The Cardozo Memory Project: 9/11

To commemorate the 20th anniversary of September 11, we wanted to get an idea of what it was like at Cardozo Law on that particular day and the days and weeks that followed. Within this publication are the responses we received from our call for memories. There are 22 contributors. These contributors include members of the Classes of 2002, 2003, and 2004. There are faculty and staff members, some who were working at Cardozo at the time, and some who were employed elsewhere. These contributions have been very lightly edited for length and clarity and broken up to provide a narrative structure. In addition to the memories, we have a conversation between Dean Melanie Leslie and Professor Stew Sterk, who was Interim Dean on September 11, where they discuss what it is like to lead a law school during extraordinary times. Finally, to complete this memory capsule, we are including excerpts from the Spring 2002 issue of Cardozo Life. The first article includes the remarks from the memorial service for two members of the Cardozo community we lost that day: Barbara Bracher Olson ’89 and Andrew Zucker ’99. The second article highlights the ways Cardozo alumni helped during September 11 and the days, weeks, and months that followed. Thank you to our contributors: Enrique Elliot Adler, Class of 2002 Daniel Biene, Class of 2002 Lester Brickman, Professor of Law (Emeritus) Benjamin Charkow, Class of 2003 Waleed Diab, Class of 2004 Gary J. Galperin, Adjunct Professor of Law Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum, Clinical Associate Professor of Law; Director, Benjamin B. Ferencz Human Rights and Atrocity Prevention Clinic; Faculty Director, Cardozo Law Institute in Holocaust and Human Rights Jennifer Golden, Director, Office of International Services, Yeshiva University Peter Goodrich, Professor of Law; Director, Program in Law and Humanities Julie Interdonato, Adjunct Professor of Law Sarah Jones, Class of 2002 Randi (Szalavetz) Katz, Class of 2002 Barbara Kolsun, Professor of Practice; Director, Fashion, Arts, Media & Entertainment (FAME) Law Center; Class of 1982 Burton N. Lipshie, Professor of Practice and Director of Advocacy Skills Training Lela Love, Professor of Law; Director, Kukin Program for Conflict Resolution; Director, Cardozo Mediation Clinic Matthew Maron, Class of 2004 Rockwell Reid, Class of 2004 Gabor Rona, Professor of Practice David Rudenstine, Sheldon H. Solow Professor of Law Robbi Smith, Director of Externships & Field Clinics Sherri L. Toub, Class of 2003 Edward Zelinsky, Morris and Annie Trachman Professor of Lawhttps://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cardozo-memory-project/1000/thumbnail.jp

Which Takes Precedence: Collective Rights or Culture?

This Paper claims that, contrary to the common assumption of Anglo-American jurists, collective rights are secondary to a analytically and experientially prior culture. Culture constitutes the identity and content of a collective right. The thrust of my Paper examines the disjunction between collective rights and the culture constituting a collective right. The clue to the disjuncture is that a collective right is assumed to be a rule or principle signified or represented in a written language. A rule or principle is a concept. A culture, in contrast, is constituted from an experiential knowledge in an unwritten language. I raise two contexts where a collective right cannot be identified without a consideration the analytically prior culture of the social group protected by a collective right: peremptory norms in international law and affirmative discrimination clauses in constitutional law. I then highlight a crucially important factor generating the unwritten language of a culture: namely, the collective memories of a group. Although a personal memory is experienced in a context-specific event, a member of a group absorbs its collective memory. The collective memory of the group exists before one is a member. Such a memory may defer to some event centuries earlier. The event may possess a mythic or even false character which cannot be verified except as a myth or historical falsity. One cannot be accepted as a member of a group without the group’s collective memory. Shared assumptions and expectations characterise a collective memory generating a culture. Such assumptions and expectations constitute meant objects. Meant objects are not posted by some source 2 external to the individual members. Meant objects are experienced. A jurist cannot analyze the signified collective rights without examining the social culture said to be represented by the boundary of the collective rights. One may be able to rationally justify a collective right in terms of its source, such as a basic constitutional text, the regularity of behaviour of lawyers and judges or some ultimate concept such as dignity. Such a rational justification, however, does not address why an individual is obligated to defer to the collective rights of an in-group in a state. One has to examine the social-cultural assumptions and expectations presupposed in the content of such collective rights in order to understand why the rights are obligatory. Such an examination dissolves the traditional boundary of legal knowledge which has excluded cultural phenomena generating the collective rights

