We kindly inform you that, as long as the subject affiliation of our 300.000+ articles is in progress, you might get unsufficient or no results on your third level or second level search. In this case, please broaden your search criteria.
This paper provides a cross-section of the scientific interests of Nenad Ljubinković. Particular attention is paid to the polemical elements in the opus of this author. His polemical moments are viewed as essentially constructive, due to the fact that, from a polemic, as if from some kind of focal point, there arises a succession of texts of a theoretical bent, from which one can read the author’s concept of folklore and folklore studies, in a nutshell, the poetics of oral culture. We analyse the specific features of Ljubinković’s contextual approach to studying folklore and point out the stylistic characteristics of his polemically intoned texts (I-statements, contamination of stylistic registers, methods of decanonisation and dethronisation of authority). Our analysis of Ljubinković’s studies of oral epic poetry reveals the modernity of this author, in view of the fact that he raises a number of exceptionally complex and topical issues (the issues of the second-degree ideologisation of folklore, acceptance of history as a social construct).
More...
Even though it seems that the recurrent image of drinking wine is one of those constants that are neutral in terms of the sujet, it encompasses a number of structural factors (chronotope, hero, metrical organisation, the context of improvisation, etc.). Being very flexible, this formula can be found in all positions in the “text“, and it supports the meaning of numerous situations that are stylised in accordance with the rules of oral epic poetry, lyrical and lyrical-epic genres. A stable minimum model manifests a broad spectrum of meanings, along with activating the pagan and Christian layers of our heritage, the ethnographic basis, the reality of the collective and reminiscences of the historical past. In this paper, we follow the functions and meanings of the formula of drinking and serving wine that are connected with the poetics of oral forms andvarious models (initiation of the bridegroom; a slandered hero; refilling a glass; self-praise and realisation of a plan; unfaithful relatives, etc.). Most frequently found in the initial position of a “text“, the formula also gets shifted towards other syntagmatic levels, whereby its semantic and sujet-related potential is increased (from a reflex of a ritual act to complications essential for the development of the sujet and the characterisation of the protagonists, from initiation of the horizon of expectation and emotional involvement of the reader, through making a point, to parody). The manifold functions and possibilities of its application are adjusted to the symbolic values of wine, the genre rules and the circumstances of realising the variants.
More...
In Kim Scott’s novel Benang: From the Heart (1999), the narrator Harley—“the first white man born” and a product of his white grandfather’s personal eugenicist project—attempts to write down, in a subversive and rebellious gesture, “the most local of histories,” in order to articulate alternative perspectives on both Indigenous and non-Indigenous identity and belonging. In this “counter-project,” Harley must not only trace his Indigenous family lineage and their stories, but he must also learn to listen to and negotiate these stories. Gradually his endeavour comes to be characterized by what Lisa Slater, in her critical essay on Benang, calls “an ethics of uncertainty,” pointing to Harley’s, and by extension to Scott’s, preoccupation with cultural dislocation—a sense of not belonging fully to either culture—and the ways this can be reflected in his writing style, language, genre and frame. Harley, the indeterminate and uncertain narrator in Slater’s terms, can be read, I would suggest, as an archetypal Indigenous life chronicler, an embodiment of the position occupied by many contemporary Australian Indigenous storytellers/writers who use the genre of life writing to re-create their stolen identities while exposing and “writing back” to the (post)colonial narratives of the settler nation.
More...
Limnos, like many parts of Greece, experienced successive and long periods of foreign domination, traumas of war and economic devastation. During the decades of 1950’s - 1970’s, compounded by social and economic instability, many Limnian islanders arrived as young immigrants to Australia looking to build a ‘normal’ life. In this paper, through oral history case studies, I examine how the first and subsequent generations of migrants engage with concepts of home and belonging and the role of ethno-regionalism in the reconstruction and redefinition of identity in the diaspora. Ethno-regional identity, of interest in this research, remains both durable and significant as it reforms on foreign soil though it has received comparatively little academic attention. Identity formation and reformation and the role of ‘return’ visits to the ancestral home emerge as transnational patterns that lead to a rediscovered identity shaping the next generation. This ‘history from below’ is not only about the potential loss of Australian migration historiography, but also the legacy of the oral narrative that links the past with the lives and memories of the present and future descendants galvanising this community’s continuity.
