Reshaping public memory in the 1619 project: rhetorical interventions against selective forgetting

This paper analyzes the New York Times' The 1619 Project and its engagement with public memory, focusing primarily on two articles, by Nikole Hannah-Jones and Jamelle Bouie, that reframe America's political history. While every piece in The 1619 project, and the archive as a whole, engages meaningfully with public memory, these pieces are most representative of the archive's rhetorical interventions against harmful narratives about the nation's past predicated on selective forgetting. Indeed, The 1619 Project has significant implications for rhetorical studies, providing a template of how archival rhetorical texts can resist the erasure of historical injustices from public memory. After examining these two articles as case studies of how The 1619 Project engages with public memory, the paper will also discuss responses to the project, which have important implications for memory studies and museum studies, in particular for discussions of how forgetting operates within particular historical discourses.

Automated summary

This paper analyzes The New York Times' The 1619 Project and its engagement with public memory through two articles, highlighting their rhetorical interventions against harmful narratives about America's political history. The implications of The 1619 Project for rhetorical studies are discussed, particularly in showcasing how archival texts can resist the erasure of historical injustices. Responses to the project and its impact on memory and museum studies, in relation to discussions about forgetting within historical discourses, are also explored.