Certain types of remembrance merely reinforce destructive prejudices and stereotypes, argues Jim Grozier
Two recent letters (31 July, 2 August) have speculated on what might have happened if the events of 100 years ago had turned out differently. While these may be interesting questions, they are not value-free: we are supposed to identify with the British of 1917, and be horrified by the prospect of a victory by the Germans, despite the fact that a German victory would almost certainly have meant no Nazi regime and no Holocaust. For me, identifying with either of those two murderous parties is equally unthinkable. Remembering, inasmuch as it involves identifying with a particular community in the past, is the real villain here: it has led to numerous past and ongoing conflicts, as Simon Jenkins pointed out so eloquently in these pages a few weeks ago (Opinion, 22 June).
Brighton, East Sussex
• Join the debate – email email@example.com