More...
April to June every year, Rwandans commemorate the 1994 genocide. Extensive oral historical narratives are brought to life. Under the Aegis Trust for the prevention of genocide and crimes against humanity, stories are re-enacted and shared. Narratives of memories are seen as instruments to heal historical trauma. Rwanda has since moved from ravages of the genocide to political and economic stability. Although, Rwanda records a history of ethnic killings and near genocide from 1950s, it is the 1994 genocide that rocked its fabric of peace. Des Forges (2007) argues the genocide was not an outburst of uncontrolled rage of ethnic hatred, but a discontent to historical grievances and widening economic disparities between the Hutu elites and Rwandan poor. To suppress dissent, state and militia extremists planned and orchestrated the genocide. After the genocide, an International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) was set up to try suspects. It was supplemented with Gacaca courts - a modified traditional conflict resolution system. In this paper, I aim to analyse oral history as a qualitative methodology. The narratives archived on video recount how Rwandans heal the genocide trauma through remembering. According to Moyer (1993) oral history involves a systematic gathering of testimonies of people who have experienced a significant event. It is not based on non-factual information, rather on verifiable facts that can be analyzed and placed in accurate historical contexts. This paper will adapt an oral historical narrative analysis of video testimonies from the Aegis Trust.
More...
This handbook offers only some of the possible answers to the question how to deepen the discussion on the past in polarized societies where denial and/or relativization of crimes is an everyday practice and where one can hear exclamations such as "There is only one truth!" more often than questions "What has happened to you and your family?" The pages you are reading have been written for all those who have doubts and question a black-and-white picture of a 'better past', subject to adjustments and polishing in order to makes 'us' look more positive and 'them' negative. The handbook deals with some of the possible ways in which facts can be documented, suffering of every victim and survivor acknowledged and dignity of every person respected. The idea for publishing this handbook was born on my way to Canada where I was supposed to present the process of dealing with the past in Croatia and the neighbouring countries, from my own perspective, to colleagues from both North and South America and other continents. Interest into our experiences, expressed by ancestors of children who were taken from Indigenous peoples’ villages near Vancouver, with "the best intentions of better education", as well as by artists from Colombia who work with traumatized families of the killed and missing and by priests who are preparing a truth commission in Burundi, but also positive reactions from Bjelovar, Pakrac, Osijek and Sarajevo, encouraged us to write this handbook. National Foundation for the Development of Civil Society also recognized the importance of learning through exchange of experiences and supported this handbook. Texts in the handbook describe experiences of people who have, for decades, been trying to find ways in which to talk about hidden, unpleasant facts and crimes committed in their neighbourhood. The authors have gathered in initiatives such as that for the return of the name of the Victims of fascism square in Zagreb or Antiwar campaign Croatia and started organizations such as Centre for peace studies, Delfin, Pravda and MIRamiDA Centre. In an attempt to initiate the process of dealing with the past and to establish a fact-based truth about the war and contribute to shifting public discussion from the level of dispute about facts towards a dialogue on interpretations, these organizations founded Documenta – Centre for Dealing with the Past (hereafter Documenta). It was established in order to systematically deal with violence inherited in the period since the beginning of the Second World War until today. The key reason for making this effort was experience in silencing and forging war crimes and other war events in the period from 1941 until 2000, which has affected the recent history of Yugoslavia, but also of post-Yugoslav states and societies. During their work, the authors have opened questions which are, at the same time, difficult and important for everyone. Experiences which they have documented cannot be implemented universally, but can perhaps serve as an inspiration for opening up the dialogue about the past and about the adequate ways of remembering those killed in different locations. Since they are aware that there are no uniform recipes for thinking about the past and selecting the way in which to discuss difficult issues, they sometimes start from their own position and position of their own family, and sometimes point to global problems. The order in which you choose to read the text is not important. Regardless of whether you choose to first read about personal, family, institutional or social sphere, the texts will lead you to taking a stand towards violence in all spheres. Considering the fact that we still live in exclusive societies in which security is often based on closing oneself in a group of people of the same nationality and/ or those who think alike and who do not refrain from radical nationalism, ideological exclusiveness, degrading people of different nationality, making fun of ideological opponents or denying facts on committed war crimes, our starting point, in the work we do, was acknowledgement and emphasis of human dignity of those who were killed, suffered or were abused, regardless of the side on which they found themselves due to their belonging, geography, choice or political beliefs. The same values may also be your own starting point. Since respect of dignity and equal rights is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace, all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and their rights, as stipulated in the Preamble and Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted at the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948. While a struggle for recognition of rights which are stipulated in this declaration is still going on, we can ask ourselves how many more decades will need to pass in order for the ‘new’ rights to truth, just court proceedings, reparations and guarantee to non-repetition of crimes, which are being affirmed within the U.N. in the past ten years, to become a worldwide recognized standard? Even if we are talking about a century of advocacy, we should not be discouraged by the slowness of changes, because taking a stand to violence on an every-day basis means a lot to those who have been hurt. Even in times of dictatorships, the destiny of those who suffered becomes visible only when others, outside one’s family circle, recognize it as such. Building mutual trust after a war and conflicts is connected to the acknowledgement of victims’ past suffering, and in Croatia and other post-Yugoslav countries, contemporaries of three cycles of violence, the Second World War, post-war violence over political opponents and the 1990s wars, are still alive. The decision on how far in the past one should go when conducting research is not an easy one. In social processes of dealing with difficult past violence, it is not easy, and sometimes even impossible, to single out only one group of crimes, especially in disputes which touch upon traumatic experiences of participants themselves. Every initiative for deepening a dialogue about the past will decide what would be a relevant period in the context of its own country. In countries with the history of colonialism or slavery, it will, for example, be necessary to take into account more layers of history. In this handbook, the authors primarily use examples from Croatia regarding three layers of the past, the contemporaries of which are still alive. In other countries, it will perhaps be possible to focus only on the last cycle of violence or it will be necessary to look back a couple of centuries back, for example to the period when colonization started. In our work thus far, it has become clear that personal, family, institutional and social dealing with the past is not only important for the protection of rights of those groups which suffered during wars or political violence, but is also important for the process of civilizational development of a society as a whole. Open, inclusive societies in which horizontal communication about all, even unpleasant topics, is encouraged, are more successful in every respect. When working through a trauma, through dealing with the past, we affirm inclusiveness and openness of a society, as a general good which should be protected. However we engage in the process of dealing with the past, it will demand from us to condemn spreading of hatred. Regardless of whether we decide to have private conversations within our own homes or to critically examine the most important decisions adopted by government institutions, the first step we make could be to condemn violence. It is less important whether this condemnation will influence our relationship with ourselves and our closest family members or whether we find a way to express this condemnation by critically commenting on the world around us. What is important is this essential step of condemning all forms of violence. The scope of your intervention, research or action will depend on your ability to include and motivate others. It is not important whether the initiative will start from one person’s wish to document his/her memories for future generations1 , from a conversation between two worried individuals2 or from years-long preparations of experienced organizers for founding a researchdocumentation centre which would systematically monitor trials and document human losses. In moments of revolt caused by a general lack of respect for values that you find important, decisions on taking action will be made in a second, while decisions on starting new organizations may take several years. But before diving into an examination of methodology, the question that should first be asked is the one about the purpose of dealing with the past. One of the possible answers, which has emerged throughout the work of human rights organizations, is that dealing with the past lessens the burden of the past, which stalls complete development of societies affected by war and political violence. Only by revealing systematically hidden and silenced information on human suffering and by gradually accepting facts about committed crimes are we creating a chance for personal and social healing, as well as providing space for realizing the rights of young people on learning about fact-based history. Emina Bužinkić, Igor Roginek, Goran Božičević, Ana Bitoljanu and Vesna Teršelič are the editors of this handbook. It contains texts on factography of suffering, recoding of personal memories, preparation of public advocacy and war crimes trials monitoring. We believe the handbook to abound in different styles, approaches, language and experiences and hope you will find it helpful.
