4 credits course Lecturer: Vlad Naumescu
E-mail: Class: Monday 1.30- 5.10 Office hours: Tuesday and by appointment

Course description This course explores the growing field of memory studies, the roots of our interest in memory and the role it plays in contemporary society. Memory is multivalent and omnipresent, part of the politics of regret that marks our political culture, the commemorative drive of the last century and the ubiquitous nostalgia for the past. The overwhelming presence of memory in public discourse and science has altered significantly the way we remember, forget or imagine our past. But this obsession with memory has also led some to question its conceptual relevance in social sciences. The course proposes thus a critical appraisal of memory studies based on the premise that the study of memory provides an excellent opportunity for engaging in a genuine interdisciplinary endeavor. It starts by defining the field of research at the intersection of history, anthropology, sociology and psychology and examines the emergence of ‘memory’ as an object of study within these disciplines, focusing on the interplay between individual and collective memory. In the second part it presents a series of case studies that expose the processes through which individual memories are shaped by larger collectivities, the cultural construction of trauma and the ways in which symbols, practices, spaces and objects become means to articulate and legitimate personal biographies, collective identities and memory projects. Learning outcomes Upon completion of the course students should: a) gain knowledge of various theoretical and empirical approaches to memory in historical and social sciences b) develop an interdisciplinary approach to memory by bringing together the conceptual and methodological tools of the respective disciplines in concrete case studies c) assess and refine their working definition of memory, becoming aware of the advantages and limitations of current approaches d) be able to develop adequate methodologies for approaching ‘memory’ in their empirical research e) learn to formulate research questions and articulate an empirically-based argument in writing. Course Requirements This course is based on weekly lectures and seminars that rely heavily on students’ contributions and discussions of the assigned readings and films screened in class. Additional readings related to the films will be provided during the course. Students have to prepare class presentations based on the readings and their own examples, and they should be actively involved in every class. They are encouraged to work on case

studies related to their own research or be ready to engage with a specific topic from the field of memory studies for the final paper. Jeffrey K. Lambek. Cambridge University Press 1989. Olick. Pp. J. Wertsch. In: How Societies Remember. Week 2. States of Memory. Vered Vinitzky-Seroussi and Daniel Levy. New York: Cambridge University Press. The final grade is based on class participation (10%). 37-51. 2000. Olick. Social Memory. Wood. The Collective Memory Reader. The Heritage of sociology. Connerton. 2010. Radstone. Halbwachs. and Bill Schwartz. London: University of Chicago Press. ed. Chicago . "Collective memory: The Two Cultures. Debates. 2009. D. J. 238-251. 2003. Blight. New York . W. On the Emergence of Memory in Historical Discourse. Legacies of Trauma in Postwar Europe. London. Paul. student presentations (30%) and a research paper (60%). pp. K. 2003. Connerton. How societies remember. N. P. On Collective Memory. and M. Maidenhead Philadelphia: Open University Press. Durham. Routledge. 1992. M. Lee. London: Duke University Press. 1989. Conflicts and Transformations in National Retrospection. Edited by P. Memory and History 2 ." Sociological Theory 17(3): 333-348. Week 1. Theorizing Society. Cambridge. V. Theories. Boyer and J. History & Culture. Tense past: cultural essays in trauma and memory. 1996. 1992. P. 2011. Theories of Social Remembering. 1999. Representations 69: 127-150. Oxford University Press. The Memory Boom: Why and Why Now? in Memory in Mind and Culture. The Emergence of Memory Studies Klein. New York: Berg. Pp. A. Vectors of Memory. B. and A. Week 3. Oxford.. Olick. On collective memory. 1989. 1999. Continuities. New York: Fordham University Press. Recommended readings and readers (available in the library) Antze. S. Maurice. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. Misztal. Politics. Memory: Histories. 6-40. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. From Collective to Social Memory Halbwachs. Coser Lewis.

