memórias coletivas e identidades

7/28/2019 memrias coletivas e identidades

1/39

http://jce.sagepub.com

Journal of Contemporary Ethnography

DOI: 10.1177/08912416032556742003; 32; 483Journal of Contemporary Ethnography

Timothy B. GongawareMovements

ollective Memories and Collective Identities: Maintaining Unity in Native American Educational So

http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/32/5/483The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Journal of Contemporary EthnographyAdditional services and information for

http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jce.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/32/5/483

SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms):(this article cites 28 articles hosted on theCitations

2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.at CAPES on September 2, 2008http://jce.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://jce.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://jce.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/32/5/483http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/32/5/483http://jce.sagepub.com/http://jce.sagepub.com/http://jce.sagepub.com/http://jce.sagepub.com/http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/32/5/483http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://jce.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts


2/39

10.1177/0891241603255674ARTICLEJOURNALOFCONTEMPORARYETHNOG RAPY/OCTOBER2003Gongaware/ COLLECTIVE IDENTITIES

COLLECTIVE MEMORIES

AND COLLECTIVE

IDENTITIESMaintaining Unity in Native American

Educational Social Movements

TIMOTHY B. GONGAWARE

University of WisconsinLa Crosse

483

TIMOTHYB. GONGAWAREis an assistant professor

in the Department of Sociology and Archaeology at

the University of WisconsinLa Crosse. In addition to

the connection of collective memory and collective

identity, his research has explored collective action

framing and the role of the self in social movement

processes. His most recent work examined the impact

Native American women have had on the develop-

mentofcollectiveactionframes ina SMO and therole

of qualitative methods in the study of social move-

ments, and he is currently working with a GLBT

movement to explore the impact of countermovement

activity on memory, identity, and framing processes.

It is not thememories

themselves that

are important to

the unity of a

social movement,

but rather that the

memory processes

interactively

construct unity

around elements

of collective

identity.

Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, Vol. 32 No. 5, October 2003 483-520

DOI: 10.1177/0891241603255674

2003 Sage Publications

http://jce.sagepub.com/http://jce.sagepub.com/http://jce.sagepub.com/http://jce.sagepub.com/


3/39

This ethnographic study of two NativeAmerican social movement orga-

nizations challenging educational practices examines the collective

memoryprocesses thatoccursimultaneouslyand inconjunction withthe

process of collective identity to help maintain movement unity. Links

between collective memory and collective identity are theoretically

traced, and theconcept of narrative commemoration is proposedto help

explore two distinct processes which emerged in the analysis. The first

process, collective memory creation, makes collective memories of

recent events held by only a small portion of a movements membership

available to be shared by thewhole movement. The second process, col-

lective memory maintenance, ensures that memories from the move-

ments past are carried forward to be shared by current members. Each

processis important as movement members developa unity aroundends,

means, fields of action, networks of relations, and recollections of theseelements from the movements past.

Keywords: collective identity; collective memory; ethnography; nar-

rative commemoration; social movements

Having driven for two hours, primarily past fields of milo and corn and

into one of the states NativeAmerican reservations, we finally arriveat

the site for a meeting of the State Indian Education Association. This

month the meeting is being held in an apartment referred to as The

Teacherage. Located in an apartment complex next to a school that

servesK-12 students,primarilyNative American, theapartment is home

to a teacher education program supported by the state university. As wego inside I am immediately struck by the smell of something cooking on

the stove. Looking around, I see tables and counters filled with food:

packages of bread, plates of cut-up vegetables and lunch meats, bags of

chips and other foods generously provided by the Teacherage students

for the groups lunch. Although the meeting is to start in only a minute,

we stand or sit around for a bit talking with each other. People ask each

other about other people they know, catch up on what people have been

doing, askabout classes andwhat the students are like and, most impor-

tant, talk about SIEA activities that have been going on and those that

are planned.

484 JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY ETHNOGRAPY / OCTOBER 2003

AUTHORS NOTE: Many thanks to Rob Benford and the anonymous reviewers atJCE for their

constructive comments on earlier drafts of this article, to the advisory committee for my disserta-tion fromwhich thisarticlewas drawn, andto the members ofthe movements I studied whose work

has been so important to their communities and whose guidance helped me to understand it.



4/39

As the conversations turn to these activities,Hela decides that we should

start the meeting. Calling the meeting to order, Hela asks one of the men

present to provide an invocation; a prayer to the grandfather(s) for

those both present and absent who are working in and for Native Ameri-

can education, as well as for the students who can benefit from their

work. This is followed by a quick review of what was done at the last

meeting and whats beendonesince then. AsI lookaround the room I see

people listening and nodding their heads, and some are taking notes.

Although many of these people were not present at the last meeting, or

even at the activities, it occurs to me that the conversation is providing

memories, collective memories, of what the group has been doing

recently; I begin to wonder if this is a part of the unity that people

develop in what Melucci (1985) describes as the process of collective

identity. [Fieldnote excerpt]

Scholars of social movements have increasingly turned to the con-cept of collective identity in order to explore questions of movementemergence, mobilization, strategic choices, and cultural effects leftunanswered by resource mobilization and political process models(Polletta and Jasper 2001). One important focus of research in this areaputs to question the sense of unity in a social movement. This unity,argues Melucci (1985), is the result of a process of collective identity.Similarly, scholars examining collective memory contend that groupsof peoplegain a sense of unity through the interactional constructionofcollective memories.

While distinct in their substantive focus, although not always in thegroups they study, other researchers have provided important insightsinto both collectivememoryandcollective identity. However, as I showin this article, it is important to explore both of these as complementaryand intertwined processes that work toward the development of socialmovement unity. To explore this link, I draw on data from anethnographic study of twoNativeAmerican1 groups challenging educa-tional systems and practices.

During my early work with these groups, each appeared to have acommonunderstanding of thepast that influenced their decisionsin thepresent. The presence of these shared notions of the past in the collec-tive identity process raised an interesting question: what is the connec-

tion ofcollectivememories to thecollective identity process as it relates

Gongaware / COLLECTIVE IDENTITIES 485



5/39

to a movements unity? I argue here that collective memories are con-duits for theconnection ofpast experienceswith present ones in thecol-lective identity process. This is important in the collective identity pro-cess as it provides, through narratives interactively exchanged, anadditional source of unity.

Two related interactive collective memory processes, collectivememory creation and collective memory maintenance, emerged in theanalysis of the data. First, collective memory creation develops collec-tive memories from activities by bringing people up to speed and pro-vidingthemwith details of thememorys objectof reference. Collectivememory maintenance, on the other hand, allows a movement to ensurethat memories of the past continue to remain a part of the collective

memory. In both cases, it is the unity of the collective identity that is atstake and is reproduced in the interactions in which they occur.

UNITY THROUGH IDENTITY AND MEMORY

Thevery notionofa collective identity implies a unity of individuals,events and ideas through time and space (Mueller 1994; Taylor 1989).Positioned in time and space are the groups perceptions of their owndistinctiveness from other groups, boundaries between members andnonmembers, appropriate activities, practices and rituals, and interpre-tive frameworks (Jasper 1997; Johnston, Laraa, and Gusfield 1994;

Taylor and Whittier 1995, 1992). More important, the collective iden-tity of a social movement implies the unity of a shared sense that it is acoherent actor with sharedends, means andfields ofaction, sharedrela-tionships, and shared emotional investments (Jasper 1997; Melucci1995, 1996).

