Przesiedleńcy ze strefy wykluczenia po katastrofie atomowej w Czarnobylu: problemy z zadomawianiem się w nowej przestrzeni

IF 0.1 Q4 ANTHROPOLOGY
Jadwiga Kozłowska-Doda
{"title":"Przesiedleńcy ze strefy wykluczenia po katastrofie atomowej w Czarnobylu: problemy z zadomawianiem się w nowej przestrzeni","authors":"Jadwiga Kozłowska-Doda","doi":"10.23858/jue17.2019.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, the so-called Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, covering the area within the 30 km radius from the nuclear reactor site, was established (also in Belarus). All people were evacuated from the zone and displaced to “clean” territory. For the purpose of the current paper, reports of witnesses from the documental prose, dialectal texts, publications and Belarus Archives of Oral History were analysed in an attempt to find in their narratives the answers to the following questions: who the people called “chernobyltsy” (literally: the Chernobyl ones) are and in what way they were and are seen by other people, especially just after the disaster; what the reaction of the people to the process of evacuation was; what the indigenous people during the evacuation took with them; what they left at their homes and why; what their attitude towards new comfortable houses and flats was; in what way they tried to adapt themselves to new environment; where they buried the dead; and whether they successfully settled in their new places of residence. Having analysed the reports and arranged them according to the phenomenology of the area based on the report of H. Buczynska-Garewicz, the category of “rootedness” of S. Weil and J. Tischner, A. van Gennep’s theory of rites of passage”, the author concludes that a great number of “chernobyltsy” are deeply rooted in their motherland; an approach that excludes the possibility of expanding the definition of “home” and “the sense of settlement”. Those people usually suffer at their new places of residence and sometimes return home. The only strategies favouring their acceptance of a new place that have been observed are focusing on work, especially on working the land (an allotment), or focusing on the health of their children.","PeriodicalId":53727,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urban Ethnology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Urban Ethnology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23858/jue17.2019.009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

After the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, the so-called Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, covering the area within the 30 km radius from the nuclear reactor site, was established (also in Belarus). All people were evacuated from the zone and displaced to “clean” territory. For the purpose of the current paper, reports of witnesses from the documental prose, dialectal texts, publications and Belarus Archives of Oral History were analysed in an attempt to find in their narratives the answers to the following questions: who the people called “chernobyltsy” (literally: the Chernobyl ones) are and in what way they were and are seen by other people, especially just after the disaster; what the reaction of the people to the process of evacuation was; what the indigenous people during the evacuation took with them; what they left at their homes and why; what their attitude towards new comfortable houses and flats was; in what way they tried to adapt themselves to new environment; where they buried the dead; and whether they successfully settled in their new places of residence. Having analysed the reports and arranged them according to the phenomenology of the area based on the report of H. Buczynska-Garewicz, the category of “rootedness” of S. Weil and J. Tischner, A. van Gennep’s theory of rites of passage”, the author concludes that a great number of “chernobyltsy” are deeply rooted in their motherland; an approach that excludes the possibility of expanding the definition of “home” and “the sense of settlement”. Those people usually suffer at their new places of residence and sometimes return home. The only strategies favouring their acceptance of a new place that have been observed are focusing on work, especially on working the land (an allotment), or focusing on the health of their children.
切尔诺贝利核灾难后被隔离区重新安置的人:在新空间定居的问题
切尔诺贝利核灾难发生后,所谓的切尔诺贝利禁区(也在白俄罗斯)建立,覆盖核反应堆场址30公里半径范围内的区域。所有人都从该地区撤离,转移到“干净”的地区。为了本论文的目的,对来自文献散文、方言文本、出版物和白俄罗斯口述历史档案的证人报告进行了分析,试图从他们的叙述中找到以下问题的答案:人们称之为“切尔诺贝利人”(字面意思:切尔诺贝利人)的人是谁,以及其他人以何种方式看待他们,特别是在灾难发生后;人们对撤离过程的反应是什么?土著人在撤离时带走了什么;他们在家里留下了什么,为什么?他们对新的舒适的房子和公寓的态度是什么;他们如何设法使自己适应新环境;埋葬死人的地方;以及他们是否成功地在新的居住地安顿下来。笔者以布琴斯卡-加雷维茨的报告、魏尔和蒂施纳的“根性”范畴、范·格内普的“通过仪式理论”为基础,对这些报告进行了分析和整理,认为大量的“切尔诺贝利人”深深扎根于他们的祖国;这种做法排除了扩大“家”和“定居感”定义的可能性。这些人通常在新的居住地受苦,有时会回家。据观察,有利于他们接受新地方的唯一策略是注重工作,特别是注重耕种土地(一种分配),或者注重子女的健康。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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