介于恢复性的怀旧和乌托邦幽灵博物馆之间。后苏联文化空间中的怀旧实践

Q1 Arts and Humanities Revista Transilvania Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.51391/trva.2022.11-12.17
Alina Iorga
{"title":"介于恢复性的怀旧和乌托邦幽灵博物馆之间。后苏联文化空间中的怀旧实践","authors":"Alina Iorga","doi":"10.51391/trva.2022.11-12.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After the collapse of the Soviet Union, particularly during the hard transition of the 90s, the highly polarized Russian society revealed two main forms of remembering and coping with recent past. This past was either idealized as a time of imperial glory, national pride, and relative welfare, even if it also included periods of anomie (the late Stalin era) or stagnation (the Brejnev era), either treated as a period of significant traumas that necessitated persistent recognition and working through. As for the official memory regimes, if the first post-Soviet decade was dominated by the totalitarian anticommunist (and antinostalgic) paradigm, the 2000s brought a radical turn, with the rise of victimhood nationalism and “redemptive” authoritarianism of the Putin era. The new mnemonic regime is shaped by an official, “patriotic” restorative nostalgia that is also placed in the centre of the presidential cultural programe designed to legitimize the authoritarian system and to support the restoration of a great, mythical Russia. Against this background, new forms of counter-memory and counter-nostalgia began to manifest within both the social and cultural field. One of the most remarkable exemples is offered within the “new realities” created by the young photographer Danila Tkachenko, who’s compositions marked by a “second-hand nostalgia” challenge both the Soviet utopia and its official nostalgic-populist recostructions. By means of a special nostalgic technique based on reframing the remnants and the “trukhliashechkas” of the Soviet past – (re)interpreted as the symbols of “the perfect technocratic future that never came” –, the young artist also deconstruct the imagined “sovietness” embedded in the cultural-political products shaped by the statist patriotic nostalgia. His representations of the post-Soviet landscape are those of “a ghost of utopia”, a land of ruins, of abandoned cities, of ecological disasters, and of millions unburied deads of the GULAG.","PeriodicalId":39326,"journal":{"name":"Revista Transilvania","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Între nostalgia restauratoare şi muzeul fantomelor utopiei. Practici nostalgice în spaţiul cultural (post)sovietic\",\"authors\":\"Alina Iorga\",\"doi\":\"10.51391/trva.2022.11-12.17\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"After the collapse of the Soviet Union, particularly during the hard transition of the 90s, the highly polarized Russian society revealed two main forms of remembering and coping with recent past. This past was either idealized as a time of imperial glory, national pride, and relative welfare, even if it also included periods of anomie (the late Stalin era) or stagnation (the Brejnev era), either treated as a period of significant traumas that necessitated persistent recognition and working through. As for the official memory regimes, if the first post-Soviet decade was dominated by the totalitarian anticommunist (and antinostalgic) paradigm, the 2000s brought a radical turn, with the rise of victimhood nationalism and “redemptive” authoritarianism of the Putin era. The new mnemonic regime is shaped by an official, “patriotic” restorative nostalgia that is also placed in the centre of the presidential cultural programe designed to legitimize the authoritarian system and to support the restoration of a great, mythical Russia. Against this background, new forms of counter-memory and counter-nostalgia began to manifest within both the social and cultural field. One of the most remarkable exemples is offered within the “new realities” created by the young photographer Danila Tkachenko, who’s compositions marked by a “second-hand nostalgia” challenge both the Soviet utopia and its official nostalgic-populist recostructions. By means of a special nostalgic technique based on reframing the remnants and the “trukhliashechkas” of the Soviet past – (re)interpreted as the symbols of “the perfect technocratic future that never came” –, the young artist also deconstruct the imagined “sovietness” embedded in the cultural-political products shaped by the statist patriotic nostalgia. His representations of the post-Soviet landscape are those of “a ghost of utopia”, a land of ruins, of abandoned cities, of ecological disasters, and of millions unburied deads of the GULAG.