The Machine Boss as a Symbolic Leader

Abstract

While research on collective memory has progressively gotten a footing in historical studies, scholars of oral history have become more and more interested in the meanings of the distortions of people's recollections.' Indeed, the awareness that memory is not reproduced, but socially and culturally constructed by reorganizations, omissions, and manipulations has made the discrepancies between factual events and reminiscences more insightful than truthfulness itself in order to cast light on people's perception of the historical process and on their consciousness of the past. As David Thelen has pointed out, what is important is that the memory be authentic for the person at the moment of construction, not that it be an accurate description of a past moment. In particular, Alessandro Portelli has shown the valuable contribution that imaginary reconstructions of events can make to illuminate the personal and collective experience of the storytellers. He has also illustrated how inventions in the narratives of the informants reflect the interests and desires of the interviewees, as well as their efforts to make sense of the past.2