Behind the Saying “Landsbergis Destroyed the Collective Farms”: Transformation of Agriculture from the Perspective of Cultural Trauma Narrative

Q4 Social Sciences
Valda Budreckaitė
{"title":"Behind the Saying “Landsbergis Destroyed the Collective Farms”: Transformation of Agriculture from the Perspective of Cultural Trauma Narrative","authors":"Valda Budreckaitė","doi":"10.15388/polit.2022.109.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article explores what is told about the supposed “collapse” of the collective farms in Lithuania, how is the negative connotation explained, and how is it attuned to the negative understanding of collectivization and collective farms in general. Relying on the theoretical literature dedicated to narrative and trauma, a scheme of cultural trauma narrative is formulated as a conceptual tool. Through narrative analysis of qualitative interviews collected in Panevėžys, Jonava, and their vicinities in 2021, it is demonstrated that the collective farm of early Soviet times is seen negatively, but the collective farm of late Soviet times is defined as a consistent unit. During transformation, this unit is suddenly disintegrated. Ordinary people are defined as the main victims. The named perpetrators can be divided into two groups. The first one is local people: the former chairs of the collective farms and other local leaders are mostly mentioned, as well as the “smarter ones” (“gudresnieji”). The second group is comprised of National government and Vytautas Landsbergis (personally); they are assigned a fatal role. A group of “critics” has been analytically distinguished. These informants have been harshly critical of collective farms regardless of times and distanced themselves from parlance regarding the “collapse” of collective farms. However, some of the “critics” repeated some elements of the cultural trauma narrative.","PeriodicalId":35151,"journal":{"name":"Politologija","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politologija","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/polit.2022.109.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article explores what is told about the supposed “collapse” of the collective farms in Lithuania, how is the negative connotation explained, and how is it attuned to the negative understanding of collectivization and collective farms in general. Relying on the theoretical literature dedicated to narrative and trauma, a scheme of cultural trauma narrative is formulated as a conceptual tool. Through narrative analysis of qualitative interviews collected in Panevėžys, Jonava, and their vicinities in 2021, it is demonstrated that the collective farm of early Soviet times is seen negatively, but the collective farm of late Soviet times is defined as a consistent unit. During transformation, this unit is suddenly disintegrated. Ordinary people are defined as the main victims. The named perpetrators can be divided into two groups. The first one is local people: the former chairs of the collective farms and other local leaders are mostly mentioned, as well as the “smarter ones” (“gudresnieji”). The second group is comprised of National government and Vytautas Landsbergis (personally); they are assigned a fatal role. A group of “critics” has been analytically distinguished. These informants have been harshly critical of collective farms regardless of times and distanced themselves from parlance regarding the “collapse” of collective farms. However, some of the “critics” repeated some elements of the cultural trauma narrative.
“landsbergi摧毁集体农庄”背后:文化创伤叙事视角下的农业转型
本文探讨了立陶宛集体农场所谓的“崩溃”,其负面含义是如何解释的,以及它如何与对集体化和集体农场的负面理解相协调。本文以研究叙事与创伤的理论文献为基础,作为一种概念工具,构建了文化创伤叙事的图式。通过对2021年在Panevėžys、Jonava及其附近地区收集的定性访谈的叙事分析,证明了苏联早期的集体农场被视为负面的,但苏联后期的集体农场被定义为一个一致的单位。在转化过程中,这个单位突然解体。普通人被定义为主要受害者。被点名的肇事者可以分为两组。第一个是当地人:集体农场的前任主席和其他地方领导人,以及“更聪明的人”(“gudresnieji”)被提到最多。第二组由国家政府和维陶塔斯·兰茨贝格(Vytautas Landsbergis)(个人)组成;他们被赋予了一个致命的角色。一群“批评家”在分析上被区分开来。这些举报人无论何时都对集体农庄进行了严厉的批评,并与集体农庄“崩溃”的说法保持距离。然而,一些“批评家”重复了一些文化创伤叙事的元素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Politologija
Politologija Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信