Advertisement

Mea Culpa

  • Cristian Tileagă
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Discursive Psychology book series (PSDP)

Abstract

The transition from communism to democracy has been a period when possibilities of constructing and affirming (alternative) personal, group, and community identities have been innumerable (Andrews 2000; Konopasek and Andrews 2000). At the same time, this period has also been one of re-evaluating and re-affirming personal, group, and community biographies from under the sway of the communist past, especially the past that related to how individuals, groups, and communities became an object of … for communist state institutions of control and surveillance. As Andrews has noted:

members of societies in acute social change are not only (and perhaps not even) experiencing a liberation of their memory; they are scrambling to construct new and acceptable identities for themselves, ones which will be compatible with the changed world in which they now live. (2000, p. 181)

In common with many other Eastern European countries, the end of the communist era in Romania has seen the publication of documents which have been perceived as evidence of complicity between the Securitate (the communist secret police) and certain public figures. The process of releasing and making public documents of the Communist Secret Police has been very slow and ridden with controversy. Investigations of the released documents have led to a series of allegations of ‘collaboration’ with the Securitate which, in turn, has led to a number of public disclosures from those concerned by those allegations: politicians, public intellectuals, clerics, and journalists. These disclosures have been delivered in a variety of forms (e.g., interviews with journalists, open letters to newspapers, etc.). This chapter is concerned with the production and politics of public disclosure in relation to accounting for ‘collaboration’ with the Securitate. It examines, in detail, an apologia for ‘being an informer’ by a Romanian public intellectual in a letter sent to one of Romania’s wide-circulation national newspapers.

