Mukul Chaturvedi

Associate Professor
Dept. of English
Zakir Husain Delhi College
University of Delhi
India
ukul.chaturvedi!outlook.co
Ethical Witnessing: The Poetics and Politics of Testimony
"ecent theoretical revaluations have e#panded the role of testiony $eyond its
docuentary and legal function and focus on the ethical aspect of survivor testiony.
%Aga$en &'''( )elan and *au$ &''+( ,liver +--&( *a Capra +--&./estiony in its
ne0 avatar has $een ontologically reconfigured and has $ecoe a useful category to
understand the silences that structure trauatic events. In the 1age of testiony2 %)elan
&''+. and the 1era of the 0itness2 %3ieviorka +--4. there has $een a gro0ing ephasis
on e#periential kno0ledge and the 0itness has $ecoe a 1key political figure of our
tie.2 %)assin +--5. 6y enlarging the notion of testiony $eyond the first7hand
kno0ledge of the 0itness( the notion of 0itnessing has undergone a radical
transforation. /estiony has $ecoe a odel of crises of representation yet its very
ipossi$ility akes $earing 0itness a necessary ethical responsi$ility.
/he literature of testiony has spa0ned in recent ties 8 soe of 0hich are
presented as colla$orative auto$iographies( life 0riting and oral history. *atin Aerican
testimonios that 0ere recorded during a period of intense social and political ferent in
*atin Aerica %&'9-2s( 5-2s and '-2s. represent soe of the 0ell7kno0n narratives of
0itnessing. Closer hoe( narratives of Dalit 0oen fro India( and 0ritings fro
conflict :ones in Middle East( Afghanistan and Pakistan 77 Malala ;ousaf:ai and
Christina *a$2s( I Am Malala( %+-&<.( )a0:ia =oofi2s The Favoured Daughter: One
Woman's Fight to Lead Afghanistan, Mukhtaran Mai2s In the Name of Honour: A
Memoir +--4. "a>a ?hehadeh2s !O""u#ation Diaries! represent e#aples of testionial
slant in auto$iographical 0riting. /he purpose of this paper is to e#aine ho0
testionial narratives can $e rearticulated@ reconfigured as narratives of 0itnessing.
)ocussing on the testionial narratives $y 0oen( the paper e#aines the gendered(
raciali:ed( se#uali:ed aspect of 0itnessing that are often su$sued 0ithin the larger
political concerns of 0itnessing. /he process of $earing 0itness does not seek to
esta$lish the truth of the event( rather the perforative enactent of 0itnessing creates
Aeffects of truthB and transfors the narrative of victi to that of an agent. 3itnessing
allo0s the possi$ility to respond and address others that constitutes the 0oen as
responsi$le social actors. In the final analysis( the paper foregrounds an ethics $ased on
0itnessing $y aking it central to the foration of su$>ectivity.
/he current and gro0ing interest in the practice of testiony has $rought in a
different perspective to address the episteological and theoretical challenges of
testionial narrative. 3hile the *atin Aerican testionio focuses on the political
diensions of testionial 0riting( the discourse on testiony as it has evolved 0ithin
the frae0ork of Ce0ish Holocaust( highlights the ipossi$ility of speaking a$out
traua and psychological and historical aspects of silence. Aga$en2s 0ork highlights
soe of the ost difficult challenges testiony poses and his forulation points to the
ipossi$ility of $earing 0itness. According to Aga$en not even the survivor can $ear
0itness copletelyD
/he language of testiony is a language that no longer signifies and that( in not
signifying( advances into 0hat is 0ithout language( to the point of taking on a
different significance 8 that of the coplete 0itness( that of he 0ho $y definition
cannot $ear 0itness. /o $ear 0itness Eit is not necessary that this senseless sound
$e( in turn( the voice of soething or soeone that( for entirely other reasons(
cannot $ear 0itness. It is thus necessary that the ipossi$ility of $earing( the
1lacuna2 that constitutes huan language collapses giving 0ay to a different
ipossi$ility to $earing 0itness 8 that 0hich does not have language. %<'.
