Picturing History: A Meta post on memory
Maybe you noticed that a few of my post titles are called "Picturing History"? You might have chalked this up to bad title-imagination, and you wouldn’t be far wrong - but there is also an underlying method to the madness.
This then is a meta-like post trying to sort out all the different arguments and views I’ve played with in the Picturing History posts. I’m not rightly sure this will interest any one but me, but it might. And if you’d like to take peek at that part of by brain that revels in academic geekery - well this is a good opportunity.
The present post considers the difference between, and the juxtapositions of, history and memory. With history being the science concerned with correct historical facts and an objective view. Memory would be its bastard baby - filled with emotion, value and pathos. It’s sometimes wrong, but it’s never uninteresting. To simplify: history would be the encyclopedic reference, and memory the bloody, lusty and colourful tale spun around the same event.
First a quick definition of what I mean when I talk about memory. There are several types of memory definitions. First there is the personal, individual memory. Shaped and formed by all the experiences and recollections that make you into you. That’s not what I’m talking about here.
Then there is Social or Collective Memory. This is the type of memory that we learn while growing up in a society. It comprises of the little habits and pieces of knowledge we have been taught, and deals for instance with such things as how we should behave and what we should value. For instance; you’re in a dentist’s waiting room. What do you do? Chances are you’ll pick up a magazine, leaf through it, stare at your shoes and check the clock a few times. You will not get up and dance or start singing - even if you’re all alone. Why am I so sure about that? Because that is partially what I would do, and largely what I would not do. For this is what I’ve been taught to do and what I remember is the right action for this environment -and since most people have been taught and remember to do the same thing the memory is largely collective.
Then there is Cultural Memory and this is a little tricky. Cultural memory works in much the same way as social memory in that it creates a common base of reference. But as you might have guessed it encompasses a culture - and all the stories, habits, traditions and artifacts that create the backbone of that culture. For instance; I guess for most Americans the 4th of July is a special day. For me, as a non-American, it’s just a date. I lack the stories, traditions and surrounding cultural environment that gives this day its significance. In short - I’m not part of that cultural memory. For me the 17th of May is the big day, as this is Norway’s Constitutional day. For us this day has huge significance and all manners of little traditions. For the rest of the world? It’s just the 17th of May really.
The 17th of May. Not such a big deal in the rest of the world. (and I'm not in this picture - it's just a typical 17th of May photo. Kids, folk costumes and flags)
And just so we clear it up - cultural memory is not national. Remember those glorious years when they released a Lord of the Rings movie right before Christmas? Yeah, I do too. And just like a lot of people, regardless of nationality, I feel a little bereaved when there are no orcs and elves to brighten my December. So we share a LOTR based cultural memory.
But what furthers distinguishes Cultural Memory is that it spans time. It gets handed down through generations, and even if it changes slightly over time, it is still possible to see a form of resemblance and a connection to what is remembered. One of the reasons it can do this is because of Cultural Texts. By this I mean not just written words, but anything that can yield information - so images, archaeological artifacts, old songs and fairytales all apply.
The Olympic Games are a good example. They began as a religious festival in Ancient Greece, and ended in 393 AD. In 1896 a Frenchman called Pierre Frédy comes and revives the Games - or so he says. What he really does (and this is the part that is really lovely) is to use the cultural texts to find information about the old games, and weaves this into the new games. The new Olympic Games are not historically correct the same as the old games - but in the realm of Cultural Memory there is a link between the two. So when images and stories from the old games are used in promoting the new games few sees this as strange. Even if Frédy’s games are very much his own creation.
So in conclusion; memory doesn’t have to be factually correct to work or have value. Take for instance Casablanca. Rick never says "Play it again Sam", but "Play it Sam. Play As Time goes bye" Yet "play it again" is the one people remember and the one most often quoted when referencing the film. So just because some thing is recalled incorrectly does not mean it’s not functional. (The disclaimer here would be that if it is just one person that remembers incorrectly the memory will not work. The memory aspect needs to be a collective thing - a common base of reference.)
