scholarly journals Approaching the past: a tangled interplay of memory, political choices and historical science. With examples from the Nordic and Baltic countries and Romania

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-68
Author(s):  
Jardar Seim
Keyword(s):  
Urban Landscape ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
Ordinary People ◽  
Historical Science ◽  
Politics Of Memory ◽  
The Past ◽  
Baltic Countries ◽  
Political Choices ◽  
Political Conditions

A discussion of topics connected with “historical memory” and “politics of memory” presupposes that we consider how and why we are approaching the past. In this paper I shall point to some ways the past is being approached by individuals, social groups and political authorities – and some reasons for such approaches. But I shall also consider the opposite choice, that of not wanting to get closer to the past, preferring instead to keep a safe distance or even to ignore it, at least painful parts of it. Memories in different forms are important in our approaches to the past. The same is true for scientific history. The interplay between memory and historical science is complicated in itself. The existence of political guidance or explicit political provisions concerning the past makes it even more complicated to understand how our relations with the past are shaped and what their functions are in a given society. In my opinion, it is impossible to generalize about such problems. But comparisons may be fruitful, for instance presentations of wars in school textbooks from different countries, or how succeeding political regimes in one country try to charge the urban landscape with a new (or old) political meaning that legitimizes the present regime or demonize another one, by changing street names, erecting or destroying monuments etc. National anthems are another field that is suited for meaningful comparisons. And even communal or personal memories that are studied without a comparison or generalization in mind may provide ideas and perspectives for dealing with quite different memories under other political conditions. Finally, the role of the presumed scientific historian ought to be examined a little. Is he or she just a rational and neutral judge of the past – compared to ordinary people with undocumented and emotional memories, or to politicians with ideological motives for approaching the past?

Editor's Note

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Kaliel
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Public Memory ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Red River ◽  
Cultural Institutions ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
The Past ◽  
Relationship Of

The articles published in our Fall 2016 edition are connected loosely under the themes of public memory and the uses of identity in the past. We are thrilled to present to you three excellent articles in our Fall 2016 edition: The article "Dentro de la Revolución: Mobilizing the Artist in Alfredo Sosa Bravo's Libertad, Cultura, Igualdad (1961)" analyzes Cuban artwork as multi-layered work of propaganda whose conditions of creation, content, and exhibition reinforce a relationship of collaboration between artists and the state-run cultural institutions of post-revolutionary Cuba; moving through fifty years of history “’I Shall Never Forget’: The Civil War in American Historical Memory, 1863-1915" provides a captivating look at the role of reconciliationist and emancipationist intellectuals, politicians, and organizations as they contested and shaped the enduring memory of the Civil War; and finally, the article “Politics as Metis Ethnogenesis in Red River: Instrumental Ethnogenesis in the 1830s and 1840s in Red River” takes the reader through a historical analysis of the development of the Metis identity as a means to further their economic rights. We wholly hope you enjoy our Fall 2016 edition as much as our staff has enjoyed curating it. Editors  Jean Middleton and Emily Kaliel Assistant Editors Magie Aiken and Hannah Rudderham Senior Reviewers Emily Tran Connor Thompson Callum McDonald James Matiko Bronte Wells

Populism and Memory: Legislation of the Past in Poland, Ukraine, and Russia

2021 ◽  
pp. 088832542095080
Author(s):  
Nikolay Koposov
Keyword(s):  
Soft Power ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
Authoritarian Regimes ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
National Narratives ◽  
Politics Of Memory ◽  
Democratic Culture ◽  
The Past ◽  
Initial Stage ◽  
The Holocaust

