The field of memory: a terrain criss-crossed with inaccuracies

Introduction: The analysis addressed the academic debate on memory in the context of forced disappearance in Mexico. Based on a roundtable discussion held in May 2024, the absence of a precise definition of the category of memory and the indiscriminate use of terms associated with memorialization processes were examined. An academic resistance to conceptualizing memory was identified, which has generated ambiguous discourses and the lack of a shared theoretical framework. Development: During the round table discussion, the researchers presented experiences of accompanying groups of relatives of disappeared persons in Mexico City and Zacatecas. However, they avoided defining the concept of memory and limited themselves to referring to its use by the groups. One researcher described the creation of a red fabric with images of the disappeared as an act of “public memory”, without specifying the meaning of the term. Another academic argued that memory had an instrumental role in making the authorities uncomfortable and mobilizing demands for justice, reducing it to an immediate political function. The analysis showed that the category of memory is used randomly in the academic sphere, without establishing its conceptual limits. It was concluded that it is essential to differentiate between memory as a symbolic action and its instrumentalization in the public sphere, in order to avoid simplistic interpretations that do not consider the complexity of historical and political processes.