Documents found
-
161.
-
162.More information
AbstractSome consider that Europe is not a recent political invention, but the result of a centuries-old process. Thus, numerous official representatives regularly refer to the European memory. There is much at stake in that discussion since one important component of collective identity lies in the interpretation of the past. Experience shows that identities are forged through the ages with adopted, kept alive, lost or even sometimes repressed memories. Therefore the organisation of what is to be remembered and forgotten appears to be a decisive condition of what European identity may be. This issue raises various questions: how can European Union representatives alleviate diverging and sometimes contradictory interpretations of the past? How can they elaborate a common language able to establish a connection between national histories? Does the emphasis on common memories necessarily imply a complete homogenisation of the representations of the past? The purpose of this article is to analyse the strengths and the limitations of any politics of memory. This analysis is divided into two parts. First, it is argued that accentuating a common past pursues a double finality in a European Union seeking legitimacy and power. Second, the article shows that the notion of European memory constitutes a political project rather than a sociological reality. To demonstrate it, it examines three limitations of an official representation that risks loosing the population's adherence if it becomes simplistic, homogeneous or fixed once and for all.
-
163.
-
164.
-
169.