“MNEMONIC TURNS” IN HISTORICAL CONTEXT. HOW CULTURES OF MEMORY INFLUENCE THE MODERN WORLD
PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY
Keywords:
memory, history, mnemonic turn, regimes of historicity, narrative, modern, revanchismAbstract
Theses about the “living” nature of the past, its ability to “return” and influence the present and the future have defined the contours of the so-called turn to memorial culture, which has been observed in Western humanities since the 1980s. The “memorial turn” marks the transition from the future-focused modernity to a new “regime of historicity” focused mainly on the past.
The article argues that the memorial turn of the late 20th century itself should be viewed historically, as one of the stages of the valorization of the phenomenon of collective or historical memory in the times of modernity and after them. The specificity of each of the stages was determined by the change in the perception of historical time as a complex mutual relationship of the temporal dimensions of the past, present and future. Depending on this, memory performed the functions of temporally overcoming gaps and balancing accelerations, the source of which was the future (1), processing traumatic historical experience and the emancipation associated with it (2), constructing the future as a field of lost or unrealized possibilities of the past (3). Each of these functions gives a special shade to the constitution of collective identity.
The memorial turn of the end of the last century was associated, first of all, with the processing of traumatic memory, regarding the crimes of former totalitarian regimes, as well as violence against oppressed and marginalized groups, communities, and peoples in the past. It took place against the background of a specific Western understanding of the conceptual implementation of the key tasks of liberal democracy, which was articulated in the discourse of the "end of history". This led to the projection of the agenda of liberal-democratic justice onto the past, as a result of which the historical-didactic concept of “negative memory” was developed and numerous discourses of memory, which became a form of emancipation from the traumatic burden of the past, emerged.
Currently, the meaning and function of the past in relation to the present are changing radically. The absence of universalist or more or less inclusive projects of the future, the alienation of the future itself, articulated in the concepts of trans- and post-humanism, lead to reconstructivist projections of historical memory onto the present and the future. From a critical elaboration of the past, they move to the embodiment of its lost and unrealized possibilities, which results in the flourishing of historical revanchism.
Against the backdrop of an alienated future, the European culture of negative memory, on the one hand, and various forms of historical reconstructivism, on the other, determine the face of the modern world. Their coexistence forms a complex picture of the multitemporality of the present despite economic, technological and communicative globalization. Projecting into the political sphere, they lead to tension and open conflicts between societies committed to the international legal status quo and the revanchist encroachments of collective actors of the "new world order", which also implies a new history.
References
Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined Communities. Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London; New York: Verso.
Ankersmit, F.R. (2009). The Postmodernist “Privatization” of the Past. Historical Representation. [In Ukrainian]. Ukraina moderna, 4 (15), 246–272.
Assmann, A. (2013). Is Time out of Joint? On the Rise and Fall of the Modern Time Regime. Ithaca; London: Cornell University Press and Cornell University Library.
Bevernage, B., Lorenz, C. (2013). Introduction. In: Breaking up Time – Negotiating the Borders between Present, Past and Future (pp. 7–35). Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen/Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht LLC, Bristol, CT, U.S.A.
Chakrabarti, D. (2000). Provincializing Europe. Postcolonial Sought and Historical Difference. Princeton; Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Derrida, J. (1994). Specters of Marx. New York; London: Routledge.
Ethnicity and Group Rights. (1997). NOMOS XXXIX. Yearbook of the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy. New York; London: New York University Press.
Fukuyama, F. (2018). Identity. Contemporary Identity Politics and the Struggle for Recognition. London: Profile Books Ltd.
Jonas, H. (1984). The Imperative of Responsibility. In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gumbrecht, H.-U. (2014). Our Broad Present: Time and Contemporary Culture. New York: Columbia University Press.
Halbwachs, M. (1968). La Mémoire Collective. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Hartog, F. (1996). History and the Writing of History: the Order of Time. In: History Making. The Intellectual and Social Formation of a Discipline (pp. 95–113). Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.
Hartog, F. (2005). Time and Heritage. Museum Internationale, 57/3, 7–18.
Hartog, F. (2015). Regimes of Historicity: Presentism and Experiences of Time. New York: Columbia University Press.
Homilko, O. (2023). Decolonization of Ukrainian Culture: Vouk Policy or National Awakening? [In Ukrainian]. Philosophical Thought, 3, 49–58.
Huyssen, A. (2000). Present Pasts: Media, Politics, Amnesia. Public Culture, 12, 21–38.
Kozellek, R. (2005). Future Past. On the Semantics of Historical Time. [In Ukranian]. Kyiv: Dukh i Litera.
Lorenz, K. (2019). Out of Time?: Some Critical Reflections on François Hartog’s Presentism. In: Rethinking Historical Time: New Approaches to Presentism. London; New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Megill, A. (1998). History, memory, identity. History of the Human Sciences, 11, 37–62.
Megill, A. (2007). Historical Knowledge, Historical Error. A contemporary guide to practice.
Chicago; London: The University of Chicago Press.
Mudrovcic, M. (2014). About lost futures or the political heart of history. Historein, 14, 7–21.
Nora, P. (1984). Entre mémoire et histoire: la problématique des lieux. In: Les Lieux de mémoire. T. 1: La République (pp. xvii–xlii). Paris: Gallimard.
Olick, J.K. (2007). The Politics of Regret: On Collective Memory and Historical Responsibility. New York: Routledge.
Proleiev, S., Zymovets, R., Kobets, R. (2023). Discourses in a Global World. Kyiv: Dukh i Litera.
Reichardt, U. (2003). The “Times” of the New World: Future-Orientation, American Culture, and Globalization. In: REAL 19 (Yearbook of Research in English and American Literature) (pp. 247–266). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Renan, E. (1882). Qu’Est-Ce Qu’Une Nation? Conference faite en Sorbonne, le 11 Mars 1882 (pp. 1–30). Paris: Calmann Levi, Editeur; Ancienne Maison Michel Levy Freres.
Saryusz-Wolska, M., Wawrzyniak, J., Wóycicka, Z. (2022). New constellations of mnemonic
wars: An introduction. Memory Studies, 15(6), 1275–1288.
Simon, Z.B. (2018). History Begins in the Future On Historical Sensibility in the Age of Technology. In: The Ethos of History: Time and Responsibility. Oxford; New York: Berghahn.
Simon, Z.B. (2024). Disconnective futures: Uncertainty, unfathomability, and the collapse of narrative crisis management. Frontiers of Narrative Studies, 9, 208–231.
Torpey, J. (2004). The Pursuit of the Past: A Polemical Perspective. In: Theorizing Historical Consciousness (pp. 240–255). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Zymovets, R. (2022). Memory Discourses and Critical Scientific History. On the specificity of Modern Historical Discourses. [In Ukrainian]. Philosophical Thought, 2, 108–124.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
