Oral History Society
Individual Remembering and 'Collective Memory': Theoretical Presuppositions and
Contemporary Debates
Author(s): Anna Green
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Oral History, Vol. 32, No. 2, Memory and Society (Autumn, 2004), pp. 35-44
Published by: Oral History Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40179797 .
Accessed: 30/01/2012 15:30
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].
Oral History Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Oral History.
http://www.jstor.org
INDIVIDUAL
REMEMBERI
AND
MEMORY':
'COLLECTIVE
THEORETICA
AND
PRESUPPOSITI
CONTEMPORARY
DEBATES
by Anna Green
Over the past decade cultural historians have focussed upon 'collective
memory', drawing upon the original theories of sociologist Maurice
Halbwachs. The conceptualisation of memory in this body of work either
conflates collective and individual memory, or relegates the latter to a
position of insignificance. Meanwhile oral historians are increasingly
focusing upon the ways in which individual recollections fit (often
unconscious) culturalscripts or mental templates. As a consequence, the
interpretativetheories of oral history and collective memory studies are
converging. The paper argues that if oral historians reject the capacity of
individualsto engage criticallyand constructively with inherited ideas and
beliefs, the field has made a paradigmatic shift from the concerns and
values that led to its growth and development in the 1960s.
If one had to pick a keymomentfor oral history,
it would surely be the late 1970s. Following
seminal publications by Ronald Grele, Luisa
PasseriniandAlessandroPortelli,amongothers,
historians, as Michael Roper put it, made an
epistemological shift into the 'interpretive
mode'.1Responding in part to criticism from
their empiricist colleagues, many historians
turnedtheirattentionto the narrativeformsand
creative dimensions of oral narratives. In the
Britishcontext the PopularMemoryGroup at
the Centrefor ContemporaryStudies in Birmingham reorientedoral historians towards the
social and culturalcontexts shaping memories
of the past. In retrospect,this shift in direction
ABSTRACT
KEYWORDS:
collective
memory;
individual
memory;
cultural scripts;
psychyoanalytic
templates
paralleled broader intellectual developments,
often subsumed under the expression 'the
linguistic turn'. This approachemphasizes the
fundamentalconstitutive role of languageand
culturaldiscourses in shapingindividualinterpretationsof experience.2
Withinoralhistory,and the fieldof life narratives in general,the focus moved awayfrom the
individual and towards the wider social and
cultural context within which remembering
takesplace.This approachis encapsulatedin the
followingexcerptsfrom two historiansworking
in the field of life narrative.In the first, noted
autobiographer Jill Ker Conway lays out her
position in a chapterentitled 'Memory'sPlots':
Autumn2004 ORAL HISTORY 35
autobiography)has resonancefor contemporary
directions in the analysis of oral histories. In
Conway'spassage, the key word is the use of
'script'. In the second example, taken from a
recent study of war memoryand commemoration, edited by T.G.Ashplant,GrahamDawson
and Michael Roper, the key concept is that of
'templates',associatedwith the psychoanalytic
conceptof unconsciousmentalschemas.Memories of war,the authorsargue,are shapedby the
'templatesof war remembrance...[the] cultural
narratives,myths and tropes.... throughwhich
laterconflicts are understood'.4
Historians are increasinglyfocussing upon
the ways in which individual recollections fit
(often unconscious) cultural scripts or
templates.Thereis apparentlylittlespacefor the
consciouslyreflectiveindividual,or for the role
of experience in changing the ways in which
individualsview the world. As a consequence,
oral history is converging with collective
memory studies, within which individual
memory is either subsumed under 'collective
memory',or assignedto the realmof the passive
unconscious.
COLLECTIVEMEMORY STUDIES
Whether we are aware of it or not, our
culturegives us an innerscriptby which we
live our lives. The main acts for the play
come from the way our world understands
human development; the scenes and key
characters come from our families and
socialization,which providethe patternfor
investingotherswith emotionalsignificance;
and the dynamics of the script come from
what our world defines as success or
achievement.5
Conway'ssuccinctdescriptionof the cultural
constructionof life narrative(in this case written
36 ORAL HISTORY Autumn2004
Culturalhistoriansand culturaltheoristslargely
agreethat contemporarysocietyis in the gripof
a memoryboom, expressedin myriadwaysfrom
the building of memorials and expansion of
museums, to retro fashions and popularrepresentations of the past in film and television.5
These multiple'sites of memory'(the phrase,of
course, is taken from French historian Pierre
Nora) have led historians to think about
whetheranother'venueof memoryand identity
transmission... operate(s) simultaneouslyand
competitively with history,namely "collective
memory"'.6 While there is no consensus
concerning the precise definition of collective
memory,in practicecollective memory studies
appearto fall primarilyaroundtwo poles.
A largebodyof culturalhistoryhas examined
what Paula Hamilton has characterised as a
cross-national'memorialculture...characterised
by the dominanceof memoryand commemoration as the prism through which we negotiate
the past'. The focus of these historiansis public
commemorationand the activeparticipationby
large numbers of people 'doing the work of
mourning and public remembering themselves...'.7The substantialbody of work on the
memorialisation and remembrance of war
comes into this category.
Alternatively,Alon Confino defined collective memorymuch more broadly,as 'the representation of the past and the making of it into
sharedculturalknowledgeby successivegenerations in "vehiclesof memory",such as books,
films,museums,commemorations,and others'.8
In this definitioneveryrepresentationof the past
is potentiallya form of collectivememory.
Despite widespreaduse of the term 'collective memory', it is only fair to point out that
many historians are very uneasy about the
concept.A numberexplicitlysubstituteparallel
or alternative terms that better reflect their
understandingof the processes throughwhich
particular groups, communities or nations
collectively remembertheir past. These terms
include,for example,'collectiveremembrance',
'collectedmemories','culturalmemory','public
memory', or 'mnemonic communities'.9 The
philosopher of history, Wulf Kansteiner, has
writtena broadand useful review of collective
memorystudies that explores a numberof the
issues thatconcernhistoriansand culturaltheorists, but here I will focus on the problems of
most relevanceto oral history.10
The two definitions of collective memory
outlinedabovecontainimplicationsthat should
concern oral historians.The first is the use of
the word 'memory'to describewhat are really
different ways of knowing about the past. As
Samuel Hynes pointed out, 'Memory is the
mentalfacultyby which we preserveor recover
our pasts, and also the events recovered.
Withoutthat link- now reachingbackto then you have an imageof the past in yourmind, but
it isn't memory but something else, a social
Inotherwords,all forms
construction,history'.11
of historicalunderstanding- even those that do
not engagethe facultyof personalmemoryat all
- are increasingly classified as memory. As a
consequence, memory has become detached
from the individual.This places theorists in a
dilemm.Memoryis indisputablya facultyof the
individualbrain,and few wouldarguethatthere
is any linearor aggregativerelationshipbetween
individual memory and collective memory.12
How do culturaltheoristsresolvethis paradox?
A numberof culturaltheoristssubsumeindividual memory under the rubric of collective
memoryand rejectthe significanceof individual
memoryaltogether.Sociologist Daniel Schudson argues that since memory can only be
expressedthroughthe 'culturalconstructionof
language in socially structured patterns of
recall',in the most importantsense all memory
Wulf Kansteiner
is collectiveculturalmemory.1"'
makesa similarpoint more cautiously:
Anotherunsettledareaof collectivememory
studiesis the preciserelationof the individual and the collective. ... researchhas time
and again emphasizedthe social nature of
individual rememberingand forgetting....
The very language and narrativepatterns
thatwe use to expressmemories,even auto-
biographical memories, are inseparable
from the social standardsof plausibilityand
authenticity they embody. In this sense,
'there is no such thing as individual
memory'.14
Other historians argue that individual
memoryis unimportantbecause it lacks active
agency. In Nancy Wood's study of memory in
postwar Europe, individual and collective
memoriesboth availthemselvesof 'mechanisms
like selection, narrativization, repression,
displacementor denial'. However,the 'emanation of individualmemoryis primarilysubjectto
the laws of the unconscious....',whereascollective representationsof the past represent the
conscious purpose of social groups.15In this
argument,collective action is permitteda high
degree of intentionality, whereas individual
memory (despite drawing upon the same
cultural mechanisms) lacks a similar sense of
purpose, [ay Winterand EmmanuelSivan also
differentiatebetweenthe activeagencyof collective remembrance, and 'passive memory understood as the personal recollections of a
silent individual',or 'homo psychologies - the
man of privatememory'.16In these definitions,
individualmemoriesare confined to the realm
of psychology, presumed to lack conscious
purpose,and are thereforelargelyirrelevantfor
the work of historians.
To sum up, the cultural theorisation of
memory/rememberingincreasinglyrejects the
value of individual recollection. The first
approachdeclares that the social and cultural
context within which rememberingtakes place
determinespersonalrecallto the extent that the
individual dimension of memory is deemed
insignificant. The second places individual
memorywithin the realm of the unarticulated,
or unconscious, psyche. Where do these ideas
originate?
