kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
TRANSCRIPT
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 1/16
Social Thought & Commentary: The Abuses of Memory: Reflections on the Memory Boom inAnthropologyAuthor(s): David BerlinerReviewed work(s):Source: Anthropological Quarterly, Vol. 78, No. 1 (Winter, 2005), pp. 197-211Published by: The George Washington University Institute for Ethnographic ResearchStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4150896 .
Accessed: 18/03/2012 16:30
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
The George Washington University Institute for Ethnographic Research is collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Anthropological Quarterly.
http://www.jstor.org
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 2/16
SOCIAL HOUGHT COMMENTARY
T h e A b u s e s o f M e m o r y :
Reflectionso n
t h e M e m o r y B o o m
i n Anthropology'
DavidBerliner
Harvard niversity
n recent years, studies of memory have blossomed in the humanities.
(Klein2000, Radstone2000, Zelizer1995)2 Inanthropologyin particular,a
vast numberof scholars are currentlyoccupied with research about memory.
(Candau1998, Climoand Cattell2002, Olickand Robbins1998)Thelist of con-
tributions in this recent field of researchis too voluminous to even begin to
report. In every new anthropological publication, there is another article
about social, cultural or material memory. Anthropology of Memory has
become a respectedcourse of many Americanand EuropeanUniversitypro-
grams,something that would have been unthinkable20 years ago. Also,con-
ferences and workshopsare being organizedwith a special focus on memory
issues, something that would also have been unthinkable 20 yearsago.3
However,they are many unsettled areas in the field of memory studies.
Historianshave indeedbegun warning
usagainst
the"terminologicalprofu-sion" and the "semanticoverload"of the notion (Kansteiner 002, Klein2000).
Gillis observes that "memoryseems to be losing precise meaning in propor-
tion to its growing rhetoricalpower"(Gillis1984: 3). As historianJayWinter
cogently writes,
197
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 3/16
TheAbuses f Memory: eflectionsn theMemory oom nAnthropology
"The nlyfixedpoint s the nearubiquity f the term[memory].ust s
we use wordslike love and hate without everknowing heir full or
shared ignificance,o are we bound o go on using he term"memo-
ry,"he historicalignature f ourgeneration"Winter000:13).
From he idea that"asocietyor a culture anremember ndforget" Are ot
only individuals apableof remembering?)4o the widelyused notion of
"vicariousmemory"5'nd the questionable alidity f the notionof memoryinapproachingertain rans-culturalontexts,6 broad angeof fundamental
epistemologicalssuesare stillto be raisedwithregardo memory.The pointthat I would like to emphasizehereconcerns he "danger f
overextension"f theconcept.Aconceptosingprecisemeaning,memoryan
also be approached s an expansivenotion.ForGediand Elam,"'collective
memory'hasbecome he all-pervadingonceptwhich n effectstands orall
sortsof humancognitiveproducts enerally"Gedi& Elam 996:40).Inpar-
ticular,historianshave alreadyunderscoredhe risksof entanglement f
memoryand identity Gillis 994, Megill1998).Someanthropologists,oo,
startedexpressing oncernsabout the "dangers f overextensionhat areinherentnthe currentboomof memory"Fabian 999:51).ForFabian,he
"concept f memorymaybecomeindistinguishablerom eitheridentity r
culture"ibid:51).JonathanBoyarinoncurs,noting hat"identitynd mem-
oryarevirtuallyhe same"Boyarin994:23).Inthisessay, contend hat he
currentusageof the notionbyanthropologistsan be a sourceof confusion
as ittendsto encompassmany eatures f the notionof culture tself. arguethat this processof conceptualextension eadingto the entanglement f
memory nd culturemerits arefulcrutinys ittells us a greatdealabout he
anthropologicalroject.Needlesso say,Iwillraisemanyquestions ndgive
very ew answers.Thispieceshouldbetakenasanepistemologicalhallengerather han a pessimistic eproach.
Memory n Anthropology:a HistoricalPerspectiveItisunfortunatehattherehasnotbeen
yeta
history, genealogyf the con-
ceptof memorynanthropology,hereasheongoingobsessionwithmemo-
ryin the humanities has been abundantlydocumented. In a powerfularticle,
Kleinreminds us that
198
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 4/16
DAVID ERLINER
"Memoryrew ncrediblymarginal, nd in 1964 TheDictionaryf the
Social Sciencesclaimed that the word verged on extinction [...] The
1968 Editionof the InternationalEncyclopediaof the Social Sciences
declined o definememoryat all, despitethe luxuryof stretchingts
contentsout for 7 volumes.By1976 [...] RaymondWilliams'slassic
study, Keywords,[...] ignored memory. [...] Little more than two
decades separate memory'svirtual disappearanceand triumphalreturn"Klein 000:131).
