This study pursued two main objectives: it sought to contribute to a critical reappraisal of the memory of Marielle Franco and to further develop the concept of dangerous memory. In the following pages, I will summarize the most important results of these endeavors and give an outlook on possible future research. I want to emphasize here that the new understanding of dangerous memory elaborated in this study does not render Metz’s reflections obsolete; they remain fundamental to the theological debate on political, social, and cultural memory. However, as demonstrated in this study, Metz’s approach cannot simply be transferred from the European context to other cultural contexts and situations without creating complex problems concerning the representation of subjects and practices of solidarity.

5.1 Marielle Franco and Individual and Collective Self-Empowerment

The first aim of this work was to show how people who were close to Franco remember her in order to contribute to a critical reappraisal of her memory. In this study, I showed that numerous hegemonic social discourses on race, gender, human rights, and sexual orientation present in Brazilian society influence how Franco’s person and trajectory are understood. As seen earlier, this was not only evident during her life and the concrete daily challenges she had to overcome, which were often shaped by violence.Footnote 1 It also became manifest in some of the ways Franco was remembered after her assassination when there were attempts to criminalize her memory as a human-rights activist and woman from a favela.Footnote 2 Against this background, it was necessary to analyze the data collected on Franco in a manner that was sensitive to power relationships and that accounted for the influence of social discourses on how we perceive the world. For this purpose, I built on insights from feminist and discourse theory (especially Judith Butler) in the data analysis and interpretation.

The data analysis showed that remembering Franco was not only about her as an individual. Instead, many aspects of Franco’s trajectory could only be explained with recourse to the collectivity through which she was shaped. In the context of this study, collectivity was understood very broadly. The term included family relations, social movements, social groups, and so on. As seen in this study, Franco was a person who did not conform to “the norm” in several respects. Because of this and her social context, she repeatedly found herself in vulnerable or even life-threatening situations. Against this background, collectivity was an essential resource for her to constitute herself as a subject. Franco’s trajectory and achievements can be understood as a fruit of these collectivities. At the same time, Franco also contributed to strengthening these collectivities.

Franco’s efforts to strengthen these collectivities were particularly evident in her contributions to Black women’s self-empowerment during her term in office. This study situated Franco’s work within a more recent current within Brazilian Black intersectional feminism. For the past decade, there has been an increase in movements and collectives of Black women seeking more political representation. Franco’s term as a Rio de Janeiro city councilor strengthened the presence of Black women in parliament. This presence was not only based on words. Instead, it also had a bodily and practical dimension. Franco not only made her own body available for this purpose. The majority of her team also consisted of Black women, who brought their networks to bear on the office’s work. In addition, with other Black women’s movements and groups, Franco’s office jointly organized various events that increased the presence of Black women in parliamentary space.

Franco’s work in the city council also led to the collective self-empowerment of lesbian women. In 2017, Franco’s office collaborated with lesbian movements and collectives to compose a bill to introduce a “day of lesbian visibility” in Rio de Janeiro’s municipal calendar. When the city council narrowly rejected the bill, Franco refused to interpret the rejection merely as a political defeat. Instead, she highlighted lesbian women’s act of resistance in a parliamentary body that did not represent them. She emphasized that in the following years, lesbian women (including herself) would continue to occupy the chamber of the city council. This helped increase lesbian women’s visibility in the city council despite the bill’s rejection.

The theme of self-empowerment also emerged in Franco’s work on the Human Rights Commission. The data analysis showed that Franco contributed to the individual self-empowerment of people who had been victims of human-rights violations (often by police violence). As illustrated in this study, in Brazil human rights are often considered “rights in defense of criminals.”Footnote 3 Consequently, they are regarded as incompatible with the police and a law-and-order perspective. Against this background, Franco also contributed to overcoming the juxtaposition between police and human-rights activism because she supported agents of police units and their relatives who had been victims of human-rights violations. In doing so, she demonstrated that human rights are not a specifically left-wing agenda but concern all people regardless of their political orientation. This is especially true in a society characterized by high levels of violence.