Oneof thequestionsin socialmovement research asks how thecom-mitment to a movementis generatedandmaintainedviacollective iden-tity (Polletta and Jasper 2001). Collective identity has been shown tocoalesce around moral shocks, identity talk, tactics and strategies, pre-vious and current networks of relations, and other shared experiencesand understandings of movement participants (cf. Friedman andMcAdam 1992; Hunt and Benford 1994; Jasper 1997; Melucci 1996;

Polletta 1998a; Snow and McAdam 2000; Taylor and Whittier 1992).Movements unite around shared experiences, ideas, and notions that




6/39

develop as participants interact, to one degree or another, with othermovement members.Similarly, collective memory research has pointed out the impor-

tance of shared experiences in the development of a groups collectivememory (cf. Lipsitz 1990; Mannheim 1928; Wagner-Pacifici andSchwartz 1991). Initially, collective memory was taken as an object, asa framework of notions (impersonal and abstract representations) ofpersons and facts, which hangs together as a totality of thought com-monto thegroup,andwhich expresses thegeneral attitudeof thegroup,the groups nature, its qualities, its weaknesses, and its historicallydeveloped traits (Halbwachs 1925). However, more recent work hasexpandedonthis by addingdimensionssuch as thepower of individuals

both in and outside of the group, the ability of the present to hold multi-pleand contradictory visions of thepast that may interact and influenceeach other, and the constraining force of the past itself (Beamish,Molotch, and Flacks 1995; Fine 1996, 1999; Schwartz 1991a). Collec-tivememory, then, isnot seen as an object, but as a process that involvesintegrating personal remembrances to be shared by all (Zerubavel1996).

Thus, collective memory also implies a sense of unity for a group asremembrances are shared and interactively integrated in one way oranother. For example, generations may share collective memoriesthrough stories based on similar experiences in adolescence (Schumanand Scott 1989), or collective memories of a group may be spread

through a population via the media (Beamish, Molotch, and Flacks1995). By definition, a degree of unity must exist in a group, as collec-tive memories, and the relations to thepast they express, are commonlyheld by the group.

The unity of social movement members, then, is developed as indi-viduals share experiences and/or the collective memories of experi-ences. In the observations presented here, the unity of the movementwas continually renegotiated as movement members, drawing on col-lective memories, discussed issues of movement ends, means, fields ofaction, emotional investments, networks of relations, and boundariesthrough a process of collective memory. Interactively, this processrelied upon mnemonic practices in general and, as explored here, the

practice of narrative commemoration.




7/39

MNEMONIC PRACTICES ANDNARRATIVE COMMEMORATIONS

Mnemonic practicesare those activities, such as celebrations, monu-ment building, and myths, which relate to the memory (cf. Olick andRobbins 1998). As Zelizer (1995) points out, in its skeletal state,remembering threads the linkage between two distinct activities, recol-lection and commemoration (p.219). To attend to thecollective mem-ory of a group, in this case a movement, a researcher must examine thepractices of individuals. Where collective memory fits into the collec-tive identity, the mnemonic practices serve as mechanisms for estab-lishing and maintaining movement unity.

First, according to Zelizer (1995) recollections are the act of estab-lishing a relationship with some event, issue or entity of the past (p.219). Recollections of direct experiences can provide the relationshipas when individualssupport thenotionof voluntary World War II mobi-lization by relating their own WWII enlistment stories (Bodnar 1996).Similarly, institutions like themass media can connect individualswithpasts they havenotdirectly experienced, thus eliminating direct experi-ence as the only way to form connections to larger varieties of pasts(Lipsitz 1990).

While recollections establisha relationshipwith thepast, thesecondpractice, commemoration, expresses this link (OlickandRobbins1998;Zelizer 1995; Zerubavel 1995). In many cases, this expression takes a

physical form such as holidays, celebrations, festivals, monuments, orstories, and can eventually crystalize into a cultural object (Assmann1995). Research indicates that commemorations are put out there forconsumption, use, transformation,and, according to Zerubavel (1995),they can compete with scholarly appraisals of the past in constructingcollective memory (p. 5).

Using either of these two practices, or a combination of them, thereare a wide range of forms available through which social movementscan attend to their collective memories/identities. Many previous stud-ies (cf. Olick 1999; Polletta 1998b; Schwartz 1982, 1991a; Wagner-Pacifici and Schwartz 1991) have focused on the large, public and/orparticularly important commemorations such as monuments, holidays,

and celebrations. However, in this study I focus on what I term narra-tive commemorations, and their use in the everyday interactive pro-cesses of collective identity and collective memory.




8/39

NARRATIVES

Narratives have long been identified as important in thestudy of col-lective memory, and are often tapped to examine memories evoked byand about commemorations (cf. Beamish et al. 1995; Polletta 1998b;Zamponi 1998; Schwartz 1998). In such studies, individuals constructthe collective memory in and through their interactions. Through thenarratives, people exchange remembrances of events and draw on eachothers remembrances to fill in gaps, correct misconceptions, and fleshout particular memories for the group (Assmann 1995; Halbwachs1925, 1950; Olick andRobbins 1998; Zelizer 1995; E. Zerubavel 1996;Y. Zerubavel 1995).

Similarly, narratives are important in thestudy of socialmovements.Indeed, Fine (1995)goes so faras to conceptualize socialmovementsasbundles of narratives. He argues that narratives are imperative to thecreation of a movements culture, and without such a shared and com-municated culture, sustained collective action is impossible (Fine2002, 230). Following this idea, recent movement research has pointedto the importance of narratives as agents of expression,persuasion, andsocial control (cf. Benford 2002; Billig 1995; Gamson 1995; Hunt andBenford 1994; Steinberg 1998; Williams and Williams 1995).

As narratives have been explored in movements, the relation of pastwith present has been highlighted. Polletta (1998a), for example, notesthat narrative is prominent in such interpretive processes because its

temporally configurative capacity equips it to integrate past, present,andfutureevents andto align individual andcollective identities duringperiods of change (p. 139). Further, in telling the story of our becom-ingasan individual, a nation, a peopleweestablishwhowe are (p.141). Examining narratives, then, becomes an important means forexploring both the processes of collective identity and collective mem-ory. In fact, they emerged as particularly important from the data in thisstudy, as it was the narratives that commemorated collective identityaspects of the past which helped to create and maintain movementunity.

NARRATIVE COMMEMORATIONS

Narrative commemorations are those narratives which express linksto past experiences and which are exchanged in the everyday interac-tions of group members. Found within the interactive processes of




9/39

collective memory and identity, the narrative commemorations do notonly establish a link with the past, but express this link as would a for-mal commemoration. However, unlike the formal commemorationstraditionally studied, narrative commemorations occur informallythrough the everyday exchanges of group members.

Long studied by researchers in collective memory, a formal com-memoration has been described as lifting from an ordinary historicalsequence those extraordinary events which embody our deepest andmost fundamental values (Schwartz 1982, 377). Theformalprocess ofcommemoration involves any number of different forms, and tends tobe viewed as both highly ritualized and, in some cases, dependent onthis ritualization. For example, Schwartz (1991b) shows how, through

the ritual of mourning, American society was able to change Lincolnsmemory into something to be cherished at a time when most peopleheld him in mixed or low regard (p. 344). Similarly, Zerubavel (1995)examines commemorative rituals as ways that groups revive, affirm,and modify older memories of the past through what he terms a com-memorationnarrative:a story about a particular past that accounts forthis ritualized remembrance and provides a moral message for thegroup members (p. 6). In studies such as these, commemoration is notonly a formal process, but may produce objects (e.g., celebrations,monuments, services,myths,and holidays)for usein theprocessand/orsynchronization of subsequent commemorative rituals (E. Zerubavel1996; Y. Zerubavel 1995).

