Contents
Preface
I II
Vll
Footprints in the Sands of Time, and All That
I
What Is Collective Memory Actually Good...
31 downloads
1159 Views
2MB Size
Report
This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form
Contents
Preface
I II
Vll
Footprints in the Sands of Time, and All That
I
What Is Collective Memory Actually Good For? 33
III
Forgiveness and Forgetting
59
IV
Amor Fati
93
v
e ofthe heart. Too long a sacrifice can make a ston
Preface
W. B. Yeats
This is a short book, long in the making. Like any reason ably historically literate person, I had always assumed that I understood the difference between the critical history of
historians and the psychological authenticity but dubious historicity of the collective memories of peoples and nations. But I had not thought this worth worrying about until the early 1990s, when I worked as a journalist covering the Bosnian war. That slaughter (calling it a war when the Serbs had the guns and the know-how, and, for most of the period, the UN and the great powers did all they could to prevent the Bosnians from even trying to gain access to the weapons they needed is the rankest misnomer) poisoned forever the idea of remembrance for me. There is no sense in pretending to an objectivity that I do not in fact possess. Caveat Lector.
vii
PREFACE
PREFACE
People, certainly Americans and, I suspect, Australians,
work on the memory of the Great Famine. They are of
of my class and interests, tend to spend far too much time
course not responsible for the uses to which I have put
bemoaning the indifferent ignorance that has become the
their learning. I
default position of so many of their fellow citizens, above
attempts to explain to me the Catholic understanding of the
all the young, toward the past. We should be more careful
relation between history and memory (he will judge if I
what we wish for. The wars of the Yugoslav Succession
have succeeded, and of course my errors are mine alone).
were inflamed by remembrance-above all the Serb
Since the days when I was his student almost forty years ago
remembrance of the defeat at Kosovo Polje in 1389. In
at Amherst College, I have benefited from the learning and
the hills of Bosnia, I learned to hate but above all to fear
friendship of Norman Birnbaum. If I have gotten Li.iwith,
collective historical memory. In its appropriation of history,
Halbwachs, Renan and other thinkers on whom I have
which had been my abiding passion and refuge since
relied even partly right, that is as much Norman's doing as
childhood, collective memory made history itself seem like
mine, even if, all these years later, Ti.innies still defeats me.
nothing so much as an arsenal full of the weapons needed
Last but certainly not least, I want to thank Louise Adler,
to keep wars going or peace tenuous and cold. What I saw
Elisa Berg and their colleagues at Melbourne University
after Bosnia, in Rwanda, in Kosovo, in Israel-Palestine,
Publishing for giving me the opportunity to write this little
and in Iraq, gave me no basis for changing my mind. This
book, and their forbearance, unpardonably taxed by me,
book is the product of that alarm.
I'm afraid, as it took me about four times as long as I had
am
equally indebted to R. R. Reno for his
promised it would to finally deliver a finished text. On some matters, notably Judaism and Irish history, I am frankly out of my depth and could not have written on these vexed subjects without the tutoring of Leon Wieseltier and Tom Arnold, and without the benefit of Cormac 6 Gnida's
viii
ix
I Footprints in the Sands ofTime, and All That
L
aurence Binyon's poem, 'For the Fallen', was first published in the London Times on 2 1 September 1914,
six weeks after the Great War had begun. It is sometimes suggested that Binyon, who was a distinguished art historian as well as a poet (he was the British Museum's Keeper of Oriental Prints and Drawings when the war began), wrote the poem in despair over how many had already died and were being condemned to die. But there is no basis for such a reading. Binyon simply could not have known this, if for no other reason than it was not until the First Battle of Ypres, then still a month in the future, that people at home began to realise how terrible the toll in lives of British and Commonwealth soldiers the war promised to exact. In reality, 'For the Fallen' is a classic patriotic poem, far closer in spirit
3
DAVID RIEFF
to Horace's 'dulce et decorum est pro patria mori' ('it is sweet and fitting to die for one's country'}--the line actually was b Qfaven into the wall of the chapel of the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst in 1913-than to the work of the great British soldier-poets like Wilfred Owen, who would himself appropriate the motto for one of his greatest poems, but only in order to call dulce et decorum est 'the old lie'. That such Promethean knowledge was unavailable to Binyon weeks into the war hardly dishonours him. Too
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
In Australia, 'For the Fallen' is now known as 'The Ode of Remembrance'. At many Anzac Day ceremonies, after the fourth stanza is declaimed, it is customary for those present to respond with the words 'Lest we forget', as if to an invocation in church, which, in a sense, of course it is. In doing so, the participants meld the Binyon poem with Rudyard Kipling's far greater poem, 'Recessional', from which 'Lest we forget' derives, with every stanza ending with two repetitions of the phrase:
old to serve in the trenches, in 1916 he nonetheless would volunteer to serve as a hospital orderly on the Western Front-no mean commitment. And his poem has endured. To this day, 'For the Fallen' has remained the quasi-official poem of remembrance, read at ceremonies honouring the memory of the dead of both World War I and World War II throughout Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
Far-called, our navies melt away: On dune and headland sinks the fire: Lo, all our pomp of yesterday Is one with Nineveh and Tyre! Judge of the Nations, spare us yet, Lest we forget-lest we forget!
Its fourth and best-known stanza reads: As was so often the case, Kipling had a far more com They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old: Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn. At the going down of the sun and in the morning We will remember them.
plicated and pessimistic view of the world than the memory of him either among his critics or his (sadly diminished number of ) admirers would lead one to believe. Though advanced in inverted terms, since the poet is in effect
4
5
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
appealing to God for a deferral of what he knows to be
conserve a moral conscience in such a society. To care
the foreordained outcome, 'Lest we forget' is a mournful
about the present would be challenge enough, let alone
reminder that this forgetting is inevitable-both on our
having something left for either the past or the future. The
own parts and with regard to us after we are gone. In this,
Buddhist sage, Trungpa Rinpoche, once said that 'The
'Recessional' echoes the chilling words of Ecclesiastes
ultimate truth is fearless'. Perhaps. But in thinking about
1:11: 'There is no remembrance of former things; neither
history, the truth is at least as likely to inspire fear. As the
shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come
German philosopher Karl Lowith put it in his now largely
with those that shall come after'. And, more proximately,
forgotten masterpiece, The Meaning of History (1947):
Kipling's poem is a gloss--explicitly so, at one point--on
'To ask earnestly the question of the ultimate meaning
Shelley's 'Ozymandias' and its unflinching meditation
of history takes our breath away. It transports us into a
on the ephemeral nature of even the most monumental
vacuum which only hope and faith can fill'.
creations and martial accomplishments of human beings.
If we must live as if Ecclesiastes were wrong, we should
Deep down, we all know this to be true, however
still at least muster the courage to look at that ultimate
much all of our public engagements are grounded in our
meaninglessness of history from time to time, and recog
acting as if we believed otherwise. But fully to make of
nise that, to paraphrase Trotsky's quip about the dialectic,
Ecclesiastes 1:11 our true north would be to live as if we
'You may not be interested in the geological record , but the
were already dead. And we neither can do this-'No man
geological record is interested in you'. Even if we narrow
can stare for long at death or the sun', as La Rochefoucauld
the frame from evolutionary or geological time to historical
famously said-nor does there seem to me to be any moral
time-the time of human consciousness-and then narrow
or ethical imperative for doing so. A society based on such
it still further to only the most recent tranche of historical
a focus might, in some ultimate sense, be more 'truthful'.
time, there is still no reprieve on offer. The modern United
But it would also be completely impossible to foster or
States from its beginnings as a colony to the presen t day is
6
7
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
a little over 400 years old. The First Fleet sailed into Botany
sense, mean imagining that the political organisation of
Bay at the beginning of 1788, meaning that modem Australia has existed for a little more than half that time. Even France,
our own era, which, globalisation notwithstanding is still' ' broadly speaking, one of nation-states, is not just destine d
which has resembled a modern state for longer than any
to be long lived, which it very well may be, but permanent.
other in the so-called Old Europe, at the very earliest can
And that is clearly absurd. This is not to say that there are
only be said to have begun to coalesce in a form we would
not good and sufficient human reasons to live inside the
recognise to any extent about 600 years ago and, even in
illusion, or, with apologies to Freud, that this illusion does
France, as Theodore Zeldin has shown, this sense of national
have a future. If truth and morality can be incommensurable '
unity was far more the creed of the ruling than the popular
which, whatever tales the Kantians console themselves with '
classes until at least the French Revolution and probably
they often are, the same can and must be said about reality
well into the nineteenth century. Although China and India
and necessity. For to live overshadowed by the certain
obviously are far, far older as civilisations, one cannot talk
knowledge that all nations and civilisations are as mortal
of a unified Indian state until at least the Mughal Empire in
and as surely condemned to extinction as individuals are
the sixteenth century, and even China, which is of course
would be paralysing. It is one thing to say that history has
much the oldest state in the world, only became a unified
no intrinsic meaning but that, instead, its meaning derives
country with the Soong dynasty in the tenth century of the
from the way in which we human beings order it and infuse
Common Era. In historical terms, this is a very long time; in
it with significance. It is quite another to assign a lifespan
geological terms it is the blink of an eye. Even if we restrict
even to those constructed meanings, and really to take on
our gaze to historical time, do any of us seriously imagine
board the fact that, in the very long
that these states will be around in anything like the same
and everything we are is destined to be forgotten.
run,
everything we do
form in another thousand years, or two, or three? In reality,
Kipling is saying just that in 'Recessional'. He under
nobody really thinks this. To do so would, in the deepest
' stood perfectly well that the question of 'Lest we forget ,
8
9
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE DAVID R!EFF
we
(in its denotative meaning: 'lasting for a markedly brief
s n, in Liiwith's words, one find forget'. But what to do whe em rope? One answer is that oneself at the end of the mod
time') and human meaning itself. Whether one accepts the
ifying statement, implicitly contained the terr
'When
r e to shift the centre of thei just as it is possible for som to personal fate in non-being perceptions from their own
y ich also may well be the onl an 'other-centred' focus (wh on prospect of our own extincti way those of us who find the
of not being driven mad by unbearable can find some way on wh y the same should not its prospect), there is no reas ve fate . If this is right, then be possible with our collecti need not be regarded only as the mortality of civilisations contrary, a wor ld in whi ch crushingly bad new s. To the
recognisable to tho se of us everything endured in a form anity's lifespan as a species living now through all of hum
of able--even if the fantasy is what is in fact unimagin just such an outcome. personal immortality posits hean and transformative In any case, however Promet appear, it is not actually of this knowledge may at first tionally or intellectually. A any great use to us either emo thing, what is more likely is Freudian would say that, if any
s nection between the brute fact that there is an essential con y ve transience, our ephemeralit of our individual and collecti
10
linkage or not, to remain productive, and probably even to stay sane, we can only really engage with the era in which we are fated to live and die, and with the relatively short period of time past and time future to which we can feel connected. Even science fiction writing, some of which reaches very far forward in time, generally deals with the consequences of events taking place today, whether the extrapolation is from our own accomplishments (what we could call the Star Trek model) or our own follies (the Planet
of the Apes
model). The only major exception I can think
of is the British science fiction writer Olaf Stapledon' who' in his novels Last
Far Future ( 1930)
and First Men: A Story of the Near and and its sequel,
Star Maker (1937),
tried
to encompass the evolution of the human species-this brief music that is man, as he described it at the conclusion of the first book-from the twentieth century two billion years into the future. Few writers in any genre have conceived their project as demanding a 'detachment from all private, all social, all racial ends', and with it 'a kind of piety toward fate'.
