THE PALETTE OF MEMORY SITES OF POLITICAL REPRESSIONS: MONUMENTS AND COUNTER-MONUMENTS
Keywords:
collective memory, political repressions, monument, counter-monument, memory sites, politics of memory, chronotope, Perm-36Abstract
The authors propose a typology of sites of memory of political repressions that took place in different periods of Russian history, which emerged under the influence of a set of historical, social and cultural factors. The purpose of the study is to trace the logic of the formation of specific types of monuments, including those existing in the form of the so-called counter-monuments, in the process of implementing the politics of memory and formulating ideas about the traumatic past. The authors used the chronotopic method of examining sites of memory in a number of regions of Russia, such as the memorial complex Perm-36, multiple sites of commemoration at the Bolshoy Solovetsky Island, places of memory at the Rybinsk water reservoir, the Butovo polygon, memorial objects in the Saratov region, and the Republic of Mordovia, architectural constructions in the Russian Far East, etc. Theoretically, the research is rooted in the concept of “memory sites” proposed by Pierre Nora and understood as a combination of material and spiritual elements of culture that carry a symbolic load associated with understanding the social past. The authors demonstrate the presence of several types of memorial sites. It turned out that in the Russian domain of memory about the political repressions there are no sites that meet the criteria of a traditional monument. Conditionally traditional monuments can be territorially localized (solitary or complex) or dispersed (standard or heterogeneous). The second type of monuments is defined as hybrid, including vernacular, alternative and palimpsest varieties. Vernacular monuments are determined by their agents of construction, while the alternative ones are associated with specific interpretations of the past and can be supplemented with new constructive elements in the course of existence, palimpsests imply the explicit or hidden presence of many symbolically loaded layers. Counter-monuments constitute a special type represented by walking, landscape, ecological, and disappearing monuments. They are characterized as performative and participatory. The presence of different types of monuments proves not so much the absence of a unified strategy of commemoration in Russian society, but rather the fact that multiple social groups participate in the process of commemoration, producing heterogeneous and polyphonic monuments.References
Богатова О.А., Митрофанова А.В., Рязанова С.В. Мордовский поселок как место и сообщество исторической памяти: коллективные нарративы и репрезентации // Финно-угорский мир. 2022. (В печати).
Митрофанова А.В., Рязанова С.В., Пляйс Я.А. Место как палимпсест событий и интерпретаций в политике памяти (на примере музея «Следственная тюрьма НКВД») // Изв. Тул. гос. ун-та. Гуманитарные науки. 2022. № 2. С. 3−16.
Нора П. Проблематика мест памяти // Франция-память. СПб.: Изд-во С.-Петерб. ун-та, 1999. С. 17−50.
Оже М. Не-места. Введение в антропологию гипермодерна. М.: НЛО, 2017. 136 c.
Хальбвакс М. Коллективная и историческая память [Электронный ресурс] // Неприкосновенный запас. 2005. № 2. URL: https://magazines.gorky.media/nz/2005/2/kollektivnaya-i-istoricheskaya-pamyat.html (дата обращения: 17.08.2022).
Хирш М. Поколение постпамяти. Письмо и визуальная культура после Холокоста. М.: Новое издательство, 2021. 428 с.
Bertens L.M.F. ‘Doing’ Memory: Performativity and Cultural Memory in Janet Cardiff and George Bures Miller’s Alter Bahnhof Video Walk // Holocaust Studies. 2020. Vol. 26, iss. 2. Р. 181−197.
Cresswell T. Place: a Short Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. 153 p.
Dembek M.M. Archaeological Fever: Situating Participatory Art in the Rubble of the Warsaw Ghetto // Holocaust Studies. 2020. Vol. 26, iss. 2. Р. 198−220.
Etkind A. Mapping Memory Events in the East European Space // East European Memory Studies E-Newsletter. 2010. No. 1. P. 4−5. URL: https://www.ukrainianstudies.org/aaus-list/1011/pdf00003.pdf (accessed: 08.08.2021).
Herscher A. Points of No Return: Cultural Heritage and Counter-Memory in Post-Yugoslavia // Curating Difficult Knowledge Violent Pasts in Public Places. Ed. by E. Lehrer, C.E. Milton, M.E. Patterson. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. Р. 147−160.
Krzyżanowska N. The Discourse of Counter-monuments: Semiotics of Material Commemoration in Contemporary Urban Spaces // Social Semiotics. 2016. Vol. 26, no. 5. Р. 465−485.
Perry R.E. The Holocaust is Present: Reenacting the Holocaust, Then and Now // Holocaust Studies. 2020. Vol. 26, iss. 2. Р. 152−180.
Popescu D. Introduction: Memory and Imagination in the Post-Witness Era // Revisiting Holocaust Representation in The Post-Witness Era. Ed. by D. Popescu, T. Schult. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. P. 1−10.
Preda C. “Living Statues” and Мonuments as “Performative Monument Events” in Post-Socialist South-Eastern Europe // Nationalities Papers. 2022. P. 1−19.
Schult T. Christoph Mayer’s The Invisible Camp − Audio Walk Gusen // Liminalities: A Journal of Performance Studies. 2020. Vol. 16, no. 1. P. 1−40.