MAURICEHALBWACHS(1877-1945)
The concept of collective memory originated
with the work of the sociologist,MauriceHalbwachs.17Influenced by the sociology of Emile
Durkheimin the 1920s, Halbwachsdevelopeda
theory of memory that continues to shape
contemporarymemorystudies. As JanAssman
pointed out, Halbwachs' research shifted our
understanding of memory from a 'biological
framework into a cultural one'.18More accuratelyperhaps,Halbwachsshiftedmemoryinto
the realmof social relationships,as the following summaryof his theoryillustrates.
Firstof all, Halbwachsagreed that memory
was a mentalfacultythatcould only exist within
the individual.In accordwith the point made by
SamuelHynesearlier,Halbwachsdid not regard
Autumn2004 ORAL HISTORY 37
als within a group would rememberthe same
events or with the same intensity,he suggested
that the need for an 'affective community'
ensuredthat individualsrememberedprimarily
those memorieswhich were 'in harmony'with
those of others.20
Thereforethe memoriesof the
individual became merged, and submerged,
within group, or collective,memory.
Halbwachs' theory of collective memory is
functionalist.Memoryfunctionsas a mechanism
that unites groups and cements identity. His
theory thereforeignores conflictingmemories,
and tends to suggest that those memoriesthat
do not accord with the group gradually fade
from memory.Peter Burkemade an interesting
point in this context,remindingus thatthe sociology of Emile Durkheim 'with its emphasis
upon community, consensus and cohesion'
developed in the context of Europeannationbuilding, and the search for traditions and
ritualsthat could legitimisenation-states.Burke
argues that it 'would be unwise to follow
Durkheimand his pupil Halbwachstoo closely
in this respect,and to discussthe socialfunction
of memory as if conflict and dissent did not
exist'.21
UFE NARRATIVE INTERPRETIVE
THEORIES
knowledge of events outside direct experience
as memory:
I carrya baggageload of historicalremembrancesthat I can increasethroughconversation and reading. But it remains a
borrowed memory,not my own.... For me
they are conceptions, symbols. I picture
them pretty much as others do. I can
imagine them, but I cannot remember
them.19
Individuals remember,Halbwachs argued,
through dialogue with others within social
groups. For example,we rememberas children
within families, or as adults within religiousor
occupationalgroups.Withinthese groups,Halbwachs suggested, the most durable memories
tended to be those held by the greatestnumber.
Finally,while he accepted that not all individu38 ORAL HISTORY Autumn2004
However, contemporary cultural theorists in
collective memory have not heeded Burke's
advice, and their work - as we have previously
shown - either conflatescollective and individual memoryor placesthe latterbeyondreach.A
little over a decade ago, James Fentress and
ChrisWickhampointed out that 'an important
problem facing anyone who wants to follow
Halbwachs in this field is how to elaborate a
conception of memorywhich, while doing full
justice to the collective side of one's conscious
life, does not render the individual a sort of
automaton, passively obeying the interiorised
collective will.'22 How have historians
approachedthis problem?
Contemporary life narrative/oral history
interpretivetheoryconsists of threeinterwoven
strands:these may be broadlycategorisedas the
cultural, the social and the psychological.
Culturalformsof analysisexamine,for example,
how individuals draw upon archetypalmyths
and follow particulargenres of storytellingor
narrative forms. The concepts central to this
approachare derivedprimarilyfromanthropology and literary studies. There is now a rich
body of literatureconvincinglydemonstrating
the pervasivenessof cultural myths and traditional narrative forms in oral expressions of
historicalconsciousness.23But it is one thing to
unpack individualnarrativesusing the tools of
culturalanalysis;it is anotherto establishpublic
culturalscripts within which individualnarratives must fit.
An example of the latter approach may be
found in Penny Summerfield'spost-structural
analysis of women's Second World War oral
narratives, ReconstructingWomen'sWartime
Lives.24In this study,Summerfieldexplores the
way women's oral histories relate to publicly
availablerepresentationsand discourses about
women's lives duringthis period. Each chapter
beginswith a summaryof the relevantpublicprewar discourses,such as the daughter/filialrelationship. These are gleaned from a variety of
sources,forexample,officialgovernmentpolicies,
girl's magazines, and films. The oral histories
recordedwith womenwho livedthroughthe war
are then located within the matrix of publicly
availablediscourses.The result is reductionist,
and complex answers are forced into the categories, for example,of 'stoic' or 'heroic'narratives. Nor is theremuch room in Summerfield's
analysisforthe self-reflectiveindividual,rejecting
as she does the 'capacityof intervieweesto see
into the innerprocessesof [the] self, specifically
to perceive internal changes across time and
attributethem to identifiablecauses'.25It is difficult to understand, in the model adopted by
Summerfield,why individualsadopt a specific
perspective,or how changesin individualperception andunderstandingcould occur.Ratherthan
exploringhow and why ideas,valuesand beliefs
are critiqued, reassembled, juxtaposed or
rejected,herfocus appearsto be how farthe oral
narrativesfit pre-existingculturalframeworks.
