New geographies of commemoration

Abstract

<jats:p> This article identifies new geographies of commemoration. These draw on non-representational perspectives that foreground the experiential aspects of commemorative sites and events, drawing these together with methodologies alive to the subtle but excessive feelings that arise in such settings. It argues that one aim of commemoration – to reinforce the contours of national identity – is disrupted by a focus on the experiential world because of the unpredictable and excessive nature of sensory and affective feelings. New research in geographies of commemoration also draws together different temporalities, holding the potential to unsettle and complicate national narratives. </jats:p>

Nuclear memory: Archival, aesthetic, speculative

“…First is that nuclear memory demands attention to alternative onto-epistemologies of time and temporality . Key here is the possibility to explore alternative ontologies of time beside chronological time (Bastian 2019; Glowczewski 2016; Kasperski and Storm 2020), including through recent research into geo-ontologies (Joyce 2020; Povinelli 2021; Yusoff 2013) and conceptualisations of the mnemo-technical capacities of the earth (Szerszynski 2019). This focus on alternative onto-epistemologies of time sometimes suggests a certain existential thrill associated with accessing deep temporal horizons – especially where the enduring materialities of nuclear waste are seen to offer fresh perspectives on durations of time besides the human condition (Gordon 2021; Ialenti 2020).…”

“…Also engaging with the relation between memory and landscape, but in conversation with historical-cultural geographies, della Dora (2013, 696) focuses on ancient Roman and Byzantine understandings of memory as "an embodied practice depending on mental and corporeal attitudes but also one heavily grounded in and interacting with landscape's matter, colours, forms, and with their specificities". Second, there has also been particular emphasis on non-representational and affective approaches (DeSilvey 2012;Drozdzewski 2018;Jones 2015;Sumartojo 2021). Engagements with affective registers of experience not only affirm an expanded conceptual repertoire accounting for the (re)production and circulation of memory, but also draw attention to certain geographies of negativity such as the way memory can fall apart, be marked by an affective sense of absence, or encounters certain bodily limits (Bissell et al 2021).…”

Memory Justice in Ordinary Urban Spaces: The Politics of Remembering and Forgetting in aPost‐ApartheidNeighbourhood

“…It is not surprising, therefore, that most geographical scholarship in this field has focused on state‐sanctioned or institutional memory acts that tangibly occupy space, such as museums and monuments (e.g. Sumartojo 2021). These are the instances in which memory‐place‐identity connections are most visible, and in which the politics of those connections play out with the greatest drama (Hamber and Wilson 2002; Marschall 2009, 2010, 2012).…”

Exploring geo-literacy in museum educational programmes at the Iziko Museums in Cape Town, South Africa

“…It is a space where learners can move around exhibitions within a single environment, access their multiple intelligences and learn more about the world in which they live (Yoo, 2021). Museums are viewed as institutions to visit in order to sharpen one's curiosity about mainly the world, science and history (Sumartojo, 2021;Yun, 2018). This means that every museum is a space to explore geographical imaginations, interpretations and representations (Schmitt & Labour, 2021).…”