Историческая политика в России: репрезентация сталинской эпохи в популярном кинематографе
This article is devoted to the analysis of the politics of the past in relation to еhe Stalin era. After offering a systematization of the theories behind totaliarianism and describing the discourse of Stalin past, an attempt is made here to identify the key images of World War II and detect attitudes towards pre and post war period in the products of mass culture. This research is conducted within the scientific field of public history. This approach sheds light on the existence of a compromise in the reconstruction of the past between the authorities and society. 13 historical films were selected from box office data covering 2000 to 2014 including Stalingrad (2013), Burnt by the Sun 2 (2010), Spy (2012) and Hitler-Kaput! (2008). As a result of this research it became clear that certain periods of history are treated with silence; pre and post war periods are virtually absent in mass cinema. One identifiable trend was toward the transformation of classic historical drama into the heroic past: comic-style blockbusters about the super heroic past have been created.
An emergence of China as a new center of power causes hot debates about its possible positive and negative impacts on the system of international relations. In an attempt to explain the present and predict what is awaiting the world in the future, the humankind traditionally refers to the history. Meanwhile, in the age of new media and a rapid development of technologies this branch of knowledge inevitably undergoes changes, for example, the role played by public history is gradually increasing. For China, which focuses on soft power and the country image in the international arena, this aspect is very important, although for many centuries there is already a quite special, different from Western worldviews, relation to the history in the Chinese society. Obviously, there is a need to explore and subject to comprehensive analysis a number of features that characterize a process of a formation of Chinese historical narratives.
The historiography of the XXIst c., which had been shaped by the influence of the so-called cultural turn, created a new field of research 'the history of historical culture'. This book presents a study of historical culture where the latter is approached through the synthesis of social, cultural and intellectual history. Intellectual phenomena have been placed in broad context of social experience, historical mentality and general intellectual processes. How did people view events (of their own lives, or of the life of their groups, but also of History) which they took part in? How did they evaluate them? How did they record and transmit information about those events while interpreting what had been seen or lived through? These questions are of great interest. Subjectivity combined with this information reflects views of a social group or of the society as a whole, but at the same time it shows cultural and historical features of its time.
The special issue explores the manifold relations between history, memory, and anthropological research. Explicitly or not, history has always been a particular reference for anthropological research. First of all, anthropologists most often deal with the past not only when attempting to reconstruct past events and conditions, but rather to look at social change, innovation, and transformation, enabling then to position their findings in larger theoretical perspectives. Moreover, many anthropologists are primarily interested in the ways in which people perceive societal changes, experience and represent them and relate them to their various world-views at large. In these endeavors, the notion of history itself became the center of debate, which shifted the attention of many scholars away from an absolute or etic frame of reference to primarily an emic understanding of its meaning with regard to local issues and life-worlds. Thus, the interaction between History and Anthropology was not simple in the past and is not so today. Whatever the particular interest or approach to history for anthropologists may be, history is therefore not just a neutral domain. From a social-constructivist perspective, history is a part of a distinct local cultural and symbolic universe and represents the result of social processes of selection, remembrance and oblivion. The ‘memory boom’ in anthropology triggered many studies in Africanist scholarship as well, for example, on the way in which historical memories were used by both protagonists of colonialism and national-liberation movements; or as a means of state propaganda by postcolonial regimes.
The paper examines the history of dissemination in 14th-17th centuries in different european countries (especially in Eastern Europe), of one curious text, known as the "Privilege of Alexander the Great for the Slavs." Particular attention was given to the specifically Russian version of this text appeared in the latter half of the XVI century.
The proposed article is based on the results of content analysis of informational TV programs of major Russian TV channels. Historical persons mentioned in these programs are considered in general context. Main conclusion is that some of the references are made in the context of fixing the characters move from the present to history. Other references are connected with the process of legitimization of current events by putting them into historical context.
The article is concerned with the notions of technology in essays of Ernst and Friedrich Georg Jünger. The special problem of the connection between technology and freedom is discussed in the broader context of the criticism of culture and technocracy discussion in the German intellectual history of the first half of the 20th century.