Istorijos patirtis ir refleksija Valkininkų krašto žmonių pasakojimuose

LTRemiantis 2011–2012 m. lauko tyrimų metu Valkininkų apylinkėse surinkta medžiaga, straipsnyje mėginama apžvelgti, kaip individualiuose autobiografiniuose pasakojimuose perteikiama istorinė žmogaus patirtis: kas prisimenama ir kas nutylima, su kuo pasakojime tapatinamasi (kieno pusė palaikoma konflikto atveju), kokios detalės pasakotojui atrodo svarbios, kokios raiškos priemonės pasitelkiamos ir ką visa tai sako apie jį patį. Analizuojama ne tik, ką žmogus prisimena; itin daug dėmesio skiriama ir kaip pasakotojas visa tai reflektuoja: kodėl pasakojami dalykai kalbėtojui atrodo reikšmingi, kaip sukaupta patirtis yra jo įprasminama ir t. t. Autobiografinius pasakojimus vertinant ne istoriko, bet folkloristo požiūriu, labiau rūpinamasi ne objektyvios tiesos atskleidimu ar kokia nors sukauptų prisiminimų verifikacija, o būtent subjektyvia jų interpretacija bei įprasminimu. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Atspindys; Istorija; Pasakojimai; Patirtis; Refleksija; Valkininkai; Žmonės; Experience; Expierence; History; Live Stories; Peoples; Refelction; Reflection; Stories; Valkininkai.

ENThe subject of the article comprises autobiographical narratives of the inhabitants of Valkininkai parish in the south-eastern Lithuania, recorded during fieldwork in 2011–2012. Having adopted the folkloristic perspective, the author is mainly concerned with individual interpretations of historical events rather than with their historiographic verification. The analysis aims at elucidating the autobiographical narratives dealing with historical events as means of identity construction. Valkininkai parish is considered a borderland with regards to its historical past: in 1920– 1939 this region was under the Polish rule, while subsequently, in 1939–1941, the ruling regime changed as many as four times during a couple of years, resulting in various tensions, conflicts, and people being forced to take sides and make radical choices related to their identity and affiliation. On the basis of the recorded narrative material, the author sets out to prove the occasionally accidental and artificial character of such choices, including even the most important categories of identity, such as ethnicity, ideology, etc. Having discovered several differing individual interpretations of the same historical conflict (which took place in 1942), the author emphasizes the importance and value of subjectivity in the personal narratives of historical events, concluding that unearthing of a single historical truth in such personal testimonies is virtually impossible. [From the publication]