The social and psychologicaldimensions of
oral historyinterpretivetheory focus upon the
contextwithin which rememberingtakes place,
and upon shared psychological imperatives
underlyingthe constructionof storiesabout the
past. The theory of 'composure', employed in
two key oral history texts published in 1994,
GrahamDawson'sSoldierHeroes, and Alistair
Thomson'sAnzacMemories,incorporatesthese
elementsalongsidea culturalanalysis.Dawson
was a memberof the PopularMemoryGroupin
Birminghamand Thomson was influenced by
the Group'sapproach,which exploredthe interactionbetweenpublicand privatememory.The
criticalinsightdevelopedby this Group,according to Michael Roper, is that remembering
always invokes broader public discourses,
particularlythose of the popularmedia:
Centralto the popular-memoryapproachis
the notionthatpersonalaccountsof the past
are never producedin isolation from these
public narratives,but must operate within
theirterms.Rememberingalwaysentailsthe
working of past experience into available
culturalscripts.26
The two culturalscriptsunder investigation
in Dawsonand Thomson'swork are those of the
'soldier hero' of Britishadventurestories, and
the Anzac legend in Australianmemory.27
As Roperpointedout, the main emphasisof
both books is upon the link betweenprivateand
public remembering,and the individual'sneed
to compose a past that is publicly acceptable.
Dawson argues that, 'subjective composure
fundamentallydependsupon socialrecognition,
with its power to confirm that the versions of
self and world figuredin a narrativecorrespond
to those of other people....28 Thomson and
Dawson also place considerableemphasisupon
the social context, the 'particularpublics' such
as a wartime platoon, within which memories
are recountedand shared.Thomson draws our
attentionto 'the importanceof socialacceptance
and affirmation'withinthesegroups,whichmay
Autumn2004 ORAL HISTORY 39
be potentiallyrepressiveof individualmemories
or perspectives that do not correspond with
those of others.'29Dawson describesthe 'determining influence'of such groups.30These arguments are consistent with those of Halbwachs,
emphasizingthe controllingrole of collectivities
sharinga rememberedpast.
Anotherdimensionof composureis psychological: the need to construct in Thomson's
words 'a safe and necessarypersonalcoherence
out of the unresolved,riskyand painfulpieces of
past and presentlives.'Composinga past we can
live with, and that gives us a sense of coherent
identity,involves activelymanagingthe memories of traumatic or painful experiences. As
Thomson acknowledges, this is not always
successful, and 'we are left with unresolved
tension and fragmented, contradictoryidentities'.31These tensions cause psychic anxieties,
and Dawson draws upon Kleinian psychoanalytic theory, and the concept of 'phantasy', to
explain the purchaseof the myth of the soldier
hero upon masculineconsciousness.32
40 ORAL HISTORY Autumn2004
The theory of composurehas had considerable influenceamongoralhistorians.It provides
a valuableway of understandingthe underlying
dynamicsof life narratives,and providesconsiderable insights into the cultural, social and
psychologicaldimensionsof remembering.
One strengthof composureas an interpretive
device is that it 'introducesone possiblemotivation for story-telling: as a means of actively
managing painful experiences from the past'.
But,as Ropercontinues,'it has littleto sayabout
personal motivations for remembering'. He
seeks to address this lacuna in a study of two
autobiographicalaccountsof a specificwartime
incident,written by the same authorsixty years
apart. Roper argues that the authorwas 'motivated as much by the need to address feelings
which date from the event itself as from the
imagined expectations of his audience at the
momentof telling'.Roperconcludesthatunconscious emotions generatedin the past coalesce
with contemporary'life-dilemmas', triggering
the processes of memory.In this analysis individual memories are structuredby the unconscious.33
In conclusion, the three strands of contemporarylife narrativeand oralhistoryinterpretive
theory- the cultural,social, and psychoanalytic
- all lean towards a culturallydeterministand
functionalistperspectiveconcerningindividual
memory.Each reinforces the notion that individuals'memoriesconformto dominantcultural
scripts or unconscious psychic templates, and
are recalledwithin the constraintsof 'particular
publics'. It is easy, therefore, for collective
memory theorists to reject the significance of
individualremembering,and subsumeit within
the concept of collectivememory.