More...
Ovaj priručnik nudi samo neke od mogućih praktičnih odgovora na pitanje kako produbiti raspravu o prošlosti u polariziranim društvima gdje je poricanje i/ili relativizacija zločina svakodnevna praksa u kojim a se puno češće od pitanja drugom čovjeku "Što se dogodilo tebi i tvojim najbližima, kako vam je bilo?", čuje povik "Jedna je istina!". Stranice pred vama napisane su za sve koji sumnjaju i propituju jednostavnu crno bijelu sliku 'bolje prošlosti', eventualno podložnu dotjerivanju i prekrajanju kako bi 'nas' pokazala u što ljepšem svjetlu, a 'njih' ocrnila. Priručnik se bavi nekim mogućim putovima prema stvaranju podrške za dokumentiranje svih činjenica, priznavanju patnje svake žrtve i preživjelog te uvažavanju dostojanstva svakog čovjeka. Ideja za priručnik rodila se na putu u Kanadu gdje sam trebala predstaviti proces suočavanja s prošlošću u Hrvatskoj i susjednim zemljama kolegama iz obje Amerike i drugih kontinenata, iz svoje perspektive. Zanimanje za naša iskustva, kako nasljednika djece koja su "s najboljim namjeram a boljeg obrazovanja" otimana iz plemenskih rezervata u blizini Vancouvera, tako i umjetnika koji u Kolumbiji rade s traumatiziranim obiteljima ubijen ih i nestalih te svećenika koji u Burundiju priprema osnivanje Komisije za istinu, kao i pozitivne reakcije iz Bjelovara, Pakraca, Osijeka i Sarajeva, ohrabrilo nas je na pisanje. Tekstovi opisuju iskustva ljudi koji su desetljećima tražili načine progovaranja o skrivenim neugodnim činjenicama i zločinima iz susjedstva. Autori/ce su se okupljali u inicijativama poput prosvjeda za vraćanje imena Trgu žrtava fašizma u Zagrebu ili Antiratnoj kampanji Hrvatske i pokretali organizacije poput Centra za mirovne studije, Delfina, Pravde i MIRamiDA Centra. Neki od njih su u nastojanju da potaknu proces suočavanja s prošlošću i ustanovljenje činjenične istine o ratu te pridonesu pomicanju javne diskusije s razine prijepora o činjenicama prema dijalogu o interpretacijama, osnovali su Documentu - Centar za suočavanje s prošlošću (u daljnjem tekstu Documenta) kako bi se sustavno bavili nasilnim naslijeđem od početka Drugog svjetskog rata. Ključni je razlog ovoga nastojanja iskustvo prešućivanja i falsificiranja ratnih zločina i ostalih ratnih zbivanja od 1941. do 2000. koje je utjecalo na noviju prošlost, kako Jugoslavije tako i post-jugoslavenskih država/društava. U tijeku svoga rada otvarali su svima mučna i važna pitanja. Iskustva koja su zabilježili nisu univerzalno primjenjiva, ali možda mogu poslužiti kao inspiracija za otvaranje dijaloga o prošlosti i primjerenim načinima pamćenja ubijen ih u različitim sredinama. Svjesni da u razmišljanju o naslijeđu prošlosti i izboru načina otvaranja teških pitanja u javnosti nema recepata, ponekad su polazili od sebe i vlastite obitelji, a ponekad su upirali prstom na globalne probleme. U vašem izboru neće biti važan redoslijed. Bez obzira hoće li vaše prvo pitanje dotaknuti osobni, obiteljski, institucionalni ili društveni krug, vodit će vas k zauzimanju stava prema nasilju i to u svim sferama. Pošto još uvijek živimo u isključivim društvima u kojima se sigurnost prečesto gradi na zatvaranju u skupine sunarodnjaka i/ili sumišljenika kojima nije stran ni radikalni nacionalizam ni ideološka isključivost ni ponižavanje ljudi druge