Memory, history and the claims of the past

Poole, Ross

doi:10.1177/1750698007088383

Cited by 79 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This record, effectively the institutional memory of the crime, is not merely cognitive, that is, information about what happened in the past. It also, to use an old fashioned term, conative; that is it bears on action (for more on this distinction, see Poole 2008aPoole , b, 2009. The record of a crime provides a prescription for legal officials to do something.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Enacting Oblivion

Poole

2009

Int J Polit Cult Soc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After periods of major political change, incoming regimes have often declared "acts of oblivion" in which courts and sometimes citizens are commanded to forget what happened under the preceding regime. But how are courts and citizens supposed to obey this command? Must they not remember what it is they are commanded to forget? If so, obedience is only possible at the price of disobedience. This paper suggests this paradox raises important issues about the concept of memory. It argues that in order to understand acts of oblivion we need to distinguish between two aspects of memory: the cognitive, concerned with the transmission of information, and the conative, concerned with the transmission of will and affect. This distinction provides a way of avoiding the more overtly paradoxical features of acts of oblivion. However, there remain significant difficulties facing the political project of forgetting.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Enacting Oblivion

Poole

2009

Int J Polit Cult Soc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 SeeMarkowitsch, 2002, pp. 56, 184; Welzer, 2002, p. 175; for an overview of the scientific concepts of 'memory' seeRoediger et al, 2007; for similarities between individual and collective memory see alsoPoole (2008).Sommer 370 r 2010 The London School of Economics and Political Science 1745-8552 BioSocieties Vol. 5, 3, 366-390…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

DNA and cultures of remembrance: Anthropological genetics, biohistories and biosocialities

Sommer

2010

BioSocieties

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article engages current human population genetic research or anthropological genetics with an emphasis on its popular forms. A general discussion of the production of biohistories on the basis of DNA analyses is elaborated by focusing on what I call the Genographic network: the Genographic Project and the associated genetic ancestry companies as well as book and film productions. In order to gain an understanding of the specificity of what is also referred to as genetic history, the development of notions such as a genetic heritage, the gene as historical document, and the DNA as archive of history are briefly treated, before approaching the recent commercializations and medializations of group-specific and personalized genetic history and identity. It is here that the challenge of joining history and DNA becomes most evident: on the one hand, the genetic knowledge is presented as particularly authentic and accurate on the basis of its epistemic objects and quantitative and technological approaches. On the other hand, in order for biohistorical identities and socialities to form, the knowledge needs to be rendered in a narrative, esthetically appealing way. This also points to differences vis-a`-vis medical genomics in that neither anthropological genetics, nor the biosocialities it facilitates, are oriented towards hope for future health solutions. In offering supposedly purely anthropological knowledge about who we are and where we come from, anthropological genetics is part of backward-looking socialities. It is part of cultures of remembrance.

show abstract

“…i) We take History as one of the cultural tools for memory (Rosa, 1993), without going in this paper into the discussion of the debate Halbwachs opened about the similarities and differences between history and collective memory (see e.g., Nora, 1989;Olick & Robbins, 1998;Poole, 2008;Wertsch, 2007).…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Memory, History and Narrative: Shifts of Meaning when (Re)constructing the Past

Luna¹,

Rosa²

2012

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is devoted to the examination of some socio-cultural dimensions of memory, focusing on narratives as a meditational tool (Vygotsky, 1978) for the construction of past events and attribution of meaning. The five elements of Kenneth Burke's Grammar of Motives (1969) are taken as a framework for the examination of reconstructions of the past and particularly of histories, namely: 1) the interpretative and reconstructive action of 2) a positioned agent operating 3) through narrative means 4) addressed to particular purposes 5) within a concrete social and temporal scenery. The reflexive character of such approach opens the ground for considering remembering as one kind of act performed within the context of a set of on-going actions, so that remembrances play a directive role for action and so have an unavoidable moral dimension. This is particularly relevant for some kinds of social memory such as history teaching and their effects upon identity.

show abstract

Memory, history and the claims of the past

Cited by 79 publications

References 18 publications

Enacting Oblivion

Enacting Oblivion

DNA and cultures of remembrance: Anthropological genetics, biohistories and biosocialities

Memory, History and Narrative: Shifts of Meaning when (Re)constructing the Past

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About