Toexplainhistriumphaleturn, istorianayWinter asshown hatthereare
"distinctiveourcesof the contemporarybsessionwith memory hat ariseout of a multiplicityf social,cultural,medical,and economic rendsand
developments f an eclecticbutintersecting ature"Winter000:1). Many
factorshistorical,ocialandsocietal)havebeen invoked o explainhe emer-
genceof thememory onceptn the humanities: boveall theShoah Lacapra
1998),butalso the influenceof identitypoliticsn the U.S, he marketingf
memoryandretro-mania,he reassessmentf national dentities n Europe
(Klein2000).FrenchanthropologistoelCandaudescribesour present-day
obsessionwithmemoryunder he term"mnemotropisme."ccordingo him,thismnemotropismes"aproblemnidentity ausedbyour ncapacityo mas-
ter theanxiety f loss" Candau998:104,mytranslation).nvadedby"apro-fuseproductionf information,magesandtraces"ibid:105,my ranslation).Candaurgues,oursociety s lesscapableof transmittingmemoryhanoth-
ers,and more obsessedwithit. In the samevein, Baxterunderlines,n the
Businessf Memory,hat"fetishizingmemorys manifestingtselfin a socie-
tywherewearetryingo copewith nformation-gluthatDavid hrenk alled
the 'data mog"'Baxter999:vii).Intheacademicworld,he memoryboomstarted ecentlyn history, rin-
cipallyncultural istory.PierreNora 1989) ndJanAssman1995) re known
as thefathers f thememory razeamonghistorians.n hewakeof the"post-modernist urn"and the deconstructionf the meta-texts,tudentsof the
humanities aveproduced adevastatingritique f the totalizing spectsof
historical iscourse"Klein000:128).Aconcept losero experiencen its con-
notations,memory"
efers o thepast
as it is livedby
thesocialagents Dosse1999,Ricoeur001).Itis definedas morehumanandsubjective,nd the his-
torian becomes interested less in the reliabilityof memorythan in the memo-
ry work itself. A group of scholars "interested n the issue of popular resist-
ance,"(Jing1996: 16)and criticalof the oralhistorypractice n the early1980s,
199
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 5/16
TheAbuses f Memory: eflectionsn theMemory oom nAnthropology
the PopularMemoryGrouplsoplayed crucial ole norientinghe attention
of scholarsowardshe "nature ndprocessesf remembering,s muchas the
contentsof the memories...]"(Thomson,risch nd Hamilton 994:34).It istemptingo understandhe success f memory monganthropologists
inthe lightof the postmodernisturnand the ragingmemory/historyebate
in the humanities, s theybothaffectedourdiscipline.Recent nthropologi-cal studieshave indeedabandonedhe suspicious ttitude owardmemorythatpreviouslyharacterized anyhistorieslike hoseof Vansina1980)or
example)ora morephenomenologicalpproach,whichconsists f capturing
the way people perceive:hey remember,orgetand reinterpretheirown
pasts.This ocuson historyas it is lived,on the remembrancesharedandtransmitted ysocialgroupshasshown hatpeopleexperience ndinterpret
theirpasts roma multiplicityf viewpoints. ucha perspective, hichdocu-
mentsthe existenceof multipleand sometimesantagonisticisionsof the
pastwithin he samesociety,hasbeencopiouslydevelopednanthropologi-cal studiessince the 1980s.A bouquetof writings pringso mind,such as
those,amongmanyothers,of Appadurai1981),Bloch 1998),Boyarin1991),Cohn 1995),Cole 2001),Dakhlia1990),Hastrup1992),Herzfeld1991), ing
(1996),Kilani1992),Lapierre2001),Rappaport1990),Rosaldo1980),Stolerand Strassler2000)and Tonkin 1992).Furthermore,ome of these recent
workshavebeguntreatinghe bodyas a "vital ite of memory,"Strathern1996:29)such as those colonialmemories xploredbyBloch n Madagascar
(1998)and Stollern Niger 1995).Anotherpateof writings n memory nd
its relationshipo places Feldand Basso1996)andobjects Radley 990) s
alsoemerginghesedays,emphasizinghe waybothplacesandobjects on-
tribute o materializendividual iographynd sharedhistory.
The Overextensionof Memory:Memoryand Culture
Today,mostanthropologistsse the notionof memoryo refer o the social
rememberingf precise istoricaland ometimesraumatic)ventsandexperi-ences.Theyunderstandt asanextremelyocialactivity yvirtue f whichone
registers,etains nd revisits ventsandexperiences. ut, ormanyanthropolo-
gists,eaders f
Halbwachs,ora,ConnertonndBastide s
well,memorysalso
understoodoughlys the"persistencefsomethingrom hepast nto hepres-
ent"(Halbwachs 994 [1925],mytranslation) r, in otherwords,when "apartic-
ular past perseveresbecause it remains relevantfor latercultural ormations"
(Olick& Robbins1998:129).Thelabel"memory"imsto grasp he pastwe carry,
200
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 6/16
DAVID ERLINER
howweareshapedby t andhow hispast stransmitted.herefore,very ittle
traceofthe"pastnthepresent"sdesignatedsmemory.Here,here s neither
perceptionorremembering. emorys not seen as a setof representationsf
eventsandexperienceshatareshared,butas theway astingracesof thepast
persistwithinus, as the transmissionnd persistence f cultural lements
throughhegenerations.Memorys not theseseriesof recalledmental mages,buta synonymorculturaltorage fthepast: t is thereproductionf thepastin the present,hisaccumulatedastwhichacts on us and makesus act.As
PierreNoraputit,"Collectiveemorys whatremainsrom he past ngroups'
life,orwhatgroups o with hepast"Nora 972:398,my ranslation).