Memory comprises of anecdotes, tales and phrases within a culture. I felt The Wire season two did a beautiful job portraying how memory forms the backbone of a collective identity. This is probably why I did a huge post on it.
Sometimes we remember based on slightly crooked information - like the World war II photos by Robert Capa. Or we remember and form a view based on how we want things to look and how we are used to things looking more than the way things were. There is our habit of recalling the Middle Ages as dark, mysterious. Or our recollection of Antiquities as dotted with white marble statues, when in most of them were painted. Quite festively.
Caligula in white and colour - look at those rosy cheeks!
The question then arises; Even if we remember all these things slightly incorrectly, does that make our memory without value? I would say no. For if memory, as I proposed earlier, is part of what forms our identity - then all these memories, even the factual wrong ones, are important in understanding of who we are. To say the white marble statues are wrong, simply because they aren’t historically correct, would be false. For we have grown used to seeing the white marble, and for us it holds all manner of significance in addition to being a historical artifact.
Memories in the forms of Memoirs can also be important in that they give us a more emotional, sometimes personal, dimension that has a habit of being sidetracked by historical facts. For me the beauty of the HBO series Band of Brothers is not its historical dimension, but that it brings to life memories and a memory culture.
Somethings we need to remember. And we don’t need facts to be reminded either - a painting, like Anselm Kiefer’s Lot’s Wife, can do just as much to trigger memory as a list of historical artifacts can.
Here is a story to believe, she said.Once we were blobs in the sea, and then fishes, and then lizards and rats and then monkeys, and hundred of other things in between. This hand was once a fin, this hand once had claws! In my human mouth I have the pointed teeth of a wolf and the chisel teeth of a rabbit and the grinding teeth of a cow! Our blood is as salty as the sea we used to live in. When we are frightened the hair on our skins stand up, just like it did wgen we had fur. We are history! Everything we've ever been on the way to becoming us, we still are. [...] I'm made up of the memories of my parents and grandparents, all my ancestors. They're in the way I look, in the colour of my hair. I'm made up of everyone I've ever met who's changed the way I think. So who is "me" ?
Terry Pratchett: Hat full of Sky
This then is a meta-like post trying to sort out all the different arguments and views I’ve played with in the Picturing History posts. I’m not rightly sure this will interest any one but me, but it might. And if you’d like to take peek at that part of by brain that revels in academic geekery - well this is a good opportunity.
The present post considers the difference between, and the juxtapositions of, history and memory. With history being the science concerned with correct historical facts and an objective view. Memory would be its bastard baby - filled with emotion, value and pathos. It’s sometimes wrong, but it’s never uninteresting. To simplify: history would be the encyclopedic reference, and memory the bloody, lusty and colourful tale spun around the same event.
First a quick definition of what I mean when I talk about memory. There are several types of memory definitions. First there is the personal, individual memory. Shaped and formed by all the experiences and recollections that make you into you. That’s not what I’m talking about here.
Then there is Social or Collective Memory. This is the type of memory that we learn while growing up in a society. It comprises of the little habits and pieces of knowledge we have been taught, and deals for instance with such things as how we should behave and what we should value. For instance; you’re in a dentist’s waiting room. What do you do? Chances are you’ll pick up a magazine, leaf through it, stare at your shoes and check the clock a few times. You will not get up and dance or start singing - even if you’re all alone. Why am I so sure about that? Because that is partially what I would do, and largely what I would not do. For this is what I’ve been taught to do and what I remember is the right action for this environment -and since most people have been taught and remember to do the same thing the memory is largely collective.
Then there is Cultural Memory and this is a little tricky. Cultural memory works in much the same way as social memory in that it creates a common base of reference. But as you might have guessed it encompasses a culture - and all the stories, habits, traditions and artifacts that create the backbone of that culture. For instance; I guess for most Americans the 4th of July is a special day. For me, as a non-American, it’s just a date. I lack the stories, traditions and surrounding cultural environment that gives this day its significance. In short - I’m not part of that cultural memory. For me the 17th of May is the big day, as this is Norway’s Constitutional day. For us this day has huge significance and all manners of little traditions. For the rest of the world? It’s just the 17th of May really.
