Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-cf9d5c678-dksz7 Total loading time: 0.591 Render date: 2021-08-01T16:33:35.664Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Narrating Unity at the European Union’s New History Museum: A Cultural-Process Approach to the Study of Collective Memory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2016

Till Hilmar
Affiliation:
Yale University [till.hilmar@yale.edu].
Corresponding
E-mail address:
Get access

Abstract

Power in sociological studies of memory is commonly understood as a function of political interests that are successfully framed as an inclusive and convincing story about selected elements of the past. By showing how negotiations of memory are driven by dynamics of symbolic exchange and by distinguishing techniques of narration emerging from this process, I develop a theoretical model that helps to better understand the locus of symbolic power in mnemonic agency. I consider the case of the plans surrounding a European history museum to show how persistent notions of cultural unity can be drafted in democratic societies.

Résumé

Dans les études de sociologie de la mémoire, le pouvoir est fréquemment perçu comme une fonction d’intérêts politiques recadrés dans les termes d’une histoire, à la fois intégratrice et incontestée, centrée sur certains éléments du passé. En montrant de quelle manière les négociations mémorielles sont dirigées par des dynamiques d’échange symbolique et en différenciant les techniques narratives qui en émergent, cet article développe un modèle théorique destiné à mieux saisir le site même du pouvoir symbolique dans l’agentivité mémorielle. Il s’appuie sur une étude de cas consacrée à l’élaboration de la nouvelle Maison pour l’histoire européenne afin de montrer comment des conceptions durables de l’unité culturelle peuvent être élaborées dans les sociétés démocratiques.

Zusammenfassung

In der Erinnerung gewidmeten soziologischen Studien wird Macht meist als Ausdruck politischer Interessen verstanden, die mit Erfolg eine inklusive und überzeugende Geschichte spezifisch ausgewählter Vergangenheitselemente bilden. Anhand von Erinnerungsverhandlungen, die von der Dynamik eines symbolischen Austausches und charakteristischen, durch diesen Prozess entstandenen Erzähltechniken gelenkt werden, entwickle ich ein theoretisches Modell, um den symbolischen Machtlokus des mnemotechnischen Trägers besser zu begreifen. Die Analyse der Entstehugsgeschichte des Hauses für europäische Geschichte ermöglicht, die Konstruktion von robusten Vorstellungen von kultureller Einheit in demokratischen Gesellschaften nachzuzeichnen.

