advancing a theory of how public forgetting leads to a cascade of impacts on policy and social well-being. Building on Beiner’s work on social memory, scholarship on the politics of memory, and research on post-disaster policy learning, I show that institutional forgetting implicitly places individual and collective memories outside the public sphere in which policymaking occurs. This discourages commemorative practices that constitute the traumatic past and present of the pandemic as creating responsibilities on the part of policymakers and governments for increased protections in the present and policy learning in the future. Constituting the Covid-19 pandemic as a necessary subject of public memory, in contrast, allows individuals and communities to assert rights to restitution and accountability for the policy failures that led to profound racial and socioeconomic disparities in risks of infection, severe illness, and death. Through engaging with the memory advocacy by the nonprofit groups the We Must Count Coalition, Marked by Covid, and the Covid-19 Longhauler Advocacy Project, I illustrate how commemorative practices by social movements illuminate the policy implications of contesting how collective traumas will be remembered.
{"title":"Contesting public forgetting: Memory and policy learning in the era of Covid-19","authors":"Sydney Goggins","doi":"10.1177/17506980231184563","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231184563","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines scholarship on public forgetting and its implications for post-disaster recovery and policy learning to theorize how tendencies toward structural amnesia risk limit policy learning as the Covid-19 pandemic continues to unfold and as the climate crisis exacerbates the risk of new global health crises. This article will contribute to memory studies by advancing a theory of how public forgetting leads to a cascade of impacts on policy and social well-being. Building on Beiner’s work on social memory, scholarship on the politics of memory, and research on post-disaster policy learning, I show that institutional forgetting implicitly places individual and collective memories outside the public sphere in which policymaking occurs. This discourages commemorative practices that constitute the traumatic past and present of the pandemic as creating responsibilities on the part of policymakers and governments for increased protections in the present and policy learning in the future. Constituting the Covid-19 pandemic as a necessary subject of public memory, in contrast, allows individuals and communities to assert rights to restitution and accountability for the policy failures that led to profound racial and socioeconomic disparities in risks of infection, severe illness, and death. Through engaging with the memory advocacy by the nonprofit groups the We Must Count Coalition, Marked by Covid, and the Covid-19 Longhauler Advocacy Project, I illustrate how commemorative practices by social movements illuminate the policy implications of contesting how collective traumas will be remembered.","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45901871","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-25DOI: 10.1177/17506980231184580
H. Hinds
This article explores the ambiguous place of memory – its absences and presences, its strategic mobilisation and theological redundancy – in the practices and writings of the early Quaker movement. Quakers’ commitment to unprogrammed, largely silent, worship and to spontaneous speech meant that memory had no place in their Meetings for Worship. Nevertheless, the movement was actively intent on conserving the memory of its early years, ensuring that its writings, published and unpublished, were preserved, by developing systems of copying and archiving key documents. Memory is thus central to the ambitions and practices of the early movement and yet also rendered redundant by aspects of its theology. The article investigates traces of memory in the composition of the Journal of George Fox, the movement’s first leader, and finds its strategic rhetorical mobilisation of memory to be rooted in Quakers’ distinctive understandings of human and divine time.
