About "Clio and Mnemosyne" L. Regalado (1) José Ignacio López Soria
Al "present" Clio and Mnemosyne. Studies on history, memory and recent past, (Lima: San Marcos / PUCP, 2007) Liliana Regalado, delivery of the course, which generally is true, that who knows more about the subject of a book is its author, in this case, its author. It happens also that I had the opportunity to read the original, or most of them, and to suggest that the author somehow picked it up.
is this fact, and not my known friendship with Lisa, which leads me to not stick to my habit to look critically at the present text. The criticism, in the form of suggestions, I made them in their time. What I do now is, first, referring to the content and second, talk to some of the themes of the book, those who summoned me into mind. In the first part of the call "description" and the second "presentation." Description
As for the "description", the subtitle is responsible for announcing the cornerstones of the text, history, memory and the recent past. In addition to the abundant literature carefully crafted and refer to it, I emphasize the study four aspects that attract my attention.
First and foremost, I want to stress the fact, rare among us, that a historian, after significant experience in teaching and research, is dedicated to both the theoretical thinking and the strategies of their own professional practice. As I say, this is rare. In general, our historians do not think his own practice. They are dedicated to reconstructing the past from one perspective, usually the positivist, which are not aware they did not even question whether the principle formulated by Ranke of the need to write history "as it really was" is well-founded.
Second, stressed that the very practice that thought leads the author to deal with other disciplines and knowledge-philosophy, anthropology and sociology of everyday life-what makes the result, the book ends pointing toward a theory of history.
matter, thirdly, to highlight that the author is aware that some of his own present, a present fact of unspeakable violence and disagreements that reveal structural fractures that come from old, but also made of forms everyday life, yet insufficiently explored, which suggests the possibility of a reunion worthy of the diversity that characterizes us. This point shows, moreover, an inclination hermeneutics that enriches the theoretical perspective and calls for commitment to build a more just and caring society that we have inherited.
Finally, considering the "recent past" as part of our own present, it is remarkable the intention of the author to relate history, memory and consciousness of this, as if it were three dimensions of historical consciousness that belong together.
To complete the description should say something about the author's biography and resume, even if briefly, the six chapters of the book and their respective paragraphs. But stakeholders in the event that you know, like me, who know their Liliana Regalado and academic production, and, moreover, I guess I will read the text, so my summary is unnecessary. And if you do not read, they will lose an excellent opportunity to enrich themselves with new knowledge and, above all, with new questions. Presentation
Why call "presentation" and not "description" to the second part of my speech? Because the description is within the scope of "representation" and it is a rigid separation between subject and object to ensure the neutrality of the speaker with respect to the spoken. What this hidden assumption, left forgotten, is that the speaker is also discussed, ie it is constituted in speaker by the very language he uses when speaking. Return to this co-belonging relationship between speaker and spoken later, but now I want to note that in the case that interests me is to think that man and his history, the separation of traditional metaphysics and modern science been established between subject and object allows us to talk about the past, to register and rebuild "scientifically", but does not allow us to speak to the past and let us speak for him. And this situation becomes an obstacle to dialogue with the past rather than simply assuming it as past but as the history of our own present.
prefer the concept of "presentation" because what I try is to bring the presence or present-in the sense of "I present to fellow" - a topic that invites me to introduce myself and, in general, introduce ourselves, to talk to him, historical and philosophical thinking. And I do so because I believe that the most interesting of a text is not what it says, but what he asked, suggesting, which calls us to think.
the book by Dr. Regalado enriches me clear distinction between history, memory and consciousness of this, the author discusses throughout the book with commendable scholarship and thoughtful reflections, but I think it calls for the co-belonging, she suggests, among the three ways to be of historical consciousness: consciousness today, modern historical consciousness and memory.
awareness of today is characterized, as noted by Ferenc Fehér, by doubts and issues with respect to modernity, the need to test it and make an inventory of your accomplishments and unresolved dilemmas, and the known living in a world made of a plurality of complex spaces and temporalities that leads us to perceive this as a time of "after", knowing that we are not where we are but later. Diversities in this world are taking the word to tell his own story, the remoteness has made us close, we live in a crossover game messages, but also threat of homogenization, knowledge has become interpretation, we note that subjectivity is constituted intersubjectively, we understand the truth and openness, and assist, as Nietzsche early and loudly announced, the twilight of the idols of modernity, we now understand as a weakening of the great speeches metanarrative, strong character of being, the concept of universal history, the idea of \u200b\u200bunlimited progress, belief in the limitless possibilities of rationalization of human life, etc.
In our case, as you remember Lisa, we should add that awareness is now also affected by an ancestral violence that has manifested itself and excruciatingly painful in recent decades, but unfortunately do not miss important segments of society who believe that manifestation as a set of facts just past and that we must try to let them into oblivion.
