Un-senling Memoxy

249 Pages·2001·29.13 MB·English

Un-senling Memoxy:
Cultural Mmoy an Postalonialism
Cliff Lobe
A thesis submiaed to the Faculty of ûraduate Studies and Rescarch in partial fidfilhnent of the
rcquiremeuts for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Edmonton, Alberta
sping 2000
A uisitions and Acquisitions et
~8iogrtîphSii ervices sewim~bi bkgmphiqu8s
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accorde une licence non
exclusive licence aiîowing the exclusive permettant h la
National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de
reproduce, loan, distriiute or sel1 reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou
copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous
paper or electronic fomats. la fonne de microfiche/film, de
reproduction sur papier ou sur format
électronique.
The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du
copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse.
thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels
may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés
reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son
pemiission. autorisation.
Looking back on the writings from some distancc 1 do not
w i lt o deny chat funhentdly they spuk only of me.
. .
Friedrich Nietzsche, on his
Fa my fathcr aud motba,
Veni and Joan Lobe
This dissertation Coasidets cultural memory in lbeay and iittntllft. It nrQ ~moiyu a
madintay or &cursive process of inscriptim and intapetaion in bcib mOdCflljty md
posmiodnnity. By locating memory in tbe scculr and tecbnological domin of culture ndKI
tbm in the orgmic or mctaphy9crl. ratha Ban in psychicd promscs or in a mystid collective
min4 1 insist üut memory is a mpsentatiot~t1 atid proces or teMn) of merniag--8
bat is organized by culture. by the sign systm of the rosai. Mcmory's rcprescntaionrl fams,
which aiways stand for sorncduDg eh,c m tbw k linked to the mliert models ofw riting as wdl
as to the latest digital inscriptions a Simutations: to Plaîo's use of the "seal" (sime or "sign")
impttsstd in the we<.tablet; to Simondes' architccnml mnemonics; to Freud's Wwderblock or
"mystic Wnting pd"; to the materiality of the sign and die inscribed soun&~tt;o die Scmiotic
and cykrnetic pioce~sesb y which cultures m e and mconsûuct meanhg in timc; to post-
st~~cturaolr deconmctive models of biowlcdge and hguagc in which the tomiiil iogic of
grammatology (pabpsesî, tnre. diilogism, iutaaxt) displaces the phonologie of ongin,
csrcace, and auratic self-presence; and evco to the icoiie md hypcrtcxt ünLe of elecbic
information technologies. in this Mew. the govcniiilg logic of mcmory is textuat and scldve; its
location is at the level of culture, "in-betwt~~th"e ideal rnd the matcrial, "in-betwsaiwm ind and
mias. it operates in the mcch~nismra nd matrices of siBuficatim and in the tmpic proctsses and
nmological SbrpingD of oondcnsation md displricement, rqmaicm and reconstruction.
in Section ûnc, 1 consida the themeticai implicitions md imbncatioas of I%uituren md
"memoryn in the modPn and postmodem periodr. As rtci3lrr collccpts mgmizad munû the
problcmatics of temponlity, discoutst, lrnguage, conacious~lu.a bject and sociai focmation,
and so for&, "culturen and "memoty" arc liPLcd t0get)ia by mpresentufion: by the socid ways
th~we"mrirltntiwrndufianwmiii$b~eprrcatr,insaiptioas,rrkrSic~c tionTwo,I
r dm o r yi n two post-wlaiiid mcatcrrtr h m t he der-invdct society of Austdia: Peia
Carey's and David Miloofs In Uywl&s, mcmary is

I owe trcInendous &bts of gratitude to the following people md organizations for various
forms of support, wibiout whicb this project would have ban irnpossibîe:
My fsmily: Vem and Joen Lobe; ?Cam Van, Brctî, Ton a dT anya Epp; Murray and Bmda
Lobe; Michael and Tina Lobe. 1 have nceived unfding support-motional, finamial,
editoriaî, and othenwise-fiom my family; theu kindness. patience, support, and love is
imprcsscd in my memory.
Charlene Diehl-Jones, whose hughta, aud words, break tbe silena of kthe; Johanna Ens, for
ber vace and goodness; Suzcttt Mayr, whor inimitable words, kindness, and style lcave thcir
marks; Karen Hdil, who kindly, and rrpcatedly, d d sm to get nit of my own way; Ihve
"Davus" Buchanan and Tbetesa Agncw, whose "mcritorious" fiiendship during the Worst
Coast Era and shuttle services 1 have greatly appnciated; Sue Fisher. who is incomparable and
wise; Jane Watt. who thinks the past off-carnpus; Nicole Markotic, who is aicouraging and
generous; Gamet and Gloria, Sheryl, Kevin and Lym, and Erin McKa. for their gracious
hospitality; the s t aa i Chez Mingay.
