Abstract
This study explores memory activism and emotion during the 1989 Romanian Revolution, addressing a gap in existing memory studies on this event. Drawing on 60 video interviews with participants in the revolution, the study uses a deductive approach to examine how personal narratives serve as memory activism. Integrating the history of emotions with memory activism, we analyze how witnesses were emotionally mobilized during and after the revolution. We show how the shift from collective euphoria to post-revolutionary disillusionment shapes participants’ search for mnemonic justice. Memories of fear transitioned into memories of revenge against former communist leaders, then further into disappointment with post-revolution leaders. These memories, as “truth stories,” expose unresolved social justice issues in post-communist Romania, especially concerning responsibility for the 1989 events and obligations to victims. This study offers a broad perspective on memory activism and uniquely contributes to understanding post-communist transitions by demonstrating how individual testimonies shape collective memory and challenge dominant narratives.
Keywords
Introduction
Recent memory literature highlights the crucial role of memory activism in recalling historical events and social movements (Gutman, 2017; Gutman and Wüstenberg, 2021, 2023). By linking memory, sociopolitical commitment, and identity, memory activism shows activists’ efforts to shape collective memory and recognize past injustices. Activism is a form of resistance against dominant historical interpretations. It can facilitate mnemonic preservation and shift existing narratives (Gutman and Wüstenberg, 2021). Activism also serves as a form of political engagement (Berger and Koller, 2024; Merrill and Rigney, 2024). Memories of protests are important in memory studies. Their core frames of remembrance can echo in later anti-regime protests, preserving historical narratives from below (Fridman, 2024).
Olick (2008) argues that memory operates as both a process and a practice, connecting to actions, discourses, and institutions that actively shape and transmit it. Such memories last, circulate, and influence a community’s identity (Stone and Hirst, 2014). In collective memory, groups blend factual events with shared emotions—feelings that resonate at group or national levels. Such narratives shape present perceptions (Portelli, 2006; Thompson, 1978). These narratives align with “history from below” because they highlight ordinary people’s experiences, challenge dominant accounts, and empower overlooked individuals (Portelli, 2006; Thompson, 1978). In memory historiography, the history of emotions encompasses not only internal reactions but also culturally and historically variable social constructs with affective power (Ahmed, 2004; Boddice, 2018; Frevert, 2015, 2016; Plamper, 2017).
If activism around the 1990s revolutions in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and in Romania in particular are presented as multiple and conflictual (Light and Young, 2015; Rusu, 2011, 2017; Young and Light, 2016), we are not aware of any studies highlighting the link between memory activism and the history of emotions based on the 1989 Romanian Revolution.
The transition from the communist regime to the capitalist system in CEE marked a major political change and created wounded memories for those who protested against communism. In most CEE countries, people experienced a smooth regime change; in Romania, the change resulted in about 1100 deaths.
This study aims to enhance the understanding of memory activism. Here, memory activism is defined as the intentional use of personal or collective memory to promote social awareness or change. We focus on the 1989 Romanian Revolution and its manifestations during periods of transition. Our methodology relies on oral history through video interviews, which are themselves a form of memory activism. This approach aligns with the tradition of “history from below.” It foregrounds the narratives of marginalized voices in shaping collective memory. We explicitly acknowledge the contested meaning of “revolution” in relation to the 1989 events. This shapes our critical and distanced analysis.
Our main method uses video interviews with 60 participants from different martyr cities in the 1989 Romanian Revolution. The data are available online for anyone interested in these memories (www.gistm.ro/revolutie).
To examine memory activists’ testimonies, we build a conceptual toolkit linking memory activism to the history of emotions. We argue that individual recollections are not just passive data but are active sites of mnemonic agency. Presenting trauma as “wounded memory” connects psychological experience with the sociopolitical aims of memory activism. From this overlap, we pose our research questions: How are participants’ memories of the 1989 Romanian Revolution structured and emotionally mobilized as forms of memory activism and “history from below”? How do these subjective narratives address unresolved issues of the post-communist transition?
To answer these questions, the study follows three objectives:
First, we map the emotional journey of revolutionary witnesses. We analyze how transitions—from collective euphoria to the trauma of violence and post-revolutionary disillusionment—underpin their memory activism and actions related to “history from below.”
Second, we present personal testimonies as active memory activism, examining how participants transform “wounded memories” into efforts for social recognition and mnemonic justice.
Third, we examine how these narratives preserve and share the “lived truth” of 1989, serving as tools that challenge the fragmentation and silence found in post-communist transitions.
The research is embedded in the local context of Timişoara, where the Romanian Revolution began. As the first city to defy the communist regime, Timişoara has a distinct mnemonic identity. It is marked by ethnic and confessional diversity (Berceanu et al., 2023; Rotaru et al., 2023) and a strong sense of civic duty. In this environment, the Revolution is often seen as foundational and sacred—a “capital R” event. We, as researchers, are also situated within this local culture of remembrance. This facilitates access to deep emotional narratives, but also requires us to maintain analytical distance. Our aim is to translate these local “wounded memories” to a global audience. This study significantly adds to research on memory studies. It offers a comprehensive view of memory activism (Berger and Koller, 2024; Gutman, 2017; Gutman and Wüstenberg, 2021, 2023; Merrill and Rigney, 2024) and the history of emotions (Ahmed, 2004; Boddice, 2018; Frevert, 2015, 2016; Plamper, 2017). It specifically fills a gap by focusing on memory activism and emotions rooted in the 1989 Romanian Revolution (Rusu, 2011; Young and Light, 2016) using a “history from below” perspective (Portelli, 2006; Thompson, 1978). Earlier studies on memory activism examined how the past is reimagined for the future in the Israel–Palestine conflict (Gutman, 2017). Others presented typologies and conceptual debates (Berger and Koller, 2024; Gutman and Wüstenberg, 2021, 2023; Merrill and Rigney, 2024). Still, studies linking memory activism and the history of emotions during the 1989 Romanian Revolution are lacking. The only exception is a recent study of postmemory and emotion in generations Y and Z (Satmari et al., 2026). In Romanian studies on the 1989 Revolution, memories are known to be multiple and contested (Rusu, 2011; Young and Light, 2016). Our study advances the debate by emphasizing the link between memory activism and the history of emotions. We also show how these memories raise issues of social justice in post-communist Romania. The value of this revolutionary recollection and emotion lies in its capacity to inform and educate the younger generation. This ensures that such atrocities—resulting in the deaths of innocent people—are not repeated.
The article is structured as follows. First, we present a conceptual background on memory activism, history from below, and the history of emotions. We then position the 1989 Romanian Revolution within this literature. Next, we describe the methods and data. The results section offers a thematic interpretation of memories from video interviews. Finally, we provide the discussion and conclusions.
Conceptual background
Recent scholarship has highlighted that the concept of memory activism links the dynamics of memory, sociopolitical commitment, and identities. Memory activism refers to efforts by activists to shape collective memory to recognize past injustices by challenging dominant narratives. As such, memory recollections based on activism resist dominant historical interpretations and can facilitate mnemonic preservation and change (Gutman and Wüstenberg, 2021).
