The world's best marketers are blessed with a peculiar inventiveness that stems from experiencing the world as a novelty, which is why the marketing discipline in general has a good memory for forgetting. In this paper then, we contend that amnesia in marketing academia is perfectly healthy, and indeed functions as a key component of our creative, ideas-laden discipline. We argue that the marketer's natural inclination towards erasure and renewal, towards always wiping the slate clean, should be encouraged, not cured. In marshalling the evidence in favour of forgetting, we pull apart the dialectic of remembering and forgetting, demonstrate how forgetting is integral to the academic sensibility, and question how much of the marketing literature is worth remembering in the first place.
New and improvedMarketing has a good memory for forgetting. Whether as a consequence of the socalled 'end of history' thesis promulgated by postmodernists or not, it is clear that many marketing thinkers and theorists frequently ignore our discipline's prodigious history. You could say they are amnesiac neophiliacs. After all, marketing's life-blood is a consumer culture sustained by what Walter Benjamin (2003: 179), paraphrasing Friedrich Nietzsche, calls the 'eternal recurrence of the new'. In 449 Volume 8(4): 449-463