In defending the significance of individual
memory and remembering for historians, I
would like to raise two questions about the
analyticalperspectivesoutlinedabove. The first
relatesto the tendencyamongmemorytheorists
to utilise the same interpretativeapproachesfor
both autobiographyand oral history;shouldnot
the differencesbetween written and oral forms
of life narrative be given greater weight? The
secondaskswhetheroralhistoriansareprepared
to abandon the idea that there is a conscious
'self capableof reflectingupon experienceand
critiquingpublic and private discourses or (to
use Dawson'sterm) 'culturalimaginaries'.
Roper'sconclusions regardingthe processes
of memory are based upon two written documents, not oral histories. However, there are
differences between the fixed, literarywritten
form of life narrative,and the fluid, interactive
and often more ambivalent dialogue that is
generatedin the oral historyinterview.All oral
narrativesare spokenwith an audiencein mind,
but reminiscingwith one's contemporaries(the
'particularpublics' of Dawson and Thomson),
writingan autobiography,and respondingto an
oral historian are all very different mnemonic
contexts.34While the oral history interviewer
undoubtedlyinfluences the narrativeoutcome
throughengagementwith the interviewee, the
nature of the dialogue between an interviewer
and intervieweeis not the same as that within a
cohesive social group such as a family,where
competingmemoriesjostle for dominance.The
interviewerusuallydoes not sharethe samepast,
and in manycontextstheremay be less personal
constrainton what may,or may not, be said.
An exampleof the relativecandourwithinan
oral history interview was noted by Alistair
Thomsonin AnzacMemories,when he wrote of
one of his interviewees:'...his rememberingwas
reflective and discursive, and sometimes selfquestioning.He decided that he should tell me
stories that he preferrednot to relate to other
audiences or to dwell upon when he was
alone....'35Furthermore,a narrationthat seeminglydrawsupona conventional'culturalscript',
maybe more subversivethanis at firstapparent.
Forexample,followingan oralhistoryinterview
with an 'ordinary'ItalianAmerican'housewife',
Susan OstrovWeisserconcludedthat the intervieweealmost'effaced'herselfin the initialspontaneous narrative,submergingherself within a
conventional family story.36But through an
insightful analysis of the ways in which the
words 'but', and 'just' were used within the
narrative,Weissercame to see how her interviewee mediatedthe genderconstraintsand expectationsof her life:
The growing society is there, yet it is also
made and remadein everyindividualmind.
The making of a mind is, first, the slow
learningof shapes,purposes,and meanings,
so that work, observationand communication are possible.Then, second, but equalin
importance,is the testingof these in experience, the making of new observations,
comparisons,and meanings....Theseare the
ordinaryprocesses of human societies and
humanminds, and we see throughthem the
nature of a culture: that it is always both
traditionaland creative....38
Williams describes the making of human
consciousnessas a creative,active and reflexive
process.Thirtyyearslater LuisaPasserinimade
similar points in her path-breakingarticle on
working-classmemories of Fascism. Individual
subjectivity,Passeriniargued, derived from the
interactionbetween inheritedsocialisationand
In
the 'capacityfor self-reflection'and critique.39
his review of collective memory studies,
Kansteiner concedes that 'more conventional
analyses of the lives and deeds of politicians,
artists and intellectualsreveal how individuals
have negotiatedand tested the limitsof ... inherited perceptionsof the past.Almostby definition
these approachespay tributeto and respect the
Do oral historicreativeenergyof individuals.'40
ans now believethat the capacityto engagecriticallyand constructivelywith inheritedideasand
values is confinedto these elites? If so, the field
has indeed made a paradigmaticshift from the
concerns and values that led to its growth and
developmentin the 1960s.