While scholarship on Central and Eastern European revolutions exists, there is a notable gap in research on memory activism related to the 1989 Romanian Revolution (Drozdzewski et al., 2016; Rusu, 2011; Siani-Davies, 2005; Young and Light, 2016). Although Romanian revolutionary memories are recognized as mnemonic and conflictual (Rusu, 2011; Young and Light, 2016), studies have not yet explored the deliberate efforts to shape these narratives around emotions.
The concept of memory activism has been defined as the relationship between memory and activism, with memory described as the recollection of past activism, examined through how historical contexts inform current activist struggles. The term “memory as activism” is part of the memory–activism nexus, but it operates on its fringes, at the threshold between social movements and the defiant actions of individuals. In this study, memory-as-activism is expanded to include individual testimonies, transforming them into a powerful form of mnemonic resistance. Through video interviews, the research demonstrates how personal acts of remembering and sharing defy dominant historical interpretations, promoting narrative change without necessarily being part of an organized movement. This type of activism distinguishes itself by focusing on historical narratives and their contestation, using storytelling and commemoration to create “truth stories” that reveal silenced aspects of the past. In addition, the study integrates the history of emotions to analyze how feelings such as fear and disappointment shape historical experiences and collective memory, arguing that emotions are driving forces in memory activism and contribute to the formation of collective narratives.
To address this, the history of emotions offers a relevant theoretical framework. This approach examines how historical narratives, particularly those of marginalized groups, are shaped by and in turn shape present perceptions (Portelli, 2006; Thompson, 1978). This field is intrinsically tied to oral history and “history from below,” which prioritize the experiences and perspectives of ordinary people to challenge dominant accounts. Oral history is not merely about describing past events but about using them to empower individuals and give voice to those historically overlooked, thereby boosting wider participation in the production of history (Thompson, 1978). As Portelli (2006) argues, this approach helps uncover new meanings attributed to events, highlighting the dynamism of memory itself.
Furthermore, the historiography of memory activism is deeply connected to the history of emotions, a field that has gained significant international attention (Boddice, 2018; Frevert, 2015, 2016; Plamper, 2017). It posits that emotions are not just internal reactions but culturally and historically variable social constructs with affective and rhetorical power (Ahmed, 2004). This theoretical framework is crucial for analyzing how memory activists strategically mobilize feelings to achieve political and social goals. For instance, commemorative practices may shift from mourning to hope, inspiring future action (Reick, 2023; Rigney, 2018). Emotions such as guilt, gratitude, and a sense of social indebtedness can also sustain long-term engagement in movements. By transforming emotional ties into collective narratives, memory activism builds solidarity, creates a sense of purpose, and ensures that the past serves as a guide for future vigilance.
Memory activism is vital for the intergenerational transmission of historical knowledge. It ensures that collective memory remains relevant for younger generations who did not directly witness key events, thereby countering the “critical years hypothesis.” By using tools like social media, activists can bridge generational divides and adapt collective memory to contemporary needs.
The act of sharing historical experiences through the medium of memory has been demonstrated to engender a sense of solidarity among individuals. Furthermore, such recollections can function as a heuristic tool, guiding contemporary actions by providing a contextual framework anchored in past events (Berger et al., 2021; Zamponi, 2018). The dynamics between remembering and forgetting unfold in the aftermath of revolutions, and this process nourishes societal wellbeing and the quest for peace and justice (Berger et al., 2021; Kubal and Becerra, 2014). By reconciliation, individuals and communities can rebuild and even recover after the revolutionary turmoil. Such memories have inspired actions for social justice and political change. Therefore, the role of memory of revolutionary movements has a transformative justice end.
For the purpose of this study, a social movement is a sustained campaign in which memory plays a crucial role in shaping its identity, strategies, and legitimacy (Della Porta et al., 2018; Tilly and Tarrow, 2015: 111). Memory work serves as a form of political resistance, reinforcing a sense of belonging and shared purpose among members (Berger and Koller, 2024; Berger et al., 2021; Jerne, 2017; Kubal and Becerra, 2014). This process involves selective remembrance, as activists strategically emphasize certain past events while forgetting others to align with contemporary goals and curate their public identity (Daphi, 2017; Merrill and Lindgren, 2018; Reick, 2023; Zamponi, 2013, 2018).
Memories of revolutions honor past struggles but also inspire political actions. They have a transformative power that the collective memory of social movements is reflected in revolutionary change. Memories of revolutions also shape the actions of social movements. They serve as hallmarks for collective identity construction and could contest dominant narratives. These memory dynamics honor past struggles and fuel future political engagements (Merrill and Rigney, 2024). Memory activists of revolutions employ a variety of frameworks to challenge dominant historical narratives and construct alternative recollections that reflect their own experiences. This serves as a resistive tool against historical forgetting or amnesia because memories and social movements can emerge amid systemic injustices, reinforcing claims for justice and human rights (Salmenkari, 2017).
Historical context of the Romanian Revolution and its aftermath
The Romanian Revolution of 1989 must be understood within the broader European context of the collapse of communist regimes across Eastern Europe and the end of the Cold War. The most significant external factor was the “snowball effect” of revolutions sweeping across Eastern Europe, which created momentum and a sense of possibility for change in Romania (Petrescu, 2021). The influence of Gorbachev’s reforms in the Soviet Union and the broader wave of democratization sweeping the region created an “optimal international context” for change, even as Ceauşescu resisted these trends (Feng, 2024; Stan, 2008). This upheaval was fueled by severe economic decline, international isolation, and widespread dissatisfaction with living standards, which had sharply deteriorated during the 1980s (Feng, 2024; Musatov, 2020).
Unlike the relatively peaceful transitions in countries like Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia, Romania’s revolution was marked by extreme violence and rapid regime change, resulting in over a thousand deaths and the execution of Nicolae and Elena Ceauşescu (Petrescu, 2019; Siani-Davies, 2005; Stan, 2008). Romania’s experience was unique in that mass street protests played a decisive role, and the regime responded with significant violence, setting it apart from other Soviet bloc countries (Hall, 2000; Siani-Davies, 2005). While some theories suggest an externally orchestrated coup, most evidence indicates that the revolution was a largely spontaneous civil uprising, though it was certainly catalyzed by the broader European context and the collapse of neighboring regimes (Musatov, 2020; Roth, 2016). Western European countries and the United States provided moral support for democratization, but there is little evidence of direct involvement in the outbreak of the revolution (Roth, 2016; Siani-Davies, 2005).
After the 1989 Revolution, Romania entered a challenging transition period marked by efforts to build both a representative democracy and a market economy, moving away from decades of communist rule and a centralized economy (Brezuleanu and Brezuleanu, 2021; Roper, 2002). The early 1990s were marked by political instability, with the National Salvation Front in control but facing internal divisions and public unrest, particularly in University Square. Former communists retained significant influence, complicating the shift to pluralism and slowing reforms (Roper, 2002). Economically, the country experienced chaos, uncertainty, and social disorder, with legislative instability and unpredictable government decisions hampering growth and deterring investment (Brezuleanu and Brezuleanu, 2021). The transition required abandoning the authoritarian, paternalistic mindset of the past and embracing new freedoms, such as open media and free movement, which accelerated social change. Despite repeated declarations of a “new era,” the process was slow and fraught with setbacks, with the first peaceful transfer of power only occurring in 1996 (Almond, 1990; Siani-Davies, 2005; Stan, 2008). The integration into the European Union in 2007 is widely seen as the symbolic end of the transition, marking Romania’s full political and economic reintegration with Europe (Bharti, 2023; Cugleşan, 2020; Oehler-Şincai, 2023; Popa and Mihalache, 2025).
