Commemorating the past: the discursive construction of official narratives about the `Rebirth of the Second Austrian Republic'

Abstract

This article analyses the discursive construction of collective and individual memories and the functions of commemorative events for the discursive construction of national identities through the example of Austrian post-war commemorative events. Thus, the various attempts to come to terms with the Nazi past in post-war Austria are illustrated in detail. The article will first summarize the socio-political contexts relating to the relevant post-war commemorative years in Austria (1988, 1995, 2005). Then we will consider sequences of a political speech by the then Austrian chancellor, Dr Wolfgang Schüssel, as one of many possible examples in 2005 which establishes a hegemonic stance towards the Nazi past. Finally, we will discuss our results and illustrate that, in addition to hegemonic discourses, competing narratives aim to provide different answers to the basic question `how should one come to terms with traumatic pasts?' Our results are such that in the hegemonic narrative of Austrian history after 1945, the political event of the Declaration of Independence is represented metaphorically as a `rebirth'; a metaphorical scenario which constructs a `creation myth', and by this anthropomorphization suggests that `newborn' Austria is to be perceived as innocent as a newborn child. On the other hand, the historical events before and after are placed in the cognitive frame of natural disasters or fateful events (`horror', `nightmare', `dark age') and a community of victims is discursively constructed comprising the victims of the Nazi terror as well as the soldiers waging the war of aggression. Discursive patterns apparent in this case study can, of course, be generalized to similar communicative events in many nation-states. The specific systematic and explicit linguistic/pragmatic and discourse-analytic methodology presented in this article lends itself to deconstruct official discourses which influence collective beliefs, opinions and ideologies.

What is a `revolution'?: National commemoration, collective memory and managing authenticity in the representation of a political event

“…Despite the interest in collective memory and collective remembering from discursive psychologists (e.g., Billig, 1999;Middleton and Edwards, 1990;Middleton & Brown, 2005), cultural psychologists (e.g., White, 1997;Wertsch, 2002) and critical discourse analysts (e.g., de Cillia et al,1999;Wodak and de Cillia, 2007), there have been few studies focusing on Eastern Europe and the discursive practices that nationstates use to understand history in 'official contexts involving public institutions and texts' (White, 1997, p. 64; but see Ahonen, 1997;Luczynski, 1997;Tulviste and Wertsch, 1994;Wertsch, 2002). Less attention has been paid to Eastern Europe, to ideologies of freedom, discourses of social change and local meanings associated with it.…”

Sharing values to safeguard the future: British Holocaust Memorial Day commemoration as epideictic rhetoric

“…My methodology draws on Critical Discourse Studies, and more specifically on the Discourse-Historical Approach (Heer et al 2008;Krzyżanowski 2010;Reisigl 2018;Reisigl & Wodak 2001Richardson 2017a;Richardson & Wodak 2009;Slavíčková 2013Slavíčková , 2014Wodak & De Cillia 2007;Wodak et al 1999), in order to make sense of (1) the field of remembrance and its genres (e.g. ceremonies, speeches, stories, testimony, music, minutes of silence, etc.)…”

Mediating National History and Personal Catastrophe: Televising Holocaust Memorial Day Commemoration

“…This facilitates room for the creation of unity but also the collision of opposing political interests and interpretations of the past, as well as the potential for conflict with the collective myths/narratives of other national, ethnic or religious groups (Heer et al 2008;Wodak and Auer-Borea 2009). Consequently, processes of collective memorialising are not neutral, but rather always tied to collective identity, politics and power in complex and mutually informed ways (Billig and Marinho 2017;Wodak and De Cillia 2007). This article examines one such case: the televisation of the British national commemorative ceremony, as part of Holocaust Memorial Day.…”