Dzūkijos ir Suvalkijos partizanų dienoraščiai: antifikcija ir interpretavimo strategijos

LTReikšminiai žodžiai: Antifikcija; Dzūkija; Ideologija; Interpretavimo strategija; Istorija; Partizanų dienoraščiai; Rezistencija; Suvalkija; Tapatybė; Visuomenė; Įsiužetinimas; Anti-fiction; Antifiction; Dzūkija; Dzūkija, Suvalkija; Emplotment; Identity; Ideology; Indentity; Interpretative strategy; Partisans diaries; Partisans' diaries; Resistance movement; Society; Suvalkija.

ENThe aim of this paper is to analyse the diaries of Dzūkija and Suvalkija partisans as the texts of anti-fiction in which interpretative strategies are implicitly inscribed. The objectives of the paper: 1) to present the conceptions of the diary and anti-fiction developed by Phillipe Lejeune and the conception of interpretative strategies developed by Hayden White; 2) to analyse the diaries as anti-fictions identifying the basis for their creation, their differences and similarities; 3) to find out why and what interpretative strategies of history and other discourses the partisans chose while writing their diaries; 4) to reveal the recording of the fights and ordinary lives of the partisans, their personal reflections in different military districts. The methodology of the paper was developed on the grounds of Phillipe Lejeune’s conception of the diary presented in his study „On Diary“ (2009) and Hayden White’s conception of interpretative strategies described in his paper „Interpretation in History“ (1972–1973). The hypothesis of the research: while writing their diaries partisans committed to paper anti-fiction and interpreted history and other discourses. The partisans modified the form of the diary, and anti-fiction (which was grounded on some real persons and events) encoded in them was meant to protect themselves against repressive occupant structures. Various functions of the diaries determined a choice of concrete interpretative strategies. The diaries of Dzūkija partisans are anti-fictions, their aim was to leave historical testimony for the future generations. The dominant strategy is a narrative strategy for which the emplotment form of romance (Vitkus-Kazimieraitis’ diary), tragedy (Baliukevičius- Dzūkas’ diary) and satire (Vasiliauskas-Bevardis’ diary) are characteristic.Various modes of expression are determined by the identities of the authors and the functions of these diaries the most important of which was to freeze the time. The diaries of Suvalkija partisans are anti-fictions, their aim was to commemorate the authors and their personal reflections. Justinas Lelešius-Grafas used all the three strategies which allowed him to create the diary as a narrative. The narrative strategy was important for Ratkelis-Oželis because he emplotted one particular month and one particular operation of the resistance movement. Rossemann used both the narrative strategy and the epistemological strategy, he wrote memories/the diary for his native Germany. The main functions of these diaries were as follows: to express oneself (to release) and to freeze the time. All the diaries, except that of Baliukevičius-Dzūkas, were rewritten and translated from Russian into Lithuanian (originally they, except the one of Rossemann, were written in Lithuanian but during the investigation process they were translated and then destroyed). Consequently, the texts must be evaluated critically and the conclusions on them are always partial and relative. [From the publication]