INDIVIDUALREMEMBERING
Are individual memories insignificant, as
culturaltheoristsoften suggest,interestedas they
are in the dominant, public affirmations of
memory? Can individual memories challenge
dominantnarratives,such as those of the nation
state for example? In practice, individual and
collectivememoriesare often in tension,and the
recollectionsof individualsfrequentlychallenge
the construction of partial accounts designed
primarilyto achievecollectiveunity.Let us take
just one example from oral history to address
these issues. In The Battle ofValle Giulia,
Alessandro Portelli explored a particularly
violent incident duringthe Second WorldWar,
Oralhistoriesare works in progress,as indi- and he comparedthe memories of Italianantividualscognitivelyand emotionallygrapplewith Fascist partisansto the dominant public interthe contradictionsandcomplexitiesof theirlives. pretations of these events that emerged in the
RaymondWilliams,whosewritingslaidthe foun- postwar years.41The incident took place as
dationsof modernculturalhistory,placed great follows.On 10thMarch1944 FascistsfromRieti
emphasisuponthe activenatureof consciousness were sent to the small town of Poggio Bustone
and the dynamicrelationshipbetween inherited to find draftresistorsfor the army,and to arrest
cultureand the individualmind:
politicaldissenters;a partisangroupreturnedto
As the first audiencefor Mrs. F.'stext, and
later one of her readerinterpreters,I came
to standbeforeit not with an authorityover
its interpretation that would foreclose or
exhaust its multiple meanings, but with a
certainhumility,admiration,and, eventually,
sympathy.Forme the ingenuity(not ingenuousness or disingenuousness) of Mrs. F.'s
narrativeis the way in which it allows for,
but also contains,a multiplicityof positions
that are contradictory, yet also permits a
certain fluidity of identity within the
constraints of her gender, ethnicity, and
class.37
Autumn2004 ORAL HISTORY 41
in battle, but the rage, the hatred,the desire to
kill them that they carried inside them....'43
These stories reflect the personal struggle to
reconcileconflictingvalues in war and peace.
The partisanaccountsof the battleof Poggio
Bustone also have profound implications for
nationalnarrativesof the past. In post-warItaly,
Portelli reminds us, the Resistance was
perceivedas the 'foundationof the Italianrepublicandemocracy',andpatrioticandheroicnarratives were 'cleansed'of violence in the partisan
struggle. Those who had taken part, however,
rejectedthe officialdiscourse,and:
...tried to make space for violence in their
narratives- to justifyit as a necessityof the
times, sometimes to redeem it as revolutionaryvalue.... they also triedto rescuethe
memoryof the Resistanceas class war and
civil war from under the suffocatingwhitewash of the exclusivelypatrioticwar.
AlessandroPortelliconcludesthatthe participants are, 'if we listen and try to understand,
more articulate and credible historians that
those professionalwritersand adminstratorsof
historywho constructedthe myth of a domesticated, pacified, almost nonviolent Resistance....'44
the town and in the ensuing battle the Fascists
were killed.
Portelli's account of the Battle of Poggio
Bustone illustratesa numberof issues we have
been discussing.The groupof partisansfit Halbwachs' definition of the memory of a social
group in continuingcontact. Here both individual and collectiverememberingrevealsmemory
as a site of culturalconflict.Firstof all, accounts
of the event are fragmentedand contradictory,
particularly on the key issue of where the
Fascistswere killed. Were they killed by partisans inside the house in which they were barricaded, or as they surrenderedoutside?42The
narrativesarealso shapedby imaginativedimensions of epic and myth, which Portelli argues
providesinsightsinto the real meaningof these
stories. 'Whatthese contradictoryand symbolic
narrativesmay be covering up', he suggests 'is
less what the partisansdid than what theyfelt:
theyneed to justifynot the killingof the Fascists
42 ORAL HISTORY Autumn2004
CONCLUSION
Contemporary oral history interpretive
approachesare convergingwith the theoretical
directionof culturaltheoristswritingon collective memory.That is, the social, discursiveand
psychologicalstructuresof rememberinghave
led both groups of historians to minimise (or
even discard)the value of individualmemory.I
would not wish to deny the valuable insights
into the culturalconstructionof memoryand the
social context of rememberingdeveloped over
the past twenty years or more. But surely the
interesting issue is not that individuals draw
upon contemporaryculturaldiscoursesto make
sense of their lives, but which ones, and why.
Psychoanalytictheories are one way some oral
historians have chosen to answer these questions, but as Joanna Bourke points out, 'too
often, psychoanalytical explanations for
emotional responses emerge out of the model
itself.45
Oral historians need to re-assert the value
of individualremembering,and the capacityof
the conscious self to contest and critique
cultural scripts or discourses. Rather than
seeking to fit oral narratives to pre-existing
cultural representations or psychoanalytic
templates,would it not be more fruitfulfor oral
historians to explore those points of conflict
and rupture in people's lives that create
confrontations with discourses of power? As
AlessandroPortellipointedout some time ago,
oral history allows us access to the range of
'expressivepossibilities'within a given society
or time.46This requiresthat we remainopen to
the richness and variety of individual
consciousness. We are uniquely placed to
investigateways in which individualsnegotiate
competing ideas or beliefs, or find spaces
NOTES
Iwould liketo thankAlistairThomsonfor his
helpfulcommentson an earlierdraftof this
article.