In summary, the data on Marielle Franco show that her memory is strongly linked to the self-empowerment of marginalized groups. Her trajectory shows that people with similar backgrounds can transform their reality, which is often experienced as an unchangeable destiny. Paradoxically, this was not only true during Franco’s lifetime but also, and even increasingly so, after her assassination. The data analysis showed that Franco’s assassination initially caused fear and horror. Subsequently, however, it also increased many people’s critical consciousness and mobilized them politically. Today, many Black women recognize and remember Marielle Franco as a champion of their cause. As “seeds of Marielle,” they carry on her legacy and multiply it: “If she did it, I can do it, and if there are many of us, it’s harder to stop it.”Footnote 4

In my view, Franco’s relationship to collectivity represents a significant challenge for the international audience who wants to stand in solidarity with her and wants to keep her memory alive. This raises the question of how a reference to a collectivity can be made visible in societies (for example, in Europe) that firmly focus on the individual. From my point of view, the Jardin Marielle FrancoFootnote 5 in Paris has chosen an interesting approach. The memorial plaques in the garden recall Franco as an individual without making any explicit reference to the movements she worked with. Yet the garden in itself symbolizes that the memory Franco is a living memory. Franco’s history and legacy are carried on by many people—the “seeds.” One day, these “seeds” might also blossom and yield fruit.

5.2 Dangerous Memory and Individual and Collective Self-Empowerment

The second goal of this work was to relate Johann Baptist Metz’s concept of dangerous memory to the memory of Marielle Franco, to discuss the concept’s potential and limits, and to develop it. The starting point for this was the observation that the concept was used, at least implicitly, in the aftermath of Franco’s assassination to interpret her trajectory and why she was murdered and to comfort and create a perspective of hope and continuation for those who were mourning her loss.Footnote 6 Against this background, the aim of this study was to disclose the use of the concept and thus open it to discussion and problematization.

The data interpretation showed that the concept initially had a high degree of plausibility. This plausibility was mainly content related. The memory of Franco as reconstructed on the basis of the collected interviews is a memory of suffering and injustice that reflects not only individual but also collective victimization. Against this background, the memory of Franco represents a dangerous memory of unfulfilled hopes and injustice. However, the above remarks about Franco’s efforts at self-empowerment also contain elements that exceed and go beyond Metz’s concept of dangerous memory. In Chap. 4, a different, decolonial understanding of dangerous memory started to emerge through the close examination of the specific situation of my interview partners who remembered Franco. In the following paragraphs, I will make this decolonial understanding of dangerous memory explicit.

Metz’s concept of dangerous memory is based on the (programmatic) assumption that established subjects (should) stand up in solidarity with those who have been hindered in their process of becoming subjects. This solidarity is motivated by the belief (anchored in the specifically Christian dangerous memory of Jesus Christ’s passion and resurrection) that God calls all people to become subjects. However, in the face of structural injustices, war, and suffering, not everyone is able to follow this call. Recognizing the gap between what is and what should be, established subjects keep alive the memory of those who have or had suffered and their unfulfilled hopes. They critically direct this memory of suffering against the parts of society that try to overcome the destiny of the dead without dealing with the questions they pose to the living. At the same time, they bring this memory before God in prayer and ask God to reveal and manifest themself as the Almighty and just God in whom Christians believe.

I have criticized two main points about this concept. First, I pointed out that while Metz requests that Christians listen to victims who have experienced suffering, this request remains purely practical and has no theoretical consequences for his concept. Second, and related to the first point, I argued that Metz is not critical enough of what it means to become and be a subject. He is aware that the (bourgeois) subject could only arise in connection with a privileged (economic and political) position. However, he does not sufficiently analyze the discursive practices of othering through which the (bourgeois) subject constitutes itself in demarcation from others. Taken together, these two points lead to a problematic tension in Metz’s concept. Dangerous memory is about remembering victims, but the victims’ own accounts of what has happened to them do not come up. Metz always starts with established subjects, who remember the victims and the dead in solidarity with them. From Metz’s point of view, this occurs in favor of the latter; it is, as stated earlier, some sort of advocacy. However, he does not provide a rationale that could further support this claim. Metz’s assertion could also well be understood as an expression of a paternalistic attitude or even an act of discursive colonization of the victims.

