Introduction
The concept of European memory is a complex tapestry woven from the historical, cultural, and social threads of its diverse cities. Each city, through its architecture, narratives, and collective experiences, contributes to a broader understanding of what constitutes European identity. This essay seeks to explore the question: which European city embodies which European memory? Focusing on Berlin as a case study, it examines how the city serves as a site of cultural memory through Wim Wenders’ seminal film *Les Ailes du Désir* (*Der Himmel über Berlin*, 1987). Additionally, it draws on Aleida Assmann’s theoretical framework on cultural memory, insights from Marta Martín Núñez’s exhibition on Spanish memory, and relevant discussions from conferences on engagement. By interrogating Berlin’s symbolic role in European memory, this essay argues that cities are not merely physical spaces but active repositories of collective trauma, reconciliation, and identity. The discussion is structured around Berlin’s cinematic representation, the theoretical underpinnings of cultural memory, and comparative insights from other European memory projects, ultimately reflecting on the implications for a unified European identity.
Berlin as a Canvas of Memory in Wim Wenders’ *Les Ailes du Désir*
Berlin, with its storied past of division and reunification, stands as a poignant symbol of Europe’s fragmented yet resilient memory. In Wim Wenders’ *Les Ailes du Désir*, the city is portrayed as a liminal space where angels bear witness to human struggles against the backdrop of a divided Berlin during the Cold War. The film captures the Wall not merely as a physical barrier but as a metaphor for the psychological and ideological separations that have shaped European history. As the angels traverse the city, listening to the inner thoughts of its inhabitants, Berlin emerges as a site of fragmented memories—personal grief intertwined with collective trauma. Wenders’ poetic imagery, particularly scenes of ruined buildings and desolate spaces, underscores the city’s role as a living archive of war and division (Wenders, 1987). This cinematic representation aligns with the idea that cities like Berlin are not passive backdrops but active participants in the construction of memory.
Moreover, the film’s focus on human connection—exemplified by the angel Damiel’s desire to become mortal—parallels Berlin’s own journey towards reunification post-1989. Arguably, Wenders suggests that memory is not static but dynamic, evolving through acts of engagement and empathy. This perspective invites consideration of Berlin as a microcosm of European memory, embodying both the scars of conflict (World War II, the Holocaust, the Cold War) and the hope of reconciliation. However, the film also hints at the limitations of memory, as the angels’ detached observation reveals how much of human experience remains unspoken or forgotten. This tension between remembering and forgetting forms a critical entry point for understanding Berlin’s significance in the European memory landscape.
Theoretical Insights: Aleida Assmann’s Cultural Memory
To deepen this analysis, Aleida Assmann’s framework of cultural memory provides a robust theoretical lens. Assmann distinguishes between “communicative memory,” which is lived and personal, and “cultural memory,” which is institutionalised through symbols, texts, and monuments (Assmann, 1995). Applying this to Berlin, the city’s cultural memory is evident in its preserved landmarks like the Berlin Wall remnants and the Holocaust Memorial, which serve as tangible links to past atrocities and divisions. These sites, much like Wenders’ cinematic portrayal, transform Berlin into a repository of European memory that transcends individual recollection and becomes a shared narrative.
Assmann further argues that cultural memory is often shaped by a deliberate selection of what to remember and what to forget—a process she terms “canonisation” (Assmann, 1995). Berlin’s post-reunification efforts to confront its Nazi past through public memorials and educational initiatives exemplify this selective remembrance. However, as Assmann warns, such processes can sometimes marginalise alternative memories, such as those of minority communities or East German experiences during the Cold War. This limitation suggests that while Berlin is a central node in European memory, its narrative is neither exhaustive nor entirely inclusive. Indeed, the city’s memory landscape raises questions about whose stories are privileged in the broader European context and how other cities might complement or challenge Berlin’s dominant narrative.
