Commemoration

(65) Often memory and history are enlisted in the service of something; where the nature of this “something” decides whether we deem it use or abuse of memory. Memorization, as briefly described above, may be used in the service of remembrance of events that are judged to be founding, or otherwise remarkable or important for the common identity. There is, Ricoeur claims, a formidable pact that is forged between remembrance, memorization and commemoration (Ricoeur 2004). Naturally we commemorate that which we must not forget. For example, many Norwegian cities had various arrangements to commemorate the “Crystal Night” happenings in 1938. More precisely, the arrangements were made to ensure that the event of the Crystal Night stays in our collective memory – it is one of those things that we must not forget, to prevent them from happening again. We have a duty to remember, and we often resort to rites, ceremonies or even myths to help us remember. This is clearly a different use of history from the one we outlined above as being common in western military academies.

(66) But the duty of memory, to which we all subscribe, is a double-edged sword. It may lead to good use of memory as well as to abuse. And nowhere is the duty of memory more blatantly expressed than in the demand to commemorate an event, now and forevr. For example, in the collective memory of the Northern Irish Protestants a huge emphasis is placed on past events where the protestant population in Ireland was besieged and nearly wiped out by the Irish Catholics. There are of course several things to be said about this example. Let us begin by stating the simple fact that the battle of the Boyne, on the 12th of July 1690, is commemorated and celebrated by Northern Irish Protestants to this day. This was the high watermark of Protestant ascendancy when Prince William of Orange decisively defeated the catholic King James II. The so-called Orange Order commemorates the battle by arranging a series of Orange Walks every year, building up to the 12th of July celebrations. But not only do these walks keep the memory of the battle of the Boyne and its outcome alive, they also help keep alive old enmities and old hatred. A battle won is also a battle lost, glory to some means humiliation and wounded memories to others.

(67) French philosopher of history Pierre Nora (1996) aptly observes that we may become obsessed with commemoration. The memorial model has triumphed over the historical model and brought in a new use of the past. This use, Nora says, is both unpredictable and capricious. In our terminology here, we would call it abuse. Nora distinguishes between memorial and historical models. The historical model refers to the history as an academic subject, with its claim to truth and its demands for evidence, objectivity and argumentation. The memorial model refers to what we might call popular history, collective memories passed on in successive generations; whether such memories are happy or wounded they are often imbued with (strong) emotions and link up to national or ethnic or group identity. In some sense, in some cases, history and memory can be identical – history as verified memory. But for the most part history, with its large normative and methodological apparatus, can be used to correct, confirm, complete or refute both personal and collective memory. This is a role for history that military academies should pay more attention to; perhaps with a special eye to how the duty of memory may take the form of an abuse of memory.

Date: 2015-01-02; view: 888