We conducted the interviews between 2019 and 2021, when Romania was grappling with significant political and economic challenges. Politically, the country experienced cabinet instability, scandals involving the political elite, and ineffective governance, with leaders more focused on distributing positions than addressing urgent issues such as the energy crisis and the underfunded healthcare system—problems exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic (Stan and Zaharia, 2022). The period was marked by uncertainty, as the pandemic exposed vulnerabilities and prompted calls for a new approach to economic policy and governance (Cîrmaciu, 2021; Gavriş and Toader, 2020).
In this context, a striking political consequence was the emergence and evolution of AUR (Alianţa pentru Unirea Românilor, or Alliance for the Union of Romanians). This nationalist, populist, and radical right party emerged rapidly in Romania during the COVID-19 pandemic. Founded in 2019, AUR surprised many by winning 9% of the vote and entering Parliament in the 2020 elections, capitalizing on low voter turnout and widespread dissatisfaction with the political establishment (Armeanu, 2025; Crăciun and Ţăranu, 2025; Doiciar and Creţan, 2021). AUR does not claim a direct role in the 1989 Revolution, as the party was founded decades later, but it strategically invokes the revolution’s legacy in its political discourse. AUR frames itself as a defender of the “authentic” spirit of 1989, positioning its mission as a continuation of the revolution’s goals—freedom, national sovereignty, and resistance to perceived external domination or internal betrayal (Marincea, 2025). Therefore, efforts to document and teach the realities of the communist regime and the revolution—through education, public memorials, and open access to archives—help inoculate citizens against propaganda, nostalgia for authoritarianism, and the selective amnesia that can enable new forms of autocracy (Rusu, 2017; Tismăneanu, 2008).
The revolution’s emotional legacy continues to influence Romanian society, as debates over its meaning and memory remain highly charged and politically significant (Almond, 1990; Siani-Davies, 2005). Testimonies from survivors and families of martyrs are important for understanding how the revolution is remembered, how it shapes Romanian identity, and how it continues to influence debates about justice, democracy, and the nation’s future (Baghban, 2024; Manolachi, 2020). Understanding these emotional dimensions is essential for grasping why the revolution remains such a powerful and contested symbol in Romania’s collective consciousness (Almond, 1990; Siani-Davies, 2005).).
The postsocialist period could have influenced the memories of the 1989 Romanian Revolution. Activists of Romania have drawn on the symbols, narratives, and emotional legacies of the anti-communist mobilizations of 1989 to inspire and legitimize more recent protests, such as those against government corruption and environmental threats, though these efforts remain deeply rooted in local and national contexts rather than aligning with broader global movements (Abăseacă, 2018). Memory representations have played a crucial role in this process, offering alternative frameworks for remembering the revolution and the communist past—ranging from official narratives to activist and nostalgic perspectives. These activist interventions challenge state-endorsed histories and foster public debate around the 1989 Romanian revolution.
Overall, memory activism in Romania is a dynamic field in which emotions and political interests continually renegotiate the meaning and legacy of the 1989 Revolution (Abăseacă, 2018; Marandici, 2022; Zavatti, 2021). Romanian memory activists navigate post-communist political challenges by adapting their strategies to shifting political climates and public attitudes toward the communist past. Initially, there was a tendency toward amnesia and avoidance, but this gave way to more confrontational approaches, including the criminalization and symbolic demonization of the former regime, as seen in official reports and public condemnations (Dobre, 2023, 2024; Rusu, 2017). However, these top–down efforts often failed to create a unified or widely accepted narrative, leading activists to advocate for a more “normalizing” approach that acknowledges the complexity and diversity of experiences under communism (Dobre, 2024; Mitroiu, 2016; Rusu, 2017).
Methods and data
The method used in our study is based on video interviewing. Video interviewing, as a qualitative approach, enables researchers to investigate participants’ subjective and personal experiences (Saraswati and Devi, 2023). As “synchronous communication in time and space” (Opdenakker, 2006), the advantage of video interviews is the spontaneity of the interviewee’s responses, which are given without extended reflection. However, this also requires the interviewer to be attentive and skilled in guiding the conversation toward responses relevant to the study’s aims. Another benefit is that the interviews are recorded, enabling more accurate information capture. Despite its advantages, the presence of video cameras can also influence behavior, leading interviewees to provide more reserved answers or avoid certain topics.
The video testimonies analyzed in this study are part of a broader project hosted by the Interdisciplinary Group for the Study of Social Memory (GISTM—www.gistm.ro/revolutie). This project serves as a digital archive and a form of memory activism, designed to preserve the “lived truth” of the 1989 Revolution. It was not developed in isolation but emerged from a collaborative network in Timişoara, involving academic researchers, student volunteers, and technical staff, partially supported by local funding aimed at regional history preservation. Access to participants was facilitated through a long-standing partnership with local Associations of Revolutionaries in Timişoara. These organizations act as key mnemonic actors in the city, providing a bridge between survivors and researchers. By collaborating with these associations, the project itself becomes a form of institutionalized memory activism, navigating the complex landscape of post-communist recognition and social justice.
The data collection for the reMIND MAPPING ’89 project followed a multi-stage, chronological framework, ensuring both broad representativeness and depth of narrative. The first phase took place in 2019 and involved 40 high-school students from Timişoara. Following intensive workshops on oral history, cinematography, and the ethics of memory, student teams recorded over 24 hours of video testimonies with both public figures and ordinary citizens.
Recognizing the need to capture a broader range of experiences and address specific thematic gaps identified during the preliminary analysis, a second phase of data collection was conducted in 2021. During this stage, the authors and a core team of researchers expanded the archive by conducting additional in-depth interviews, focusing on participants whose stories highlighted the long-term emotional impact of the post-communist transition in Timişoara and other martyr cities. This longitudinal approach yielded 60 curated video interviews, which serve as the empirical basis for this article. The integration of 2019 and 2021 data provides a robust perspective on how revolutionary memories are not static but are continually mobilized as activism in the contemporary public sphere.
The database of the reMIND MAPPING ’89 is valuable in itself as a form of memory activism, and it is also essential for contextualizing authors’ own agency and the extent to which memory activism is supported in contemporary Romania by local actors. Although the interviews were not collected in isolation, but rather through the support of the network of revolutionaries in Timişoara, the project did not receive external funding. The primary limitation was the lack of financial resources. Nevertheless, volunteers’ contributions were instrumental. The public discourse surrounding 1989 in the authors’ local milieu was well received by local and regional radio and TV, as Timişoara is distinctive in its memory of the 1989 Revolution. The milieu that made our project possible had large opportunities because Timişoara is a “martyr city,” the first to initiate protests against the communist regime, and one marked by significant ethnic and confessional diversity. All these opportunities helped elucidate our informants’ discourse on the revolution as framed within the authors’ milieu. Therefore, the authors did not position themselves against that milieu, but rather situated themselves as scholars who take the necessary analytical distance from an object of study that naturally evokes strong emotions and memories in order to examine it more effectively for a global readership.