However, not all commemorations produce or rely on specificobjects. Schudson (1992), for example, notes that a collective memorycan live on through nonspecific creations such as Watergates com-memoration within the names of those who were a part of that event.The implication is that commemorations do not, in fact, need to take onan objective oreven specific form in order to endure. As such, thedefin-ing characteristic of a commemoration is not that it is a formal process,or even that it involves an object. Instead, a commemoration is thatwhich expresses a link to the past and has a degree of persistence over aperiod of time.

Where previous studies directed their focus on formal commemora-tions and the conditions in which they are created over long periods of

time, I explore a more informal process. Following the challenge ofrecent work in social constructivism (cf. Miller and Holstein 1993), Idirect attention to the processes of reality production. Spector and




10/39

Kitsuse (1977), examining social problems, argue that they are theactivities of individuals or groups making assertions or grievances andclaims with respect to some putative conditions (p. 75; see also IbarraandKitsuse 1993). I follow a similar line here in maintaining that narra-tive commemorations are the activities of groups selecting those mem-ories which aresignificant andare to endurewithina particular context.The focus, then, is on the mundane, or informal interactions of groupmembers, rather than on what is produced (Gubrium 1993).

In analyzing the informal processes for this study, narratives thatappeared similar to commemorations emerged from the data. Far frombeing the formless, willful, or disorganized communications that havebeen thought to characterize everyday communications of collective

memories (Assman 1995), these narrative commemorations high-lighted specific features of the past that were of particular significanceand use in the interaction. In interactions, individuals exchanged narra-tives of selected past experiences that were significant within the con-text of the interaction. This was similar to Schwartzs (1982) observa-tion that the choice of a memory for a formal commemoration is aselective exploitation of past events and people that have some factualsignificance to thegroup;a significance, I shouldpoint out, that is pre-supposed by their perpetuation (Schwartz 1982, 390). While theevents and people selected for narrative commemorations may appeartrivialand ordinarywhencompared to theextraordinaryeventsselectedfor more formal commemorations, they are important in the immediate

context of the interaction.Additionally, just as formal commemorations help to establish a

groups self-conception by creating a relatively enduring connectionwith the groups past (Wagner-Pacifici and Schwartz 1991), narrativecommemorations are informal means to the same end contained withina specific interaction or set of interactions. Just as the identification ofsharedpasts helpedestablishsocially situated actionfor thedyads stud-ied by Katovich and Couch (1992), narrative commemorations can beseen here as providing interactants with an organizing frameworkaround which to formulate subsequent interaction. However, equallyimportant is their function in helping a group to develop its sense of selfand unity by expressing a link to past events, people, and experiences

that are significant within the context of the interaction.Narrative commemorations are features of a production of social

reality as they arise in the mundane interactions that comprise the




11/39

collective identity and collective memory processes. While a narrativecommemoration may in fact endure beyond an interaction and becomea formal commemoration (a situation for exploration elsewhere), theyare not initially intended for formal public consumption. They are,instead, constructed and exchanged within the informal interactions ofmovementparticipants.As exploredbelow, a movementforges itsunitywith thepast through theconduit of collectivememory. As thenarrativecommemorations informally express a selected link to the past, theycan serve as this conduit.

METHOD AND SETTING

This study draws on ethnographic data collected through a year ofobservation, participation, and formal interviews with two NativeAmerican social movement organizations.2 The two groups, a StateIndianEducationAssociation andan urban areas Title IX ParentAdvi-sory Committee, each challenge educational issues and practices. Inboth cases, I observed and participated in formal and informal groupmeetings and in group activities/events, and I interacted one on onewith members outside of group gatherings. The majority of the eventsin which I observed andparticipatedwere open to thepublic, while oth-ers were those that I was invited to attend and observe.3

Throughout the study I kept written field notes of the activities,

events, and interactions observed. These were entered, along with theinterview transcripts, into the QSR*NUDIST qualitative data analysisprogram. Using the program, I analyzed the data following a groundedtheory approach (cf. Glaser1992; Glaserand Strauss 1967; Strauss andCorbin 1990). Through grounded theory I was able to attend to thethemesandtheir relationsas they emerged from an examinationof inci-dents gathered from the movements.

The challenges posed by the two groups I worked with in this studyare neither rare nor new in the history of NativeAmerican relations fol-lowing the colonization of North America. Scholarly work indicatesthat the experiences and outcomes of Native Americans in the educa-tional system, like those of other minority groups, comprise a unique

history of ongoing colonization practices that has included missionarywork, day schools, boarding schools, and our current system of public




12/39

education (Adams 1995; Noriega 1992; Reyhner and Eder 1988; Szasz1999). In modern education systems, many of the curriculums (whicheither leave out Native Americans altogether or misrepresent them infundamental ways) are controlled by either Anglo teachers or Anglo-trained Native American teachers (Cleary and Peacock 1998; Noriega1992). Additionally, many educational institutions for Native Ameri-cans have had poor leadership, few resources for maintaining struc-tures, and inadequate relations between the schools and communities(Cleary andPeacock 1998).More specifically, theAnglo values of indi-vidualism and interpersonal competition tend to be taught and directlyconflict with cultural values such as community, reciprocity, and coop-eration (James et al. 1995).

These practices have, from the beginning, elicited contention fromparents, tribes, and intertribal organizations (Adams 1995; Reyhnerand Eder 1988; Szasz 1999). Groups have challenged the treatment ofNative American students by teachers and administrators, the use ofNative Americansas mascots forschoolteams, andtheincorrector lackofhistorical andcultural information about Native Americansin curric-ulums (Nagel 1996; Reyhner and Eder 1988; Szasz 1999). Posingchal-lenges such as these and working on solutions were the goals of the twomovements studied here.

Each of the two movements contained members from differenttribes, and thus from different cultural backgrounds. Interestingly,members didnot tend to explicitly identify tribally specific understand-

ings of activities and practices. Instead, they tended during meetings torefer to our culture or our traditions when discussing the group as awhole, and onlyto theirspecific tribal affiliations/understandings whenspeaking with each other outside of meetings. This reflects the use ofwhat Cornell (1988) terms a supratribal ethnic identity.

Emergingmore prominently after WWII with themigrationof manyNative Americans into urban areas (Cornell and Hartmann 1998), thesupratribal ethnicidentity iscomposed ofthosedescendants ofAmeri-can aborigines who act self-consciously on the basis of Indianness(Cornell 1988, 107). Although tribal distinctions are still important tomany Native Americans, a form of detribalization has occurred dur-ing the establishment of modern Indian-White relations (Cornell

1988). Nagel (1996) argues that this unifying categorical distinctionwasgivengreater currencythrough theRed Powermovement of thelate




13/39

1960s and early 1970s. She argues that, as the movement identifiedproblems common to many different tribes, it

reaffirmed Native Americans shared history, values, and meaning and

provided a symbolic base from which to appeal to constituents, recruit

participants,buildorganization,andplanand launchprotestactions.(p.158)

Native American organizations, particularly those working in urbanareas, then, have made use of the supratribal identity as a means forgaining power in working with societal and governmental institutions(Cornell andHartmann 1998).Similarly, theethnic identity wasimpor-tant for the two movements examined in this study. Both groups drew

on members who were from various tribes, and each group worked tomeet commonly shared goals or to make useof resourcesdesignated byoutside groups such as the government for use by those of the categori-cal distinction Native American.

