Memory. Battlefield or a harvest field? Eremeeva S.

The active disputes of scientists around the legitimacy of the concept of “collective memory” ended not with a consensus or compromise, but by the natural demarcation between those who do not recognize such a “method of packaging” of the past, and for whom collective memory as cultural practice and the subject of research exists. After such a separation, it was time to focus on the details and contradictions of specific situations of memory, representing, in addition to purely cognitive or academic interest, the opportunity through the attitude to the past to study themselves - today's and remembers.

memory can be considered as a mechanism as a mechanism - Then the main object of the study will be efforts to construct it and manipulate it with various memorial groups. Memory can be considered as an organism - then the emphasis in the analysis is transferred to how the memory manifests itself, realized in “lower” practices. Although the constructivist approach is focused on universality, and the immanent - reveals cultural specificity, the study of memory and from the other point of view shows that in reality, multidirectional, it would seem, efforts affect each other, but the methods and results of their interaction are often unexpected.

Memory is concrete and variable, an attempt to describe its cash condition will always be incomplete and delay. Nevertheless, this book is trying to at least partially fix the coordinates of the mnemonic landscape that exists here and now? -in Russia of the 10s of the XXI century.