Because of the complexity in which we live, today's consciousness manifests as perplexity, but the perplexity do not understand here as "confusion" over what is, "doubt" against the established knowledge and "indecision" or "indecision" as opposed to do, but as a mood that expresses and facilitates the willingness to theorize in a context of complexity. What I mean is that, understood as confusion, doubt and indecision, perplexity would be the effect of the complexity and then I could say that the state of perplexity is a kind of lost in the maze of today. But here, again, perplexed understand the state of consciousness that organizes the known complexity without losing itself as complexity.
is clear that today's self-consciousness is not consistent with modern historical consciousness, because the latter seeks to "facts" verifiable, regularity, causality and continuity, to express them in a discourse of a historical process, unilinear and teleological periodization. Regardless of the scientific nature of this discourse, ie the coherence and consistency of his proposals, "the truth is it takes the floor for all people to tell their story and provide identity, defining the history and identity that level of evolution that has reached every village on the scale set by the story.
modern historical consciousness manifests itself as secular because they know security is no longer founded on metaphysical and religious beliefs but on scientific truths, axiological unrelated, based on subject / object dichotomy and consistent and consistently constructed. Therefore, a historical science born of this awareness is not concerned to promote permanent loyalties and deep links with the past or talk about, what interests him is to record the past to talk about it rationally organized as possible.
Away from me, of course, considering the historical science of modern style is unimportant. Has the same importance of other components of the discourse of modernity: to help build the modern world and, therefore, to move to other companies essentially prescriptive essentially elective, with all the challenges that this implies both with regard to the desecration values \u200b\u200band autonomy of the spheres of culture, and in relation to the social organization in sub-rational action and transformation in everyday life. Among the perplexity
own awareness of current and assurances secularized modern consciousness lies the memory. I am convinced, with Heidegger, that memory is the source from which the thought. Memory, just to express narrative and not scientifically, it is binding, joins us all as speakers, listeners or spoken. Thanks to memory we cherish, we collect and congregate the past and we do this remembering, that is going to pass through the heart. The memory is manifested as a souvenir. So the memory and the memory are related to devotion rather than with the cold accumulation of the past. Memory, and here we are concerned, there is a repository of information about something or someone. Memory and re-sane feed links and loyalties, facilitate a-sane and "present" the past. This presentation challenges us, invites us, not force us to introduce us to the past to establish a dialogic relationship with it that gives dignity to the face and past substance and historical depth to our thinking today.
must be taken into account, however, that at present time to live "after" the memory invites us to maintain a relationship with the past and but not mandatory and elective dialogic: the past talks but does not oblige us, we use the past and not only him, we chose a particular past and we were chosen by him. This dialogical relationship-elective is not connected with a lost paradise apologetic and all consideration of the past as the sole source of mandate and legitimacy to this.
If, as I said, memory-in the form of stories, written and oral narratives, collective knowledge, refigurations art, street furniture, place names, names given to the people and things, forms of identity, sensibilities, attitudes, etc. .- devoutly collects and brings the past and brings us to the presence remembering it is not surprising that we consider as an area where they can find without getting lost, modern historical consciousness and consciousness of today. It is thus a co-belonging relationship between history, memory and consciousness, which now provides meaning to each of these three forms of historical consciousness without loss of its peculiarities.
is precisely this condition that causes memory thought convene invited to think like a human group continuities lasting, permanent links and deep loyalties, but also with potential projections and always open to the complexity of current and generally , the wealth accumulated by mankind.
I have for me, as I suggest the book that said, one of the problems that affect us as human community and, consequently, deserves more thought, is precisely that of having left in the oblivion both continuities and linkages loyalties as projections of our society.
When no field is the encounter between history, memory and consciousness of today, history is reduced to recording and reconstruction of events, memory repository of information and awareness of current is lost in the multiplicity of real. Since that disagreement can not think of ourselves as historical community.
By contrast, when we think of the scope of the meeting of the three mentioned forms of historical consciousness, we perceive as having a past, on the other hand, we are saying goodbye forever and never let it into oblivion. Thus, the past acquires dignity and face, this historical density, and the future is projected as a community of diversity that have chosen to live dignified and happily together and recognized as being different.
In conclusion I reiterate that my purpose was not to summarize the ideas of the book you will read with profit, but let me call the axes of thought that he raises. Therefore, it is not unlikely that neither own She sits read by me, but I hope so successful and remembered and spoken fondly.
Notes (1) Published with slight modifications as outlined in: Revista Complutense de Historia de America. Madrid, Publications of the Universidad Complutense de Madrid, vol. 33, 2007, p. 328-332.
0 comments:
Post a Comment