Aga$en points to the liits of representation and addresses the parado# of
ipossi$le 0itnessing as e#eplified $y the figure of the Muselan( the true 0itness( of
the cap. /he Atrue 0itnessB or the Acoplete 0itness(B according to Aga$en( 0ho
suffered the full kno0ledge and 0eight of the event through their death 7 can $ear no
0itness at all to the event. ?urvivor2s testiony thus ust proceed $y pro#y and
testiony is structured $y a discrepancy. In suggesting that Anot even the survivor can
$ear 0itness copletely( can speak his o0n lacuna(B Aga$en highlights the Aspecial
ethical aporia of Ausch0it:B 0hich calls into Fuestion the very eaning of testiony as
language since A0hat $orne 0itness is to cannot already $e language or 0riting. It can
only $e soething to 0hich no one has $orne 0itness.B /he value of testiony(
according to Aga$en( lies essentially in 0hat it lacks. )urtherore( in $earing 0itness
to those 0ho cannot speak( the task of 0itnessing essentially involves $earing 0itness to
the ipossi$ility of 0itnessing. /he ethical aporia presented $y Ausch0it: pro$leati:es
0itnessing and constructs the 0itness as a lone figure( the liit figure of the huan and
the inhuan. /he 1ethical2 0itness as forulated $y Aga$en foregrounds the failure of
language to counicate the e#perience of suffering and forulation of a voice 0ithin a
parado#. 3hile Aga$en akes a copelling arguent $y pointing to silences and the
non7languages that constitute parado# at the heart of testiony( he precludes the
possi$ility of an aesthetic response.
?hoshana )elan and Dori *au$ in their path $reaking 0ork on testiony have
dra0n attention to the cople# relation $et0een history and 0itnessing. In an essay on
Claude *an:ann2s fil 1?hoah(2 )elan talks a$out the 0itnessing of a catastrophe( in
this case the Ce0ish Holocaust( 0hich puts to test the liits of the 0itness and 0itnessing
and at the sae tie puts into Fuestion the very liits of reality. %+-G. )elan further
ela$orates that testiony is uch ore than siply reporting a fact or recalling an event.
AMeory is con>ured here essentially in order to address another( to ipress upon a
listener( to appeal to a counity.B%i$id +-H. )elan and *au$ highlight the
significance of testiony and the 0ays in 0hich it has $ecoe a crucial ode of relation
to events in our ties( ore specifically to the trauas of conteporary history 8 the
?econd 3orld 3ar( the Holocaust( the nuclear $o$ and other 0ar atrocities. )elan
argues that to testify( to vo0 to tell the truth is to accoplish a speech act rather to
siply forulate a stateentD
/o testify is thus not erely to narrate $ut to coit oneself( and to coit the
narrative to others Dto take responsi$ility7 in speech7 for history or for the truth of
occurrence( for soething 0hich( $y definition( goes $eyond the personal( in
having general%non7personal.validity and conseFuences.% i$id +-H.
Ho0ever( as )elan points out( 0hat testiony does not offer is a coplete
account of those events. AIn the testiony( language is in process and in trial( it does not
possess itself as a conclusion as the constation of a verdict or the self7transparency of
kno0ledge. /estiony is( in other 0ords a discursive practice( as opposed to pure
theory.B%i$id G. /he task of testiony thus is to Aopen up the $elated 0itness( 0ho the
reader no0 historically $ecoes( the iaginative capa$ility of perceiving history7 0hat
is happening to others7 in one2s $ody( 0ith the po0er of sight or insight that is usually
afforded only $y one2s iediate physical involveent.B%i$id 4.
