The theory of cultural trauma focuses on the relationship between shared suffering and collective identity: Events become traumatic when they threaten a group’s foundational self-understanding. As it stands, the theory has illuminated profound parallels in societal suffering across space and time. Yet focusing on identity alone cannot explain the considerable differences that scholars document in the outcomes of the trauma process. Namely, while some traumas become the basis for moral universalism, generating a capacity to forge connections between an in-group’s suffering and that of out-groups, others have the opposite effect, leading to particularism and closure. Returning to the interdisciplinary literature on trauma, I argue for incorporating temporality as a twin pillar of the trauma process, distinguishing between acting out (reexperiencing a past event as the present) and working through (situating a painful event within historical context). A comparison of three U.S. sites of memory dealing with terrorism illustrates the distinction.

中文翻译：

---

恐怖纪念馆和博物馆的打标时间：临时性和文化创伤

文化创伤理论侧重于共同的痛苦与集体认同之间的关系：当事件威胁到群体的基本自我理解时，事件就变得具有创伤性。就目前而言，该理论阐明了跨越时空的社会苦难的深层相似之处。然而，仅关注身份并不能解释学者在创伤过程结果中所记录的巨大差异。即，虽然某些创伤成为道德普世主义的基础，产生了在团体内的痛苦与团体外的痛苦之间建立联系的能力，但其他创伤却产生相反的效果，导致特殊化和封闭。回到关于创伤的跨学科文献，我主张将时空性作为创伤过程的双支柱，区分执行（现在经历过去的事件）和进行工作（在历史背景下定位一个痛苦的事件）。对美国三个有关恐怖主义的记忆地点进行比较，就可以看出这一区别。