We define the “martyr cities” as urban centers in Romania where significant casualties and violent confrontations occurred during the 1989 Revolution. Participants, comprising “active participants,” “martyrs,” and “activists,” were identified and selected through a combination of existing lists (e.g. from revolutionary associations) and snowball sampling, in which initial contacts recommended other eligible individuals. Initial contact with participants was made directly or through established organizations, often preceded by a pre-screening process to ensure their willingness and relevance to the study. While the interviews followed a narrative format, a comprehensive interview guide was used to cover the main themes relevant to the three specific moments of the revolution: the atmosphere at its start, the events themselves, and the immediate aftermath. Questions were designed to elicit personal memories and reflective accounts of these distinct periods. The data analysis involved a rigorous process, with independent coding by four researchers. The sample size of 60 interviews was chosen based on the principle of thematic saturation, as no new themes or significant information emerged from additional interviews.
We acknowledge that it may limit the capture of finer nuances related to regional diversity or micro-social variations in memory activism. Consequently, future research could explore these aspects further by extending the geographical scope to other secondary urban centers or by conducting comparative studies across different generations of witnesses. This would allow for a deeper understanding of how “active memory” is recalibrated as the temporal distance from the 1989 events increases.
The distinction between “memory activists” (individuals engaging in memory activism) and “activist memories” (memories themselves acting as a form of activism or arising from it) was made explicit and consistently applied throughout data collection and analysis, influencing how interviewees’ narratives were interpreted.
In 2019, interviews focused on individual memories of the revolution and were conducted exclusively in Timişoara. To avoid limiting our article to interviewees in Timisoara, in 2021, we used a snowball sampling method to identify new respondents from four additional cities: the capital, Bucharest, Reşiţa, Petroşani, and Hunedoara, referred to in this study as “other cities.” Three of the respondents in Timisoara provided us with contact details of other people from “other cities.”
The interviews followed a narrative format, encouraging personal recollections, lived experiences, and reflections related to the 1989 events. To preserve confidentiality, each interviewee was assigned a unique code, and all personal data was fully anonymized. Regarding gender distribution, there were 11 female and 29 male interviewees in 2019, and 9 female and 11 male interviewees in 2021. The respondents’ ages ranged from 7 to 65 at the time of the revolution, which means they were 39–95 years old at the time of the interview. Their occupations were classified as students, workers, and intellectuals (Figure 1).
The frequency of the interviews is distributed by location, gender, age group, and occupational category.
The interviews ranged from 4 to 75 minutes, with an average of approximately 24 minutes. For each participant, the following variables were recorded and compiled into a database (Table 1): gender, age, occupational category, location, year of interview, duration (minutes), role during the revolution, involvement as memory activist, and possession of a revolutionary certificate.
Overview of interview distribution by key socio-demographic and revolutionary experience variables.
The research adhered to ethical guidelines and prioritized participant wellbeing. All participants provided informed consent, were informed of their right to withdraw, and had their anonymity preserved unless they explicitly consented otherwise for historical purposes.
We took into consideration our analytical distance from the empirical sources and potential biases concerning the events and their postmemory. We are also aware that the period during which the interviews were conducted (2019–2021) could have impacted the respondents. This was a turbulent period in Romania, marked by the coronavirus pandemic and the emergence of the AUR, but neither affected the interviewees’ memories. Only 3 of the 60 interviewees received rewards from the postsocialist state for their revolutionary activities, and participants’ lives improved after 1989. The voices of most interviewees are currently being acknowledged by Romanian media. Most of the interviewees have been invited to TV debates, have participated in commemorating the revolution, or have written articles about the revolution in Romanian journals. Although some of the interviewees were children during the revolution, their memories are important because they participated in some of its events.
The video materials were transcribed and processed using WhisperAI, and the resulting video-to-text transcriptions were manually verified by the authors to ensure fidelity to the original recordings.
We adopted a thematic analysis (Bryman, 2016), following the procedure proposed by Braun and Clarke (2006). First, we reread the transcripts and then coded the key elements. A theoretical approach to thematic analysis was adopted (Braun and Clarke, 2006: 84), so the analysis sought to identify topics related to memory literature. The last phase of data analysis was based on grouping of initial codes into themes (Braun and Clarke, 2006: 90). By comparing the (sub-)themes, a final set of themes was produced. Therefore, the thematic objectives emerged from the analysis of the interview transcripts. The themes emerged from grounded quotes selected from the empirical data, so they were not theoretically oriented but empirically derived.
Three themes emerged as three clear memory moments. We define “moments” as specific timing of the revolution:
Moment 1: Awareness memories of the beginning of the revolution, including:
• Material deprivation and the denial of free expression as thresholds of endurance;
• Pervasive fear, particularly fear of arrest and deportation;
• Courage as an extreme manifestation of fear;
• Solidarity as a driving force of change.
Moment 2: Memories based on physical and psychological abuses during the revolution, expressed through:
• Verbal brutality;
• Physical violence;
• Direct armed attacks resulting in injuries and fatalities.
Moment 3: Memories of the aftermath of the revolution: confusion and disappointment, which encompass the following items:
• Widespread confusion immediately following the collapse of the regime;
• Fear of “terrorists”;
• Disappointment stemming from the gap between expected transformation and actual outcomes–the most sensitive issue being the continued lack of accountability for those responsible, a moral obligation toward the martyrs;
• Anxiety about Romania’s ongoing instability and the potential for a future that could tragically mirror its past.
As authors and members of the Timişoara academic community, we recognize our own agency in this process. Our work does not merely observe memory activism; it contributes to it by transforming oral testimonies into scholarly discourse. This dual role allows us to capture the nuances of the local “discourse of truth” while framing it within the broader theoretical tools of memory studies.
Besides the significant advantages of the data and methods used in this study, including numerous unknown details of activism and memories of the 1989 Revolution, there are some limitations of the data. We did not use large archival documents in this study. Maybe a broader analysis of documents, including activists’ memories of the 1989 Romanian Revolution, could open new avenues for memory activism. Furthermore, while rich, the reliance on narrative interviews rather than more structured interviews might have limited direct comparability across participants’ responses on certain specific points.
Deep analysis of results: Emerging moments and their narrative distribution
Our analysis is operationalized through a specific conceptual toolkit designed for memory studies. First, we use emotional scripting to decode how feelings organize the narrative structure of the revolution. Second, we apply the lens of mnemonic agency to interpret testifying as a proactive intervention in the public sphere. Finally, by treating trauma as “wounded memory”, we bridge the gap between individual psychological experience and the broader sociopolitical goals of memory activism.
The three themes or moments identified through content analysis—the triggering moment, abuses, and the post-revolutionary drama—map out a complex emotional landscape of the 1989 Romanian Revolution. The individual narratives disclosed not only external events but also an inner dynamic of transformation: a transition from fear to courage, from solidarity to suspicion, and from elation to disillusionment. This palimpsest, characterized by its affective nature, contributes to a deeper understanding of the revolution’s experience, extending beyond the streets into the collective psyche. The memory of activists continually brings these themes into current discourse. The intensity with which they are addressed in testimonies indicates that, amid unresolved issues related to accountability for the decisions and actions that led to the tragic events of 1989, the depth of trauma and emotional wounds remains unhealed.