For nstance,hisis particularlylear n the powerful ookbyJunJingTheTemplef Memories,here heauthor mployheword"memory"o refero the
"meticulousemembrancef pasteventsand persons"romthe Communist
political ersecutionra(Jing 996:17)aswellas to describehecontemporary
"resurgencef popular eligion"ibid:173) n the Chinese illageof Dachuan.
Thenotionof memoryhelpsJing,nstead f mourninghe passing f tradition-
alsociety,othinkhroughhepersistencef hisobject fstudy,hat s therepro-duction f Kongocietyhroughimedespitedramatichangesncontext:
"Thetoryof Dachuannd its Confuciusemple,"ewrites, ...] "isone
of proud ndinnovative eople ryingo rebuildheir ifeaftergrievousassaultson their culturaldentity,ense of history, ndreligiousaith"
(ibid: 2).
Itis as if,afterhavingbeen uncertain bouthowpracticesouldbe transmit-
ted in such tormentedmodernworldswhere"savages" ere supposed o
"vanish,"nthropologistsealized hat the pastdoes notevaporate,butper-sists nmultipleways.Here,"collectivememory"eferso the memoryof the
society,tsability o reproducetselfthroughime.
Tothe best of my knowledge,he contemporarynthropologicalse of
memorys hoveringbetweenhistory s it is livedby peopleand those issues
of culturalpersistence.As Battagliaput it, "thestudyof "socialmemory"
addressesproblemsn the "livinghistory"ndongoing ulturalraditionsfcollectivities
f persons"Battaglia992:
14, myemphasis).Atthe sametime
the term stands n for remembrancef pastevents and experiences nd a
"past"ransmittedand stored (like in a computer,without meaningor
remembering).Indeed, byvirtue of its semantic multidimensionality,memo-
ryis an expansive label that seems to migrateinto different places. Infact, as
201
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 7/16
TheAbuses f Memory: eflectionsn theMemory oomnAnthropology
wetrack heusagesof theconcept,tbecomes lear hatwecanobserve dif-
fusionof the problem f memorynto thegeneralprocess f culture.
Tosuggestwhat I havein mind,let me offerone illuminatingxample
from he recentbookeditedbyClimo ndCattell, ocialMemoryndHistory:
Anthropologicalpproaches.n her contributiono the volume,"ExploringVenuesof SocialMemory,"aroleCrumley eginsbyasking wo questions:"One earnsculture,but how?Which lementsand events of everydayife
transmitvalues, beliefs,techniques,strategies?"Climoand Cattell2002:
39).Shehenproposes definition f socialmemory:
"Socialmemory",he writes,"is the meansby whichinformationstransmittedmong ndividual ndgroupsandfromone generationo
another.Notnecessarilyware hattheyaredoingso, individuals asson theirbehaviors nd attitudes o others nvarious ontextsbutespe-
cially hrough motionalandpracticalies andin relationshipsmong
generations ...] Touse an analogy romphysics, ocialmemoryacts
likea carrierwave,transmittingnformation vergenerations egard-lessof the degreeto whichparticipantsreawareof their roles n the
process"ibid:40).
Accordingly,ocial memorycorrespondso those "community ercep-
tions, attitudes, behaviors,values and institutions"hat "aretransmitted
acrossgenerations"ibid:40).Thethingto noteaboutCrumley'sext is that
itsdefinitionof memorys so broad hat it becomes ncreasinglympossibleto discern he boundaries f the notion.Indeed,whatis notmemoryhen?
Besides, f memorys howthe past persistsnand invests he present,being
everythingndeverywhere,f it is definedas"thepattern-maintenanceunc-
tionof societyor as socialreproduction erse"(Olick&Robbins 998:112),then isn'tmemoryhe process f culture tself?Isthat notwhat he conceptof culture s all about?
But"how hese collectivememoriesdifferfromanything lse learned,"
askscogentlyCrapanzano2004:156)?Onemight ndeed be puzzledbythe
similarity f Crumley'sefinitionwith the initialdefinitionof culturepro-
posednthe fifties
byKluckhonndKroeber:
"Culture,"hey say,"consistsof patterns,explicitand implicit,of and for
behavior acquired and transmitted by symbols, [...] including their
embodiment in artifacts; he essential core of culture consists of tradi-
202
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 8/16
DAVID ERLINER
tional(i.e. historicallyerivedandselected) deas andespeciallyheir
attachedvalues;culture ystemsmay,on the one hand,be considered
as products f action,on the otherhand as conditioninglements of
furtheraction"Kroeber Kluckholn952:357).