11
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
But Stapledon is an outlier. As a general rule, the historical
those people had all died, as the events of September II, say, are to us today.
reach of the imagination, whether backwards or forwards, even in science fiction, is limited. As with imaginative literature, so too with the 'shelf life' of historical memory. In 2010, it still makes not just historical but ethical sense to most people in Australia and New Zealand for them to honour the memory of the dead of Gallipoli, and in doing so (particularly since there are now so many recently arrived immigrants in both countries) to honour their own national sense of belonging. But even the most historically minded do not claim that there is either moral impera tive or civic utility to holding services today in honour of the Norman and Anglo-Saxon dead of the Battle of
Of course, we can still study the Battl e of Salamis; indeed, one can argue plausibly that, beca use the past half-century has been something of a Gold en Age for historical writing, we certainly know more today about the war between Greece and Persia that culminated with the Athenian victory at Salamis than we did in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when , culturally, Hellenism provided so central a model for poets and philosophers from Schelling and Goethe to Byron and at some level even Matthew Arnold, that in 1935 , the British scholar Eliza Butler could write a book calle d quite simply
Hastings of I066 or the battles of Sekigahara in 1600
The Tyranny ofGreece Over Germany. It was also
and Osaka Castle in 1615 that led to the establishment of
the self-conception of the British Empire, and
the Tokugawa shogunate in Japan, let alone the Battle of
its last gasp, to the belief, in a Britain shorn of its colonies, that its global role now depended on playi ng Greece to
Salamis between the Athenians and the Persians (480 BCE) or the battles of the Chu-Han war in China (206-202 BCE)
.
central to
eventually, in
America's new Rome. This was almost certainly the
Indeed, it would be morally absurd to do so. And yet these
last convincing contemporary appropriation of classical
battles were just as critical in their time, just as firmly
Greek and Roman history (the American Empire has other
entrenched in the minds and hearts of people who lived
myths-above all, that it is not an empire; the Chinese
through them, and for many generations who came after
Empire will have still others, though as yet these are
12
13
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
still on the drawing board). It lasted far longer than most
the (at least imagined) cultural continuity between Greece
collective memories of the past, but the 2500 intervening
and Rome and the West through to World War I that made
years between ourselves and Salamis at last have come to
the past legible. Picasso was interested in Velazquez, who
represent too long a distance for us to make myths about
died 220 years before he was born; today, young painters
it that have any authority over our moral or political
are unlikely to be interested in their predecessors of half-a
imaginations. We can still admire The Iliad and Cicero, the
century earlier. Today, in Australia, Sidney Nolan's histori
Pantheon and the Acropolis, and be inspired by them, but
cal paintings from the late 1940s and early 1950s, such as
as vehicles for our myth-making about ourselves, they are
Death of Captain Fraser, still seem relevant to the Australian
finally lost to us, just as the fate of Gallipoli will sooner or
debate over multiculturalism, history and memory. But for
later be lost.
how long will they be intelligible, let alone relevant, in
But what a run! Most civilisations, and the art and thought they give rise to, disappear far more quickly.
other than purely aesthetic terms, as classical Greek statuary is today?
Think of Rubens' portraits of the English nobility: in their
Wringing one's hands over this is about as useful as
own time, these were clearly understood as glorifications
complaining about the heat in New Delhi or the rain in
of both the Stuart dynasty and the doctrine of the divine
Paris. What is worth paying heed to is just how easy it turns
right of kings. Today, the beliefs and understandings that
out to be for nations to 'revise' and 'rewrite' their collective
informed his way of seeing make no sense to us precisely
memories. That alone should signal to us how much closer
because Rubens was a man of his time-in many ways,
historical memory is to myth on one side and contemporary
its biographer. In contrast, Turner, whom John Berger once
politics and ideology on the other than it is to history. This
described as 'a man alone, surrounded by implacable and
is hardly news in an age of literary 'deconstructionism'
indifferent forces', is still accessible to us precisely because
but in fact our understanding of the social construction
the logic of his work put him outside his own time. It was
of memory goes back to the 1920s and the pioneering
!4
15
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
work of the great French sociologist Maurice Halbwachs
of these 'reconstructions', these 'rewritings', have proven
(he was arrested in Paris by the Gestapo in 1944, and
to be so much riskier than others at a given point in history
was murdered in the Buchenwald concentration camp
only to evolve or be transformed (the mechanisms that make
in
1945*). Halbwachs would almost certainly have
it possible for this to happen are rarely straightforward) into
found the late modern claim that everything from our
something that poses little or no danger. The 'constructed'
sexuality to our understanding of our historical traditions
collective memory that may anger and excite a community
is socially constructed. He was far more interested in the
in one historical era may endure in a form not only harmless
reconstruction than in the deconstruction of collective
but actively anodyne to the culture of grievance and grudge
memory. Halbwachs derived much of his theory about
of a couple of generations later.
how collective memory is formed from the work of British
The history of Ireland from the late nineteenth century
neurologist Henry Head's studies of veterans of World
through the 1916 Easter Rising all the way to the economic
War I who had suffered head wounds. 'What [someone
boom of the early twenty-first century, followed by the
with aphasia]lacks', Halbwachs wrote, 'is less memories
banking crash and the collapse of the housing bubble in
themselves but the framework in which to situate them'.
2008, provides a particularly illuminating example of the
Halbwachs understood that while, as he put it, 'societies
phenomenon. It is commonplace both among the Irish
and groups are capable at each moment of reconstructing
themselves and among the descendants of the Irish diaspora,
their past', at the same time that 'they reconstruct it, they
as well as among those with 'central casting' Ireland in their
deform it'. But for all its insights, his work does not do
heads, to speak as if this bathetic mixture of the cliches of
enough to explain why, both politically and morally, some
Republicanism and the cliches of the Irish National Tourist Board were at least an approximation of the country's history
*
Jorge Semprlln, who was a fellow prisoner \Vith him in Buchenwald,
wrote an extraordinary accc;mnt of Halb\vachs' death in his memoir,
and spirit. But that mythical Ireland never existed (any more than the mythical France, or China, or United States
L 'ecriture ou Ia vie.
16
17
DAVID RIEFF
existed). Irish historians generally agree that the shift of the centre of gravity of Irish nationalism from parliamentary politics to Romantic cultural nationalism occurred in large measure because of the failure of that more prosaic constitutional nationalism. Had Charles Parnell, the Irish leader in Westminster and the great champion of Irish Home Rule, not been brought down by sexual scandal, the cultural memories that now seem so 'organic' to Ireland might have remained at the fringe, and the symbiotic relationship between the Easter Rising and the Irish literary revival might never have occurred. Instead, that symbiosis became central to Irish nationalism to the point where, in Ulysses, Joyce can invent a nationalist conversation in Barney Kiernan's pub whose politics are overwhelmingly cultural and revolve around 'Irish sports and shoneen games the like of lawn tennis and about hurley and putting the stone and racy the soil and building up a nation once again'. Obviously, this is not 'historical'. No-one in the milieu Joyce was portraying imagined that they could re-create the clan-based Irish nation that had existed before the Cromwellian slaughter or, going further back, before Henry VIII's unseating of the Fitzgerald dynasty, or even
18
AGAll'iST REMEMBRANCE
wanted to, for that matter. What was of concern to them, as has generally been the case for cultural natio nalists whether in Ireland or anywhere else, was the trauma of the Irish nation's destruction and the heady prospect of breathing life back into it. At first glance, the rhetoric that accompanies this appears to be highly specific, as, return ing to Joyce's archetypal rendering, when 'Irish' sport s like hurley are opposed to shoneen ones (the word is a derogatory des cription of Irish people who prefer Engl ish attitudes and styles). But in historical terms, these mem ories of the past are as hazy as they are impassioned. That is exactly what the essence of histo rical remem brance boils down to: identification and psychological proximity, rather than historical accuracy let alone political depth. The question of whether historical remembrance is constructed, imagined, manufactured out of whole cloth or willed is, quite correctly, of profound importance to professional historians but, as the best of them realise full well, it is also beside the point. National ism is an emotion but the love in question is self-love. The great nineteenth century French (nationalist) historian Ernest Renan is remembered for having said that natio ns were founded
19
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
on 'a rich legacy of memories'. Although he himself was
rather morality, ideology and, more often than not, cultural
a very good historian, Renan explicitly did not call for
and political organising principles. Ideology is not always
such memories to be based on the best available historical
compelling even in countries where nationalism historically
research. To the contrary, he was adamantly opposed to
has run deep. For example, writing of his own childhood in
letting the historical chips fall where they may. 'Forgetting,'
the 1930s and the early to mid-1940s, the Irish writer John
he wrote in What Is a Nation? ( 1882), 'and I would even
McGahern could affirm that 'The 1916 Rising was not
say historical error, are an essential factor in the creation
considered to be of any great importance in the country I
of a nation'. Far from welcoming them, Renan insisted
grew up in'. Because Easter 1916 was not that far away, he
that 'the progress of historical studies is often a danger to
explained, 'it was probably too close in time for the comfort
[the sense of] nationhood'. He said this while conceding
of mythmaking'.
the obvious. 'Nations are not something eternal', he wrote.
