Approaching the past: a tangled interplay of memory, political choices and historical science With examples from the Nordic and Baltic countries and Romania

• Published in: Revista română de studii Baltice şi Nordice Vol. 7; no. 2; pp. 55 - 68
• Main Author: Seim, Jardar
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Asociatia Romana pentru Studii Baltice si Nordice 2015; Romanian Association for Baltic and Nordic Studies
• Subjects: History; Politics / Political Sciences; Social Sciences; Romania; memory; comparison; history; Scandinavia; Baltic countries
• ISSN: 2067-1725; 2067-225X

A discussion of topics connected with “historical memory” and “politics of memory” presupposes that we consider how and why we are approaching the past. In this paper I shall point to some ways the past is being approached by individuals, social groups and political authorities – and some reasons for such approaches. But I shall also consider the opposite choice, that of not wanting to get closer to the past, preferring instead to keep a safe distance or even to ignore it, at least painful parts of it. Memories in different forms are important in our approaches to the past. The same is true for scientific history. The interplay between memory and historical science is complicated in itself. The existence of political guidance or explicit political provisions concerning the past makes it even more complicated to understand how our relations with the past are shaped and what their functions are in a given society. In my opinion, it is impossible to generalize about such problems. But comparisons may be fruitful, for instance presentations of wars in school textbooks from different countries, or how succeeding political regimes in one country try to charge the urban landscape with a new (or old) political meaning that legitimizes the present regime or demonize another one, by changing street names, erecting or destroying monuments etc. National anthems are another field that is suited for meaningful comparisons. And even communal or personal memories that are studied without a comparison or generalization in mind may provide ideas and perspectives for dealing with quite different memories under other political conditions. Finally, the role of the presumed scientific historian ought to be examined a little. Is he or she just a rational and neutral judge of the past – compared to ordinary people with undocumented and emotional memories, or to politicians with ideological motives for approaching the past?