Mympressionere sthat,bya dangerousctof expansion,memory raduallybecomes verything hich s transmittedcross enerations,verythingtored
inculture, almostndistinguishable"henfrom heconcept f culturetself.
ContinuityAsmanytheoristshavepointedout, the memorycrazein historyand the
social ciences anbeseen as a consequence f thepostmodernisturn.Pierre
Norahimselfobserveshat "thecollectivememorys a recenthistorical rob-
lem" Nora1972:400, mytranslation).However,herehasto be more o the
story f one is to understandts successamonganthropologists.ome, the
memoryboom in anthropologys not a surprise,nor is memoryonly an
invention f the postmodernisturn.Indeed,accordingo White,
"Toanthropologists,he spateof recentwritingon collectivememory
may seem puzzling or its familiarity.Work n the area reinvents
approachesoculture ndidentity ommonlypursuedn ethnographic
research n narrative,itualpractice,ifehistories, nd so forth"White1996:495, myemphasis).
Withoutminimizinghe crucial mpactof the postmodernisturn since
the 1980s, I wouldliketo suggestthat we can, and perhaps hould,also
understand he successof memoryamonganthropologistss an avatarof
the never-endingebateaboutthecontinuity ndreproductionf society. n
particular,findthattheconceptualnterferencesetweenmemoryand cul-
tureteach usa greatdeal aboutthe wayanthropologistsonceptualizeoci-
etyandculture.
Inanthropology,wooft-ignoreduthors an be seenaspioneersn the field
ofmemory
tudies.ThenameofJackGoody
sassociatedwith he first tudies
of memory. nspired y research boutbardicperformances, oody howed
that there is no idea of a fixed model text to serve as a ritualistguide. Thereis
no sucha thingas verbatimmemoryin the Bagremyth(Goody 972).Obviously,
Goodywas not interested n "popularmemory,"but rather n the exactitudeof
203
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 9/16
TheAbuses f Memory: eflectionsntheMemory oom nAnthropology
rememberingnd memorization. owever,yfocusing n thesuccessiveepe-titionsof onemythand itsmetamorphoses,isresearch ealtprecisely ith he
processes ndconditions f learning ndthe transmissionf culture.Also,we
shouldpaya specialattention o theworkof RogerBastidewhois usuallyor-
gotten n memory tudies.8Analyzinghe vestiges f African ulturen Brazil,
Bastide1970)builthiswholework round heconcept f collectivememoryo
describereligiousyncretistichenomena, specially hrough ensory-motorrecollectionsfAfricanites nSouth-Americanontexts.
Goody nd Bastidewereverymuchconcernedwith ssuesofwhathasbeen
called he presentist malleability"f the past,andthe"bricolage"imension
of ourrelationshipoward t. However,he initialemphasisntheirworksasin the works f Halbwachs)son the continuance nd transmissionfsociety.Howpractices e-enact,modifyand conserve"pastness"hroughime is the
mainanthropologicalssue hattheyweredealingwith.Insofars it is defined
as a faculty hat sustainscontinuity,he notionof memoryhelpedthemto
think hroughhose issuesof cultural onservationnd socialcontinuity. or
Connerton,whose work (like Halbwachs')as been highlyinfluential n
anthropology,memory s alsoan idealentrypointto engagewithissuesof
cultural ontinuity:
"Whereasome dominantcontemporaryrends in socialtheory,"he
writes,"areoften criticized n theground hattheydo notaddress, r
addressnadequately,hefactof socialchange, shallseekto highlightthe wayin whichsuchtheoriesare oftendefectivebecausetheyare
unableto treatadequatelyhe fact of socialpersistence"Connerton1989:39-40).
Ina revealingway,memory,s it is usedbyanthropologists,s notthisfrag-ileand unreliablememoryhatembarrasseduspicious istoriansn thepast.