The members of my Pb. D. Couunittee-h. Stcphen Slmion, Dr. Daphne Rcaâ, Dr. Paul
Hjartarson, Dr. Alan Lawson, h. Richard Young, Dr. Robert Wilson-whose tolerant
readings, critical suggestions, and judicious questions belped me to find rny way through, and
beyond, the labyrinth of cultural mcmory.
1 would also like to mdividually thank: Alan Lawson for his scrupulous editorial work on
various chaptns of ibis dissertation, for his encouragement, and for bis kind hospitdity during
my nay in Brisbane; Daphne Reaâ, for h a c ritical and collegial support thmughout this project
and its various incarnations, as wcll as for hcr meticulous ditonal work; Dawnt McCancc, for
h ag entle and generous cnthusiasm, for h ac ritical msight into the problcm of memory, md for
hcr theoretical and padagogical guidance; Gillian Whitlock, for ha suggestions b u t h ow to
begin to rcsd Ausadia; John Murray and his &!y for theu wann hospitaiity a d for an
unforgettable hike a, Flat Rock; Anna Johnston, Doug and T m L ca Ranwn and adly, wd
Edgar and Vivian Garner, for their hospitality and guidance during my stay m Auraalia
The University of Alberta for a University of Alberta Ph. D. Scholmhip, a Walter H. Johns
Graduate Fellowship, and for a Univeniîy of Alberta Dissertation Fellowship; the Province of
Alberta for a Ralph Stcinhaucr Award of Distinction; the Gov~rtllllenot f Canada for a Social
Sciences and Humanitics Rcsearch Council Doctoral Fellowship.
Stephcn Slemon, my supervisor, without whose patimcc, opamism, eacoumgcmeat, wisdom,
and aitical support bis pojcd would have b#n forgoam long ago; whos models of ngorous
acadcmic dialogue and inquiry 1 have kncfitcd cdom and &al1 continue oo aspire &W. "ûne
rcpays a teacher badly if one ranaùis only a pupil."
And Gloria Bonows, who is unforgettable.
Table of Contents
...........................................................
Introduction: The Question of Culturai Memory 1
Section One: Cultural Memory: in Theory
Section Two: Cultural Memory and Literaturc
Carcetal Architecture and Cultural Arnnesia
.........................................................................
in Peter Carey's 141
Colonial Encountcrs and "In-bctween Creatures": Cultural Mnemonics
v..
in David Malouf s .....................................................,1. 82
Conclusion
......................................................................
Speaking of Cultural Mamxy.. .223
.......................................................................................................
Works Chi.. .233
Section One
Introduction
8
The Question of Cultural Meaory
Like a well-censored drcam, and subject perhaps to similar
mechanisms, mernory has the orderliness and the teleological drive
of narrative. Its relation to the past is not that of truth but of desire.
John Frow
Time and C o m m o d i m
This dissertation is a begiMing to think about cultural mernory. It records my attcmpt to
intmogate mmory in contemporary culture, to test some of the links ktwecn cultural mcmory
and theoretical and literaiy discourse, and to comib~tei,n somc minor way, to the dialogues that
have recently begun to organize in and around this category. The path 1 have taken ihrough this
field has not k m straightfoiward. Both "culhin" and "manory" are tcmis that resist simple
exphnation or identification; more than once as 1 prrpared this text 1 thought 1 might have pinned
down "culture" or cnuaciatcd "mcmory" in a meaningful wy oniy to find that the linkage
severed or the i&a dissrniinsied into otha discursive fornations or contradictory concepts bat
senneci to cxist at evcn higher levels of abstraction. During thor love& und treacherouc
moments. 1 confcss, 1 rqcatdy thought of Thomas Pynchoo's mvitv's Rsinbow and one of
that novel's most mernorable characten: the senile Brigadier Gencral Eniest Pudâing, with whom
(for reams that will becorne obvias soon eaough) I want to clah a pmrMl kinship. Puddine is
a vetaan of the Great War, and he is a h it s papehial mnemonic prima; but what is more
pressing, here, in my preüminary invocation of the Brigadier Gcnersl, is bis attcmpt to complctc
his magnum opus, Thinns Thrt Cm Hm- in Eummn Poiiti~.P udding, we naû, found
himsclf muttering at the kguuiiag of cach &y's work: "Never make it . . . it's chmghg out fmm
under me. Oh, dodgy-vcry dodgy" (77).
