Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  HISTORIC MONUMENTS
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The text initially analyses what the term “historic site of interest” included during individual phases of modern Czech history. It also describes how and why spontaneous interest in historic monuments transformed into scientific interest. However, the text mainly focuses on the attitude of Czech society towards historic sites of interest and historical preservation after the Second World War. The paper clarifies why Prague monuments of the highest possible national value (Old Town Square, Prague Castle, Karolinum, Bethlehem Chapel, Hvězda Summer Palace) received the most attention primarily. It also clarifies the importance state bodies credited to minor (mainly Jewish) historic sites of interest, both in Prague and in the regions. The text states that although selected Jewish historic monuments in Prague were repaired in the 1950s, because it was assumed that they would be used in the field of tourism, others (including those that were of interest to tourists) were left to fall into disrepair. Terezín received attention for ideological reasons. However, its historical value was used for propaganda purposes. Victims of the Shoa were described as fighters for socialism in the 1950s. The post-war condition of Jewish historic sites of interest in the regions can be described as catastrophic, during which time only two regional synagogues were repaired during socialism (in Plzeň and Holešov). The devastation of unprotected Jewish cemeteries, which were usually located in remote areas, also continued. The gravestones in these cemeteries became sought-after building material. Indications of changes to come in relation to regional Jewish historic sites of interest only appear at the end of the so-called normalisation period.
EN
Taking as her starting point the concept of “historicity”, understood as a way of conceiving the past through different social practices [Hirsh and Stewart 2005], the author reflects on the results of her long term ethnographic research on two prominent “monuments of Polish history and culture”: namely the royal castles in Warsaw and Cracow. Following up on Hirsh and Stewart’s insight that academic history is one of the modern historicities, the article proposes taking “history” and “heritage” (understood by David Lowenthal [1998] as two co–existing sets of past–oriented practices) for two modes of modern historicity, arguing that to some extent they also correspond to different modes of representation of the past in modernity, as described by Bann [1984]. Pointing to the late modern crisis of representation, the author studies the politics of the representation of the past, focusing on historic monuments. It is suggested that their status is legitimized on two levels of power relations. On the macroscale the stance of subsequent political systems and governments are considered, and the material and institutional solutions that result from them are considered, while on the micro–scale the political involvement of the two historic monuments emerges from expert discourses and practices. It is on the micro–scale level of power relations, that historic value is ascribed to objects, and they become heritagized. Ethnographic research of historic monuments should therefore recognize the modes of historicity involved, and describe their selective character and legitimizing practices, opening up the field to further analysis of the power relationships involved.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.