Todaymore hanever,memorys on the side of continuity, ermanencend
"retention"Crapanzano004). Foranthropologists,here is nothingnew
aboutthese ideas. Hasanthropology ot alwaysbeen concernedwith the
retentionof the old, sinceinitialevolutionistmphasison "survivals,"hese
vestigesof older customs hat resisted volution,o the theoriesof cultural
transmission y Herskovits?s not the "anthropologyf knowledge"evel-
oped by Barth(1990)another example of the same set of paradigmatic nter-
ests with culturalreproduction? nthese dayswhen the Bourdieusianhabitus
dominates our intellectualenvironment,debates about the continuityof soci-
204
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 10/16
DAVID ERLINER
etyand of culturalpractices recrucial o anthropologists,hile new devel-
opmentsin cognitiveanthropologyBloch1998,Whitehouse 002)offer a
fresh ookat issuesof culturalransmissionndpersistence.Thisopensontoa fundamental uestionas to what isactuallynew inour
current ascinationwith memory.HistoriansGediand Elam uggested hat
"'collectivememory' ...] covers he areaspreviously esignatedby'myth"'
(Gedi nd Elam1996:41).In the samevein,for Klein,memorys "replacingold favorites"uchas"nature, ulture,anguage"Klein 000:128).Followingthis line,Iwouldliketo suggest hat the successof memoryamonganthro-
pologists esidesalsoin itsconceptual fficiencyo prolonghe anthropolog-
ical projectof understandingontinuity.Alongwiththe notion of culture,withwhich t tendsto fusion,memoryhelpsus to think hroughhe continu-
ityand persistence f representations,ractices,motions,andinstitutions,
an idea fundamentalo anthropologistsincethe founding f the discipline.A last word remainso be writtenaboutforgetting.Thesuggestion am
making or memory-that the triumphof memory n our disciplinecould
also be understood yreferenceo issuesof cultural ontinuity nd persist-
ence-may be extended o the treatmentof "forgetting"n anthropological
studies.Inthisessay, did not consider heconceptofforgettinghat anthro-pologistshaverecently rought ut to better ackle ssuesof identity onstruc-
tion (Aug6 998,Battaglia993,Carsten 995).However,ustas anthropolo-
giststend to entanglememoryand cultural eproduction,hatisat stake n
forgettingtudies s the veryreproductionr persistence f forgetting. ince
it is a socialprocess,orgettings described s"acrucialpartof theway den-
tityisactively cquired...]"(Carsten995:318).Similarly,orBattaglia, for-
gettinggivesriseto "society,"Battaglia993:430)and,byvirtueof its"per-
sistentnon-presence,"ibid: 38,myemphasis),t serves o prolong aunitary
perdurableocialorder"ibid:430).Although aivelyheldin oppositionwith
memory,he anthropologicalpproacho forgettingeems to be motivated
bythe same setof paradigmaticoncerns.Middleton nd Edwardsre rather
clearabout t, by pointing ut thatinanalyzinghe"practicesf institutional
rememberingndforgetting,t is possible o see howthe continuity f social
life, as preservedn certain orms of socialpractices, ...] dependson the
preservationf those
practices"Middeltonnd Edwards 990:
10).Tosome
degree, orgetting, longwithmemory,ooksas if it is on the side of perma-
nence and retention, and serves also, by its non-presence, to prolong the
anthropological projectof understandingcontinuity.
205
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 11/16
TheAbuses f Memory: eflectionsn theMemory oom nAnthropology
Clarity
Among nthropologists,ntilrecently,herewasa high evelof consensus n
the conceptof memory.Thisessayattemptedo demonstratehatwe should
be ascritical f "memory,"problematicutindispensableoncept orthem,
aswe have earned o beof"culture"r"identity."tseems o me thatthecon-
ceptof memoryhas becomea scientific ommonsensentheanthropological
discourse,onstantlyndunthinkinglyeployed.First, argued hat "memo-
ry," s it is usedbyanthropologists,asgraduallyecomeavague, uzzyabel.
Indeed,some of the authorscurrentlyworking n memory, tart fromtoo
broada definition, ndthat,as a result,we no longer ee clearlywhatthey
meanbythe term.Sucha lackof claritys farfromexceptionaloranthropo-logical oncepts, nd there s,of course,no needto advocateora rejectionf
the term.Rather,argued,t is time todisentanglehe multiple ndexpansive
meanings f the notion,and to questiontspopularitynourdiscipline.Inparticular,have shown hatone of theseambiguitiess thatthe con-
ceptof memoryends to encompasshe notionof cultureand its reproduc-tion. Inmyview, hisemphasison memory s "thepresence f the past," s
continuityndpersistencelsoexplainswhy t hasbecome ucha trendy on-
cept in ourdisciplinehistoricallykewed oward hose issues.Inthisprocessof conceptualexpansion,some highlyinfluential cholarssuch as Nora,
Halbwachs, erdiman ndespeciallyConnertonwhouse the concept n its
broadest ense)can also be held for responsible. t is worthnoticing hat
"Connerton'slim volume is indeed often the only referenceprovidedby
anthropologistsntheirdiscussions f memory"Sutton001:10). Byarguingthatmemoryseverythingr thateverythingsmemory aswritesTerdiman)and that"societys itselfa formof memory"asConnertonut t), heseschol-
ars plainlycontributed o diffusethe problemof memory nto the general
processof culture,and to the renewed nterestamonganthropologistsn
"socialmemory s culture."
Consequently,heanthropologicalsesof memory an be a sourceof con-
fusion.Such ndiscriminate sesof a term to denote such different xperi-ences andprocessesdo indeedbreedmisunderstanding,ndwe mustmake
necessaryerminologicalistinctionsfor nstance,betweenmemory s recol-
lectionandmemory
s culturaleproduction).
bove ll,byoverextending
he
usageof thisnotion,aren'twe arelosing hespecificityf whatanthropology
of memory is, i.e. to understand the way people rememberand forget their
past?Asthe historianJayWinterput it candidly,
206
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 12/16
DAVID ERLINER
"Oneof the challengesof the next decade or so is to tryto drawtogeth-
er some of these disparatestrands of interest and enthusiasm through
a more rigorousand tightlyarguedset of propositionsabout what exact-
ly memory is and what has been in the past. [...]" (Winter 000: 13).
