"Lietuviškosios" praeities aktualizavimas kaip tapatumo orientacijos raiška pokario Klaipėdoje

LTRemiantis atminimo kultūros, kolektyvinės atminties ir kolektyvinio tapatumo konceptais, nagrinėjama, kokie praeities elementai buvo pasitelkiami ir kokiomis priemonėmis jie buvo reprezentuojami pokario Klaipėdoje aktualizuojant ir palaikant lietuvišką tapatumo orientaciją. Pirmajame skyriuje apžvelgiant sociokultūrinę situaciją Klaipėdoje po Antrojo pasaulinio karo, aiškinamasi, kokios komunikacijos terpės galėjo aktualizuoti "lietuviškumo" įtvirtinimą Klaipėdos viešojoje atminimo kultūroje. Analizė parodė, kad galima išskirti du laikotarpius, kai lietuviškoji tapatumo orientacija kėlė tokios aktualizacijos reikmes: pirmuosius pokario metus (maždaug iki XX a. 5.6 d-mečių sandūros) ir 8.9 d-mečius. Toks išskyrimas grindžiamas tuo, kad šiais laikotarpiais mieste būta tvirtos komunikacinės atramos, kurioje galėjo cirkuliuoti lietuviškumą išreiškę simboliai. Ir atvirkščiai, 6.7 dešimtmečiuose lietuviški kultūriniai židiniai Klaipėdoje buvo išardyti, o dominavusi "tarybinė" tapatumo orientacija neįleido tokių simbolių į viešąją erdvę. Antrajame ir trečiajame straipsnio skyriuose pokario Lietuvos viešosios atminimo kultūros realijų kontekste nagrinėjami "lietuviškosios" praeities aktualizavimo kontekstai, parodoma, kaip reikmė legitimuoti Klaipėdos krašto priklausomybę Lietuvai, antivokiškas antagonizmas, adaptuotas lietuviškumas skatino įvairių praeities kontekstų aktualizavimą. Aptariami praeities vaizdiniai ir siužetai, į kuriuos buvo orientuojama "lietuviškoji" Klaipėdos tapatybė, nurodomos abiems išskirtiems laikotarpiams būdingos šio orientavimo bendrybės ir atskirybės. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Klaipėda po II pasaulinio karo; Kultūrinė atmintis; Klaipėda after the II World war; Cultural memory.

ENOn the grounds of concepts of "culture of commemoration", "collective memory", and "collective identity" the paper analyses what elements of the past were invoked and through which media they were represented in post-war Klaipėda supporting the Lithuanian identity orientation. Reviewing of socio-cultural situation in post-war Klaipėda revealed which communication milieu could call the "Lithuanian" past into being in public culture of commemoration of post-war Klaipėda. Examination of contexts of such calling testified that two periods of it might be distinguished. The first period when Lithuanian identity orientation awoke exalting of the "Lithuanian" past embraces the late 1940's while the second encompasses a streak of the 1970-1980's. Such discernment is based on detection of firm communicative foundation where symbols expressed Lithuanian culture could circulate. On the contrary, in the 1950-1960's when spawns of Lithuanian culture were dismantled dominant "Soviet" identity orientation denied these symbols to the public space. During both periods prevailing utilization of the contexts of the interwar past is observed. This was conditioned not only by requirement of legitimation of Klaipėda area (Memel territory) subordination to Lithuania, but also by anti-German antagonism, which was implanted into the public space as far back as World War II. However, orientation towards the contexts of the interwar past during both periods differed from each other. Straight after the war considerable part of the intelligentsia was related to the cultural activity in the interwar Klaipėda.Therefore continuity of the interwar traditions seemed rather natural to them. To the contrary, in the 1970-1980's the intelligentsia of Klaipėda had no relevancy with interwar "Lithuanian" cultural environment of Klaipėda. Accordingly requirements of hunting for "Lithuanian" past were healthier. Local movement of regional studies and monument preservation met these requirements. From the late 1950's - early 1960's it reflected newly-developed legitimation myth of Soviet Lithuania created till the mid 1950's in which stories, events, and personalities of the "national" past survived adopted within the framework of the "class struggle". Hunting for "Lithuanian" past, notably intensified from the late 1960's - early 1970's, enabled both the resurrection of the plots of "Lithuanian" Klaipeda's past, created in the interwar period, and the loan of appropriate cogitative categories of this period. However, it is important to notice that conflict character (dissociation from the "German" past) of "Lithuanian" identity orientation in Klaipėda was consolidated and radicalized namely in post-war period and steadfastly held its field till the late 1980's - early 1990's. [From the publication]Referring to the concepts of the culture of remembrance, collective memory and collective identity, the elements of the past, which were employed and the means, by which they were represented in the postwar Klaipėda when actualizing and supporting the Lithuanian identity orientation are examined. The first chapter, when overviewing the socio-cultural situation in Klaipėda after the WW II, examines the communication media, which could have actualized the consolidation of “being Lithuanian” in the public culture of remembrance of Klaipėda. The analysis showed that two periods can be distinguished, during which the Lithuanian identity orientation raised the said meanings of actualization: the first years after the war (approximately until the end of the forties – the beginning of the fifties) and seventies – eighties of the 20th century. Such division is based by the fact that during the said period the city had strong communication support, in which the symbols, expressing Lithuania could circulate. And on the contrary, in the fifties and sixties the Lithuanian cultural hotbeds in Klaipėda were terminated and the predominant “Soviet” orientation of identity did not let such symbols into the public space. The second and third parts of the article examine the contexts of actualization of the “Lithuanian” past in the context of realities of the public culture of remembrance of the postwar Lithuania and show the ways the need to legitimate the belonging of the Klaipėda area to Lithuania, the anti-German antagonism and the adapted being Lithuanian encouraged the actualization of different contexts of the past. The article discusses the images and subjects of the past, which the “Lithuanian” identity of Klaipėda was oriented towards and states the similarities and differences of the orientation, characteristic of both periods.