The first of the two groups with whom I worked was the State IndianEducation Association (SIEA). For the past fifteen years, the SIEA hasmet with legislators and state government officials, has organizedworkshops for educators and parents, has worked as advocates for stu-dents and parents in schools and school districts, and has providedscholarships for Native American college students from different tribalbackgrounds. During the study, group membership included over sixtyeducators, administrators, researchers, program directors, tribal and

state government officials, parents, and students. Three fourths of boththe membership and Board of Directors were women. Further, exceptfor two individuals (myself and oneof thegroups founding members),Board positions were held by Native Americans. Both the board posi-tions and regular membership rolls included individuals from tribesincluding Omaha, Winnebago/Ho-Chunk, Cherokee, Cheyenne River,Oglala, Rosebud, and Santee.

Meetings of the SIEA were relatively small and, although rangingfrom four to fourteen, averaged about nine members. Meetings lastedfor three to four hours and were held on the first Saturday afternoon ofthemonth.Discussions at themeetings,which usually included a meal,addressed both evaluations of past activities and plans for future events

andactivities.In addition to thediscussions at meetings,members com-municatedby phone andemail and at small informal and/or impromptu




14/39

meetings, and talked at SIEA or community events and activities tokeep abreast of events going on around the state.The second group, a Title IX Parent Advisory Committee (Title IX

PAC), maintained a focus on issues within their own school district.Meetings were meant to facilitate and implement programs that wouldassess, evaluate, anddeal with theproblems that were or might be expe-rienced by Native American students in the district. Most meetingsaveraged eleven attendees, ranging from seven to eighteen individualsdepending on the topic. Ideally, group membership included all of thedistricts Native American parents and children. However, the coregroup included four schoolpersonnelandfiveparents whoconsistentlyattended meetings.

The Title IX PACs three-hour-long meetings were held in the earlyevening, and usually included a meal of some sort (provided either bythe district or by potluck). The group was supported by a federal TitleIX grant of $56,000 which was to be used for the benefit of NativeAmerican children. Most discussions focused on future events, devel-oping baseline assessments, and disseminating information aboutavailable district services. Although I was not a party to all phone andemail conversations within this group, such as those of subcommitteesand factions of the group, I did take part in formal meetings and activi-ties as well as many informal gatherings and in conversations at groupevents.

COLLECTIVE MEMORY CREATION

The concept of narrative commemorations helps identify the key toanswering what emerged as an important question throughout thestudy: what happens when some members of a movement are not pres-ent for an experience and do not have access to the memories of thatexperience?An answer to this question came at meetings where collec-tive memories were narratively presented to those who had not beeninvolved with a recent activity. In short, members engaged in a processof collectivememorycreation wherethenarrative commemorationsactas unifying agents. Specifically, collective memory creation develops

collective memories of recent activities by bringing people up to speedand providing them with details of the memorys object of reference.




15/39

Theinteractions thatcreatetheframeworkof themovementscollectivememories instigate the collective identity process, and through it themovements unity is renegotiated and reasserted.

THE SOCIAL DRAMA OF

COLLECTIVE MEMORY CREATION

Turners socialdrama(1969,1982)provides a model forunderstand-inghow thecollectivememory creation process takes place. Accordingto Turner (1982) each social drama begins with a breach in the normaltenor of life. This then leads to a crisis of understanding and a situationin which sides are formed and taken. To prevent the further develop-

ment of a breach, people use redressive mechanisms which aid in lead-ingpeopleto either recognize that thebreachcannotbe repaired or rein-tegrate and reconstitute the group.

As will be explored below, thenarrative commemorationof an expe-rience that is held by only a part of the membership can serve as justsuch a breach. It creates a crisis in the groups sense of unity as under-standings of the movements past are no longer thought to be shared.The redressive mechanism used, in this case, tends to be interactions inwhich participants provide details of the collective memory being cre-ated. It is in these details that elements of the collective identity arise(e.g., membership definitions, appropriate activities, group missions,and group distinctiveness) and act as a catalyst for the collective iden-

tity process.Through the redressive mechanism of exploring details, the interac-

tion can move toward a reintegration. This tends to involve a redefini-tion of themovements past to incorporate thecollectivememory beingcreated, and a redefinition of the movements present to incorporatenotions of collective identity elements that arose in the interaction.Through the interactivesharing of these elements,participantscan thenregain a sense of unity (see Figure 1).

THE DEVELOPING RELATIONSHIP

AND BREACHES IN UNITY

One of the best examples of collective memory creation in the cur-rent study emerged as the SIEA developed a unity in the shared notionsof its field of action and its distinctiveness from the states newly




16/39

formed Advisory Council on Native American Education (ACNAE).4

TheACNAE wasformedfollowing a state-sponsored Indian EducationSummit Conference held in the fall of 1999. This summit, and the taskforce it proposed, focused primarilyon publicschools that were locatedon reservations in the state. The conference was organized because ofexpectations that public schools on reservations would be classified aslow-performing in a state assessment of all the public schools.

Members of the SIEA were a part of both the summit and a meetingat the states Department of Education (DOE) that selected representa-tives from various groups and tribes to be ACNAE members. However,the SIEAwas not given a specificsloton the taskforce for its own repre-sentative. As a result, the SIEA decided to send a delegation of mem-bers to the commissioner to discuss the situation. The delegation (sixpeople including myself) first met to discuss strategies, met again justbefore the meeting to go over everything, and then met with the com-missioner for about an hour. Before hearing our arguments for an SIEA

position on the task force, the commissioner outlined some of his ideason the development of the task force.

We [the DOE] seemed to be trying to deal with tribal communities as if

they are like any other community, but theyre not, they have their own

issues. So, how do we make policies work for Native American kids? I

dont know that we have a specific agenda. If anything . . . well, if we

havesomething to go to the legislature next year I want it to go next year

and we need the council [ACNAE] to decide this. We also need a Native

American in this department who would be a consultant.

After we argued our case, the commissioner agreed to consider ourrequest and indicated that he would call us in a few days. Following thisthere wasa seriesofphone conversations between members of thedele-gation, and then a phone call from thecommissioner to theSIEAs pres-ident and myself agreeing to give SIEA a position on the task force.


FIGURE 1: The Social Drama and Collective Memory Creation



17/39

Creating a collective memory for the entire group out of the delega-tions experiences involved narratively commemorating those experi-ences in conversations with other members. Although many detailsconcerning this meeting were provided at subsequent SIEA meetings,the first chance to engage in collective memory creation with otherSIEA members occurred at a school event on one of the reservations inthe state. In effect, upon hearing that the meeting with the commis-sioner had taken place, those who were not in the delegation no longerhad a sense that they knew what had happened in the movements past.Ok,Im lost, what did wedoat the meeting? was a commonresponse.These members were missing a piece of information, and their sense ofunity with the group was disrupted.

As I was bothsecretary for the SIEAand a memberof the delegation,people often came to me for information. I was thus able to observe thebreaches firsthand. Questions such as So, who went with you? andWhat happened at the meeting with [the Commissioner]? were fre-quent expressions of the breach. To begin redressing this breach, to fillin the information they were missing, I was asked for details of theexperience. For example, I told them who was on the delegation, whatwas said, what was asked, and how the representative was chosen.Speaking with another delegation member, I found that they hadanswered similar questions in informal conversations.