In dissociating the idea of 0itnessing fro the concept of an eye0itness
testiony and that it ust $e e#perienced through a speaking su$>ect( )elan
ephasi:es the significance of listening to others and akes it crucial to the process of
$earing 0itness. )ocusing on the literal( historical and psychoanalytical aspect of
testiony( )elan( *au$ and Cathy Caruth highlight the essential inaccessi$ility of
traua as it effaces voice and eory. /aking the Holocaust as the prototype of the
historical traua( and its victi as the paradigatic victi( )elan( *au$ and Caruth
ela$orate a theory of testiony $ased on the crises of 0itnessing. /estiony $ecoes a
oral( political and ethical response to the silences and non7languages that constitute the
e#tree situations of traua. )or instance looking at the e#perience of individuals 0ho
0ere diagnosed 0ith P/?D after the 3orld 3ar II( Caruth points out that survivors of
violence are often una$le to e#perience the trauatic event as it occurs( as a atter of
survival and often e#perience it $elatedly. Caruth also argues that traua ay not $e
assiilated at the tie of occurrence and is usually e#perienced as an afterath in
relation to people( tie( and places other than itself. 3hile Caruth highlights the
1inherent $elatedness2 of traua 0hat is interesting in her forulation is the presence of
another( 0ho 0ill $ecoe a 0itness $y listening to victi of traua. 6y ephasi:ing
Aspeaking and listening fro the site of trauaB( Caruth highlights the dialogic nature of
testiony 0hich has $een ela$orated $y Dori *au$( hiself a child survivor. Dori *au$
also notes that Holocaust 0as an 1event2 that produced no 0itnesses at the tie of actual
occurrence and 0itnessing is possi$le only retroactively. He ephasi:es the >oint
responsi$ility of the intervie0er7 listener and the narrator. In fact( according to *au$( the
listener or the intervie0er $ecoes the Holocaust 0itness $efore the narrator doesD
/o a certain e#tent the intervie0er and listener take on the responsi$ility for
$earing 0itness that previously the narrator felt he $ore alone( and therefore could
not carry it out. It is encounter and the coing together $et0een the survivor and
the listener( 0hich ake possi$le soething like a repossession of the act of
0itnessing. /his >oint responsi$ility is the source of the reeerging truth. %5G.
In her seinal 0ork on 0itnessing( =elly ,liver( develops an ethics $ased on
0itnessing( $y aking it central to the foration of su$>ectivity. ,liver addresses herself
to the dou$le eaning of 0itnessing( as eye0itness testiony $ased on the first7hand
kno0ledge( and testifying to soething that cannot $e seen( that is $eyond recognition.
%+--<D4H. /he tension $et0een the t0o eanings of testiony( $et0een the force of
historical facts and the force of historical %psychoanalytic. truth( positions the su$>ect in
history and necessitates the infinite responsi$ility of su$>ectivity. %i$id 4<. According to
,liver it is the a$ility to respond and address others that constitutes an individual as a
su$>ect. 3itnessing restores $oth the address7a$ility and the response7a$ility and
constitutes su$>ectivity. Addressing particularly the victis of su$ordination(
enslaveent and torture( ,liver points out that 0hile oppression daages su$>ectivity(
0itnessing offers the possi$ility of restoring it. ,ppression and su$ordination underine
the very possi$ility of su$>ectivity that ust $e revived or reconstructed in order for the
survivor to $e a$le to act as an agent. Central to the notion of 0itnessing( ho0ever( is the
presence of an addressee as it is ipossi$le to $ear 0itness 0ithout an addressee.
Dra0ing attention to0ards the dialogic nature of su$>ectivity that eerges as a result of
the process of 0itnessingI Dori *au$ notesD
/he intervie0er 8listener takes on the responsi$ility for $earing 0itness that
previously the narrator felt he $ore alone and therefore could not carry out. It is the
encounter and the coing together $et0een the survivor and the listener( 0hich
akes possi$le soething like a repossession of the act of 0itnessing ./his >oint
responsi$ility( is the source of the reeerging truth. %&''+D 5G.
3itnessing is possi$le only in dialogic relations 0ith the others( and for *au$ the
Ainner 0itnessB is produced and sustained $y dialogic interaction 0ith other people.
E#panding *au$2s notion of 1inner 0itness2( ,liver argues that to have a sense of oneself
as a su$>ect develops through Aaddress and address7a$ility fro and to others. 3ithout
an e#ternal 0itness( 0e cannot develop or sustain the internal 0itness necessary for the
a$ility to interpret and represent our e#perience( 0hich is necessary for su$>ectivity and
ore essentially for $oth individual and social transforation. /he perforance of
0itnessing restores a sense of agency to the victi A$ecause it reesta$lishes the dialogue
through 0hich representation and there$y eaning are possi$le and $ecause this
representation allo0s the victi to reassert his o0n su$>ective agency and huanity into
an e#perience it 0as annihilated.B %4<. According to ,liver( A$oth individual and social
change are possi$le through the transforative po0er of 0itnessing( the po0er to
%re.inscri$e huanity and su$>ective agency into $oth social and psychic life.B%4H. As
argued $y ,liver( through the process of $earing 0itness to oppression( those 1othered2
can $egin to repair daaged su$>ectivity $y taking up position as 1speaking su$>ects2.