But at other times, the need for the security that such
'They had their beginnings and they will end.' (Presciently,
myth-making affords can seem desperately important. If,
he foresaw their eventual replacement by a 'European
in the United States today, large numbers of people care
confederation'.) Another way of putting this is that the
passionately
nation always chooses myth-codified in remembrance
should continue to be taught that Columbus was the heroic
over history.
discoverer of America, as they have been for generations,
about
whether American
schoolchildren
Renan's claim that a nation is, as he put it, 'a large-scale
or instead that he was in reality a servant of the Spanish
solidarity', also may help to explain why attempts to debunk
Empire intent on despoiling a continent whose location he
or modify collective national myths almost invariably pro
could not even correctly identify, as at least some American
voke such alarm. We are far removed from scholarly debate
schoolchildren are now being taught. The controversy
here. Not only are we not talking about history, we are not
does not reflect some new-found interest in getting the
even really talking about memory in any proper sense, but
past right but rather the worry that, if the old myth is
20
21
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
repudiated, Americans will no longer really know on what
be dwarfed by the social discord they would engender
the devotion to nation that is the essence of patriotism is
and the national disunity they would sow. Certainly, some
to be based. In a nation where the overwhelming majority
Australian multiculturalists have left themselves open both
of whose citizens are immigrants or the descendents of
to that charge and to essentially not caring about historical
immigrants, that is bound to be of particular concern. And,
realities. A case in point is the University of Melbourne
increasingly, the United States is simply the world writ
academic Chris Healy, who has called for new histories of
smalL In an era of global mass migration, it should come
the story of Eliza Fraser�a European woman shipwrecked
as no surprise that similar 'education wars' are going on all
in 1836 along the Queensland coast who then lived with
over the world.
the Ngulungbara people before being found by a European
In Australia, John Howard's Coalition government made
search. That seems reasonable enough. But Healy goes on
a concerted effort to blunt what it viewed as the inroads
to insist that these histories would need to 'eschew a desire
of a Left and multicultural view of the country's history,
to rescue an authentic Eliza Fraser'.
which the conservatives believed wildly over-emphasised
One should not exaggerate, as so many conservatives,
Australia's mistreatment of its Indigenous peoples, while
and by no means only in Australia, tend to do. Bitter as
perpetuating other forms of injustice and inequality at the
they are, the experience of the past century in the United
expense of the traditional positive linear account that alone
States, Canada, Australia and western Europe shows that
could integrate new immigrants from outside of Europe,
all such cultural wars end sooner or later, usually in some
and their children, into the Australian national 'family'.
form of negotiated settlement in which elements of the
The multiculturalists, Howard claimed, had espoused a
older and newer conceptions are joined together. While
'black armband' view of history and their putative accom
such collective historical myths never stand still for more
plishments (above all in recognising the sufferings and
than a few generations, and viewed from a very long
accomplishments of the marginalised) inevitably would
perspective eventually mutate out of all recognition with
22
23
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
what they were when they were first constructed, during
in the early nineteenth century. And Benedict Anderson has
the period in which they hold sway it is as if they have
given us the valuable template of the nation as an 'imagined
always and will always exist. That is why their accuracy
community'. It has been clear at least since Renan's day
or inaccuracy is largely irrelevant. When Lytton Strachey
(and probably much earlier) that history and memory are
published his famous series of debunking portraits of four
two different things. By now, it is a commonplace. But what
of the great iconic figures of Victorian England-General
the study of the engineering of traditions and the template
Gordon, Florence Nightingale, Cardinal Manning and
of the nation as an imagined community make clear is that
Thomas Arnold-the history he uncovered was not all that
collective historical memory is neither one nor the other.
new or his arguments all that authoritative from a scholarly
Always constructed by human beings for human purposes,
perspective: 'what was true wasn't new, and what was
whether good or ill, it requires, as Renan understood, that
new wasn't true', as the old Oxbridge joke would have
we not inquire too closely into its factualness and instead
it. The book (published in 1918) could find a receptive
allow ourselves to be swept away by a strong feeling
audience because, in the last days of World War I, the
dressed up as historical fact, whether that feeling is one
Victorian myths and collective memories were themselves
of solidarity, of grief, of love of one's own nation or hate
so damaged by revulsion at the slaughter on the Western
for another's. Where remembrance is concerned, it would
Front, and at Gallipoli and Kut, that they were 'ready' for
seem that it is Nietzsche who has the last word: 'there are
revision or replacement.
no facts, only interpretations'.
Eric Hobsbawm and Terrence Ranger have written
Too often, the consequences of the suspension of
as about 'the invention of tradition', using such examples
disbelief required in order to keep faith with such collective
n the Scottish kilt, which, apparently, was largely the creatio
self-conceptions have proved far more costly humanly and
ion of Sir Walter Scott's Romantic imagination and pro-un
politically than is commonly assumed. At times, it can be
ers with England views, and the industry of Lowlands millin
like the proverbial yelling of 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre.
24
25
DAVID RIEFF
AGAI:--JST REMEMBRANCE
But even at its best, the historical record (the verifiable one,
today there are vestiges of it), circulating like a poison in
I mean, not the mythopoeic one) does not justify the moral
Southern society.
free pass that remembrance is usually accorded. I will
The example of the American South is anyth ing but unique. I remember going to Belgrade in 1993 to visit
return to this. For now, let me simply reiterate what I hope is the commonsense observation that collective historical memory, and the forms of remembrance that accompany it, are neither factual nor proportional nor stable. There are immediate political implications of this. Were those implications overwhelmingly positive, or, failing that, at least largely neutral, arguing against remembrance would not only be disrespectful but unnecessary. What, for example, could be wrong with wearing a poppy in your lapel on Anzac Day or Remembrance Day? But it is a decent thing to do in considerable measure because people in Australia do not wear poppies in their lapels the other 363 days of the year. Would the significance not be very different if the poppies were worn year-round? White people in the American South did not wear paper flowers in their lapels after the American Civil War, but the cen trality in their collective memory of the slave-holding Confederacy that their ancestors had fought for endured in a virulent form for more than a century and a half (even
26
Vuk Draskovic, the Yugoslav nationalist politi cian and writer who was then leading the mass opposition against the Milosevic regime and in doing so had drawn liberal, as well as ultra-nationalist, support in Serbi a. As I was leaving, my head still ringing with Draskovic' s romantic paeans of praise for the Chetnik leader Draza Mihajlovic, one of his young aides pressed a folded bit of paper into my hand. It was blank except for a date: ' 1453 '-that is, the year Orthodox Constantinople fell to the Muslim Ottomans. Friends of mine who worked in the former Yugoslavia during the Croatian and Bosnian wars had similar experiences in Zagreb and in Sarajevo. It seemed that the 'sores of history', as the great Irish write r Hubert Butler once called them, remained unhealed more than half a millennium later-at least in the desperate, degraded atmosphere of that time and place. Far too often, collective historical memory as under stood and deployed by communities, peoples and natio ns-which
27
DAVID R!EFF
to repeat the essential point, is always selective, usually self-serving and historically anything but unimpeachable has led to war rather than peace, rancour rather than reconciliation and the determination to get revenge rather than commit to the hard work of forgiveness. It happened in the American South between 1865 and at least the mid1980s; it happened in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Today, it is happening in Israel-Palestine, among the Hindu nationalists in India (whose distortions of the historical character of their faith are even more egregious than their largely fraudulent reading of Indian history) and of course among the Islamists, whether Sunni or Shiah. Obviously, there is no easy resolution, since it is quite likely that our need for community is compelling in times of peace and plenty, as in modern Australia or the modern United States, and overwhelming in times of trouble. But even assuming that it is so, let there at least be no mistake about the high price we have frequently had to pay for the solace of remembrance. History is not a menu. You can't have the solidarity that a national myth helps to form and sustain but not the self absorption, or the pnde but not the fear. Nor, despite all the
28
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
talk of globalisation, is the universal ethical
community that
the Israeli philosopher Avishai Margalit-echoing Kant's vision of a civil society administering unive rsal rights-has called for anything more than a pipe-dream , at least for now. Margalit is right to conclude that if we could somehow create what he calls a shared moral memory based on some generally accepted moral minima then there could be a globalisation of conscience on a part with the globalisation of capitalism and of migration. To his great credit, Margalit himself goes to some pains to show how difficult it would be to go about creating such a memory. But then he in effect falls back on the old German idealist view that if somethina b should be done, if it is a moral imperativ e, then it must be done (the world as 'cosmological idea', in another Kantian formulation)--an injunction that can also be summarised as 'ought implies can'. With the spirit of our own time, in which universal values are everywhere unde r assault, this seems less likely than ever, and in any case there is a whiff of eschatology about it: Alle Menschen werd en Briider (all men become brothers)--The End. Mostly, though, it is like the old fantasy of world governmenta kind of moral Esperanto that is beautiful, noble even, but, when all is said
29
DAVID R!EFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
and done, a waste of hope. As Leszek Kolakowski once
victor. In such circumstances, often what is needed most is
remarked, 'We can imagine the universal brotherhood of
appeasement in its denotative sense of ' soothing', 'bringing
wolves but not of humans, since the needs of wolves are
peace', though another term would probably have to be
limited and definable and therefore conceivably satisfied,
used since appeasement may simply be too identified with
whereas human needs have no boundaries we could
Chamberlain and Daladier's caving in to Hitler in 1938
delineate'.
over the fate of Czechoslovakia to be useable. To achieve
human need for For better or worse, how we weigh the t take place in the remembrance against its dangers mus who we actually context of the way we actually live and time in which we are as human beings. 'In the terrifying rian of Judaism, live and create', wrote the great histo
this, I believe that we will need some version of what John Gray has called modus vivendi between civilisations
,
cultures, religions and nations. If this is right, then far from being always a moral imperative, remembrance is what is going to stand in the way.
ediate concern'. Yosef Yerushalmi, 'eternity is not our imm it to become Nor do we live in a world that, even were y), ever will be less terrifying (which hardly seems likel something that converted to Kantian absolutist idealismthing! Instead, our actually seem s to me to be a very good worl d whe re, too challenge is to keep our bearings in a have proven to be often for it to be a limiting case, values is the inimical incompatible. An obvious example of this -truth, justice relationship between three virtuous goals wars, especially and peace-in the aftermath of savage there is no clear in the increasing number of cases where
30
31
II What Is Collective Memory Actually Good For?
O
ld men forget, as Shakespeare has the king say in
Henry
V. But, left to their own devices, societies
forget too, and not just inevitably, over the very long run, but often surprisingly quickly. This is truer now than it has ever been in the past. The French historian Daniel Halevy foresaw as much in his Essay on the Acceleration
of History, published in 1948. He argued that we were witnessing the dawn of an era in which change, sometimes very rapid change, was becoming the norm. This was an epochal event in world history-a decisive break with the essential continuity that had marked almost all societies throughout history. It is not that things never change in traditional cultures (by which one generally means peasant culture); they do, but slowly, and most of the time in ways
35
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
that are imperceptible to any given generation, except in
millions have moved from country to city and tens of
moments of calamity, which has usually meant in times
millions from country to country, and where, for all the
of famine. This is because such societies are governed
cheap self-flattering and faux insurgent attitudinising of
by custom and precedent, which are exceedingly slow
the multiculturalists, homogenisation is everywhere the
to change-rather than the myths of collective historical
order of the day. Not a year goes by without at least ten
memory, real or invented, in which, as in all myth, the
small languages dying out. Small cultures are disappearing
stories are fixed and immovable-but that are far, far less
everywhere, subsumed into a few dominant ones articulated
enduring. What Halevy saw-and that he could do so at
in a few world languages-English, Spanish, Chinese, Hindi,
all is in itself a tremendous achievement since the process
Arabic and, still, to some extent, French and Portuguese.
was anything but self-evident at the end of the l 940s-was
For Halevy, the acceleration of history had shattered the
not just that these stable arrangements were coming apart
traditional continuity between our societies' past, present
but that, once they had eroded past a certain point, as they
and future. And if history and collective memory have never
were sure to do, they could never again be reconstituted.
been one and the same, Halevy argued that never before had
The past sixty years have more than borne out Halevy's intuitions. Today, one would probably want to add that this
either the latter or the former come under the kind of stress that history's acceleration was producing.
acceleration has been particularly extreme in the hard
Halevy was writing in the immediate aftermath of
sciences and in the arts. But in every domain except our
World War II, well before the full implications of the
identities as biological beings (and there are nanotechnolo
decolonisation process that was only just beginning began
gists working on that at this moment), the world of the early
to be understood in Europe. As a result, he was less attentive
part of the twenty-first century has been transformed. For
to global political change than he would have been had he
the first time in human history a majority of people live
written the book a decade later, which is why his argument
in cities instead of in the countryside, when hundreds of
is with Spengler, rather than with Gandhi or Fanon. But his
36
37
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
argument has turned out to be particularly relevant to those
history wars and all over western Europe, though there it is
moments when empires fall and new polities rise (or are
usually the Islamic faith rather than race that is at the heart
revived) in their place, or when the demography of a given
of the matter.
