Search results

Abstract
Dealing with various aspects of 20th century history still poses a significant challenge to Croatian society. This also includes dealing with the socialist period. In the last fifteen years, propelled by the Eastern enlargement (2004, 2007), the EU has developed a common European memory of the totalitarian and authoritarian regimes of the 20th century, including communism. This article analyzes the impact of a common European culture of remembrance on Croatian commemorative culture, especially remembrance of communist crimes. The analysis will include the political discourse of selected mnemonic actors and commemorative practices. In 2011, the Croatian Parliament passed a law to commemorate the European Day of Remembrance of Victims of All Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes every August 23. However, the article argues that a shared European memory had only limited success on Croatian debates and conflicting narratives on communist crimes and the socialist period. The main reason is the dominantly antagonistic mode of remembering and representing of the communist period in Croatia.

Why and how do companies remember their past in terms of history and tradition? This book empirically explores the phenomenon of organizational remembrance inthe German automobile company Audi AG from a cultural perspective. By dissecting the relationships between memory, identity, and image in a business setting, this study makes sense of the complex cultural forces at work in the corporate handling of the past, the present, and the future.

This interdisciplinary series addresses the relation between media and cultural memory. Its publications study how media construct, store, and disseminate memory. The series' focus is on different media and technologies, such as text and image, the cinema and the new digital media, on transmediality, intermediality, and remediation, as well as on the social (and increasingly transnational and transcultural) contexts of mediated memory. The aim of the series is to provide a vibrant international platform for research and scholarly exchange in the field of media and memory studies. Manuscripts submitted to the series are peer reviewed by expert referees.

Everyday life is filled with numerous images of what has passed. All of them, although on different bases, leave a mark in time and thus become legacies of the past. Although we usually understand and accept this inherited corpus without a problem, sometimes we face certain inconveniences. For example, we would rather forget the heritage that remind us of colonialism and slavery, civil conflicts, wars, nuclear catastrophes. This paper searches for answers as to why certain contents from the past survive and others disappear, as well as when and why we decide to change their interpretation. Namely, the development of information technologies and new models of communication, in addition to many advantages, has contributed to the development of a perhaps not new, but certainly more striking culture of thinking. Based on condemnation, denial, harsh criticism without the possibility of adequate defence, the cancel culture is present in almost all spheres of everyday life. "Concern" for the culture of memory thus has reached a new level. Although the ban on specific forms of artistic expression has a long history, today we are witnessing the formation of movements that fight by all means for various types of censorship, and interestingly, they are no longer instructed by governing structures, but come from culture, science, and art. Justifying these actions with pedagogical reasons, correcting injustices, and caring for the culture of remembrance, unpleasant and politically incorrect contents are avoided, exhibitions are cancelled, monuments are occupied, modified, destroyed. The contribution of once famous artists and scientists is being revised and challenged. This raises a number of questions. What ideas inspire such iconoclastic actions? Who are the actors involved in these practices? When diversity became a problem, where did the dialogue go? What are the spatial, social and political implications of these transformations? In the circumstances of such rapid social changes and (re)interpretation, it is increasingly difficult to remain calm and objective even in science. The general chase, and sometimes the mass hysteria, help us to easily slip into revisionism. Instead of focusing on the possibilities that different values of the legacies of the past open to us, it seems that we are moving towards the fact that every heritage, sooner or later, will be disputable.

Dieser Beitrag greift Missverständnisse gegenüber der Frauengesundheitsbewegung innerhalb von Erinnerungskultur auf. Ziele von gynäkologischer Selbstuntersuchung (Self-Help) scheinen im feministischen Diskurs, aber auch in der Geschlechterforschung jüngerer Zeit als unpolitische Übung gesundheitlicher Selbstbildung fehlgedeutet zu werden. Um dies als geschichtliches Missverständnis zu markieren, erscheint es vielversprechend, historische Dokumente der Neuen Frauenbewegung mit späteren aktivistischen Zeugnissen zu verbinden. In einem derartigen Fokus wird es möglich, Hinweise auf politische Gehalte in feministischen Publikationen retrospektiv zu entziffern. Aspekte menstrueller Extraktion, die jene Praktik als Ersttrimester-Abtreibungen - und somit als strafrechtlich untersagte Handlungen - nachvollziehbar machen würden, sind besonders in den frühen Jahren der Neuen Frauenbewegung von Aktivistinnen in schriftlichen Dokumenten dezidiert ausgelassen worden. Das Wissen zu dieser Technik als feministischer Selbsthilfeansatz, um frühe Schwangerschaften abzubrechen, wurde in Selbsthilfe-Workshops geteilt und der vorliegende Beitrag zeigt, wie es sich international jenseits von Publikationen in der Vertraulichkeit feministischer Netzwerke verbreiten konnte. Gynäkologische Selbsthilfe wird dabei als politische Aktionsform verdeutlicht, um zu fragen, ob feministische Erinnerungskultur dieses Politikum durch eine verengte eigene Perspektive aus dem Blick verloren hat.