Conference: "Backward Glances: History, Imagination and Memory" - Ireland, August 2011

Seen in UPenn CFP:

Backward Glances: 31st August - 1st September
University College, Cork
contact email: backwardglances@ucc.ie

Call For Papers:

Backward Glances: History, Imagination, and Memory
University College Cork, Ireland.
31st August – 1st September 2011

Society is marked by a fascination with its past, yet this need or desire to look backward and understand, is complicated by the illusive nature of the past. Accessible only through the sites of text, memory and imagination, the past is, in essence, unstable and transitory. Both individual and communal in nature, it is continually exposed to processes of re-interpretation, revision, and re-writing. Anchored in the present, the backward glance is influenced by the concerns and needs of that present, and subject to the dominant ideological perspectives of a fleeting contemporary moment.

Backward Glances, a two-day interdisciplinary conference at University College Cork, seeks to generate dialogue and debate about the nature and function of the retrospective gaze. Exploring the diverse modes by which culture strives to assimilate its history, the conference considers the manner in which constructions of the past are conditioned by the lens of the present. The desire to reflect on and reshape former times is not limited to literature. The organisers invite 20-minute papers from a wide variety of fields. Topics may include but are not confined to:

• National history and national memory
• Spaces of Memory
• Historical fiction
• Individual and collective pasts
• Contested histories
• History and trauma
• History and gender
• Memoirs/Biography

Abstracts of approximately 200-250 words to be submitted to backwardglances@ucc.ie by 12th May 2011.

Please direct any queries to this address or see our website www.ucc.ie/backwardglances for more information.

Wilderness vs. Wal-Mart

First, let's be blunt. I hate Wal-Mart. And let's be honest. I do shop there, less out of a desire to do so, and more because it is one of the only places to get what I need in the small town in which I live (the Wal-Mart here is of the old-fashioned early Sam Walton variety: it stocks the basics. The very basics). I hate Wal-Mart for the reasons that people everywhere hate it. It's the epitome of the postmodern corporation: it gives us cheap (finanically and materially), shoddy merchandise made in China by exploited workers, while promoting a carefully-constructed mythology of American values: helping out the working class, being "good for the community" and allowing mom to stay within her budget. In reality, the economic behavior of Wal-Mart in the United States and elsewhere should make them the enemy of the working class, particularly if we look at their atrocious record of workplace gender and racial discrimination (women and other minority groups missing out on promotions), and denial of health care to its workers by re-defining what "full-time" meant. For more, see Robert Greenwald's 2005 documentary Wal-Mart: the High Cost of Low Price.

Since the end of the Bush era, Wal-Mart has invested in a healthy dose of re-branding. Let's take a look at the "military industrial complex" Wal-Mart (original photo here):

The red, white and blue (and cement gray), clearly meant to emphasize the patriotic nature of shopping (as promoted by George W. Bush in 2007), fit nicely with the pretty star-cum-hyphen between Wal and Mart:

Of late, we have seen a move to this cleaner, more environmentally-conscious looking logo:

No matter how it defines itself to the public, Wal-Mart still has the reputation for deciding to set up shop where it is least welcome. Claiming that it will provide impoverished communities with a healthy supply of jobs, it seems to nearly always get its way when all is said and done. Its idea of "living better" is being able to do "one-stop shopping," where you can get groceries, prescriptions, clothes, a burger at McDonalds, an oil change for your car, a lawnmower and perhaps a bookcase or two all under one roof. On the way out, stop at the Wal-Mart gas station for some extra cheap gas too! Wal-Mart made other kinds of shopping -- the pharmacy, the clothing boutique, the family-owned hardware store -- extinct, turning town squares into a bunch of empty storefronts and making small business owners and employees largely unnecessary.

For some time now, Wal-Mart has been involved in a dispute in the state of Virginia over whether the former should be permitted to build near an historic battle site of the American Civil War. Wal-Mart argues, once again, that the construction will bring many new jobs to the area. It also states that it would be building in an area already dotted with retail locations. Those involved in the local tourism industry claim that what visitors desire is familiarity, convenience and access, which Wal-Mart can provide (see video). Historical preservationists are concerned by the shopping center's proposed proximity to the site of the Battle of the Wilderness, a turning point of the war. For a change, Republicans and Democrats have, together with historians and celebrities, teamed up to keep Wal-Mart out. This week, the case goes to court. It is hard to overlook the irony of the battle's name in its confrontation with the corporate giant. It is getting harder and harder to imagine any wilderness in this country.