society is altered so drastically that the emphasis on a past
In a brilliant short memoir called 'Wbere Statues Go
no longer shared by most people no longer seems to make
to Die', David Cannadine, historian of the British Empire,
sense. Historically, this has been especially relevant to
illustrated the fragility and contingency of even the most
settler societies like the United States and Australia. When
grandiose emblems of bygone empires by narrating how
most Americans were of European origin, an emphasis
during a visit to India he had come face to face with the
in primary school world history classes on the history
inglorious fate of colonial monuments. He told of being
of Europe made human sense (there were other issues,
taken to a large open space on the edge of New Delhi
of course, notably the brute fact of European colonial
where, during colonial times, British viceroys held their
domination that only ended in the 1960s, and the implicit
great 'durbars '-their imperial assemblages and reviews. In
American self-conception of itself as the successor state
2003, what Cannadine found was a 'neglected, overgrown,
to those empires). But in the increasingly de-Europeanised
obscure piece of ground' that conveyed the message that
United States of today, it does not. Moreover, in a world
'earthly power is transient, and that imperial dominion is
in which all but the poorest societies, not just rich
ephemeral'. In the remotest corner of the site, he was led to
countries like the United States, Canada, Australia and the
'a most astonishing scene: a dozen immense statues, rising
countries of the European Union, are being transformed by
up from the bushes and the brambles, like the chessmen
migration, the distinction between settler and non-settler
arrayed for that terrifYing contest towards the end of the first
societies is harder and harder to draw. As a result, conflicts
Harry Potter film'. In fact, the statues portrayed not only a
over curricula of this American type are cropping up both
number of British viceroys, but also George V, Emperor of
in Australia in what Stuart Macintyre has described as the
India. As Cannadine observed, 'the statues I encountered on
38
39
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
that hot and dusty Indian afternoon had been placed by the
doubt. There could be no appeal. It was in the nature of
British in New Delhi to be permanent monuments to men
empire, shown over and over again throughout the ages, to
whose lives and deeds they deemed worthy of everlasting
end in failure. As it says in Isaiah 40:24, 'Yea, they shall
commemoration'. But India had moved on, as Indonesia
not be planted; yea, they shall not be sown; yea, their stock
moved on (there is a brilliant Cartier-Bresson photograph of
shall not take root in the earth; and He shall also blow upon
official paintings of colonial officials being removed like so
them, and they shall wither, and the whirlwind shall them
much rubbish from the governor's mansion in Jakarta after
away as stubble'. That through all of this-'action and sufferina power '"
independence in 1949), and as, sooner or later, suddenly or gradually, all our societies will move on as well.
and pride, sin and death', as Lowith put it---God endured
We are back again with Kipling. He did not live to
could be no mitigation for Kipling, since God is mainly
see the end of this empire whose bard he was, nor did he
outside of history, really intervening only at its beginning
experience the high, iconoclastic moment when all those
with the act of love that is the Creation and at its end, the
grand symbols of imperial rule reverted to being not
Apocalypse, 'the oncoming Apocalypse [that is] the never
very different from what they had been when they were
fading framework of Jesus' preaching', to use Leszek
still being cast at the foundry-bits of fashioned stone
Kolakowski's words. That is the significance of eschatology,
representing something barely intelligible. But then, he
which is why some of the best known of the early Christian
really had no need to. For Kipling, the mortality of empire
martyrs were committed to giving up their property and of
was as certain as our own individual mortality-perhaps
two minds even about having children-that is, the essential
even more so, since, at the end of his life, the poet had
elements necessary for a family future in this world-and
the uneasy consolation of believing in spirits as well as in
instead, as in the stories of Thecla (who vows to remain
Jesus Christ. He might implore God to extend the Raj's
a
lifespan, but about its days being numbered he was in no
the Gospel until her death at ninety-one), and Maximilla
40
41
virgin and flees to the mountains where she preaches
DAVID R!EFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
(whose love of God made her pray to be able to stop having
the sacrifices and the sufferings of those who came before.
sex with her husband, Aegeates), pledged themselves to the
If those who died in battle or for their beliefs are not
world to come.
remembered, how can their sacrifices have any meaning?
For the rest, game, set and match to Shelley:
And for their sacrifices, read all sacrifice. While it is incon trovertibly true, at least in the context of evolutionary time,
'My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
acknowledging it simply undermines too much that we
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!'
bore under at our peril. In Dryden's great phrase, that truly
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
would be the 'untuning of the sky'.
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare, The lone and level sands stretch far away.
'Imagine . . . a world without memories' runs the tag line on the website of the Australian Government-backed 'Australian Memory of the World Register', which is part
Although he, too, despaired, Kipling still chose to write
of a global project on memory organised by UNESCO.
in the conditional: 'Lest we forget'. He was right. Had he
The reality of the effort is actually far less doom-laden
done anything else, no matter how transient he knew it to
than these words might lead you to believe, and it largely
be, Kipling's appeal for remembrance would have been
involves the preservation of historical documents and the
rendered all but meaningless. And it is emphatically not
recording of oral histories. But that does not make the words
meaningless except within the cognitively (and probably
on the home page any less nonsensical. The world doesn't
morally) useless framework of eternity. Human beings are
have memories nor do peoples or nations. Individuals
drawn to ceremony and, whether they are believers or not,
remember-something that, in life, nothing this side of
to piety as well. This is why, without falling fully into a
a brain injury can ever change. Yet in this culture, at this
subspecies of ancestor worship, surely there is something
moment in history, many people do speak of collective
impious or at least ethically impoverished about forgetting
memory as if it were on a par with individual, that is to say,
42
43
DAVID RIEFF
AGAI:-<ST RHlEMBRA:"CE
real memory, if indeed it does not morally outrank it at times.
Margalit is interested in global ethical minima that should
That individuals forget may be the result of the sad fact of
command not just one people's or even one civilisation's
ageing or, conversely, of some happy fact of private life
allegiance but humanity's as a whole. He believes there
(such as love affairs from which one recovers). None of this
are certain 'moral nightmares', as he calls them, the Shoah
is thought to pose a threat to society as a whole. In contrast,
first and foremost among them, that must remain in our
a collective failure of remembrance is often presented as
collective memories because they are 'striking examples of
if it were an invitation to moral or political disaster. The
radical evil and crimes against humanity, such as enslave
paradigmatic contemporary expression of this is the assertion
ment, deportations of civilian populations, and mass exter
that shirking our moral obligation to remember the Shoah is
minations'. In effect, Margalit is saying that the need to
to effectively exile oneself from the civilised world.
be alert to radical evil (he borrowed the term from Kant
This is what underpins the views of Avishai Margalit
but imbued it with a somewhat different meaning) imposes
that I discussed earlier. For him, it is not a matter of Jewish
the prudential requirement of constructing a shared moral
particularism, though because the Jews are a religion that
memory for humanity as a whole. To do anything less is to
became a people rather than a people who became a religion
leave humanity and even morality itself vulnerable. In this,
(the formulation is Harold Bloom's), the question of that par
as in his argument for forgiveness but against forgetting,
ticularism, and, more broadly of a Jewish approach to history
Margalit followed Paul Ricoeur, who wrote that, 'We must
that is in many ways unparalleled must be addressed. Lowith,
remember because remembering is a moral duty. We owe a
for example, thought that, while it was impossible to apply
debt to the victims . . . By remembering and telling, we
a purely Christian interpretation to the historical destiny
prevent forgetfulness from killing the victims twice'.
of Christian peoples, the destiny of the Jews was indeed a
But what if this is wrong, however counter-intuitive
possible subject for Jewish interpretation. Presumably, this
that may seem, and however much one may sympathise
would have to include the Shoah.
with the moral seriousness of Ricoeur's and Margalit's
44
45
DAVID RIEFF
AGA!?\ST REMEMBRANCE
projects? What if the memory of an instance of radical
part of the conventional wisdom of the age, even though
evil--even if it is the Shoah itself-does nothing to protect
Santayana wrote as if Freud's insight into human beings'
society from future instances of radical evil? And what if
'unconsciousness chain of repetition' did not need to be
collective national memory of a nation, which Margalit
taken into account. Pitched lower, it has always effortlessly
himself concedes has been defined as a society that nour
found its way into popular doggerel from the Guy Fawkes
ishes a common delusion about its ancestry, is not just
Day injunction in Britain to 'Remember, remember, the
wildly overrated as a measure of that society's coherence,
fifth of November' to our own day. But pitched high or
not just quixotic (the message at the heart of Kipling's
low, the conviction that memory is a species of morality
'Recessional', no matter how martial the terms in which
is one of the more unassailable pieties of the age. The
it is delivered) but often actively dangerous? And what if,
conventional wisdom is straightforward: to remember is to
instead of being the herald of meaninglessness, it is a decent
be responsible-whether to truth, to history, to the traditions
measure of communal forgetting that is the sine qua non of
of one's own people (though usually what is meant by this
a peaceful and decent society, while it is remembering that is
is its sufferings) or to one's personal itinerary. Anything
the politically and morally risky pursuit?
less, on this account, is at the very least irresponsible
Of course, almost no-one believes this: the citations
again both to self and community-and, more often than
I have taken from authorities like Ricoeur and Margalit
not, is the emblem of a fall into moral cowardice and civic
illustrate how lopsided the consensus is in the opposite
nihilism, and individually or collectively self-destructive
direction. They take the intellectual high road and their
into the bargain.
account is highly nuanced. But think of the extent to which
This establishment of memory as a species of public
George Santayana's far too celebrated, and, to my mind,
good, and as one of the essential bona fides of the health of a
often demonstrably false injunction that 'those who cannot
society or an individual, actually transcends politics and
remember the past are condemned to repeat it' has become
even an interest in politics. As a result, it is as persuasive
46
47
DAVID RIEFF
AGA!l'iST REMEMBRAl'iCE
to those whose understanding is fundamentally social
a virtual monopoly by the state (above those elements of
and historical as it is to those whose understanding is
the state concerned with education and with war), it is
fundamentally private and psychological. Fascists and
now contested ground, with ethnic, religious and sexual
multiculturalists alike pay homage to 'The Duty of
minorities challenging the traditional mainstream account.
Memory'-the name a well-known French activist group
What both sides would almost certainly agree about-no
on the Left assumed (though it used the plural 'duties') when
matter how bitterly what should be remembered and how
it began its efforts to pressure the French state to acknowl
that remembrance should be marked would be debated-is
edge fully both the historical contribution of non-white
that not to remember at all would make matters far worse
peoples to the country and France's past involvement in the
constituting what Vladimir Jankelevitch called a 'shameful
slave trade. The great French historian Pierre Nora, who
amnesia', and therefore be completely unacceptable.
'
pioneered the role that collective memory plays in history,
What is less clear is why this is so. Assume for the
has remarked that in contemporary France, "'Memory" has
sake of argument that Jankelevitch is correct and that it is
taken on a meaning so broad and all-inclusive that it tends
indeed both morally shameful to forget the horrors of the
to be used purely and simply as a substitute for "history"
past and morally uplifting to remember, or, even better,
and to put the study of history in the service of memory'.
to recuperate it. That still begs the question of what to do
Renan would have loathed what Nora called the 'dem
with those memories.
ocratisation' of history that he argued was behind this
While the issue is more or less contemporaneous, for
shift. But it vindicates rather than undermines his view:
example bringing the perpetrators of atrocities to justice,
identity and memory are still being viewed as inseparable,
or piercing a barrier of lies about what actually occurred,
with the former being impossible without the latter, and,
whether during the Irish famine, the Armenian genocide
if anything, more urgent. The difference now is that
or the Shoah, most of us would agree that the morality
where, until comparatively recently memory was held as
of the question is usually (though not always) clear-cut.
48
49
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
Of course perpetrators of atrocities should indeed be held
that bygones must not be allowed to be bygones. He was
to account, all other things being equal. In fact, there can
absolutely right to do so, as were others, notably the great
be considerable collateral effects to indicting a tyrant while
French writer Pierre Vidal-Naquet, who spoke of France's
he is still in office (something the International Criminal
'memory wars' and of the so-called revisionist historians
Court now has the power to do) or arresting him after he
who, in denying that the Shoah ever took place, had
has relinquished power. Most people rightly regard the
become the 'assassins of memory' . They had no less an
by the Spanish magistrate
authority than Adolf Hitler's own words to back up their
arrest warrant issued in
1998
1939, Hitler said contemptuously
Baltasar Garzon for former Chilean dictator Augusto
arguments. On 22 August
Pinochet as having been a long overdue blow for justice.
that the Germans could and would exterminate the Poles
But things are more complicated than that. Many Chileans,
'mercilessly and without compassion' and that it would not
including a substantial number of those who welcomed
matter, since, 'Who, after all, speaks today of the annihila
Garzon's action, believe that had the order been issued in
tion of the Armenians?' In this, he echoed Nietzsche's stark
at the time Pinochet left office, it is by no means
reminder that 'Whichever interpretation prevails at a given
1990,
certain he would have relinquished power at all. Would standing up for the truth have been worth it then?
time is a function of power, and not truth' . It was, I think, the facts that the Holocaust took place in
In fairness, Jankelevitch was referring specifically to
secret and that, when the Nazis realised they were going to
the trial of Klaus Barbie, a French official who served
lose the war, they had done everything possible to cover the
the Nazis-that is to say, a major war criminal who had
traces ofwhat they had done, that seemed to establish beyond
lived in hiding in South America for many years but
question or doubt that to remember was in and of itself a
had been delivered to the French authorities. Appalled
moral act. Judging and imprisoning and executing Nazi
by the suggestion that stirring up the past could only be
officials and camp guards, which, in any case, inevitably
destructive, Jankelevitch was saying as sternly as he could
was going to be incomplete, could not be enough in and
50
51
DAVID RIEFF
AGAI;>;ST REMEMBRA;>;CE
of itself. As Elie Wiesel put it, 'Justice without memory is
of laws criminalising the denial of the reality of the Shoah.
incomplete justice, false and unjust. [For to] forget would
A knock-on effect of this has been an expanded interpreta
be an absolute injustice in the same way that Auschwitz
tion of the original legislation passed in France in 1990---the
was the absolute crime. To forget would be the enemy's
so-called Loi Gayssot
final triumph'. For though justice at its best can establish
in 2005, of any public denial of the reality of the Armenian
fact, assign guilt and at times provide relatives of those
genocide. This was followed two years later by a proposal
who were murdered with some measure of relief, those are
in the European parliament to punish by a term of imprison
its limits. For Wiesel, in his melodramatic and somewhat
ment an expansive menu of 'denialism'. This includes
incoherent way, as for the nuanced Ricoeur, memory can
(the explanatory notes in brackets are mine): 'genocides'
confer a kind of afterlife to the dead by refusing to let them
(plural), 'war crimes of a racist character [sic] and crimes
be effaced from memory as they have been effaced from
against humanity', 'gross banalization' (that is, saying these
the world before their time. Thus, to remember is to deny
crimes are not especially important or special-as some
the perpetrators their ultimate victory; and the obligation
French lawyers defending Nazi war criminals had done) and
to remember-'always'.
even 'complicity in that banalization', no matter when these
What Nietzsche said about power and truth is usually understood as a cynical comment on the way the powerful
that eventually led to the prohibition,
-
crimes occurred and what political, administrative or judicial authority has determined them to be established as facts.
misrepresent the truth. But unless you believe that everything
Unsurprisingly, the consensus among professional
states do is invariably malign, there is no reason why this
historians has been to oppose such blanket prohibitions.
power cannot be turned to moral ends as well as immoral
Of course, they know better than anyone that states have
ones. In the case of the Shoah, some states, France above
often tried to cover up shameful episodes in their history;
all, have tried to enlist the law in the service of historical
it is the recourse to law that most consider mistaken. As
truth. What this has meant in practice has been the passage
Pierre Nora put it, when the Loi Gayssot was passed:
52
53
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
victims and orphans [of the victims] were before
Protestant minority, who, after schooling at an English public
our eyes, and the authors of these abominations
school and an English university had travelled extensively
very much alive. With [the passage of [the] Loi]
in Egypt, the USSR, the Balkans and central Europe in tbe
Taubira [which stated that the slave trade beginning
1930s;
in tbe fifteenth century had been a crime against
group in Vienna helping Jews escape Nazi Austria. In
humanity] we reached back five or six centuries,
he gave a public talk in Dublin about the Balkans, which
and with the Armenians to crimes in which France
was criticised in Ireland for not emphasising the persecution
played no role. What about the Vendee? . . . The
of Catholics by the victorious Tito dictatorship. Butler had
Albigensians, the Cathars, the Crusades?
insisted-unfortunately for him, the Papal Nuncio was in
for a time in
1 938-39,
he worked with a Quaker
1 952,
attendance-that a far greater crime had been the campaign
Loi Gayssot, we
of tbe Nazi-installed Croatian regime of Ante Pavelic to
are creating a system that can only constrain research and
convert the Serbs of Bosnia and Croatia to Catholicism and
paralyse teachers'. I share this view. But, in fairness, it is
to murder those who refused to renounce their faitb, and
anything but clear that it poses an assault on truth on any
tbe complicity of then Monsignor Stepinac, the Archbishop
thing like the same order as the tendency of governments
of Zagreb, in this genocidal war against the Serbs. Butler
to deny not only their own dirty secrets but also those o f
writes about tbis in an extraordinary essay he called 'The
other states, movements, or institutions with which they
Sub-Prefect Should Have Held His Tongue' .
Nora concluded that 'On the model of the
are in sympathy. When a government is committed to that
In the debate that ensued, Butler-who, as a writer was
course, the consequences for those who do try to bring
very much a localist and who, once he had returned to Ireland
what actually happened to light can be severe.
permanently, spent most of his very long life in the country
The case of the Irish essayist Hubert Butler is illumina
fastness of his native County Kilkenny-was excoriated
ting in this regard. He was a member of the Republic's
by the Irish clerical and political establishment. A book
54
55
DAVID RIEFF
AGAI?\ST REMEMBRANCE
defending Stepinac was published with a preface by the
was a gross falsification of history. Because of this, Butler
R.
S. Devane, a well-known
was adamant. 'If we agreed', he wrote, 'that history should
Irish Jesuit of the day of whom, early in his career, it was
be falsified in Croatia in the interests of Catholic piety,
said that he 'had been known to confiscate British publica
how could we protest when our own history was similarly
tions from unwilling newsagents in his native Limerick',
distorted?'
Archbishop of Dublin. Father
insisted that there had been no forcible conversions, while
In the early 1 950s, unlike in our own time, there still was
the Irish Minister ofAgriculture in the de Valera government
a difference between celebrity and notoriety, and Butler paid
advised a group of Irish law students to model themselves
dearly for his effort to set the historical record straight. As an
on figures like Stepinac, Pavelic and Cardinal Mindszenty of
Irishman, he understood better than most what the cost could
Hungary-figures, he said, who had 'so gallantly defended
be of tearing the scabs off historical wounds. Beyond that,
freedom of thought and conscience'. As Butler observed,
Butler was the subtlest of writers, and never confronted the
'Those who knew Yugoslavia were aghast, for Pavelic . . .
question head on. From what he did write, it seems evident
was the Yugoslav counterpart of Rimmler'.
that for Butler any decent politics had to be a politics of truth
From the onset of the controversy, Butler seems to have
in which even inconvenient, unwelcome or, to use a term
understood very well the risks he was running. But he felt he
much favoured by generations of engineers of the human
had no choice, especially because he was an Irish Protestant.
soul whether religious or secular, 'unhelpful' facts needed
The controversy simply fell too close to home. The sores of
to be aired. As he put it, 'If you suppress a fact because it
history, as Butler once called them, were too raw and, in the
is awkward, you will next be asked to contradict it'.
Ireland of the day, people thought in caricatures. But Butler
This is that most old-fashioned of things: a noble
was convinced that for all their mistakes and derelictions,
sentiment. But as Butler himself would certainly have
the demonisation of the Irish Protestant community in the
understood, the question of historical memory is more
de facto clerical state that was Eamon de Valera's Ireland
vexing, and the binary conceptions oftruth versus lie and the
56
57
DAVID RIEFF
concealed versus the revealed only get us so far. To repeat: what do we actually mean when we speak of historical memory? It cannot be what individuals remember. As any police investigator will tell you, the longer the period that elapses between a person being in an accident or being the victim or witness to a crime, the less accurate his or her testimony is likely to be. And the historical memory of an event, by which we usually mean the collective memory of people who did not themselves live through it but have had it passed down to them, whether through family stories or public education and ceremonial commemorations, is not just flawed but impossible. One simply cannot conjugate the verb to remember in the plural unless one is talking about those who lived through what they remember, for we do so as individuals not as collectivities. Thus, it is impossible to speak seriously of a people's collective memory in the same way that we speak of individual memory, just as it is absurd to speak of a people's collective guilt for, say, the Shoah or the Rwandan genocide in the same way that we speak of individual guilt for crimes committed during those horrors.