nacionalnosti, kao ni ismijavanje ideoloških oponenata ili negiranje činjenica o počinjenim zločinima, u svom smo radu kretali od priznavanja i isticanja ljudskog dostojanstva ubijenih, stradalih, zlostavljanih, bez obzira na kojoj su se strani podjela zatekli zbog svoje pripadnosti ili geografskog usuda ili pak zbog svoga izbora i političkih uvjerenja. Možda s te vrijednosne platforme krenete i vi. Budući da je priznanje urođenog dostojanstva te jednakih prava temelj slobode, pravde i mira, sva ljudska bića rađaju se slobodna i jednaka u dostojanstvu i pravima, stoji u Preambuli i Članku 1. Opće deklaracije o ljudskim pravima, usvojene i proglašene na Općoj skupštini Ujedinjenih naroda 10. prosinca 1948.. Dok je još uvijek u tijeku borba za priznavanje u nju zapisanih prava možemo se zapitati koliko će nam desetljeća trebati da ‘nova ’ prava na istinu, pravični sudski postupak, reparacije i garanciju neponavljanja zločina, koja se u tijeku posljednjih desetak godina postupno afirmiraju unutar Ujedinjenih naroda, postanu standard priznat od strane većine svjetskih država? Čak i ako je riječ o stoljeću zagovaranja, ne bi nas smjela obeshrabriti sporost pomaka, jer svakodnevno zauzimanje stava prema nasilju puno znači povrijeđenima. Čak i u vrijeme diktature sudbina stradalog postaje vidljiva kad je prepoznaju drugi, izvan neposrednog obiteljskog kruga. Izgradnja povjerenja poslije rata i sukoba neodvojivo je povezana s priznavanjem patnje žrtava iz prošlosti, a u Hrvatskoj i drugim post-jugoslavenskim zemljama još uvijek žive suvremenici tri vala nasilja, Drugog svjetskog rata, poslijeratnog vremena nasilja nad političkim neistomišljenicima i ratova devedesetih. Odluka koliko daleko u prošlost će vas odvesti propitivanja i istraživanja za koja se odlučite nije jednostavna. U društvenim procesima prorade teškog naslijeđa nasilja nije lako, a katkada ni moguće, izdvojiti samo jednu grupu zločina, posebno u prepirkama koje dotiču traumatična iskustva samih sudionika. Svaka će inicijativa za produbljivanje dijaloga o prošlosti odlučiti što bi bilo relevantno razdoblje rada u kontekstu svoje zemlje. U zemljama s naslijeđem kolonijalizma ili ropstva bit će primjerice neophodno voditi računa o još više slojeva prošlosti. U ovom priručniku autori/ce će pretežno koristiti primjere iz Hrvatske u vezi tri sloja prošlosti čiji su suvremenici još uvijek živi. U drugim će se zemljama možda biti moguće usredotočiti samo na zadnji val nasilja ili će pak biti neophodno pogledati i nekoliko stoljeća unatrag, primjerice u vrijeme početaka kolonizacije. U dosadašnjem radu pokazalo se da osobno, obiteljsko, institucionalno i društveno suočavanje s prošlošću nije važno samo zbog zaštite prava pripadnika skupina stradalih u ratovima ili političkom nasilju, već je značajno i u procesu civiliziranja društva u cjelini. Otvorena, ukljućiva društva u kojima se ohrabruje horizontalna komunikacija o svim pa i neugodnim temama su uspješnija u svim pogledima. Proradom traume kroz suočavanje s prošlošću afirmiramo ukljućivost i otvorenost društva kao opće dobro koje treba štititi. Kako god krenuli u proces suočavanja s prošlošću to će od nas iziskivati osudu raspirivanja mržnje. Hoćemo li odabrati kao svoj put unutarnje razgovore u tišini vlastitog doma ili kritično