When I was growing up, in 1980s Ohio, my parents took my sister and I on many exciting "one tank trip" vacations. We got to know our state parks, in other words. But three of the most thrilling summer trips were going from Ohio-Florida (in a brown Valiant with vinyl seats and no air conditioning!), Ohio-Great Smoky Mountains and Ohio-Maine. There were no Wal-Marts to stop at along the way. And yes, a certain amount of "wilderness" was involved -- we were never sure where we would end up and what we might find there. We had to pack for the unexpected. We drove all day, until my parents were too tired to go any further -- and then we found a hotel. We always had enough gas, because we were never sure where the next gas station would be -- it's not like now, where there is one at every highway exit. The littering of the American landscape with Wal-Marts and other similar structures makes our universe always 24-7, always within reach. We don't have to rely on ourselves, because Wal-Mart will always be there to help us out of a jam, as this 2008 map from Wal-Mart Watch suggests:

The impact of Wal-Mart construction is not only environmental and cultural, but, as the case in Virginia demonstrates, historical. Does it really matter, as some claim, that the proposed store location would fall outside the actual core of the Civil War battlefield, where some 30,000 were killed, injured or disappeared? Does building a perimeter of commerce -- with Wal-Mart at the helm -- around the battle area defame or re-shape this "site of memory"?

There are those who argue -- including the Pulitzer prize-winning historian James McPherson -- that the building site that would be occupied by Wal-Mart was in and of itself part of the battle area:

McPherson is expected to testify that the store's site and nearby acres were blood-soaked ground and a Union "nerve center" in the battle. Grant's headquarters and his senior leaders were encamped near the site of the proposed store and Union casualties were treated there or in an area destined to be the store's parking lot, McPherson wrote in a summary of his testimony.

"Among other things, thousands of wounded and dying soldiers occupied the then open fields that included the Walmart site, which is where many of the Union Army hospital tents were located during the battle," McPherson wrote.

The pro-Wal-Mart side claims, on the other hand, that "'There is no indication that any significant historical event occurred on this land.'"

It will be interesting to see how this story develops, especially given the upcoming commemoration of the Civil War. The interest in "historical preservation" in the United States is very uneven. On the one hand, this country seems to favor a "throw away" architectural practice -- build one, build more, and if it doesn't work, tear it down and build it again. Or, if it's old, it's no good. The U.S. is a largely forward-looking society -- rather than honoring "tradition," it likes to see "progress," which often means the building and opening of new, often unnecessary, stores. But at the same time, it is also a country -- like others, I suppose -- that engages in a very selective monumentalization -- Mt. Rushmore, the Statue of Liberty, the new World Trade Center.

The American Civil War is a defining piece of U.S. history. Why does Wal-Mart need to build right there, near the battle site of the Battle of the Wilderness? Surely, it is not the only location available. It seems more likely that the company hopes to capitalize on the challenges of the current economy -- perhaps, by linking itself to perceived demands of local tourism as well.

Obama's Arizona Speech

"If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate, as it should, let's make sure it's worthy of those we have lost."

(At some point soon, I will write a post on the Arizona shootings, and this speech).

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Commemorating the American Civil War

Since around 2004, my main area of research has been on contemporary literature and film of the Spanish Civil War and Francoism. Therefore, whenever I hear "civil war," my first reaction is to think of Spain. The American Civil War (1861-65) is, quite frankly, something that has never really piqued my interest. I guess when I think of this period of American history, the image that comes to mind is my high school A.P (advanced placement) history class, where the teacher spent a large part of the period reading the newspaper while we "did homework." I did not learn anything in that class, and I did not get college credit for it either (instead, in college, at the wonderful suggestion of an adviser, I ended up taking "Black Experience I and II," which were two of the best history classes never taught in high school -- at least, not mine). In addition to my dreary high school history experience, the American Civil War also brings to mind Civil War re-enactments or the burning passion some still feel for the Confederate flag. It's difficult for me to relate to the desire to live or pay homage to our history in either of these ways.

Over the past few weeks, I have begun to notice more and more mentions of the American Civil War. One of my favorite poetry sites, Poetry Daily, featured James Doyle's "Civil War Photograph." I heard that the USPS will be releasing commemorative Civil War stamps in 2011. And today's NYT features a new occasional series, "Disunion," which "follows the Civil War as it unfolded." Of course, the renewed interest in the war is due to the fact that 2011 is the 150th anniversary of its beginning. We are sure to see an increase in the number of films, publications and commentary -- and probably, commemorative activities -- on the war.

The 150th commemoration of the start of the American Civil War comes at a time of extreme political vitriol in the United States. It is not at all surprising to encounter some rather casual and more explicit Civil War allusions in the verbal sparring between Democrats, Republicans and Tea Partiers and in the neo-confederate tributes to the so-called "War for Southern Independence" such as the ones below:

• April 2010: governor Bob McDonnell (R-VA) declares "Confederate History Month," failing to mention slavery as a cause for the Civil War 
• June 2010: in reference to the Arizona immigration bill, Glenn Beck claims "I think we're headed for a civil war"
• October 19, 2010: Time magazine publishes the commentary "Will the Federal Reserve's Ben Bernanke Cause a Civil War?"
• December 2010: South Carolina's "Secession Gala," which remembered the state as the first to secede from the U.S., was met by protests (of course, "states' rights" is a huge Tea Party focal point, so it's a convenient way to tie the Civil War memory to current day agendas)

I must admit, I feel a new interest in learning about the American Civil War, thanks to studying the Spanish Civil War -- and particularly, how it continues to be remembered. But as with the SCW, I am especially intrigued by how the memory of war continues to mark the contemporary political landscape. Obviously, there is quite a difference between "remembering" a war that began 150 years ago and one that occurred in the 20th century (2011 is 75 years since the start of the war in Spain). The case of Spain is complicated, besides, by 36 years of dictatorship, the "pact of silence" and the fact that mass graves continue to be uncovered today (though of course, a majority of these graves are not from the war itself, but the brutal postwar repression). In the U.S., no one can say they recall the war, while in Spain, the war's survivors have passed or will do so soon. Nonetheless, the shelf life of a civil war is long. 150 years may seem like an eternity, but  many are more than happy to make the past quite present, if only to help feed current political interests. In that, Spain and the U.S. have something in common.

On Nocturnal Statue Removals

A statue of Joseph Stalin has been removed from its perch overnight (the short report follows). For those interested in the subject, I recommend this more extensive article published by the BBC, which outlines similar dictator-removal acts. I am all for the removal of dictatorial statues and symbols, but I think these nighttime removals are a bit sneaky, and don't really help install confidence in local politics. Covering up a video camera, doing the removal under a tarp or stopping by at 3 a.m. with a few pulleys and chains in itself suggests an authoritarian or paternalistic stance toward memory. It almost seems as if the state is telling the people, "we don't trust you, so we have to take matters into our own hands." These removals also beg the question, "what happens to these objects once they are removed?" Where are they stored? Who will see them, if anyone? What will replace these statues? How will these replacement objects be received?

I am reminded of a recent article from the Spanish press on the work of Fernando Sánchez Castillo (Madrid, 1970), who created several pieces on the Francoist legacy now showing as part of the PhotoEspaña exhibit. The pieces include 3 photographs, a video and a spinning head of Francisco Franco. In the article, Sánchez Castillo spoke of the difficulties he encountered when hoping to gain access to remnants of the Franco era. In 2002, the artist began a project - really, a sort of campaign -- that involved having several blind friends visit and touch statues of the dictator that had been removed upon the passage of the Law of Historical Memory (2007). However, only one government authority - the Barcelona city  hall -- granted him permission to peruse the dictatorship storage unit. As the artist put it, the challenges he faced show that "we still have a serious problem with our history: we don't know what to do with it."

Fernando Sánchez Castillo, Tactic, 2010. Courtesy of the artist and Juana de Aizpuru Gallery. © Fernando Sánchez Castillo

From: The New York Times

June 25, 2010
Statue of Stalin Removed from His Birthplace
By ELLEN BARRY

MOSCOW — Citizens in the Georgian city of Gori, the birthplace of Stalin, woke on Friday to discover that a towering statue of the dictator erected 48 years ago had been removed from the central square during the night, in another potent symbol of Georgia’s rejection of its Soviet legacy.

Georgian authorities took the statue down under conditions of complete secrecy, temporarily blocking the lens of a closed-caption camera that offers a live video feed from the square, according to the online news service civil.ge.

The city was badly battered by Russian bombing raids during the 2008 war, and officials said they would replace the statue with a monument to victims of Russian aggression. Still, the move is likely to anger some in Gori, which vigorously capitalized on its status as Stalin’s birthplace throughout the Soviet era and still offers a range of exhibits and impersonators to nostalgic tourists.

Visual Commentary on the Garzón Suspension

The following cartoons appeared today in the Spanish paper Público.

Title: "The winners"
Artist: Manel Fontdevila
Date: May 15, 2010

Here, a group of men gathers to read the news, "Garzón expelled." The first man comments, "Great news! The winners wrote history." And then he states with apparent glee, "And now, we're also rewriting it!" The men clearly represent the "victors" of the Civil War, or at least, the inheritance they left behind.


Artist: Vergara
Title: "Day of the masks"
Date: May 15, 2010

Yesterday, as Judge Garzón left the Spanish Supreme Court, his supporters lined the street, many of whom carried likenesses of the judge ("We are all Garzón"). On the left, we see Garzón in tears, disguised by the old theatrical comedy mask -- perhaps, to symbolize the farce of the suspension and the sham of the justice system, but also because it was reported that initially, the judge appeared to have received good news, which turned out not to be the case. On the right of the drawing we see a Franco-era officer (actually, it looks to be Franco himself), dressed in judicial robes. The mask he is holding up is that of Luciano Varela, one of the Supreme Court magistrates at the head of the charges of "prevarication" against Garzón (and, not coincidentally, someone who strongly opposed the Law of Historical Memory prior to its 2007 passage).

40th Anniversary of May 4, 1970

May 4, 2010 is almost over, and yet, I cannot let this day pass without writing at least a few lines (in fact, it will be May 5 by the time this is posted). Today was the 40th anniversary of the Kent State shootings. Although I was not even born yet, I am tied to the events of that day for two reasons - my uncle was a journalism student at Kent State in 1970, and I graduated with two degrees from the university in the 1990s. In 1995, I attended and participated in the 25th year commemoration of the shootings. I often think that my interest in memory goes back to my early experiences at the university, and the yearly debates that surfaced about what to do -- or not -- to commemorate May 4 (photo of students running for cover in a May 4 parking lot)

During my six years in Kent, my feelings about May 4 evolved and matured, as I listened to professors, students, family members, townspeople and poets bear witness (my uncle NEVER talked about May 4 -- it was, in a sense, his secret). As a first-year student, I went to an initial meeting of the "May 4th Task Force," but I was not involved in politics at the time, and I felt that I would need to be were I to become a part of the group. Later, I participated in a silent candelight procession on May 3 around the perimeter of the campus, which ended in the parking lot where the students were shot. This was one of the most moving moments of my time as a Kent State student.

Over the past few days, I have barely been able to keep up with the articles and reports on May 4. Rather than attempting to review the multiple articles out there on Kent State, I will just post links to several, most of which are from the greater northeast Ohio area:

• "Kent State and May 4: a new generation refuses to forget" (in Scene - part 1)
• "A 40-Year Old Tragedy and the Wounds that Never Heal" (in Scene - part 2)
• "On 40th Anniversary of Kent State Shootings, Truth Tribunal Seeks Answers" (in Democracy Now)
• "Kent State Shooting Divided Campus and Country" (on NPR)
• "Shots Still Reverberate for Survivors of Kent State" (on NPR)
• "Vietnam War Still Stirs Passionate Divisions at Kent State May 4 Events" (in Cleveland Plain Dealer)
• "Lives Interrupted" (in Akron Beacon Journal)
• "Kent State: Coming of Age 40 Years after May 4, 1970 Shootings that Stunned America" (in Cleveland Plain Dealer)

The flood of articles is, of course, due to the anniversary year. However, the increased press is also because the May 4 site has recently been listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and a new "walking tour" has been constructed to facilitate doing what the stones of the memorial state -- "inquire, learn, reflect." A "visitors' center" is also planned, which will be housed in Taylor Hall, the journalism building that sat in the middle of the protests and the fatal shots.

I am glad that the University has taken steps to acknowledge visibly the physical markers of May 4, or to give voice to those places where a story has been missing. For example, when I was a student at Kent, everyone knew to "look for the bullet hole," and yet, this hole remained unidentified to the everyday observer. I have not yet returned to Kent to visit the campus and see how the tour is laid out, but it seems to be designed to enhance engagement with and reflection on the past, as well as with the present. Kent State did not happen in a vacuum, and hopefully, the tour will provide an appropriate historical context for the events of May 4, so that the memorial and eventual "visitors' center" can be as interactive as possible. A few pictures:

from the KSU website

May 4 Memorial, dedicated 1990 (photo here)

Without a doubt, it is essential to learn what happened on May 4, 1970 in Kent, Ohio.* Unfortunately, part of the learning has, until now, often involved "picking a side," with the choices being "innocent students" versus "evil National Guard." After all this time, hopefully we can do better than that. There are so many ways we can link the local tragedy of May 4 to the national tragedies war produces. When we learn about one May 4, we inevitably find out about others, much like Ariel Dorfman opened many Americans' eyes with The Other September 11.

When we remember the 4 students killed 40 years ago at Kent State, we should take the time to inquire about other unjust deaths, including those perpetrated by our own country. I agree with and like the "Inquire, Learn, Reflect" statement on the stones that form part of the 1990 May 4 Memorial. But perhaps, 20 years after that memorial was unveiled, Kent State is showing the university is ready to go beyond reflection, toward action.

What will it mean to make May 4 a "historical site"? This summer, I plan a visit to Ohio. I will report back with more detailed observations then. For more, see the Kent State May 4 Center website here and the university's Center for Applied Conflict Mangagement.

*Laurel Krause, the sister of one of the May 4 victims, has set up a "Kent State Truth Tribunal: "We hope the Kent State Truth Tribunal will help to heal those involved, establish cause and effect, and shed light on responsibility for the events that transpired on May 4, 1970. We have not set out in pursuit of punitive justice, but rather the restorative justice that comes from collective sharing and healing. The Truth Tribunal honors those whose lives have been directly affected by the killings and also marks the importance of Kent State as an influential chapter in the history of protest, democracy, civil rights and public security in the United States."

In memory of R.B.

Tony Blair - "Let History Judge"

Question of the day: when politicians say "let history judge," how do they frame their roles in that political process? The role of their constituents and fellow citizens?

From: TypicallySpanish.com

Tony Blair to El País: It is history which must judge if the decision to invade Iraq was correct

By m.p. - Nov 29, 2009 - 3:30 PM

The former UK Prime Minister told the newspaper that he would again do everything he could to expel Saddam Hussein

The UK’s former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, was in Madrid last week, and included a journalist from El País in a round of interviews which were organised for last Thursday. The Chilcot Inquiry into Britain’s involvement in Iraq began in the UK last week, and the interviewer, José Manuel Clavo, asked Mr Blair if he would take the same decision again to invade.

Mr Blair answered ‘We would have to take into account that the information we received turned out to be incorrect,’ but added, ‘If you are asking me if I would again do everything I could to expel Saddam, the answer, clearly, is yes’. And when asked if, looking back, he had any doubts or anything he regretted, the reply was, ‘I always say that what came after deposing Saddam was much worse than we could have foreseen’.

It is history, Mr Blair said, which must be the judge of whether the decision was correct or not.

The Chilcot Inquiry opened last Tuesday and this week’s Mail on Sunday has revealed that Tony Blair may be questioned over a memo from the UK’s Attorney General which had warned him that an invasion to depose Saddam Hussein would be in breach of international law. The paper said the letter from Lord Goldsmith was sent to the Prime Minister eight months before the war, and claims that Goldsmith was ‘gagged’ and a cover-up was ordered by Blair.

Goldsmith is said to have been under such pressure to keep quiet about the letter, which was allegedly even kept from the Cabinet, that he lost a massive amount of weight and threatened to resign, before he eventually gave qualified legal backing to the conflict. The letter is now understood to be in the possession of the inquiry and both Mr Blair and Lord Goldsmith will likely be questioned about it when they are called to give evidence next year.