Christopher Cepernich

Memoria collettiva e usi simbolici della Resistenza. Un'analisi sociologica tra fondazione ideologica e retorica identitaria

Introduction

Memoria collettiva e usi simbolici della resistenza. Un'analisi sociologica tra fondazione ideologica e retorica identitaria. Studio sociologico sulla memoria collettiva e gli usi simbolici della Resistenza. Analizza come plasma il discorso pubblico, le identità politiche e i conflitti democratici.

Abstract

This article offers a sociological reflection on the political uses of the memory of the Resistance, conceived both as a social construction and as a resource for legitimation in political conflict. The Resistance is framed as a category of thought that still helps to shape contemporary public discourse—for instance in electoral campaigns and collective mobilizations, but also in media entertainment products. The analysis distinguishes between two logics through which the memory of the historical Resistance experience is mobilized: an ideological–foundational function in political modernity, and a rhetorical–strategic function in the postmodern phase, marked by storytelling, branding, and the fragmentation of the public sphere. In conclusion, the article argues that Resistance memory progressively detaches from its historical anchoring to become a contested narrative asset within the “market of meanings,” crucial for understanding the contemporary dialectic between political identity, consensual recognition, and democratic conflict.

Review

The article "Memoria collettiva e usi simbolici della Resistenza" presents a highly relevant and insightful sociological analysis of the political uses of Resistance memory. By conceptualizing the Resistance not merely as a historical event but as a living "category of thought" and a crucial resource for political legitimation, the author establishes a strong framework for understanding its enduring influence on contemporary public discourse. The abstract clearly outlines the article's core contribution: to explore how this collective memory is actively constructed, mobilized, and contested across diverse arenas, from electoral campaigns to media entertainment, positioning it as a significant contribution to memory studies and political sociology, particularly concerning foundational national narratives. A key strength of this work lies in its analytical distinction between two distinct logics of memory mobilization. The article effectively differentiates between an "ideological–foundational function" characteristic of political modernity and a "rhetorical–strategic function" that predominates in the postmodern phase, marked by storytelling, branding, and a fragmented public sphere. This conceptual framework offers a sophisticated lens through which to examine the evolving utility of historical memory. The proposed argument that Resistance memory progressively detaches from its historical anchoring to become a "contested narrative asset" within a "market of meanings" is particularly compelling, promising a nuanced understanding of the interplay between political identity, consensual recognition, and democratic conflict. While the abstract outlines a robust theoretical contribution, it implicitly invites further consideration of the empirical grounding and specific methodologies. A reviewer might anticipate a detailed exploration of the mechanisms and specific instances that exemplify this detachment from historical anchoring, beyond general allusions to "storytelling" and "branding." Additionally, a deeper engagement with the potential normative implications of such rhetorical and strategic uses of memory – for instance, concerning historical accuracy or the integrity of collective consciousness – could further enrich the analysis. Nevertheless, the article appears to offer a timely and conceptually strong contribution, making it essential reading for scholars interested in the dynamics of political memory and identity in contemporary societies.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.