Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Memory Studies
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Radstone, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Memory studies: For and against

Susannah Radstone

University of East London, UK, S.Radstone{at}uel.ac.uk

This article examines the opportunities and risks afforded by the consolidation of memory research into the subject area of `memory studies'. Debates about memory culture outside the academy and within academic memory research have hinged on its perceived over-personalization of the political. However, memory research is often informed by a broader ethical turn that understands itself to be transforming politics. The article argues that this split results in part from the over-generalizations produced by the travelling concepts of a transdisciplinary memory studies. It concludes that the politics of memory culture and of memory research might be best analysed and practiced within the disciplines and by means of the research methods from which memory studies borrows.

Key Words: personalization • politics • transdisciplinarity • trauma

Memory Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, 31-39 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1750698007083886
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ConvergenceHome page
J. Santone and W. Straw
Editorial: Cultural Memory and Digital Preservation
Convergence, August 1, 2009; 15(3): 259 - 262.
[PDF]

Home page
 Memory StudiesHome page
M. Kontopodis
Documents' memories: Enacting pasts and futures at the School for Individual Learning-in-Practice
Memory Studies, January 1, 2009; 2(1): 11 - 26.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Memory StudiesHome page
S. D. Brown
The quotation marks have a certain importance: Prospects for a 'memory studies'
Memory Studies, September 1, 2008; 1(3): 261 - 271.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Memory StudiesHome page
J. Burton
Bergson's non-archival theory of memory
Memory Studies, September 1, 2008; 1(3): 321 - 339.
[Abstract] [PDF]