Book review: The Performance of Memory as Transitional Justice
| Published date | 01 May 2016 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0269758016628949 |
| Date | 01 May 2016 |
| Subject Matter | Book reviews |
Book reviews
S Elizabeth Bird and FraserM Ottanelli (eds)
The Performanceof Memory as Transitional Justice
Intersentia:Cambridge, 2015; viiiþ201 pp.: hbk, ISBN 9781780682624.
Reviewed by: Tinneke Van Camp, University of Sheffield, UK
DOI: 10.1177/0269758016628949
This edited collection is concerned with the process of building a common narrative following
mass victimisation and the role of such collective memory for healing in post-conflict countries.
The book does not look at individual victims, but at social groups as victims. As such it transcends
one of the limits of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRCs) identified by Urban Walker in
the first chapter, that is, reliance on individuals who directly witnessed atrocities. Bird and
Ottanelli have bundled highly insightful chapters written by scholars from a variety of scientific
disciplines. None of them misses a beat and manages to adhere to the book’s clear-cut aim.
Chapters are remarkably informative and concise, and thanks to the clever use of nuanced but
clear language, they form a truly digestible read.
The theoretical groundwork is laid in Part I. In the first chapter, Urban Walker explains the
epistemological approach to truth adopted in the collection, that is, a constructivist approach,
which recommends that building a common memory is a dialectical process. A key message
concerns the need to respect multiple narrators’ discourses, whether or not they contradict common
or official narrative. Urban Walker also discourages overreliance on TRCs. These have a moral and
political agenda and are restricted in time and in who is invited to testify. She argues that, whilst a
TRC is an important political gesture, it can only unveil part of the truth. It is a start, but not the
end: ‘among [TRCs] central recommendations should be that truth recovery continue through
varied projects and institutions’ (p.20). Lo´pez (Chapter 2) expands on this idea and challenges
the potential of formal justice mechanisms to facilitate shared narrative. She argues that collective
memory, which emerges from collaborative narrative, matters because it strengthens social soli-
darity, which is instrumental in post-conflict nations. It is then in the interest of collective healing
to supplement formal procedures with more organic forms of justice.
Parts II and III include case studies that offer insight into various mechanisms through which
collective narrative and transitional justice might be achieved. In accordance with the constructi-
vist approach, they all illustrate that there is not one truth – there are multiple truths. Moreover,
multiple truths can only be uncovered through not one but multiple ways of memory building.
Also, throughout, it is argued that memorialisation and truth building should be seen as on-going
processes. Across the different cases, it is clear that contributors agree with Lo´pez that institutional
and judicial responses often fall short in uncovering the full truth. In their respective chapters,
contributors look at both formal and informal mechanisms, all the while underlining their
International Review of Victimology
2016, Vol. 22(2) 195–200
ªThe Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
irv.sagepub.com
To continue reading
Request your trial