Suchergebnisse

Giuseppina Martinuzzi (Labin, 1844. – Labin, 1925.), labinska pedagoginja, učiteljica, pjesnikinja, društvena i politička djelatnica, u oporuci napisanoj 1897. godine izrazila je želju da svoju ostavštinu, sastavljenu od mnoštva knjiga, novina, mapa, bilježnica i rukopisa objedinjenih u Knjižnicu Giovanni Antonia Martinuzzi, nakon smrti ostavi rodnom gradu Labinu. Nakon Giuseppinine je smrti 1925. godine njenoj želji udovoljeno te je Knjižnica ostala u Labinu, ali krajem Drugoga svjetskog rata, zbog neadekvatnih uvjeta čuvanja, dio je ostavštine premješten u današnju Sveučilišnu knjižnicu u Rijeci, a dio je ostao u Labinu. Godine 1961. labinski je dio pohranjen u Narodnom muzeju Labin i tu je ostao do današnjega dana. Na inicijativu Narodnoga muzeja Labin i Grada Labina te uz pristanak Sveučilišne knjižnice u Rijeci 2018. godine Ministarstvu kulture RH upućen je zahtjev za povratom riječkoga dijela Giuseppinine ostavštine u Labin, čemu je udovoljeno u srpnju 2019. godine. Građa iz Sveučilišne knjižnice u Rijeci, sastavljena od mapa različitih sadržaja, prenesena je u Narodni muzej Labin u studenom 2019. godine te je time Knjižnica Giovanni Antonia Martinuzzi ponovno dobila svoj izvorni oblik i postala cjelina kakvom ju je formirala Giuseppina Martinuzzi. ; Giuseppina Martinuzzi (Labin, 1844 – Labin, 1925), Labin-born pedagogue, schoolteacher, poet, social and political worker, expressed in her will in 1897 a desire to leave her material legacy, composed of a large number of books, newspapers, maps, notebooks and manuscripts all forming the Giovanni Antonia Martinuzzi Library, to her hometown of Labin. After Giuseppina's death in 1925, her wish was granted and the library remained in Labin, but at the end of World War II, due to inadequate storage conditions, part of the library was moved to today's University Library in Rijeka, while the other part remained in Labin. In 1961, the Labin holdings were moved to the Labin National Museum and have remained there to this day. At the initiative of the National Museum of Labin and the City of Labin and with the consent of the University Library in Rijeka, a request was sent to the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Croatia in 2018 to return the Rijeka portion of Giuseppina's library to Labin, which was granted in July 2019. The material from the University Library in Rijeka, composed of folders holding various contents, was transferred to the National Museum of Labin in November 2019, so that the Giovanni Antonia Martinuzzi Library regained its original form and became a whole as originally envisioned by Giuseppina Martinuzzi. ; Giuseppina Martinuzzi (Albona, 1844 – Albona, 1925.), pedagoga, maestra, poetessa, operatrice sociale e politica, con volontà testamentaria del 1897 espresse il desiderio che dopo la sua morte il suo lascito, composto da molti libri, giornali, mappe, quaderni e manoscritti raccolti nella Biblioteca Giovanni Antonia Martinuzzi, venisse consegnato alla sua città natia. In effetti dopo la morte di Giuseppina, avvenuta nel 1925, il suo desiderio fu esaudito e la sua Biblioteca fu collocata ad Albona. Dopo la seconda guerra mondiale, a causa delle inadeguate condizioni di conservazione, una parte del suo lascito fu trasferita nell'odierna Biblioteca universitaria di Fiume, mentre l'altra rimase ad Albona. Nel 1961 la parte rimasta ad Albona fu consegnata al Museo popolare di Albona, dove tuttora si trova. Su iniziativa del menzionato Museo nonché della Città di Albona e con il benestare della Biblioteca universitaria di Fiume nel 2018 fu inoltrata al Ministero alla cultura della Repubblica di Croazia la richiesta di restituzione ad Albona della parte fiumana del lascito di Giuseppina, e questa fu accolta nel luglio 2019. La documentazione custodita presso la Biblioteca universitaria di Fiume, composta da mappe di contenuti diversi, fu trasportata al Museo popolare di Albona nel novembre 2019 e in tal modo la Biblioteca Giovanni Antonia Martinuzzi acquistò nuovamente la sua forma originaria e ridiventò quell'insieme che Giuseppina Martinuzzi aveva creato.