Moment 1: Awareness of the starting of the Revolution
On 15 December 1989, in Timişoara, a protest broke out in front of the Reformed Church where Pastor László Tőkés was serving. A group of demonstrators gathered to prevent the arrest of the pastor, who was known for his criticisms of the communist regime. The following day, on 16 December, the number of protesters grew, and the crowd began chanting anti-communist slogans and moving toward the city center. The spontaneously ignited demonstration rapidly escalated; large numbers of people gathered to voice their discontent with the regime. The authorities’ failure to react swiftly in the early moments allowed the protest to spread to multiple areas of Timişoara and become increasingly difficult to control (Siani-Davies, 2005).
The initial moment identified through content analysis pertains to the recognition of the historical significance of the revolution’s onset. The early gatherings in Timişoara show how spontaneous acts of solidarity can quickly escalate into collective protest. Individuals who initially hesitated due to fear gradually joined the movement, creating a shared sense of purpose and belonging. From the perspective of memory activism (Wawrzyniak, 2023), these early participants can be seen as grassroots agents who, under specific sociopolitical conditions, mobilized their experiences and narratives to challenge dominant power structures. Their memories of fear, courage, and emerging solidarity not only document the events but also performatively assert the legitimacy of popular agency in shaping historical memory. This moment is characterized by a convergence of sentiments surrounding fear, courage and solidarity. Associated subjects include the following: the feeling of constraint; widespread fear; the fear of arrest or deportation; individual or collective courage; and the emergence of solidarity as a spontaneous response to deeply felt oppression.
The issue of “the breaking point of enduring communism” is conveyed through the evocation of a collective experience marked by a pervasive sense of suffocation, by the material deprivations of everyday life, and the absence of fundamental freedoms. Scarcity of basic resources such as heating, electricity, and hot water, combined with the impossibility of openly voicing opinions, generated a profound feeling of frustration. Individuals felt permanently observed, even without the presence of visible control mechanisms: It was a harsh regime, you were not allowed, you did not dare to express yourself. There were no surveillance cameras, because real eyes were watching you all the time. (I18, Male, 17 years, Timişoara) We sought refuge in the privacy of our homes, where the temperature in winter rarely exceeded 12–16 degrees Celsius. Hot water was supplied only once a month, and much of the electricity was exported, leaving us without light. (I38, Male, 36 years, Timişoara) I had this feeling of suffocation, that it couldn’t go on like this, that everything had reached a breaking point. (I32, Female, 32 years, Timişoara)
Fear emerges as a major emotional constant. However, it does not paralyze. Instead, it becomes a catalyst for courage: a courage that “simmers” and erupts from a tense, cathartic build-up at the moment perceived as “now or never.” As a generalized sentiment, fear is vividly illustrated through mass imagery, parental reactions, inner hesitations, and tensions experienced within the intimacy of family life, as reflected in the following statements: My mother stood in the doorway: You’re not going anywhere, I don’t care what you say. (I56, Male, 21 years, Reşiţa) My father: There are some revolutions which, according to the way they unfold, will have some guys pulling the strings from behind, some will make money, and some will die, right? That’s the deal! (I56, Male, 21 years, Reşiţa) A group of people passed down my street shouting: Down with Ceauşescu! I couldn’t believe it, I was standing behind the curtain, I didn’t even dare to move it, because I had this fear of the unknown, and fear of the regime that had existed. (I18, Male, 17 years, Timişoara)
The fear of “arrest” and “deportation” is expressed explicitly and carries both a personal and socially transmitted dimension, reflecting internalized fears and a still-present climate of repression: That if we didn’t leave, we’d be arrested, deported. Our families would suffer. They tried to intimidate us through loudspeakers, to make us give up, disperse. (I44, Male, 26 years, Reşiţa) Both my wife and I were caught. Two militiamen grabbed us tightly by the arms and took us somewhere behind the County Council building . . . We were left under the guard of one militiaman, while the others were still chasing down protesters to catch and arrest more. That guy looked left, then right, and said: Leave, quickly. And he let us go. (I22, Male, 20 years, Timişoara)
The theme of “courage” is conveyed through statements that range from public self-identification to the decision to return to the streets after violent episodes. In this context, solidarity is perceived as an emergent state of collective belonging, an emotional “electricity” in which strangers become accomplices in the same liberating act. The formation of a group consciousness is evident, characterized by the practice of shared rituals (prayers, collective chants) and gestures of mutual support (food sharing).
The protesters, the crowd of people, started to shout for freedom. They became aware and conscious that they belong to a strong group having the same demands. Moreover, praying and shouting “Down with Ceausescu” were the major actions they did: And they fired, they fired toward the central park. Some people fell. Shop windows shattered around us. We couldn’t believe they were using live ammunition. We were seized by fear. I have to admit, we ran like cowards. (I09, Male, 31 years, Timişoara) News spread that children had been killed on the cathedral steps. Innocent ones. The numbers varied. They kept growing. That filled us with shame. So, we came back, in greater numbers, with greater fury, this time on the streets. (I09, Male, 31 years, Timişoara) And I said: hey, I want to say something. I climbed onto the tram bumper. I held on to Zoli and Radu to keep my balance, . . . I’m a student (which I wasn’t, but I wanted to give people courage, and the idea that a student was starting this sounded great and fit what was happening), I’m not afraid of the Securitate: Down with Ceauşescu! There was a dreadful silence. I thought, okay, now I’m really screwed. I shouted again: Down with Ceauşescu! A few voices followed. I shouted a third time: Down with Ceauşescu! from the top of my lungs. Then everyone erupted. (I30, Male, 25 years, Timişoara) I was at the prefecture, where we all shouted: Down with Ceauşescu. On top of that, trucks came with bread: warm bread was distributed. There was this feeling of belonging, somehow, of being a group. We all wanted the same thing. (I05, Female, 14 years, Timişoara) Let me tell you how the revolution began: simply. Through an act of solidarity. Through the voicing of a thought we had carried silently for years through humiliation, and had never dared to shout aloud. Namely: Down with Ceauşescu! It was a cry of overwhelming liberation. Then, after all those years, I thought: My God, the world is born from the word. The word was the vehicle of solidarity, it made us all accomplices, all of us in the street. We became accomplices to that cry. (I29, Male, 30 years, Timişoara) And then the army knelt together with us, all of us present there, and we recited the Lord’s Prayer. (I01, Female, 34 years, Timişoara)
The courage described appears as an almost blind courage, born from a trust and hope that had long been repressed. Those who express it are mainly young people and young adults, at a stage in life where they can still fight for a future they believe they will live to see. Shouting “Down with Ceauşescu!” becomes the expression of this collective courage but also a personal one. In this way, their courage is not only a spontaneous reaction to violence but also the affirmation of a group consciousness that was born and strengthened in the streets.
Moment 2: Physical and psychological abuses during the Revolution
Between 17 and 20 December 1989, Timişoara became the site of a violently unfolding revolution. Initially, the crowd chanted, prayed, waved the Romanian flag with the communist emblem cut out, and sang the national anthem, Deşteaptă-te, române! (“Awaken thee, Romanian!”). Very soon, the protest gained significant momentum, and the authorities requested military intervention.