Type
Varia
Copyright
Copyright © A.E.S. 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, Julia, 2011. “1-800-How-Am-I-Driving? Agency in Social Science History”, Social Science History, 35: 1-17.Google Scholar
Alexander, Jeffrey C., 2003. “Cultural Trauma and Collective Identity” in Alexander, Jeffrey C, The Meanings of Social Life. A Cultural Sociology (Oxford, Oxford University Press: 85-108).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, Jeffrey C. and Smith, Philip, 2003. “The Strong Program in Cultural Sociology. Elements of a Structural Hermeneutics” in Alexander, Jeffrey C, The Meanings of Social Life. A Cultural Sociology (Oxford, Oxford University Press: 11-26).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, Jeffrey C., 2009. Remembering the Holocaust: A debate (Oxford, Oxford University Press)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axelrod, Robert M., 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation (New York, Basic Books).Google Scholar
Ash, Timothy Garton, 2002. “Mesomnesie: Plädoyer für ein mittleres Erinnern”, Transit. Europäische Revue, 22: 32-48.Google Scholar
Assmann, Aleida, 2007. “Europe: A Community of Memory? Twentieth Annual Lecture of the ghi, ghi Bulletin, 40: 11-25.Google Scholar
Bennett, Tony, 1995. The Birth of the Museum. History, Theory, Politics (London, Routledge).Google Scholar
Blaecker, Uilleam, Etkind, Alexander and Fedor, Julie, eds., 2013. Memory and Theory in Eastern Europe (New York, Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaive, Muriel, Gerbel, Christian and Lindenberger, Thomas, eds., 2011. Clashes in European Memory. The Case of Communist Repression and the Holocaust (Innsbruck, Studienverlag).Google Scholar
Collier, David, 2011. Understanding Process Tracing. PS: Political Science and Politics, 44: 823-30.Google Scholar
Conway, Brian, 2009. “Rethinking Difficult Pasts. Bloody Sunday (1972). A Case Study”, Cultural Sociology, 3: 397-413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eder, Klaus, 2009. “A Theory of Collective Identity. Making Sense of the Debate on a ‘European Identity’”, European Journal of Social Theory, 12: 427-447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Parliament (EP), 2008. “Conceptual Basis” http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/dv/745/745721/745721_en.pdf, date accessed: 1 November 2014.
European Parliament (EP), 2013. “Building a House of European History. A Project of the European Parliament” http://www.europarl.europa.eu/visiting/ressource/static/files/building-a-house-of-european-history_e-v.pdf, date accessed: November 1 2014.
Eyerman, Ronald, 2004. “Cultural Trauma. Slavery and the Formation of African American Identity” in Alexander, Jeffrey C. et al., eds., Cultural Trauma and Collective Identity (Berkeley, University of California Press: 60-111).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fyfe, Gordon, 2006. “Sociology and the Social Aspects of Museums” in Macdonald, Sharon, ed., A Companion to Museum Studies (Oxford, Blackwell: 33-49).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giesen, Bernhard, 2004. Triumph and Trauma (Boulder, Paradigm Publishers).Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen , 2001. “Why Europe Needs a Constitution”, New Left Review, 11: 5-26.Google Scholar
Halbwachs, Maurice, 1994. On Collective Memory (Chicago, University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Herzfeld, Michael, 1987. Anthropology through the looking-glass. Critical ethnography in the margins of Europe (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Holmes, Douglas, 2000. Integral Europe. Fast-Capitalism, Multiculturalism, Neofascism (Princeton, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Huistra, Pieter, Molema, Marijn and Wirt, Daniel, 2014. “Political Values in a European Museum”, Journal of Contemporary European Research, 10: 124-136.Google Scholar
Ifversen, Jan, 2011. “Myth in the Writing of European History” in Berger, Stefan and Lorenz, Chris, eds., Nationalizing the Past: Historians as Nation Builders in Modern Europe (New York, Palgrave Macmillan: 452-479).Google Scholar
Kaiser, Wolfram, Krankenhagen, Stefan and Poehls, Kerstin, 2014. Exhibiting Europe in Museums. Transnational Networks, Collections, Narratives and Representations (Oxford, Berghahn).Google Scholar
Lamont, Michèle and Molnár, Virág, 2002. “The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences”, Annual Review of Sociology, 28: 167-195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leggewie, Claus, and Heuer, Friderike, 2009. “A Tour of the Battleground: Seven Circles of Pan-European Memory”, Social Research. An International Quarterly, 75: 217-234.Google Scholar