sagledavanja najvažnijih odluka vladinih institucija, prvi bi korak dakle mogla biti osuda nasilja. Hoće li ta osuda prije svega utjecati na naš odnos prema sebi i našim najbližima ili ćemo pronaći način da je izrazimo u kritičkom komentiranju funkcioniranja svijeta oko nas, manje je važno od bitnog koraka osude svakog nasilja. Doseg vaše željene intervencije, istraživanje ili akcija ovisit će o vašoj mogućnosti uključivanja i motiviranja drugih. Nije nevažno hoće li inicijativa krenuti od želje jedne osobe da zabilježi svoja sjećanja za buduće generacije, razgovora dvoje zabrinutih ili od dugogodišnjih priprema iskusnih organizatora na pokretanje istraživaćko-dokumentacijskog centra koji će moći sustavno pratiti suđenja i dokumentirati ljudske gubitke. U trenucima revolta zbog gaženja vama važnih vrijednosti odluke o nekim akcijama će biti donesene praktično u trenu, a za odluke o pokretanju novih organizacija možda će trebati više godina. No prije nego uronimo u propitivanje metoda, ipak je na mjestu pitanje svrhe, čemu uopće suočavanje s prošlošću? Jedan mogući odgovor, koji se iskristalizirao u radu organizacija za ljudska prava, je da bi smanjili teret prošlosti koji onemogućava pun razvoj stvaralaštva u ratom i političkim nasiljem obilježenim društvima. Tek otkivanjem sustavno sakrivanih i prešućivanih podataka o stradanju te postupnim prihvaćanjem činjenica o zločinima stvaramo priliku za osobno i društveno iscjeljenje, a i prostor za ostvarivanje prava mladih na učenje povijesti utemeljene na činjenicama. Priručnik su uredili Emina Bužinkić, Igor Roginek, Goran Božičević, Ana Bitoljanu i Vesna Teršelič. Sadrži tekstove o faktografiji stradanja, snimanju osobnih sjećanja, priprem i javnog zagovaranja, i praćenju suđenja. Priručnik smatramo bogatim u njegovoj različitosti stilova, pristupa, jezika i iskustava. Nadamo se da će vam biti od pomoći.
More...
Željko Obradović rođen je 1967. u Donjem Lapcu. Uspostavom ‘’SAO Krajine’’ bio je mobiliziran u krajinsku vojsku. U svibnju ‘95 su ga zbog kritiziranja srpskih političkih lidera uhitile krajinske vlasti pa je 22 dana zatvoren u zatvoru u Frkašiću. Nakon VRA Oluja s obitelji je otišao u izbjeglištvo u Srbiju. Iz Srbije je pokušavao s obitelji otići u ‘’treće zemlje’’, no kako nije uspio, 1999. odlučio je vratiti se u Hrvatsku. Nakon rata aktivirao se u lokalnoj politici kao član SDSS-a. Danas živi s obitelji u Donjem Lapcu i zauzima se za prava srpske nacionalne manjine.
More...
U ovoj knjizi donosimo transkript nekoliko izlaganja sa konferencije koju je Documenta organizirala u Zagrebu u rujnu 2013. godine s ciljem predstavljanja višegodišnjeg snimanja i objave intervjua na web stranici www.osobnasjecanja.hr. Uz komentare i pitanja nekih od sudionika konferencije, u knjizi možete pročitati uvodni tekst koji je na konferenciji izložila urednica kolekcije Maja Dubljević, te transkript izlaganja Vesne Jakumetović iz Vukovara, Ane Raffai iz Zagreba, te Đorđa Gunjevića iz Pakraca. Predstavljamo vam i dvije studije slučaja u kojima su korišteni snimljeni intervjui - studiju slučaja publicistkinje i istraživačice, Vesne Kesić „Španovica / Novo selo / Španovica: Znalo se? Nije se znalo?“ te studiju slučaja povjesničara Marka Smokvine “Stara Gradiška kao paradigma hrvatske povijesti 20. stoljeća”.