Theprocess of collectivememorycreation occurred in both informalconversations and formal SIEA meetings. In both situations, the

breaching and collective memory creation began through bringingpeople up to speed, which initiated a breach in understandings of themovements past. This was then followed by a period of detailedaccounting that tended to force a focus on one or more of the collectiveidentity elements.

First, we should bring everyone up to speed.

Bringing people up to speed was either used or implied whereverportions of the membership needed to be given information of some-thing new from the recent past. The initial act in bringing people up tospeed was a stimulus that involved informally presenting little to only

general details of a collective memory from the recent past. For exam-ple, at a Title IX PAC meeting, a veteran member5 brought newermem-bers up to speed with narrative commemorations about a developingprogram.




18/39

Maria: Have we started the summer program for the high schoolers?

Hela: First, we should bring everyone up to speed. For those just joining,

weve been developing what, for lack of a better term, are transitional

summer camps.

Going back to the SIEA-ACNAE relation, a discussion concerning thetask forcebeganaftera comment wasmade about thelack ofattendanceat meetings.

Hela: One thing weve learned over theyears is that peopleneed something

in it for themselves. [The DOE Commissioner] calls a meeting and gets

people.

Tina: Its about power.

Walt: Which meeting? When we metwith [the Commissioner] to get some-one on the task force?

Tina: No, we met with . . . we had our first Advisory Council meeting.

The memory of the first task force meeting is not initially an importantfocal point. Instead, thememory is informally interjected as it relates toa present interest in SIEA meeting attendance. However, the memorybreaches thegroups unityandthe groupturns itsfocusto thetask force.

In a majority of cases, the narrative commemorations involvedsomething from the recent past which only a few members knewabout.Finding out that other SIEA members were appointed to ACNAE, forinstance, was new even to people from the original delegation. Walt, a

founding member of the SIEA and a member of the delegation, wasunaware that other appointments had been made. Responding to Tinascomment, We had our first Advisory Council meeting, Walt asked,Are you on that?

Tina: Yeah

Walt: Really? [upward inflection in voice] I thought Hela was on it.

Tina: She is . . .

Walt: And so are you?

Tina: Yeah, as a representative of parents from [a large urban area].

Hela: We had a sort of a take over . . . [big smile]

Walt: Good for you . . .

Walt was aware that ACNAE had accepted Hela as the SIEA represen-tative, but wassurprised that ACNAE had also appointed another SIEAmember. This breached Walts perception of the movements past.




19/39

Other members were sitting quietly, but their quizzical looks, attentive-ness, head nodding/shakingindicated that thenew information hadalsobreached their understanding of the movements past.

Additionally, since the information indicated a new way for themovement to relate to ACNAE (through more than one representative),it breached an understanding of the present. In this case, a breach inunderstanding the movements past meant a breach in shared under-standings of present networks of relations. This was a common occur-rence in collective memory creations. Since collective memories relateto present interests of a group, they force considerations of present col-lective identity elements. Then, as the interaction proceeds, it works toredress the breach in the unity of both the past and present: it works to

redefine both the collective memory and collective identity.

There is still a need for us.

Details of the collective memory serve as redressive mechanisms inthesocialdrama that begins when a narrative commemorationbreachesa movements shared sense of unity involving definitions of both thepast and present. In other words, the process continues through theexchange and consideration of information about the collective mem-ory, and the shared definition of the past is interactively negotiated. Asthenarrative commemoration indicates elements of thecollective iden-tity, participants can actively consider details of these elements to help

redress the breach.Returning to our main example, the conversations among SIEA

members concerning ACNAE tended to force a focus on both theSIEAs field of action and its distinctiveness. A good example came inearly conversations that centered on strategies for the delegationsmeeting with the DOE commissioner. The conversation began with adescription of ACNAEs general purpose, and a discussion of what thegroup should do at the meeting. In discussing this information, thegroup began to answer a members question about why SIEA needed tobe on the task force in the first place.

Merry: Were an organization dedicated to the education of Native Ameri-

cans and we have members with a high amount of dedication. Theyrevolunteers.

Hela: Were the only state organization dedicated to Indian education.




20/39

Merry: We should put together a list of what weve done. We are set up to

work cooperatively with various organizations such as the task force.

ME: Were also committed to supporting, in whatever way they ask, their

efforts?

Merry: Right, and with the growing interest and focus on Indian education

we can provide a pool of support from various degreed educators.

Here, the collective memory of ACNAEs purpose and proposed activ-ity invoked a discussion about the SIEA-ACNAE relation. This theninvoked a consideration of the movement itself; a collective identityprocess of negotiating notions of ends, membership, and means. Con-siderations of these notions were developed by presenting collectivememories of what the SIEA is supposed to do, what it had done, and itsmembership. To developa relation with ACNAE,theSIEA used collec-tive memories to ground understandings of its own distinctiveness.

This distinction became more important as the task force continuedto evolve. Collective memory creations involved some membersexpe-riences with ACNAE. Details of the SIEA-ACNAE relationship aidedin developing the movements shared understanding of itself and itsfield of action.

Hela: We [ACNAE] have had three meetings.Weve spent most of our time

defining ourpriorities.Wehavent reallydone anythingyet. Theres a lot

of discussion that comes out to not a lot being done. Im kind ofI

shouldnt be the one talking about it because I . . .

Tina: You sound really negative. I dont think its that negative.

Hela: I feel real negative about it. I think its becoming a real political kind

of thing.

Tina: And you knew it would be because its the Department of Education,

its a state entity, a state agency . . .

Hela: Well, at any rate, I just dont see a lot happening. At least here we do

things.

Obviously, personal opinions about ACNAEdiffered.However,Helasnew information allowed her to make a statement about the SIEA. Atother points, people referenced the activities of the SIEA as an impor-tant distinction from ACNAE. Referring to a conversation in which a

member had implied that ACNAE would be doing what the SIEA wasdoing, Hela referenced a recent movement activity.




21/39

One thing I had said was that the state committee might be seen as doing

what were doing, but I still see a need for us. For example, I got a call

from some parents about their sonwhohada ponytail andwas being told

by the school to cut his hair. The parents were quite upset about that so

they came and talked. They had an appointment with the principal, and

they wanted some support.

Shethen went on to describe how theSIEA provided support by writinga letter to the principal and agreeing to attend the parents meeting withthe principal if needed.

Along with ties to other political entities and differences in groupends/means, distinctions in membership emerged when narrative com-memorations turned to ACNAE in collective memory creation. Spe-cifically, the interaction focused on the need to make ACNAE aware ofthe SIEAs unique membership. For example, Tinas narrative com-memoration of task force membership made a contradistinction withthe shared understanding of SIEAs membership.

One of the things that they dont realize is the level of professionalism

that we have. The thing that frustrates me is that on that advisory com-

mittee . . . wellits starting tosortout now. But at the first coupleof meet-

ings you had people [for whom] education is one of the things they deal

with over a whole myriad of things. So theyre not focused entirely on

education. Some of those people have filtered out now, and so now you

havemore educators there which may make a difference in the long run.

Oneof theproblems I always see is that youhavenon-educators runningeducation which is stupid.

The SIEA membership is labeled as professional, and more specifi-cally, as composed of professional educators. The contradistinctionbetween SIEA and ACNAE provided above is made through anaccounting of ACNAE membership and the focus of its members.

In this case, the movement develops its distinctiveness and field ofaction through the collective memory creation process. The narrativecommemorations of ACNAE initially breached the groups unity andthen, through details, brought elements of the collective identity intoplay. The final piece of this social drama is the redress of the breach

through the use of the details.