Against this background, I based my interpretation of the data on Marielle Franco on the “victims’” perspective. This was made possible by the empirical approach applied in this study, which allowed me to listen and consider some of the people who were directly affected by Franco’s murder. At the same time, the empirical approach also made it possible to reconstruct their understanding of their context, which is the Sitz im Leben of the memory of Marielle Franco evaluated in this study. The data interpretation suggested that the memories of my interview partners were memories in a moment of danger.Footnote 7 The notion of danger referred to the risk of being affected by different types of violence that my interviewees and people with similar backgrounds (especially Black women, favelados, and human-rights activists) are exposed to. This danger was acutely manifested after Franco’s assassination. But it is also manifested chronically in everyday life in Rio de Janeiro when one thinks of the widespread forms of violence in society and culture as well as the violence by armed groups (militias, criminal gangs, police).

Remembering Franco and her trajectory in a context that is experienced as dangerous is not an escape into a better past. Instead, it is related to the present and has to do with how to stay safe and survive in the present moment. This became apparent in the consequences that my interview partners drew from Franco’s assassination when they realized how drastically the context had changed. It was also reflected in the individual and collective strategies of (self-)empowerment. In this study, these strategies have been strongly associated with Franco’s activities. But it is crucial to emphasize that they go beyond her, her story, and her death and are still used today by my interviewees as well as other people in this environment. Finally, the importance of the memory of Franco for the present is also reflected in the fact that many Black women have appropriated her memory. As I argued in this study, Franco was “resurrected” by these women through different ways of remembering her and asserting her ideals and fights. Evaluated from a theological perspective, this resurrection testifies to a hope against all hope. Franco may be dead, but her legacy moves and inspires women to rise for themselves.

At the level of theoretical conceptualization, the constant presence of violence in Rio de Janeiro and the risks it entails make the assumption of a fully autonomous and self-determined subject untenable. This insight was already integrated in Metz’s concept of dangerous memory. However, the empirical research done in this study further radicalized it. Given the situation in Rio de Janeiro, Metz’s distinction between (established) subjects and those who were interrupted and could not become subjects is too elementary. In a context where violence is highly prevalent (and also legitimized by specific social discourses), subjects are and remain fragile, especially if they deviate from “the norm.” Against this background, Judith Butler’s theory of subjectivation through subjection provides a helpful approach for theoretically capturing subjects’ fragility. Butler argues that an individual must be subjected to social discourses in order to be recognized as someone, even if it is hurtful. As Butler further shows, subjection does not deny agency. Paradoxically, it is also the precondition for subversion (through the creative reappropriation of injurious names) and resistance. This approach is well suited to Franco’s trajectory and her surroundings since it is about subjectivity from a marginalized perspective.

In summary, the concept of dangerous memory presented here does not primarily or exclusively refer to the remembrance of suffering and victimization that are critically kept alive by established subjects in solidarity with those who suffered and have died. Instead, it is remembrance that mobilizes marginalized people in a moment of danger and empowers them. Also, it honors the legacy of the dead because their example shows that resistance is possible and that there are alternatives to the present conjuncture. Last but not least, it is remembrance based on solidarity between fragile subjects, either living or dead. Understood in this way, the dead and the living support each other in the process of subject formation.

