Representations of the Outbreak of World War II in Polish Film, 1945–67: From Partial Recognition to a Component of National Memory

The aftermath of World War II saw the emergence of many new nation-states on the Asian geopolitical map and a simultaneous attempt by these states to claim the agency of nationhood and to create an aura of a homogenous national identity. Textbooks have been the most potent tools used by nations to inject an idea of a national memory - in many instances with utter disregard for fundamental contradictions within the socio-political milieu. In South Asia, political sensitivity towards transmission of the past is reflected in the attempts of these states to revise or rewrite versions which are most consonant with the ideology of dominant players (political parties, religious organizations, ministries of education, publishing houses, NGOs, etc.) concerning the nature of the state and the identity of its citizens. This paper highlights the fundamental fault lines in the project of nation-building in states in South Asia by locating instances of the revision or rewriting of dominant interpretations of the past. By providing an overview of various revisionist exercises in South Asia, an attempt will be made to highlight important issues that are fundamental to the construction of identities in this diverse continent.

Download Full-text

Deportacja w pamięci historycznej i praktykach kommemoracyjnych Karaczajów

Studia Polityczne ◽

10.35757/stp.2021.49.2.04 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 49 (2) ◽

pp. 73-85

Author(s):

Rustam Biegieułow

Keyword(s):

World War Ii ◽

Political Culture ◽

Collective Memory ◽

World War ◽

Interethnic Relations ◽

National Memory ◽

History Of ◽

Regional Authorities

This article deals with the problem of the collective memory of the Deportation of the Karachays. The repressions carried out by the Soviets in 1943 left a deep mark on the people’s consciousness. This study focuses on several aspects of popular beliefs about the deportation and its consequences.The author considers the main reasons for the eviction that have remained in the national memory. It is noted that they continue to have a certain influence not only on the regional political culture, the system of interethnic relations, but also on the organisation and conduct of research into the history of the Karachays during World War II. This article also describes the evolution of the ideological and practical approaches of the regional authorities to the coverage and interpretation of this problem after the repatriation of the Karachays. It also deals with the established forms of national memorial practices that help preserve the collective memory of the deportation, the time spent in places of settlement and repatriation.

Download Full-text

Competing national memories of World War II

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ◽

10.1073/pnas.1907992116 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 116 (34) ◽

pp. 16678-16686 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Henry L. Roediger ◽

Magdalena Abel ◽

Sharda Umanath ◽

Ruth A. Shaffer ◽

Beth Fairfield ◽

...

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

United Kingdom ◽

World War Ii ◽

Soviet Union ◽

World War ◽

The Soviet Union ◽

National Memory ◽

Great Responsibility ◽

War Effort

We assessed the knowledge of 1,338 people from 11 countries (8 former Allied and 3 former Axis) about World War II. When asked what percentage their country contributed to the war effort, across Allied countries, estimates totaled 309%, and Axis nations’ estimates came to 140%. People in 4 nations claimed more than 50% responsibility for their country (Germany, Russia, United Kingdom, and United States). The overclaiming of responsibility reflected in these percentages was moderated when subjects were asked to consider the contributions of other countries; however, Russians continued to claim great responsibility, the only country that remained well over 50% in its claim of responsibility for the Allied victory. If deaths in the war are considered a proxy of a nation’s contributions, the Soviet Union did carry much of the burden. This study points to sharp differences in national memory even across nations who fought on the same side in the war. Differing national perspectives shape diverse memories of the same complex event.

Download Full-text

Different Memories, Different Worlds

How Nations Remember ◽

10.1093/oso/9780197551462.003.0001 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-30

Author(s):

James V. Wertsch

Keyword(s):

World War Ii ◽

Collective Memory ◽

Narrative Approach ◽

World War ◽

National Community ◽

The Third ◽

The Past ◽

National Memory ◽

Strong Disagreement ◽

American Memory

The chapter begins with an illustration of a “mnemonic standoff” between the author and Vitya, a Soviet friend from the 1970s, over the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. The two are stunned that they had such different accounts of “what really happened,” and this leads to three general questions: 1. How is it that there can be such strong disagreement between entire national communities about the past? 2. Why were Vitya and I so certain that our accounts of the events in 1945 were true? 3. What deeper, more general commitments of a national community led to the tenacity with which we held our views? The remaining sections of the chapter address why national memory, as opposed to other forms of collective memory, deserves special attention, what a “narrative approach” to national memory is, and how disciplinary collaboration is required to deal with such questions. It then turns to three illustrations that help clarify the conceptual claims. The first involves American and Russian national memory of World War II, the second focuses on differences between Chinese and American memory of the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999, and the third examines how Russian national memory is used as a lens for interpreting contemporary events in Russia and Georgia. Final sections of the chapter introduce the notion of narratives as “equipment for living” in national memory.

