Suchergebnisse

The nationalist regime guarded the 1926 December 17 memory, and in the public space they presented only those memories that coincided with the formed discourse justifying the coup. Individual images of the coup, competing with and opposing the discourse, were pushed out of public discourse by means of censorship and condemnation of the author of unfavorable memories, through organizations loyal to and in favor of the regime. 1926 December 17 in the army was remembered with the help of images, in which the unity of the army and the President was actualized, the threat of the Bolsheviks and the transfer of power to A. Smetona were emphasized. The Union of Nationalists linked the legitimacy of the coup not only to the threat of the Bolsheviks, which remained an important highlight of the commemoration, but also to the opposition of the democratic period of the interwar Lithuania and the subsequent epoch after the coup. In the forties coup d'etat was legitimized by representing the government's achievements in foreign policy, education, social and cultural fields. The Lithuanian Christian Democratic Party favored the officers and the fact of the coup, therefore it contributed to the legitimacy of the coup. This attitude remained unchanged after the party found itself in opposition, although at that time moderate criticism of the nationalist regime had already begun.

The nationalist regime guarded the 1926 December 17 memory, and in the public space they presented only those memories that coincided with the formed discourse justifying the coup. Individual images of the coup, competing with and opposing the discourse, were pushed out of public discourse by means of censorship and condemnation of the author of unfavorable memories, through organizations loyal to and in favor of the regime. 1926 December 17 in the army was remembered with the help of images, in which the unity of the army and the President was actualized, the threat of the Bolsheviks and the transfer of power to A. Smetona were emphasized. The Union of Nationalists linked the legitimacy of the coup not only to the threat of the Bolsheviks, which remained an important highlight of the commemoration, but also to the opposition of the democratic period of the interwar Lithuania and the subsequent epoch after the coup. In the forties coup d'etat was legitimized by representing the government's achievements in foreign policy, education, social and cultural fields. The Lithuanian Christian Democratic Party favored the officers and the fact of the coup, therefore it contributed to the legitimacy of the coup. This attitude remained unchanged after the party found itself in opposition, although at that time moderate criticism of the nationalist regime had already begun.

The nationalist regime guarded the 1926 December 17 memory, and in the public space they presented only those memories that coincided with the formed discourse justifying the coup. Individual images of the coup, competing with and opposing the discourse, were pushed out of public discourse by means of censorship and condemnation of the author of unfavorable memories, through organizations loyal to and in favor of the regime. 1926 December 17 in the army was remembered with the help of images, in which the unity of the army and the President was actualized, the threat of the Bolsheviks and the transfer of power to A. Smetona were emphasized. The Union of Nationalists linked the legitimacy of the coup not only to the threat of the Bolsheviks, which remained an important highlight of the commemoration, but also to the opposition of the democratic period of the interwar Lithuania and the subsequent epoch after the coup. In the forties coup d'etat was legitimized by representing the government's achievements in foreign policy, education, social and cultural fields. The Lithuanian Christian Democratic Party favored the officers and the fact of the coup, therefore it contributed to the legitimacy of the coup. This attitude remained unchanged after the party found itself in opposition, although at that time moderate criticism of the nationalist regime had already begun.

In the European tradition, cultural memory of the castle is first of all stone castles, Lithuanian cultural memory -­ hill forts, stone castles, that disappeared long ago. Cultural memory of hill forts goes back to the 19th century. The way of cultural memory of stone castles was long and complicated: Lithuanians had to make a distinction which heritage is own and which is others', acknowlege that Polish built the most important castles, deal with memory games of the Soviet time. Changes in cultural memory are linked to changes of a political system. Cultural memory consolidates the nation and helps search for cultural identity. During the last 130 years hill forts have been and still are the most important landmark in Lithuanian cultural memory. Reconstructed heritage provides much information about modern society, cultural memory, ideologies of the past and present needs. It is more informative than an "authentic" object itself. When heritage, a silent and neutral witness of the past, undergoes restoration it is consciously or sub-­consciously replaces with what is acceptable for the, fulfils his expectations, restores his memory. The same has happened with castles. They have been made more Lithuanian like, important and decorative, older than they were just to be proud of. Cultural memory underlies the reconstructed object and the process of reconstruction.