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Transilvania\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Transilvania\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51391/trva.2022.11-12.17\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Transilvania","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51391/trva.2022.11-12.17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

苏联解体后,特别是在90年代的艰难过渡时期,高度两极化的俄罗斯社会显示出两种主要的记忆和应对最近的过去的形式。这段历史要么被理想化为帝国荣耀、民族自豪感和相对福利的时代,即使它也包括社会反常时期(斯大林晚期时代)或停滞时期(勃列涅夫时代),要么被视为需要持续认识和努力的重大创伤时期。至于官方记忆体制,如果说后苏联时代的第一个十年是由极权主义的反共(和反共产主义)范式主导的,那么本世纪头十年则是一个激进的转变,受害者民族主义和普京时代的“救赎”威权主义兴起。新的记忆法体制由一种官方的、“爱国的”恢复性怀旧所塑造,这种怀旧也被置于总统文化计划的中心,旨在使专制制度合法化,并支持恢复一个伟大的、神话般的俄罗斯。在这种背景下,反记忆和反怀旧的新形式开始在社会和文化领域显现出来。年轻摄影师达尼拉·特卡琴科(Danila Tkachenko)创作的“新现实”就是一个最引人注目的例子,她的作品以“二手怀旧”为特征,既挑战了苏联乌托邦,也挑战了官方的怀旧民粹主义重建。通过一种特殊的怀旧技术,基于重构苏联过去的残余物和“trukhliashechkas”(被重新诠释为“从未到来的完美技术官僚未来”的象征),这位年轻的艺术家还解构了由国家主义爱国怀旧塑造的文化政治产品中嵌入的想象中的“苏维埃性”。他对后苏联时代景观的描述是“乌托邦的幽灵”,一片废墟之地,被遗弃的城市,生态灾难,以及数百万未被埋葬的古拉格死者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Între nostalgia restauratoare şi muzeul fantomelor utopiei. Practici nostalgice în spaţiul cultural (post)sovietic
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, particularly during the hard transition of the 90s, the highly polarized Russian society revealed two main forms of remembering and coping with recent past. This past was either idealized as a time of imperial glory, national pride, and relative welfare, even if it also included periods of anomie (the late Stalin era) or stagnation (the Brejnev era), either treated as a period of significant traumas that necessitated persistent recognition and working through. As for the official memory regimes, if the first post-Soviet decade was dominated by the totalitarian anticommunist (and antinostalgic) paradigm, the 2000s brought a radical turn, with the rise of victimhood nationalism and “redemptive” authoritarianism of the Putin era. The new mnemonic regime is shaped by an official, “patriotic” restorative nostalgia that is also placed in the centre of the presidential cultural programe designed to legitimize the authoritarian system and to support the restoration of a great, mythical Russia. Against this background, new forms of counter-memory and counter-nostalgia began to manifest within both the social and cultural field. One of the most remarkable exemples is offered within the “new realities” created by the young photographer Danila Tkachenko, who’s compositions marked by a “second-hand nostalgia” challenge both the Soviet utopia and its official nostalgic-populist recostructions. By means of a special nostalgic technique based on reframing the remnants and the “trukhliashechkas” of the Soviet past – (re)interpreted as the symbols of “the perfect technocratic future that never came” –, the young artist also deconstruct the imagined “sovietness” embedded in the cultural-political products shaped by the statist patriotic nostalgia. His representations of the post-Soviet landscape are those of “a ghost of utopia”, a land of ruins, of abandoned cities, of ecological disasters, and of millions unburied deads of the GULAG.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Revista Transilvania
Revista Transilvania Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mircea Eliade’s Unpublished Manuscripts from Private Collections: Notebooks I & II (Calcutta, 1929-1931). Critical edition Samuel Beckett and E. M. Cioran: The Passion for Ruins Ignacio Prat y la transducción dantesca Un manuscris ascuns în văzul lumii: jurnalul lui Mihail Sebastian din anii 1930-1931 Romanele lui Camil Petrescu din perspectivă substanțialistă
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1