Landsberg describes prosthetic memories as those “not strictly derived from a persons lived experience” (25). She goes on to add that “prosthetic memories are adopted as the result of a persons experience with a mass cultural technology of memory that dramatizes or recreates a history he or she did not live (28). In this context, the majority of my recollections from 19th May 2000 are in fact prosthetic memories revised and reconfigured according to the different media technologies I was engaged with on the day. And in hindsight it becomes a difficult task to distinguish between what I personally experienced and what was disseminated to me via the media.
To begin with, the radio broadcasts from the Parliament complex consisted of a play-by-play commentary of what the commentator was witnessing. The urgency in the commentators voice and the descriptive power of his chosen words acted as stimulants to the frenzy of the rising action. And today my most powerful memory of the radio broadcasts, is that lone, disembodied voice sometimes distorted by static. This in itself is problematic because the voice is at once both powerful and poignant but also curiously weak without any supporting visuals. And I suppose this is one of the core limitations of radio as a media form; we tend to forget words after sometime but images themselves speak a thousand words and if powerful enough, get etched in our memories long-term. Conversely, the broadcasts were useful in the sense that they complemented my overall memory of the wider event. Both the city looting and the takeover of Parliament were inter-related and had I only relied on the television broadcasts, I would have missed out on the crucial developments in the Parliament complex which was equally important for me to gain a broader perspective on the whole event.
Next came the live television coverage of the looting and the destruction of the capital city, Suva and the ensuing confrontation between the armed military men and the rebelling citizens. The latter is a powerful image that has imprinted itself in my mind and even though I am aware that it was a mediated memory it has managed to replace my authentic memory of the soldiers being friendly and non-threatening. Also it may be worthwhile to compare media forms again and ask whether the same would have held true if there were no visuals to base the recollections on? For it was precisely the visual aspect of the memory that ensured its endurance for me. Also the visual power of the moving images was such that I acutely felt the sensations that I would have felt had I been physically present there. To use Landsberg again, I was emotionally possessed (30). I identified myself as living that moment, through the television broadcasts. As it is, my memory becomes not so much a recollection than the revisiting of an experience and even today I find it difficult to separate the authentic memories from the mediated ones and also to discern which of my authentic memories have been supplanted by prosthetic ones.
Works Cited
Landsberg, Alison. "Prosthetic Memory." Prosthetic Memory: The Transformation of American Remembrance in the Age of Mass Culture. New York: Columbia University Press, 2004. 25-48. Print.
Works Cited
Landsberg, Alison. "Prosthetic Memory." Prosthetic Memory: The Transformation of American Remembrance in the Age of Mass Culture. New York: Columbia University Press, 2004. 25-48. Print.
