La «tyrannie» de la mémoire

We are experiencing today everything related to memory, which is perhaps the sign of a new regime of historicity privileging the present and a symptom of the crisis of the future. While one should maintain a critical regard, that of the historian on the memorial legacy, one must also be careful not to challenge the memorial dimension which has greatly enriched the historical discourse. The problem of the places of memory permits this double movement of appropriation and of critical distance which augurs a new way of writing history, starting from its footprints. Key words: Regime of historicity. places of memory, appropriation, critical distance, footprints

El tombant interpretatiu i pragmàtic de la historiografia francesa

Partiendo de la reciente rectificación de la línea editorial de la revista Annales, se tratan cuatro problemas metodológicos de la historiografa actual, tal como se manifiestan en las reflexiones de diversos historiadores y pensadores: la cuestión de la historie événementielle; el retorno de la historia política; las posibilidades de una historia del "tiempo presente;" y la hermenéutica histórica desarrollada por Paul Ricoeur.Starting from the recent rectification of the editorial line of the review Annales, Dosse deals with four methodological problems of the contemporary historiography as they appear on the reflections of a certain number of historians and thinkers: the question of the histoire événementielle, the return of the political history, the possibilities of a "present time" history and the historical hermeneutics developed by Paul Ricoeur

Introduction

Introduction (en) ERRS 2017 8 1Introduction (anglais) ERRS 2017 8

L’histoire entre la guerre des mémoires et la Justice

The question arises as to whether justice is capable of repairing the tragedy of history. François Dosse situates his analysis on the pragmatic axis of the citizen's concern expressed by Ricœur from the first lines of Memory, History, Forgetting when he says he is troubled by too much memory here and too much forgetting elsewhere. We are witnessing a progressive judicialisation of the historical discipline. It has resulted in a disturbing, memory inflation since the Gayssot law of 1990. The functions of the judge and the historian certainly have common features, as Marc Bloch has shown in Apologie pour l’histoire and Carlo Ginzburg in Le juge et l’historien. The examining magistrate can be compared to the historian, but not to the judge who must render the judgment. This progressive hold of justice over the past perversely results in an attempt to sanction historical questions. Ricœur helps us to rethink the relations between justice, history and memory by distinguishing and articulating these various dimensions through the work of a clarification of concepts. He makes it possible to better articulate the judicial function, the work of memory and the historiographic operation while respecting the validity of each of these dimensions.La question se pose de savoir si la Justice est capable de réparer le tragique de l’histoire. François Dosse situe son analyse sur l’axe pragmatique de la préoccupation citoyenne exprimée par Ricœur, dès les premières lignes de La mémoire, l’histoire, l’oubli, lorsqu’il se dit troublé par le trop de mémoire ici et le trop d’oubli ailleurs. On assiste en effet à une judiciarisation progressive de la discipline historique. Elle se traduit par une inquiétante inflation mémorielle depuis la loi Gayssot de 1990. La fonction du juge et de l’historien a certes des points communs, comme l’a montré Marc Bloch dans Apologie pour l’histoire ou Carlo Ginzburg dans Le juge et l’historien. Le juge d’instruction peut s’apparenter à l’historien, mais pas celui du siège qui doit rendre un jugement. Cette emprise progressive de la justice sur le passé a pour effet pervers une tentative de sanctuarisation des questions historiques. Ricœur nous aide à repenser les relations entre justice, histoire et mémoire en distinguant et en articulant ces diverses dimensions par un travail de clarification des concepts. Il permet de mieux articuler la fonction judiciaire, le travail de mémoire et l’opération historiographique en respectant la validité de chacune de ces dimensions

Os engajamentos políticos de Gilles Deleuze

Behind the philosophical work of Gilles Deleuze, directed mainly to theconstruction of concepts, we can make out his propensity for politicaladvocacy, both timely and concrete. From May 1968, he participatedin social movements (GIP) and political and intellectual debates thatanimated the 1970s. His philosophical writings attest to his “rebel” spiritand his aversion to all forms of power and oppression.Por trás da obra filosófica de Gilles Deleuze, voltada notadamente àconstrução de conceitos, percebe-se sua propensão à defesa de causaspolíticas, pontuais e concretas. A partir de maio de 1968, ele participade movimentos sociais (GIP) e de debates políticos e intelectuais queanimaram a década de 1970. Seus escritos filosóficos atestam seu espírito”rebelde” e sua aversão a toda forma de poder e de opressão

Introduction

Introduction ERRS 2017 8 1Introduction ERRS 2017 8

Le présent est davantage que l’instant

La question centrale de cette contribution est de penser la singularité de l’histoire du temps présent, ce qui la différencie de l’histoire immédiate ou du très contemporain. Celle-ci réside dans la contemporanéité du non-contemporain, dans l’épaisseur temporelle de l’espace d’expérience, de toute l’épaisseur du présent du passé. L’histoire du temps présent n’est donc pas une période nouvelle à ajouter aux quatre « vieilles », mais un nouveau regard sur le passé, scrutant ses usages, ses réemplois, ses recyclages. Pour étayer cette position, on s’appuiera sur la problématique des Lieux de mémoire, de Pierre Nora, mais on mobilisera aussi l’histoire de la pensée du temps depuis saint Augustin, Bergson, Husserl, Gadamer, Deleuze… On montrera par ailleurs que la notion de temps présent est doublement issue de la cristallisation du sens et de l’hétérochronie, qui est le temps non linéaire scruté par les psychanalystes et les herméneutes.The main question of this paper is to think about the singularity of the history of the present, which differentiates it from immediate or very contemporary history. This singularity resides in the contemporaneousness of the non-contemporary, in the temporal dimension of the area of experience, of the entire dimension of the present of the past. The history of the present is not, therefore, a new period to add to the four ‘old’ ones, but a new way of looking at the past, examining how it is used, re-used, and recycled. To support this position, I will focus on the problematics in Lieux de mémoire (Realms of Memory), by Pierre Nora, and also on the history of reflections on time since Saint Augustine, Bergson, Husserl, Gadamer, Deleuze… Moreover, I will show that the notion of present time results from both the crystallization of meaning, and heterochrony, which is non-linear time examined by psychoanalysts and scholars of hermeneutics