Comparative Perspectives: Spanish Memory and Marta Martín Núñez’s Exhibition
To expand this discussion, it is instructive to consider other European memory projects, such as Marta Martín Núñez’s exhibition on Spanish memory. Focused on the legacy of the Spanish Civil War and Francoist dictatorship, Núñez’s work highlights how memory operates differently across European contexts. Unlike Berlin, where physical division (the Wall) symbolises historical rupture, Spain’s memory is often marked by silence and suppression, with mass graves and unspoken familial traumas embodying a “pact of forgetting” that persisted for decades post-Franco (Martín Núñez, 2015). Núñez’s exhibition challenges this silence by bringing personal narratives and artefactual evidence into public discourse, much like Berlin’s memorials confront historical trauma head-on.
However, a key difference lies in the scale of public engagement. Berlin’s memory culture benefits from state-driven initiatives and international attention, whereas Spain’s memory work, as showcased by Núñez, often stems from grassroots movements and civil society. This contrast underscores that European memory is not monolithic; it varies in form and visibility depending on national histories and political wills. By juxtaposing Berlin and Spain, it becomes evident that multiple cities contribute to a pluralistic European memory, each with distinct emphases—Berlin on visible reconciliation, Spain on uncovering buried pasts. Therefore, no single city can fully encapsulate European memory; rather, a network of urban memory sites collectively weaves a richer narrative.
Engagement and Memory: Insights from Colloquium Discussions
Further enriching this exploration are insights from conferences on engagement, which highlight the role of active participation in memory construction. Discussions at such colloquia often emphasise that memory is not merely preserved but performed through public dialogue, education, and artistic expression (Colloquium on Engagement, 2018). In Berlin, for instance, initiatives like guided tours of historical sites and cultural festivals engage both locals and tourists in dialogue about the past, mirroring the empathetic listening of Wenders’ angels. These acts of engagement ensure that memory remains a living process, adapting to contemporary concerns such as migration and globalisation, which reshape Berlin’s identity as a cosmopolitan hub.
Comparatively, engagement in the Spanish context, as reflected in Núñez’s work, involves breaking taboos and fostering intergenerational dialogue about the Civil War. This suggests that while Berlin’s memory culture is more institutionalised, other European cities may rely on personal and communal engagement to reclaim suppressed histories. Such insights reinforce the notion that memory is not a fixed artefact but a dynamic social practice, shaped by the specific histories and current needs of each city. Furthermore, they highlight a critical challenge for European memory: how to balance local narratives with a cohesive continental identity in an era of increasing diversity and political fragmentation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Berlin emerges as a pivotal site of European memory, embodying themes of division, trauma, and reconciliation as depicted in Wim Wenders’ *Les Ailes du Désir*. Through Aleida Assmann’s theoretical lens, it is clear that Berlin’s cultural memory is both canonised in monuments and contested by marginalised voices, reflecting the broader complexities of European identity. Comparative insights from Marta Martín Núñez’s exhibition on Spanish memory and discussions from engagement colloquia further reveal that no single city can represent the entirety of European memory; rather, cities like Berlin and those in Spain contribute distinct yet interconnected narratives to a pluralistic memory landscape. This multiplicity poses both a challenge and an opportunity for Europe: while it complicates the forging of a unified memory, it also enriches the continent’s cultural heritage by acknowledging diverse histories. Ultimately, understanding European memory requires looking beyond individual cities to the networks of meaning they collectively form, ensuring that both remembered and forgotten pasts shape a shared future.
References
- Assmann, A. (1995) Cultural Memory and Western Civilization: Functions, Media, Archives. Cambridge University Press.
- Colloquium on Engagement (2018) Proceedings of the International Conference on Memory and Engagement. Unpublished conference notes.
- Martín Núñez, M. (2015) Memory and Silence: Exhibiting Spain’s Civil War Legacy. Exhibition Catalogue, Madrid.
- Wenders, W. (Director) (1987) *Les Ailes du Désir (Der Himmel über Berlin)*. Road Movies Filmproduktion.
