Memorial Representations of Working Class Quarters: Experiences of USSR and China
Abstract
Research provides a comparative analysis of the collective memories formed aroundordinary residential complexes in socialist cities. Comparison is done between elements that are manifested in the collective memory of the working class quarters built previously in two socialist countries - USSR and People’s Republic of China (PRC). Two workers’ districts - the Khavsko-Shabolovsky (Moscow) and the Iron and Steel Corporation (Wuhan) housing estates – serve as research cases. Memorialrepresentationsof selected residential complexes are different from the standard set byEastern European cities with majority of socialist legacies either completely excluded from the collective memory, or reduced to the function of the communist era amusement park. While the Chinese case demonstrates the diversification of symbols and types of memory, memory structure of Moscow quarter is more unified: leading symbol is the avant-garde architecture, which is valued so high that it functions as a barrier toproper development of social memory of the place. The identity of the Khavsko-Shabolovsky housing estate is built on the cultural memory basis, demanded by certain group of consumers, mostly non-residents of the district. The analysis makes it possible to contribute to post-socialist ethnography, fixing some common and particular features in memorial presentations of two functionally similar objects of the urban environment created during an intensive social transformation while establishing socialist ideology at the national level.
Keywords: postsocialism, working class quarter, memory
References
[1] Antonova, N., Grunt, E., Merenkov A. 2017. Monuments in the Structure of an Urban Environment: The Source of Social Memory and the Marker of the Urban Space IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 245 (6). DOI: doi:10.1088/1757-899X/245/6/062029
[2] Assmann, A. 2014. Dlinnaya ten’ proshlogo: Memorial’naya kul’tura i istoricheskaya politika [The Long Shadow of the Past: Cultures of Memory and the Politics of History]. Moscow: New Literary Observer.
[3] Assmann, A. 2008. “Transformations between History and Memory.” Social Research: An International Quarterly, 75 (1): 49–72.
[4] Bartmanski, D. 2011. “Successful icons of failed time: Rethinking post-communist nostalgia.” Acta sociologica, 54 (3): 213-231.
[5] Czepczyński, M. 2008. Cultural Landscapes of Post-socialist Cities: Representation of Powers and Needs. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing, 2008.
[6] Harvey, D.C. 2001. “Heritage Pasts and Heritage Presents: Temporality, Meaning and the Scope of Heritage Studies.” International Journal of Heritage Studies 7: 319–338.
[7] Hobsbawm E. and T.O. Ranger. 1992. The Invention of Tradition. UK: Cambridge University Press.
[8] Lowenthal, D. 1998. The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. UK: Cambridge University Press.
[9] Macdonald, S. 2013. Memorylands: Heritage and Identity in Europe Today. London: Routledge.
[10] Samuel, R. 1994. Theatres of Memory: Past and Present in Contemporary Culture. London, New York: Verso.
[11] Smith, L. 2006. Uses of Heritage. London, New York: Taylor & Francis.
[12] Wright, P. 2009. On Living in an Old Country: The National Past in Contemporary Britain. New York: Open University Press.