METAMORPHOSES OF OWNERSHIP AND DILEMMAS OF COMMUNIST MONUMENT PROTECTION
METAMORPHOSES OF OWNERSHIP AND DILEMMAS OF COMMUNIST MONUMENT PROTECTION

Summary/Abstract: French Revolution represented and enormous transfer of property and nationalization of history. Due to that, historical monuments were used as ideological instruments (and justifications) for the political restoration. The state monument protection came into existence. The situation in the Habsburg monarchy was a particular one. The establishment of the monument protection institution by the state followed the French model and was motivated by a very similar purpose. The growth of economic power of the bourgeoisie at the end of the 19th century and its utilitarian, exploiting and profit oriented mentality influenced the development of monument protection policy of the Habsburg Monarchy. In contrast to the 19th century historical revivals Socialist Realism was no retrospectivism. On the contrary, it represented the cult of the present interpreted as ever lasting and eternal. That is the explanation of the paradox that the revival of historical forms in Socialist Realist art was accompanied by the indifference or even iconoclasm concerning historical monuments. The implicit antinomy of the Communist relation to the past, i.e. iconoclasm versus the idea of Communism as a true protector of the human cultural heritage appeared in a new shape: Ignorants and pragmatists concluded a silent agreement on the control over historical monuments. Very typical for the monument protection practice in the Communist era is the case of Bratislava castle.

• Details
• Contents