On the evening of 17 December 1989, the army opened fire on the crowd, including on children, women, and those trying to assist the wounded. Most of the victims were recorded on that night. Nicolae Ceauşescu ordered the total suppression of the protests by any means necessary. Military-grade weapons were used against civilians, many of whom gave their lives for freedom. The demonstrators continued their fight against the system through prayer, religious hymns, and slogans such as: “Down with communism!”, “Freedom!”, “Romanians, join us!”, “Don’t be afraid, Ceauşescu will fall!”, and “Today in Timişoara, tomorrow across the country!” (see also Pădurean, 2006).
On the morning of 18 December 1989, the demonstrators returned to the streets, defying the cold and fear of death. Armed forces continued with acts of violence and mass arrests. In hospitals, doctors were pressured not to disclose the actual number of casualties. The extreme violence did not put an end to the protests; on the contrary, the movement grew stronger. On 20 December 1989, Timişoara became the first Romanian city to be liberated from communism. (Tismăneanu, 2007).
The sentiments expressed in the interviews revealed a series of recurring subjects, including intimidation, brutality, and assault. The abuses are described with a high degree of sensory and emotional detail, and their nature is often both physical and psychological. Intimidation is manifested through the overwhelming presence of law enforcement forces and their equipment. Psychologically, these forces are perceived as “unseen,” “from movies,” yet in moments of retreat, they become vulnerable, and this vulnerability of the oppressor generates a sense of encouragement and a symbolic reversal of power dynamics. One respondent highlighted that: Where the tram line was, two buses appeared after a while. Riot police got off, formed two rows in front of the County Council, and started banging on their shields. We on one side, they on the other. And then a beating began: feet on shields, batons to the head, feet on shields . . . (I04, Male, 20 years, Timişoara)
Another respondent had the following shocking memories: What surprised me was that there were soldiers equipped in these coveralls, with white helmets, visors, just like those special forces nowadays. And with them, civilians, civilians carrying submachine guns with folding stocks. (I22, Male, 20 years, Timişoara)
The reference to “special forces nowadays” suggests a retrospective reinterpretation, in which the witness uses contemporary categories to make sense of past experiences. Such framing shows how memories are filtered through later knowledge and comparisons, not only through immediate perception.
Confrontation with Milişia/Police was also reflected in several statements: We were introduced into a dimly lit garage, where about 20 people were standing with their hands raised and facing the wall. The policemen beat us and made us shout: Freedom. “You wanted freedom, you wanted democracy? Wait, we’ll give you freedom, we’ll give you democracy.” (I43, Female, 14 years, Bucharest)
The reconstructed dialogue here works as a stylized narrative, turning the violence into a lesson on the distorted meaning of “freedom.” The precision of the dialogue suggests less a verbatim recollection and more a moralizing framework imposed after the fact.
All 11 of us, after kneeling down, the beating began. They beat our soles. We knelt, and they beat our soles. With big wooden sticks, about the size of broom handles. “What did you look for in the revolution? Did you want freedom? Did you want democracy?” (I43, Female, 14 years, Bucharest)
This testimony illustrates the ritualized nature of violence, but the repetitive form also points to how trauma is remembered in cycles, emphasizing the bodily memory of pain rather than the chronological detail of events.
A patrol of policemen stopped me, asked for my papers, and asked where I was going. I told them I was going to my mother’s. They said I couldn’t go. I asked: Why not? They said: Because that’s the order. I said: What, aren’t we in a free country? And then they slapped me and put me in the van. They said: Let us teach you what a free country is. (I26, Male, 27 years, Timişoara)
So, these memories highlight that the communist regime tried to hide any trace, to cover everything up. Militia members had presumed that activists would never voice their opinions. It was hypothesized that the protesters would lack the fortitude to divulge the events that transpired years later in their entirety. Indeed, some accounts were unrelentingly candid, as the following quotation attests: I saw with my own eyes how a civilian came and punched a child in the head. A child! It was unbelievable. And with the other hand, he slapped the child’s mother across the face. That’s when the beating started. Everyone jumped in. It was indescribable. Yes, a child, who I don’t think was even six years old. It was something horrific. (I01, Female, 34 years, Timişoara)
The armed attacks are described as both direct experiences of physical violence and incidents perceived from the position of an observer. The quotes from interviews reflect emotions ranging from intense fear and confusion to shock. The wounded and the dead are portrayed not only as victims of a repressive regime but also as symbols of a fight for freedom. The attack and violence expose the brutality of the regime and the psychological impact on those who survived. Moreover, the armed attacks and the deaths of the innocent generated a sense of shame and remorse among the participants, accompanied by a recognition of human fragility in the face of the oppressive regime.
Some memories were based on traces of dead people: In that rain-soaked ground, there was a red puddle and a windbreaker jacket. Then, and even now when I think about it, I shiver, I thought: someone died there. (I23, Male, 35 years, Timişoara)
Another interviewee remembers that: I heard the click when the bullet went into the barrel . . . I was shot at with a burst above my bed. It was being shot close to the cathedral. I screamed. It was a horrible moment. (120, Male, 43 years, Timişoara)
Deep memories are related also to seeing people dying: We were running in circles, and at one point, I heard a scream behind me. I looked over my shoulder while running. I saw how a tank passed over her. I still remember now that she had two bags in her hand. In one bag, she had two loaves of bread. And at that moment, the first thing I thought was: Where does this woman have Sunday bread? Because bread wasn’t sold on Sundays. (I26, Male, 27 years, Timişoara) Sad, sad. I realized then that in Romania, one could die sadly. Almost without meaning, without doing anything. I fainted with this image of her shouting “criminals” and running toward the soldiers who had shot. (I27, Male, 20 years, Timişoara)
This interpretation of death as “sad” and “without meaning” reveals the respondent’s attempt to process trauma through moral reflection. The language suggests a retrospective evaluation, not only a recollection of events.
An important event for Timisoara was the shooting of innocent children on the stairs of the Orthodox Cathedral. An interviewee was part of that event and remembered that: A woman was telling me how she had a flag with the coat of arms cut out, and when they started shooting, they rushed to run inside the cathedral. She dropped the flag, turned to grab it, and a boy next to her, who was closer to the fallen flag, bent down to pick it up, and when he stood up, a bullet hit him in the head. (I35, Male, 36 years, Timişoara) I shouted: Hey, they’re shooting at us! No, no, those are blank bullets! No, those are real bullets! Then they shot. I pulled my friend. I felt a hit in my back. I stood up and I said: Hey, I think I’ve been shot. (I04, Male, 20 years, Timişoara)
From a demographic perspective, there are no significant gender differences observed in relation to the experience of these abuses. However, one interview with an adolescent participant is particularly noteworthy, as it involves the description of traumatic experiences that evoke a significantly more pronounced emotional response compared with that observed in other interviewees. Furthermore, respondents from larger cities, particularly those directly affected by repression (Timişoara, Bucharest), report incidents of a much higher intensity.
In conclusion, the way participants experienced the revolution is defined by a tension between what was directly lived and what was later remembered. The immediacy of fear, brutality, and confrontation with death shaped the primary experience, while the act of remembering transformed these fragments into enduring narratives. Across testimonies, recurring patterns emerge: intimidation through the massive presence of armed forces, the humiliation of beatings, the shock of seeing children among the victims, and the haunting traces of blood and loss in public spaces. These patterns are not only personal recollections but also collective markers of a society breaking free from repression.