1 • Michael Roper,'Oral History',in Brian
Brivati,
JuliaBuxtonand AnthonySeldon (eds),
TheContemporaryHistoryHandbook,
Manchester:ManchesterUniversity
Press, 1996,
p347.
2. A discourseis 'a moreor less coherentbody
of statementsthatcan be analysed using
approaches derivingfromlinguistics,and
underlyingwhich is a particularview of the
world'.See Ludmillajordanova,
Historyin
Practice,London:Arnold,2000, p 21 2.
3. JillKerrConway, When MemorySpeaks:
Reflectionson Autobiogaphy,New York:Alfred
A. Knopf,1998, p 6.
4. T.G.Ashplant,GrahamDawsonand Michael
Roper(eds),ThePoliticsof WarMemoryand
London:Routledge,2000, p
Commemoration,
34.
5. See, for example, David Lowenthal,The
Past is a ForeignCountry, Cambridge:
Cambridge UniversityPress, 1985; Raphael
Samuel, Theatresof Memory, vol 1: Past and
Presentin ContemporaryCulture,London:
Verso, 1994; PierreNora, Realmsof Memory:
Rethinkingthe FrenchPast , 3 vols, New York:
Columbia UniversityPress, 1996-98; Andreas
Huyssen, TwilightMemories:Marking Timein
a Cultureof Amnesia, New York:Routledge,
1995; TonyBarta(ed), Screening the Past:
Filmand the Representationof History,
Westport:Praeger, 1998.
6. SusanCrane, 'Writingthe IndividualBack
intoCollectiveMemory',TheAmericanHistorical
Review,vol 102, no 5, 1997, p 1372.
7. PaulaHamilton,'MemoryStudiesand
CulturalHistory',in Hsu-MingTeo and Richard
White (eds), CulturalHistoryin Australia,
Sydney:UNSW Press,2003, p 83.
8. AlonConfino,'CollectiveMemoryand
CulturalHistory:Problemsof Method',American
HistoricalReview,vol 102, no 5, 1997, p
1386.
9. Inorderof presentation:Jay Winterand
EmmanuelSivan, War and Remembrancein the
TwentiethCentury,Cambridge:Cambridge
within or between dominantdiscourses.In The
Cheese and the Worms, Carlo Ginzberg
revealed the imaginativeand eccentric worldview of Mennochio,a sixteenth-centuryItalian
miller.The miller of Friulitransformedhistorians' understandingof the expressive possibilities within sixteenth-centurypeasant culture.47
What would oral historiansmake of a contemporaryMennochio?
UniversityPress, 1999, p 9; James E. Young,
The Textureof Memory: HolocaustMemorials
and Meaning, New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1993, p xi;Jan Assman, 'Collective
Memoryand CulturalIdentity',New German
Critique,no 65, 1995, p 126; John Bodnar,
RemakingAmerica:PublicMemory,
in the Twentieth
Commemoration,and Patriotism
Century,Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,
1992; EviatarZerubavel,TimeMaps:
CollectiveMemory and the Social Shape of the
Past,Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press,
2003.
1 0. Wulf Kansteiner,'FindingMeaning in
Memory:A MethodologicalCritiqueof
CollectiveMemoryStudies',Historyand Theory,
no 4 1,2002, pp 179-197.
11. SamuelHynes, 'PersonalNarrativesand
Commemoration',in Winterand Sivan, 1999,
p206.
1 2. Jay Winter,'Filmand the Matrixof
Memory',TheAmericanHistoricalReview,vol
106, no 3, 2001, p 860.
1 3. Michael Schudson,'Dynamicsof Distortion
in CollectiveMemory',in DanielSchacter(ed),
How Minds, Brainsand
MemoryDistortion:
the Past,Cambridge:
Societies Reconstruct
HarvardUniversityPress, 1995, pp 346-47.
14. Kansteiner,2002, p 185. Itshouldbe
noted thatKansteiner's
references,while reflecting
an otherwiseadmirablebreadthof research,
containnot one significantcontemporarytextby
an oral historian.
1 5. Nancy Wood, Vectorsof memory:
Legaciesof Traumain PostwarEurope,Oxford:
Berg, 1999, p 2.
1 6. Jay Winterand EmmanuelSivan, 'Setting
the framework',in Winterand Sivan, 1999,
pp6, 10.
1 7. MauriceHalbwachs, TheCollective
Memory,translatedby FrancisJ. Ditterand Vida
Yazdi Ditter,New York:Harperand Row, 1980.