22/39

Redefining past and present

According to Turner (1982), the redress ofa breach takes the form ofpeople either taking sides or reconciling. In the examples presentedhere, a stimulus breached the unity of shared notions of the past, anddetails simultaneously invoked and instigated a consideration of collec-tive identity elements. Participants explored both collective memorydetails and collective identity elements as they worked to reconcile thebreached unity.

However,reconciliationis notalways immediatelyapparent.Partici-pants did not explicitly reflect on what they had just heard and thenexpress the redefinition. Instead, indications of the redefinition arose atlater times, and in offhand remarks and comments not otherwisefocused on the interaction which had allowed the past/present to beredefined.

Take, for instance, the initial breach created when information aboutthe SIEA delegations meeting with the commissioner was presented,or when a discussion of the first meeting was presented. In subsequentconversations and comments, the actions of the delegation were neverreferred to as something accomplished by a separate group. It was notthey who secured a position for the SIEA or went to the first ACNAEmeeting. Instead, individuals whowerenotpersonally involved in theseevents made comments such as We went to thecommissionerto askfora position, or [The Commissioner] then called us and said we could

have a position, or referenced the time We went to the first ACNAEmeeting.

What these recollections conveyed was a collective memory of whatthe movement had done. This indicated a sense that the movementhad acted as a coherent actor. Having reconciled the breach with thenew information, the participants now had the knowledge of what wasdone by a portion of the movement, and had redefined it as somethingthe entire group had accomplished. The unity of the group was reestab-lished through collective memory creation.

The redefinition in the redress did not stop at the creation of a newcollective memory. This new memory was a crucial part in the ongoingcollective identity process. Furthering the shared unity, movement

members were able to posit definitions of, for example, the field of




23/39

action of which the SIEA and ACNAE were a part, and the distinctive-ness ofSIEA from ACNAE. For example, in an interview with an SIEAmemberafter these discussions, the difficulty of ACNAEs chairpersonto draw on people outside the political sphere was a definingdistinction.

My personal feeling is that the SIEA has to exist, because there isnt

another one likeit. There has tobe thisorganization tokindof . . . well. . .

Just like when [the DOE commissioner] is getting a state wide advisory

group together anddoesnt know that the [SIEA] exists, butHela is able,

through the mailing list she has, to muster a group of people to get down

to the state department of education and talk to him and in no uncertain

terms let him know why its important that SIEA be brought into the

scope on that list of committee members. SIEA may not bemakinghuge

changes, butat least they arean entitythat is there to respond sometimes,

and other times to take action.

Here, Jana, who is an instructor at one of the states universities, drawson a shared notion of the field of action: that the SIEA works in abroader environment. It should be noted that this was not necessarily anew definition of the field of action. In conversations prior to thedevel-opment of ACNAE, members had defined the SIEA as working in abroad field of action. The redefinition of the present does not necessar-ilyentaildevelopinga completely new definition of thepresent. Rather,the redefinition can entail a renewed, or perhaps enlarged, sense of themovement and its unity.

COLLECTIVE MEMORY MAINTENANCE

Collective memory maintenance is a process that emerges from thedata as the way movement participants make sure recollections fromthe distant past are carried forward to the present. While collectivememory creation draws from the recent past, collective memory main-tenance draws from a more distant past (e.g., earlier that year, earlier inthemovements history, or even further back in time). As arguedabove,

movement unity involves the sharing of experiences (cf. Hunt andBenford 1994; Jasper 1997; Melucci 1996; Snow and McAdam 2000)as well as collective memories of experiences (cf. Lipsitz 1990;Mannheim 1928; Schuman and Scott 1989; Wagner-Pacifici and




24/39

Schwartz1991) that arerelevant to themovement. As previous researchhas shown the importance of the pasts influence on the present (cf.Olick 1999; Ruffins 1997; Schudson 1992; Schuman and Scott 1989;Schwartz 1996; Spillman 1998), it is important to examine how collec-tive memories of experiences in the more distant past continue to beshared by movement members.

As with collective memory creation, Turners (1969, 1982) socialdrama model helps us to understand theprocess. However,while in col-lective memory creation the narrative commemorations are what ini-tially breached the unity and details aided in its redress, in collectivememorymaintenance the narrative commemorations are the redressivemechanisms. Here, the breach is something that has occurred as a

cumulative series of events over a period of time.In examining the social drama, Turner tended to focus on instances

where a breach was created by a single and serious infraction of norma-tivebehavior. However, henotes that a breachmayarise from thecumu-lative effect of a seriesof incidents(Turner 1982).Such breaches in thisstudy involved both indications that somethingof thepast hadbeen for-gotten by some members as well as specific activities and/or disagree-ments over time. In both situations the result was a situation whereshared definitions were, at least for a moment, in question. As the crisisin thegroups unity is recognized, thereminders point outpast incidentsas memories that should not be forgotten, connect them with othermemories and present circumstances, and thus work toward reintegrat-

ing understandings of the past and present (see Figure 2).

REMINDERS

Reminders, defined here as the act of perpetuating recollections, arethe primary mechanism through which the past is carried forward intothe present. As such, they appear in one of two ways: contextually orinstrumentally. First, collective memories may be revived contextuallythrough the interaction itself. Involvement in particular interactionswith other movement members, for instance, may remind participantsof therecollections.Second, individuals may explicitly interjecta refer-ence tosomething fromthe past that is related towhat is currently being

discussed, and, in doing so, instrumentally remind others of the recol-lection. In either case, the revival makes explicit what of the past andpresent is shared and thus contributes to the unity of the collective




25/39

identity process.The ability to provide reminders,however,depends onthepresenceof individualswho haveknowledgeof what is recollected.

So, what do you hear about . . . ?

In its first form, reminders emerge as a contextual result ofinteractional focalpoints. Halbwachs(1950) notesthatcollectivemem-ories are maintained and constructed in the duration of events. Othersposit that they are also a result of internal contexts such as habit, repeti-tion or custom (Assmann 1995; Shils 1981), and cultural contexts(Bodnar 1996; Schwartz 1991b). Participants, then, recollect a sharedpast through thecollective identity process itself, via the internal or cul-tural contexts contained in the duration of the interaction.

When thecollective identity process focuses on specificsobjects, thepreviously shared notions of these objects are made more explicit. Theeffect of this is to invoke a reminder of the groups unity. Although theremindersmayinvolve any of theelements of thecollective identity, the

influence of a movements network of relations provides the mostinstructive illustration.

Researchers have shown that a movements network of relations isimportant as it provides pools of potential participants, sites out ofwhich it may grow, and a sphere in which practices and relationshipscan be developed (cf. Friedman and McAdam 1992; Gamson 1990;Gerlach and Hine 1970; Melucci 1985; Mueller 1994; Snow, Zurcher,and Ekland-Olson 1980). Additionally, the network within a movementis important as it includes shared notions of organizational forms, lead-ership models, communication channels, and technologies. The mostsalient aspect of the network, whether internal or external, involves theindividuals who compose it.

Prior to the official start of each SIEA and Title IX PAC meeting, forexample, those who arrived early tended to chat with each other about


FIGURE 2: The Social Drama and Collective Memory Maintenance



26/39

matters that appeared to be unrelated to the group itself. However, as Ipaid closer attention to the conversations, a general pattern emerged. Iheard, for example, people ask about Native American communitymembers:How isBill doing? orHaveyouspoken with Russ lately?Ostensibly, these questions were sparked out of genuine concern orcuriosity about the individuals mentioned. Still, while garnering infor-mation, the interactions concurrently served to remind other partici-pants that they share relations with other people.