In the European tradition, cultural memory of the castle is first of all stone castles, Lithuanian cultural memory -­ hill forts, stone castles, that disappeared long ago. Cultural memory of hill forts goes back to the 19th century. The way of cultural memory of stone castles was long and complicated: Lithuanians had to make a distinction which heritage is own and which is others', acknowlege that Polish built the most important castles, deal with memory games of the Soviet time. Changes in cultural memory are linked to changes of a political system. Cultural memory consolidates the nation and helps search for cultural identity. During the last 130 years hill forts have been and still are the most important landmark in Lithuanian cultural memory. Reconstructed heritage provides much information about modern society, cultural memory, ideologies of the past and present needs. It is more informative than an "authentic" object itself. When heritage, a silent and neutral witness of the past, undergoes restoration it is consciously or sub-­consciously replaces with what is acceptable for the, fulfils his expectations, restores his memory. The same has happened with castles. They have been made more Lithuanian like, important and decorative, older than they were just to be proud of. Cultural memory underlies the reconstructed object and the process of reconstruction.

In the European tradition, cultural memory of the castle is first of all stone castles, Lithuanian cultural memory -­ hill forts, stone castles, that disappeared long ago. Cultural memory of hill forts goes back to the 19th century. The way of cultural memory of stone castles was long and complicated: Lithuanians had to make a distinction which heritage is own and which is others', acknowlege that Polish built the most important castles, deal with memory games of the Soviet time. Changes in cultural memory are linked to changes of a political system. Cultural memory consolidates the nation and helps search for cultural identity. During the last 130 years hill forts have been and still are the most important landmark in Lithuanian cultural memory. Reconstructed heritage provides much information about modern society, cultural memory, ideologies of the past and present needs. It is more informative than an "authentic" object itself. When heritage, a silent and neutral witness of the past, undergoes restoration it is consciously or sub-­consciously replaces with what is acceptable for the, fulfils his expectations, restores his memory. The same has happened with castles. They have been made more Lithuanian like, important and decorative, older than they were just to be proud of. Cultural memory underlies the reconstructed object and the process of reconstruction.

In the European tradition, cultural memory of the castle is first of all stone castles, Lithuanian cultural memory -­ hill forts, stone castles, that disappeared long ago. Cultural memory of hill forts goes back to the 19th century. The way of cultural memory of stone castles was long and complicated: Lithuanians had to make a distinction which heritage is own and which is others', acknowlege that Polish built the most important castles, deal with memory games of the Soviet time. Changes in cultural memory are linked to changes of a political system. Cultural memory consolidates the nation and helps search for cultural identity. During the last 130 years hill forts have been and still are the most important landmark in Lithuanian cultural memory. Reconstructed heritage provides much information about modern society, cultural memory, ideologies of the past and present needs. It is more informative than an "authentic" object itself. When heritage, a silent and neutral witness of the past, undergoes restoration it is consciously or sub-­consciously replaces with what is acceptable for the, fulfils his expectations, restores his memory. The same has happened with castles. They have been made more Lithuanian like, important and decorative, older than they were just to be proud of. Cultural memory underlies the reconstructed object and the process of reconstruction.

The object of this master thesis – three museums of occupation in the Baltic states: Museum of occupations and freedom fights in Lithuania, Museum of occupation in Latvia, Museum of occupations and freedom in Estonia. The goal of the thesis – study how a museum works as an instrument of memory politics in the Baltic states on a specific case. Main tasks of the thesis: analysis of the narratives of museums' expositions, the web-sites of these museums, other information about their activities (history of creation, features of functioning, educational programs, etc.) and further comparative analysis of the narratives of the three museums. Methodologically, the study is a case study based on examples of applied work in the field of memory studies and representation of memory politics in museums. In the analysis of museum narratives, it was concluded that the museums of occupation in the Baltic states are the mediums of the history politics of their countries and are objectified by national discourses of memory politics. The common European trends of memory politics can be seen in museums rarely, it is usually included artificially into the body of the narrative: in particular, this concerns the representation of the Holocaust in the museum expositions. This master thesis can be useful to the researchers of memory politics, lecturers and students.

The object of this master thesis – three museums of occupation in the Baltic states: Museum of occupations and freedom fights in Lithuania, Museum of occupation in Latvia, Museum of occupations and freedom in Estonia. The goal of the thesis – study how a museum works as an instrument of memory politics in the Baltic states on a specific case. Main tasks of the thesis: analysis of the narratives of museums' expositions, the web-sites of these museums, other information about their activities (history of creation, features of functioning, educational programs, etc.) and further comparative analysis of the narratives of the three museums. Methodologically, the study is a case study based on examples of applied work in the field of memory studies and representation of memory politics in museums. In the analysis of museum narratives, it was concluded that the museums of occupation in the Baltic states are the mediums of the history politics of their countries and are objectified by national discourses of memory politics. The common European trends of memory politics can be seen in museums rarely, it is usually included artificially into the body of the narrative: in particular, this concerns the representation of the Holocaust in the museum expositions. This master thesis can be useful to the researchers of memory politics, lecturers and students.