Ministarstvo kulture 2013. godine provodi istraživanje o stanju u medijima, a 2015. godine započinje raspravu o medijskoj politici te donosi deset dokumenata koji služe kao temelj za medijske politike u RH od 2015. do 2020. godine. Nemoguće je tvrditi da je samo ekonomska kriza uzrok krize u medijima, iako postoji sveza jer je pad broja oglasa u medijima za sobom donio i pad broja zaposlenih. Manji broj novinara u redakcijama utjecao je na pad kvalitete novinskih uradaka, a ekspanzija društvenih medija te jačanje portala na internetu, usmjerili su novinarstvo u drugom smjeru. Erozija demokratske funkcije medija termin je s kojim se danas susrećemo kada govorimo u "krizi" ili stanju u medijima. Iako je prethodno održano nekoliko tematskih prosvjeda Hrvatskoga novinarskog društva, u ožujku 2019. godine organiziran je opći prosvjed nazvan Oteli ste medije, novinarstvo ne damo. Prosvjed je imao za cilj uručiti Vladi osam zahtjeva koji se odnose na sudske tuže, pritiske politike i oglašivača, prijetnje novinarima, ugrožavanje profesionalnih standarda, nepoštivanje medijskih zakona kao te izostanak ozbiljne medijske politike. Iako rasprava o medijskoj politici završava u 2020. godine, sami novinari navode izostanak adekvatne strategije. S obzirom na završetak petogodišnjega razdoblja rasprave o medijskoj politici, u radu će se prikazati rekapitulacija protekloga razdoblja. Je li sve navedeno uzrok daljnje krize u medijima te erozije funkcije medija, autori će nastojati utvrditi u radu. Za potrebe rada provedena je anketa među novinarima dostupnim na društvenoj mreži LinkedIn. Također će se napraviti komparacija s početnim stanjem rasprave o medijskoj politici i dobivenih rezultate. Slijedom slogana prosvjeda, pokušat će se dati odgovor tko je oteo medije te kakva je ocjena novinarstva u Hrvatskoj. ; The Ministry of Culture in 2013 conducts research on the media situation, and in 2015 begins discussions on media policy and adopts ten documents that serve as the basis for media policies in the Republic of Croatia in the period 2015 to 2020. It is impossible to argue that only economic crisis is the cause of the crisis in the media, although there is a link because the decrease in the number of advertisements in the media has also led to a decrease in the number of employees. Fewer journalists in newsrooms have affected the decline in the quality of news articles, and the expansion of social media and the strengthening of online portals have directed journalism in another direction. Erosion of the democratic function of the media is a term that we come across today when we speak in a "crisis" or situation in the media. Although several thematic protests have been held by the Croatian Journalist Society, a general protest called "You kidnapped the media, we don't give journalism" was organized in March 2019. The protest was intended to deliver to the Government of eight claims relating to the largest number of lawsuits, political PR and prints and advertisers' pressures, threats against journalists, jeopardizing the professional rights and standards, failure to comply with media laws and the lack of serious media policy. Although the debate on media policy, in the framework of the start, ending in 2020. Godin e journalists themselves referred to the lack of adequate strategies. Given the end of the five-year media policy debate period, a recapitulation of the past period will be made through the paper. Is all of the above a cause of further media crisis and erosion of media function, the authors will endeavour to determine through the work. For the paper, a survey was conducted among journalists available through the LinkedIn social network. Equally, a comparison will be made with the initial state of the media policy debate and the results obtained will be compared. Following the slogan of the protest, an attempt will be made to answer who abducted the media and what is the rating of journalism in Croatia.

