2013
DOI: 10.2979/histmemo.25.1.111
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Regarding the Recording: <em>The Viewer of Video Testimony, the Complexity of Copresence and the Possibility of Tertiary Witnessing</em>

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, participants' emotional stories are often elicited and recorded to be disseminated broadly for non‐immediate audiences via documentaries, radio, television, archives, and other channels. Indeed, recordings of emotional testimonials are often included in Holocaust education for the purpose of affectively stirring broad audiences (Ebbrecht‐Hartmann, 2016; Felman & Laub, 1992; Hartman, 1995; Obens, 2016; Wake, 2013; Weissman, 2004; Wieviorka, 2006). Even when participants take part in recorded one‐on‐one interviews, they do so with the understanding that their storytellings will ultimately be de‐ and recontextualized by and for differently positioned audiences, beyond the interview event itself (Bauman & Briggs, 1990; Briggs, 2007; Koven, 2014).…”
Section: Communicating and Circulating Affectmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, participants' emotional stories are often elicited and recorded to be disseminated broadly for non‐immediate audiences via documentaries, radio, television, archives, and other channels. Indeed, recordings of emotional testimonials are often included in Holocaust education for the purpose of affectively stirring broad audiences (Ebbrecht‐Hartmann, 2016; Felman & Laub, 1992; Hartman, 1995; Obens, 2016; Wake, 2013; Weissman, 2004; Wieviorka, 2006). Even when participants take part in recorded one‐on‐one interviews, they do so with the understanding that their storytellings will ultimately be de‐ and recontextualized by and for differently positioned audiences, beyond the interview event itself (Bauman & Briggs, 1990; Briggs, 2007; Koven, 2014).…”
Section: Communicating and Circulating Affectmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This leads us then to the second group around which there is much debate as to their status as 'witnesses': 'secondary' or even 'tertiary' witnesses (Wake 2013). Secondary witnesses have been conceptualised in multiple ways.…”
Section: Secondary Witnessesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, they not only record the survivor as witness, they also position the viewer as witness to their testimony. In her examination of the role of the witness in Holocaust video testimonies, Caroline Wake (2013) differentiates between 'primary witnessing' and 'secondary witnessing', explaining that primary witnessing is 'being spatiotemporally copresent at the scene of trauma', whilst secondary witnessing is 'being spatiotemporally copresent at the scene of testimony'namely, someone who has heard the testimony of the primary witness and 'responds to the primary witness and, just as importantly, to the process of witnessing ' (113, 116). She proffers that the viewers of such recorded testimonies becomes 'tertiary witnesses' who, although they are separated from the witnesses by time and space, still feel an 'emotional copresence' with the witnesses (113).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%