This article discusses the narrative construction of various philosophical reflections on cultural memory in Julian Barnes’s novel Elisabeth Finch. It addresses the dichotomy between recollection and oblivion, presenting a memory process as a the “problem of forgotten evidence”, thoroughly discussed in today’s Cultural and Memory Studies. While contemporary scholars and philosophers aim at reflecting on the role of memory in metaphysics and epistemology, mainly relating the process of recollection either to personal identity, or the experience of time, space and epistemic rationale, the dimension of collective memory, and its foregrounding role in everyone’s self-perceptiveness, receives a considerably reduced critical attention. The literary analysis of Elizabeth Finch seeks to problematize this divisive understanding of functions of memory, proposing instead to consider the semantic complementarity of various processes of recollection/forgetting, connecting the narrative representation of events that one has personally experienced and the officially stated collective renderings of factual memory. It resists considering personal remembering and collective forgetting as ostensibly competing rationales, proposing to delve deeper into a tightly crafted relationship between the perception of one’s identity in time and epistemological framework of collective experience mostly focused on the officially stated dimension of memory. Revisiting discourses on religion associated with the narrative construction of borderlands in Julian Barnes’s Elizabeth Finch, this article contributes to reconsider collective memory and counter-memory not as mutually exclusive, but as synthetized and put into productive motion narrative dimensions. The intertextual articulation of discourses on religion fosters new theoretical perspectives for rethinking counter-memory not only as a mode of recovering silenced and contested versions of the European history, but also as a means of providing multidimensional and transcultural interpretation of the collective past. Perceived as a form of discursive resistance to any kind of political and social dominance, the narrative construction of “forgotten evidence” elucidates the complex post-dialectical relationship between official collective memory and marginalized counter-memory.
Published in |
English Language, Literature & Culture (Volume 9, Issue 4)
This article belongs to the Special Issue Memory and Counter-memory in Postmodern British Fiction |
DOI | 10.11648/j.ellc.20240904.12 |
Page(s) | 108-117 |
Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Elizabeth Finch, Discourses on Religion, Collective Memory and Forgetting, Counter-Memory, ‘Forgotten Evidence’
[1] | Andersen, Tea and Tornquist-Plewa, Barbara. The Twentieth Century in European Memory. Transcultural Mediation and Reception. Brill, 2017. |
[2] | Assmann, Aleida. Cultural Memory and Western Civilization. Arts of Memory. Cambridge University Press, 2013. |
[3] | Barnes, Julian. A History of the World in 10 ½ Chapters. London: Vintage International, 1989. |
[4] | Barnes, Julian. Elizabeth Finch. London: Vintage, 2022. |
[5] | Barnes, Julian. Flaubert’s Parrot. London: Vintage, 1984. |
[6] | Barnes, Julian. Nothing to Be Frightened Of. London: Vintage, 2022. |
[7] | Bernecker, Sven. Memory: A Philosophical Study. Oxford University Press, 2009. |
[8] | Bassnett, Susan. “Reflections on Comparative Literature in the Twenty-First Century”. Comparative Critical Studies, Volume 3, Issue 1-2, pp. 3-11. Published by Edinburgh University Press. |
[9] | Bond, Lucy, Craps, Stefed. Memory Unbound: Tracing the Dynamics of Memory Studies. Edited by Lucy Bond, Stef Craps and Pieter Vermeulen. Berghahn Books, 2016. |
[10] | Centre for Philosophy of Memory (phil-mem.org). University Grenoble Alpes. Available from: Centre for Philosophy of Memory (phil-mem.org). Accessed 18.03.2024. |
[11] | Erll, Astrid. “The Hidden Power of Implicit Collective Memory”. Memory, Mind and Media. Cambridge University Press, 2022. |
[12] | Erll, Astrid. Memory in Culture, Trans. Sara B. Young, Palgrave Macmillan (Palgrave Macmillan Memory Studies), 2011. |
[13] | Fairclough, Norman. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. The Critical Study of Language. London: Routledge, 2013. |
[14] | Foucault, M. Language, counter-memory, practice. Cornell University Press, 1977. |
[15] | Haugaard, Mark. “Foucault and Power: A Critique and Retheorization”. A Journal of Politics and Society, Taylor and Francis. 2022, Volume 34, Issues 3-4: New Perspectives on Foucault. 341-371. |
[16] | Jorgensen, Marianne and Philips, Louise. Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. London: Sage Publications, 2002. |
[17] | Lachmann, Renate. Memory and Literature. Intertextuality in Russian Modernism. Translated by Roy Sellars and Anthony Wall. Minneapolis/London: University of Minnesota Press, 1997. |
[18] | Land, John. “Synthesizing collective memory and counter-memory in urban space”. Journal of Urban Geography, Taylor & Francis. 2023, Volume 44, Issue 5. 1011-1019. |
[19] | Locke, Don. Memory. London: Macmillan, 1971. |
[20] | Milevski, Urania and Wetenkamp, Lena. Relations between Literary Theory and Memory Studies. Journal of Literary Theory. 2022, Volume 16(2). pp. 197-212. |
[21] | Neumann, Birgit. The Literary Representations of Memory. A Companion to Cultural Memory Studies. Ed. Astrid Erll and Ansgar Nunning. De Gruyter, 2010. 333-344. |
[22] | Rothberg, Michael. Multidirectional Memory: Remembering the Holocaust in the Age of Decolonization. Stanford University Press, 2009. |
[23] | Tello, Verónica. “Counter-memory and and–and: Aesthetics and temporalities for living together”. Journal of Memory Studies. 2019, Volume 15, Issue 2. 390-401. Accessed 18.03.2024. |
[24] | The Times, Elizabeth Finch by Julian Barnes review — an old-fashioned novel full of big ideas to chew on (thetimes.co.uk). Accessed April 13, 2024. |
[25] | The Yasnaya Polyana Book Award Winners. 2021. yppremia.ru. Accessed 18.03.2024. |
APA Style
Bollinger, E. (2024). “The Shifting Light of History”: Addressing Philosophy of Memory in Julian Barnes’s Elizabeth Finch. English Language, Literature & Culture, 9(4), 108-117. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ellc.20240904.12
