An episode of social conflict between Russian and Estonian "mnemonic communities" is used as a framework for exploring issues of collective memory. In order to understand the strong Russian reaction to the Estonian decision to move a memorial statue, it is argued that the notion of "deep memory" is needed, a notion that is, in turn, grounded in the construct of a "narrative template." The particular narrative template examined is the Russian "Expulsion of Foreign Enemies" plot line. The call for (...) recognizing a distinction between abstract narrative templates, on the one hand, and "specific narratives," on the other is viewed as applying to a wide range of cases where mnemonic communities seem to exist in implacable opposition. In such cases deep memory and the narrative templates around which it is organized are set forth as strong underlying conservative forces that resist change in collective memory at a deep level. It is suggested that debates grounded in formal history may help overcome this resistance to change but that such efforts will be limited as long as the forces of deep collective memory are not recognized. (shrink)

The study of mediated action focuses on how humans use cultural tools, or mediational means (terms used interchangeably), when engaging in various forms of action. The cultural tools involved may range from simple mnemonic devices, such as marks on a stone, to natural language and computers, and the kind of action involved may be socially distributed or carried out by individuals.

Renewed interest in collective memory has raised the need for conceptual elaboration of the topic and how it can be studied. In an attempt to clarify how it fits into interdisciplinary discussion the following conceptual oppositions are laid out: memory versus remembering, collective versus individual remembering, history versus collective memory, and strong versus distributed versions of collective remembering. Collective memory is then analyzed from the perspective of M. M. Bakhtin's understanding of ‘text’ in which a ‘language system’ is contrasted with (...) an ‘individual, unique, and unrepeatable’ pole of textual analysis. These ideas are harnessed to examine forms of dialogicality that shape collective memory, especially in politically contested cases such as Estonian and Russian accounts of conflict over the past century. (shrink)