Divided Country: Memory and History in Twentieth-Century Italy
Lead Research Organisation:
University College London
Department Name: Italian
Abstract
Divided Country: Memory and History in Twentieth-Century Italy
Context
There has been a vast increase in 'memory study' in Italy over the last 25 years. This work has often been fragmentary and has seldom been adequately grounded in theoretical, methodological or historical discussion. Often, too, it has been one-sided, involved in the promotion of one set of memories over others. My research draws on historical sources but also makes critical use of memories in other genres, including theatre, cinema, photography, music, fiction and documentary. Extensive use will be made of the work of oral historians - above all Contini (whose concept of 'divided memory' is a key one), Passerini and Portelli. All of these historians have worked on controversial questions regarding memory and the past (fascism, wartime massacres, 1968). Oral history in particular allows for a critical approach to the subjectivity of memory - it embraces false memories, self-representation and the politicisation of memory.
My research begins with one main argument, which is then woven into various case studies. I argue that all of Italian history since Unification has been marked by a tendency towards divided memory. Events have been interpreted in contrasting ways, and the facts themselves have often been contested. There has been very little consensus what happened, why it happened, and how to remember what happened. This project aims to investigate and explain this phenomenon through the examination of various case studies.
The proejct will investigate the relations between Italy's divided history (in the sense both of the divisions created by specific historical events and divided historiographical interpretation) and this tendency towards divided and fragmented memory. Divisions have been territorial, but also political and ideological. Italy's history can be read as a series of civil wars which have almost produced contrasting ideas about what happened, and why, and how to remember. Moreover, the weak role of the state which has been in the throes of a legitimation crisis ever since Unification, has allowed alternative visions and oppositions to emerge and take root.
Throughout the research use will be made of the distinction between living and dead memory. The first consists of memorials, history books, testimonies, plaques. This memory 'only makes sense if it serves to keep interior memory alive. Dead memory can help to elicit live memory, but it cannot take its place.' (Bobbio). A tomb only takes on meaning when it is visited by a relative, or created, or moved, or some flowers are left nearby. It is the interaction between memory sites and active remembering which creates memory or keeps it alive. Conflict also counts. It could be argued that the very lack of consensus in Italy has led to more debate and research over the issues of memory and forgetting, keeping issues alive where, in other societies, they have been consigned to the history books.
Memory here is looked at in various ways. Individual and collective private memories are seen mainly through oral history but also via diaries, biographies and autobiographies. Public memories will be analysed through plaques, anniversaries, monuments and various other 'places of memory' created in response to moments of major and minor importance. Links between place, space and memory will be made in relation to a number of key areas. An important actor here is the state, and the political use of memory has been a key feature of contemporary Italy. However, resistance to the state, and to 'official' memory strategies, has also been an ever-present trend.
Chapters:
1 Memory and History in Contemporary Italy
2 Colonialism
3 Emigration
4 World War One
5 Fascism
6 The Resistance
7 Memories of Massacre and the Holocaust, 1943-1945
8 From the Foibe to Sarajevo. The North-East 9 Economic Miracle, 1950-70 10 Revolt, Revolution, Reaction, 1968-1980 Conclusion
Context
There has been a vast increase in 'memory study' in Italy over the last 25 years. This work has often been fragmentary and has seldom been adequately grounded in theoretical, methodological or historical discussion. Often, too, it has been one-sided, involved in the promotion of one set of memories over others. My research draws on historical sources but also makes critical use of memories in other genres, including theatre, cinema, photography, music, fiction and documentary. Extensive use will be made of the work of oral historians - above all Contini (whose concept of 'divided memory' is a key one), Passerini and Portelli. All of these historians have worked on controversial questions regarding memory and the past (fascism, wartime massacres, 1968). Oral history in particular allows for a critical approach to the subjectivity of memory - it embraces false memories, self-representation and the politicisation of memory.
My research begins with one main argument, which is then woven into various case studies. I argue that all of Italian history since Unification has been marked by a tendency towards divided memory. Events have been interpreted in contrasting ways, and the facts themselves have often been contested. There has been very little consensus what happened, why it happened, and how to remember what happened. This project aims to investigate and explain this phenomenon through the examination of various case studies.
The proejct will investigate the relations between Italy's divided history (in the sense both of the divisions created by specific historical events and divided historiographical interpretation) and this tendency towards divided and fragmented memory. Divisions have been territorial, but also political and ideological. Italy's history can be read as a series of civil wars which have almost produced contrasting ideas about what happened, and why, and how to remember. Moreover, the weak role of the state which has been in the throes of a legitimation crisis ever since Unification, has allowed alternative visions and oppositions to emerge and take root.
Throughout the research use will be made of the distinction between living and dead memory. The first consists of memorials, history books, testimonies, plaques. This memory 'only makes sense if it serves to keep interior memory alive. Dead memory can help to elicit live memory, but it cannot take its place.' (Bobbio). A tomb only takes on meaning when it is visited by a relative, or created, or moved, or some flowers are left nearby. It is the interaction between memory sites and active remembering which creates memory or keeps it alive. Conflict also counts. It could be argued that the very lack of consensus in Italy has led to more debate and research over the issues of memory and forgetting, keeping issues alive where, in other societies, they have been consigned to the history books.
Memory here is looked at in various ways. Individual and collective private memories are seen mainly through oral history but also via diaries, biographies and autobiographies. Public memories will be analysed through plaques, anniversaries, monuments and various other 'places of memory' created in response to moments of major and minor importance. Links between place, space and memory will be made in relation to a number of key areas. An important actor here is the state, and the political use of memory has been a key feature of contemporary Italy. However, resistance to the state, and to 'official' memory strategies, has also been an ever-present trend.
Chapters:
1 Memory and History in Contemporary Italy
2 Colonialism
3 Emigration
4 World War One
5 Fascism
6 The Resistance
7 Memories of Massacre and the Holocaust, 1943-1945
8 From the Foibe to Sarajevo. The North-East 9 Economic Miracle, 1950-70 10 Revolt, Revolution, Reaction, 1968-1980 Conclusion
Organisations
People |
ORCID iD |
| John Foot (Principal Investigator) |