This article belongs to the special cluster “Here to Stay: The Politics of History in Eastern Europe”, guest-edited by Félix Krawatzek & George Soroka. The rise of historical memory, which began in the 1970s and 1980s, has made the past an increasingly important soft-power resource. At its initial stage, the rise of memory contributed to the decay of self-congratulatory national narratives and to the formation of a “cosmopolitan” memory centered on the Holocaust and other crimes against humanity and informed by the notion of state repentance for the wrongdoings of the past. Laws criminalizing the denial of these crimes, which were adopted in “old” continental democracies in the 1980s and 1990s, were a characteristic expression of this democratic culture of memory. However, with the rise of national populism and the formation of the authoritarian or semi-authoritarian regimes in Russia, Turkey, Hungary, and Poland in the 2000s and 2010s, the politics of memory has taken a significantly different turn. National populists are remarkably persistent in whitewashing their countries’ history and using it to promote nationalist mobilization. This process has manifested itself in the formation of new types of memory laws, which shift the blame for historical injustices to other countries (the 1998 Polish, the 2000 Czech, the 2010 Lithuanian, the June 2010 Hungarian, and the 2014 Latvian statutes) and, in some cases, openly protect the memory of the perpetrators of crimes against humanity (the 2005 Turkish, the 2014 Russian, the 2015 Ukrainian, the 2006 and the 2018 Polish enactments). The article examines Russian, Polish, and Ukrainian legislation regarding the past that demonstrates the current linkage between populism and memory.

scholarly journals SCIENTISTS OF YEKATERINBURG AS ACTORS PROMOTING THE MOVEMENT FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THE INDUSTRIAL HERITAGE

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-124
Author(s):  
E.V. Zaitseva ◽  
◽  
E.A. Azorkin ◽  
A.N. Alekseychik ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Community ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Industrial Society ◽  
Ordinary People ◽  
The Urals ◽  
Industrial Heritage ◽  
Historical Significance ◽  
The Past ◽  
Industrial Regions

Yet several decades ago the term “industrial heritage” was unknown not only to ordinary people, but also to many scientists. However, the transition from an industrial society to a postindustrial one arouses interest in the objects of the former industrial territories. Over the past twenty years, a number of interesting theoretical and applied studies of the industrial heritage of old industrial regions have been formed. These studies raise the problems of the industrial heritage of Russia and its regions, reveal the potential of territories of cultural and historical significance, describe infrastructural complexes and industrial objects of the past. The article describes the role of scholars from one of the main industrial regions of Russia, the Urals, in the popularization of the industrial heritage through theoretical and empirical research. Primary attention is paid to the analysis of the main directions of this activity, presented in publications by various representatives of the scientific community, which form the scientific and cultural background of the topic of preserving the industrial heritage of Russia. There is a large scientific community in Yekaterinburg, represented by many scholars, including Professor V.V. Zapariy, national representative of Russia in TICCIH (the International Committee for the Conservation of the Industrial Heritage), writing on this topic, which is relevant for the industrial region.

Historiographical facts and political practice in Russia in the XVIII – beginning of the XXI centuries

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Г.Н. Ланской
Keyword(s):  
Control Strategies ◽  
Historical Research ◽  
Political Practice ◽  
Historical Science ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
The Past ◽  
And Control ◽  
Coordination And Control ◽  
Development And Evolution

Статья посвящена истории связи между развитием исторической науки и политической практики в России. В контексте этого развития представлены, с одной стороны, эволюция исторических исследований и их координации и, с другой стороны, трансформация подхода институциональных структур государства к выбору управленческой стратегии в руководстве работой историков. В качестве примера для исследования обозначенной проблемы выбран период с начала XVIII до начала XXI века, потому что в его рамках была сформирована практика профессиональной деятельности в сфере историографии как процесса человеческой деятельности. Особое внимание в статье адресовано к роли идеологии в формировании различных моделей связи между работой историков и политических деятелей по конструированию образа прошлого, настоящего и будущего развития российской истории. The article reveals the connection between the historical science development and evolution of political practice in Russia.In that context shown are the course of the historical research and the coordination and control strategies implemented by the state, including institutional transformations.As a subject of current research was taken the period from the XVIII – beginning of the XXI centuries, when historiography became a profession and was institutionalized.Special attention is driven to the role of ideology in adopting different models of interaction between historians and political actors, while framing the image of the past, the present and the future of Russia.

