Коммеморация столетия революции(й) 1917 года в РФ: сравнительный анализ соперничающих нарративов.
The article presents the results of the study of public commemoration of the centenary of the February and October revolutions in Russia as the episode of politics of memory. It compares historical narratives of the key mnemonic actors – the ruling elite, the Communists, the Russian Orthodox Church, the “Conservatives”, the Liberals etc. The analysis is based on recent texts of the politicians and public intellectuals from these groups.
The historical narratives are compared by five criteria: 1) the main idea (that usually follows from the mission / political program / identity); 2) the plot (that is usually focused on the story about tragedy and trauma that Russia experienced in the 20th century); 3) the events that come as causally linked elements of the narrative; 4) the main actors; 5) the lessons that should be leant.
It is concluded that actually the commemoration of the centenary of the revolution(s) took part in the context of a fragmented memory regime. However, the discrepancy of competing interpretations have not brought an open public conflict because the mnemonic warriors either experienced a lack of resources for more active propaganda, or partly shared the attitudes of the ruling elite. As a result, by avoiding the official commemoration the latter escaped direct public discussions, and could turn the commemorative process to the “peaceful” path.
The author, the candidate of philosophy, the associate professor of the National Research University Higher School of Economics, suggests first in Russian language the entire historical and conceptual description of the state award system of the socialistic Cuba. In this connection, he disclosures its unique feature: the enormous number of the awards named for the Cuban national heroes. The attempts to find a similar phenomenon in the award systems of the another states all over the world are failed. The analysis of the Cuban personificated awards in light of the historical sociology results in a typology of the persons of the national heroes of the socialistic Cuba symbolically represented in their awards. The comprehension of this unusual phenomenon from the sociological, social-psychological, cultural-scientific and political-scientific standpoints leads to the conclusion that a cult of hero personality historically formed in the socialistic Cuba is reflected in its state award system. The author argues that this cult not barely memorizes the fighters for the liberty and the independence of the Cuba but is an essential component of a civil-patriotic religion which the ruling power created on the basis of the national political culture traditions with the purposes of the consolidation and the development of the Cuban society.
El autor, doctor de filosofía, docente de la Universidad Nacional de Investigación «Escuela Superior de Economía», ofrece por primera vez una completa descripción histórica y conceptual del sistema de condecoración de la Cuba socialista. Fue revelada su característica principal: una cantidad extremadamente grande de premios nombrados en honor a los héroes nacionales cubanos. Los sistemas de condecoración de otros países no presentan este fenómeno. El resultado del análisis de las condecoraciones personalizadas, en lo que a sociología histórica se refiere, es una tipología de la personalidad de los héroes nacionales de la Cuba socialista, representados simbólicamente en las condecoraciones. La comprensión de este particular fenómeno desde los puntos de vista sociológico, socio-psicológico, cultural y político, ha llevado a la conclusión de que en el sistema de condecoración de la Cuba se reflejaba en el culto a los héroes en este país socialista. El autor sostiene que este culto no sólo perpetúa la memoria de los luchadores por la libertad y la independencia de Cuba, sino que además es un elemento esencial de la religión civil-patriótica, creado por el gobierno en base a las tradiciones nacionales de la cultura política con el fin de consolidar y desarrollar la sociedad cubana.
The article deals with various historical narratives which can be used as a framework for the Russian-Polish relations during the long XIX century in contemporary historiography, first of all the Russian one. A special attention is paid to the Polish factor in the context of systematic elaboration of the history of Russian empire as well as the identities of the Russian-Polish frontier.
This edited collection offers an empirical exploration of social memory in the context of politics, war, identity and culture. With a substantive focus on Eastern Europe, it employs the methodologies of visual studies, content and discourse analysis, in-depth interviews and surveys to substantiate how memory narratives are composed and rewritten in changing ideological and political contexts. The book examines various historical events, including the Russian-Afghan war of 1979-89 and World War II, and considers public and local rituals, monuments and museums, textbook accounts, gender and the body. As such it provides a rich picture of post-socialist memory construction and function based in interdisciplinary memory studies.
