147 Fathi, Full Circle. 148 Fathi, Full Circle.
149 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 5. 150 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 5.
151 Zonana, Dream Homes; Kazzaz, Mother of the Pound; Sabar, My Father’s Paradise; Fathi, Full Circle; Schinasi-
Silver, 42 Keys to the Second Exodus. While this occurs across the body of texts, those referenced above provide a cross-section of those whose authors demonstrate a high awareness of different interlocking pasts and presents within their narrative focus.
79 In the face of the complexities presented by Mizrahi experiences and life writing, Rothberg’s concept of multidirectional memory offers a vital intervention.152 Rather than
viewing the interactions between different collective memoires as simply efforts to eclipse each other, multidirectional memory reflects and acknowledges the interconnected and entangled nature of experience, recollection, and representation.153 In appreciating the
entangled relationship between pasts and peoples, the commonalities as well as the differences, Rothberg’s model is highly complementary with Shohat’s relational approach to identities.154 Rothberg developed this new framework by combining insights from
Holocaust studies and postcolonial studies. This involved investigating Holocaust remembrance in relation to the strong entanglements between “black Atlantic and French- Algerian contact zones”, reading this “across and through Jewish history”.155 Despite the
presence of apparently differing historical experiences and collective memories, Rothberg found that these were actually involved in complex dialogues, mutual exchanges, and interconnections.156 Importantly, Holocaust remembrance was shown to enable other
collective memories rather than only exclude them, as is often claimed.157 These insights – of
entangled connections – make the multidirectional memory model complementary with Shohat’s recommendations for Mizrahi studies.158 Shohat specifically identified the
acceptance of historical entanglements and relational parallels as crucial for the understanding and accurate representation of Mizrahi experiences.159 To equitably
encapsulate Mizrahi experiences, past and present, she strongly advised using cross- disciplinary approaches which recognise the interconnections between different places, peoples, and temporalities – multidirectional memory does this.160 Rothberg’s model is
squarely situated within a Jewish context but also, as Shohat advocates, importantly recognises and values relatedness and interconnection with other histories, memories, places, and spaces – making it ideal for studying Mizrahi narratives and life writing.
Compared to the competitive model, multidirectional memory presents a different understanding of the relationship between collective memories and present identities which
152 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory. Rothberg demonstrates this new epistemological stance to collective
memory within this book.
153 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 3-5, 11-12, 18, 27-29; Shohat, ‘Taboo Memories, Diasporic Visions’, 206-
209.
154 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 3-5, 11-12, 18, 27-29; Shohat, ‘Taboo Memories, Diasporic Visions’, 206-
209.
155 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, xiii. 156 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 1-29. 157 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 1-3, 6-7, 11.
158 Shohat, ‘Taboo Memories, Diasporic Visions’; Shohat, ‘Rupture and Return’.
159 Shohat, ‘Taboo Memories, Diasporic Visions’, 206-209, 213-229; Shohat, ‘Rupture and Return’, 332-333,
352-354.
80 are viewed as relational rather than absolute.161 This is consistent with the perspective
within postcolonial theory (a background that Shohat and Rothberg share) that identities are unstable and are negotiated and created through interaction within narrative, discourse, and representation.162 Nevertheless, power inequalities between differing “articulations of
memory” continue to be acknowledged, as does the “urgency of memory, with its life-and- death stakes”.163 Rothberg recognises that “powerful social, political, and psychic forces
articulate themselves in every act of remembrance” and the “differentials of access and power that marks the public sphere”.164
Instead of one collective memory acting simply to eclipse another or be eclipsed, this relationship is made more complex – indeed multidirectional. Rather than assuming a fixed result of silencing, loss, exclusion, and destruction will inevitably result, possible outcomes are recognised as unpredictable.165 This includes recognition of the ability to create and
construct new understandings of the past and different configurations of identity in light of interaction.166 Rothberg argues that “the content of a memory has intrinsic meaning but
takes on meaning precisely in relationship to other memories in a network of associations”.167 Interestingly, Domańska suggests that “every kind of human activity is
essentially a way of searching for oneself and for self-realisation” – writing about one’s past or reading about those of others shape knowledge of human experience but also the self.168
In the framework of multidirectional memory, the public sphere remains the theatre where interaction is played out. Rather than being seen as a limited and static resource, it is instead viewed as an “open ended field of articulation and struggle” with greater flexibility and fluidity than is often anticipated”.169 Rothberg explains further:
In contrast [to the competitive model], pursuing memory’s multidirectionality encourages us to think of the public sphere as a malleable discursive space in which groups do not simply articulate positions but actually come into being through their dialogical interactions with others; both the subjects and spaces of the public are open to continual reconstruction.170
161 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 4-7, 11; Shohat, ‘Taboo Memories, Diasporic Visions’, 206-209; Prentice,
Devadas, and Johnson, ‘Introduction – Cultural Transformations’, xii.