58
III Forgiveness and Forgetting
K
laus Barbie, Gestapo chief of Lyon between 1942 and 1 944 before working briefly for US counter intelligence and then fleeing to Arg entina thanks to the
help of one of Ante Pavelic's henchm an, was unquestion ably guilty. Even his sinister, charisma tic defence lawyer, Jacques Verges, never claimed otherwis e, arguing instead that the Nazis' crimes had been no worse than those com
mitted by European colonists. But by 202 5 at the very latest, and probably much sooner, no-o ne like Barbie will still be alive. At that point, the role of historical memory regard to the Nazi occupation in Fran ce, and more :; uncc>mJ'ortabl.y. as was shown by the trial of Maurice Papon, served both the Vichy and the Gaullist state (he was u]:'rete,ct of Police of Paris between 1 958 and 1 967 and 61
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMHIBRANCE
eventually Budget Minister between 1978 and 1 9 8 1 , during
be made of? Official remembrance almost always skates
Giscard d'Estaing's presidency), the considerable continuity
precariously on the edges of kitsch, and to observe that
between Vichy and both the Fourth and Fifth (postwar)
much remembrance of the Holocaust has not just been
republics will have a very different resonance from the one
employed to serve contemporary political agendas (this is
that rightly seemed so central to Vidal-Naquet and other
what critics usually mean when they speak of a Holocaust
like-minded historians and philosophers during the memory
'industry') but, even when largely innocent of such sub
wars over the Shoah. Collaboration, like the Holocaust
texts, has been smothered in kitsch as Milan Kundera
itself, will then have become what the German historian,
once defined it: all answers being 'given in advance and
Norbert Frei, not without regret, called 'in scholarly terms,
[precluding] any questions'. There is nothing wrong with
"plain" history'.
enjoining people to be moved. Where it becomes kitsch is
We are not quite there yet, if for no other reason than the best available psychological evidence suggests strongly
when people take the fact that they are moved as a reason to think better of themselves.
that what the trauma survivors suffer from is passed along
It is extremely unfortunate that one of the best examples
for two if not three subsequent generations. Nonetheless,
of this kind of kitsch is the best-known memorial to the
sooner or later a new set of difficulties will arise--ones to
Shoah outside the Yad Vashem Memorial Museum and
which the conventional response that to remember remains
Centre in Israel-the Holocaust Museum in Washington,
a moral obligation does not fully respond. We already have
D.
been confronted by the problem: no Turk who killed an
heartbreakingly far from kitsch as it is possible to get. But
Armenian is alive today, nor is any British official with
these exhibits are bracketed by two extraordinarily kitschy
responsibility for the Bengal famine of 1 943, let alone
pieces of set-dressing. As one enters and before one sees a
the Irish famine of 1 84 7. When the same can be said of
single image or artefact of either Nazi atrocity or Jewish
the Shoah, what then will, what then can its remembrance
martyrdom, one has to pass the serried battle flags of the
62
63
C. To be clear, much of what is in the museum is as
D�WID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
American army divisions that liberated the concentration
and redemption. Still, it seems to me that a Zionist would
camps (there are no British or Russian standards, even
not want to claim that Israel's moral legitimacy depends on
though a great many of the museum's exhibits concern
the Shoah, as the Holocaust Museum's final exhibit would
Bergen-Belsen, liberated by the British, and Auschwitz,
tend to suggest. If that were the case, then a Jewish state
which of course was liberated by the Soviets). As one leaves
could have been created anywhere. But at the heart of the
the last room of the museum, what one sees are images
Zionist claim (both secular and religious) is that the land
of David Ben-Gurion proclaiming the independence of
oflsrael with Jerusalem as its capital is not just the historic
the state of Israel, and what one passes is a column oftan
but the spiritual home of the Jewish people and that in all
sandstone that is identified as coming from Jerusalem.
their wanderings the Jews never relinquished what the
Presumably, this was meant to be uplifting, that is to say,
Israeli writer Yoram Kaniuk once called their mystical
to begin and end on a note that would somewhat palliate
deed to it. Presumably, a Zionist would say that collective
the pure horror of what the museum contains. The impulse
memory is what made the creation of the state of Israel
is understandable but it is both a historical and moral
possible and, given this, would be hard-pressed not to view
solecism. I am not a Zionist, which is not the same thing,
the phenomenon of collective memory with more gratitude
I suppose I must add, given the tenor of times, as saying
than scepticism. Yosef Yerushalmi went to the heart of
the state of Israel is illegitimate (in any case, I do not see
the matter when he wrote that 'Jewish historiography can
what saying such a thing accomplishes: the state exists and
never substitute for Jewish memory' .
will not be dissolved, and the very real crimes that accom
To say this is, of course, not to imply that Zionism i s only
panied its founding are in no way unique, let alone more
about historical continuity (real or imagined); historically,
atrocious than those that were the handmaiden of most
it is at least as about making a break with the Jewish past.
state formations). And it is true that there is a tradition
does not augur well for what the remembrance of Shoah will
within Jewish thought of linking dialectically destruction
become after it has fully passed into history for a museum
64
65
It
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST RE:\,1Ei\:1BRA.NCE
meant to commemorate it to begin with an ostentatious
same ways that the Nazis did, cover up what traces remain
display of American nationalism and end with a kitsch
when they realise that they will soon lose power.
theodicy.
There need not be a change of regime. The Barbie trial did not unveil anything about what the Nazis had done
But we are not there yet, and justice for the victims
during the Occupation that was not already widely known (though unfortunately it did reveal how resonant Verge s' defence was among certain sections of the tiers-mond isant
who remain alive and for their traumatised children and grandchildren more than vindicates the determination of a Hubert Butler or a Pierre Vidal-Naquet to make uncovering
Left in France). In contrast, the Papon trial had some thing of the same morally emancipatory effect that the truth and reconciliation process in South Africa and Latin America
the truth their priority, and let the chips fall where they may. One does not have to be a cultural relativist to believe that this cannot be the final word. A meticulous investigation
has had where it has been deployed. In post-Worl d War II France, it had taken the path-breaking books ofan Ame rican historian, Robert Paxton, to bring the mainstream rather
like the one the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission carried out is effective precisely because everyone concerned either committed a crime or was the
than renegade nature of the Vichy regime to the fore (if anything, it had been de Gaulle who had been the reneg ade figure and Petain the man of the traditional establishm ent)
victim of a crime (or the relative of a victim). Although catharsis for the victims is important, both personally and in the furtherance of the post-apartheid or post-junta peace
and, in terms of a wider audience, Marcel Ophii ls' docu mentary film The Sorrow and the Pity to break the con sensual silence about the extent and the enthu siasm of
settlements, such a commission's priority is the amassing of the facts necessary to establish an unimpeachable histo rical record. This is needed in large measure because dictatorships like apartheid South Africa or the Chile of Pinochet take such pains to commit their crimes in secret even while they are at the height of their power, and, in the
66
•
French collaboration with the Nazis (Hara Kazu o's The Emperor s Naked Army .Marches On had a some what . similar effect in Japan). On his entry into Paris in 1 944,
67
DAVID RIEFF
AGAI�ST REMPv1BRA�CE
General de Gaulle had pronounced the Vichy regime 'to
capacity for remembering but rather their capacity for
have been a non-event without consequence'. As head
eventually forgetting. I need to be very clear here: I am
of the provisional government and, later, during the Fifth
emphatically not arguing that this forgetting should take
Republic, he governed through a kind of inspired syllogism.
place in the immediate aftermath of a great crime or even
In effect, he said, 'Most of you did little to oppose Vichy
when its perpetrators are still at large. To the contrary,
and the German occupier. But I did resist and I incarnated
there I'm with Butler, Vidal-Naquet, Paxton and Ophtils.
France. Therefore, France resisted' .
Obviously there are times when relations between states
When Marcel Ophtils' film The Sorrow and the Pity
can be improved and much bitterness removed when a state
was released (it was only aired on French television in
that has committed a crime acknowledges its culpability.
1981, years after it had been made), French schoolchildren
For years, there was a bitter joke about Poland that asked:
were still being taught that the main current in German
'Who does a Pole kill first, a German or Russian?' To
occupied and in Vichy France had been the Resistance.
which the answer is: 'A German, of course; duty before
At first, the airing of the truth was greeted with consterna
pleasure'. The fact that the Putin government in Russia
tion, anger and denial at such divisive truths having been
acknowledged finally that the Katyn massacre of Polish
allowed to come to light. The Gaullist party called it
officers had taken place almost certainly means that, merci
unpatriotic. At the time, many French people agreed.
fully, in another generation that joke�so resonant for so
It is now clear that their fears were misplaced. But this
many generations�will make little or no sense to anyone
does not change the fact that historical memory is rarely
in Poland, Germany or Russia. (An awful sidebar to this
as hospitable to peace and reconciliation as it is to grudge
is that the plane crash that killed the Polish president and
keeping, duelling martyrologies and enduring enmity.
many senior Polish officials in 20 I 0 was in part due to
This is why a strong case can be made that what ensures
Kaczynski's eagerness to get to the joint memorial being
the health of societies and individuals alike is not their
held at the site of the crime.)
68
69
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBR.A.NCE
No-one who lives in the real world should ever under estimate the power of an apology or deny that memory
that is lasting. But again. empirically, this is highly debatable. My own view is that the deepest explanation can
can be its catalyst. In Halbwachs' work, there is at least the intimation that memory is inseparable from the hope
be derived from the fact that the human rights movement is first and foremost a movement grounded in law and that,
for progress. But, like it or not, there must come a time when the need to get to the truth should not be assumed
not just as idealists but as lawyers, they have uncritically
to trump all other considerations. Peace and justice do not fit together as easily as so many leading global human
'outranks' all other moral claims. The Dayton Peace Agreement that ended the Bosnian War is a good illustration
ri"hts activists have convinced themselves they do. Just as
of this. From the human rights perspective, Dayton was an
Kant thought that no right action could ever also have a
unjust peace that, in effect, let the principal architect of the
wrongful element, the human rights establishment simply will not seriously entertain the possibility that their calls
death ofYugoslavia, Slobodan Milosevic, off scot-free. But
"'
assimilated the Kantian view that the imperative ofjustice
for many of us who had seen the horror ofthe war first-hand,
for justice, an end to impunity and so on could have consequences that would have abidingly negative effects,
any peace, any end, no matter how unfair, to the seeming endless infliction of death, suffering and humiliation was
though they do concede in the short run there may well be negative as well as positive consequences of their justice
preferable to a continuation of the slaughter.
'agenda'. At first glance, this is incomprehensible. After all, human rights activists know better than most people
solecism often invest remembrance with the same moral
how terrible wars are, whatever their cause, and how urgent it is to bring them to an end; part of their rationale for insisting that justice and peace must proceed in tandem is their belief that without justice there can be no peace
70
Those who believe forgetting to be the ultimate moral authority. Yosef Yerushalmi asked whether it was 'possible the antonym of "forgetting" is not Hremembering," but ;ju.stic,e?' Even if he were right, this does little to invalidate empirical claim that, on the ground, peace and justice some occasions, at least, can be inimical to each other.
71
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
If this is right even some of the time, then surely those of
a measure of justice was indeed delivered when Judo-e
us who neither accept that the Kantian moral hierarchy
Garzon handed down his indictment. Will a Chilean lookino-
of the 'human rightsists' is self-evidently correct nor that
back on these events a hundred years from now really
the philosophical project-it goes back to Plato--of a
believe that the fact that justice had to wait almost a decade
rational reconstruction of ethical life is possible have the
was really such an intolerable price to pay for democracy?