Halbwachs'majorwork, [a Memoirecollective,
originallypublishedin 1950 (afterhis death in
Buchenwald),was translatedintoEnglishin
1980.
1 8. Assman, 1995, p 125.
19. Halbwachs, 1980, p 51.
20. Halbwachs, 1980, pp 25, 48, 43, 3 1.
21 • PeterBurke,'Historyas Social Memory',in
Burke,Varietiesof CulturalHistory,Ithaca:
CornellUniversityPress, 1997, p 55.
22. James Fentressand ChrisWickham, Social
Memory,Oxford:Blackwell,1992, p ix.
23. Forexamples, see the following:Raphael
Samueland PaulThompson,TheMyths We Live
By, London:Routledge, 1990; Marie-Francoise
'NarrativeStructures,Social
Chanfrault-Duchet,
Models, and SymbolicRepresentationin the Life
Story',in Sherna BergerGluckand Daphne
Patai(eds), Women'sWords: TheFeminist
Practiceof Oral History,New York:Routledge,
1991 ; AlistairThomson,'Anzac memories:
puttingpopularmemorytheoryinto practice in
Australia',in RobertPerksand AlistairThomson
(eds), TheOral HistoryReader,London:
Routledge, 1998.
24. PennySummerfield,Reconstructing
Women'sWartimeLives,Manchester:
ManchesterUniversityPress, 1998.
25. Summerfield,1998, p 252.
the
26. Michael Roper,'Re-remembering
SoldierHero:the Psychicand Social
of Memoryin PersonalNarrativesof
Construction
the Great War', HistoryWorkshopJournal,no
50, 2000, p 183.
27. Anzac is the acronymforthe Australian
and New Zealand ArmyCorps.
28. Graham Dawson, SoldierHeroes: British
Adventure,Empireand the Imaginingof
Masculinities,London:Routledge,1994, p 23.
29. AlistairThomson,Anzac Memories:Living
withthe Legend,Melbourne:OxfordUniversity
Press, 1994, p 9.
30. Dawson, 1994, p 23.
31. Thomson,1994, p 10.
32. Dawson, 1994, chapter2.
33. Roper,2000, pp 183-4, 20O1 .
34. See Joanna Bornat,Is Oral History
Auto/Biography?',Auto/Biography,vol 3, no
1, 1994, pp 17-29.
35. Thomson,1994, p 17.
36. See Susan OstrovWeisser, '"WhatKindof
LifeHave I Got?"Gender in the LifeStoryof an
Woman', in Sidonie Smithand Julia
"Ordinary"
Watson (eds), Gettinga Life:EverydayUses of
of
Autobiography,Minneapolis:University
MinnesotaPress, 1996, pp 249-270.
2004 ORALHISTORY43
Autumn
37.Weisser, 1996, p 267.
38. RaymondWilliams,'Cultureis Ordinary',
reprintedin A. Gray and J. McGuigan (eds),
reader,London:
StudyingCulture:an introductory
EdwardArnold, 1993, pp 5-6. See Martin
Hewitt,'RaymondWilliams(1921-1988)', in
KellyBoyd (ed), Encyclopediaof Historiansand
HistoricalWriting,2 vols, Londonand Chicago:
FitzroyDearborn,1999, p 1304.
39. LuisaPasserini,'WorkIdeologyand
ConsensusunderItalianFascism:work in
progress',HistoryWorkshopJournal,no 8,
44 ORALHISTORYAutumn
2004
1979, p 104.
40. Kansteiner,2002, p 196.
41 . AlessandroPortelli,The Battleof Poggio
Bustone',in TheBattleof ValleGiulia,Madison:
of Wisconsin Press, 1997.
University
42. Portelli,1997, p 132.
43. Portelli,1997, p 135.
44. Portelli,1997, p 139.
45. See Joanna Bourke,'Fearand Anxiety:
Writingabout Emotionin Modern History',
HistoryWorkshopJournal,no 55, 2003, pp
111-1 33, forfurtherdiscussionabout historyand
of emotion.
psychoanalyticinterpretations
46. AlessandroPortelli,'NarrativeFormin
Autobiographyand Oral History',in TheBattleof
ValleGiulia, p 86.
47. Carlo Ginzburg,TheCheese and the
Worms:TheCosmos of a Sixteenth-Century
Miller,London:Penguin,[1976] 1992. 'Inthe
late sixteenthcentury,a self-taughtbut
voraciousItalianmillercalled
intellectually
Menocchio drew on books, a sense of social
injusticeand a richimaginationto producehis
eccentriccosmology.'
own startlingly