Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLee, Philip
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-25T09:06:41Z
dc.date.available2019-09-25T09:06:41Z
dc.date.created2011-10-27 02:15
dc.date.issued2010-04
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/181448
dc.description.abstract"If the inability to forget is problematic both for individuals and societies, imposed political, social, or cultural amnesia must be considered deliberately injurious and, in terms of human rights, unjust. One particularly insightful essay identifies a basic typology of forgetting, some aspects of which have largely negative or detrimental, and others positive or beneficial, implications (Connerton, 2008). The seven kinds are ‘repressive erasure’ (obliteration, destruction, editing out); ‘prescriptive forgetting’ (erasure that is believed to be in the best interests of all parties); ‘forgetting that is constitutive in the formation of a new identity’ (forgetting is not a loss but a gain that facilitates new beginnings); ‘structural amnesia’ (the tendency to forget links that are socially undesirable); ‘forgetting as annulment’ (flowing from a surfeit of information, discarding or storing vast quantities of information); ‘forgetting as planned obsolescence’ (discarding as a vital ingredient of consumerism); and ‘forgetting as humiliated silence’ (collusive silence brought on by a particular kind of collective shame). Connerton describes his typology as work in progress. Two of his types are important to the formulation of a right to memory both for individuals and for collectivities. They are ‘repressive erasure’ and ‘prescriptive forgetting’, usually carried out by States, governments, and ruling parties."
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherWorld Association for Christian Communication
dc.rightsWith permission of the license/copyright holder
dc.subjectright to memory
dc.subjectrecovering information
dc.subjectrepressive erasure
dc.subjectprescriptive forgetting
dc.subject.otherSocial ethics
dc.subject.otherFamily ethics
dc.subject.otherSexual orientation/gender
dc.subject.otherEducation and ethics
dc.subject.otherGeneral theology/other
dc.titleTowards a right to memory
dc.typeArticle
dc.source.journaltitleMedia Development
dc.source.issue2
dc.source.beginpage9
dcterms.accessRightsopen access
refterms.dateFOA2019-09-25T09:06:41Z
ge.collectioncodeAA
ge.dataimportlabelGlobethics object
ge.identifier.legacyglobethics:4757554
ge.identifier.permalinkhttps://www.globethics.net/gel/4757554
ge.journalyear2010
ge.lastmodificationdate2019-02-11 19:08
ge.lastmodificationuseradmin@novalogix.ch
ge.submissions1
ge.peerreviewedno
ge.placeofpublicationToronto (Canada)
ge.setnameGlobeEthicsLib
ge.setnameGlobeTheoLib
ge.setspecglobeethicslib
ge.setspecglobetheolib
ge.submitter.emaillijoamuabel@rediffmail.com
ge.submitter.nameJohn, Lijo
ge.submitter.userid2069840
ge.linkhttp://www.waccglobal.org/en/resources/media-development/2286-20102-the-right-to-memory.html


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
lee.pdf
Size:
200.3Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record