Post-war memories and silences within families
Why micro hesitations matter
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6442205 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Valérie Rosoux (0000-0003-0506-8461, UCLouvain, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 688-700 |
| Publication date | 2025-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Memory Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1750-6980 • E-ISSN: 1750-6999 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/17506980251334951 |
| OpenAlex | W4411457732 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 29 |
This article is part of a special issue on Micro-Memories. The article analyses a short strip of interaction, which concerns a 3-minute fragment of a 60-year-old Belgian woman talking about her deceased father’s past as a Nazi collaborator. The analysis is anchored in philosophy and political sciences. It is divided into two main sections. The first highlights a general sense of confusion that characterizes most of the answers given by the interviewee about her father’s past. The study takes the inconsistency of her posture as the starting point for reflecting on how we remember after a war. To do so, it questions the link between two fundamental dynamics in memory studies: the “weight of the past” (concerned with the traces left by the past on the present) and the “choice of the past” (which refers to its strategic uses). The second section underlines the features of the intergenerational transmission of memories in the family observed here. It emphasizes the critical role played by the third generation in memory transmission and the lack of relevance of the false/true dichotomy in this specific context. Despite its shortness, the initial interview underscores the intricate role of the family in the decision to attribute—or, in this case, not to attribute—meaning to the past. The succession of silences and interrupted sentences express the multitude of gray zones about the war. The conclusion raises a general question about closure after political violence. In choosing not to explore further her father’s involvement during the war, the interviewee attempts to deal with a past that is not her own but is nevertheless a part of her identity. In such circumstances, how can descendants draw a line between the past and the present
Closure (psychology · Context (archaeology · Epistemology · Meaning (existential · Multitude · Political science · Politics · Relevance (law · Sociology · Hermeneutics and Narrative Identity · History · Law · Memory, Trauma, and Commemoration · Oral History, Memory, Narrative Analysis · Philosophy · Psychology
Post-Conflict Memorialization
Abductive Analysis
Remembering in Conversations
Memory distortion
Grandchildren and Grandparents
Beyond the Sins of the Fathers: Responsibility for Inequality
Intergenerational transmission of World War II family historical memories of the Resistance
Memory in a Global Age
Transnational Memory
Embodied reconciliation
A waffle-shaped model for how realistic dimensions of the Belgian conflict structure collective memories and stereotypes
Psychological perspectives on collective memory and national identity
The Belgian national past
Cultural memories and their re-actualizations
Growing up in the shadow of the Second World War
The Past in Belgium
Justice after Transition
Administrations of Memory
A social psychological perspective on World War II collaboration in the 21st century
Postponing trauma
Collective memory
Transnational Grandparenthood
Conceptualizing Stigma
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |