Alternative Rememberings

“Monument to the International Community” from the “Grateful Citizens of Sarajevo.” Image taken from Reuters.

On Thursday, we’ll continue our conversation on commemoration by considering alternative forms of remembering as practiced by individuals and community-based organizations (CBOs) during and in the aftermath of mass atrocities. Erin Baines and Pilar Riaño-Alcalá’s article “The Archive in the Witness: Documentation in Settings of Chronic Insecurity” compares strategies used by individuals and CBOs in northern Uganda and Colombia to create and maintain a “living archive” of war and related subjects (p. 412). Next, Anna Sheftel’s piece “‘Monument to the international community, from the grateful citizens of Sarajevo'” examines dark humor as a form of “counter-memory” (p. 145) that is used by Bosnian artists, activists and civilians to resist official narratives of the Bosnian War from 1992 to 1995.

Together, these articles present some alternatives to the commemorative strategies typically privileged as part of the transitional justice toolkit, such as international criminal tribunals and other formal legal institutions, truth and reconciliation commissions, and memorial sites and events. But where do the strengths of these approaches come from? And how well might the proposed models then be applied to other post-conflict settings?

Finally, one of your classmates is working on an online project for her course on Ethical Witnessing. If you have time, please consider visiting her blog / website Are You Idling? and sharing your thoughts on Idle No More, First Nations rights, and related issues of (neo)colonialism, racism and sexism.

Nationalized Commemoration

Wood carving at Murambi Genocide Memorial Centre. Photo by Erin Jessee.

Commemorative events and sites are generally regarded as an essential part of the transitional justice toolkit to be applied in the aftermath of genocide, war and other periods of mass violence. As stated on the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) website, “victims of human rights abuses cannot forget, and states have a duty to preserve the memory of such crimes.” But when states take control of commemoration events and sites of remembrance, what is being preserved? And to what end? Theorists warn that just as memorialization as a process can promote social reconstruction, it can also “crystallize a sense of victimization, injustice, discrimination, and the desire for revenge” (Barsalou and Baxter, 1).

On Tuesday’s class, we’ll consider processes related to nationalized commemoration, whereby transitional and post-conflict governments – often with the support of the international community – facilitate the creation and maintenance of memorial sites and events that are intended to make public the range of atrocities endured by the population. Judy Barsalou and Victoria Baxter’s report on “The Urge to Remember: The Role of Memorials in Social Reconstruction and Transitional Justice” articulates the often-ignored challenges inherent in commemorative practices in the aftermath of mass atrocities. Rachel Ibreck’s journal article “The Politics of Mourning: Survivor Contributions to Memorials in Post-Genocide Rwanda” examines the varied ways that survivors of the 1994 Rwandan genocide have contributed to the process of nationalized commemoration.

In addition, if you have the time, I’d highly recommend watching Chimamanda Adiche’s Ted Talk ” The Danger of a Single Story,” and browse through the online resource: Genocide Archive Rwanda.

Guest Lecture with Lara Rosenoff: Arts-Based Research Methods Amid Political Violence

Her name is Beatrice. Photo by Lara Rosenoff Gauvin.

On Thursday, Lara Rosenoff – an artist, activist and anthropologist – will be providing a guest lecture on her work in northern Uganda. Lara uses arts-based research methods, collaborating with Acholi youth and elders to create new ways of representing their worldviews and experiences of political violence. The accompanying readings – Lara’s “Rational Witness No More: Social Documentary and War in Northern Uganda” and Ian Crouch’s “The Exchange: Susie Linfield on Photography and Violence” – speak to the challenges of using photography, social documentary and other artistic media to engage with narratives of war and other forms of violence, and disseminate them to an often depoliticized public.

Lara will be giving us a brief overview of her work in northern Uganda and then leading a class discussion. As a starting point, she asks that you frame your blog comments around any questions/hesitations/critiques/confusions you have regarding representation in settings of insecurity and violence.

International and Locally Conceived Responses to Justice and Reconciliation

Mass Funeral at Srebrenica Memorial, 2007. Photo by Erin Jessee.

On Tuesday, we’ll begin looking at transitional justice – an emerging paradigm that draws upon the disciplines of political science, anthropology, history, sociology, and gender studies. Early transitional justice discourses typically revolved around criminal prosecutions, truth commissions, and memorial projects, based on the assumption that truth-telling, retributive justice, and commemoration are central for promoting reconciliation and long-term political stability in the aftermath of mass human rights violations. However, the readings for Tuesday’s class complicate this perspective by examining international perspectives on justice and reconciliation from the perspective of individuals and communities whose lives have been intimately affected by political violence in its various forms. We’ll consider two case studies: Sarah Wagner’s analysis of efforts to locate, identify, and rebury with respect the missing victims of the 1995 genocide in Srebrenica; and Fiona Ross’ assessment of women’s agency within the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

Possible questions for discussion include: how might locally conceived understandings of justice and reconciliation differ from those promoted by the international community? And why are these alternative understandings important in the aftermath of political violence?

Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes

Raphael Lemkin. Photo taken from the Audiovisual Library of International Law.

On Thursday, we’ll take a deeper look at state-sanctioned mass violence by considering the legal prohibitions against genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Alexander Hinton’s introduction “The Dark Side of Modernity: Toward an Anthropology of Genocide” seeks to “focus anthropological attention directly on the issue of genocide and to envision what an ‘anthropology of genocide’ might look like” (p. 2). In doing so, he frames genocide as a modern phenomenon that is intricately linked to local processes wherever it may occur. We then turn to Tone Bringa’s case study  “Averted Gaze: Genocide in Bosnia-Herzegovina, 1992-1995.” This chapter examines how politicians and educated elites used personalized and mass violence to redefine “categories of belonging” along ethnic and nationalist lines (p. 194).

Possible questions for discussion include: in terms of theory, how are modern ethnographers framing the subject of genocide and crimes against humanity? Why might it be important to distinguish these crimes from war crimes? And how might academic and popular understandings of genocide and related mass atrocities benefit from ethnographic insights?