Remembered today, these experiences gain an additional layer of meaning, becoming part of what has been described as memory activism. As Wawrzyniak (2023: 52) points out, the significance lies less in proving whether such activism existed, and more in understanding how those who took part in it—outside official state channels—turned memory into a tool of resistance and historical testimony. In this sense, the revolution is both a lived experience of violence and courage, and a remembered struggle whose value endures through the voices that continue to bear witness.
Moment 3: The aftermath—confusion and disappointment
On the morning of 22 December 1989, the pressure of the protests became overwhelming. The regime ultimately collapsed after the failure of Ceauşescu’s mass rally, during which he was publicly booed on live television. Nicolae Ceauşescu and his wife, Elena Ceauşescu, fled the Central Committee building by helicopter, marking the fall of the communist regime. Shortly thereafter, amid the political chaos, Ion Iliescu emerged. A former Communist Party member marginalized for his allegedly liberal views, Iliescu quickly became the leader of the National Salvation Front (NSF) and assumed control of the country, though without genuine democratic legitimacy. The NSF presented itself as a provisional political structure that would organize elections and guarantee the return to democracy.
Despite the efforts of revolutionaries to participate in the political reconstruction, the NSF monopolized power and promoted a narrative of the revolution that ignored the complexity of the events. This political climate led to deep disappointment among the revolutionaries of Timişoara, who did not want the party to overshadow the events in their city or dominate the political stage. In response, the Timişoara Proclamation was issued, demanding, among other things, the banning of former communist leaders from holding public office.
The beginning of the revolution belonged to the people, but its end was overtaken by a political group that bore little distinction from the previous regime (Siani-Davies, 2005). The final moment of activist memories outlines the period immediately following 22 December 1989. It highlights the transition from liberating enthusiasm to a state of unrest, confusion, and skepticism. The topics addressed include rumors about terrorists, a state of uncertainty, disappointment at the lack of clarity regarding real change, and a reactivated sense of fear. These narratives are no longer anchored in concrete physical spaces or in the dynamics of the protest, but rather in the process of reflection and evaluation of what followed.
Freedom, despite being a highly desired ideal, was paradoxically accompanied by a lack of control and a widespread sense of chaos. This period was distinguished by an absence of authoritative structures, leading to a sense of uninhibited freedom, where individuals felt empowered to act without contemplating the repercussions of their actions: The Romanians became very brave, things started to happen, it felt like a general disorder. They felt free to do anything, as there was no one to stop them, which I don’t think was a very good thing. But, well, it was a release. (I54, Female, 26 years, Hunedoara) There were all sorts of rumors and funny situations. I won’t name names, but someone who entered the city hall, in the office that used to be the first secretary’s, climbed onto the table and shouted: “I am the mayor, I got here first!” The struggle for power had begun. (I54, Female, 26 years, Hunedoara) And everyone wanted to enter the town hall, and, well, almost everyone wanted to be the future mayors. (I59, Male, 30 years, Reşiţa)
Terrorism and panic caused by rumors and false alarms are a classic example of manipulating emotionally vulnerable people. The existence of an imaginary enemy (the terrorists) was used to make people afraid and to justify authoritarian actions, even though there was no evidence that these threats existed: Over 25 alarms were received on the militia phone, in the duty officer’s room, stating that there were green lights on these hills, that the water was poisoned, that the mine institute headquarters was being attacked, that a bus of terrorists was coming . . . to blow up the power plant. (I59, Male, 30 years, Reşiţa) And then came everything you know about the revolution. That is, the intoxication with terrorists, the poisoned water. They put us in ridiculous situations, making us shoot at each other. (I58, Male, 30 years, Petroşani)
The perception that “we missed a huge opportunity” reflects the fact that, after years of repression, people found themselves facing a new form of oppression, one that was more subtle but just as effective in keeping citizens prisoners of a corrupt system and a political class that failed to bring about the promised change. This is reflected in the following statements: Many times, I think that our parents, those who shouted for freedom in those days, died with this wish and with certainty, when they closed their eyes, that, indeed, we, their children, would be free . . . But we didn’t feel freedom. And we don’t feel it. And we are not truly free. (I43, Female, 14 years, Bucharest) And I am afraid I don’t know what I will leave to my children. I try to give them wings and make them fly out of this country. Because it’s horrible here, it’s still the same communist prison. Freedom, in the true sense of the word, this fundamental human right, does not exist in Romania. (I43, Female, 14 years, Bucharest)
Most of the respondents ask themselves why people died for this revolution. Therefore, after the revolutionary enthusiasm faded, a new fear emerged: the fear of returning to a dictatorship, one that would be more subtle, of falling once again into the trap of authoritarianism. Here, fear is no longer as visible as before, but it persists in a more diffuse, harder-to-identify form. It is a collective anxiety presented very well by one interviewee: I’ve always had a sense of fear. I know that young people are . . . always wanting something else. I know that young people are naturally revolutionaries, wanting something different, without knowing what has been. We don’t want to go back, to live through the same thing again, when we get old, to end up in the same, in the same era of sad memories. That would be awful. (I08, Female, 24 years, Timişoara)
The general perception is that of a rupture between the revolutionary ideal and the post-event reality: fears arise regarding manipulation, infiltration, “the guys behind the scenes” pulling the strings, lack of transparency, and the sense that “the truth” remains inaccessible.
The Revolution . . . it ended the moment Ceauşescu was shot. (I60, Female, 11 years, Reşiţa) We missed a huge chance, an immense one. Too much freedom was granted to us all at once, and perhaps it did not do us good. (I54, Female, 26 years, Hunedoara) I travelled to Turkey, where I remained for over a month. The atmosphere there was strikingly different: people, though poor and clothed in rags, appeared cheerful and eager to engage in conversation. They possessed a sense of spiritual freedom. When I returned in Romania, I came back to a grey, dull land. (I22, Male, 20 years, Timişoara) Was this truly the cause for which people sacrificed their lives? God, the dead must be turning in their graves. Not a single hair would have been lost had anyone anticipated the disaster that followed, leading Romania to its present condition. (I41, Female, 45 years, Bucharest)
In conclusion, the memories of the aftermath of the revolution reveal how emotions were not only passively experienced but also actively performed and reshaped within new social and political contexts. The initial euphoria of liberation quickly gave way to confusion, disappointment, and diffuse fear, illustrating how emotional practices shift when the framework of power and authority changes. Following Scheer’s (2012) Bourdieuan approach, these emotional states can be understood as practices emerging from bodily dispositions and social dynamics: people mobilized fear and hope, named their disappointment, communicated distrust through narratives of “terrorists” or “hidden powers,” and regulated their emotions by expressing skepticism about the future.
Therefore, the confusion and skepticism of the post-December period represent more than private feelings; they are collective practices shaped by uncertainty, rumors, and political manipulation. The revolution did not simply transform the political system—it also transformed the practices of feeling, as citizens moved from visible confrontation with repression to more subtle anxieties about corruption, betrayal, and unfinished change. In this way, the aftermath reflects Scheer’s idea that emotions are inherently historical: they are transmitted, negotiated, and contested, and they evolve as part of broader social practices. The emotional landscape of 1989–1990 in Romania demonstrates how fear and hope were performed, circulated, and transformed, leaving a legacy of emotional practices that continue to shape how the revolution is remembered today.
