Suchergebnisse

Research into the artistic culture of Lithuania during the time of the first Soviet occupation is interesting in itself. At the same time, it helps one to grasp the particularities that art and politics had in common throughout Western culture in the 20th century. The topic is also relevant in terms of other research regarding Lithuanian history. Without the period 1940-1941, the mosaic of the mid-20th century remains incomplete. The first Soviet occupation of Lithuania left a distinctive mark on the life of the country, and it is impossible to comprehensively analyse the much longer period of the second Soviet occupation without evaluating the cultural consequences of the former. An overview of Lithuanian art in 1940-1941 could allow one to say that both the modernists, and the bards of patriotism collaborated with the occupying Soviet authorities. Both chose a path of compromise. The first gave up their artistic ideals and professional ambitions, and the second resolved to reform their historical memory and civic consciousness for the sake of a career. All the same, it must be acknowledged that with the arrival of the second Soviet occupation, the majority of the most talented and ambitious Lithuanian artists chose the fate of an emigrant. In Soviet Lithuania, the work of Jonynas, Kašuba and Petravičius was seen as an example of free art, as a source of the vitality of the nation's culture feeding those who were suffering oppression.

Research into the artistic culture of Lithuania during the time of the first Soviet occupation is interesting in itself. At the same time, it helps one to grasp the particularities that art and politics had in common throughout Western culture in the 20th century. The topic is also relevant in terms of other research regarding Lithuanian history. Without the period 1940-1941, the mosaic of the mid-20th century remains incomplete. The first Soviet occupation of Lithuania left a distinctive mark on the life of the country, and it is impossible to comprehensively analyse the much longer period of the second Soviet occupation without evaluating the cultural consequences of the former. An overview of Lithuanian art in 1940-1941 could allow one to say that both the modernists, and the bards of patriotism collaborated with the occupying Soviet authorities. Both chose a path of compromise. The first gave up their artistic ideals and professional ambitions, and the second resolved to reform their historical memory and civic consciousness for the sake of a career. All the same, it must be acknowledged that with the arrival of the second Soviet occupation, the majority of the most talented and ambitious Lithuanian artists chose the fate of an emigrant. In Soviet Lithuania, the work of Jonynas, Kašuba and Petravičius was seen as an example of free art, as a source of the vitality of the nation's culture feeding those who were suffering oppression.

Research into the artistic culture of Lithuania during the time of the first Soviet occupation is interesting in itself. At the same time, it helps one to grasp the particularities that art and politics had in common throughout Western culture in the 20th century. The topic is also relevant in terms of other research regarding Lithuanian history. Without the period 1940-1941, the mosaic of the mid-20th century remains incomplete. The first Soviet occupation of Lithuania left a distinctive mark on the life of the country, and it is impossible to comprehensively analyse the much longer period of the second Soviet occupation without evaluating the cultural consequences of the former. An overview of Lithuanian art in 1940-1941 could allow one to say that both the modernists, and the bards of patriotism collaborated with the occupying Soviet authorities. Both chose a path of compromise. The first gave up their artistic ideals and professional ambitions, and the second resolved to reform their historical memory and civic consciousness for the sake of a career. All the same, it must be acknowledged that with the arrival of the second Soviet occupation, the majority of the most talented and ambitious Lithuanian artists chose the fate of an emigrant. In Soviet Lithuania, the work of Jonynas, Kašuba and Petravičius was seen as an example of free art, as a source of the vitality of the nation's culture feeding those who were suffering oppression.

Research into the artistic culture of Lithuania during the time of the first Soviet occupation is interesting in itself. At the same time, it helps one to grasp the particularities that art and politics had in common throughout Western culture in the 20th century. The topic is also relevant in terms of other research regarding Lithuanian history. Without the period 1940-1941, the mosaic of the mid-20th century remains incomplete. The first Soviet occupation of Lithuania left a distinctive mark on the life of the country, and it is impossible to comprehensively analyse the much longer period of the second Soviet occupation without evaluating the cultural consequences of the former. An overview of Lithuanian art in 1940-1941 could allow one to say that both the modernists, and the bards of patriotism collaborated with the occupying Soviet authorities. Both chose a path of compromise. The first gave up their artistic ideals and professional ambitions, and the second resolved to reform their historical memory and civic consciousness for the sake of a career. All the same, it must be acknowledged that with the arrival of the second Soviet occupation, the majority of the most talented and ambitious Lithuanian artists chose the fate of an emigrant. In Soviet Lithuania, the work of Jonynas, Kašuba and Petravičius was seen as an example of free art, as a source of the vitality of the nation's culture feeding those who were suffering oppression.

In the theoretical literature on tolerance a distinction is proposed between coexistence and respect tolerance. In three studies with four national samples of Dutch majority members, we demonstrate that these two forms of tolerance can be distinguished empirically in relation to different immigrant target groups. The findings of all studies further show that the more principled respect tolerance was negatively associated with prejudice towards immigrants, and positively associated with the acceptance of concrete minority practices, above and beyond prejudice. However, the positive association between respect tolerance and acceptance of practices was weaker for people who were more strongly concerned about the continuity of their national cultural identity. Overall, the more pragmatic coexistence tolerance was found to have no independent association with prejudicial feelings and with the acceptance of minority practices. The findings indicate that stimulating respect tolerance might be particularly helpful for improving intergroup relations in culturally diverse societies.

Along with a number of other countries, particularly those in southern Europe, Italy has only been a receiving country for international immigration for about 25 years. Italy itself has a long tradition of emigration and it is estimated that there are currently about 60 million Italian emigrants all over the world. In Italian Law, the concept of "immigrant" first appeared as recently as 1986. Previously there was only the general juridical type of the "foreigner", whose residence within the national boundaries was governed by public security law. In the Italian public discourse, up to the end of the 1980s, "immigrants" were internal migrants from less developed southern regions ("Mezzogiorno") who moved towards the more dynamic areas of Northern Italy, a huge phenomenon throughout the twentieth century, and particularly intense in the "golden period" of the industrial development (from the 1950s and the first half of the 1970s): initially migration was mainly towards the so called "industrial triangle" (Milan-Turin-Genoa), afterwards it was also towards the central and north-eastern regions, characterized by the growth of small companies and industrial districts. Based on a historical analysis, we know that today's aversions and oppositions towards foreign immigrants were directed to migrants from the south of Italy in the past. However, in those times immigration was not a central issue in the political debate, essentially because the internal migrants were citizens and voters and they might be employed as civil servants. The phenomenon of international migration has therefore developed in a national context characterized by certain aspects that should be taken into account throughout the analysis.