History an essential aspect of humanity
History is an essential aspect of humanity. History allows humans to make sense of the presence, understand their culture, recreate events that make sense to them, and discover the reason for the activities in modern society, to mention but a few. As a result, historical studies have been done both formally and informally. For instance, different second and third immigrant family members are constantly reminded of their home country and what the parents hated or liked about their culture. On the other hand, the formal understanding of history is done through scholarly materials and reconstructions. However, history can be confusing as it refers to social memory on the issue. In the first to third topics by Maurice Halbwachs on the recollection of the society, the author focusses on the impact of the present society through language, dreams, and reconstruction. The concept of the society presently is expressed as influencing the manner in which someone presents reality. On the other hand, Paul Connerton captures social memory as differing from person to person, thus cannot be highlighted as collective. Through the analysis of the French revolution, the author gives a precise examination of the differences in social memory. Social memory is essential in the reconstruction of historical moments; however, they are different, depends on the setting, present factors, and is based on the issues that are considered relevant to the specific people.
Social memory is critical to the understanding of the past and the issues that stood out to the people in the era. Social memory allows a different understanding of the history that impacts the present by offering different cultures and ways of life meaning. According to Connerton, “our experiences of the present largely depend very largely depends upon our knowledge of the past” (2). That is, the understanding of the past offers a perspective of the present in terms of culture and behavior. When the aspect of the history is missing, different theories are expected to recreate and provide an understanding of the past, such as in the theories of creation to make sense of the present. As Halbwachs concurs, “we preserve the memory of each epoch in our lives,” which aids in the understanding of the period and present (47). Gaining an understanding of the past offers the present a form of completion in providing meaning and purpose. The reason for certain practices and ways of life is essential in the understanding of the past and why it was necessary in the first place. History continues to be an essential part of humanity as it offers the current meaning and explanation. As a result, humans have relied on formal and informal channels to capture the past and preserve it. However, the concept of the past limits accuracy as it relies solely on personal experiences and cannot be collective among all people.
Overall, social memory is inadequate as it differs among people. People from different communities have different understandings and recollections of the past, depending on the impacts of the events and other factors. As Halbwachs explains, “collective frameworks are precisely the instruments used by the collective memory to reconstruct an image of the past” (40). That is, to gain a clear and accurate understanding of the past, people rely on collective frameworks rather than the specific memory of one person. People have a different understanding of an event as it focuses on their knowledge and interpretation of the concepts as they happen. As Connerton explains, “the effect is seen perhaps most obviously when communication among generations is impended on different sets of memory” (3). In that, the narratives passed down in different generations have disparities based on the narrator. Different people offer different perspectives on similar events despite being alive in the same period. Both books highlight the importance of a framework and recollection strategies that enhances similar qualities for historical accuracy. Nonetheless, human memory is different based on the understanding of society, which can be impacted by the social setting.
The social setting and structure of the community impact the recollection of issues for humans. Different events are preserved differently in memory and retrieved separately depending on the location of a person. As Halbwachs explains, “if we examine a little more closely how we recollect things, we will surely realize that the greatest number of memories come to us when our parents, friends and other persons recall them to us” (38). In that, the manner in which a person remembers an incident is based on the setting in which a person is currently placed. The concepts of the past change depending on the relationship with the person and context. Different incidences happening at the same time are viewed differently depending on where and what a person was doing at the time. For instance, in the setting of a more radical and pro-racial disparity, a person that experienced 911 might rely on the aspect of Islamism. On the other hand, in a political setting, a different person can highlight the memory as a political superiority context between the east and west. Although the differences are slight at times, the configuration of the past and present influence the understanding and retrieval of a given memory.
Moreover, social memory relies on the present. The structure of the past is expressed in a manner that contrasts with the past. As Connerton explains, “experiences of the present largely depend upon our knowledge of the past, and that our images of the past commonly serve to legitimate a social present” (3). The modern society has a perception of the past in terms of life, gender roles, social standing, and class. As a result, the images of the memory are developed to fit in the understanding of the past. The past is viewed as “incompletely and imperfectly” as compared to the present (Halbwachs 50). An understanding of the post is characterized by the social perception and acceptable framework in modern society. For instance, a person from a primitive tribe is less likely to focus on an invention from the society that transformed the way of farming and herding. On the contrary, the storyteller from a primitive tribe tells narrative based on the defining aspects of the society, such as seasonal activities and rituals. The structure of modernity affects social memory by limiting accuracy. Different storytellers in the informal sector are capable of discarding the social expectations in telling different narratives from memory.
In the reading, it is evident that memories are essential in the understanding of the future; however, social memory is not accurate as it focusses on the setting of narration and social expectations. Recollection and collective framework are critical in the capture of the accurate form of data about events in the past. The collective structures allow similar events from social memories to express a timeline and a shared understanding of the events. It is evident that memories can be elusive and inaccurate. Despite being essential for the understanding of the present, it is evident that memories can be misleading in the creation of formal documentation of events. Therefore, historians should focus on offering a collective understanding of events rather than recollections from the perspective on a personal failure to which the narration of the event should be given with a disclaimer. Memories form part of humanity; thus, images and videos are necessary to humans as they offer future meaning and purpose.