Memorial service for capt. Emile Driant, fallen in the first days of the Battle of
Verdun, Feb. 22, 1916 (photo taken Feb. 24, 2012 at Nancy) (see note below)
Verdun, Feb. 22, 1916 (photo taken Feb. 24, 2012 at Nancy) (see note below)
From talking about commemoration in the sense of
memorialization to talking about remembering is only a small step. Commemoration
is remembering in a certain way. When you commemorate you bring to the mind something
that happened, often together with others, although the latter is not
necessary. Usually we don’t commemorate the complete event but only certain
aspects. Take, for example, how the Netherlands commemorates the Second World
War. In the evening of May 4 the Dutch remember the people fallen or killed in
that war, on May 5 the liberation, the end of the war, is celebrated. In other
countries it’s done on the same day but never at the same time.
People who organize a commemoration for the first time,
say one year or several years after the event, often still remember what
happened because they went through or saw the event that is literally
remembered (recollected) or they have known the person or persons remembered.
We can say that a commemoration is then an institutionalized remembrance
(recollection). But when a commemoration is not once-only but becomes a
tradition, the number of people who actually saw the event or knew the person(s)
remembered gradually disappear and the commemoration is performed by people who
know what happened or who know the person(s) remembered only from stories, oral
or written: the remembrance becomes derivative or secondhand.
Actually this is not very different from how I
remember from my own personal experience. Experiences are stored as memories in
the mind and when they are called up they become remembrances of what happened.
But how are they called up? If memories are not triggered they fade away and
will be forgotten and lost. But how to prevent our memories from being lost?
There is a simple solution , or so it seems: Write them down or make a picture.
Then they are stored for ever, like information on the hard disk of your
computer. Just as you can look for secondhand information by calling it up from
your hard disk (or from the “hard disk” of the Internet), you can call up your
memories by opening the notebook in which you have written your experiences or by
taking your photo album. I often use the second method. When I look at an old
photo taken by myself I often immediately know what it is and where I have
taken it and under which circumstances. However, there is something strange:
Usually I know only the story directly related to the photo and not its wider
context. About the way I came there on the site I often have only vague
remembrances. So, if I see a photo of my mother, I remember, for instance, that
I took it on a trip with her – and that she enjoyed such trips – and I know yet
the exact location, but I hardly remember which trip it was, about when and
such things, if I do at all. Actually, I remember things that a lot of other
people could read from that photo, too, especially if they know me. In that
sense, my remembrance has a shade of being secondhand. Then it’s only one step
from seeing a photo and knowing that you have taken it, where you have taken it
and so on, to thinking that you have
taken the photo and know the circumstances that you have done it: You have
become a false witness of your own experiences. I think that it’s something
that happens more often than people realize. But if the remembrance called up
is true, it can become a kind of personal mini-commemoration: If you are in the
mood or have an urge, it’s often good to take old things in your hand, your
photos of something special or not so special, or your notebooks with what you
did, and give the past a moment’s thought as we sometimes do with others in a
public ceremony.
No comments:
Post a Comment