Week 4. Stanford. Oxford. 1-26. Pp.C. Olick. Shaw. In Memory. Confino. In Solovyovo: the story of memory in a Russian village. Butler.Nora. 2003. Edited by T. Olick. Edited by Fara. Assmann. pp. P. 97-113. American Historical Review. pp. pp. Berliner. Culture and the Mind. K. 1999. J. What Does It Mean to Normalize the Past? Official Memory in German Politics since 1989. K. D. Alon. 2006. Wolf 2002.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press. New York: Berg. New York: Berghahn Books. “The abuses of memory: Reflections on the memory boom in anthropology. Public Memory and Postconventional Identity. 1998. 187-203. Memory Frictions: Localizing the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Sierra Leone .: Stanford University Press. Collective Memory and Cultural History: Problems of Method. Patterson. 1-25. Representations 26 : 7-24. 259-288. Dec 1997. Conflicts and Transformations in National Retrospection. 1997. Pina-Cabral. Politics. Edited by F. Memory as Cultural Transmission Goody. London: Duke University Press. The International Journal of Transitional Justice 1: 183-207. AHR Forum. History. Elders' Cathedrals and Children's Marbles: Dynamics of Religious Transmission among the Baga of Guinea. Washington. Continuities. Pine and J. Cultural memory in the present. In States of Memory. P. 73-94. Vol. J. What is Cultural Memory? In Religion and cultural memory: ten studies. Paxon. Burke. Finding Meaning in Memory: A methodological critique of collective memory studies. Durham. M. History as Social Memory. 3 . R. The Critics of Memory: Theoretical & Methodological Challenges Kansteiner.” Anthropological Quarterly 78(1): 183-197. J. d. Week 6. Week 5. In Vectors of Memory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. New York: Basil Blackwell. In Memory. The Politics of Memory: Paradigms Wood. and K. N. Calif. 1989. 2008. Pp 39-59 Oxford. pp. 1989 Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire. David 2004. Edited by J. Sarro. History and Theory 41: 179-197. Pierre. Memory in Oral Tradition. 2007. in On the margins of religion. Memory’s Topography. Pp. History & Culture. Rosalind. 2005. 102(5): 1386-1403. Legacies of Trauma in Postwar Europe.

pp. 1996. Autobiographical Memory: from Individual to Social Remembrance Bloch.S. 1-26. Lambek. Kirmayer. 25-39. Time. The Media of Memory Strathern. 2004. Cappelletto. L. pp. Antze and M. 2010.Week 7. and Culture. 1996. 400-413. and action. pp. memory politics. Habit or Habitus? Theories of Memory. A. The Ethics of Remembrance Kwon. Culture and Psychology 8(l): 130-145. pp 114-127. 2002. 1996. Burchianti. Memory sciences. 151-171. Ann Arbor. and Change. Edited by M. Narrative. 1998. the Body. F. History & Anthropology 15:133-150. In Tense past: cultural essays in trauma and memory. Week 9. Oxford. pp. JRAI (N. 2006 Memory and Commemoration: The Case of Jedwabne. Spring/Summer 2006. In History and Memory. Cultural memory in the present. J. language. Tschunggnall. Michael. Illness. Pp. In Body Thoughts. 2007. Ian. Calif. S. Colorado. 1996. Long-term memory of extreme events: from autobiography to history. 67-88. New York and London: Routledge. Westview Press. Rewriting Memories: Family Recollections of the National Socialist Past in Germany. pp. Kenny. New York: Fordham University Press. An Anthropological Approach to Traumatic Memory. Stanford. Building Bridges of Memory: The Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo and the Cultural Politics of Maternal Memories. In Tense Past. and Wolentarska-Ochman. Week 10. In Tense Past. Landscapes of Memory: Trauma.) 9:241-260. memory. v. Autobiographical Memory and the Historical Memory of the More Distant Past. 173-198. 2003. P. M. 4 . In How we think they think: anthropological approaches to cognition. Week 8. Boulder. Trauma and its Critics Hacking. Trauma. M. and Harald Welzer. Karoline. Lambek.: Stanford University Press. Ed. in Ordinary ethics: anthropology. and Dissociation. The Ghosts of War and the Ethics of Memory. Dijck. Mediated memories in the digital age. The University of Michigan Press. Kapralski. Volume 18 (1). H. and literacy.

edu/~mh2349/papers/generation. Carol. Nostalgia and Its Discontents. 1990.Radley. Alan.2CBoym. 1-18.pdf Boyer. Ostalgie and the Politics of the Future in Eastern Germany. The Memory of Loss (and the Loss of Memory) Hirsch. Adrian. Toward an Ethnography of Silence: The Lived Presence of the Past in the Everyday Life of Holocaust Trauma Survivors and Their Descendants in Israel. Artifacts.columbia. Dominic. 2006. Forty. M. 1999. Pp. Oxford/New York: Berg. Current Anthropology 50(1): 5-27.iasc-culture. Week 12. Public Culture 18:361-381. 2009. In: David Middelton and Derek Edwards (eds). The Hedgehog Review 7-18. Memory and a Sense of the Past. Introduction. London/New Bury/New Delhi: Sage. Poetics Today 29(1): 103-128. In: Forty. Adrian and Susanne Küchler (eds).org/eNews/2007_10/9.pdf Kidron. Collective Remembering. The Art of Forgetting. 2007. Svetlana. The Generation of Postmemory. Permanent link: www. Nostalgia Boym. Week 11. Pp. Permanent link: www. 46-59. 5 . 2008.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.