Download Full-text

Selectivity and Emplotment in National Memory

How Nations Remember ◽

10.1093/oso/9780197551462.003.0004 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 115-160

Author(s):

James V. Wertsch

Keyword(s):

World War Ii ◽

Essential Role ◽

American Culture ◽

Survey Study ◽

World War ◽

Top Down ◽

Bottom Up ◽

National Community ◽

Specific Memory ◽

National Memory

This chapter discusses how narrative tools serve to select and neglect information in national memory. This view contrasts with standard assumptions about how the process is primarily a matter of top-down coercion by state authorities. Instead, it is argued that all parties in a national community, including state authorities, do their thinking and speaking with the help of narrative tools, giving an essential role to bottom-up cultural and psychological forces. The section “Resources for Selectivity in National Memory” examines selecting events and actors in accordance with what Zerubavel terms “mnemonic focusing.” In the USSR this often involved “blank spots” where events were airbrushed from official memory. Official Soviet accounts of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact are used to illustrate that even suppressing concrete details in a specific memory may do little to change the underlying narrative template of a national community. “Privileged event narratives” (PENs) represent a combination of a specific narrative and narrative template that yields a powerful lens through which events are remembered. For Russians, World War II is a PEN that is used to interpret many events, whereas for the Chinese the Century of Humiliation is a PEN. Finally, evidence from a survey study of “Selective Memory and National Narcissism” in connection with World War II is presented. This study involved 11 nations and reveals surprising findings about how Russian national memory contrasts with that of virtually every other nation. This may reflect the power of Hollywood and American culture of memory more generally.

Download Full-text

Deviations of the Politics of Memory in Eastern Europe and in the Post-Soviet Space

Quaestio Rossica ◽

10.15826/qr.2021.3.627 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (3) ◽

Author(s):

Julia Kantor

Keyword(s):

World War Ii ◽

Eastern Europe ◽

Second World War ◽

Alternative View ◽

World War ◽

Politics Of Memory ◽

National Memory ◽

Ideological Influence ◽

The Difference ◽

Second World

The narratives of the Second World War, which may undoubtedly be referred to as “complex issues of history”, have not been entirely reflected upon yet and therefore are full of phobias and myths. While analysing the set of tools of the politics of memory, the author of this article points outs the following: the politicization of history (following political conjuncture), the manipulation of facts, the glorification of history and its actors, demonisation, i. e., the construction of the image of an internal and external enemy, the ideological censoring of controversial assessments, and the actualisation of sociopolitical nostalgia. The use of this arsenal of ideological influence on mass consciousness can be seen in high-profile sociopolitical incidents of recent times. The difference in historical assessments is a reality that is pointless to obscure. Overcoming historical traumas, i. e., the “combination of history and memory”, is an indispensable condition for normalising and objectifying reflection on the past. The subject of the author’s attention is foreign policy invectives that have become hotbeds of diplomatic tension (more particularly, the Declaration of the European Parliament on the Outbreak of World War II adopted in 2019), the activities of governmental organisations “responsible” for the politics of memory (the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory), expositions of museums in Eastern Europe (the Museum of the Second World War in Gdansk, the Museum of the Occupation in Riga), school history textbooks, the fate of the monuments dedicated to the Second World War (in particular, the Bronze Soldier in Tallinn), public historical and political actions that “overturn” historical reality (for example, Legionnaire Day marches in Riga), and the censorship of publications with an alternative view of the traumatic events of the war.

Download Full-text

La festa della fratellanza italiana: Gianni Grohovaz and the Celebrations of Italian Memorial Day in Toronto, 1960-1975

Quaderni d'italianistica ◽

10.33137/q.i..v31i1.14209 ◽

1969 ◽

Vol 31 (1) ◽

pp. 197-225

Author(s):

Paul Baxa

Keyword(s):

World War Ii ◽

World War ◽

National Memory ◽

National Archives ◽

Community Activist ◽

Italian Community

This article examines the Italian Memorial Day celebrations held in Toronto between 1960 and 1975. These celebrations were organized and conceived by poet-activist-exile Gianni Grohovaz during his tenure as director of the now defunct Italo-Canadian Recreation Club (ICRC) in Toronto. Using the Grohovaz Fonds at the National Archives of Canada, the article explores how the Memorial Day celebrations brought together Grohovaz’s passions as artist and community activist. The celebrations were an attempt to fulfill the ICRC’s mission of uniting Italians by transcending politics, religion, and regionalism while also allowing Grohovaz an opportunity to represent his own life as a veteran and exile from his hometown of Fiume. Through a study of Grohovaz’s Memorial Day celebrations, much can be learned about the changing identity of Toronto’s bourgeoning Italian community after World War II, its relations with the host and mother countries, and of the limits of trying to overcome persistent regional identities through national memory.

Download Full-text