Discussion and conclusions
This study aimed to investigate trauma as “wounded memory” by bridging memory activism and the history of emotion. This emerged from prominent activism during and after the 1989 Romanian Revolution, and the feelings that accompanied those memories. Our findings reveal a clear and compelling “descending narrative trajectory” of emotions, progressing from initial exaltation and collective courage during the height of the revolution to widespread skepticism, disillusionment, and a more diffuse form of collective anxiety in its aftermath. The analysis demonstrates how memories of fear, often evolving in nature, along with memories of revenge directed toward former communist power structures, and profound disappointment with post-revolutionary developments, have profoundly shaped the participants’ experience of the revolution and its subsequent impact.
This study makes a significant contribution to the field of memory studies by offering a unique and comprehensive perspective on memory activism and the history of feelings, specifically within the context of the 1989 Romanian Revolution.
First, memory activism is rooted in the recollection of historical events and social movements (Berger and Koller, 2024; Berger et al., 2021; Gutman, 2017; Gutman and Wüstenberg, 2021, 2023; Merrill and Rigney, 2024). As memory activism brings to the fore the rhetoric of activists to shape collective memory toward the recognition of past injustices, the activism of participants in the 1989 Romanian Revolution is a form of resistance against dominant historical interpretations, so it can work mnemonic preservation and change in existing dominant narratives (c.f. Gutman and Wüstenberg, 2021). Such memories work also as a form of political engagement (Berger and Koller, 2024; Merrill and Rigney, 2024).
Second, as highlighted in previous studies (Portelli, 2006; Thompson, 1978), such historical narratives of memory activism could shape present perceptions and are forms of resistance working as highlighting “history from below”, forms of empowerment for individuals who have been overlooked in recent times (Portelli, 2006; Thompson, 1978).
Third, the memory activism of the 1989 Romanian Revolution is tightly connected to the history of emotions. These emotions are not simply reactions but deep social constructs with affective power (Ahmed, 2004; Boddice, 2018; Frevert, 2015, 2016; Plamper, 2017; Till, 2008).
Fourth, if activism around the 1989 Romanian Revolution is presented in past studies as multiple and conflictual (Rusu, 2011; Young and Light, 2016), except for a single study (Satmari et al., 2026), we are not aware of any studies highlighting the link between memory activism and the history of emotions based on the 1989 Romanian Revolution.
Responding to our research question, the most prominent activism memories were related to communist leaders harming people, and this is related to deep feelings. Therefore, memory activism is closely tied to deep feelings and emotions. Indeed, memories of fear were complemented by memories of activist feelings of revenge during the uprising against a repressive political regime. However, disappointment toward the political leaders installed in power in the 1990s was also echoed by the interviewees. Remembering fear leaves a shiver in any participant in a revolution. Fear has been the strongest feeling among activists during the 1989 Romanian Revolution. Crucial was that our interviewee activist conveyed a sense of fear, complemented by feelings of revenge at the outset of their participation in the revolution. It was the fear of being shot or arrested by communists. Interestingly, fear reappeared as the revolution neared its end, due to confusion about the form of democracy Romania followed, an aspect highlighted in a recent study of the 1989 Romanian Revolution (Satmari et al., 2026).
Moreover, the 1989 Romanian Revolution can also be understood as a field of contestation and negotiation, a field of multiple, contested sites (Light and Young, 2015; Rusu, 2011, 2017; Young and Light, 2016). It can become a symbolic battleground where decisions are made about which information should be preserved in the collective memory and which should be forgotten. Such “images of the past” (Olick, 2008) involve not only the act of remembering the past but also the ability to commemorate some of its fragments. Certainly, we are aware that memory activism inevitably evolves over time, and the period during which the interviews were conducted (2019–2021) may have affected the interviewees due to the turmoil of the coronavirus pandemic and the rise of the far-right AUR party (Doiciar and Creţan, 2021). This process of slight forgetting can take the form of induced forgetting through selective recall. This occurs when only certain aspects of an event are mentioned in a conversation, while others are omitted, leading to a collective forgetting of those excluded elements. However, the practical implication of our study is that activist memories can be used as truth stories and serve as issues of social justice in post-communist Romania.
We have deepened the explanation of how these personal and collective memories function as powerful “stories” and specific emotions, articulating the unresolved “social justice issues” that persist in post-communist Romania. These issues are directly linked to the enduring lack of accountability for the tragic events of 1989 and the moral obligations owed to the victims and their families, thereby solidifying the central argument regarding the critical relevance of memory in navigating post-communist realities. Furthermore, this study consistently reaffirms a nuanced understanding of the term “revolution” as applied to the 1989 events, acknowledging its contested nature and its implications for collective memory, thereby reinforcing our commitment to a critical, analytically distanced approach. Memory activism related to the Romanian Revolution centers on how collective remembrance of 1989 shapes contemporary social movements, political discourse, and cultural identity.
The practical implications of our study or the societal relevance of memory activism are important, as the memory of the Revolution is worth supporting by Romanian authorities. Public museums commemorating the 1989 Revolution need to be built in Timisoara and other cities in Romania. A small museum of the Revolution operates in Timisoara, but it is more supported by the local nongovernmental organization (NGO) of revolutionaries than by the local and national authorities. Emotions, social justice, and memory activism intersect, and they could lead to more dedicated forums of discussion and recognition for the people who died, were wounded, or participated directly in the revolution. At the moment, most forums of debate on the 1989 Romanian Revolution appear in the public sphere only in mid- to late-December, not in other months of the year. On the contrary, as postsocialist memory activists have faced the challenge of competing with nationalist and revisionist actors who use memory politics to promote their own agendas, such as recasting controversial historical figures in a positive light (Dobre, 2023), they have to employ more educational initiatives, such as museum visits and public discussions, which encourage critical reflection and intergenerational dialogue, though their impact on attitudes can be limited (Creţan and Doiciar, 2023; Creţan et al., 2018, 2026; Light et al., 2019, 2021; Mitroiu, 2016). Furthermore, generational storytelling could become an important tool, allowing younger generations to share personal memories and memorabilia, broadening the scope of remembrance beyond official narratives (Pohrib, 2019). Overall, Romanian memory activists must continually negotiate between official, nationalist, and grassroots perspectives, using a mix of confrontation, education, and creative engagement to address the ongoing complexities of post-communist memory politics (Abăseacă, 2018; Dobre, 2023; Mitroiu, 2016; Pohrib, 2019; Rusu, 2017).
Our findings have now opened new avenues for future research. These could include comparative studies exploring memory activism in the context of other post-communist or post-conflict revolutions and protest movements globally. Follow-up interviews could be conducted with the same participants to trace the longitudinal evolution of their memories, or a more in-depth archival analysis could be undertaken to complement the qualitative interview data. These suggestions demonstrate a forward-looking vision and a recognition of the inherent complexity of memory activism and the history of emotions.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors thank all the participants of this research who kindly shared their stories with them. Thanks are also due to the anonymous reviewers from Memory Studies for their important comments and useful suggestions for improvements. Finally, the authors declare that they did not use any AI tools to generate ideas in this paper.
Consent to participate
Respondents were given the information of what their participation entailed, and they gave verbal consent before starting interviews.
Consent for publication
Consent for publication was provided by the participants when they agreed to be a part of the study.
Author contributions
All authors participated equally in writing this paper.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.