Linde, Charlotte, 1986. “Private Stories in Public Discourse. Narrative Analysis in the Social Sciences”, Poetics, 15: 183-202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linenthal, Edward T., 1995. Preserving Memory. The Struggle to Create America’s Holocaust Museum (New York, Viking Penguin).Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J., 2000. Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes (Boulder, Lynne Rienner).Google Scholar
Littoz-Monnet, Annabelle, 2011. “The EU Politics of Remembrance” Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Working Papers in International History n° 9, October 2011.
Littoz-Monnet, Annabelle, 2012. “The EU Politics of Commemoration Post-Eastern Enlargement” Euroclio Working Paper: Europe Twenty Years after the End of the Cold War: The New Europe (Brussels, Peter Lang: 63-78).Google Scholar
Littoz-Monnet, Annabelle, 2013. “Explaining Policy Conflict across Institutional Venues: European Union-Level Struggles over the Memory of the Holocaust”, Journal of Common Market Studies, 51: 489-504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, Sharon, 2003. “Museums, National, Postnational and Transcultural Identities”, Museum and Society, 1: 1-16.Google Scholar
MacDonald, Sharon, 2006. “Collecting Practices” in Macdonald, Sharon, ed., A Companion to Museum Studies (Oxford, Blackwell: 81-97).Google Scholar
Mälksoo, Maria, 2009. “The Memory Politics of Becoming European. The East European Subalterns and the Collective Memory of Europe”, Journal of International Relations, 15: 653-680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mälksoo, Maria, 2014. “Crimininalizing Communism: Transnational Mnemopolitics in Europe”, International Political Sociology, 8: 82-99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mark, James, 2010. The Unfinished Revolution. Making Sense of the Communist Past in East-Central Europe (New Haven, Yale University Press).Google Scholar
Mazé, Camille, 2013. “Zwischen Geschichts- und Gedächtnispolitik: Europäisierung nationaler Museen” in François, Etienne et al., eds., Strategien der Geschichtspolitik in Europa nach 1989. Deutschland, Frankreich und Polen im Vergleich (Göttingen, Wallstein: 491-513).Google Scholar
Mccall, Vikki and Gray, Clive, 2013. “Museums and the ‘new museology’: theory, practice and organisational change”, Museum Management and Curatorship, 29: 1-17.Google Scholar
Mckeown, Timothy J., 2004. “Case Studies and the Limits of the Quantitative Worldview” in Brady, Henry E. and Collier, David, eds., Rethinking Social Inquiry. Diverse Tools, Shared Standards (Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield: 139-167).Google Scholar
Mink, Georges and Neumayer, Laure, 2013. History, Memory and Politics in Central and Eastern Europe. Memory Games (New York, Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, Claire, 2008. Narrating Political Reconciliation: South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (Lanham, Lexington Books).Google Scholar
Mork, Andrea, 2012. “Presentation of the House of European History”, European Remembrance Symposium Gdansk, http://www.europeanremembrance.enrs.eu/edition2012/house-of-european-history, Accessed November 1 2014.
Mork, Andrea, 2014. “From National Narratives to Shared Memories: Is a Pan-European Memory Possible?”, Presentation given at Networking European Citizenship Education Conference 2014, 16-18 October 2014, Vienna: http://www.bpb.de/system/files/dokument_pdf/NECE%202014%20Andrea%20Mork%20WS%207.pdf., Accessed December 8 2014.
Müller, Jan-Werner, 2004. “The power of memory, the memory of power, and the power over memory” in Müller, Jan-Werner, ed., Memory and Power in Post-War Europe, (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 1-38).Google Scholar
Nora, Pierre, 1989. “Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire”, Representations, 26: 7-24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olick, Jeffrey K., 1999. “Collective Memory: The Two Cultures”, Sociological Theory, 17: 333-348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olick, Jeffrey K. and Robbins, Joyce, 1998. “Social Memory Studies: From ‘Collective Memory’ to the Historical Sociology of Mnemonic Practices”, Annual Review of Sociology, 24: 105-140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pomian, Krzysztof, 1990. Collectors and Curiosities. Paris and Venice 1500-1800 (Cambridge, Polity Press).Google Scholar
Prösler, Martin, 1996. “Museums and Globalization” in Macdonald, Sharon and Fyfe, Gordon, eds., Theorizing Museums: Representing Identity and Diversity in a Changing World (Oxford, Blackwell: 21-44).Google Scholar
Rivera, Lauren, 2008. “Managing ‘Spoiled’ National Identity: War, Tourism and Memory in Croatia”, American Sociological Review, 73: 613-634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, Max, 2004. “Interpreting the new museology”, Museum and Society, 2: 84-103.Google Scholar