ACS Style
Bollinger, E. “The Shifting Light of History”: Addressing Philosophy of Memory in Julian Barnes’s Elizabeth Finch. Engl. Lang. Lit. Cult. 2024, 9(4), 108-117. doi: 10.11648/j.ellc.20240904.12
AMA Style
Bollinger E. “The Shifting Light of History”: Addressing Philosophy of Memory in Julian Barnes’s Elizabeth Finch. Engl Lang Lit Cult. 2024;9(4):108-117. doi: 10.11648/j.ellc.20240904.12
@article{10.11648/j.ellc.20240904.12, author = {Elena Bollinger}, title = {“The Shifting Light of History”: Addressing Philosophy of Memory in Julian Barnes’s Elizabeth Finch }, journal = {English Language, Literature & Culture}, volume = {9}, number = {4}, pages = {108-117}, doi = {10.11648/j.ellc.20240904.12}, url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ellc.20240904.12}, eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ellc.20240904.12}, abstract = {This article discusses the narrative construction of various philosophical reflections on cultural memory in Julian Barnes’s novel Elisabeth Finch. It addresses the dichotomy between recollection and oblivion, presenting a memory process as a the “problem of forgotten evidence”, thoroughly discussed in today’s Cultural and Memory Studies. While contemporary scholars and philosophers aim at reflecting on the role of memory in metaphysics and epistemology, mainly relating the process of recollection either to personal identity, or the experience of time, space and epistemic rationale, the dimension of collective memory, and its foregrounding role in everyone’s self-perceptiveness, receives a considerably reduced critical attention. The literary analysis of Elizabeth Finch seeks to problematize this divisive understanding of functions of memory, proposing instead to consider the semantic complementarity of various processes of recollection/forgetting, connecting the narrative representation of events that one has personally experienced and the officially stated collective renderings of factual memory. It resists considering personal remembering and collective forgetting as ostensibly competing rationales, proposing to delve deeper into a tightly crafted relationship between the perception of one’s identity in time and epistemological framework of collective experience mostly focused on the officially stated dimension of memory. Revisiting discourses on religion associated with the narrative construction of borderlands in Julian Barnes’s Elizabeth Finch, this article contributes to reconsider collective memory and counter-memory not as mutually exclusive, but as synthetized and put into productive motion narrative dimensions. The intertextual articulation of discourses on religion fosters new theoretical perspectives for rethinking counter-memory not only as a mode of recovering silenced and contested versions of the European history, but also as a means of providing multidimensional and transcultural interpretation of the collective past. Perceived as a form of discursive resistance to any kind of political and social dominance, the narrative construction of “forgotten evidence” elucidates the complex post-dialectical relationship between official collective memory and marginalized counter-memory. }, year = {2024} }
TY - JOUR T1 - “The Shifting Light of History”: Addressing Philosophy of Memory in Julian Barnes’s Elizabeth Finch AU - Elena Bollinger Y1 - 2024/09/23 PY - 2024 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ellc.20240904.12 DO - 10.11648/j.ellc.20240904.12 T2 - English Language, Literature & Culture JF - English Language, Literature & Culture JO - English Language, Literature & Culture SP - 108 EP - 117 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2575-2413 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ellc.20240904.12 AB - This article discusses the narrative construction of various philosophical reflections on cultural memory in Julian Barnes’s novel Elisabeth Finch. It addresses the dichotomy between recollection and oblivion, presenting a memory process as a the “problem of forgotten evidence”, thoroughly discussed in today’s Cultural and Memory Studies. While contemporary scholars and philosophers aim at reflecting on the role of memory in metaphysics and epistemology, mainly relating the process of recollection either to personal identity, or the experience of time, space and epistemic rationale, the dimension of collective memory, and its foregrounding role in everyone’s self-perceptiveness, receives a considerably reduced critical attention. The literary analysis of Elizabeth Finch seeks to problematize this divisive understanding of functions of memory, proposing instead to consider the semantic complementarity of various processes of recollection/forgetting, connecting the narrative representation of events that one has personally experienced and the officially stated collective renderings of factual memory. It resists considering personal remembering and collective forgetting as ostensibly competing rationales, proposing to delve deeper into a tightly crafted relationship between the perception of one’s identity in time and epistemological framework of collective experience mostly focused on the officially stated dimension of memory. Revisiting discourses on religion associated with the narrative construction of borderlands in Julian Barnes’s Elizabeth Finch, this article contributes to reconsider collective memory and counter-memory not as mutually exclusive, but as synthetized and put into productive motion narrative dimensions. The intertextual articulation of discourses on religion fosters new theoretical perspectives for rethinking counter-memory not only as a mode of recovering silenced and contested versions of the European history, but also as a means of providing multidimensional and transcultural interpretation of the collective past. Perceived as a form of discursive resistance to any kind of political and social dominance, the narrative construction of “forgotten evidence” elucidates the complex post-dialectical relationship between official collective memory and marginalized counter-memory. VL - 9 IS - 4 ER -