In Search of Global Memory: Where Does the Transnational Turn in Memory Studies Lead?

IF 2.9 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
A. F. Pavlovskii
{"title":"In Search of Global Memory: Where Does the Transnational Turn in Memory Studies Lead?","authors":"A. F. Pavlovskii","doi":"10.30570/2078-5089-2023-109-2-166-194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the transnational turn in the research of collective and cultural memory in the 21st century, reflecting the desire of scientists working within Memory studies to go beyond “methodological nationalism” and explore the formation and circulation of historical memory across borders. Based on the English-language literature of the 2000s—2020s, the author analyzes the emerging field of Transnational Memory studies from the point of view of the categorical apparatus, disciplinary features and research approaches. Having documented that discussions about the transcultural dimension of collective memory are present even in the works of the classics of Memory studies, the author shows that the efforts of their modern critics are driven by the attempts to conceptualize the memory of the Holocaust, World War II, colonialism and other events of the “difficult past”. The abundance of closely related concepts elaborated in recent years creates an illusion of competition in this field, but these concepts are often based on fundamentally different ideological and methodological settings, and if some of the concepts possess a certain empirical potential, others are completely normative. The author identifies six main research lenses within the current state of Transnational Memory studies — international, supranational, diasporic, mediatized, digital and, finally, global, associated with the problem of memory synchrony/simultaneity. At the same time, according to his conclusion, getting rid of the national perspective in understanding transnational memory is still far from complete, and the very fact that scientists look beyond borders indicates that such borders still exist.","PeriodicalId":47624,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Political Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2023-109-2-166-194","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article is devoted to the transnational turn in the research of collective and cultural memory in the 21st century, reflecting the desire of scientists working within Memory studies to go beyond “methodological nationalism” and explore the formation and circulation of historical memory across borders. Based on the English-language literature of the 2000s—2020s, the author analyzes the emerging field of Transnational Memory studies from the point of view of the categorical apparatus, disciplinary features and research approaches. Having documented that discussions about the transcultural dimension of collective memory are present even in the works of the classics of Memory studies, the author shows that the efforts of their modern critics are driven by the attempts to conceptualize the memory of the Holocaust, World War II, colonialism and other events of the “difficult past”. The abundance of closely related concepts elaborated in recent years creates an illusion of competition in this field, but these concepts are often based on fundamentally different ideological and methodological settings, and if some of the concepts possess a certain empirical potential, others are completely normative. The author identifies six main research lenses within the current state of Transnational Memory studies — international, supranational, diasporic, mediatized, digital and, finally, global, associated with the problem of memory synchrony/simultaneity. At the same time, according to his conclusion, getting rid of the national perspective in understanding transnational memory is still far from complete, and the very fact that scientists look beyond borders indicates that such borders still exist.
寻找全球记忆:记忆研究的跨国转向将走向何方?
这篇文章致力于研究21世纪集体和文化记忆研究的跨国转向,反映了从事记忆研究的科学家超越“方法论民族主义”,探索跨国界历史记忆的形成和循环的愿望。本文以2000 - 2020年代的英语文献为基础,从范畴结构、学科特征和研究方法等方面分析了跨国记忆研究的新兴领域。通过记录关于集体记忆的跨文化维度的讨论,甚至在记忆研究的经典作品中也存在,作者表明,他们的现代批评者的努力是由试图概念化大屠杀,第二次世界大战,殖民主义和其他“艰难的过去”事件的记忆所驱动的。近年来阐述的大量密切相关的概念造成了这一领域竞争的假象,但这些概念往往基于根本不同的意识形态和方法设置,如果某些概念具有一定的经验潜力,则其他概念完全是规范的。作者在跨国记忆研究的现状中确定了六个主要的研究视角——国际的、超国家的、散居的、媒介化的、数字化的,最后是全球的,与记忆同步/同时性问题相关。与此同时,根据他的结论,在理解跨国记忆时摆脱国家视角还远远没有完成,而科学家超越国界的事实表明,这种边界仍然存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: The Journal of Political Philosophy is an international journal devoted to the study of theoretical issues arising out of moral, legal and political life. It welcomes, and hopes to foster, work cutting across a variety of disciplinary concerns, among them philosophy, sociology, history, economics and political science. The journal encourages new approaches, including (but not limited to): feminism; environmentalism; critical theory, post-modernism and analytical Marxism; social and public choice theory; law and economics, critical legal studies and critical race studies; and game theoretic, socio-biological and anthropological approaches to politics. It also welcomes work in the history of political thought which builds to a larger philosophical point and work in the philosophy of the social sciences and applied ethics with broader political implications. Featuring a distinguished editorial board from major centres of thought from around the globe, the journal draws equally upon the work of non-philosophers and philosophers and provides a forum of debate between disparate factions who usually keep to their own separate journals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信