本文探讨了在早期贵格会运动的实践和著作中，记忆的模糊位置——它的缺席和存在，它的战略动员和神学冗余。贵格会教徒对无程序的、很大程度上沉默的礼拜和自发的演讲的承诺意味着记忆在他们的礼拜聚会中没有地位。然而，该运动积极致力于保存其早年的记忆，通过发展复制和存档关键文件的系统，确保其出版和未出版的著作得到保存。因此，记忆是早期运动的野心和实践的核心，但也因其神学方面而显得多余。本文调查了该运动第一任领袖乔治·福克斯(George Fox)的《日记》(Journal of The movement)中记忆的痕迹，并发现其对记忆的战略性修辞动员根植于贵格会对人类和神圣时间的独特理解。
{"title":"Memory and time in early Quakerism","authors":"H. Hinds","doi":"10.1177/17506980231184580","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231184580","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the ambiguous place of memory – its absences and presences, its strategic mobilisation and theological redundancy – in the practices and writings of the early Quaker movement. Quakers’ commitment to unprogrammed, largely silent, worship and to spontaneous speech meant that memory had no place in their Meetings for Worship. Nevertheless, the movement was actively intent on conserving the memory of its early years, ensuring that its writings, published and unpublished, were preserved, by developing systems of copying and archiving key documents. Memory is thus central to the ambitions and practices of the early movement and yet also rendered redundant by aspects of its theology. The article investigates traces of memory in the composition of the Journal of George Fox, the movement’s first leader, and finds its strategic rhetorical mobilisation of memory to be rooted in Quakers’ distinctive understandings of human and divine time.","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43996870","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-22DOI: 10.1177/17506980231184541
Zizhan Yao, D. Mortensen, K. Multhaup
In 1949, George Orwell proclaimed in his dystopian novel, 1984, that “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past” (p. 44). Almost three-quarters of a century later, the global trend of championing nationalism as the answer to twenty-first-century problems makes this quote resonate. Donald Trump’s nostalgic appeal to America’s past greatness, Vladimir Putin’s myth-making of Russian history, and Xi Jinping’s reinterpretation of China’s role during WWII highlight how political leaders have employed nationalist historical narratives in “top-down state efforts to control national memory” (p. xii). During this era of “new nationalism,” how do scholars from diverse disciplines define and analyse national memory? How do they frame the relationship between past, present, and future when examining how different countries (re) shape their collective memories? In National Memories: Constructing Identity in Populist Times, a multidisciplinary team of scholars explores “national memory in the hopes of addressing its powers and its dangers” (p. xii). National Memories attempts to spark conversation across disciplinary silos. Noting the “transcultural turn” (p. xi) in memory studies, the editors incorporate research on national memory and identity from Asia and Europe, in addition to including US-based studies. Roediger and Wertsch organize the volume into five sections; each contains four to five chapters and is prefaced by a brief introduction. Sections I and II, Historical Origins of National Memory and Populism in America and Case Studies of National Memory and Populism in America employ historical, ethnographic, and textual analysis to investigate large questions about when a nation begins, how forgetting is a critical component of nation building, and how competing narratives coexist as threads in the complex tapestry of national memory. Sections III and IV, Comparative Studies of National Memory and Populism from Around the World and Case Studies of National Memory and Populism from Around the World, document cross-cultural differences in collective memory. These sections use diverse methodologies to explore wide-ranging topics, such as historical charters, collective narcissism, implicit mnemonic devices within collective memories, national communities’ complicated emotions toward the past, and bottom-up resistance to top-down control. In the final section, Conceptual Frameworks for the Study of National Memory and Populism, the reader is invited to consider fundamental mechanisms and theories that undergird the formation of national memory. These include the efficacy of symbolic tools in mass coordination, the formation and propagation of memory in smaller social groups, the role of motivational and cognitive factors in facilitating memory formation, and the power of narratives in shaping national memory. 1184541 MSS0010.1177/17506980231184541Memory StudiesBook reviews book-review2023
{"title":"Book review: National Memories: Constructing Identity in Populist Times","authors":"Zizhan Yao, D. Mortensen, K. Multhaup","doi":"10.1177/17506980231184541","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231184541","url":null,"abstract":"In 1949, George Orwell proclaimed in his dystopian novel, 1984, that “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past” (p. 44). Almost three-quarters of a century later, the global trend of championing nationalism as the answer to twenty-first-century problems makes this quote resonate. Donald Trump’s nostalgic appeal to America’s past greatness, Vladimir Putin’s myth-making of Russian history, and Xi Jinping’s reinterpretation of China’s role during WWII highlight how political leaders have employed nationalist historical narratives in “top-down state efforts to control national memory” (p. xii). During this era of “new nationalism,” how do scholars from diverse disciplines define and analyse national memory? How do they frame the relationship between past, present, and future when examining how different countries (re) shape their collective memories? In National Memories: Constructing Identity in Populist Times, a multidisciplinary team of scholars explores “national memory in the hopes of