162 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 4-7, 11; Shohat, ‘Taboo Memories, Diasporic Visions’, 206-209; Prentice,
Devadas, and Johnson, ‘Introduction – Cultural Transformations’, xii.
163 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 16-17, 21. 164 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 16, 21. 165 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 11-12, 16.
166 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 5-6, 16; Morris-Suzuki, Past Within Us, 22-23; Domańska, ‘Ewa
Domańska (Self-interview)’, 257; Whitlock, Soft Weapons, 10.
167 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 16.
168 Domańska, ‘Ewa Domańska (Self-interview)’, 257. 169 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 5, 21.
81
This echoes Shohat’s insight that identities are not static but often shift along with new political circumstances that can redefine categories of inclusion and exclusion.171 Different
narratives of the past and collective memories are selectively used to justify and negotiate these categorisations of belonging.172 Within this discursive dynamic, “transfers . . . take
place between diverse places and times during acts of remembrance” as identities are reconfigured to fit new situations.173 Pasts, and remembrances of them, are not exclusive or
separate, but instead overlap, although at first they may appear oppositional.174 As
Rothberg explains:
[W]e cannot stem the structural multidirectionality of memory. Even if it were desirable – as it sometimes seems to be – to maintain a wall, or cordon sanitaire, between different histories, it is not possible to do so. Memories are mobile; histories are implicated in each other.175
These interconnections between histories and memories directly shape how identities are perceived to operate because they are constructed in present time using inevitably selective understandings of the past.176 As a consequence of multidirectional memory, identities can
no longer be understood as absolute, exclusive, or deterministic, but rather are fully recognised as malleable and shared, often in surprising ways.177 It is important here to note
that while the focus here are memories, remembrances, and narratives of events – the specificity of each and every event continues to be maintained “since no two events are ever alike”.178 Conceptualising Mizrahi history, memory, and identity within a
multidirectional framework liberates analysis from a static, artificial, and restrictive mode, shifting instead towards an intellectual stance that sees all three as “subject to ongoing negotiation, cross-referencing, and borrowing; as productive and not privative”.179
Multidirectional memory, as a framework, is more reflective of Mizrahi experiences and their life writing than a competitive memory approach. The presence and dynamics of multidirectional memory can be clearly seen throughout Mizrahi memoirs. As “narrative acts” they bear witness to injustice, record memories of past experiences and present circumstances, along with the shifts that occur throughout the renegotiation of space,
171 Shohat, Taboo Memories, Diasporic Voices, 206. 172 Tumblety, Memory and History, 4.
173 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 11. 174 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 7, 11. 175 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 313.
176 Domańska, ‘Ewa Domańska (Self-interview)’, 265; Paris, Long Shadows, 450; Tumblety, Memory and History,
7; Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 5, 18-19.
177 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 5, 18-19. 178 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 18. 179 Rothberg, Multidirectional Memory, 3.
82 place, and identities.180 As representations in the form of literary commodities these
published texts circulate throughout a global context with the potential to “shape understanding” during this socially and politically charged time where identities tend to be considered in more absolute terms.181 Yet they are also very personal stories, sharing
subjective experiences of self, family, and others across different times and places. They are transnational narratives of disruption and displacement. This quality situates them in a relationship with other groups’ collective experiences of exile or dispersal, be it as refugee or immigrant. Importantly, these are also Jewish stories with a relationship to other Jewish histories and remembrances.