Ruiny, wszędzie ruiny: Czarnobyl i archeologiczny wymiar dziedzictwa niedawnej przeszłości

Q4 Arts and Humanities
Dawid Kobiałka
{"title":"Ruiny, wszędzie ruiny: Czarnobyl i archeologiczny wymiar dziedzictwa niedawnej przeszłości","authors":"Dawid Kobiałka","doi":"10.18778/0208-6034.32.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For many centuries, scientists, philosophers, artists and others have been fascinated with ruins. However, this fascination usually focused upon ancient and medieval relics. Indeed, it can be metaphorically said that archaeology was built upon ruins. Nonetheless, the archaeological analyses of ruins, their functions, meanings, uses and re-uses over the next centuries had been very selective. In short, modern ruins have been out of closer archaeological attention. It seems as if modern ruins were deprived of social, cultural, and archaeological dimensions. However, this changed during the first decade of the 21st century when archaeologists started to pay attention to the modern ruins. The so-called archaeology of (modern) ruins is one of the most interesting, provocative, and subversive fields of the contemporary archaeological discourses. The starting point of this paper is that there is no “ontological difference” between the Greek, the Roman and the Soviet ruins. All of them can and should be part of archaeological thinking. A two-step approach is applied here. First, the archaeological value of ruins in Chernobyl is discussed. A documentary entitled Czarnobyl – Wst e p Wzbroniony (2015) (Eng. Chernobyl – No Entry ) is reviewed to highlight the processes of transformation of the unimaginable nuclear catastrophe into valuable heritage of the recent past. It is argued that Chernobyl can be seen as “Pompeii of our times”. Second, the review of Czarnobyl – Wst e p Wzbroniony is used as a pretext to shortly present different categories of modern ruins that one can encounter in contemporary Poland. Many of them are related with the Soviet occupation in Poland between 1945 and 1993. The point that I try to back up in this paper is that these Soviet ruins are also part of the archaeological heritage of the recent past. Accordingly, this paper is a call for a closer archaeological interest in the ruins of the recent past in general.","PeriodicalId":52871,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Lodziensis Folia Archaeologica","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Universitatis Lodziensis Folia Archaeologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6034.32.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For many centuries, scientists, philosophers, artists and others have been fascinated with ruins. However, this fascination usually focused upon ancient and medieval relics. Indeed, it can be metaphorically said that archaeology was built upon ruins. Nonetheless, the archaeological analyses of ruins, their functions, meanings, uses and re-uses over the next centuries had been very selective. In short, modern ruins have been out of closer archaeological attention. It seems as if modern ruins were deprived of social, cultural, and archaeological dimensions. However, this changed during the first decade of the 21st century when archaeologists started to pay attention to the modern ruins. The so-called archaeology of (modern) ruins is one of the most interesting, provocative, and subversive fields of the contemporary archaeological discourses. The starting point of this paper is that there is no “ontological difference” between the Greek, the Roman and the Soviet ruins. All of them can and should be part of archaeological thinking. A two-step approach is applied here. First, the archaeological value of ruins in Chernobyl is discussed. A documentary entitled Czarnobyl – Wst e p Wzbroniony (2015) (Eng. Chernobyl – No Entry ) is reviewed to highlight the processes of transformation of the unimaginable nuclear catastrophe into valuable heritage of the recent past. It is argued that Chernobyl can be seen as “Pompeii of our times”. Second, the review of Czarnobyl – Wst e p Wzbroniony is used as a pretext to shortly present different categories of modern ruins that one can encounter in contemporary Poland. Many of them are related with the Soviet occupation in Poland between 1945 and 1993. The point that I try to back up in this paper is that these Soviet ruins are also part of the archaeological heritage of the recent past. Accordingly, this paper is a call for a closer archaeological interest in the ruins of the recent past in general.
几个世纪以来,科学家、哲学家、艺术家和其他人都对废墟着迷。然而,这种魅力通常集中在古代和中世纪的遗迹上。的确,可以打个比方说,考古学是建立在废墟之上的。尽管如此,在接下来的几个世纪里,对废墟及其功能、意义、用途和再利用的考古分析是非常有选择性的。简而言之,现代遗址已经失去了考古学的关注。似乎现代废墟被剥夺了社会、文化和考古的维度。然而,在21世纪的头十年,当考古学家开始关注现代遗址时,这种情况发生了变化。所谓的(现代)废墟考古学是当代考古学话语中最有趣、最具挑衅性和颠覆性的领域之一。本文的出发点是希腊、罗马和苏联遗迹之间不存在“本体论差异”。所有这些都可以而且应该成为考古思维的一部分。这里采用了两步方法。首先,讨论了切尔诺贝利遗址的考古价值。纪录片《切尔诺贝利-西部》(2015)(英)。《切尔诺贝利-禁止入内》一书的回顾突出了将难以想象的核灾难转变为最近的宝贵遗产的过程。有人认为,切尔诺贝利可以被视为“我们这个时代的庞贝”。其次,对察诺比-西波兰的回顾被用作一个借口,简要介绍人们在当代波兰可以遇到的不同类别的现代废墟。其中许多都与苏联在1945年至1993年间占领波兰有关。我试图在这篇论文中支持的观点是,这些苏联遗址也是最近的考古遗产的一部分。因此,本文呼吁人们对最近的废墟有更密切的考古兴趣。
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
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
22 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