2023 Volume 90 Issue 4 Pages 563-574
As the number of World War II survivors declines, the issue of how to pass on the memory of war becomes more important. Most memory studies that focus on this subject criticize the history of the nation-state as a grand narrative and insist on the importance of passing on the memory of each individual citizen. These memory studies often refer to Maurice Halbwachs' theory of collective memory (mémoire collective).
Many previous studies on collective memory have focused exclusively on the interpretation that the past is reconstructed from the perspective of the present. However, the most significant feature of Halbwachs' theory of memory is that he views memory as a collective. Therefore, this paper focuses on the concept of "collectif" to clarify the truth of Halbwachs' theory of collective memory.
First, the paper clarifies the social and ideological background that led Halbwachs to conceive of collective memory. For this purpose, it focuses on the solidarité concepts raised by Renouvier and Durkheim. What they had in common was the a priori positing of personality (personnalité) as universal and transcendent. Human relations based on this concept of solidarité did not respect the individuality of people, who ought to be unique and diverse, but rather integrated all members of the group into a universal and transcendent personality in general.
Next, the paper examines Halbwachs' theory of memory as an idea that attempts to critically overcome the solidarité concept. In particular, the paper focuses on the concept of collectif, which is a characteristic of the theory of collective memory. Important in this concept is the idea of continuously generated diverse memories. These memories are generated through the concrete interactions that occur constantly in the actual world (le monde) in which diverse people live. According to Halbwachs, these memories are different from history, which he criticizes in its form of positivist historiography. This history, based on "authentic" sources, neither generates nor transforms.
Based on the theory of memory, which emphasizes the concept of collectif as clarified in this paper, previous studies that have interpreted collective memory in terms of constructionism have overlooked an important aspect of Halbwachs' theory of memory. Certainly, it is significant that previous studies have criticized the "history of the nation-state" which may exclude the memory of some citizens. However, the most important point of Halbwachs' criticism of positivist history is that it is fixed and not open to transformability. This critique might also be directed at the memory of citizens, which has been made a counterpoint to the history of the "nation-state." For example, the memories of war survivors may be considered "sacred" because of the absoluteness of their experiences. This view, however, may render their memories fixed. These memories should be open to the possibility of continued transformation and generation through interaction with diverse people in the actual world.