U tekstu se, temeljem fotografija od kojih se neke objavljuju prvi put, rekonstruira izvorni izgled secesijske zgrade Hrvatskog doma u Splitu kao zrelog arhitektonskog djela Kamila Tončića. Donosi se i kronološki pregled uloge Hrvatskog doma u društvenoj povijesti grada Splita koji pridonosi spomeničkoj vrijednosti zgrade. ; The idea of building a "Croatian House", in which the Split culture, art and sporting associations connected to National Party would be located Narodna čitaonica (People's Reading Room), Slavjanski napredak (Slav Progress), Narodna glazba (National Music), the Volunteer Fire-Fighters, Muzikalno društvo "Zvonimir" (the Zvonimir Musical Association) and Hrvatski sokol (the Croatian Hawk – sporting association) came upon the scene in 1896. At the turn of the century artists who elevated the cultural and artistic life of Split and took it out of the provincial context, placing it shoulder to shoulder with European contemporaries, came together in the National party circles. The design of the building made in the spirit of Art Nouveau architecture by Kamilo Tončić in 1906 was bold and avant-garde for a centre in which up to then Historicist or revival architecture had prevailed; in consequence it aroused diverse public reactions. But the Croatian House was nevertheless built according to the Tončić design, and opened in 1908. It had an important role in the musical life of Split as a gathering place for musicians, as a stage and concert venue, all the way up to World War I. The most important event in the first year of the existence of the Croatian House was the organisation of the First Dalmatian Art Exhibition at which the foundation of the Medulić Croatian Art Association was mooted, and the idea for founding the Gallery of Fine Art was also put forward. In the changed political circumstances after World War I, the House lost its pre-war role as an essential factor in the creation of the musical and artistic life of the city. When the Sokol association of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was formed in 1929, all activities in the Sokol House unfolded under the aegis of Sokol (Hawk), for it was a state organisation; the art and cultural events did not rise above the average amateur level. The most important event in the working of the amateur sections of Sokol was the foundation of the puppet theatre in 1933, on the foundations of which the Marionette Theatre still in operation today was built in 1945. After WWII, the onetime Croatian and later Sokol House was renamed Youth House, while along with the Split City Puppet Theatre, various sporting organisations were assigned the premises of the House. The house was remodelled and extended in 1930 and 1939, and thoroughly remodelled in 1942, when all the decorations on the facade and in the interior of the grand hall were destroyed in order to bring out the monumental aspects of the house in the spirit of fascist architecture. The concept of the building is a simple T-shaped ground floor. In the northern part of the site there is a narrow four-storey building with an attic along the long side placed parallel to the street in which the premises of the societies were located, while at the end of the plot, perpendicularly to it, is a two-storey building with a grand hall on the upstairs. With logical grouping of features and a functional arrangement, the spatial constraints of the plot were made use of to the best extent and complemented with an extensive programme that was supposed to meet the needs of the associations so that all of them should have their own individual quarters while making use in common of the grand hall meant for municipal events, joint events and Sokol members' athletic exercises. Although the principal facade is symmetrical with the main entrance in the middle, the courtyard part of the house with the hall is not built on its vertical axis, but shifted to the west. At the joint of the street and courtyard part of the house there are the grand stairs. The non-formalist asymmetrical disposition of volumes between the courtyard wing of the Croatian House and the neighbouring house left room for a large exercise space outdoors. Only a photograph of the drawing of the main facade remains of the design of the Croatian House. By rectification of the historical photographs, the drawing of the built facade was reconstructed, and a comparison of the project and the original appearance of the original facade shows that the design really was built, in basic idea and composition, and that alterations were made only to some of the decorative features. The lobby of the auxiliary eastern entrance and the threeflight stone staircase are kept in original form. The rectification of the previously unknown photographs of the interior of the hall has allowed the reconstruction of the original volume, position and repertoire of decoration. The space of the hall that we know of today in denuded form consists of two parts: the grand hall with the stage and the backstage areas. Abstract, linear and almost flat details, floral motifs, female heads with flowers and leaves in their hair and masks – common in the Art Nouveau idiom – were applied in the iconographic programme. In the choice of construction material and the manner of construction Tončić opted for the classic solid masonry construction of roughly worked stone blocks in lime mortar, smoothly rendered. The between-floor constructions were of wood, as was that of the gable roof. The flights of stairs with stone steps were leaned on iron I-section girders clad in rendered moulding. The pilasters alongside the central entrance, the pillars on the facade with an emphasised cornice and the attic are made of concrete, but they are only decorative and not structural elements of the building. The building of the Croatian House was adapted to the possibilities (i.e. the constraints) of the site and the function, that is, the needs of its users, in the allocation of the fundamental volumes and in the organisation of space. The interior decoration was also adjusted to the contents (the modestly decorated staircase area as against the luxuriant decoration of the grand hall), and a clearly, symmetrically and gracefully designed facade enhanced with Art Nouveau decorations and the characteristic Tončić details reveal its almost classical composition. The representative Art Nouveau building of the Croatian House, designed in the spirit of the Wagner school and its earlier works, is the original work of a mature architect in whom along with an echo of the classicist tradition the architecture of the modern age can also be sensed. But it is not just its Art Nouveau idiom that imparts a particular heritage value to the Croatian House, but also the events and personalities linked with it, whose importance in the history of the city of Split and Croatian art surmounts that of the building itself.