Paper Short Abstract:

Post-war memory landscapes are defined by notions of victimhood, often with little space for ambiguity and nuance. This paper examines the possibilities and limitations of engaging with silenced stories through multimodal research interventions.

Paper Abstract:

How to handle stories shared by research partners in confidence, off the record, and with the intention to remain hidden from official memory narratives? A decade ago, I began my research in the Peruvian highland town of Ayacucho, collaborating with mainly female indigenous leaders and memory activists. I have supported their demands for truth and justice by making films and writing stories about the violence inflicted by insurgent groups and state forces during the Peruvian internal armed conflict (1980-2000). I also learned that not all suffering is shareable. Some people’s stories of guilt, shame and regret remain unspeakable. And yet, these stories may be part of a more complex memory landscape that I, as a researcher, am committed to portraying.

In this paper, I would like to consider the (im)possibilities of narrating what so often has appeared in my research without warning, tripping me up and making me think more carefully about what is going on. I call it the impossible story; the kind of story that upsets the neatness of contemporary memory regimes, defining who and what is to be remembered. It’s the story that sits uneasily amidst declarations of loyalty, assumed positionalities and collaborative approaches because their impossibility imposes innocence as the necessary condition for victim-survivors to be granted victimhood before the state and retain their right to claim truth, justice and remembrance.