Минало несвършващо Теренно изследване
Изтегляне 2.29 Mb.
|
- Навигация на страницата:
- Българи католици – 25 души
- Българи протестанти – 15 души
- Prof. Evgenia Ivanova (New Bulgarian University). Consensuses of Bulgarian memory
- Prof Evelina Kelbecheva (American University in Bulgaria). What is „yes”, what is „no” – the present of the historic memory in Bulgaria
- А s. Alexei Kalionski (University of Sofia) Official history and local interpretations
- Assoc. Prof. Dmitrii Varsonovtsev (New Bulgarian University). Whose is this memory „Remembrance” as an industrial-institutionalised manufacturing of biographies
- Assoc. Prof. Alexandar Nikolov (University of Sofia). The h istory t extbook as a f ormative f actor of n
- Kristina Ferdinandova (student, University of Sofia )
Араби – 7 души
Арменци – 24 души
Армъни – 11 души
Българи католици – 25 души
Българи протестанти – 15 души
Власи – 23 души
Гагаузи – 10 души
Гърци – 10 души
Евреи – 13 души
Каракачани - 18 души
Македонци – 2 души
Руснаци – 37 души
Татари – 5 души
Украинци – 8 души
Заб. Сборът от респондентите е 1006, защото 3 души не са се определили по етнически признак.
Най-важното историческо място/етнос 
Най-важното историческо събитие / етнос 
Най-важната историческа личност/етнос 
Характер на топосите
Типология на топосите
Хронология на топосите
Заб.
Сборът от процентите в последните три таблици не винаги дава 100, тъй като някои от респондентите са давали невъзможни за определяне отговори. Abstracts Prof. Evgenia Ivanova (New Bulgarian University). Consensuses of Bulgarian memory The paper summarizes the results from the research project “Topoi of Memory”, which is a joint venture between the New Bulgarian University and the American University in Bulgaria. The major goal of the research team is to investigate the level of modernization of Bulgarian society using the mechanism of historical memory. Thus we are trying to answer the question: whether there exists one coherent and normative Grand Historical Narrative, inspired by “the inventors of tradition” - and how does it function. Or, whether there are diverse narratives which circulate among the various social, ethnic and religious groups, according to their own value systems. Another aim of the research is to establish the generators of memory, which are at odds between the institutional education and the traditions of the different groups. The results are quite clear: the Grand Bulgarian Historical Narrative is centered on the last decade of the Ottoman Rule in Bulgaria, (the 1870’s) which presents the climax of the national liberation movement and the Liberation from the “Turkish Joke”. Still, the “joke“is marked primarily by the heroic discourse. This is in sharp distinction with Serbia, where the traumatic discourse is dominant. The heroic discourse allows much more wider deployment of the narratives of epic heroism, than the traumatic national memory of martyrdom. The leading topoi of memory among the majority of Bulgarians and the diverse minorities groups are relatively similar, still they differ on the level of repetition of these topoi. Even the representatives of the Turkish minority consider the Liberation of Bulgaria from the Ottoman rule the most important historical event. This fact does not mean that these Bulgarian Turks highlight a distinct “martyrdom memory”, or feature a high level of integration in Bulgarian society. It rather presents (in the majority of the cases) a special mimicry of the minority group versus the majority.
This paper is an attempt to analyse two levels of the existing and the absent topoi of Bulgarian memory. The first emphasis in this analysis is placed on the influence of the history textbooks on the formation of a notion of the past. I believe that the essentialistic approach of official historiography is the primary reason for the fossilisation of the clichés of Bulgarian historic memory. On the other hand the Grand Historic Narrative, in my opinion, can be viewed as a great tale where coherently, linearly, emotionally, and convincingly a story is created to the satisfaction of all. The second part of the paper analyses the blank zones or more precisely the black holes of Bulgarian memory. Some of them are expected, others – unexpected. The most “logical” absence is the orderly and consensual knowledge of the Communist period. It still continues to be a legal as well as historiographical, moral and psychological problem facing the nation. The unexpected, in my opinion, „amnesia” is the absence of the Antiquity and the Thracian heritage in Bulgarian memory, i.e. the Thracians as „the third element in the formation of Bulgarian Medieval nationality” are not discernable. Аs. Alexei Kalionski (University of Sofia) Official history and local interpretations This paper outlines a specific group of “minority” answers, some of them coinciding with the general results of the project, and some of them not. Despite the striking similarity with the Orthodox Bulgarians, representatives of 15 other religious, language or ethnic groups have pointed out topoi, historical heroes and events outside the “Grand narrative” of the national past. They indicate the importance of local or other national symbols in the dynamic process of constructing and sustaining the respective identities. Here an analysis is offered, of possible motives, contexts, and alternative interpretations. Assoc. Prof. Dmitrii Varsonovtsev (New Bulgarian University). Whose is this memory? „Remembrance” as an industrial-institutionalised manufacturing of biographies The surveys conducted within the project „Topoi of Historic Memory” show that the images and topoi of historic memory – whether they are institutionalised or have become „routine” – are set in stone, even fossilised and due to their finite materialised functionality and mechanics leave a broad area of individual preferences for the „samples”. The current reality to which they form an entirely external frame, with which they do not „merge”, falls apart into diverse, conflicting and even incompatible images and associations with historic time. Young people, on the one hand, do not perceive their situation „as historically constructed and integrated”, an on the other, they play quite freely with this same „history”, they relativize it finitely – although forced to perform the role of someone narrating correctly a history which is not theirs. Quite naturally comes the question – whose is this history? Assoc. Prof. Alexandar Nikolov (University of Sofia). The history textbook as a formative factor of national memory in the internet era. The paper is concentrated on the unexpectedly great role of the history textbook, that is underestimated to a certain degree as a source of national memory. The text is based on research results, dedicated to the topoi of Bulgarian historical memory and also on an analysis of a part of the most widespread history textbooks. Thus, the research attempts to underline the role of the school as an environment for the formation of the imagination of history- still an important social function similar to the function of the personality of the teacher and difficult to be followed by purely sociological means. A vast spectrum of answers is available that is directing us to a traditional information milieu, dominated by the printed authorized text and, of course, to the teacher as an interpreter. This comparison demonstrates that, despite the growing influence of Internet as a main source of information about vast circle of issues, the school, textbooks and teaching materials are still a source of significant importance. This phenomenon is also researched through the parameters of generation, locality and education. Kristina Ferdinandova (student, University of Sofia) The greatness of a nation – comparative analysis of Vasil Levski’s and Hristo Botev’s images in history and literature textbooks This paper aims at demonstrating that Bulgarian national history is constructed around idealized heroic figures such as Levski and Botev. Drawing on 35 history and literature textbooks, the article analyzes how the images of those two revolutionaries have been constructed and represented. The analysis shows that both Levski’s and Botev’s images are presented in the textbooks in entirely positive light and that they are constantly used as pillars of the national identity building. This is also one of the explanations why they are always recognized by ordinary people as the greatest national historical figures. Каталог: faculty -> evelina -> evaluation%202017 evaluation%202017 -> Слово о полку игореве faculty -> Отчет на училищния участък 2010 2011 Страница 2 Училищно настоятелство списък Директор името на директора Изтегляне 2.29 Mb. Сподели с приятели:
|