Schult T. Citizens as walking memorials: Rethinking the monument genre in the twenty-first century // Monument Culture: International Perspectives on the Future of Monuments in a Changing World. Ed by Macaluso L. Lanham et al.: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2019, pp. 205-218.
Stevens Q., Franck K.A., Fazakerley R. Countermonuments: the Anti-Monumental and the Dialogic // The Journal of Architecture. 2018. Vol. 23, no. 5. Р. 718−739.
Whigham K. Reading the Traces: Embodied Engagement with the Past at Three Former Nazi Concentration Camps // Holocaust Studies. 2020. Vol. 26, iss. 2. Р. 221−240.
Young J.E. The Counter-Monument: Memory against Itself in Germany Today // Critical Inquiry. 1992. Vol. 18, no. 2. Р. 267−296.
References
Augé, M. (2017), Ne-mesta. Vvedenie v antropologiyu gipermoderna [Non-places. Introduction to an anthropol-ogy of supermodernity], NLO, Мoscow, Russia, 136 p.
Bertens, L.M.F. (2020), “‘Doing’ memory: performativity and cultural memory in Janet Cardiff and George Bures Miller’s Alter Bahnhof Video Walk”, Holocaust Studies, vol. 26, issue 2, pp. 181–197.
Bogatova, О., Mitrofanova, А. & S. Riazanova (2022), “Mordovian settlement as a site and community of his-torical memory: collective narratives and representations”, Finno-ugorskiy mir (in print).
Cresswell, T. (2004), Place: A short introduction, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK, 153 p.
Dembek, M.M. (2020), “Archaeological fever: situating participatory art in the rubble of the Warsaw ghetto”, Holocaust Studies, Vol. 26, issue 2, pp. 198–220.
Etkind, A. (2010), “Mapping memory events in the East European space”, East European Memory Studies E-Newsletter, № 1. pp. 4–5, available at: https://www.ukrainianstudies.org/aaus-list/1011/pdf00003.pdf45xzd (accessed 27.09.2022).
Halbwachs, М. (2005), “Collective and historical memory”, Neprikosnovennyy zapas, № 2, available at: https://magazines.gorky.media/nz/2005/2/kollektivnaya-i-istoricheskaya-pamyat.html (accessed 27.09.2022).
Herscher, A. (2014), “Points of no return: cultural heritage and counter-memory in post-Yugoslavia”, in Lehrer, E., Milton, C. E. & M.E. Patterson (eds.), Curating Difficult Knowledge Violent Pasts in Public Places, Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK, рр. 147–160.
Hirsch, M. (2021), Pokolenie postpamyati. Pismo i vizualnaya kultura posle Kholokosta [The generation of postmemory: writing and visual culture after the Holocaust], Novoe izdatelstvo, Мoscow, Russia, 428 p.
Krzyżanowska, N. (2016), “The discourse of counter-monuments: semiotics of material commemoration in contemporary urban spaces”, Social Semiotics, vol. 26, № 5, pp. 465–485.
Mitrofanova, А., Riazanova, S. & Ya. Plyais (2022), “Place as a palimpsest of events and interpretations in memory politics”, Izvestia Tulskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Gumanitarnye nauki, № 2, pp. 3–16.
Nora, P. (1999), “The problematics of sites of memory”, in Frantsia-pamyat [France-memory], Izdatelstvo SPbGU, St. Petersburg, Russia, pp. 17–50.
Perry, R.E. (2020), “The Holocaust is present: reenacting the Holocaust, then and now”, Holocaust Studies, Vol. 26, issue 2, pp. 152–180.
Popescu, D. (2015), “Introduction: memory and imagination in the post-witness era”, in Popescu, D. & T. Schult (eds.), Revisiting Holocaust representation in the post-witness era, Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK, pp. 1–10.
Preda, C. (2022), “’Living statues’ and monuments as ‘performative monument events’ in post-socialist South-Eastern Europe», Nationalities Papers, pp. 1–19, available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/
nationalities-papers/article/abs/living-statues-and-nonuments-as-performative-monument-events-in-postsocialist-southeastern-europe/92AE56BCBF77DC08314886227E93F91A (accessed 27.09.2022).
Schult, T. (2019), “Citizens as walking memorials: rethinking the monument genre in the twenty-first century”, in Macaluso, L. (ed.), Monument culture: international perspectives on the future of monuments in a changing world, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Lanham et al., USA, pp. 205–218.
Schult, T. (2020), “Christoph Mayer’s The Invisible Camp – Audio Walk Gusen», Liminalities: A Journal of Performance Studies, vol. 16, № 1, pp. 1–40.
Stevens, Q., Franck, K.A. & R. Fazakerley (2018), “Countermonuments: the anti-monumental and the dialogic”, The Journal of Architecture, vol. 23, № 5, pp. 718–739.
Whigham, K. (2020), “Reading the traces: embodied engagement with the past at three former Nazi concentra-tion camps”, Holocaust Studies, vol. 26, issue 2, pp. 221–240.
Young, J. E. (1992), “The Counter-Monument: Memory against Itself in Germany Today”, Critical Inquiry, vol. 18, № 2, pp. 267–296.