The aim of the paper is to analyse various books about Lithuanian partisan commanders (J. Žemaitis, J.Vitkus-Kazimieraitis, V.Voveris-Žaibas, A.Ramanauskas-Vanagas, J.Lukša, etc.) as 'the grand narrative'. How is this narrative constructed? What is the relation between a person and the resistance movement? What knowledge do these texts reveal? The author makes an attempt to find answer to these questions. The research hypothesis: The 'grand narrative' about partisan commanders in resistance literature, cultural memory and narrative knowledge. The theoretical problem of the research is how to explore representation of the resistance movement as a discourse of (non)narrative knowledge and define 'visual knowledge'. The methodology of the study is based on Jean-François Lyotard's conception of 'the grand narrative', Barbara Harlow's notion of 'resistance literature' and Aleida Assmann's conception of memory. "Žuvusiųjų prezidentas" (2007) (President of Martyrs) by Nijolė Gaškaitė-Žemaitienė, "Pulkininkas Kazimieraitis: Pietų Lietuvos partizanų srities vado Juozo Vitkaus gyvenimas, veikla, šeimos likimas" (2001) (Colonel Kazimieraitis: Life, Activity, Family Story of Juozas Vitkus, Partisan Commander in Southern Lithuania) by Vytautas Vitkus, "Žalio velnio takais" (1995) (Following the Path of the Green Devil) by Stanislovas Abromavičius offer 'the grand narrative' and narrative knowledge. The former is constructed through biographical and military discourses, historical documents, reminiscences of fellowmen and comrades-in-arms. The mentioned texts are a historical evidence.

The aim of the paper is to analyse various books about Lithuanian partisan commanders (J. Žemaitis, J.Vitkus-Kazimieraitis, V.Voveris-Žaibas, A.Ramanauskas-Vanagas, J.Lukša, etc.) as 'the grand narrative'. How is this narrative constructed? What is the relation between a person and the resistance movement? What knowledge do these texts reveal? The author makes an attempt to find answer to these questions. The research hypothesis: The 'grand narrative' about partisan commanders in resistance literature, cultural memory and narrative knowledge. The theoretical problem of the research is how to explore representation of the resistance movement as a discourse of (non)narrative knowledge and define 'visual knowledge'. The methodology of the study is based on Jean-François Lyotard's conception of 'the grand narrative', Barbara Harlow's notion of 'resistance literature' and Aleida Assmann's conception of memory. "Žuvusiųjų prezidentas" (2007) (President of Martyrs) by Nijolė Gaškaitė-Žemaitienė, "Pulkininkas Kazimieraitis: Pietų Lietuvos partizanų srities vado Juozo Vitkaus gyvenimas, veikla, šeimos likimas" (2001) (Colonel Kazimieraitis: Life, Activity, Family Story of Juozas Vitkus, Partisan Commander in Southern Lithuania) by Vytautas Vitkus, "Žalio velnio takais" (1995) (Following the Path of the Green Devil) by Stanislovas Abromavičius offer 'the grand narrative' and narrative knowledge. The former is constructed through biographical and military discourses, historical documents, reminiscences of fellowmen and comrades-in-arms. The mentioned texts are a historical evidence.

In the military, patriotism and civil awareness is an integral part of military training and education provided not only through training programs but also through non-formal education, such as celebrations, important events, lectures, meetings with freedom fighters, educational trips and anniversaries of the state and armed forces. The sense of identity with a military unit, community and traditions is very important for strengthening patriotic feelings. Servicemen are united by a common service, uniform, unit name, flag, emblem, slogan, etc [.]

In the military, patriotism and civil awareness is an integral part of military training and education provided not only through training programs but also through non-formal education, such as celebrations, important events, lectures, meetings with freedom fighters, educational trips and anniversaries of the state and armed forces. The sense of identity with a military unit, community and traditions is very important for strengthening patriotic feelings. Servicemen are united by a common service, uniform, unit name, flag, emblem, slogan, etc [.]

In the military, patriotism and civil awareness is an integral part of military training and education provided not only through training programs but also through non-formal education, such as celebrations, important events, lectures, meetings with freedom fighters, educational trips and anniversaries of the state and armed forces. The sense of identity with a military unit, community and traditions is very important for strengthening patriotic feelings. Servicemen are united by a common service, uniform, unit name, flag, emblem, slogan, etc [.]

In the military, patriotism and civil awareness is an integral part of military training and education provided not only through training programs but also through non-formal education, such as celebrations, important events, lectures, meetings with freedom fighters, educational trips and anniversaries of the state and armed forces. The sense of identity with a military unit, community and traditions is very important for strengthening patriotic feelings. Servicemen are united by a common service, uniform, unit name, flag, emblem, slogan, etc [.]