寻忆陌生人:数字记忆实践中的“联结”与“无法联结”

胡康, 郑一卉

国际新闻界 ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (6) : 119-136.

PDF(1770 KB)
PDF(1770 KB)
国际新闻界 ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (6) : 119-136.
研究论文

寻忆陌生人:数字记忆实践中的“联结”与“无法联结”

作者信息 +

Recalling Strangers: Get or Not Get Connected via Digital Memory Practice

Author information +
文章历史 +

摘要

人类的记忆实践已无法脱离技术的作用,如同数字档案的社交平台在开放与在线中使许多记忆微光得到贮存与显现,看似与记忆无关的“陌生人”也在“人—物”的相互联结下成为追忆者展开记忆实践的聚焦对象,并在主体的公开寻忆中转变为一种联结式的“诸众记忆”。在“寻忆陌生人”的实践背后,旧照片、算法等共同构成了记忆和关系联结的触发器。在社交平台铺就的交互轨迹中,“过去”与“当下”得到跨时空联结,形塑出动态的“纵向共时性”。更重要的是,记忆实践的展开并不是活动的终点,追忆者与陌生人的联结建立起了新的交际关系,续写了新的记忆,“过去—现在”也在此意境中向“未来”靠近。不过,在联结与记忆触达的背后同样存在着“无法联结”的情况,其不仅反映了记忆攸关方对时空权力的施展,反向突显出联结的意义与价值,以及联结本身的“不稳定性”和“未知性”,而且其为我们否思、补充“联结记忆”理论提供了新的视角。

Abstract

Human memory practice cannot be separated from technology, the social platform is like digital archives, allows many memories to be stored and displayed in an open and online environment. Seemingly unrelated “strangers” have also become the focus of reminiscers’ memory practice under the interconnection of human and object, and have transformed into the “ memory of the multitude” in the public search of the subject. Behind the practice of “seeking memories of strangers”, old photos, algorithms, and other factors together form triggers for memory and relationship connections. In the interactive trajectory laid out on social platforms, the “past” and “present” are connected across time and space, shaping a dynamic “vertical synchronicity”. More importantly, the unfolding of memory practice is not the end point of the activity. The “connection” between the reminiscer and the “stranger” establishes a new communicative relationship, continues to write new memories, and the “past” “present” also approaches the “future” in this artistic conception. However, there is also a situation of "inability to connect" behind the connection and memory outreach, which not only reflects the exercise of temporal and spatial power by memory stakeholders, but also highlights the significance and value of connection, as well as the “instability” and “unknowns” of connection itself, and provides us with a new perspective to rethink and extend Connective Memory.

关键词

联结 / 记忆实践 / 陌生人 / 数字媒介

Key words

Connection / memory practice / stranger / digital media

引用本文

导出引用
胡康, 郑一卉. 寻忆陌生人:数字记忆实践中的“联结”与“无法联结”[J]. 国际新闻界. 2025, 47(6): 119-136
HU Kang, ZHENG Yihui. Recalling Strangers: Get or Not Get Connected via Digital Memory Practice[J]. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 2025, 47(6): 119-136