Jeffrey Olick is one of the most prominent researchers in the field of memory studies nowadays. Yet, none of his works have been translated into Russian. “Figurations of memory” as the author himself states is one of his most important texts. It is dedicated to the process-relational methodology. J. Olick criticizes traditional approaches as they see collective memory as a static thing, whereas it should be studied as a process. On the other hand author criticizes a mainstream understanding of memory as a unified object. Instead he suggests that there are multiple mnemonic forms and practices that should be investigated. As a result he presents a new methodology that is based on analysis of the four essential aspects of memory work: field (mostly in a sense in which Bourdieu used it), medium, genre and profile. This method of analysis leads to emergence of additional empirical categories, such as official, vernacular, public, and private memory; affective, aesthetic-expressive, instrumental-cognitive, and political-moral media; the normal legitimation, German traditions, German victimhood, and German guilt genres; and the reliable, moral, and normal profiles. Though in the end the model may seem rather complex, author claims that it is by far more clear and precise that other models of research of collective memory. More than that, he claims that this methodology can be universal for studying a large number of sociological topics.
Public history (PH) as a concept and movement emerged in the United States in the 1970s. It has become an academic field that provides opportunities for the representatives of the Humanities, academic community and the museum staff to establish communication ties. With the help of PH, historians became able to communicate with the society and, as a result, came into the public sphere. Public history is a relatively new area of knowledge in Russia - it appeared in 2012–2013 with the emergence of the first Master's program in the Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences and, in what follows, conferences and round tables. The article discusses the development of public history in Russia. It is based on a review and analysis of academic literature and is aimed at understanding and exploring this new academic field. After analyzing the academic discourse on the current problems of historical science and the role of public history in the process of developing new ways of communication, the author comes to the following conclusions. The contemporary academic community is facing the problems of understanding how the audience showing today an increasing interest in history looks like. Besides, the field struggles with the problems of the “academic vs popular” languages and difficulties with the translation of historians’ texts. There is also a lack of direct communication between those creating a variety of historical products, such as teachers, employees of museums, filmmakers, media, etc., on the one hand, and historians, on the other hand. The result of the analysis, along with the post-Soviet “hereditary” problems of confidence in the subject of history, allows us to speak about the crisis of professional historical community as an expert in public sphere.
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.
Scientific and educational project "Culture of Reconiliation: New historical consciousness in Ukraine" was held in autumn 2015 with the support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Germany and the society "Bochum - Donetsk" (Germany). The project brought together the experts studying the problems of historical memory and the collisions of historical narratives, problems of healing the wounds of the past. How can we exclude the exploration of historical knowledge as a instrument of war propaganda? How can we turn history into space of coexistence and the retention of the human dignity. Historians, philosophers, sociologists and culture experts from several European states combined their efforts in this book.
The book is aimed at the audience of specialists in philosophy of history and all those who are interested in the nature of past and historical memory.
The article deals with the processes of building the information society and security in the CIS in accordance with modern conditions. The main objective is to review existing mechanisms for the formation of a common information space in the Eurasian region, regarded as one of the essential aspects of international integration. The theoretical significance of the work is to determine the main controls of the regional information infrastructure, improved by the development of communication features in a rapid process.The practical component consists in determining the future policies of the region under consideration in building the information society. The study authors used historical-descriptive approach and factual analysis of events having to do with drawing the contours of today's global information society in the regional refraction.
The main result is the fact that the development of information and communication technologies, and network resources leads to increased threats of destabilization of the socio-political situation in view of the emergence of multiple centers that generate the ideological and psychological background. Keeping focused information policy can not be conceived without the collective participation of States in the first place, members of the group leaders of integration - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Currently, only produced a comprehensive approach to security in the information field in the Eurasian region, but the events in the world, largely thanks to modern technology, make the search for an exit strategy with a much higher speed. The article contributes to the science of international relations, engaging in interdisciplinary thinking that is associated with a transition period in the development of society. A study of current conditions in their relation to the current socio-political patterns of the authors leads to conclusions about the need for cooperation with the network centers of power in the modern information environment, the formation of alternative models of networking, especially in innovation and scientific and technical areas of information policy, and expanding the integration of the field in this region on the information content.
This special publication for the 2012 New Delhi Summit is a collection of articles by government officials from BRICS countries, representatives of international organizations, businessmen and leading researchers.
The list of Russian contributors includes Sergei Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia, Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the Trade Negotiations Department of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development, Vladimir Dmitriev, Vnesheconombank Chairman, Alexander Bedritsky, advisor to the Russian President, VadimLukov, Ambassador-at-large of the Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry, and representatives of the academic community.
The publication also features articles by the President of Kazakhstan NursultanNazarbayev and internationally respected economist Jim O’Neil, who coined the term “BRIC”. In his article Jim O’Neil speculates about the future of the BRICS countries and the institution as a whole.
The publication addresses important issues of the global agenda, the priorities of BRICS and the Indian Presidency, the policies and competitive advantages of the participants, as well as BRICS institutionalization, enhancing efficiency and accountability of the forum.