Wri$ng  the  Image:    The  Interac$on  of  Photographs  and  

Texts  in  the  20th  Century  

Compara(ve  Literature    A.Y.  2016-­‐2017  

1  

Memory  Studies  

1.  Individual  memory  

2.  Collec(ve  memory  

3.  Cultural  memory    

2  

Individual  Memory  Individual memory is defined as a personal interpretation of an event from ones own life. This personality is related to own ex- periences during socialisation processes and thus it is highly subjective.

But:

All subjective memories are related to the cognition of relevant peers and thus are the basis for collective memories (as we-identification of social groups).

3  

 Individual  Memory  in  Rela(on  to  Collec(ve  Memory  

 •  The  social  group  in  which  s/he  iden(fies  with  unques(on-­‐ably  

influences  the  opinions,  beliefs,  and  a7tude  of  the  individual.  Individuals  weave  together  their  past  experien-­‐ces  to  form  collec(ve  memories.  

4  

Collec:ve  Memory  

Collective memories are socially con-structed based on common sentiments, values, and the present circumstances in which the group finds itself.

Memories created by groups serve as important role in creating a sense of identity.

Each ‘we’ is constructed through specific discourses that mark certain boundary lines and define respective principles of inclusion and exclusion and suggests that to acknowledge the concept of collective memory is to acknowledge the concept of some collective identity

5  

Maurice  Halbwachs  (1877-­‐1945)  

•  The  Social  Frameworks  of  Memory,  originally  published  in  1925.  

•  The  Legendary  Topography  of  the  Gospels  in  the  Holy  Land,  published  in  1941.    

•  The  Collec$ve  Memory  (1950,  New  York:  Harper  and  Row,  1982).  

6  

•  Memory  func(ons  within  a  collec(ve  context.  •  Collec(ve  memory  is  selec(ve.  •  Different  modes  of  bahavior.  •  Different  images  of  Jesus’  life  •  Construc(on  of  reality  is  different  according  to  the  social  class  one  belongs  to.  

•  The  Social  Frameworks  of  Memory:  memory  and  society  

•  To  remember  is  to  be  (ed  to  collec(ve  frameworks  of  social  reference  points  in  (me  and  space.  

7  

•  Memory  orders  the  experience  and  ensures  the  con(nuity  of  collec(veness.  

•  Tradi(ons,  ideas  and  images  :  collec:ve  memories  are  not  pure  recollec:on  but  reconstruc:ons.  

•  Halbwachs  vs.  Henri  Bergson  •  Time  and  Free  Will:  An  Essay  on  the  Immediate  Data  of  Consciousness  (Essai  sur  les  données  immédiates  de  la  conscience,  1889).    

•  MaPer  and  Memory  (Ma$ère  et  mémoire,  1896).  

8  

•  Bergson’s  dura:on  (French:  la  durée)  is  a  theory  of  (me  and  consciousness  that  bound  memory  to  intui(on.  

•  Halbwachs:  consciousness  of  dura(on  is  a  social  fact.  To  remember  one  needs  “others”    

•  Example:    The  Legendary  Topography  of  the  Gospels  in  the  Holy  Land,  where  the  loca(ons  of  major  events  linked  to  the  origins  of  Chris(anity  change  according  to  doctrinal  and  poli(cal  developments.  

•  Loca(ons  are  a  kind  of  “staged  authen(city”.  9  

•  Halbwachs  theory  vs.  abempts  to  coceive  colelc(ve  memory  in  biological  terms  (“racial  memory”).  C.G.  Jung’s  theory  of  the  archetypes.    

•  Cultural  framework  instead  of  a  biological  one.  

•  The  specific  character  deriving  from  belonging  to  a  dis(nct  society  and  culture  is  the  result  of  socializa(on  and  customs.    

•  The  “survival  of  the  type”  is  a  func(on  of  the  cultural  memory  

10  

•  F.  Nietzsche:  Humans  must  find  a  means  by  which  to  maintain  their  nature  consistently  through  genera(ons.  

