文化记忆有诸多不同的表征形式,根据其性质和影响的不同可以分为硬记忆与软记忆,两者之间既相互区别又相互依存。前者主要指纪念性的建筑实体,包括纪念碑、雕塑、博物馆等,一般由政府主导;后者主要指具有文本和叙事性质的文化产品,包括回忆录、小说、诗歌、电影等,多由私人领域发起。文化记忆的活力在于硬记忆与软记忆之间的融合与互动。本文通过大量的实例分析了在德国和俄罗斯的政治创伤文化中采用的不同的记忆形式,并阐述了这种差别带来的不同后果和影响。德国的记忆在经过软记忆性质的各种讨论之后,多以硬记忆的形式被展现和固定下来;而俄罗斯的记忆多以软记忆的形式出现,始终没有得到沉淀。社会共识的缺乏阻碍了硬记忆的出现,由软记忆到硬记忆的转变需要私人领域的推动、社会活跃分子的参与以及政治意愿等共同促成。 There are many different representations of cultural memory, which can be divided into hard memory and soft memory according to their nature and influence. The two are different and interdependent. The former mainly refers to monumental architectural entities, including monuments, sculptures and museums, which are generally dominated by the government. The latter mainly refers to cultural products with textual and narrative features, including memoirs, novels, poems, movies, etc., mostly initiated by the private sector . The vitality of cultural memory lies in the integration and interaction between hard and soft memories. Through a large number of examples, this article analyzes the different forms of memory used in the political trauma culture in Germany and Russia and explains the different consequences and implications of such differences. After various discussions on the nature of soft memory, the memory of Germany was mostly manifested and fixed in the form of hard memory. However, the memory of Russia appeared mostly in the form of soft memory and was never precipitated. The lack of social consensus hindered the emergence of hard memory. The transition from soft memory to hard memory required the promotion of the private sphere, the participation of social activists and political will.