Past, present, future
History and memory- which one to believe?
The people who survived the Holocaust are slowly disappearing. The number of these survivors is decreasing drastically year by year. Does that mean the memory of these brave fighters leave this world with them? Yes? No? This is where the role of history enters the image. Recorded documents, facts, statistics, writings out of archives are all everlasting pieces of the past. These documents on their own fail to present the undented picture of the dreadful events occurred. The emotions and sorrows felt by the individuals are completely overlooked and sidestepped in historical recordings. History being claimed as an objective piece tries to be as unbiased as possible, which if argued about can be questioned, as selective choosing of certain facts is present. While reading a history textbook I have wondered myself about the cold presentation of breath-taking events. After all who decides what is put into it? What is relevant and what isn’t? The past itself is always an objective matter, but as soon as it is presented by an individual it evolves to being subjective. Although history provides the background knowledge to individual memories, as seen in ‘The Fiftieth Gate’, “I try narrating the stories in his own style…” says Baker in the hope of triggering some of his father’s memories by the use of his documented evidences. ‘Very clever of Mark Baker to do such, I, myself would remember more efficiently if presented with some background. I have read that
it is natural for the human brain to continuously link memories with the corresponding senses, but what if they are never triggered correctly. “Does history remember more than memory?” following question asked by Mark Baker. Memories as known and presented by these people tend to have their flaws and gaps. Memory fades over time whereas the written facts are always present. History is more reliable? “HISTORY brings with it memories…”as ‘The...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document