HISTORY, MEMORY, IDENTITY

The present paper examines certain salient features of the history-mem ory-identity relation. The common feature underpinning most contempora ry manifestations of the memory craze seems to be an insecurity about identity, an insecurity that generates an excessive preoccupation with 'memory'. In the face of memory's valorization, what should be the at titude of the historian! At the present moment there is a pathetic and sometimes tragic conflict between what 'memory' expresses and confirm s, namely, the demands made by subjectivities, and the demand, essenti al to any scientific discipline, for proof. The paper explores this co nflict and argues that neither term can be reduced to the other. It su ggests that one needs to conceptualize the field of history as involvi ng inevitable limits to historical knowledge, such that both history a nd memory are seen as inadequate. In this way one avoids both the arro gance of a would-be definitive history and the 'arrogance of authentic ity' that all too often accompanies claims for memory.