p.1 Les usages et abus de la mémoire. Les différentes dimensions de la mémoire : la sélection, la distinction entre le recouvrement et utilisation du passé ; le rapport entre le passé et présent, et la dimension éthique et politique de l’usage de la mémoire.
Memory is a selection rather than an integral preservation. There is an interaction between erasure and conservation of certain elements.
Total restoration of the past is impossible. Somethings forgotten, others remembered.
We have to make a distinction between recovery of the past and its usage. It can be used deceivingly.
p.2 Modern society no longer values tradition and the past; memory is replaced by a focus on the future. There is no place to honour memory which is part of our identity.
The past is no longer thought of as legitimacy.
The author asks if there is a way to distinguish between the good and bad uses of the past.
Memory can be viewed literally or in a way to exemplify, as if to learn a lesson from memory.
Memory serving as an example can be a form of justice.
Nowadays, there is an obsession into memory but the author argues that this has no legitimacy when its use/aim is not specified.
Three principals of memory:
1) Representation of the past = individual identity, or collective identity. The feeling of belonging to a group and the recognition of existence.
Our modern world attempts homogenisation/uniformity whilst also neglecting traditional identities.
Bringing the two together, the need for collective identity and the destruction of traditional identities.
2) To commemorate the victims of the past
3) Giving the right of victims to complain/protest, rather than having a role of receiving compensation for having suffered an offense.
We should maintain the memory of the past to be aware of new situations to come.
History is a true selection process, unconsciously.
Research into memory allows us to see the real link between politics and history.
No comments:
Post a Comment