No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
La Révolution roumaine de 1989 : mémoire, histoire et fiction. Autour de La Nuit quand quelqu’un est mort pour toi par Bogdan Suceavă, in Romanistische Zeitschrift für Literaturgeschichte / Cahiers d’histoire des littératures romanes, vol. 47, no. 1-2/ 2023 https://rzlg.winter-verlag.de/article/RZLG/2023/1-2/14
Abstract
The "competitive memory" of the Romanian Revolution, which engendered antagonistic narratives within both the political arenas and cultural field, is also reflected in a significant number of novels in which 1989 as lieu de mémoire has been almost obliterated, whereas the events of December have lost their tragic dimension, being painted in grotesque colors by means of satire and allegory or by those of the "miserable realism". In contrast with these fictions, the novel of Bogdan Suceavă, The Night when someone died for you (2010) restores the dimension of human tragedy-even if it preserve the topics of the "chaotic bloodshed"-through a profound affective and ethical engagement in the "individualization of history", the Revolution being here memorialized within an exemplary story, incorporated in an autobiographical narrative. It is the story of an "absent", and yet one of the most "implicated subjects" in the tragic events (the departed): a young soldier, Cristi (the symbolic double of the narrator-protagonist), who died the night of December 23, killed by a stray bullet. From this viewpoint, the novel accomplish a similar function to those cultural artifacts in which is activated the "prosthetic memory" whose ability of generating "empathy and social responsibility" is crucial in connecting readers, and especially young people, with "painful pasts". In The Night…, these affective-imaginative links are going beyond the level of the individualization of history, as the novel integrate, at the same time, like all the books of Suceavă, an intertextual dimension, connecting historical with cultural and especially literary memory. Finally, The Night… comprise a metatextual level in which the introspections of the hero-narrator, his memories of recent military experience (which constitutes a second diegetic layer, and a "mirror" for the "film" of the Revolution), and his dialogues with other "implicated subjects" are mobilized in a "post-ideological" meta-narrative regarding the "ideologization of memory", and the politicization and moralization of contested pasts. By this complex architecture, the "novel of memory" constructed by Suceavă is acquiring an "agonistic", "multidirectional" dimension, despite the limitations of the autobiographical form.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, particularly during the hard transition of the 90s, the highly polarized Russian society revealed two main forms of remembering and coping with recent past. This past was either idealized as a time of imperial glory, national pride, and relative welfare, even if it also included periods of anomie (the late Stalin era) or stagnation (the Brejnev era), either treated as a period of significant traumas that necessitated persistent recognition and working through. As for the official memory regimes, if the first post-Soviet decade was dominated by the totalitarian anticommunist (and antinostalgic) paradigm, the 2000s brought a radical turn, with the rise of victimhood nationalism and “redemptive” authoritarianism of the Putin era. The new mnemonic regime is shaped by an official, “patriotic” restorative nostalgia that is also placed in the centre of the presidential cultural programe designed to legitimize the authoritarian system and to support the restoration of a great, mythical Russia. Against this background, new forms of counter-memory and counter-nostalgia began to manifest within both the social and cultural field. One of the most remarkable exemples is offered within the “new realities” created by the young photographer Danila Tkachenko, who’s compositions marked by a “second-hand nostalgia” challenge both the Soviet utopia and its official nostalgic-populist recostructions. By means of a special nostalgic technique based on reframing the remnants and the “trukhliashechkas” of the Soviet past – (re)interpreted as the symbols of “the perfect technocratic future that never came” –, the young artist also deconstruct the imagined “sovietness” embedded in the cultural-political products shaped by the statist patriotic nostalgia. His representations of the post-Soviet landscape are those of “a ghost of utopia”, a land of ruins, of abandoned cities, of ecological disasters, and of millions unburied deads of the GULAG.
