{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03422619047619048, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00744047619047619, 'mean_word_length': 5.1981566820276495, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Book review: The Stages of Memory: Reflections on Memorial Art, Loss, and the Spaces Between

colonial times and the denial of recognition and memory. So too, Susan Buck-Morss (2009) traces the forgetting of slavery at the heart of Enlightenment thinking in Hegel, Haiti, and Universal History. This kind of forgetfulness, Fabian (2007) argues, “impairs reason and knowledge because it prevents recognition” (p. 68). Rieff has given us a book, a meditation on the dilemmas associated with the construction of memory, morality, forgetting, and the fraught difficulties that run through these processes. He reaches widely and brings together thinkers on the issue to illustrate how complex these dilemmas are. It will be an important book in the historiography on memory and forgetting, frequently bound together in a ghastly embrace. While the arguments “against remembrance” resonate in certain situations and periods, memory too remains imperative in others. Surely at the heart of the debate is the question of intention. When the social agents of collective memory engage in crude identity politics, outside a pluralistic framework, surely Rieff’s argument is compelling. Yet, as Wiesel’s work and provocations also demonstrate, one could write “in praise of remembering,” above all emphasizing the symbiotic dependence of each on the other.