addressing its powers and its dangers” (p. xii). National Memories attempts to spark conversation across disciplinary silos. Noting the “transcultural turn” (p. xi) in memory studies, the editors incorporate research on national memory and identity from Asia and Europe, in addition to including US-based studies. Roediger and Wertsch organize the volume into five sections; each contains four to five chapters and is prefaced by a brief introduction. Sections I and II, Historical Origins of National Memory and Populism in America and Case Studies of National Memory and Populism in America employ historical, ethnographic, and textual analysis to investigate large questions about when a nation begins, how forgetting is a critical component of nation building, and how competing narratives coexist as threads in the complex tapestry of national memory. Sections III and IV, Comparative Studies of National Memory and Populism from Around the World and Case Studies of National Memory and Populism from Around the World, document cross-cultural differences in collective memory. These sections use diverse methodologies to explore wide-ranging topics, such as historical charters, collective narcissism, implicit mnemonic devices within collective memories, national communities’ complicated emotions toward the past, and bottom-up resistance to top-down control. In the final section, Conceptual Frameworks for the Study of National Memory and Populism, the reader is invited to consider fundamental mechanisms and theories that undergird the formation of national memory. These include the efficacy of symbolic tools in mass coordination, the formation and propagation of memory in smaller social groups, the role of motivational and cognitive factors in facilitating memory formation, and the power of narratives in shaping national memory. 1184541 MSS0010.1177/17506980231184541Memory StudiesBook reviews book-review2023","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":"16 1","pages":"1383 - 1387"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45508813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-04DOI: 10.1177/17506980231184577
Liucija Vervečkienė
The collective-level heroisation of the armed resistance (1944–1953) against the Soviet occupation in Lithuania faces various challenges, which initially address the threat posed by foreign propaganda or the legacy of Soviet period narratives. However, in this article, I argue that the difficulties in constructing a hero-freedom fighter from the partisan past lie in the exaltation of the ‘right’ type of behaviour at the ‘wrong’ time of occupation. As collective (political)-level memory portrays heroic resistance, the ‘memory consumers’ within families of different generational experiences mediate meanings and react to them with certain strategies. This reveals rather painful aspects of remembering collaboration and being on the ‘wrong side’, although the heroic image of the partisan aims to foster pride in the conflictual past. The Lithuanian case illustrates more general challenges in the intersection of individual, communicative and structural (political) memory in a country that experienced transformational regime change and commemorates the difficult past.
{"title":"Remembering the anti-Soviet partisan war in Lithuania, 1944–1953: The effects of heroization at different levels of remembrance","authors":"Liucija Vervečkienė","doi":"10.1177/17506980231184577","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231184577","url":null,"abstract":"The collective-level heroisation of the armed resistance (1944–1953) against the Soviet occupation in Lithuania faces various challenges, which initially address the threat posed by foreign propaganda or the legacy of Soviet period narratives. However, in this article, I argue that the difficulties in constructing a hero-freedom fighter from the partisan past lie in the exaltation of the ‘right’ type of behaviour at the ‘wrong’ time of occupation. As collective (political)-level memory portrays heroic resistance, the ‘memory consumers’ within families of different generational experiences mediate meanings and react to them with certain strategies. This reveals rather painful aspects of remembering collaboration and being on the ‘wrong side’, although the heroic image of the partisan aims to foster pride in the conflictual past. The Lithuanian case illustrates more general challenges in the intersection of individual, communicative and structural (political) memory in a country that experienced transformational regime change and commemorates the difficult past.","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45105729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-04DOI: 10.1177/17506980231184558
Ming-li Yao
This study aims to discuss how the state of the Republic of China, which is Chinese-oriented, created the discourse of the national holiday of Peace Memorial Day to reinforce Taiwanese nationalism. Peace Memorial Day was proclaimed to commemorate the tragedy of the state’s massacre of Taiwanese locals on 28 February 1947, usually known as the ‘228 Incident’. Based on resources collected from the two officially sponsored museums, this study explored how the Republic of China government has ‘selectively’ presented the sources of the 228 Incident, reshaping the contested text as part of a mnemonic past shared by itself and society, and on which basis it has developed the cultural discourse embodying Taiwanese nationhood. The research results also suggest that the officially constructed memory underscores the core value of democratisation not only to reinforce the notion regarding the Republic of China as a ‘Taiwanese’ government, but also to mark the distinction between the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China as two ‘national’ unities.