/he perforative enactent of 0itnessing creates AeffectsB of truth and transfors the
narrative of the victi to that of an agent. In suggesting that 1response7a$ility2 is central
to 0itnessing( ,liver akes the dynaic of address and response crucial to the foration
of the su$>ect. /he Aperforance of 0itnessing can $e transforative $ecause it
reesta$lishes dialogue through 0hich eaning and representation are possi$le ( and
$ecause this representation allo0s the victi to reassert his o0n su$>ective agency and
huanity into an e#perience in 0hich it 0as annihilated or reduced to guilt and self 8
a$use.B%'<. /he perforance of testiony( argues =elly( says ore than the 0itness
kno0s. 3hile historical facts conceal the process of 0itnessing the perforance of
testiony allo0s a hitherto undocuented 1e#perience2 to $e narrated. "epresentation
thus is crucial in restoring a sense of self in the 1speaking su$>ect2. 3hile I 0ill address
,liver2s arguents in detail in the ne#t chapter( suffice it to say here( that in aking the
su$>ect dependent on the possi$ility of an address and response( she suggests that
su$>ectivity entails a fundaental responsi$ility to and for others. ,liver2s notion of
0itnessing is useful for testionial narrative for it is founded on a dialogical relationship
$et0een the 0itness and the addressee.
In esta$lishing the role of testiony $eyond its docuentary and legal functions
and an effort to evolve an ethics $ased on 0itnessing( recent revaluations reconfigure the
episteological challenges of testiony. In dra0ing attention to the silences and non
7languages that structure trauatic events( $oth in historical and the psychoanalytical
ters these critics of testiony offer copelling arguent a$out engaging 0ith
particular aspects and conditions of traua. /he de$ates on testiony and 0itnessing
have eerged 0ithin the larger discourse of traua as in the late +-
th
century 3estern
culture( Atraua has eerged as a paradigatic discourse for defining the catastrophic(
calaitous( or other0ise in>urious( for attri$uting $lae( accounta$ility( and for
organi:ing su$>ectivity and identity.B% Mckinney +4G. /he therapeutic effects of the
articulation of trauatic eory have $een su$>ect of uch discussion. /he therapeutic
process also has iportant political and oral diensions especially 0ith trauatic
eory of survivors of genocide( 0ar( and political conflict. Ho0ever( traua2s
essential inaccessi$ility and the ipossi$ility of $earing 0itness to it suffers fro
liitations 0hen trying to understand situations of collective and personal violence and
the yriad responses that e#ist siultaneously. In 1sacrali:ing2 %*a Capra +--H. traua
and endo0ing victis 0ho suffered 0ith a su$lie character there is hardly any roo
for iagining possi$ilities 0here task of re$uilding personal and social relationships
reain in the afterath of occurrence of the trauatic event. Critics of testiony
theory as ela$orated in the field of Holocaust studies have pointed to the liitations of
such a odel for understanding the presence of violence and atrocities as an ongoing
challenge in various part of the 0orld. /he literature of testiony has gro0n in societies
that have e#perienced atrocities and large scale huan rights violations.
/estionies that are produced fro 0ithin conflict :ones are not preised on a
retroactive response to a situation of e#tree traua. Instead( they deal 0ith prolonged
situations of political violence and atrocities that have disrupted the social and political
fa$ric of the society. More significantly( they foreground the challenges of re$uilding
relationships in the afterath of violence. /hese narratives ove a0ay fro the
paradig of victihood and seek to esta$lish social and political agency and effect
change 0hile Holocaust narratives perceives its audience to have vanished
apocalyptically and e#aines the crises of 0itnessing occasioned $y the e#tree
situation of traua. 3hile 0itness voca$ulary is very uch part of the *atin Aerican
secular and religious traditions( it seeks to esta$lish agency as an ongoing process of
social and political change. )urther( testionio2s call for support and solidarity seeks an
affective response fro its readers. /he trou$le 0ith testionio is that it 0as too readily
appropriated $y the )irst 3orld critics( as reflecting the reality of the /hird 3orld and
the genre found favour( as Jugel$erger >ustly point out( A0hen post structuralis and
deconstruction eroded all hopes of refrentiality in literature.B /he ethodological and
theoretical challenges that affected testionial studies led to reconsideration of the
narrative for.