Inthe same vein as Todorovwarningagainst the abuses of memory in the
political sphere, Ricoeur invited us to look for what he calls "une memoire
juste"(Ricoeur2001). I haveargued in this essay,that in anthropologyas well,
it is time for a more matured use of this notion.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thispiecewas writtenat HarvardUniversitywhile a recipientof a PostdoctoralFellowshipof the BelgianAmericanEducational oundation. am verygrateful o MichaelHerzfeld,RandyMatory,DebboraBattaglia nd Lauren hweder or theirinsightful ommentson mywork.For nspiringdiscussions, want to thank RamonSarro.Ashortenedversion of this
essaywas deliveredat the 8th EuropeanAssociation f SocialAnthropologistsonferenceheld in Vienna, September2004. I wish to thank the convenorsof the lively panel"Anthropologicalpproaches n SocialMemory,"haronMacDonald,HelenaJermanandPetriHautaniemi.Finally, wasmuchhelped bythe editorialcommentsof RichardGrinker,MeliGlennandJenHuiBonHoa.
ENDNOTES
11borrowedhe title from the bookLesabusde la memoirebyTvetzanTodorov1995).Inthistext,he denounces he exploitation f the notionof memorynthe contemporary olit-icalsphere.
2Thoughignoreduntilrecently,Halbwachs'lassics,LesCadresociauxde la memoire 1994[1925]) nd Lamemoire ollective1997[1950]),havenowbeen re-discovered. ince he 80s,
anthropologists ave been reading he colossalLesLieux e la memoirepublishedbyhisto-rianPierreNora 1989),while HowSocietiesRemember1989)byConnerton, escribedas "atouchstone or recentstudiesof memory,"Sutton2001: 10)has become an anthropologi-cal must-read.
31should mentionthat these reflectionshavearisenout of fieldwork onducted n Guinea-
Conakry,WestAfrica.As memory s a key-wordn the social sciencestoday,the attitudetoward he pastand its transmission re a hot topic in Africanocietiesas well.Alongwith
"identity,"memorys at presenta globalizednotion,and the concept s nowlargelyusedbyAfrican oliticians nd local elites. Idon't have time here to deepenthis point,but we def-
initelylive in a time when memory s globalized,an historicalmomentthat Nora ermed
convincinglyhe moment-memoire.
4Somescholarsusedangerouslyhe notion of "remembering"n reference o collectiveenti-ties. For nstance, n the introduction f her TangledMemories,turken sks"What oes it
mean fora culture o remember?"Sturken 997:1). In the samevein, MaryDouglascon-siders that institutionscan "Rememberand Forget" Douglas1986). Connerton'sHowSocietiesRememberonstitutesanother amousexampleof this imprudent emanticexten-
207
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 13/16
TheAbuses f Memory: eflectionsn theMemory oomnAnthropology
sion. However, s Funkenstein bserves,"consciousness nd memorycan only be realized
byan individualwhoacts, is aware,and remembers. ustas a nationcannoteat ordance,neither can it speak or remember.Rememberings a mental act, and therefore it is
absolutelyandcompletelypersonal"Funkenstein989:6).Fora criticalookat this misuse
of "remembering,"ee also Kansteiner2002).5"Vicarious emories" ccurwhen someone"remembers"vents that havenot been per-sonallyexperiencedbyher/him Teski nd Climo1995).In herMemoriesf the SlaveTrade,RosalindShaweloquentlycapturescontemporarymemoriesof the Atlantic lave tradeinTemneritualpracticesSierraLeone).However, eruseof "remembering"eems hazardousto me. For nstance, he proposes o explore he way"inwhichthe slave tradeis forgottenas historybut remembered s spirits"Shaw 002:9). But,can we really"remember"ome-
thingthatwe did not experience?Can omeone"remember"he slave trade?
6Handlerhowedeffectively hatthe conceptof identity annot"beappliedunthinkinglyoother placesandtimes" Handler 994:27).Thesame remains o be verified or the notion
of memory.7In the samevein,one mightbe intriguedbythe resemblances etweencertainapproach-es to traditionand so-called "culturalmemory."Consider,or instance,the definitionof"tradition" roposed by Shils(1983),and see how it overlapswith the semantic field of
memory.Following hils,"Memoryeavesan objectivedepositin tradition.Thepastdoesnot have to be rememberedbyall who reenact t. [...] But to become a tradition,and toremaina tradition,a patternof assertionoraction musthave enteredintomemory"Shils1983:167).What re then the conceptual imitsbetween he notionsof memoryandtradi-tion?Istradition he "presence f the pastin society"ibid:162) or is that memory?
8For n exception, ee Bourguet,Valensiand Wachtel1990).
REFERENCES
Appadurai,Arjun. 981. "Thepastas a scarceresource."Man16: 201-219.