After the horrific experiences of ex-Yugoslavia, the tragedy of Ukraine reveals the terrible consequences of the memory conflicts radicalization. Anticipated by a constant mnemonic war led by the Russia particularly against its Eastern neighbors, it proves "what happens when memory wars turn into real wars". Since the end of Cold War, in the context of the re-nationalization of ideologies, the remythologization of national histories, and the reshaping of memory politics, the European memory games, as part of the struggle for recognition, have often became memory wars. This article provides some relevant insights about the political instrumentation of the "restorative nostalgia" /"retrotopia" in the (post-)Cold War illiberal memory games/wars, against the background of the growing crises connected to the rise of neo-nationalism.
Setting the agenda for the chapters to come, the volume editors lay out in this chapter the importance of moving beyond the nation state in memory studies, arguing that a narrower and more specific framework than the global/universal needs to be developed. This is why they propose an alternative unit of analysis on the medium scale: the memory region, which allows for a more nuanced and accurate approach to memory processes and dynamics in various parts of the world. They emphasize connectivities between memories across national borders and cross-national orientation points in forming memories, as much as agency and subjectivity of memory actors in the construction and reconstruction of memory reference points and frameworks across borders. The authors discuss memory regions in reference to such concepts as: regimes of memory, geography of memory, area studies, and travels of memory.
This book discusses the merits of the theory of agonistic memory in relation to the memory of war. After explaining the theory in detail it provides two case studies, one on war museums in contemporary Europe and one on mass graves exhumations, which both focus on analyzing to what extent these memory sites produce different regimes of memory. Furthermore, the book provides insights into the making of an agonistic exhibition at the Ruhr Museum in Essen, Germany. It also analyses audience reaction to a theatre play scripted and performed by the Spanish theatre company Micomicion that was supposed to put agonism on stage. There is also an analysis of a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) designed and delivered on the theory of agonistic memory and its impact on the memory of war. Finally, the book provides a personal review of the history, problems and accomplishments of the theory of agonistic memory by the two editors of the volume.
Stefan Berger is Professor of Social History and Director of the Institute for Social Movements at Ruhr-Universitaet Bochum, Germany. He is also executive chair of the Foundation History of the Ruhr and Honorary Professor at Cardiff University, UK. He has published widely on the history of memory, the history of deindustrialization, industrial heritage, the history of social movements and labour movements, the history of historiography, historical theory and the history of nationalism and national identity.
Wulf Kansteiner is Professor of Memory Studies and Historical Theory at Aarhus University, Denmark. His research interests include the methods and theories of memory studies; the role of visual media—TV, film, digital culture—in the formation of cultural memory; post-narrativist historical theory; and Holocaust history, memory, and historiography. His recent publications include ‘Prime Time Nationalism: Patterns of Prejudice in TV Crime Fiction’ in National Stereotyping, Identity, Politics, European Crises (2021) and ‘Media and Technology,” in The Twentieth Century, vol. 6 of A Cultural History of Memory (2020).
This chapter introduces ‘Unsettling Remembering and Social Cohesion in Transnational Europe’ (UNREST) which was a Horizon 2020–funded project that ran between 2016 and 2019 and involved researchers from different disciplines, principally, history, literary studies, anthropology and memory studies, coming from British, Spanish, Danish, Polish and German institutions (www.unrest.eu). The researchers involved in the project set out to find agonism in different memory settings across Europe. They analysed cultural memories of war on display in history museums and took a close look at communicative memories of war crafted in response to mass exhumations of victims of war and ethnic cleansing. In addition, UNREST researchers sought to create new sites of agonistic memory. They collaborated with playwrights, actors and museum professionals to develop a theatre play and a history exhibit promulgating agonistic interpretations of warfare. As a result of these efforts, we are now in a position to define in more concrete terms what scholarly, ethical and political potential agonistic memory possesses and what important questions remain to be solved in future research about agonistic memory.