My purpose is to initiate a productive engageent $et0een the t0o odes of
0itnessing since their critical discourses have $egun to infor each other. Interestingly(
literature fro ?outhern Cone( especially Argentina( 0hich focuses on the Ce0ish
e#perience of atrocities as is evident in the 0orks of Alicia Partnoy( Alicia =o:aeh(
Caco$o /ieran( and Kora ?tre>ilevich echo a siilar voca$ulary as that of Holocaust
0riting. /he ter 1Kever Again2 a dictu of the Holocaust( recurs often in relation to the
atrocities that 0ere coitted in the dictatorship period in Argentina. /he pedagogical
and ethical iplications of ree$rance resonate 0ith the ephasis on eory in
Holocaust 0riting. Until recently testionio 0as read ore as third 0orld literature(
narrative of resistance and su$altern literature $ut 0as often arginali:ed 0ithin the
theoretical discussions on 0itnessing. 3ith the eergence of the 1era of the 0itness2( in
the 1age of testiony2( I 0ish to e#plore testionio 0ithin the larger theoretical
discourse and politics of testiony. /he pro$le of representation in testionio does not
have to contend 0ith >ust episteological challenges $ut 0ith ethical dileas since it is
tied to the production of kno0ledge and po0er. /he trou$le 0ith testionio is that it2s
ultidiensionality and slippery generic location point to the liitation of a singular
theoretical odel to understand the construction of agency of 0oen. /heoretical
insights fro recent 0ork on traua( testiony and 0itnessing can assist in clearer
articulation of the testionio2s pro>ect of esta$lishing agency of 0oen.
Kot0ithstanding the larger political and theoretical frae0ork 0ithin 0hich
these different theories of 0itnessing eerged( y contention is that they forulate an
ethics $ased on 0itnessing though to0ards very different end. /estionio seeks
intervention( calls for an affective response( links process of 0itnessing to Fuestions of
acceptance and >ustice and 0ants to effect political change. 3hile testionio also
eerges fro situations of social and cultural traua( 0hat distinguishes it fro other
narratives of historical traua is the teporal distinction $et0een the t0o discourses.
/he narrative of historical traua is oriented ore to0ards the past( and as Caruth has
highlighted( it is $ased on a retroactive response to traua. /estionio is oriented ore
to0ards the present( $y influencing the reader to act and calls for a change. As =i$erly
Kance points out( AAs part of a social pro>ect( testionio is ... La atterM of speaking of
one2s suffering in such a 0ay that readers 0ill $e induced to act against the in>ustice of
it.B%+--&D '-. According to Kance( Atestionio speakers declare ephatically that their
pro>ects neither end 0ith the production of the te#t nor even 0ith its enthusiastic
reception. Instead( they descri$e the te#ts as interediate steps in a process directed
to0ard producing change in the life 0orld.B%&H. /he iediacy and urgency of
testionio akes it a vehicle for social change and it is this Fuality that sets apart
testionio fro narratives of historical traua. /he 0itness of the testionio esta$lishes
her authority as 1episteic2 0itness 0ho is speaking on $ehalf of her people( telling the
0orld a$out the 1reality2 of her country and in doing so( solicits support and solidarity.
More significantly( the narrative calls for response fro its audience and asks the to
take a political stand. Anne Cu$ilie rightly points out that Atestiony and the
responsi$ility of >ustice and ethics are not >ust a$out ipossi$ilityI they are also a$out
0hat 0e are 0illing to do as 0itnesses to 0itnesses.B %<. Cu$ilie further notes that
Atestiony e#ists in a perforative relationship of language and action( $et0een survivor
80itness( the 0itness to the testiony and 0hat Derrida has called Athe respect for those
others 0ho are no longer there or for those others 0ho are not yet there.B %i$id <. )or
Cu$ilie( testiony is the forulation of a voice and identity 0ithin a parado# and this is
ade possi$le $y the perforative enactent of 0itnessing that constructs the narrative.
/estionio( thus( seeks to esta$lish an ethics of testiony that takes into account an
ethics that coes out of an actual engageent 0ith the 0itnesses theselves. If
0itnessing is to $e linked to responsi$ilities of >ustice and ethics( as is evident in the
de$ate on *atin Aerican testionio( than 0e have to ove $eyond the notion of
testiony as a 1language that no longer signifies.2 6y highlighting every day( systeic
and e#tree situations of violence and i$rications of gender( race( class and se#uality(
testionio calls for a critical engageent and political response. More significantly(
testionio does not seek epathy and identification as uch as it calls for solidarity and
action. /estionial narrative is not preised on a retroactive response to traua( rather
testiony $ecoes an event in 0hich the responsi$ility of the 0itness is at play.
