Methods and periods in memory studies
"Memory studies and the Anthropocene: A roundtable":
" In her 2011 essay ‘Travelling memory’, Astrid Erll distinguishes three phases in memory studies. The first phase encompasses the pioneering work of early-twentieth-century memory scholars, most prominently and influentially Maurice Halbwachs, who developed the concept of collective memory. Memories, according to Halbwachs (1925), are inevitably shaped by collective contexts – one’s family, religion, region, profession, and so on – which he referred to as the social frameworks of memory. The second phase, which started with the publication of Pierre Nora’s (1984–1992) seminal Lieux de mémoire project in the late 1980s and early 1990s, put forward the nation-state as the primary social framework of memory. The turn of the twenty-first century, finally, saw the arrival of a third phase of memory studies, whose theorists and practitioners are united in opposition to the methodological nationalism characterizing the previous phase. Memory, they contend, transcends such narrow boundaries and must therefore be studied from a transnational, transcultural, or global perspective (Assmann and Conrad, 2010; Bond and Rapson, 2014; Crownshaw, 2011; De Cesari and Rigney, 2014; Levy and Sznaider, 2006; Rothberg, 2009). Without meaning to suggest that the last word about transnational, transcultural, or global memory has already been said, I think it can be argued with some justification that what we are witnessing now is the advent of a new, fourth phase in memory studies..."
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1750698017731068
KIBRIS SAVAŞI İÇİN: "The Role of Turkish Cinema in Collective Memory Formation Regarding the Cyprus Question"
PIERRE NORA İÇİN: "The Karbalization of Lebanon: Karbala as lieu de mémoire in Hezbollah’s Ashura narrative"
ETNO_SYMBOLISM İÇİN: "Andricgrad: hijacking memories and the new Serb identity"
" In her 2011 essay ‘Travelling memory’, Astrid Erll distinguishes three phases in memory studies. The first phase encompasses the pioneering work of early-twentieth-century memory scholars, most prominently and influentially Maurice Halbwachs, who developed the concept of collective memory. Memories, according to Halbwachs (1925), are inevitably shaped by collective contexts – one’s family, religion, region, profession, and so on – which he referred to as the social frameworks of memory. The second phase, which started with the publication of Pierre Nora’s (1984–1992) seminal Lieux de mémoire project in the late 1980s and early 1990s, put forward the nation-state as the primary social framework of memory. The turn of the twenty-first century, finally, saw the arrival of a third phase of memory studies, whose theorists and practitioners are united in opposition to the methodological nationalism characterizing the previous phase. Memory, they contend, transcends such narrow boundaries and must therefore be studied from a transnational, transcultural, or global perspective (Assmann and Conrad, 2010; Bond and Rapson, 2014; Crownshaw, 2011; De Cesari and Rigney, 2014; Levy and Sznaider, 2006; Rothberg, 2009). Without meaning to suggest that the last word about transnational, transcultural, or global memory has already been said, I think it can be argued with some justification that what we are witnessing now is the advent of a new, fourth phase in memory studies..."
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1750698017731068
KIBRIS SAVAŞI İÇİN: "The Role of Turkish Cinema in Collective Memory Formation Regarding the Cyprus Question"
PIERRE NORA İÇİN: "The Karbalization of Lebanon: Karbala as lieu de mémoire in Hezbollah’s Ashura narrative"
ETNO_SYMBOLISM İÇİN: "Andricgrad: hijacking memories and the new Serb identity"
Comments
Post a Comment