The Central European Archaeology of Knowledge: Exploring Polish and Ukrainian Literature (1989–2014): Introductory Essay

Abstract

In 1989, Poland, together with other Soviet satellite states in the region, ceased to be a communist country. Shortly after this the USSR dissolved, and Ukraine — after almost seventy years — regained its independence. With political freedom and market economies, the years 1989 and 1991 brought Central Europeans both vertical and horizontal; borders were opened, and the ‘iron curtain’ and East-West divisions was assumed not to exist anymore. In Poland, the processes of modernization were rapid, and encompassed not only politics and economics, but also the social and cultural spheres. Similar steps were taken in Ukraine, but they were implemented with fewer visible effects. However, once Poland became a member of NATO (1999) and then the European Union (2004), the political and economic divisions between the two countries became more evident. Nonetheless, within the cultural spheres of both countries one could observe similar tendencies: the revival of local identities (e.g. Silesian, Galician) and the appearance of new issues (such as gender) on the one hand, and a postmodern scepticism towards grand narratives on the other. However, the atmosphere of living in a transitory Central Europe during Francis Fukuyama’s peaceful ‘end of history’ was interrupted in 2014 when Russian troops annexed Crimea. After a quarter of a century the old divisions between East and West reappeared, with Ukraine transformed into country at war. The studies collected in the following volume can be seen as archaeological projects, as the objects of their investigation — spatial narratives from Ukraine and Poland — reflect the main geopolitical changes and their consequences for local communities. It is the Foucauldian notion of the ‘archaeology of knowledge’ that will be used, and treated, in an unrestricted manner. ‘Archaeology’ is understood here as being a type of discursive analysis that is not bound to the rigorous structuralist method. As all of the authors in this special issue conceive literature in distinct contexts and through a geopolitical key (yet without any uniform model of temporalization), this kind of ‘archaeology’ has enabled them to apply a wide range of analytical conditions and thus reveal different forms of imagined worlds. How fruitful this approach might be is shown by the fact that spatial narratives themselves enable the appearance of new aesthetics and discourses, as well as the (re)emergence of local myths and their constitutive role in (re)creating different collective memories — for instance, both Polish and Ukrainian authors made use of the myth of the Habsburg’s Galicia. All the articles in this special issue question the narratives that have shaped the cultural memory of the inhabitants of Poland and Ukraine. The authors have highlighted the role of literature and popular culture in providing alternative visions of the past and the present. The greatest common advantage of their methodological background is their rejection of generalizing and universalizing geopoetics. In turn, they go beyond the meta-narratives that have consolidated