•  Solu(on  is  offered  by  CULTURAL  MEMORY:  

1.  A  collec(ve  concept  for  all  knowledge  that  directs  behavior  and  experience  in  the  intereac(ve  framework  of  a  society  

2.  A  collec(ve  concept  meaning  repeated  societal  prac(ce  and  ini(an(on.    

11  

12  

•  “Cultural  memory”  is  defined  through  a  double  delimita(on  that  dis(nguishes  it  from:  

-­‐  “Communica(ve”  or  “everyday”  memory:  no  “cultural”  characteris(cs  

-­‐  “science”,  because  scinece  relates  to  a  collec(ve  self-­‐image.  This  delimita(on  was  developed  by  Halbwachs  with  respect  to  the  dis(nc(on  between  “memory”  and  “history”.    

Our  focus  is  on  the  dis(nc(on  between  “comunica(ve”  and  “cultural”  memory.  

13  

Communica:ve  Memory  

•  It  includes  those  varie(es  of  collec(ve  memory    based  on  everyday  communica(on  that  cons(tute  the  field  of  ”oral  history”.  

•  Non-­‐specializa(on,  reciprocity  roles,  thema(c  instability,  disorganiza(on.    

•  This  memory  takes  place  between  partners  who  change  roles.  

•  Through  this  manner  of  communcia(on  each  individual  composes  a  memory  which  is  “socially  mediated”  and  “related  to  a  group”.  

14  

•  Individual  memory  and  communcia(on  with  “others”  meant  as  groups  of  people,  who  concieve  unity  and  peculiarity  through  a  common  image  of  their  past.    

•  Families,  professional  groups,  poli(cal  par(es,  associa(ons.  Every  individual  belongs  to  such  groups  and  entertains  numerous  collec(ve  self-­‐images  and  memories.    

•  “Oral  History”  and  communica(ve  memory:  a  limited  temporal  horizon  (no  more  than  80-­‐100  years  =  3  or  4  genera(ons).  

•  Communica(ve  memory  offers  no  fixed  point  which  would  bind  it  to  the  ever  expanding  past  in  the  passing  of  (me.  

•  Fixity  can  be  only  be  achieved  through  a  cultural  transforma(on.  

15  

Transi:on  •  From  communci(ve  memory  to  objec(vized  culture  

•  Transi(on  is  fundamental  and  it  makes  the  methaphor  of  memory  even  unapplicable.  

•  Halbwachs  stopped  at  the  point  where  collec(ve  memory  turns  into  objec(vized  culture.  Perhaps  he  believed  that    once  living  communica(on  cristallized  in  the  forms  of  objec(vized  culture,  the  group  rela(onship  and  the  contemporary  reference  are  lost.    

•  Objec(vized  culture:  texts,  images,  ci(es,  monuments,  etc.  

•  Memory  is  transformed  into  history    16  

Cultural  Memory  •  Characterized  by  its  distance  from  everyday.  •  Cultural  memory  has  its  fixed  point  and  its  horizon  does  not  change  with  the  passing  of  (me.    

•  Cultural  Memory  has  fixed  point,  i.e.  fateful  events  of  the  past,  whose  memory  is  maintained  through  a)  cultural  forma(ons  [texts,  images,  ci(es,  monuments,  etc.]  and  b)  ins(tu(onal  communica(on  [recitals,  prac(ce,  observance].    

•  “Figures  of  memory”    

17  

•  Rites,  fes(vals,  epics,  poems,  images  form  “islands  of  (me”  of  a  temporality  suspended  from  (me.  

•  In  cultural  memory  such  islands  of  (me  expands  into  memory  spaces  of  “retrospec(ve  contempla(veness”,  an  expression  by  Aby  Warburg.    

•  “Mnemonic  energy”  leads  to  the  objec(va(on  of  culture  with  respect  to  high  art,  but  also  to  posters,  postage  stamps,  costumes,  customs,  etc.  

•  Cultural  forma(on:  a  collec(ve  experience  crystallizes  and  its  meaning  may  become  accessible  again  across  millennia.    

•  Aby  Warburg’s  Altas  of  Memory  (Mnemosyne)  large-­‐scale  project:  reconstruc(on  of  the  pictorial  memory  of  Western  Civiliza(on.    

18  

Maurice Halbwachs (1877-1945)

“There  are  no  ideas  without  images:  more  precisely,  idea  and  image  do  not  designate  two  elements  of  our  states  of  consciousness,  one  social  and  the  other  individual,  but  rather  two  points  of  view  where  society  can  focus  on  the  same  objects  at  the  same  :me”.      (Halbwachs,  M.  1925,  p.  9)