The differentiated meaning of dangerous memory proposed here also has consequences for the understanding of Christian faith. To Metz, the memoria passionis, mortis et resurrectionis Jesu Christi is the paradigmatic dangerous memory. This means that the suffering and unfulfilled hopes in human history are related to the Christian hope manifested in the memory of Jesus Christ, a hope that all are humans called to be subjects. As Metz admits, his understanding of dangerous memory strongly focuses on suffering or, in Christological terminology, on the Cross. For Metz, a belief in resurrection appears to be exclusively manifested in subjects who turn in solidarity to victims and the dead. In contrast to Metz, my own understanding of dangerous memory as elaborated in this study is dangerous because it fragmentarily anticipates the resurrection of those who have died because of an act of injustice. This understanding of resurrection is not only a cognitive principle or abstract part of the Christian credo but also relates to an experience and practices in the present. As shown in this study, people, especially Black women, remember Marielle Franco in ways that create the impression that she is still present. These practices cannot bring Franco back to life, nor can they make the individual and universal resurrection of the dead at the end of time happen, which is part of the Christian credo and hope. But the collective experience of an anticipated resurrection of an individual like Franco is a sign of hope against all hope, even if it remains fragmentary.

Finally, there is also an ecclesiological dimension to the results of this study. This study showed how practices toward resurrection could lead (at least temporarily) to the spontaneous formation of a community in the streets. The community thus created is highly fleeting. It is not built by individuals who join because they share the same interests. Instead, it represents a moment of communal gathering in which individuals better understand themselves and their social position. The body of this community is fragile. It is not a community that institutionalizes itself in order to stay. Rather, it is a community constituted around “open wounds.” It honors the dead and the void they have left behind. It bears witness to what remains beyond death, and it then resolves to carry on.

5.3 Going Beyond: Dangerous Memory, Decolonization, and the Role of Empirical Research

The results of this study are most relevant in contexts where decolonization processes are at stake. As shown earlier, decolonial theory aims to analyze and transform the legacy of European colonialism, which encompasses all areas of life in a globalized world. This includes not only the economic system and social and cultural structures but also academic knowledge production. Decolonial theory aims at a radical social transformation of colonial power relations. It hopes to accomplish this through practices that challenge colonial power structures.

The differentiated understanding of dangerous memory elaborated in this study shares many concerns with and owes insights to decolonial theory and practices. First, an interconnection can be observed with regard to its research object. In this study, I developed my understanding of dangerous memory through engagement with Marielle Franco’s story. Even though the term decolonization was hardly used in the interviews, it is possible to make several links between Franco’s work and decolonial approaches.Footnote 8 Both aim(ed) to construct social conditions that create new life possibilities for those on the margins and to free them from a colonial imaginary.

Second, the proximity of my approach to decolonial approaches is also manifested in my argumentation. The starting point for my further development of dangerous memory was my critique of Metz’s juxtaposition of subjects and nonsubjects, which appears to be dualistic. As I have argued at different points, Metz’s distinction risks making nonsubjects the “other” of the subject. De- and postcolonial theories both emphasize that othering is not a harmless practice because it is prescriptive and depicts the other as inferior.Footnote 9 This study argued that Metz’s distinction between subjects and nonsubjects (or victims) runs the risk of making the latter inferior by denying their agency. As a consequence, nonsubjects or victims are considered as those who need the solidarity, support, and help of established subjects. This establishes a power relation that perpetuates old colonial patterns, according to which the (White, bourgeois, male) subject must help the (Black, poor, female) victim.

In contrast, the concept of a dangerous memory that promotes collective self-empowerment takes a different approach. It does not assume a (prescriptive) distinction between established and nonestablished subjects. Instead, it starts with the assumption of subjects’ fragility. This fragility was strongly manifested in Franco’s trajectory. She belonged to a group of people who do not represent the social hegemonic norm and are therefore at an increased risk of being exposed to violence. Her trajectory testifies to a long and complex process of subject formation and identity construction. Against this background, my understanding of dangerous memory recognizes that there are acts and situations of injustice that complicate or interrupt people’s processes of becoming subjects. However, my understanding of dangerous memory does not define these people in principle as victims but engages with their self-understanding. Furthermore, it not only refers to the memory of the suffering they have experienced but also considers the practices of resistance and decolonial resurgence with which these people have tried to overcome collective suffering, which is often an expression of colonial power structures, and what they have achieved in doing so.