Other interactions specifically involved movement members andserved to unify understandings of shared networks of relations throughthe reminder of who is involved with the group, or who is connected tothegroup.Members revivecollectivememories ofcommonrelations as

they put forth individual names and look to see if others know who wasbeing referenced. For example, at a Title IX meeting Dena asks,

You know Sara? [looks at Jane who nods her head] Yeah, she probably

wont make it this evening. There was some trouble with her roof so

shes at home to get it taken care of.

Although the presentation focuses on Saras current predicament, thecollective memory implicitly invoked is that Sara is a part of the net-work of relations. The maintenance of the collective memory occurscontextually through the interaction, and serves to remind others bothof the networks composition and that the presenter shares that notion.

In theflowof themoment, theparticipants createa sharedsenseofcom-mon knowledge about the groups network of relations; this sharedsense contributes to a sense of unity concerning this element.

We should remember that . . .

In their second form, reminders arise as explicitly presented narra-tive commemorations that aid the ongoing collective identity process.In talking about current or future action, members might remind thegroup of past discussions, individuals, or activities. For example, at anSIEA meeting I discussed what had been sold at a recent SIEA art auc-tion and the potential sale of a painting to the local universitys art gal-

lery. One member, Walt, reminded the group how much the paintinghad cost, and where the painting had come from.




27/39

I found our records that showed that wepaid$5,000 for that painting. If I

remember, this was [a past SIEA Officers] thing. Somehow we came

into some money and we were supposed to also get postcards to send to

people for the conference with this on it.

Walt brings forward an event from the distant past because it relatesdirectly to the current topic of interest. The object of reference, thepainting, invoked the memory of how much the painting cost as well asthe who, what, and why of its acquisition, which is narratively com-memorated in the members reminder.

The point of the narrative commemoration in these cases is not toprovide new information so much as to ensure that the recollection ofdetails pertaining to the object continues to be a part of the collectivememory. In many cases, members provide details to lend a contextualrichness to thememory. Through an informal interjectionin theconver-sation, the memorys presence is perpetuated. For instance, referencesto the amount originally paid for the painting came up a number oftimes in future conversations as movement members lamented over therelatively small size of the final selling price.

There are two interrelated properties of these reminders that areimportant here. The first is the instrumental use of the reminders torelate present interests with the past. The second is the position of theindividuals presenting the reminders. In essence, the focus of presentinterests influencesthedeveloped notionsof thepast.Previousresearch

has pointed to the importance of institutions, elites, and reputationalentrepreneurs in the instrumental shaping of shared views of the past(cf. Benford 1996; Fine 1996; Lee and Lee 1998; Schwartz 1991b).While thepresent interest influences what of thepast is interjected, andthus what of the past is remembered, individuals have varying abilitiesto shape that view. As that shared view contributes to the collectiveidentity process, it can thus shape the unity of the group as well.

Reminders were particularly important as the Title IX PAC workedto establish its own unity. Many of the reminders were interjected byindividuals who were either veteran members of the program or veter-ans in thecommunity. Thereminderswere particularlyimportantas thegroup was working to redress a disruption in its unity early in the obser-

vation period. Events in the year prior to the study period had breachedthe unity of the parents and school personnel. According to John, a vet-eran to both the group and community:




28/39

Nothing seems to be getting done at the [City] Public Schools. A lot of

our Indian kids fall through the cracks. They cant read and are not pre-

pared formath.And now they areparents.How cantheyhelp theirkids if

theydont know. . . . Its not working because over the summer theygot a

badfeeling about theprogram andIndian parents shiedaway. We need to

rectify that.

In this situation, past actions and interactions were what led to the badfeelings John mentions. As the crisis in the groups unity is recog-nized, the reminders point out those incidents as memories that shouldnot be forgotten, connect them with other memories and present cir-cumstances, and work toward reintegrating understandings of the pastand present.

The reminders served to redress the breach by addressing under-standings of what the group has done, what it should be doing, and howit should be done. Participants provided reminders of events, activities,and goals from up to nearly a decade in the past. In other conversations,members interjected memories of the Title IX PACs past composition,including specific references to those who had served in officer posi-tions. In each instance, the focus of the interaction on a present interest,what the group should do for example, invoked recollections of whatthe group had done. As such, the present focus of a conversation influ-enced which reminders were presented.

Reminders were provided to people who, for the most part, were

already aware of them. At times they would make comments like Ohyes, or I remember . . . or Thats right, I forgot about that. In effect,the reminders, while reviving the collective memories of the group,contributed to shared notions of elements in the collective identity.Instead of contributing to a brand new definition of past and present asin collective memory creation, theprocess in this case reestablishes theexistence of shared notions about collective identity elements.

The interjections of reminders addressed any number of collectiveidentity elements, and tended to arise from within the movement itself.However, in this case, duringcollectivememorymaintenance the influ-ences ofother groups, especiallya cultural group such as a tribe orwhatCornell (1988; see also Nagel 1996) refers to as a supratribal ethnic

identification, were important in the process. This was especially trueearly on in the study as the unity of the Title IX PAC was being reestab-lished. Reminders of culturally defined relations allowed veteran




29/39

members to mold both understandings of the past and the developmentof present interests.Forexample, early Title IX PAC interactions narratively commemo-

rated the culturally defined relations between individuals and groups.Early in the observation period, there was a split between the NativeAmerican parents and the school personnel. As the current interest forthe group was onwhatto dowiththe Title IXfunds, the group worked toredevelop their unity around shared notions of what they should do.Maria commented,

We need to rebuild the trust between theparents and theschool. Perhaps

we need to bring in mediation. We need to set up a meeting with time to

get parents there so we can set up a plan for them to discuss and comeaway to implement.

The Native American parents defined the other side of the split asschool personnel who were non-Indian. Although these school person-nel were veteran members who had heard the information before, theparents took the time to remind them of cultural objects and practicesthey felt were important in the present development of the group.

In these cases, the social placement of the parents as members of aNative American community gave them the power to mold the sharedviews of the pastand use it indeveloping the present. In planningfor therequestedmediation intervention, forexample,a numberof peoplesug-

gested having a dinner during the meeting. Immediately following thesuggestions, a grandparent, Jane, looked directly at the school person-nel and commented, I think thats very important as its a very impor-tant part of our traditions. Her understood identification as a NativeAmerican gavehera certain amountof power to narrativelycommemo-rate the cultural tradition, and a certain degree of influence in develop-ing the mediation meeting. The interplay of these memories with thepresent, and the parents authority in forming notions of the past andpresent interests, were even more evident as thegroupattended tomem-bership boundaries.

At thefirstcoupleofTitleIX PACmeetings following themediation,the group spent time establishing who, from those gathered and from

the community, could serve as official members.6 In the followingexchange, Rene, who was the outgoing president, begins to talk about




30/39

the next election of officers. Dena, director of federal programs for theschool district, then reminds the group of its past composition.

Rene: We have four items starting with nominating the committee

Dena: We need to take names of individuals from the community. They

must be Native American parents. We need a minimum of six people.

Maria: Can they be grandparents?

Dena: Yes, they technically should be legal guardians, but if youll remem-

berwevenotenforcedit theway peoplein special educationdoes [many

are nodding their heads].