Rostoks, Tom, 2011. “Debating 20th Century History in Europe: The European Parliament and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Compared” in Muiznieks, Nils, ed., The Geopolitics of History in Latvian-Russian Relations (University of Latvia Press: 191-218).Google Scholar
Schmidt, Mária, 2011. “Auf dem Weg zu einem europäischen Gedächtnis? Eine ungarische Sicht auf das geplante Haus der Europäischen Geschichte” in Knigge, Volkhard et al., Arbeit am europäischen Gedächtnis. Diktaturerfahrung und Demokratieentwicklung (Köln, Böhlau: 165-167).Google Scholar
Schwarz, Barry and Wagner-Pacifici, Robin, 1991. “The Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Commemorating a Difficult Past”, American Journal of Sociology, 97: 376-420.Google Scholar
Shore, Chris, 2000. Building Europe. The Cultural Policies of European Integration (New York, Routledge).Google Scholar
Shore, Chris, 2006. “‘In Uno Plures’(?) EU Cultural Policy and the Governance of Europe”, Cultural Analysis, 5: 7-26.Google Scholar
Sierp, Aline, 2014. History, Memory, and Trans-European Identity. Unifying Divisions (New York, Routledge).Google Scholar
Snyder, Timothy, 2010. Bloodlands. Europe between Hitler and Stalin (New York, Basic Books).Google Scholar
Somers, Margaret R., 1994. “The Narrative Constitution of Identity: A Relational and Network Approach”, Theory and Society, 23: 605-649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spillman, Lyn, 1997. Nation and Commemoration. Creating National Identities in the United States and Australia (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, Dan, 2012. “Memory Wars in the ‘New Europe’” in Stone, Dan, ed., The Oxford Handbook of Postwar European History (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szelényi, Iván, Eyal, Gil and Townsley, Eleanor, 1998. Making Capitalism Without Capitalists. Class Formation and Elite Struggle in Post-Communist Central Europe (London, Verso).Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles, 1994. “The Politics of Recognition” in Taylor, Charles et al., Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition (Princeton, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Teeger, Chana and Vinitzky-Seroussi, Vered, 2007. “Controlling for Consensus. Commemorating Apartheid in South Africa”, Symbolic Interaction, 30: 57-78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theiler, Tobias, 2005. Political Symbolism and European Integration (Manchester, Manchester University Press).Google Scholar
Troebst, Stefan, 2010. “Halecki Revisited. Europe’s Conflicting Cultures of Remembrance” in Pakier, Malgorzata and Strath, Bo, eds., A European Memory? Contested Histories and Politics of Remembrance (New York, Berghahn: 56-63).Google Scholar
Troebst, Stefan, 2012. “Eckstein einer EU-Geschichtspolitik? Das Museumsprojekt ‘Haus der Europäischen Geschichte’ in Brüssel” DeutschlandArchiv 10/2012, published by the Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, Bonn: http://www.bpb.de/geschichte/zeitgeschichte/deutschlandarchiv/144616/eckstein-einer-eu-geschichtspolitik?p=all, date accessed: 3 November 2014.
Troebst, Stefan, 2013. “Die Europäische Union als ‘Gedächtnis und Gewissen Europas’? Zur EU-Geschichtspolitik seit der Osterweiterung” in François, Etienne et al., eds., Strategien der Geschichtspolitik in Europa nach 1989. Deutschland, Frankreich und Polen im Vergleich (Göttingen, Wallstein: 94-155).Google Scholar
Vinitzky-Seroussi, Vered, 2002. “Commemorating a Difficult Past: Yithak Rabin’s Memorials”, American Sociological Review, 67: 30-51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vovk van Gaal, Taja and Dupont, Christine, 2012. “The House of European History” in Axelsson, Bodil et al., eds., Entering the Minefields: the Creation of New History Museums in Europe, Eunamus Report 9 (Linköping, Linköping University Electronic Press: 43-53).Google Scholar
Vovk van Gaal, Taja and Itzel, Constanze, 2012. “The House of European History project in Brussels” in Borodziej, Wlodzimierz and von Puttkamer, Joachim, eds., Europa und sein Osten. Geschichtskulturelle Herausforderungen (München, Oldenbourg Verlag: 75-80).Google Scholar
White, Hayden, 2000. “Catastrophe, Communal Memory and Mythic Discourse: The Uses of Myth in the Reconstruction of Society” in Strath, Bo, ed., Myth and Memory in the Construction of Community. Historical Patterns in Europe and Beyond (Brussels, Peter Lang: 49-74).Google Scholar
4
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Narrating Unity at the European Union’s New History Museum: A Cultural-Process Approach to the Study of Collective Memory
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Narrating Unity at the European Union’s New History Museum: A Cultural-Process Approach to the Study of Collective Memory
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Narrating Unity at the European Union’s New History Museum: A Cultural-Process Approach to the Study of Collective Memory
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *