| This thesis proposes an approach of the memoriel which questions the production of memory in its processual character. It has three main features. First, it focuses on a plurality of times involved in the production of memory (but also the establishment of local communities and the production of their continuities). It also places the processes of representation at the heart of its questionings---in particular, it emphasizes the ways in which memory is constituted by representation (instead of examining the ways in which memory is represented). Finally, it questions the ways in which the production of memory contributes to circumscribe, to maintain and to make communities, and what forms of collectivization are realized in this respect.;Keywords: memory, memoriel, public personalities, Maurice Richard, Janette Bertrand, surface analysis, technologies, figures of public individuality, hero, pioneer.;The first chapter outlines this approach to memory in contrast with a presentation of three major families of approaches---approaches to collective memory, approaches of cultural memory and presentist approaches---which apprehend memory as a construct. It also explains how I put the memoriel to good use in a surface analysis which captures the constitution of representations by which the former hockey player Maurice Richard and the former host and television writer Janette Bertrand are established as public figures, through technologies and figures of public individuality which bring them into being in singular ways. In this perspective, I present, in the second chapter, an analysis of the constitution of Maurice Richard as a hero, and in the third, an analysis of the constitution of Janette Bertrand as a pioneer. In the fourth and final chapter, I notice in particular the effectiveness of the respective technologies and processes of representation by which these public personalities are established. I also bring to light that these technologies and the elements which they produce, run through and put into relation are constantly apprehensible in the singularity of their meetings. I then conclude by outlining the manner in which my approach of the memoriel contributes to memory studies, a field which is the object of an increasing disciplinarization. |