Memory ecologies

The individual and collective and also cultural domains have long constituted challenging boundaries for the study of memory. These are often clearly demarcated between approaches drawn from the human and the social sciences and also humanities, respectively. But recent work turns the enduring imagination – the world view – of these domains on its head by treating memory as serving a link between both the individual and collective past and future. Here, I employ some of the contributions from Schacter and Welker’s Special Issue of Memory Studies on ‘Memory and Connection’ to offer an ‘expanded view’ of memory that sees remembering and forgetting as the outcome of interactional trajectories of experience, both emergent and predisposed

Digital ethnography, resistance art and communication media in Iran

Iranian visual materials relating to the presidential election crisis have the potential to become the sites of analysis and debate for fields as diverse as history, visual history, memory and post-memory, or trauma studies. References to memory are now omnipresent in scholarly discourse and in a wider public debate: ”social memory’, “collective remembrance”, “national memory”, “public memory”, “counter memory”, “popular history making” and “lived history” jostle for attention.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Collective Representations, Divided Memory and Patterns of Paradox: Mining and Shipbuilding

This paper seeks to examine the different relationship of two industries to their potential for representation and celebration in collective memory. Looking at case studies of mining and shipbuilding in the shared location of Wearside the paper compares and contrasts features of the two industries in relation to the divergent outcomes of the traces of their collective memory in this place. Using visual representations the paper makes the case that the mining industry has experienced a successful recovery of memory. This is contrasted to the paucity of visual representation in relation to shipbuilding. The reasons for the contrast in the viability of collective memory are examined. Material, cultural and aesthetic issues are addressed. Contrasts are drawn between divisions of labour in the two industries and the ways in which these impact upon community and trade union organisation which further relate to the contrast between industrial and occupational identity. Differences in the legacy of the physical occupational communities of the two industries are illustrated. There is also an examination of the aesthetic forms of representation in which mining is seen as characterised by the aesthetics of labour, whereas shipbuilding is represented more through the aesthetics of product. The way in which the industries were closed also becomes important to understand the variation in the differences of the potential of collective memory. All of these strands are brought together to conclude that in relation to the potential for collective memory, mining can be seen to have gone through a process of 'mourning' whereas melancholia seems to more adequately represent the situation with respect to shipbuilding. In illustrating these cases the paper is arguing for a more sophisticated understanding of the process of deindustrialisation and the potential for the recovery of collective memory.Collective Memory, Mourning, Melancholia, Deindustrialization, Post-Industrial Community, Locality, Mining, Shipbuilding

Public Libraries: techno trends and collective memory

By public library I mean here a library providing some kind of universal access to its assets, one whose readership isn’t exclusively tied and restricted to a particular organization – including the generally called public libraries, but also many specialized libraries, such as the academic of the open kind. Despite all efforts, public libraries continue to face strong barriers to their participation in the information society. Participants of the World Meeting on the Future of the ISIS Software recognized that “the ISIS Software Family has a unique technological concept and developmental mission to cope with Information Storage and Retrieval Systems (ISRS), particularly for developing countries where the technology is widely known and used; that the ISIS Software Family has now fully embraced the Free and Open Source Software approach and the support of UNICODE structures to be fully open and multilingual” (Rio Declaration 2008), restating thus the persistent relevance of this software family. OSS (Coar 2006) is defined as software whose source code is freely available, therefore allowing for free inspection and/or utilization, i.e., it is available for study and use by everyone without any payment or any other barrier to access. the lack of technical skill in libraries, a situation that libraries share with much of the public and cultural sectors. The study of OSS ILS, and of the their adaptation to the needs of specific public libraries may be the solution to this. Library Management Systems) that enhances digital archive interoperability between a diverse range of libraries