Datum zveřejnění:

25.9.2020

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21104/CL.2020.3.02

Abstrakt:

This article considers a place as being filled with the symbolic meanings of the different groups controlling that place in different periods of history. It focuses on the example of the Soviet military zone in Transbaikalia, which was created on the site of the Buryat Buddhist monastery of Tsugol in the early 1930s. The military zone went on to replace the previous identity of the place by appropriating the meanings and symbols attached to the monastery. Fifty years later, in the post-Soviet period, the place was “re-appropriated” by the Buryat Buddhist monastery. The article discusses the practices of appropriation and re-appropriation of the place, and the way the competing narratives merge into a multilocal phenomenon.

Klíčová slova

cultural landscape;post-Soviet military base;Soviet modernity;Buryat Buddhism;borderland

Text článku

Reference

Andreev I. 1997. ‘Poverzhennye datsany’ in Sinitsyn F. 2013. Krasnaya burya: Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i buddizm v 1917–1946 g, Saint-Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo A. A. Terentyev: 441–481.
Boronoeva D. 2006. Vozniknovienie buriatskoi diaspory za rubiezhom, Diaspory v kontiekstie sovremiennych etnokulturnykh i etnosotsialnych processov, volume 3: 33-47.
Casey E. S. 1996. ‘How to get from space to place in a fairly short stretch of time. Phenomenological prolegomena’ in Steven F., Keith H. B. (eds). Senses of Place. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press: 53–90.
Demski D. – Czarnecka D. 2015. ‘Mapping Meanings in the Post-Soviet Landscape of Borne Sulinowo’, Latvijas Vēstures institūta Žurnāls, 2 (95): 96–120.
Dondukov B. 2019. The Struggle for “Trueness” of Buddhism: Internet as a Space of Dialogues and Conflicts in Buddhist Communities of Russia, PhD dissertation written under the supervision of prof. dr. hab. Ewa Łukaszyk, Warsaw.
Gerson, M. S. 2010. The Sino-Soviet Border Conflict: Deterrence, Escalation, and the Threat of Nuclear War in 1969, Center for Naval Analyses. Available at: www.cna.org/CNA_files/PDF/D0022974.A2.pdf, last acf, last accessed on March 30, 2019.
Kradin N. – Baksheeva S. – Prokopets S. 2018. ‘Cities and palaces of the Mongol Empire in Eastern Transbaikalia’, Sibirskie istoricheskie issledovania 2: 65–80.
Latour B. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern, London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Namsaraeva S. 2012. ‘Ritual, Memory and the Buriad Diaspora Notion of Home’, Frontier Encounters: Knowledge and Practice at the Russian, Chinese and Mongolian Border. Available at books.openedition.org/obp/1537, last accessed on March 30, 2019.
Nimaev D. 1993. Naselenie Buryatii i formirovanie ego natsional'ogo sostava, Respublike Buryatii 70 let: 41-49.
Peshkov I. 2011. ‘Pamyat’ v kulturesoobshchestv starozhilov vo Vnutrenney Mongolii’, Debaty Artes Liberales: Tsivilizatsionny vybor i pogranichie, vol. IV: 109–128.
Peshkov I. 2014. ‘Usable Past for a Transbaikalian Borderline Town 'Disarmament' of Memory and Geographical Imagination in Priargunsk’, Inner Asia 16: 95–115.
Rodman M. C. 1992. ‘Empowering Place: Multilocality and Multivocality’, American Anthropologist, New Series, 94 (3): 640–656.
Seljamaa E-H. – Czarnecka D. – Demski D. 2017. ‘Small Places, Large Issues: Between Military Space and Post-Military Place’, Folklore. Electronic Journal of Folklore 70: 7–18.
Sinitsyn F. 2013. Krasnaya burya: Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i buddizm v 1917–1946 g, Saint-Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo A. A. Terentyev.
Sovetskaya Sibirskaya Enciklopediya. 1932. Buryatskie datsany, Tom III: Irkutsk: Tipografiya gazety „Pravda”
Szacka B. 2006. Czas przeszły, pamięć, mity, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe SCHOLAR
Tsyrendashiev D. 2008. Süügelei dasan: domog, tüükhe, barimtanuud (XIX-dekhi zuun zhel), Ulan-Ude: Respublikanskaya tipografia.
Vanchikova T. – Gomboeva M. 2010. Filosofskie shkoly buddijskih monastyrej Vostochnogo Zabajkal'ya kak istoriko-kul'turnaya predposylka epohi buryatskogo Prosveshcheniya, Gumanitarnyj vektor. Seriya: Pedagogika, psihologiya 4 (24): 44-49.
Zhamsueva D. – Luvsan O. 2018. Tsugol'skij i Shenekhenskij dacany v sravnitel'nom aspekte, Vlast' №9: 212-216.