Assman, an.1995. "CollectiveMemorynd Culturaldentity."ewGermanCritique5 : 125-133.
Aug6,Marc. 998.Lesormesde I'oubli.Paris:Payot.
Barth,Fredrik. 990. "TheGuruand the Conjurer:Transactionsn Knowledgeand the
Shapingof Culturen SoutheastAsiaand Melanesia."Man25(4):640-653.
Bastide,Roger. 970. "Memoire ollectiveet sociologiedu bricolage." 'Anneeociologique21: 65-108.
Battaglia,Debbora. 992. "TheBody nthe Gift:Memory nd Forgettingn SabarlMortuaryExchange."merican thnologist9(1):3-18.
. 1993. "AtPlay in the Fields(and Borders)of the Imaginary:MelanesianTransformationsf Forgetting." ultural nthropology(4):430-442.
Baxter,Charles.1999. TheBusinessof Memory.TheArtof Rememberingn an AgeofForgetting.aintPaul,Minnesota:Graywolf ress.
Bloch,Maurice. 998. How WeThinkTheyThink:Anthropological pproacho Cognition,MemoryndLiteracy.UK:WestviewPress.
Bourguet,Marie-Noelle, ucetteValensiand NathanWachtel.1990. BetweenMemorynd
History.Chur:HarwoodAcademicPublishers.
Boyarin,onathan. 991. PolishJews nParis:TheEthnographyf Memory. loomingtonnd
Indianapolis:ndianaUniversity ress.
208
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 14/16
DAVID ERLINER
. 1994 Remapping Memory:the Politics of TimeSpace. Minneapolis: Universityof MinnesotaPress.
Candau, oel.1998.Memoiret identite.Paris : PressesUniversitaires e France.
Carsten, anet.1995. "ThePoliticsof Forgetting:Migration,Kinship nd Memoryon the
Periphery f the SoutheastAsianState."].Roy.Anthrop.nst.1: 317-335.
Climo, Jacob and Maria Cattell. 2002. Social Memoryand History.AnthropologicalPerspectives.WalnutCreek,CA:AltamiraPress.
Cohn,Bernard. 995. "ThePastsof an IndianVillage." nTime:Histories nd Ethnologies.Hugues, Diane and ThomasTrautmann,eds. pp. 21-30. Ann Arbor:Universityof
MichiganPress
Cole, Jennifer.2001. ForgetColonialism?acrifices nd the Artof Memory.Berkeley/LosAngeles/London: niversityf California ress.
Connerton, Paul. 1989. How Societies Remember.Cambridge/NewYork:Cambridge
University ress.Crapanzano,Vincent. 2004. ImaginativeHorizons:An Essayin Literary-Philosophical
Anthropology. hicago: heUniversity f ChicagoPress.
Dakhlia, ocelyne.1990."L'histoirest dansI'attente." ahiers 'Etudes fricaines0(3):251-278.
Dosse,Francois. 999. "Lamithode historique t les traces m6morielles."nLedefiduXXlesiecle.Relieres connaissances. dgarMorin, d. pp.317-326.Paris:Editions u Seuil.
Douglas,Mary. 986.HowInstitutions hink. yracuse: yracuseUniversity ress.
Fabian,Johannes.1999. "Rememberinghe Other:Knowledgeand Recognition n the
Explorationf CentralAfrica." ritical
nquiry6: 49-69.
Feld,Stevenand KeithBasso.1996. Sensesof Place.SantaFe:Schoolof AmericanResearchPress.
Funkenstein,Amos. 1989. "CollectiveMemoryand HistoricalConsciousness." istory nd
Memory (1):6.
Gedi,NoaandYigalElam.1996. "CollectiveMemory What sIt?"History ndMemory(1):30-50.
Gillis, John. 1994. "Memoryand Identity: The History of a Relationship."InCommemorations:hePoliticsof NationalIdentity.Gillis, ohn,ed. pp.3-27. Princeton:PrincetonUniversity ress.
Goody, ack.1972. TheMythof theBagre.Oxford: Clarendon ress.
Halbwachs,Maurice. 994. [1925]Lescadressociauxde la memoire.Paris:EditionsAlbinMichel.
.1997 [1950] La
memoirecollective. Paris:Albin Michel.
Handler,Richard. 994."IsIdentity' UsefulCross-Culturaloncept?"nCommemorations:The Politicsof National Identity.Gillis,John, ed. pp. 27-40. Princeton:Princeton
University ress.
Hastrup,Kirsten. 992. OtherHistories.London:Routledge.
Herzfeld,Michael.1991.APlace n History. ocialand Monumental imen a CretanTown.
NewJersey:PrincetonUniversity ress.Jing,Jun.1996. TheTemple f Memories.History,Powerand Moralityn a ChineseVillage.
Stanford: tanfordUniversity ress.
Kansteiner,Wulf.2002. "FindingMeaning in Memory:A MethodologicalCritiqueof
CollectiveMemory tudies."History nd Theory 1: 179-197.
