- 영문명
- Memory, Trauma, and Psychoanalysis: Dominick LaCapra and Theory of Holocaust
- 발행기관
- 한국아메리카학회
- 저자명
- 육영수(Youngsoo Yook)
- 간행물 정보
- 『미국학논집』제36집 3호, 172~199쪽, 전체 28쪽
- 주제분류
- 인문학 > 기타인문학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2004.12.01
국문 초록
영문 초록
The article aims to understand, analyse, and criticize Dominick LaCapra"s interpretations of the Holocaust by closely examining four of his publications-Representing the Holocaust (1994), History and Memory After Auschwitz (1998), Writing History, Writing Trauma (2001), and History in Transit (2004). As one of the most renowned intellectual historians and influential theorists in historical methodology in the U. S. A., LaCapra had been the leading advocate of the so-called "linguistic turn in history." While continuing to call for dialogical interaction between text and context, he recently shifted his scholarship from textual criticism to the theory of historical trauma, that is, the Holocaust.
LaCapra is confident that the Holocaust, as subject-matter, is located at a crossroad where the complex and problematic relationships among memory, trauma, and historical writings can be carefully explored and critically reevaluated. He is interested in how the remembrance of the past is sometimes repressed, distorted, exaggerated, and/or politicized according to the subject-positions of those who are involved. For the purpose of illustrating how victims, predators, bystanders, and collaborators differently exploited the memories of the past, LaCapra borrowed from psychoanalysis such conceptions as transference, acting out, and working through, and applied them to the study of the Holocaust. He emphasizes the important and indispensable roles of "primary memories" cherished by the survivors, which testify to experiential evidence of particular traumas. LaCapra is very convinced that an empathetic narration of the past is not only possible but also ideal in which historians can combine a documentary/positivistic research model with a radical/post-modern constructivism.
The author expresses some uneasy concerns regarding LaCapra"s theoretical positions on the Holocaust. First, LaCapra"s insistence on jumping to an "ethical tum" (via trauma studies, skipping a "cultural turn") in historical writings may result in another example of "theoretism(theory for theory"s sake)", unless it accompanies concrete and persuasive case studies. Second, the author challenges the universal validity and applicability of LaCapra"s conceptual (especially psychoanalystic) tools to other historical traumas. He thus concludes the article by inviting his fellow historians to test whether LaCapra"s theory of the Holocaust may be useful to the case of the massacre of American Indians and/or "Korean military comfort women" during the Japanese colonial era.
LaCapra is confident that the Holocaust, as subject-matter, is located at a crossroad where the complex and problematic relationships among memory, trauma, and historical writings can be carefully explored and critically reevaluated. He is interested in how the remembrance of the past is sometimes repressed, distorted, exaggerated, and/or politicized according to the subject-positions of those who are involved. For the purpose of illustrating how victims, predators, bystanders, and collaborators differently exploited the memories of the past, LaCapra borrowed from psychoanalysis such conceptions as transference, acting out, and working through, and applied them to the study of the Holocaust. He emphasizes the important and indispensable roles of "primary memories" cherished by the survivors, which testify to experiential evidence of particular traumas. LaCapra is very convinced that an empathetic narration of the past is not only possible but also ideal in which historians can combine a documentary/positivistic research model with a radical/post-modern constructivism.
The author expresses some uneasy concerns regarding LaCapra"s theoretical positions on the Holocaust. First, LaCapra"s insistence on jumping to an "ethical tum" (via trauma studies, skipping a "cultural turn") in historical writings may result in another example of "theoretism(theory for theory"s sake)", unless it accompanies concrete and persuasive case studies. Second, the author challenges the universal validity and applicability of LaCapra"s conceptual (especially psychoanalystic) tools to other historical traumas. He thus concludes the article by inviting his fellow historians to test whether LaCapra"s theory of the Holocaust may be useful to the case of the massacre of American Indians and/or "Korean military comfort women" during the Japanese colonial era.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말: "언어적 전환"그 이후
Ⅱ. 잡종적 역사이론 세우기
Ⅲ. 트라우마의 기억과 증언
Ⅳ. 정신분석학과 홀로코스트
Ⅴ. 맺음말: 역사학의 윤리적 전환?
인용 문헌
Abstract
Ⅱ. 잡종적 역사이론 세우기
Ⅲ. 트라우마의 기억과 증언
Ⅳ. 정신분석학과 홀로코스트
Ⅴ. 맺음말: 역사학의 윤리적 전환?
인용 문헌
Abstract
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
참고문헌
최근 이용한 논문
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!