"'
"'
right to ask whether what is conventionally asserted as
Here, it may be useful to invoke Pierre Nora's distinction
occupying the moral high ground is not in reality the height
between the imperatives of memory and the imperatives of
of political irresponsibility, that, if we are to issue fatwas
history. 'Memory is life', he writes, 'borne by living societies
on the subjects, it is those who insist on remembrance,
founded in its name. It remains in perpetual evolution, open
at almost at any cost, who are the nihilists rather than
to the dialectic of remembering and forgetting, unconscious
those who believe in the moral defensibility of an ethic of
of its successive deformations . . . insofar as it is affective
forgetting? Again, the least that can be said is that peace
and magical, [it] only accommodates those facts that suit
is always urgent. Without peace, the killing goes on and
it'. In contrast, history for Nora 'is the reconstruction,
on. Those who say that there can be no peace without
always problematic and incomplete, of what is no longer'.
justice are simply deluding themselves. History is replete
Their relationship, he argues, is dialectical: 'Memory instills
with examples of precisely that outcome. When General
remembrance within the sacred; history, always prosaic,
Pinochet stepped down in 1990, clearing the way for the
releases it again' .
country's return to democracy, no-one believed that justice
In addition to Nora's evocation of the sacred, one should
had been done. But the need for democracy was simply
add that collective memory also functions as an escape and
more pressing for more people (though not for the families
as an idyll, and, above all, as licence for nostalgia. Indeed,
of the dictatorship's victims) than the need for justice.
to remember the historical past is all but inevitably to sail
While it was anything but inevitable, eight years later
into that dangerous narrow channel in which one has to
72
73
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
DAVID RIEFF
navigate between the Scylla of nostalgia and the Charybdis
Czeslaw Milosz said that 'It is possible that there is no
of grievance, neither of which is 'historical' in any proper sense of the term. The Cuban-American writer Orlando
other memory but the memory of wounds' . If he is even partly right, then it should be obvious that embedding
Ricardo Menes has written that ' idyllic memories are a
those memories in the context of the sacred-to use Nora's
jeweled noose'. It took at least fifty years for the Cuban American diaspora to loosen its hold. That exile has gotten
language-is likely to lead to a veneration, not to say to the idolatry, of one's own individual and collective suffering
a bad press. It bears some blame for this but the deeper reason, I think, for why it has received such little sympathy
and of what one has lost, which is another way of saying
is because of the romantic illusions about the Cuban Revolution from which, to this day, the Left throughout
tive future. After all, how could the ordinariness of the present or the uncertainties about what is still to come
the world cannot quite free itself (think of the continued
possibly compete with memory in which the past is almost
obsession with Che Guevara, whose handsome image Jesus meets Jim Morrison-is emblazoned on T-shirts from
bound to appear perfumed and gilded? How can one ever
of one's past, at the expense of one's individual and collec
be at rest, free to get on with things, if one is carrying
Sydney to Paris, and Johannesburg to San Francisco). But its actions in exile are a textbook example of the way nostalgia
the Sisyphean burden of the wrongs one's people have
(and self-absorption, the other cardinal vice of the exiled
To be sure, this veneration of memory is not presented
and scorned) can serve as a prophylactic against political commonsense. About certain hardline Cuban Miamians it
as something limitless. You are thought, and rightly so, to be
used to be said that 'his watch stopped in 1 959'-the year Fidel Castro came to power. But it is not as if the Irish, the
country 's past (whether to glorifY or to vilifY it) or your own childhood (happy or unhappy). But this is more a matter of
Jews, the Armenians or the Tamils are any less trapped in
proportion than one of category. Serious psychologists may
their own particular versions of the same basic typology.
74
suffered?
a fanatic or an egomaniac if you obsess too much about your
( Allest:ion both the accuracy and helpfulness of the supposed
75
DAVID RIEFF
AGA!O:ST REMEMBRAO:CE
revelations of sexual abuse that have been the stock-in-trade
the memory of wounds. To understand everything may be
of the so-called 'recovered memory' movement, and there
to forgive everything, as the old French adage instructs, but
are not many people who witnessed what havoc the Serb
surely to remember everything would be to forgive nothing
nationalists' morbid obsession with the Battle of Kosovo
and be relieved of nothing. Of course, this can be true in
Polje of 1389 wreaked on the former Yugoslavia in the early
the lives of individuals as well. Imagine, for example, that
1990s who would have this version of memorial thinking
one remembered-vividly, accurately-the physical pain
as anything but destructive to everyone concerned, what
one has suffered. If that were really possible, how many
ever deep psychological needs it satisfied or political and
women would bear a second child? But it is in collective
social unity it succeeded in producing. The recognition that,
remembering that the difficulty of forgetting Milosz's
like anything else, historical remembrance can be taken too
'wounds' truly becomes daunting. We know the cost, too.
far rarely if ever leads to the suggestion that, on balance, it
Again, think of Ireland until very recently, where, as one
has been more of a destructive force than a healing one. The
Ulster poet put it, the country 'got martyrs when it needed
farthest even the most brilliant analysts of historical memory
men'. Might it not have been better for everyone in the six
are generally prepared to go is in calling for a 'good use' of
counties had those wrongs of past centuries-whether real
memory--{)ne that, in Tzvetan Todorov's phrase, 'serves a
and imagined, accurately or inaccurately described-instead
just cause, [and does not] content itself with reproducing the
disappeared from the collective memories of Irish men
past'. Following Ricoeur, Todorov insists that we must not
women? In short, why is memory, above all historical
fall into the 'trap of a duty of memory' but instead commit
memory, viewed as a blessing when, indisputably, precisely
ourselves to the 'work of memory', much as an individual
from an historical perspective, it has so often been a burden
does in the work of psychoanalysis.
it was not a curse?
But eloquent and serious as these arguments are, they
And yet, across the political spectrum, and not only in
fail to respond to Milosz's intuition about memory being
extreme case (possibly even, in philosophical terms,
76
77
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REME:YlBRANCE
the limiting case) of the Shoah, it is generally assumed
Examples like Tache's are more the exception than the
to be beyond dispute that this rallying of nations to their
rule, as the history of Quebec after the so-called Quiet
obligations to their collective memories is on balance a
Revolution of 1 960s amply demonstrates, when the mixture
good, even a necessary thing. There are examples of the
of opportunism and clerical conservatism that had marked
appeal to historical memory in the name not just of pride
the politics of the province during the long premiership of
but of reconciliation: 'Je me souviens' (I remember), the
Maurice Duplessis, which in many ways was as close as
official motto of Quebec, is a good example. It was
North America has come to a Francois! or Salazarist cor
the coinage of the architect Eugene-Etienne Tache, the
poratism, amply demonstrates. It followed the more usual
son of a former prime minister of United Canada and one
pattern in which the invocation of historical memory serves
of the architects of Canada's Confederation of 1 867, which
to accentuate differences rather than bridge them. In the case
is to say of its birth as a modem nation. Tache had been
of Quebec, the irony is that Quebecois nationalism in the
commissioned to design the province's new parliament
I960s emphasised Quebec's distinctness while breaking with
building, and he appears to have thought up completely on
Quebec's actual past. Where Quebec had traditionally been
his own the adding of Je me souviens to the coat of arms
politically conservative, the new nationalist intellectuals
granted to Quebec by the British Crown in 1 868, in the
identified themselves with the Left; where Quebec had been
Confederation's immediate aftermath. Although some mid
religious, they were non-believers. In other words, the claim
twentieth-century Quebec nationalists would claim Tache
that Quebec had always been a distinct society, and should
had had a separatist meaning in mind, there is no convincing
be an independent country, coexisted with the repudiation
evidence of this, unlike, say, the watchword notre maitre le
of everything, apart from language itself, obviously, that
passe (our master the past), the frankly separatist rallying
historically had made French Canada unique.
cry coined in 1936 by Father Lionel Groulx, one the founders of modem Quebecois nationalism.
78
Whether differences are accentuated or even invented out of whole cloth, the question ofhistorical accuracy rarely
79
DA\'ID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
seems nearly as important as the solidarity remembrance
well be highly dangerous politically when nations or peoples
engenders. This is politics as radical subjectivity, belonging
act on their collective traumas (nations, after all, are not
more to the mystical than any actual world of facts. But how
treated; to extend the psychotherapeutic metaphor, they self
could mere facts compete with something so psychically
medicate). Part of the reason for this, I think, is that while
annealing? It is a psychological truism that remembering
individuals' memories are often distorted (and, in extreme
when done properly and seriously in a therapeutic context
cases, partly invented or even false), they are real in the sense
(Freud's
can heal individuals, and, unfor
that they derive from actual lived experience. In contrast, his
tunately, this has led to the psychological pop-culture
torical memory is constructed-it is a political and cultural
commonplace that to be able to remember a traumatic
invention or at least re-creation---once the generation that
experience is the necessary first step in coming to terms
experienced the event being remembered has left us. To use
with it. A shrewder and humanly far more sophisticated
two storied examples, Irish men and women today do not
version of this is to argue, as the American psychiatrist
'remember' the Great Famine of
Janet Baird has done, that both individuals' traumatic
'remember' Jerusalem. Obviously, this does not mean that
memories and the historical memories of groups 'retain the
contemporary Irish people have no right to be angry about
quality of "now", rather than receding into the subjective
what happened during the famine or that Jews do not have
past'. Baird added that, where historical memory is con
the right to believe Jerusalem to be their spiritual home.
durcharbeiten)
1 847
any more than Jews
cerned, social stress seems to awaken and activate 'the
Self-evidently, beliefs are not memories. Even Tzvetan
historical memory in a way that the actors back then
Todorov, who, even while warning against the dangers
become resurrected in the "now"'.
of sacralisation on the one hand and banalisation on the
The problem here is that while what Baird says is
other, has made the most eloquent case for the moral and
undoubtedly true clinically, what may be constructive for
political value of engaging in historical remembrance, has
a therapist treating a patient's individual trauma may very
conceded that, to be valuable, this hard work must lead to
80
81
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRA.l'\CE
'a (generalisable] principal of justice, a political ideal, or a
prisoners in the Long Kesh prison in 1981 (he was the IRA's
moral rule (that must be] legitimate in and of themselves and
officer commanding). 'They won't break me', he wrote,
not because they derive from a memory that is dear to us'.
'because the desire for freedom, and the freedom of the
On what basis other than hope itself should we think
Irish people, is in my heart. The day will dawn when all
this is where such remembrance likely will lead? Since
the people of Ireland will have the desire for freedom to
collective memory historically has been extraordinarily
show. It is then that we will see the rising of the moon'.
toxic in many parts of the world, why take the risk, no matter
In Sands' diaries, there are also echoes of The King's
how desirable the emancipatory aim? It is not as if we do
Threshold, Yeats' play about a hunger strike in the mythical
not understand very well what these risks are. The Irish
past. It is also of a piece with the belief of Padraig Pearse,
writer and politician Conor Cruise O'Brien once observed
the schoolmaster who was the chief strategist of the Easter
during a particularly dark period of the conflict in Northern
Rising (there is a good book to be written about the
Ireland that there had been times when, just as it seemed
attraction of romantic nationalism for schoolteachers) that
that Republicans and Unionists might be close to coming to
even if the revolt failed, it would be a 'blood sacrifice'
terms, people on one side or another would remember one
that would stir the Irish people to finally win their
of the great militant songs of martyrdom-'The Rising of
independence. In fairness, Sands is a profoundly contro
the Moon' or 'The Sash My Father Wore'-and any such
versial figure in Ireland. Seamus Heaney, a great writer in
hope would quickly evaporate. Cruise O'Brien was given
a country where the bar for great writing has always been
to embellishment but in the instance not by all that much.
set higher than in almost any other country, wrote that in
'The rising of the moon' were the last words of the prison
1 98 1 , ' I was highly aware of the propaganda aspect of the
diary kept by the Provisional IRA militant Bobby Sands,
hunger strike and cautious about being enlisted. There was
before he starved himself to death on the sixty-sixth day of
realpolitik at work; but, at the same time, you knew you
the hunger strike he had organised among the Republican
were witnessing something like a sacred drama'.