The Landscape of Historical Memory

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirk A. Denton
Keyword(s):  
Architectural Design ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
Democratic Progressive Party ◽  
Martial Law ◽  
History And Memory ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Past ◽  
Culture History ◽  
Economic Climate

The Landscape of Historical Memory explores the place of museums and memorial culture in the contestation over historical memory in post–martial law Taiwan. The book is particularly oriented toward the role of politics—especially political parties—in the establishment, administration, architectural design, and historical narratives of museums. It is framed around the wrangling between the “blue camp” (the Nationalist Party, or KMT, and its supporters) and the “green camp” (Democratic Progressive Party, DPP), and its supporters) over what facets of the past should be remembered and how they should be displayed in museums. Organized into chapters focused on particular types of museums and memorial spaces (archaeology museums, history museums, martyrs’ shrines, war museums, memorial halls, literature museums, ethnology museums, ecomuseums, etc.), the book presents a broad overview of the state of museums in Taiwan in the past three decades. The case of Taiwan museums tells us much about Cold War politics and its legacy in East Asia; the role of culture, history, and memory in shaping identities in the multiply “postcolonial” landscape of Taiwan; the politics of historical memory in an emergent democracy, especially in counterpoint to the politics of museums in the People’s Republic of China, which continues to be an authoritarian single party state; and the place of museums in a neoliberal economic climate.

Narrating atrocity: Genocide memorials, dark tourism, and the politics of memory

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 805-827 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Kenyon Lischer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Memory ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
Politics Of Memory ◽  
Dark Tourism ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Past ◽  
Human Rights Regime ◽  
International Interactions

AbstractAfter a genocide, leaders compete to fill the postwar power vacuum and establish their preferred story of the past. Memorialisation, including through building memorials, provides a cornerstone of political power. The dominant public narrative determines the plotline; it labels victims and perpetrators, interprets history, assigns meaning to suffering, and sets the post-atrocity political agenda. Therefore, ownership of the past, in terms of the public account, is deeply contested. Although many factors affect the emergence of a dominant atrocity narrative, this article highlights the role of international interactions with genocide memorials, particularly how Western visitors, funders, and consultants influence the government's narrative. Western consumption of memorials often reinforces aspects of dark tourism that dehumanise victims and discourage adequate context for the uninformed visitor. Funding and consultation provided by Western states and organisations – while offering distinct benefits – tends to encourage a homogenised atrocity narrative, which reflects the values of the global human rights regime and existing standards of memorial design rather than privileging the local particularities of the atrocity experience. As shown in the cases of Rwanda, Cambodia, and Bosnia, Western involvement in public memory projects often strengthens the power of government narratives, which control the present by controlling the past.

scholarly journals Memory, Historiography, and “Memorial Paradigm”: On the Role of Historical Memory in Specific Situations [Review: The Past for the Present: Historical Memory and Narratives of National Identity: A Collective Monograph. Repina L.P. (Ed.). Moscow, Akvilon, 2020. (In Russian)]

2020 ◽  
Vol 162 (6) ◽  
pp. 227-234
Author(s):  
D.E. Martynov ◽  
◽  
G.P. Myagkov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Great Britain ◽  
Intellectual History ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
World History ◽  
Integral Image ◽  
Factual Information ◽  
The Past ◽  
History Of ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

The paper reviews the collective monograph published by the Center for Intellectual History of the Institute of World History of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IWH RAS). The reviewers consider the theoretical and factual information presented in the monograph in the context of the analysis of both general and specific characteristics of historical memory. The study of historical memory is possible through the analysis of specific political and intellectual practices of the era of early and mature modernity. The use of J. Rusen’s methodology was justified. According to this methodology, historical memory can be regarded as an “unconscious ideology,” which will inevitably be mythological, because it links the memories of an individual with an integral image of the past. From the aforesaid, it may be seen that the compound term “past – for – present”, which expresses the direction of historical memory, can be introduced. The term is reflected in the title of the monograph under review. The substantive features of strategies for the development of historical memory based on ideologemes were considered by the authors using the example of Russia, Great Britain, Poland (the ideology of Sarmatism), and Bolivia (the ideology of Indianism).

scholarly journals Transformation of historical discourse and the problem of time

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 9-13
Author(s):  
Oleg V. Gerasimov
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Historical Time ◽  
Historical Science ◽  
Problem Of Time ◽  
Historical Discourse ◽  
The Past ◽  
Perception Of Time ◽  
The 19Th Century

The article is devoted to the analysis of the transformation of historical discourse in modern writing of history and its relationship with the problem of historical time. The author shows that since the second half of the 20th century, the representation of the past has been gradually shifting from scientific historiography, as it was formed in the 19th century, to the memory studies. Unlike distancing from the past inherent in historical science, historical memory is characterized by emotional and existential tension, the involvement of the past in the present. This became possible not only as a result of the tragic events of the 20th century, but also due to changes in the temporal regime of modern society. The linear perception of time, peculiar to a modern man, is giving way to post-historical time characterized by non-linearity and reversibility, which makes it possible to actualize the past with the help of memorial policy. A change in the historical time perception gives rise to changes in the perception of the past and, as a result, leads to a transformation of historical discourse.

scholarly journals The problem of actualization of historical memory in the context of the political influence of the regionalelites of Sumy region

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tetiana Bevz
Keyword(s):  
Central Government ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
Political Influence ◽  
Political Elite ◽  
Political Elites ◽  
Politics Of Memory ◽  
The Past ◽  
History Of ◽  
Symbolic Resource ◽  
The One

The article analyzes the role of regional political elites of Sumy region in the actualization of historical memory. It was noted that the politics of memory is a symbolic resource of regional political elites. It was shown that regional political elites, on the one hand, «can create a favorable ground for the growth of multiple identities», and on the other – «are able to stimulate the growth of polar and conflicting identities». Emphasis was placed on the fact that the historical past becomes the ideological present. It was shown that the basic factor for the regional political elite of Sumy region in the processes of actualization of historical memory was the symbolic representation of the past, first of all, the history of the region. It was determined that memory is designed not only to reflect the past, but also to form its meaning for the present. In today's world, there is a great public demand for the formation, restoration, preservation, transmission, reading and affirmation of historical memory. And in this context, the urgent need for the central government and the regional political elite was the need to actively shape a nationwide policy of historical memory.

Circulation, Conditions, Claims: Examining the Politics of Historical Memory in Eastern Europe

2021 ◽  
pp. 088832542096978
Author(s):  
Félix Krawatzek ◽  
George Soroka
Keyword(s):  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Special Section ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
The Past ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Form Part ◽  
Regime Types ◽  
Individual Contributions ◽  
The Individual

Across Eastern Europe how the past is remembered has become a crucial factor for understanding present-day political developments within and between states. In this introduction, we first present the articles that form part of this special section through a discussion of the various methods used by the authors to demonstrate the potential ways into studying collective memory. We then define the regional characteristics of Eastern Europe’s mnemonic politics and the reasons for their oftentimes conflictual character. Thereafter we consider three thematic arenas that situate the individual contributions to this special section within the wider scholarly debate. First, we examine the institutional and structural conditions that shape the circulation of memory and lead to conflictive constellations of remembering; second, we discuss how different regime types and cultural rules influence the framing of historical episodes, paying attention to supranational integration and the role of technological change; third, we consider the different types of actors that shape the present recall of the past, including political elites, social movements, and society at large. We conclude by identifying several promising avenues for further research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document