The 17th of May. Not such a big deal in the rest of the world. (and I'm not in this picture - it's just a typical 17th of May photo. Kids, folk costumes and flags)
And just so we clear it up - cultural memory is not national. Remember those glorious years when they released a Lord of the Rings movie right before Christmas? Yeah, I do too. And just like a lot of people, regardless of nationality, I feel a little bereaved when there are no orcs and elves to brighten my December. So we share a LOTR based cultural memory.
But what furthers distinguishes Cultural Memory is that it spans time. It gets handed down through generations, and even if it changes slightly over time, it is still possible to see a form of resemblance and a connection to what is remembered. One of the reasons it can do this is because of Cultural Texts. By this I mean not just written words, but anything that can yield information - so images, archaeological artifacts, old songs and fairytales all apply.
The Olympic Games are a good example. They began as a religious festival in Ancient Greece, and ended in 393 AD. In 1896 a Frenchman called Pierre Frédy comes and revives the Games - or so he says. What he really does (and this is the part that is really lovely) is to use the cultural texts to find information about the old games, and weaves this into the new games. The new Olympic Games are not historically correct the same as the old games - but in the realm of Cultural Memory there is a link between the two. So when images and stories from the old games are used in promoting the new games few sees this as strange. Even if Frédy’s games are very much his own creation.
So in conclusion; memory doesn’t have to be factually correct to work or have value. Take for instance Casablanca. Rick never says "Play it again Sam", but "Play it Sam. Play As Time goes bye" Yet "play it again" is the one people remember and the one most often quoted when referencing the film. So just because some thing is recalled incorrectly does not mean it’s not functional. (The disclaimer here would be that if it is just one person that remembers incorrectly the memory will not work. The memory aspect needs to be a collective thing - a common base of reference.)
Memory comprises of anecdotes, tales and phrases within a culture. I felt The Wire season two did a beautiful job portraying how memory forms the backbone of a collective identity. This is probably why I did a huge post on it.
Sometimes we remember based on slightly crooked information - like the World war II photos by Robert Capa. Or we remember and form a view based on how we want things to look and how we are used to things looking more than the way things were. There is our habit of recalling the Middle Ages as dark, mysterious. Or our recollection of Antiquities as dotted with white marble statues, when in most of them were painted. Quite festively.
Caligula in white and colour - look at those rosy cheeks!
The question then arises; Even if we remember all these things slightly incorrectly, does that make our memory without value? I would say no. For if memory, as I proposed earlier, is part of what forms our identity - then all these memories, even the factual wrong ones, are important in understanding of who we are. To say the white marble statues are wrong, simply because they aren’t historically correct, would be false. For we have grown used to seeing the white marble, and for us it holds all manner of significance in addition to being a historical artifact.
Memories in the forms of Memoirs can also be important in that they give us a more emotional, sometimes personal, dimension that has a habit of being sidetracked by historical facts. For me the beauty of the HBO series Band of Brothers is not its historical dimension, but that it brings to life memories and a memory culture.
Somethings we need to remember. And we don’t need facts to be reminded either - a painting, like Anselm Kiefer’s Lot’s Wife, can do just as much to trigger memory as a list of historical artifacts can.
Here is a story to believe, she said.Once we were blobs in the sea, and then fishes, and then lizards and rats and then monkeys, and hundred of other things in between. This hand was once a fin, this hand once had claws! In my human mouth I have the pointed teeth of a wolf and the chisel teeth of a rabbit and the grinding teeth of a cow! Our blood is as salty as the sea we used to live in. When we are frightened the hair on our skins stand up, just like it did wgen we had fur. We are history! Everything we've ever been on the way to becoming us, we still are. [...] I'm made up of the memories of my parents and grandparents, all my ancestors. They're in the way I look, in the colour of my hair. I'm made up of everyone I've ever met who's changed the way I think. So who is "me" ?
Terry Pratchett: Hat full of Sky