In summary, the present study demonstrates that empirical research shows great potential for thinking further about dangerous memory in decolonial contexts. Empirical research provides methods to engage with the self-understanding of people who have been victimized and their practices of responding to suffering. Empirical research in systematic and political theology also forces researchers to question disciplinary self-understandings. This is because empirical research methods are not part of the traditional canon of methods in systematic or political theology, so they can help promote thinking and observing from an “outsider-within perspective.”Footnote 10 Concerning Metz, empirical research helps radicalize his concerns and decenter the aspects and perspectives in his approach that are Eurocentric. As seen in this study, Metz’s theological approach starts from an experience of being affected and interrupted by the enormous suffering in human history. Such suffering occurred and continues to occur not only in Europe but worldwide. Empirical research is a way to engage methodologically with such interruptive experiences and to make them the starting point for thinking anew about theological concepts.

Building on what has been said so far, one could think about further decolonizing the concept of dangerous memory by emphasizing and developing how it encourages occupying (political) spaces, a theme that repeatedly came up in this study.Footnote 11 One possibility would be to engage further with the Brazilian theologian Vítor Westhelle’s spatial, latitudinal, and liminal approach to eschatology. In his thoughtful but complex book on the topic, which would need further discussion,Footnote 12 Westhelle analyzes modern Western eschatologies and observes that they only reflect on time and history but never on space(s), borders, or limits. In his evaluation from a postcolonial perspective, silence about space(s) is characteristic of colonial discourse because talking about space(s) risks weakening the position of the colonizer who “dominates the territory” as it would outline the proper limits of that territory.Footnote 13 For this reason, Westhelle emphasizes the critical potential of theories about the production of social space for postcolonial liberatory eschatology in the wake of the so-called spatial turn.Footnote 14 Reading Metz through the lens of Westhelle’s approach, one must acknowledge that Metz attempts to create an awareness of the limits of time and history through his programmatic reference to apocalypticism.Footnote 15 However, his approach reflects the perspective of people who have already managed to establish themselves as subjects and are full members of society. By contrast, the situation of the Black women whose lives came into view in this study more strongly reflects the “outsider” position of those who have yet to gain access to fundamental rights and socially relevant spaces such as politics. Against this background, the memory of Franco could be further conceptualized and theorized as a decolonial dangerous memory that not only encourages people to occupy political spaces and to cross borders and limits but also teaches them how to do so.Footnote 16

5.4 Ending in the Open

In this study, it is difficult to come to a final point because the story of Marielle Franco continues beyond her death. On the one hand, this relates to the political resurrection I have described. Franco’s memory is alive and continues to inspire people in Brazil and around the world to stand up and fight for justice.

On the other hand, her story continues because despite the recent arrests in 2024 of the alleged masterminds of Franco’s murder, there are many questions that remain open. After the arrests of the hitmen in 2019,Footnote 17 the investigation stagnated. From what we know today, part of the stagnation might have been due to the fact that the ex-chief of the civil police was apparently also involved in the case and is said to have covered up for those who ordered the murder. Beyond this, it appears that there was also a more profound lack of political will to solve the case. This interpretation seems plausible because the recent advances in the investigation came only under Lula’s presidency, whose government has sent political signals since he came to power in 2023 that Franco has not been forgotten. This could be seen with the appointment of Franco’s sister, Anielle, as the minister for racial equality. Then, the new minister of justice and public security, Flávio Dino, declared solving the case a top priority of the federal police.Footnote 18 Just a few months later, in July 2023, a third suspect was arrested.Footnote 19 In January 2024, news spread that one of the alleged murderers had made a plea bargain with the federal police and given the names of those who had ordered the murder.Footnote 20 Ultimately, these developments led to the latest arrests in March 2024.

In the face of the still ongoing investigations and the challenges that the continuing expansion of militias pose for society and politics in Rio,Footnote 21 the last word about the memory of Marielle Franco cannot be written. Nevertheless, I hope that this work has provided some insights into the lives of the people carrying on her legacy as “seeds.” In the end, I see their efforts as an expression of love and a lasting feeling of indebtedness to Franco and many others who preceded them in opening up new paths to a future characterized by more justice and the inclusion of all people in a democratic society.