209
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 15/16
TheAbuses f Memory: eflectionsnthe Memory oom nAnthropology
Kilani,Mondher. 992. Laconstructione la memoire.Le ignageet la saintetedansI'oasisd'ElKsar.Geneve:Labor t Fides.
Klein,Lee.2000."Onhe Emergencef MemorynHistoricalDiscourse." epresentations9:127-150.
KroeberA. and C.Kluckhohn. 952. Culture: CriticalReview f Conceptsnd Definitions.NewYork:RandomHouse.
Lacapra,Dominique.1998. History nd MemoryfterAuschwitz.thaca:CornellUniversityPress.
Lapierre,Nicole.2001. Le silencede la memoire.A la recherche esJuifsde Plock.Paris:EditionsLeLivre e Poche.
Megill,Allan.1998."History,Memory, dentity."Historyf theHumanSciences 1(3):37-62.
MiddeltonDavid nd DerekEdwards. 990.Collective emembering.ondon/NewBury/NewDelhi:Sage.
Nora,Pierre.1972. "Memoire ollective." n La NouvelleHistoire, acquesLeGoff,RogerChartier t Jacaues Revel, eds. pp. 398-401. C.E.P.L., es Encyclop6dies u SavoirModerne.
1989. "BetweenMemory nd history:LesLieuxde M6moire." epresentations26: 7-24.
Olick, effrey ndJoyceRobbins. 998. "SocialMemory tudies:From CollectiveMemory'othe Historical ociologyof MnemonicPractices." nnualReviewof Sociology 4: 105-140.
Radley,Alan.1990."Artefacts,Memory nd a Senseof the Past." nCollective emembering,DavidMiddelton nd DerekEdwards,ds. pp.46-59.London/New ury/NewDelhi:Sage.
Radstone,Susannah. 000. MemoryndMethodology. xford/New ork:Berg.
Rappaport, oanne.1990. ThePoliticsof Memory.Nativehistorical nterpretationn theColombian ndes.Cambridge/Nework:Cambridge niversity ress.
Ricoeur,Paul.2000. Lamemoire, 'histoire,'oubli.Paris:Editions u Seuil.
Rosaldo,Renato.1980. llongot Headhunting1883-1974.A Studyin Societyand History.Stanford: tanfordUniversity ress.
Ross,Bruce.1991.RememberinghePersonalPast.Descriptionsf Autobiographical emory.NewYork/Oxford:xfordUniversity ress.
Shaw,Rosalind. 001. Memoriesf theSlaveTrade.Ritualand the Historicalmaginationn
SierraLeone.Chicago/London:heChicagoUniversity ress.
Shils,Edward. 983. Tradition. hicago:Universityf ChicagoPress.
StolerAnnand Karen trassler.000.Castingsor the Colonial:MemoryWorkn'NewOrder'
Java.ComparativetudiesnSociety nd History2(1):4-48.
Stoller,Paul.1995.Embodying olonialMemories:piritPossession, ower ndthe HaukanWestAfrica.NewYork/LondonRoutledge.
Strathern,Andrew. 996.BodyThoughts. nnArbor:TheUniversity f MichiganPress.
Sturken,Marita.1997. TangledMemories:TheVietnamWar, he AIDSEpidemic, nd thePolitics f Remembering. erkeley:Universityf California ress.
Sutton,David.2001. Remembrancef Repasts:AnAnthropologyf Foodand Memory.NewYork/Oxford:erg.
Terdiman,Richard. 993. PresentPast.Modernitynd the MemoryCrisis. thaca/London:CornellUniversity ress.
210
8/2/2019 kolektif-sosyal hafıza ayrımı
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kolektif-sosyal-hafiza-ayrimi 16/16
DAVIDERLINER
Teski,Mareaand JacobClimo.1995. TheLabyrinth f Memory.Ethnographicourneys.
Westport/London:erginandGarvey.
Thomson,Alistair,Michael Frischand Paula Hamilton.1994. The Memoryand HistoryDebates:SomeInternational erspectives.OralHistory 2(2):33-43.
TodorovTzvetan. 995.Lesabusde la memoire.Paris : Arlda.
Tonkin,Elizabeth.1992. Narratingour Past. The Social Constructionf Oral History.Cambridge: ambridgeUniversity ress.
Vansina, an.1980."MemoryndOralTradition."nTheAfricanPastSpeaks.Essaysn OralTradition ndHistory.Miller, oseph,ed. pp.262-279.Folkestone:Dawson-Archon.
White,Geoffrey.001. "HistoriesndSubjectivities."thos28(4):493-510.
Whitehouse,Harvey.2002. "ReligiousReflexivityand TransmissiveFrequency." ocial
Anthropology0(1):91-103.
Winter,Jay.2000. "The Generationof Memory.Reflectionson the MemoryBoom in
Contemporary istorical tudies."GermanHistoricalnstitute 7.
Zelizer,Barbie.1995."Readinghe PastAgainst he Grain:TheShapeof MemoryStudies."Critical tudies n MassCommunication2: 214-239.