References

  1. Abadi, A. (1990). The Speech Act of Apology in Political Life. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 467–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, M. (2000). Texts in a Changing Context: Reconstructing Lives in East Germany. In P. Chamberlayne, J. Bornat, & T. Wengraf (Eds.), The Turn to Biographical Methods in Social Science: Comparative Issues and Examples (pp. 181–195). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Atkinson, P., & Coffey, A. (1997). Analysing Documentary Realities. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice (pp. 45–62). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Bakhtin, M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Ed. and trans: C. Emerson. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  5. Barthélémy, M. (2003). Temporal Perspectives in the Practical-Textual Handling of a European Public Problem. Social Science Information, 42, 403–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barthes, R. (1986). The Rustle of Language (R. Howard, Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Benoit, W. L. (1995). Accounts, Excuse and Apologies: A Theory of Image Restoration Strategies. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bergmann, J. R. (1998). Introduction: Morality in Discourse. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 31(3-4), 279–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Braithwaite, J. (1999). Restorative Justice: Assessing Optimistic and Pessimistic Accounts. Crime and Justice, 25, 1–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Braithwaite, J. (2000). Repentance Rituals and Restorative Justice. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 8, 115–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Braithwaite, J., & Mugford, S. (1994). Conditions of Successful Reintegration Ceremonies. British Journal of Criminology, 34, 139–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brooks, P. (2000). Troubling Confessions: Speaking Guilt in Law and Literature. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Coetzee, J. (1985). Confession and Double Thoughts: Tolstoy, Rousseau, Dostoevsky. Comparative Literature, 37, 193–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davies, M. (1993). Healing Sylvia: Accounting for the Textual “Discovery” of Unconscious Knowledge. Sociology, 27(1), 110–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Derrida, J. (1997). Archive Fever. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. Edles, L. (2002). Cultural Sociology in Practice. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Edwards, D. (1997). Discourse and Cognition. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Edwards, D. (1999). Emotion Discourse. Culture & Psychology, 5, 271–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Edwards, D. (2000). Extreme Case Formulations: Softeners, Investment and Doing Nonliteral. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 23(4), 347–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Edwards, D. (2005). Moaning, Whinging and Laughing: The Subjective Side of Complaints. Discourse Studies, 7, 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Edwards, D. (2006). Facts, Norms and Dispositions: Practical Uses of the Modal Verb Would in Police Interrogations. Discourse Studies, 8(4), 475–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eglin, P., & Hester, S. (2003). The Montreal Massacre: A Story of Membership Categorisation Analysis. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Erben, M. (1993). The Problem of Other Lives: Social Perspectives on Written Biography. Sociology, 27(1), 15–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Erikson, K. T. (1962). Notes on the Sociology of Deviance. Social Problems, 9, 307–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Featherstone, M. (2006). Archive. Theory, Culture and Society, 23, 591–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Freeman, M. (1993). Rewriting the Self: History, Memory, Narrative. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Garfinkel, H. (1956). Conditions of Successful Degradation Ceremonies. The American Journal of Sociology, 61, 420–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gergen, M., & Gergen, K. (2002). Ethnographic Representation as Relationship. In A. Bochner & C. Ellis (Eds.), Ethnographically Speaking (pp. 11–33). Walnut Creek: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
  29. Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in Public. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  30. Goode, E. (2004). Is the Sociology of Deviance Still Relevant? The American Sociologist, 35, 46–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ilie, C. (1999). Question-Response Argumentation in Talk Shows. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 975–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jayyusi, L. (1991a). Values and Moral Judgement: Communicative Praxis as Moral Order. In G. Button (Ed.), Ethnomethodology and the Human Sciences (pp. 227–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kampf, Z. (2009). Public (Non-) apologies: The Discourse of Minimizing Responsibility. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 2257–2270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Konopasek, Z., & Andrews, M. (2000). A Cautious Ethnography of Socialism: Autobiographical Narrative in the Czech Republic. In M. Andrews, S. D. Sclater, C. Squire, & A. Treacher (Eds.), Lines of Narrative: Psychosocial Perspectives (pp. 92–103). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lakoff, R. B. (2001). Nine Way of Looking at Apologies: The Necessity for Interdisciplinary Theory and Method in Discourse Analysis. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. Hamilton (Eds.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 199–214). London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  36. LeCouteur, A. (2001). On saying sorry: Repertoires of apologising to Australia's Stolen Generations’. In A. McHoul & M. Rapley (Eds.), How to Analyse Talk in Institutional Settings: A Casebook of Methods (pp. 148–160). London: Continuum International.Google Scholar
  37. Lee, J. (1984). Innocent Victims and Evil Doers. Women's Studies International Forum, 7(1), 69–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lemke, J. L. (1995). Textual Politics: Discourse and Social Dynamics. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  39. Lepper, G. (2000). Categories in Text and Talk: A Practical Introduction to Categorisation Analysis. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Livingston, E. (1995). An Anthropology of Reading. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Lynch, M. (1999). Archives in Formation: Privileged Spaces, Popular Archives and Paper Trails. History of the Human Sciences, 12, 65–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lynch, M., & Bogen, D. (1996). The Spectacle of History: Speech, Text, and Memory at the Iran-Contra Hearings. Durham/London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Meier, A. J. (1998). Apologies: What do We Know? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8, 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Middleton, D., & Brown, S. D. (2005). The Social Psychology of Experience: Studies in Remembering and Forgetting. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  45. Miller, B. (1999). Narratives of Guilt and Compliance in Unified Germany: Stasi Informers and their Impact on Society. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Miller, B. (2003). Portrayals of Past and Present Selves in the Life Stories of Former Stasi Informers. In R. Humphrey, R. Miller, & E. Zdravomyslova (Eds.), Biographical Research in Eastern Europe: Altered Lives and Broken Biographies (pp. 101–114). London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  47. Owen, M. (1983). Apologies and Remedial Interchanges. New York: Mouton Publisher.Google Scholar
  48. Passerini, L. (2005). Memory and Totalitarianism. Somerset: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  49. Payne, L. (2008). Unsettling Accounts: Neither Truth nor Reconciliation in Confessions of State Violence. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Plummer, K. (2001). Documents of Life 2: An Invitation to Critical Humanism. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pomerantz, A. (1986). Extreme Case Formulations: A Way of Legitimating Claims. Human Studies, 9, 219–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Potter, J. (1996). Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Prior, L. (2004). Documents. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative Research Practice (pp. 375–390). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  54. Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schütz, A. (1967). Collected Papers I: The Problem of Social Reality (Eds. M. A. Natanson & H. L. van Breda). Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
  56. Simons, H. W. (2000). A Dilemma‐Centered Analysis of Clinton’s August 17th Apologia: Implications for Rhetorical Theory and Method. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 86(4), 438–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Smith, D. (1990a). The Active Text: A Textual Analysis of the Social Relations of Public Textual Discourse. In Texts. Facts and Femininity: Exploring the Relations of Ruling (pp. 120–158). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  58. Smith, D. (1990b). Textually Mediated Social Organization. In Texts, Facts and Femininity: Exploring the Relations of Ruling (pp. 209–224). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Stanley, L. (1993). On auto/Biography in Sociology. Sociology, 27(1), 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Walker, M. U. (2006). Moral Repair: Reconstructing Moral Relations after Wrongdoing. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Watson, R. (1997). Ethnomethodology and Textual Analysis. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice (pp. 80–98). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  62. Wertsch, J. (2007). Collective Memory. In J. Valsiner & A. Rosa (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Sociocultural Psychology (pp. 645–660). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wetherell, M. (2007). A Step Too Far: Discursive Psychology, Linguistic Ethnography and Questions of Identity. Journal of SocioLinguistics, 11, 661–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wilson, J. (1990). Politically Speaking: The Pragmatic Analysis of Political Language. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cristian Tileagă
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Social SciencesLoughborough UniversityLoughboroughUK

Personalised recommendations