As Freudian psychoanalysis described it, oblivion is neither a malfunction or a gap of memory but an active process of erasement related with repression. Based on memory studies that specifically take forgetting as a topic (Loraux, Ferro, Heinrich, Guenée), this paper will consider such oblivions as the complement of memory, not its opposite. In a sociocritical perspective (Robin, Angenot, Popovic), its purpose is to identify the components, the modes and the uses of collective amnesia. Such oblivions result from semiotic interventions that affect the memory texture of a society.
What kind of oblivions is collective amnesia based on? Why does a society erase entire parts of its past? The general concept of oubliogramme covers four categories: national oblivions, scientific oblivions, community oblivions and cultural oblivions. How does a society erase an element of the past that is public and belongs to common knowledge? As Ricœur says, oblivion suffers from the same forms of abuse as memory: ordered oblivions; erasements provoked by substitution of one memory by the other; manipulations and narrative operations organised by the official memory that impeach other visions of the past to emerge; traumatic memories that leave a lasting impression on a whole generation and that are simply left unsaid for some time.
Analyzing specific cases of erasement, this paper will define the concept of oblivion and explore more specifically the rewrittings and the distorsions that shape the collective oblivion of post-war French society (1945-1961).