Maria: So, they could be a grandparent who is living with the children and

their parents.

Dena: Yes.

Here, the present is defined with an eye to the past, and the past isrevived with an eye on the present. In this case, Dena had a certaindegree of power as she was the most senior member of the group: shehad been in her position for eight years. Through her position she coulddraw upon a vast store of collectivememories as well as the district andfederal regulations related to carrying out the Title IX programs. Thereminder she provides draws on a collective memory of membershipboundaries established by past Title IX PACs.

The reminder that thegroup had never enforced a definition of mem-bers that excluded nonlegal guardians is equally important. Given thatthegroup is,by definition, an organization of Native American parents,the focus turns toward cultural prescriptions. Note, for instance, howrecollections of culturally defined familial forms were equally, if notmore, important in establishing shared notions of membershipboundaries.

Maria: Are we eliminating grandparents?

Dena: [her voice has a defensive upswing in its toneher eyebrows are

raised and she emphasized the word I] I havent changed anything.

This is your call.

Rena: I like the idea of including grandparents.

Maria: Well, I attend the meetings a lot and I have two grandchildren.

Fred: I think its a good idea going back to traditional lines of thought, but

we need to establish the committee.Maria: The reason I brought this up . . .

Fred: Let me finish . . .




31/39

Maria: [interrupting] Well, I just think we need to use our own understand-

ingof whoraises ourchildrenand notthe government regulations. Tradi-

tionally thegrandparents areheavily involved in raising children. I want

to know if the grandparents are invited to this table even if they dont

have legal guardianship.

Fred: We can debate this, and I think all should be invited and be welcome.

But we need the committee.

Hela: I think thats what shes saying.

In contributing to this instance of the collective identity process, thereminder presented the collective memory of a past practice, drawnfrom a sharedculture, tohelp definea sharedsenseof theboundary. Themaintenance in this case contributed to the unity of the group by inter-

jecting reminders of collective memories concerning both movementpractices and culturally defined familial relations.

It is important to note a final element in the use of reminders. Thetime a participant spends with a movement can change his or her rela-tion to thepresentations of memories being provided. In themajority ofcases, participants engaging in collectivememorymaintenance assumethat the audience has a degree of familiarity with the information beingpresented. Obviously this is not always the case. The reminders, at dif-ferent times, then, serve simultaneously in collective memory creation.For veteran members, remindersarejust what hasbeen described: a partof collective memory maintenance. However, for a newer member,the reminder may create a breach in the shared sense of unity. So, whilethedetails provide contextual richness for the reminders, they may alsoprovide the needed information for new members to redress a breach inunity.

CONCLUSION

Examining collective memory creation and maintenance can aidresearchers attempting to examine the collective identity process andunity in socialmovements.Assessing this unity is important forexplor-ing important questions concerning participant mobilization, commit-

ment, and the development of movement action (Polletta and Jasper2001).Collectivememory processes work concurrentlywith thedevel-opment of shared notions that comprise the collective identity. As wasindicated above, collective memory creation and maintenance are




32/39

important means for movement members to develop a unity aroundmovement ends, means, fields of action, networks of relations, and therecollections of these elements in the movements past. They do so by

playing important parts in the social dramas of everyday interaction(see Figure 3).

Collective memory creation contributed to movement unity by firstbreaching and then redressing the breach in this unity. The interjectionof information concerning the recent past that was not held by all mem-bers created a disruption in shared understandings of the movementspast. Such understandings involved ideas of the movements estab-lishedends, means, fields of action, andother elements of thecollectiveidentity. Interactions after the disruption provided details of varyingdegrees to give participants a better sense of that past. In attending tothese details, the breach in unity was redressed and unity was reestab-lished by incorporating old notions of the movements past with newnotions concerning various elements of collective identity.

Similarly, collective memory maintenance influenced movementunity by aiding in the redress of a breach in movement unity. However,rather than being localized, the breach in this case arose out of a cumu-lative series of events over time. The redressive mechanism of remind-ers ensured that elements of the movements past were drawn into theinteraction and helped to reestablish the shared definitions of past andpresent thus helping to restore unity.

Each of these processes involves the use of narrative commemora-tions exchanged as a part of what Gubrium (1993) refers to as of themundaneprocess of social construction. It is not thememories them-

selves that are important to the unity of a social movement, but ratherthat the memory processes interactively construct unity around ele-ments of collective identity. As such, it is those who have access to thememories who have a degree of power in the ongoing construction of


FIGURE 3: The Social Drama and Collective Memory Processes



33/39

collective identity. Highly active movementmembers, by virtue of theirpresence at events less active members may miss, for instance, canmold movement unity through collective memory creation. Similarly,veteran members potentially have a degree of power over newer mem-bers in the collective memory maintenance as they have a greater storeof memories on which to draw. The implications of power in these situ-ations, then, have implications for future examinations of the linkbetween collective memory and collective identity.

As issues of power always seem to imply, not all collective memoryconstructions can be taken as smooth and unchallenged. Just as theyemerge in regard to collective action frames (cf. Benford 1993), dis-putes canemergeregardingtheaccuracy or even themeaning ofmemo-

ries. The disputes, then, can impact the collective identity process andthe very unity of the movement. In this study, for instance, evidence ofconflicts between movement members began to emerge. Thedynamicsof these disputes will need to be explored in subsequent research, spe-cifically in light of variations in the power that movement participantshave for influencing collective identity, collective memory, and theoverall unity of the movement.

Finally, it should be noted that in addition to a unity in time, thenotions of collectivememoryandcollective identity also imply thecon-tinuity of a social movement through time (Gongaware 2001). Pastresearch has consistently noted the idea of movement continuity devel-oping as a relation to the past. For example, movements have been

shown to emerge from and draw on preexisting networks, submergednetworks, and/or abeyance structures (Friedman and McAdam 1992;McAdam 1988; Melucci 1995; Taylor and Whittier 1992). As collec-tive memories have been shown to have such a tremendous ability tocarry the past forward into the present (Olick 1999; Schwartz 1991c,1996; Schudson 1992), research should further examine the relation-ship of collective memory and collective identity. Such a focus mayprovide insights into how movement continuity is established andmaintained.

Collective memory and collective identity research have been sepa-rate areas of research even given their obvious implications for eachother and, at times, their similarity in research subjects. Most notably,

collective memories have been an underlying implication of previousstudies on collective identities, and collective memory research hasmade use of social movements as objects of study. Current research




34/39

such as this study and the work of Timothy Kubal (2001) has begun toexplore this link directly and to explore its dynamics and implicationsfor understanding social movements. While Kubals work focuses onthose collective memories drawn from the cultural heritage of NativeAmericans regarding the commemorations of Thanksgiving andColumbus Day, this study has directed attention to those memories thatare developed in and of the movement itself. Drawing on the wealth ofknowledge in collective identityandcollectivememory research, I havehighlighted the utility of attending to both memory and identity simul-taneously. Collective identities are ongoing interactive processes that,through the conduits of collective memory creation and collectivememory maintenance, forge and maintain a unity among movement

members.

NOTES

1. When asked directly, many of theinformants preferred that I indicate their ances-

tral background through their tribal affiliation. Many also suggested that I use Native

American or Indian whenever I refer to groups composed of multiple tribes. You

will noticein thedirect quotes that these terms areused interchangeably, andfollowing

their lead I will do the same here.

2. Social movementorganizationsare defined hereas complex and formal organiza-

tions that identify their goals with

memórias coletivas e identidades

Documents