Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University
Professor
Cultural Studies, Art History
Doctor of Historical Sciences
Tbilisi, Georgia
nino.chikovani@tsu.ge
Abstracts
April 9 represents a paradigmatic event in the modern history of Georgia. It “turned social reality upside down” and shaped collective identity and memory for decades. Recent developments demonstrate that April 9 remains socially and politically relevant despite the generational distance of more than thirty years. The paper examines how the trauma of April 9 is transmitted to generations with no lived experience of the event and how Millennials and Generation Z emotionally engage with it. It reveals how traumatic experiences of the past are mobilized by different political actors in the construction of memory, as well as how transgenerational trauma operates among generations born after 1989. This is particularly relevant in light of recent developments in the country. The study draws upon theories of cultural trauma (J. Alexander), communicative and cultural memory (J. and A. Assmann), and postmemory (M. Hirsch). These theoretical approaches make it possible to analyze the mechanisms of transgenerational transmission, as well as the changing forms of their manifestation over time. Various types of narratives that shaped the perception of April 9 as trauma and/or triumph, as well as the ways in which it has been remembered or forgotten, were collected, categorized, and scrutinized using discourse analysis. Several periods can be distinguished in the transmission of the memory of April 9: the two years immediately following the event, culminating in the restoration of Georgia’s independence on April 9, 1991; the period of civil confrontation and the “dark 1990s,” when the government that came to power through a military coup sought to reinforce the traumatic dimension of April 9 through annual commemorative practices dedicated to the victims, while placing less emphasis on its significance for the restoration of independence; the return of April 9 to public memory as a paradigmatic event after the Rose Revolution of 2003; the change of power in 2012 and the subsequent marginalization of April 9 within memory politics; and finally, the period from 2019 to 2025, marked by the active resurgence of April 9 in public discourse, with Millennials and especially Generation Z playing a leading role in the reactivation of transgenerational memory. The paper argues that the memory of April 9 continues to shape the historical consciousness of younger generations through intergenerational narratives, commemorative practices, and mediated forms of cultural memory. For those who directly experienced the event, April 9 is embedded in communicative and cultural memory, whereas for Millennials and Generation Z it operates primarily as postmemory.
Keywords: April 9; Georgia; collective memory; transgenerational trauma; Millennials; Generation Z.