In the last four decades, the novel of memory has gained momentum on the world scene, taking advantage of the collapse of colonial and/or dictatorial regimes around the globe. Romania was not an exception, so after the fall of Communism in 1989, and more prominently at the beginning of the new millennium, this subgenre blossomed. Based on quantitative and qualitative research of a selection of fifty novels published in the Romanian space both before and after the fall of the communist regime, this article is the first attempt to map the Romanian novel of memory from a genre-based perspective. Our approach follows the evolution of the novel of memory in the course of four decades, from a thematic, formal, and generational perspective. Relying on these operators, as well as on the culturalist approach to literature in memory studies, we distinguish between a traumatic, a (n)ostalgic and an agonistic novel of memory.
These days 1989 isn't what it used to be. Not so long ago the wildfire revolutions that swept across Eastern Europe during that momentous year were routinely celebrated as the grand victory of liberal democracy over Soviet-style communism. However, recent developments in Poland, Hungary and elsewhere on the continent which in various ways all invoked 1989, either as inspiration or negative foil, behove us to reconsider the effects of that fateful year in Central Europe from a different perspective. The rise of xenophobia, resurgent populist politics on both the Radical Right and the Left, as well as the spread of ‘illiberal democracy’ across Europe, the US and elsewhere have predictably generated great alarm. Plenty of commentary on the comeback of authoritarian anti-liberalism in Central Europe has claimed that we are witnessing a kind of ‘return of the repressed,’ a dangerous repudiation of the golden principles of 1989 three decades after the uprisings. But construing recent developments in Central Europe as simply an anti-1989 backlash does not get us very far, not least because the unrest of 1989 carried within it the seeds of illiberalism as well. With distance, the inheritance of the ‘revolutionary autumn’ appears more mixed and precarious, and much harder to classify than it once was. Like all revolutions, 1989 brought in its train a mixed bag of dreams and disappointments, stark ruptures and stubborn continuities, and this article revisits some of the grey and even darker tones of the inheritance.
This book explains, from a comparative and transnational perspective, the 1989 collapse of the communist dictatorship in Romania as an aggregation of structural, conjunctural and nation-specific factors.
This article argues for the need for memory studies to go beyond its present focus on traumatic memories and to develop analytical tools for capturing the cultural transmission of positivity and the commitment to particular values. Building on an emerging interest in the relationship between memory and activism, it puts its case for a re-orientation of memory studies through a close analysis of the commemoration of the Paris Commune which shows how the festive mode of commemoration itself turned the memory of defeat into a carrier of hope.
This article is part of the special section titled The Genealogies of Memory, guest edited by Ferenc Laczó and Joanna Wawrzyniak
This introduction to the special section on memories of 1989 calls for a closer analysis of various ways in which narratives of the democratic breakthrough in East Central Europe develop at the transnational, national, and vernacular levels. The four case studies in this section show that the liberal view of 1989 has been neither institutionalized nor internalized as its most common understanding. Instead, we observe a divergence of interpretations, the replacement of 1989 with other symbolic dates, its non-existence in the “working memory” of Western Europeans, as well as disappointments, frustrations, or nostalgia for socialism in East Central Europe.
This article is part of the special section titled The Genealogies of Memory, guest edited by Ferenc Laczó and Joanna Wawrzyniak
This article analyses the wider context of policy conflict concerning public memory of the 1989 events. It uses Pierre Nora’s concept of lieux de mémoire in trying to explain why 23 August 1939 has been turned into a European Remembrance Day whereas 9 November 1989 has not. By investigating closely the role that various memory actors played during debates at the European level, it advances the idea that the anniversary of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact has been more successful in establishing itself within the European remembrance landscape because it has allowed for the promotion of a unifying narrative of the European past. In doing so, the article questions the frequently advanced idea that memory clashes in the EU form around an East–West divide that in some cases overlaps with a Right–Left divide. The analysis digs deep into the complex dynamics lying at the heart of memory contests concerning the end of the Cold War within the EU and provides a more differentiated view of discussions preceding EU decisions on policies of memory.