/hough testionio deands a fair share of cognitive truth( in its act of testifying
to a historical and political reality( accuracy cannot $e a criterion for such truth. /he
narratives are in the for of an ethical address to the readers( asking the to take a stand
against in>ustice. /he ethics of 0itnessing in these narratives has a counal diension
and it seeks to raise consciousness of the reader $y e#ploiting the po0er of the 0ord as
Paulo )reire puts it( 1the right to sa$ his o%n %ord, to name the %orld&. Dra0ing on the
recent thought of $earing 0itness to historical traua the paper has argued that the
perforative enactent of 0itnessing creates 1effects2 of truth and transfors the
narrative of the victi into that of an agent. Moving a0ay fro the pro$les of veracity(
y purpose is to foreground 0itnessing as an alternative that restores $oth dignity and
huanity to the su$altern 0oan and constitutes agency. Instead of roantici:ing
su$altern resistance and ideali:ing it is ore re0arding to analy:e ho0 0itnessing
restores the fractured su$>ectivity and prepares the su$>ect for political action.
"eferences
Adler( Conathan.E( N/estiony( /rust and =no0ing1( /he Cournal of Philosophy(
Oolue '& Ko. G( May &''H
Adorno( /heodor 3. PCoitent. In The 'ssential Fran(furt )"hool *eader ed.
Andre0 Arat and Eike Je$hardt Ke0 ;orkD Continuu( &'5+. <--7<&5.
Aga$e( Jiorgio. *emnants of Aus"h%it+: The Witness and Ar"hive( Ke0 ;orkD
Zone 6ooks.&'''.
Anne Cu$iliR and Carl Jood( SIntroductionD /he )uture of /estionyS( Dis"ourse
+G%&T+. +--HD H7&5( G and reiterated in "oss Cha$ers( ,ntimel$ Interventions- AID)
Writing, Testimonial . the *hetori" of Haunting %Ann Ar$orD /he University of Michigan
Press( +--H.D #i#(
Ant:e( Paul and Michael *a$ek( eds. Tense /ast: 0ultural 'ssa$s in Trauma and Memor$.
Ke0 ;orkD "outledge( &''4.
Aron( A. %&''+.. /estionio( a 6ridge 6et0een Psychotherapy and ?ociotherapy.
Women and Thera#$, 1223, &9<7&5'.
=leinan( Arthur( Oeena Das( and Margaret *ock(eds 4iolen"e and
)u56e"tivit$.6erkeleyD University of California Press.+---.
=leinan( Arthur( Oeena Das( and Margaret *ock( eds. )o"ial )uffering- 6erkeleyD University of
California Press.&''9.
Audi( "o$ert( PThe a /riori Authorit$ of Testimon$( Philosophical issues( &H( +--H
6arto0( Coanna ". SEssential ?u$versionsD "eading /heory 0ith *atin Aerican
3oenUs /estionial DiscourseS. Women as Witness: 'ssa$s on Testimonial Literature 5$
Latin Ameri"an Women. Eds. *inda ?. Maier T Isa$el Dulfano. Ke0 ;orkD Peter *ang( +--HD
H975-.
6au( " Never to forget: #edagogi"al memor$ and se"ond generation %itness7 In ". I.
?ion( ?. "osen$erg( T C. Eppert Eds. 8et%een ho#e and des#air: #edagog$ and the
remem5ran"e of histori"al trauma, MarylandD "o0an and *ittlefield. +---.

6ecket( Cerey PAuto5iogra#hi"al and testimonial dis"ourse in M$les Lalor 9oral
histor$7 in Telling )tories: Indigenous histor$ and memor$ in Australia and Ne% :ealand-
Ed. 6ain At0ood and )iona Mago0an Cro01s KestD Allen and Un0in +--&.
6enayor( ". NTestimon$, a"tion resear"h, and em#o%erment: /uerto *i"an %omen
and #o#ular edu"ation7. In ?.6. Jluck T D. Patai %Eds..( Women7s %ords: The feminist
#ra"ti"e of oral histor$ %pp.&G'8&9H.. Ke0 ;orkD "outledge&''&.
6ernard7Donals( Michael and "ichard Jle>:er. Witnessing the Disaster: 'ssa$s on
*e#resentation and the Holo"aust. MadisonD U of 3isconsin P( +--<.
6everley( Cohn and Mark Zieran. Literature and /oliti"s in 0entral Ameri"a-
AustinD University of /e#as Press( &''-
6everley( Cohn. 9The Margin at the 0enter: On Testimonio7 in Testimonio: On the
/oliti"s of Truth- MinneapolisD University of Minnesota Press.+--H.
6everley( Cohn. Against Literature. MinneapolisD University of Minnesota Press( &''<.
Caruth( Cathy Trauma: e;#lorations in memor$ /he Cohns Hopkins University PressD
6altiore Maryland. &''G.
Caruth( Cathy ,n"laimed ';#erien"e: Trauma, Narrative and Histor$. 6altioreD Cohns
Hopkins UP( &''4.
Coady( C.A.C Testimon$: A /hiloso#hi"al )tud$ ,#ford University Press( &''H.
Cu$iliR( Anne. Women Witnessing Terror- Testimon$ and the 0ultural /oliti"s of Human *ights
Ke0 ;orkD )ordha University Press( +--G.
Da0es( Caes. That the World Ma$ <no%- 8earing Witness to Atro"it$ %Ca$ridge( Mass. T
*ondonD Harvard University Press( +--9.D <G7G'( <5.
Douglass( Ana and /hoasOolger. 3itness and MeoryD /he Discourse of /raua. "outledge
and Ke0 ;ork.+--<.
)assin Didier( S/he Huanitarian Politics of /estionyD ?u$>ectification through /raua in the
Israeli7Palestinian ConflictS( 0ultural Anthro#olog$ +<( no. < %+--5.D G<&7GG5.
)elan( ?hoshana and Dori *au$. Testimon$: 0rises of Witnessing in Literature,
/s$"hoanal$sis, and Histor$ .Ke0 ;ork and *ondonD "outledge.&''+.
)reire( Paulo( /edagog$ of the O##ressed %trans(. Myra 6ergan "aos. Penguin Education.
&'9+.
Jivoni( Michal( S3itnessing@/estionyS( Mafte'a(h +( +-&&D &H97&4'
Jluck( ?. 6.( T Patai( D. %Eds.. Women7s %ords: The feminist #ra"ti"e of oral histor$.
Ke0 ;orkD "outledge. %&''&.
Jold$erg( Eli:a$eth ?0anson. 8e$ond Terror: =ender, Narrative Human *ights "utgers
University Press( +--9.
=ay ?haffer and ?idonie ?ith( Human *ights and Narrated Lives: the ethi"s of
re"ognition Ke0 ;orkD Palgrave Macillan( +--H.
=elly( ,liver Witnessing: 8e$ond *e"ognition Minneapolis and *ondonD University of
Minnesota Press( +--&.
=i$erley( Kance( Disarming Testimon$: )#ea(ers *esistan"e to readers Testimonio(
8iogra#h$, Cune +--&
*a Capra( Doinick Writing Histor$, Writing Trauma %6altiore( MarylandD Cohn
Hopkins University Press( +--&
*aCapra( Doinick NHolo"aust Testimonies: Attending to the 4i"tims 4oi"e7 in Moishe Postone
and Eric ?antner ed. The Holo"aust and the T%entieth 0entur$.University of Chicago
Press.+--<.
*au$( Dori. N6earing 3itness or the Oicissitudes of *istening1 in ?hoshana )elan and Dori
*au$. Testimon$: 0rises of Witnessing in Literature, /s$"hoanal$sis, and Histor$. Ke0 ;orkD
"out ledge( &''+.
Maier( *inda ?. and Isa$el Dulfano( eds. Woman as Witness: 'ssa$s on Testimonial Literature
5$ Latin Ameri"an Women- Ke0 ;orkD Peter *ang( +--H.
Kance( =i$erly A. 0an Literature /romote >usti"e? Trauma Narrative and )o"ial A"tion in
Latin Ameri"an 'Testimonio'. KashvilleD Oander$ilt University( +--4.
"icoeur( Paul. The Hermeneuti"s of Testimon$-in 'ssa$s in 8i5li"al Inter#retation-
Philadelphia( PAD )ortress Press. &'5-%&''7G<.