The sociology of memory from the rich legacy of Maurice Halbwachs (1925, 1992) to recent interdisciplinary research has long been enveloped in the dichotomous tension between collective and individual memory. This was most clearly expressed, well over a decade ago, in an influential assertion of two distinct cultures of memory perched at the very center of Halbwachs’ mnemonic theorizing: these are the aggregation of individual “collected memories,” on the one hand, and powerful shifting representations, or “collective memories,” on the other (Olick 1999). This dualism, however, requires closer scrutiny from a relational standpoint and within a late modern global context: relational because hybrid-like cultural associations often manifest themselves in individualized forms of action-digital and physical in their consequences-based on subjective knowledge about the broader sense of their global meanings; global because the international context of spatial compression and de-compression creates new horizontal-as opposed to vertical-opportunities for collective and individual reflexivity, distinguished by “shareable” (existing across generational divides, culture, and space) mnemonic values, which are often manifested in the strained composites of collective memories.