Multicollective Memory: Diversity and Identity in a Globalized World

In relation to Klaus P. Hansen s concept of multicollectivity (2009: 20), my concept of multicollective memory elucidates how individuals in the contemporary globalised world have become part of numerous collective memories. In contrast to the identification with a singular national´-or-ethnic memory, individuals in the present era exhibit multiple affiliations that inform their memories and identities. The central characteristics of multicollective memory can be defined as follows: firstly, the simultaneous identification with several groups-;- secondly, the overlapping and mixing of collective memories across borders-;- and thirdly, the influence of digital media, which facilitate the exchange of memories. In other words, the concept of multicollective memory posits that individuals in today s globalised world are simultaneously anchored in a multiplicity of collective memories. In contrast to the notion of a unified collective memory, individuals in the contemporary era exhibit a multifaceted and diverse array of affiliations, which serve as reference points for their memory and identity.
The contemporary era is characterised by the phenomenon of multicollective memory, which is shaped by the processes of globalisation and digitalisation. These developments facilitate the exchange of memories and the formation of new multicollective narratives. Nevertheless, there are challenges inherent in the continued salience of national and ethnic identities, which can give rise to conflict when different collective memories come into conflict. In this context, the concept of collective memory, as defined by the French sociologist Maurice Halbwachs (1925, 1941, 1950), remains a pertinent and timely concept, despite having been subjected to numerous critiques and adaptations. Halbwachs underscored the significance of social groups in the formation of memories. Nevertheless, Aleida and Jan Assmann correctly identify a deficiency in Maurice Halbwachs sociology of memory, namely the absence of a robust conceptualisation of conflict. In essence, collective memory serves to foster cohesion and consensus within a group. However, this cohesive and homogenising -function- is inextricably linked with processes of exclusion and demarcation from other groups. The formation of identity is inextricably linked to the construction of alterity (J. Assmann-;- A. Assmann 1990: 27).
The other side of this homogeneity, which manifests itself in the production of alterity and conflict, is not addressed by Halbwachs in any explicit manner. Therefore, the traditional notion of collective memory is insufficient for elucidating conflicting memories within a given group´-or-between disparate groups, as well as the conflicts that arise from divergent memories. It is thus necessary to supplement this concept in order to take account of the contemporary reality of multiple and overlapping affiliations. In this sense, multicollective memory builds upon the concept of memory as a social construction put forth by Halbwachs, reflecting the dynamic interactions between different cultural groups. The concept of multicollective memory thus provides a more nuanced understanding of the culturally diverse memories of our time, taking into account the multiplicity of perspectives and the interactions between different socio-cultural groups.
It is evident that collective memory and multicollective memory are two distinct concepts that exhibit notable differences in several respects and serve different -function-s within social groups. The term "collective memory" is used to describe the collective recollection of a specific, cohesive group. It is typically stable and generates a coherent identity, which frequently encompasses a (latent) exclusion of otherness. The content of these memories is typically homogeneous. In contrast, multicollective memory encompasses multiple interacting groups, is open and dynamic, and produces a complex and heterogeneous identity that emphasises mutual recognition (cf. A. Honneth 1995, 2018). While collective memory fosters a homogeneous identity, multicollective memory facilitates the construction of a multicollective identity, drawing upon the diverse experiences of the groups involved. This comparison between collective and multicollective memory demonstrates that multicollective memory, in contrast to Halbwachs classical concept, presents a more intricate and dynamic perspective on cultural memory. This is achieved by acknowledging and emphasising the diversity of sociocultural perspectives and their interactions in a pluralistic society.
The concept of multicollective memory is of significant importance for the comprehension of identity in multicultural societies, as it demonstrates the manner in which multicollective identities are constituted through cultural interactions. Furthermore, it can facilitate conflict resolution by considering multiple perspectives and acknowledging the diversity of human experiences.

Rate the article
Bad	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	Very good
Result : 100%							Participated in the vote : 4