参考文献

[1]
阿莱达·阿斯曼(2009// 2016). 《回忆空间: 文化记忆的形式和变迁》(潘璐译). 北京大学出版社.
[2]
安德鲁·霍斯金斯, 李红涛(2015). 连结性转向之后的媒介、战争与记忆. 《探索与争鸣》,(7),106-114.
[3]
格奥尔格·齐美尔(1950/2002). 《社会是如何可能的: 齐美尔社会学文选》(林荣远编译). 广西师范大学出版社.
[4]
韩婕, 李红涛, 刘于思(2023). 数字“瘟疫年纪事”:连接性见证与灾难马拉松的公共记忆. 《国际新闻界》,(1),106-131.
[5]
胡康(2024). 人媒共生中的时间与记忆:论斯蒂格勒的媒介思想及其在数智时代的“延异”. 《新闻界》,(7),85-97.
[6]
胡康, 郑一卉(2024a). 传播的“记忆观”:基于对斯蒂格勒媒介思想的解读. 《新闻大学》,(10),16-27+121-122.
[7]
胡康, 郑一卉(2024b). “记忆”之辨:新闻传播学领域记忆研究的概念辨析与方法论反思. 《新闻与写作》,(8),62-72.
[8]
黄顺铭, 陈昭博(2024). 重返帖与诸众记忆:以QQ空间的“那年今日”为例. 《新闻界》,(10),49-63.
[9]
黄泰轲(2018). 鲍曼的“陌生人”概念及其道德地位问题. 《伦理学研究》,(4),57-62.
[10]
李红涛(2022). 连接转向之后怎样?——数字记忆的嵌入、汇流与激荡. 《文化研究》,(3),15-43.
[11]
李红涛(2024a). 迈向明智的数字记忆研究. 《新闻记者》,(9),91-109.
[12]
李红涛(2024b). 从“被记忆权”到“记忆权”——迈向复调式的记忆权利观念和多元的公共讨论. 《新闻记者》,(3),42-52.
[13]
李红涛, 杨蕊馨(2022). 把个人带回来:数字媒介、社会实践与记忆研究的想象力. 《新闻与写作》,(2),5-15.
[14]
刘蒙之(2010). 格雷格里·贝特森对传播学研究的奠基性贡献. 《国际新闻界》,(1),105-110.
[15]
沈阳晚报(2023年3月18日). 辽宁女大学生晒21年前游沈阳老照片想要找出当年蹭照的小帅哥如今在哪. 《沈阳晚报》,4.
[16]
闫文捷, 李红涛(2022). 汇入治理的数据行动——蔚蓝地图的连结想象与实践. 《新闻与传播研究》,(5),74-92+127-128.
[17]
张杰(2016). 通过陌生性去沟通:陌生人与移动网时代的网络身份/认同——基于“个体化社会”的视角. 《国际新闻界》,(1),102-119.
[18]
郑一卉, 胡康(2024). “活”在云端:基于云的数智记忆实践及其意义研究. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》,(1),21-30.
[19]
Bauman Z. (2004). Wasted lives: Modernity and its outcasts. Polity Press.
[20]
Bennett W. L., & Segerberg A. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739-768.
[21]
Brown S. D., & Reavey P. (2014). Vital memories: Movements in and between affect, ethics and self. Memory Studies, 7(3), 328-338.
[22]
Claire L. E. (2014, October 16). William Gibson has no idea how the future will see us. Vice. https://www.vice.com/en/article/william-gibson-we-have-no-idea-what-the-future-will-think-of-us/
[23]
Deuze M. (2011). Media life. Media, Culture & Society, 33(1), 137-148.
[24]
Ernst W. (2006). Dis/continuities:Does the archive become metaphorical in multi-media space? In WHK. Chun and T. Keenan (Eds.), New media old media: History and theory reader (pp. 105-123). Routledge.
[25]
French L., Garry M., & Mori K. (2008). You say tomato? Collaborative remembering leads to more false memories for intimate couples than for strangers. Memory, 16(3), 262-273.
Research on memory conformity shows that collaborative remembering--typically in the form of discussion--can influence people's memories. One question that remains is whether it matters with whom we discuss our memories. To address this question we compared people's memories for an event after they discussed that event with either their romantic partner or a stranger. Pairs of subjects watched slightly different versions of a movie, and then discussed some details from the movie, but not others. Subjects were better at remembering non-discussed details than discussed details: when remembering discussed details they incorrectly reported information from their partner's version instead of their own. In addition, subjects who discussed the event with their romantic partner (rather than with a stranger) were even more likely to report false memories. We discuss our findings in relation to other research on memory conformity, social influences on false memories, and memory systems within romantic relationships.
[26]
Gasparini G. (1995). On Waiting. Time and Society, 4(1), 29-45.
This article argues that waiting, a typical `inter-stitial time', deserves specific analysis because of the wealth of meanings which can be attributed to it from the actor's point of view. After considering the links between `waiting' and `expectation', three types of waiting are considered: namely, waiting as blockage of action; as an experience filled with substitute meanings; and as a meaningful experience. Special attention is paid to the causes underlying waiting in service activities. Finally, the author tries to show how various kinds of waiting are interrelated in everyday life.
[27]
Hepp A. (2020). Deep mediatization. Routledge.
[28]
Hoskins A. (2011a). Media, memory, metaphor: Remembering and the connective turn. Parallax, 17(4), 19-31.
[29]
Hoskins A. (2011b). 7/7 and connective memory: Interactional trajectories of remembering in post-scarcity culture. Memory studies, 4(3), 269-280.
[30]
Hoskins A. (2017a). The Restless Past:An Introduction to Digital Memory. In A. Hoskins (Ed.). Digital memory studies (pp.1-24). Routledge.
[31]
Hoskins A. (2017b). Memory of the multitude:The end of collective memory. In A. Hoskins (Ed.). Digital memory studies (pp.85-109). Routledge.
[32]
Hoskins A., & Halstead H. (2021). The new grey of memory: Andrew Hoskins in conversation with Huw Halstead. Memory Studies, 14(3), 675-685.