More...
Both literally and figuratively, war has always been an arena for encounters with the otherworld. From the interventions of the gods in the Trojan War to the Angels of Mons in the 1916, the mythology of conflict has offered resolution in the shape of alternative realities. As if war is too materialist, it must be endowed with magic. This might be from outside (the Angels of Mons) or through the appeal to internal anxieties implied by the famous question 'What did you do in the Great War, Daddy?' This paper examines the ways in which contemporary songs explored alternative representations of the First World War, asserted a critical consciousness of the paradoxes and ironies involved, and also, in many cases, asked whose interests the War served. The study is based on a huge international initiative to gather oral and written narratives from all the countries taking part in the 1914-18 War. It takes examples of songs from both ‘sides’ in a war in which the ideologies of each were, in fact, remarkably similar.
More...
Oral-prose forms as parts of the structure in the novel Grozdanin kikot by Hamza Humo have been analyzed in this work. The focus of the analysis is to abstract the oral tradition and reveal its function in the novelistic structure.
More...
The study examines the holocaust in the Moravian villages of Svatobořice and Strážnice using the micro-historical view. The transformations of the locality of Baráky in Svatobořice as well as the talk by the survivor Ruth Felix about her life reflect the „great history“ of the 20th century. The study draws information on both sites from the oral sources stored in the Visual History Archive (University of Southern California). The presentation of the field research concerns the locality of Baráky (Svatobořice – Mistřín), the former Roma settlement near Svatobořice, the synagogue and the Jewish cemetery in Strážnice and the house of Ruth Felixová on Bzenecká Street.
More...
Štúdia skúma metódou mikrohistorickým pohľadom holokaust v moravských obciach Svatobořice a Strážnice. Premeny lokality „Baráky“ vo Svatobořicicích ako i rozprávanie preživšej Ruth Felixovej o jej živote sú odrazom „veľkých dejín“ 20. storočia. Štúdia čerpá informácie k obom miestam z orálnych prameňov uložených v archíve svedectiev Visual History Archive (Univerzity v južnej Kalifornii). Prezentácia z terénneho výskumu sa týka lokality Baráky (Svatobořice – Mistřín), bývalej rómskej osady pri Svatobořicích, synagógy a židovského cintorína v Strážnici a domu Ruth Felixovej na Bzeneckej ulici.
More...
My jsme ze Slovenska, máma pocházela z Hrabušic v okrese Spišská Nová Ves, táta kousek odvedle. Byla jsem malá, když jsme se přestěhovali do Ostravy, měla jsem rok, takže nevím, jak to tam vypadá, byla jsem tam jednou. To jsme byli malí, máma nás tam vzala a od té doby jsem tam už nebyla. Už tolik roků. A neláká mě tam jet. Já jsem jako děcko tam na Slovensko chodit nechtěla, protože máma mluvila, že to tam bylo děs a hrůza. Romové kradli, neměli kde brát, dávku jim pozastavili, museli krást v obchodech, na polích. Brambory, zelí, takový ty věci.
More...
Interviurile cu povestea vieții înregistrate de grupul de antropologie culturală și istorie orală al Fundației „A Treia Europă” ne-au oferit adesea inserturi memoriale în istoria unui loc, unde intervievatorul și-a trăit viața, și-a făcut anii de școală, s-a format, a călătorit, a parcurs un traiect profesional.
More...
Studiile de istorie orală dețin deja un loc bine definit în spectrul metodologiei sociale calitative, reprezentând un instrument de cercetare tot mai des folosit în majoritatea științelor socio-umane. Consacrată sociologic încă din 1948, o dată cu „Proiectul de istorie orală de la Universitatea Columbia” coordonat de Allan Nevins, metoda istoriei orale urmărește reconstituirea, pe baza relatării subiecților, a unor evenimente desfășurate în trecut.
More...