{"title":"The invented myth behind the Taiwanese ‘national’ holiday: The collective memory of Peace Memorial Day","authors":"Ming-li Yao","doi":"10.1177/17506980231184558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231184558","url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to discuss how the state of the Republic of China, which is Chinese-oriented, created the discourse of the national holiday of Peace Memorial Day to reinforce Taiwanese nationalism. Peace Memorial Day was proclaimed to commemorate the tragedy of the state’s massacre of Taiwanese locals on 28 February 1947, usually known as the ‘228 Incident’. Based on resources collected from the two officially sponsored museums, this study explored how the Republic of China government has ‘selectively’ presented the sources of the 228 Incident, reshaping the contested text as part of a mnemonic past shared by itself and society, and on which basis it has developed the cultural discourse embodying Taiwanese nationhood. The research results also suggest that the officially constructed memory underscores the core value of democratisation not only to reinforce the notion regarding the Republic of China as a ‘Taiwanese’ government, but also to mark the distinction between the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China as two ‘national’ unities.","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48068247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-03DOI: 10.1177/17506980231184564
S. Webster
Memoricide, it seems, is memory made rubble and ash. Its emblematic imagery is of scenes many would find familiar: burning ash-snow from Sarajevo’s Vijecnica; satellite images of Palmyra’s missing structures; the exploding Bamiyan Buddhas. Physically altering space is understandably a highly visible tactic. However, when explicitly built into definitions, the emphasis on physical destruction has been on specific forms targeted: archival institutions, monuments, memorials and heritage sites. This article revisits memoricide as a range of converging physical, social and discursive strategies. It introduces ‘everyday’ memoricide – the normalisation of memory erasure as mundane practices – which ordinarily masks its intelligibility as memoricide through ‘common sense’ or ‘greater good’ discursive frames. The sacred Djab Wurrung trees, threatened by the Victorian State Government’s Western Highway project, and a felled Directions Tree in particular, provide a still unfolding case study within the broader history of Australian memoricide.
{"title":"Revisiting memoricide: The everyday killing of memory","authors":"S. Webster","doi":"10.1177/17506980231184564","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231184564","url":null,"abstract":"Memoricide, it seems, is memory made rubble and ash. Its emblematic imagery is of scenes many would find familiar: burning ash-snow from Sarajevo’s Vijecnica; satellite images of Palmyra’s missing structures; the exploding Bamiyan Buddhas. Physically altering space is understandably a highly visible tactic. However, when explicitly built into definitions, the emphasis on physical destruction has been on specific forms targeted: archival institutions, monuments, memorials and heritage sites. This article revisits memoricide as a range of converging physical, social and discursive strategies. It introduces ‘everyday’ memoricide – the normalisation of memory erasure as mundane practices – which ordinarily masks its intelligibility as memoricide through ‘common sense’ or ‘greater good’ discursive frames. The sacred Djab Wurrung trees, threatened by the Victorian State Government’s Western Highway project, and a felled Directions Tree in particular, provide a still unfolding case study within the broader history of Australian memoricide.","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44829216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-30DOI: 10.1177/17506980231184567
H. Vogel, M. Klomp, M. Barnard
This article discusses the role of biographical memory in three contemporary ritual-musical appropriations of the psalms in Dutch and Flemish contexts. We observe that, in performances of psalms, participants (intend to) either forget or recall different biographical memories. Nostalgic narratives of religious, cultural and individual change and continuity inform both the way that they interpret their experiences of these psalm performances, and their motivations for attempting to forget or recall particular memories related to the psalms. By using the notion of sacrality — that which is set apart, non-ordinary — we show that particular non-negotiable desires and non-ordinary experiences recur multiple times in these nostalgic narratives. Analysis of these desires and experiences leads us to conclude that contemplative experiences are desired by many, but experienced by only a few. We suggest the combination of Aleida Assmann’s theory of forgetting and remembering with the notions of nostalgia and sacrality as a way to successfully overcome the unproductive dichotomy between religious and cultural heritage.
{"title":"A psalm is always a memory: Nostalgia and sacrality in contemporary ritual-musical appropriations of the psalms","authors":"H. Vogel, M. Klomp, M. Barnard","doi":"10.1177/17506980231184567","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231184567","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses the role of biographical memory in three contemporary ritual-musical appropriations of the psalms in Dutch and Flemish contexts. We observe that, in performances of psalms, participants (intend to) either forget or recall different biographical memories. Nostalgic narratives of religious, cultural and individual change and continuity inform both the way that they interpret their experiences of these psalm performances, and their motivations for attempting to forget or recall particular memories related to the psalms. By using the notion of sacrality — that which is set apart, non-ordinary — we show that particular non-negotiable desires and non-ordinary experiences recur multiple times in these nostalgic narratives. Analysis of these desires and experiences leads us to conclude that contemplative experiences are desired by many, but experienced by only a few. We suggest the combination of Aleida Assmann’s theory of forgetting and remembering with the notions of nostalgia and sacrality as a way to successfully overcome the unproductive dichotomy between religious and cultural heritage.","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47180040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：