Andrew Hoskins – interviewed by Huw Halstead – discusses the tensions and paradoxes of memory and place in the connective era. Digital media liberate memory from the spatial archive, but they also create a connective compulsion and dependency, a disconnect from the present moment and a loss of control over memory. The overwhelming abundance and immediacy of digital data breed a placelessness of the digital traces of ourselves, an algorithmic narrowing of information, knowledge and life. The COVID-19 pandemic has intensified this compulsion to record to such an extent that it may be considered a new memory boom, an obsessive desire to remember. Locative and mobile technology may seem to locate us in space more than ever before, but they do so in ways that are beyond our comprehension: our smartphones know more about our locatedness than we do, ushering in a ‘new grey’ in digital memory. Yet, it is critical to be aware of the variegated geography of connective memory – and of Memory Studies itself.
[33]
Jackson L., Harris C., & Valentine G. (2017). Rethinking concepts of the strange and the stranger. Social & Cultural Geography, 18(1), 1-15.
[34]
Jacobsen B. N. (2024). When is the right time to remember? Social media memories, temporality and the kairologic. New Media & Society, 26(5), 2872-2888.
This article asks what impact temporality and timing have on the ways in which memories are felt and made to matter on social media. Drawing on Taina Bucher’s theorisation of the ‘kairologic’ of algorithmic media, I explore how digital memories are resurfaced or made visible to people at the ‘right time’ in the present. The article proposes the notion of ‘right-time memories’ to examine the ways in which social media platforms and timing performatively shape people’s engagement with the past. Drawing on interview and focus group data, I explore four ways that right-time memories are sociotechnically produced and felt in everyday life: through an anniversary logic, personalisation, rhythms, and tensions. Ultimately, it is argued that when memories are made to matter in the present is a crucial way to further examine the temporal politics of social media platforms and algorithms.
[35]
Kalin J. (2012). Reanimating memory: The prospects of memory in a digital age [PhD’s dissertation, North Carolina State University]. ProQuest.
[36]
https://www.proquest.com/openview/c7ff661e17e25ca8f0eace8d7818f4f3/1?cbl=18750&loginDisplay=true&pq-origsite=gscholar
[37]
Kwon J. H. (2015). The work of waiting: Love and money in Korean Chinese transnational migration. Cultural Anthropology, 30(3), 477-500.
[38]
Lofland L. H. (1973). A world of strangers:Order and action in urban public space. Basic Books, Inc.
[39]
Lohmeier C., Kaun A., & Pentzold C. (2020). Making time in digital societies: considering the interplay of media, data, and temporalities-an introduction to the special issue. New Media & Society, 22(9), 1521-1527.
[40]
Lupton D. (1999). Dangerous places and the unpredictable stranger: Constructions of fear of crime. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 32(1), 1-15.
[41]
Marotta V. (2012). Georg Simmel, the stranger and the sociology of knowledge. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 33(6), 675-689.
[42]
Nora P. (1989). Between memory and history: Les lieux de mémoire (M. Roudebush, Trans.). Representations, 26, 7-24.
[43]
Plato. (2002). Five dialogues: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo (G. M. A. Grube, Trans.). Hackett Publishing Company.
[44]
Prey R., & Smit R. (2019). From personal to personalized memory:Social media as mnemotechnology. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A networked self and birth, life, death (pp.209-223). Routledge.
[45]
Ricker T. J., Vergauwe E., & Cowan N. (2016). Decay theory of immediate memory: From Brown (1958) to today (2014). Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(10), 1969-1995.
[46]
Ricoeur P. (2000/2004). Memory, history, forgetting. (K. Blamey, & D. Pellauer, Trans.). The University of Chicago Press.
[47]
Schwartz R. (2013). The networked familiar stranger: An aspect of online and offline urban anonymity. In K. M.Cumiskey, & L. Hjorth, Mobile media practices, presence and politics (pp. 135-149). Routledge.
[48]
Skowronski J. J., Betz A. L., Thompson C. P., & Shannon L. (1991). Social memory in everyday life: Recall of self-events and other-events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 831.
[49]
Van Dijck J. (2007). Mediated memories in the digital age. Stanford University Press.
[50]
Virno P. (2001/2003). A grammar of the multitude: For an analysis of contemporary forms of life. (I. Bertoletti, J. Cascaito, & A. Casson, Trans.). Semiotext (e).
[51]
Word Press. (2015). Remembrance: Landscape photography and memory. https://hollyconstantinephotography.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/remembrance-land-photography-and-memory-draft-4.pdf

PDF(1770 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

段落导航
相关文章

/