82
83
D/\.VID RlEFF
AGAINST REMEMBR.A.l'\CE
As Heaney knows better than anyone, sacred drama is
history, and not a particularly long one at that. I want to
the antithesis of any decent politics. In the sacred, there
emphasise again that we are not talking about folklore
is no compromise. But politics without compromise is
here or the enshrined customs of peasant societies, which
invariably totalitarian. Yeats might write in his poem
are often confused with collective memory. Nor are we
'September 1 9 1 3', 'Romantic Ireland's dead and gone; it's
talking about religious memory, whose extra-historical
with O'Leary in the grave' but, in reality, Romantic Ireland
dimension gives it a very different character (though,
survived the Fenian John O'Leary, financial officer of
again, the Jews, those champions of memory-usually to
the Irish Republican Brotherhood and editor of The Irish
their sorrow-may be a special case). Collective memory
People, as it would survive Pearse, and Sands too. It was
is a modern notion; it arises with the nation-state, and is
the deed of another Easter Sunday-the peace agreement
almost invariably political, whether the politics in ques
in 1 998 that ended the Troubles in Northern Ireland-that
tion are meant to deepen support for the established order
finally put Romantic Ireland in its grave. That Ireland had
(Hobsbawm and Ranger's invented traditions) or an inde
lived and battled in poetry, whereas, whatever else has
pendence movement (the Ireland of the Rising) to the
gone wrong in Ireland in the twenty-first century, peace
'recovered' memory of the (supposedly suppressed) role
in the north and the loss of credibility of the IRA in the
sexual, religious and ethnic minorities have played in the
Irish Republic have been a demonstration of the wise
powerful Western countries in which immigration has been
observation that a decent government governs in prose (the
so transformative.
words are those of a former governor of New York State,
Would we live in a better world if, instead of believing
Mario Cuomo). To believe the contrary is pathological-a
so strongly in historical remembering as moral imperative,
pathology that is anything but unique to Ireland.
we would instead choose to forget? Politically, it is hard
In any case, the problem goes deeper than that.
to imagine that we would wind up worse off. The contrast
The idea of collective memory has its own particular
is stark. Again, the essence of democratic politics is
84
85
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
compromise (the prose bit, you might say}-that most
United States has increasingly become an arena for
effective of prophylactics against fanaticism. As John
competing or, at the very least, synchronous martyrologies.
Kenneth Galbraith admonished, and as anyone with any
This again raises the question of the numerous memorials
direct experience of practical politics knows to be true,
built in the last several decades in the United States to
'Nothing is so admirable in politics as a short memory'.
various people's national tragedies-most commonly
But poetry, which also happens to be the language of myth
to the Shoah and to the Irish famine. My neighbourhood
in its most heightened form, facilitates long memories,
in lower Manhattan in New York City is exceptional in
sometimes to the point where distant past and recent
that the Irish Hunger Memorial and the Living Memorial
politics seem to fuse, as in the statue of the Irish hero
to the Holocaust are less than a kilometre from each
Cu Cuchulainn that stands by the General Post Office in
other, but monuments and museums commemorating
Dublin as a tribute not to ancient Ireland but to mark the
both catastrophes are familiar sights in many US cities
Easter Rising of 1 9 1 6 of which the General Post Office was
nowadays.
the epicentre. Was this why Samuel Beckett, in Murphy,
In the specific context of the contemporary United
had Neary say that he wanted to 'engage with the arse of
States, what is most remarkable about this is that the most
the statue of Cuchulainn, the ancient Irish hero, patron
mourned events are those for which the country bears no
saint of pure ignorance and crass violence', by banging his
responsibility. This is entirely different from the Australian
head against it?
Government officially apologising for its treatment of
The commonplace condemnation of contemporary
the Stolen Generations (something, which when viewed
life-which is that because of a surfeit of technological
from the other side of the Pacific, that is obviously not
stimulation we have shorter and shorter attention spans
a subjective historical memory but rather an objective
does not appear to have done anything to shorten our
historical fact), or similar actions by the government of
collective memories of grievance. To the contrary, the
Canada. It is probably a particular American political
86
87
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
dynamic that Americans cannot also offer official contrition
catastrophe of a people, never to be experienced again
for the enocide the settlers committed or to African-
by that people, in a place that the ancestors of that people
Americans for the crime that was slavery. But why it is
fled to in the wake of that catastrophe. To the extent that
impossible in the United States of the early twenty-first
it reflects the steadily deepening obsession with roots
century to at least erect a museum in Washington, which
surely, one of the more melancholy epiphenomena of an
would be as devastating in its portrayal of the Middle
age where in fact global cultural homogenisation means
Passae as the Holocaust Museum has been designed to be
that there are fewer and genuine cultural differences
about the Shoah, is a mystery to me. Even leaving this to
between peoples, at least as compared to a century ago-
one side, it is difficult to understand what the existence of
then it is probably inescapable. But unless unavoidable has
these monuments is supposed to further. I am well aware
become a synonym for admirable, let the buyer beware.
that this is supposed to be self-evident. In 20 l 0, I am no
In the case of Holocaust memorials, the moral impe ra tive is derived from the idea that reminding people of the murder of European Jewry will help them preve nt or
"'
C>
longer convinced that it is. Until fairly recently-probably until the peace agree ments that ended the Troubles in Northern Ireland-there would have been an anti-British, Irish nationalist subtext to a memorial to the Great Famine, but this is no longer the case. The justification cannot be preventative, since no-one seriously believes there will be another famine in Ireland; indeed, famine, the incidence of which has
resist the evils of our own time. However well intended there is no real basis for such a claim; instead, it repre sents a reversion, albeit one undertaken, I repeat, since these
'
matters are delicate (as they absolutely should be), out of the best of intentions, to mystical and even to myth ological thinking. There is no historical basis for concludin g any
great historical curse that humanity may very well be
thing of the sort. I am of course well aware that there is (an admittedly minoritarian) tradition within Jewish thought
conquering. So we an" being invited to remember the
in the aftermath of Auschwitz of viewing the Shoah as
88
89
declined dramatically in the past half-century, is the one
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBRANCE
an event outside history. About that, I have no right to an
ment, as if Barack Obama were Neville Chamberlain and
opinion. But assuming that this is wrong, as the majority
Ahmadinejad were Hitler. In this context, where one stands
of contemporary Jewish thinkers have believed, surely the
on the question of a nuclear-anned Iran is irrelevant. The
value of understanding the Shoah as a historical event does
best one can say is that this is a metaphoric statement, not a
not principally reside in the lessons derived from such study
historical one. For an event taking place in
allowing us to better confront the evils of our own time. To
and one occurring in
put the matter starkly, the phrase 'never again' is a noble
comparable. That so few people accept this is not the least
sentiment but it is also a wholly unrealistic one. Unless one
ofthe muddleheadedness of so much contemporary thinking
subscribes to one of the cruder forms ofprogress narratives,
about memory and history.
2010
1 938
in Prague
are incommensurable rather than
whether religious or secular, no increase in the amount of
The fact that we do not remember these events in their
remembering will do any good. To imagine otherwise is to
specificity somehow does not make us any less convinced
leach both the past and the present of their specific gravity.
that we know everything worth knowing about them. In
For Santayana was wrong. The past never repeats itself, at
this we are quite mistaken. Despite what contemporary
least not in the way he meant. Auschwitz does not inoculate
Americans too often seem to imagine, there is no necessary
us against East Pakistan, East Pakistan against Cambodia,
connection to how we feel about the past-the essence of
Cambodia against Rwanda. To believe otherwise is pure
collective memory, constructed or otherwise-and what
sentimental wishful thinking; more to the point it is not just
can be known about it. Locke said reason was a poor light
ahistorical, it is anti-historical. Of course, politicians and
but all we had. The romance that is historical memory is
pundits love to make analogies between the past and our own
at best the candle we light in honour of the dead and, at
time. For example, those who believe the Iranian nuclear
its worst, a kind of cognitive equivalent of an astrophysical
program poses an existential danger to the United States
black hole-a region from which no historical reason and
often compare the failure to confront Tehran as appease-
no political sobriety can escape.
90
91
IV Amor Fati
93
yperthymesia is a rare medical condition that has
H
been defined as 'unusual autobiographical remem
bering' . The journal
Neurocase
identifies its two main
characteristics as being that a person spends 'an abnormally large amount of time thinking about his or her personal past', and when the person 'has an extraordinary capacity to recall specific events from their personal past'. Hyperthymesia is thought of as being similar to a case documented by the great Russian neurologist Aleksandr R. Luria in his book
The Mind of the Mnemonist,
of a man who could forget
only by an act of will. Luria described this as an inability to engage in what is sometimes called 'ordinary forgetting'. The contemporary elevation of remembrance, that is, of collective historical memory to the status of moral
95
DAVID RIEFF
AGAINST REMEMBR.-\.NCE
European Union, obligation-and in many countries of the
But remembrance is about self-love, and self-recognition,
one as well-too at least in the case of the Shoah, a legal
or it is about nothing.
hyperthymesia writ often appears like nothing so much as
'What is the Ninth Symphony ', Karl Kraus asked,
d by state-builders large. At least remembrance as understoo
'compared to a pop tune played by a hurdy-gurdy and a
of what, from a like Renan intentionally omitted much
memory? ' That is remembrance in a nutsh ell. At best, it is a
remembered. With historical point of view, was there to be
consolation, an ego boost, while at its worst (and it is often
rightly called the the explosion of what Pierre Nora has
at its worst), it is a wallowing, whether in past triumphs or
rd remembrance memory industry, this passion for towa
past injuries. In contrast, history is hard , and the better the
like a cognitive has become so broad as to begin to seem
history, the more demanding and outw ard-looking rather
cs, with
than inward-looking it is. Never mind the Ninth Symphony:
rsed with time. Yet the search for memories ever more dispe
think Berg. Instantly gratifYing (even if the form this grati
lchildren in virtually all of this occurs at a time when schoo
fication takes is anger or bitterness), the overvaluing of
t contemporary every rich country know less and less abou
memory and the undervaluing of histo ry is a perfect fit with
ry. There is nothing politics and virtually nothing about histo
the spirit of an age that is dominated by instant gratification.
city for retaining wrong with their brains, as their capa
Add the culture ofcomplaint and self-abso rption that is better
uter technology sporting statistics and their mastery of comp
thought of as the society of the spectacle (in Guy Debord's
le often say tq should make clear, but what young peop
sense of 'all that was once directly lived has become mere
to their lives. What pollsters is that the past seems irrelevant
representation') in multicultural drag rather than any even
at all in any prc>per· "i little history they do know is not history
P1Dtei1ti