During the last years, several subjects have advanced claims for developing within the EU specific elements of what is often referred to as policies of memory. Whilst this trend could be perceived as one more instance of transference of domestic issues to the EU level, the distinctive trait of these claims is that claims on memory are associated both to justice and identity and, hence, they appeal to an underlying structure of normative justification. This paper examines these claims and discusses the normative argument supporting them. The argument revises, firstly, what are the policies of memory and, secondly, it discusses the relation between policies and politics towards the past in order to unveil the subjective component associated to recognition. The subjective dimension of recognition paves the way for asserting the location of victims as the most legitimate bearer of claims for recognition. The third section describes the very limited policies and politics of memory in the EU in order to enter, fourthly, into a deeper analysis of the new claims emerging in the post 2004 scenery. The argument elaborates then a theoretical frame which draws on the notion of “recognition order” of Honneth in order to establish the normative foundation for EU policies of memory. Being the EU a recognition order, claims referring memory cannot be legitimately excluded from the EU agenda. Nevertheless, legitimacy of claims for recognition does not mean that policies and proposals linked to these claims have automatic validity. Rather, policies must derive from EU wide deliberation on the claims and the proper policies to pursue having in mind a number of requirements. The conclusion sums up the argument.
Why is there nostalgia for real socialism? Is it but a logical response to sudden, dramatic transformation? Don’t people remember those days anymore—or do they remember them all too well? In popular opinion, nostalgia for socialism is something fabricated, invented, and then imposed by different groups of people to achieve some goals: to open a new commercial niche, to attain political credit, to win popular support, to get artistic inspiration, and so on. Thus, many academic studies have examined only this instrumental side of the phenomenon, limiting it to the “industry of nostalgia” only. But research shows that nostalgia is in fact a retrospective utopia, a wish and a hope for a safe world, a fair society, true friendships, mutual solidarity, and well-being in general, in short, for a perfect world. As such, it is less a subjective, arbitrary, ideological effort to recall the past as it is, an undetermined, undefined, amorphous wish to transcend the present. So nostalgia for socialism in fact does not relate exclusively and precisely to past times, regimes, values, relations, and so on as such, but it embodies a utopian hope that there must be a society that is better than the current one.
Europe is grounded, from all sides, in traces of old inter-state and ethnic conflicts. Experience has proved that they can still be re-activated in spite of various forms of resolution in the past. History is welcome in the present, and we can observe mobilisation among agents, populations of victims, or despoiled groups, which have been forgotten or forced into silence through post-conflictual issues. Various interest groups, political parties, or states, build up memorial resources that they incorporate in their actions list of historicist strategies, with the aim of ‘recycling’ the representations of the symbolic pasts into contemporary political games. These mobilisations meet the reconciliation trends coming from society (for example, informal groups, NGOs, and so on), or are taken in charge by national and international institutions – which are becoming more and more routine – especially under the influence of the circulation of ‘good’ models of the pacification of resentments, containing a highly normative tone. The question is to know whether, in spite of the apparent heterogeneity of this phenomenon, the historicist games do
constitute a common indicator of the state of political regimes, especially democracies, and also of the strength of that supranational construction called the EU. This question necessitates the revisiting of the dominant concepts in the field of the political sociology of memory. The international circulation of reconciliation grammars, and the fact that memory issues are being torn out of their national frameworks and exploited in several arenas, both internal and external, in order to increase their yield of political resources, are further evidence that the paradigms heretofore dominant in the social sciences are now at an impasse.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, particularly during the hard transition of the 90s, the highly polarized Russian society revealed two main forms of remembering and coping with recent past. This past was either idealized as a time of imperial glory, national pride, and relative welfare, even if it also included periods of anomie (the late Stalin era) or stagnation (the Brejnev era), either treated as a period of significant traumas that necessitated persistent recognition and working through. As for the official memory regimes, if the first post-Soviet decade was dominated by the totalitarian anticommunist (and antinostalgic) paradigm, the 2000s brought a radical turn, with the rise of victimhood nationalism and "redemptive" authoritarianism of the Putin era. The new mnemonic regime is shaped by an official, "patriotic" restorative nostalgia that is also placed in the centre of the presidential cultural programe designed to legitimize the authoritarian system and to support the restoration of a great, mythical Russia. Against this background, new forms of counter-memory and counter-nostalgia began to manifest within both the social and cultural field. One of the most remarkable exemples is offered within the "new realities" created by the young photographer Danila Tkachenko, who's compositions marked by a "second-hand nostalgia" challenge both the Soviet utopia and its official nostalgic-populist recostructions. By means of a special nostalgic technique based on reframing the remnants and the "trukhliashechkas" of the Soviet past-(re)interpreted as the symbols of "the perfect technocratic future that never came"-, the young artist also deconstruct the imagined "sovietness" embedded in the cultural-political products shaped by the statist patriotic nostalgia. His representations of the post-Soviet landscape are those of "a ghost of utopia", a land of ruins, of abandoned cities, of ecological disasters, and of millions unburied deads of the GULAG.
Today’s Russian war against Ukraine is unique in its unfolding through a prism of personalized realities, made and remade for individuals, in what we call the “war feed.” This is a new disruptor of war fought in plain sight, revolutionizing both war and media, in and through a frenzy of participation in immediate yet continuous, personalized yet global, digital feeds. The war feed renders the war in and against Ukraine up close and personal. Never have so many images and videos of human suffering and death in war been so quickly available, streaming from the battlefield. A digital multitude posting, liking, sharing, and applauding each individual image or short form video, are all participants in a fractalized psychological war. In this article we propose that the war feed transforms the way war today is perceived, participated in, and fought over, but also how it will be remembered and forgotten. We focus on the messaging app Telegram as a rapidly evolving weapon of psychological warfare, which utterly disrupts the relationship between the showing, hiding, and the seeing of modern war. There seems little point in raging against ineffectual moderation and regulation of social media platforms, whilst the world burns on Telegram.
div>
Throughout Europe, narratives about the past circulate at a dizzying speed, and producing and selling these narratives is big business. In museums, in cinema and opera houses, in schools, and even on the Internet, Europeans are using the power of performance to craft stories that ultimately define the ways their audiences understand and remember history.
Performing the Past offers unparalleled insights into the philosophical, literary, musical, and historical frameworks within which the past has entered into the European imagination. The essays in this volume, from such internationally renowned scholars as Reinhart Koselleck, Jan Assmann, Jane Caplan, Marianne Hirsch, Leo Spitzer, Peter Burke, and Alessandro Portelli, investigate various national and disciplinary traditions to explain how Europeans see themselves in the past, in the present, and in the years to come.
</div
How has memory - collective and individual - influenced European politics after the Second World War and after 1989 in particular? How has the past been used in domestic struggles for power, and how have 'historical lessons' been applied in foreign policy? While there is now a burgeoning field of social and cultural memory studies, mostly focused on commemorations and monuments, this volume is the first to examine the connection between memory and politics directly. It investigates how memory is officially recast, personally reworked and often violently re-instilled after wars, and, above all, the ways memory shapes present power constellations. The chapters combine theoretical innovation in their approach to the study of memory with deeply historical, empirically based case studies of major European countries. The volume concludes with reflections on the ethics of memory, and the politics of truth, justice and forgetting after 1945 and 1989.
La chute de Nicolae Ceauşescu en 1989 conduit à de fortes mobilisations intellectuelles pour la condamnation du régime communiste de Roumanie dans un contexte politique où l’exercice du pouvoir est assuré dès 1990 par une formation composée d’anciens membres de la nomenklatura. Marginalisé dans un premier temps, ces demandes de condamnation aboutissent au milieu des années 2000 à l’officialisation d’un discours de criminalisation du passé par le chef de l’État fortement appuyé dans sa démarche par une minorité d’historiens. Elle suit de près à la déclaration de reconnaissance par la Roumanie de sa participation à l’Holocauste durant la Deuxième Guerre mondiale. Cette thèse interroge les recompositions politiques et intellectuelles qui se déploient après 1989 sur le terrain des combats d’interprétation du passé pour montrer comment se structure un espace où cet exercice d’exégèse de l’histoire nationale devient consubstantiel à la légitimation démocratique du nouveau régime.
'Imagined Communities' examines the creation & function of the 'imagined communities' of nationality & the way these communities were in part created by the growth of the nation-state, the interaction between capitalism & printing & the birth of vernacular languages in early modern Europe.
This paper links memory to generations of meaning and argues that generational belonging mediates access to memory. Generations of meaning create memories because they connect experiences, beyond the lifetime of individuals, with the wider cultural existence of social communities. Such connections can be understood as a hermeneutic and relational process. Meaning is not a factor of causation, but is cumulative, as meanings are recollected across generational thresholds of experience. This paper conceptualizes such thresholds of experience through three lines of enquiry. First, generativity produces new carriers of culture and memory, which sustain perceptions of historical beginnings. Second, generational change is a condition of liminality and in-betweenness, which people work to transcend by mediating fractures and thus connecting past problem spaces to frameworks of anticipation. Third, narrative commitments emerge as memories are recollected across different temporalities, incommensurability, and forgetting. Memory is not the product of one determining generation, but relational, cumulative, and stretched out in time.
The interconnections between histories and memories of the Holocaust, colonialism and extreme violence in post-war French and Francophone fiction and film provide the central focus of this book. It proposes a new model of 'palimpsestic memory', which the author defines as the condensation of different spatio-temporal traces, to describe these interconnections and defines the poetics and the politics of this composite form. In doing so it is argued that a poetics dependent on tropes and techniques, such as metaphor, allegory and montage, establishes connections across space and time which oblige us to perceive cultural memory not in terms of its singular attachment to a particular event or bound to specific ethno-cultural or national communities but as a dynamic process of transfer between different moments of racialized violence and between different cultural communities. The structure of the book allows for both the theoretical elaboration of this paradigm for cultural memory and individual case-studies of novels and films.
In the past decade, Jeffrey Olick has established himself as one of the world’s pre-eminent sociologists of memory (and, related to this, both cultural sociology and social theory). His recent book on memory in postwar Germany, in the House of the Hangman (University of Chicago Press, 2005) has garnered a great deal of acclaim. This book collects his best essays on a range of memory related issues and adds a couple of new ones. it is more conceptually expansive than his other work and will serve as a great introduction to this important theorist. in the past quarter century, the issue of memory has not only become an increasingly important analytical category for historians, sociologists and cultural theorists, it has become pervasive in popular culture as well. Part of this is a function of the enhanced role of both narrative and representation – the building blocks of memory, so to speak – across the social sciences and humanities. Just as importantly, though, there has also been an increasing acceptance of the notion that the past is no longer the province of professional historians alone. Additionally, acknowledging the importance of social memory has not only provided agency to ordinary people when it comes to understanding the past, it has made conflicting interpretations of the meaning of the past more fraught, particularly in light of the terrible events of the twentieth century.
Before democracy becomes an institutionalised form of political authority, the rupture with authoritarian forms of power causes deep uncertainty about power and outcomes. This book connects the study of democratisation in eastern Europe and Russia to the emergence and crisis of communism. Wydra argues that the communist past is not simply a legacy but needs to be seen as a social organism in gestation, where critical events produce new expectations, memories, and symbols that influence meanings of democracy. By examining a series of pivotal historical events, he shows that democratisation is not just a matter of institutional design, but rather a matter of consciousness and leadership under conditions of extreme and traumatic incivility. Rather than adopting the opposition between non-democratic and democratic, Wydra argues that the communist experience must be central to the study of the emergence and nature of democracy in (post-) communist countries.
The "lost world" and the "emerging society":
Intellectual conceptions of the Romanian transition out of Communism
For readers not familiar with studies by Romanian scholars, most of which are not available in the languages used for international communication, a few themes related to Communism in Romania and the transition out of it are proposed. Focus shifts back and forth between the institutional poles of production and the explanatory categories used to talk about a "lost world" (Communism) and an "emerging society" (post-Communist). By bringing to light what is said and what is left unsaid in the social sciences (in particular history and sociology), this reconstitution of the "native" intellectual perspective on contemporary Romania sheds light both on the way this society is managing its relation to the past and on the place reserved for the past in efforts to activate a sense of identity.
In this review, I survey the empirical research literature on collective memory work in post-1989 Central-East Europe. Among the central cultural changes that the transformative moment of 1989 represented for the seven former members of the Eastern Bloc was the restructuring of public memory, through new anniversaries, monuments, museums, and apologies. By synthesizing the existing literature, we can discern a number of common threads in public memory across these locations, as well as differences, signaling that each country is charting its own path. Trends point toward preferences for damning the communist history, reviving national traditions, lustrating particular individuals, and hesitating over how to commemorate the 1989 events. There are gaps in the arenas that the literature address, which could be filled by a more representative balance across the seven countries, and toward increased attention to the publicly performed meanings of 1989.
Postmemory describes the relationship of the second generation to powerful, often traumatic, experiences that preceded their birth but that were nevertheless transmitted to them so deeply as to seem to constitute memories in their own right. Focusing on the remembrance of the Holocaust, this paper elucidates the generation of postmemory and its reliance on photography as a primary medium of trans-generational transmission of trauma. Identifying tropes that most potently mobilize the work of postmemory, it examines the role of the family as a space of transmission and the function of gender as an idiom of remembrance.
The exact nature of the events of December 1989 in Romania has long been the subject of intense speculation and this article seeks to contribute to this ongoing debate by considering the previously rather neglected question of whether from a theoretical point of view it can be justifiably termed a revolution. Utilizing the current literature on theories of revolution, it examines whether the events constituted a revolution or some other form of irregular political challenge such as a coup d'état or popular uprising. The overall conclusion is that although a revolutionary situation arose in the country in 1989, a revolutionary outcome is not yet assured.
Multidirectional Memory brings together Holocaust studies and postcolonial studies for the first time. Employing a comparative and interdisciplinary approach, the book makes a twofold argument about Holocaust memory in a global age by situating it in the unexpected context of decolonization. On the one hand, it demonstrates how the Holocaust has enabled the articulation of other histories of victimization at the same time that it has been declared "unique" among human-perpetrated horrors. On the other, it uncovers the more surprising and seldom acknowledged fact that public memory of the Holocaust emerged in part thanks to postwar events that seem at first to have little to do with it. In particular, Multidirectional Memory highlights how ongoing processes of decolonization and movements for civil rights in the Caribbean, Africa, Europe, the United States, and elsewhere unexpectedly galvanized memory of the Holocaust. Rothberg engages with both well-known and non-canonical intellectuals, writers, and filmmakers, including Hannah Arendt, Aimé Césaire, Charlotte Delbo, W.E.B. Du Bois, Marguerite Duras, Michael Haneke, Jean Rouch, and William Gardner Smith.
Media and Cultural Memory. Cultural Memory Studies. An International and Interdisciplinary Handbook
- A Assmann
Assmann, A. (2008). Canon and Archive. In A. Erll, A. Nünning & S. B. Young (éds.). Media
and Cultural Memory. Cultural Memory Studies. An International and Interdisciplinary
Handbook (pp. 97 -107). Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.
The Future of Nostalgia
- S Boym
Boym, S. (2001). The Future of Nostalgia. New York: Basic Books.
« O tranziţie devenită istorie, dar o temă de actualitate
- B Burţa-Cernat
Burţa-Cernat, B. (2017). « O tranziţie devenită istorie, dar o temă de actualitate ». Observator
cultural 877, URL: https://www.observatorcultural.ro/articol/o-tranzitie-devenita-istoriedar-o-tema-de-actualitate/.
« Cum se ascunde literatura sub "fustele murdare ale istoriei
- P Cernat
Cernat, P. (2007). « Cum se ascunde literatura sub "fustele murdare ale istoriei" ». Observator
cultural 387, URL : https://www.observatorcultural.ro/articol/cum-se-ascunde-literaturasub-fustele-murdare-ale-istoriei-2/.