It is a commmplace thu culn<n is an morphous and inclusive concept, and 1 bave ccme
to believe that lhm re few ihiag~m ore "dodgy" than memay: ihe term "culturr" might denote
the ways in which crops and animais arc cultivatcd, "nipcnor" acsthctic knowlcdges and
practices, the disciplinary ffaces and apparatuses that imite (or fhgment) social groups, or evcn
the "scmiotic institution" or social mcchanism that genmes the relational and ccmfüctud
"rrgimes of value" in what John Frow cails the 'stniggle ova how the world is to be
understood-a stni@e over the tams of aur ercpericnec of the world" (Cultural Studies 72); the
tma "maaory," which in the past bu ben viriousiy undcotood as part of the "seul* of man and
thus the scat of mith" and 'self-pnscnce" a the systmi that underlies consciousness and
pcrccption, mon raxntly bas beai imapined as the "lacus" for language (Silveiman Il) or. in
mothm way, the "wchanism by which idcology mataializcs itsclf" (Terdiman, prrSrnt Past 33).
In this view. memory becornes the locaîîon for the various “invisible" structures or "discoums"
that organize social activity sud & d e t he subject positions and socid formations aiet we
inhabit in the pnseat Such a view of memory, as Richard Terdirmn argues in ReKnt P M k gan
to &velop in the nineteenth cairn dong with the "himui" sciences. psychology and sociology;
it continues to develop today, 1 will argue, as a problm about humw knowledge but alro about
social groups and the cultural systcms that hold thcm togethcr. For memory is imbricaîed in the
thoughts we biink, the worâs wc spcak and hte, and the nanatives WC hear and mû, not to
mention the commuaitics we "imagine" for oursclves; put rnother way, mmmiory itself is a
Eemiological meçhanism, and its effixts iatcrocct with subject fonaation and with the social
organization of howledge and powa at countlcss points. To study the mechanisms of manory in
culture, or how culnval groups manber, is to keep both the subjective and the social in play: it
is to a&, as Richard Terdiman does in Rescnt Pa& how we knaw or scmi to "know . . . things
without lcnowing that WC know them" (34); it is to question how memoiy in the modem period
"appcars to nside not in the perceiving consciousness but in the material: in the practices and
institutions of social or psychic lifc, which hction within us, but, strangcly, do not semi to
require eitha our participation or our orplicit allegiancc*' (34).
Mmiory can thus secm to be everywhere and nowhere, at once a bodily prMia. a
neurological event, and an aspect of consciousness: bodies 'branembcr" through sensations,
ntuals deportmcnts, and rcpeated gesms or movcments, this last some claim a fom of
"muscle" mcmory involved in such complex actions, for instance, as walking or riding a bicycle
or striking a goltball; contemporary ne-psychologists snidy the dynamic neural networks and
synapses of the brain and model the mnemonic processer of storagc and r d 1 a s interactive
b'modules" or systems within the brain, cnvisioning, at one level, the ceIl adhesion molecules that
form in-betwecn prosynaptic and pst-synaptic membranes (Rose 15 8-60) and, at another level, a
multistore model of mernory, one that relies on diffemt "eocoding" systans and modes of
rettieval for diffemt fom of input or information, even though th- is a substantial
disagreement about how these terms are applied in the biological and psychological domains
(Sejnowski 162; Pmkin 10-14, 22-25); "brain" memory itself, a the mernory system which
undcrlies consciousness in humans, as William James clab in his 1890 Rinci~lcso f
Pwcholo~~ca, n be divided into "Bort tam" or "pimary" memory, which supports
conscioumess, and long tm" or "scccmdary" mmory, which comprises our "permanent record
of the pan" or unconscious (Parkin 2). a bifbrcatcd mode1 of memory (rationaVirrational,
petmannitlimpcnnanent, censored/un-cmsorcâ, in-timc/timcless) dcveloped et the end of the
ninetcentb caitury in such pimaring waks on mnerncmics and psychology such as Théociule
Ribot's Maladies de Ia mhoire (18 8 1). Hemm Ebbinghaus' aber &s Gedochtnis (1885). Henri
Bergson's MatiCre and niémire (18%)- and, of course, m the numaous publishcd works, essays,
and lettcrs of Sigmund Freud. As a social practicc or culhiral modality, memory is no less
ubiquitous: the cultural pacsscs of "storagen and 'tetricvai" m u n d u s and help us to explpin
the worlds in whicb we think and a*, as is cvinced in the exprrssive effects of cdtural sysicms
which "prexrven the part as toaurl traces, not the least of which, for Jome critics, is language
itself and the related concepts of the sign and the "sound" image; in addition to the fht order
culnual systaa of languagc, 0th inagaic acts of culturai expression Ne films and litcrary
texts, monuments aad architecture, traditions and social rimals re-pesent the past and in doing so
rcgulate how we uadcrstand expriena and cmstruct meaning and value in the pesa. As an
aspect of technology, rnemary can be Yound" in certain m d s a nd plastics, not to mention
machines: a "rmtcrids"m cmory ensures h td efmtion or dcflectim due to ataiial physical
stress is tcmpomy; carocras and phono%Rphs scem to "recqd" the pst, but the most obvious