Ethnic nationalism produces conflicts through constructing identities that include certain groups and exclude or marginalize others. This process often continues in post-war periods and hinders inter-ethnic reconciliation. Political actors proceed with constructing ethno-national identities and (re-)writing national narratives in the realm of remembering. This thesis seeks to understand how memorial sites are used for nation-building processes in post-war contexts, based on the municipality of Prijedor, Bosnia and Herzegovina. This single instrumental case study analyzes two memorial sites through fieldwork, newspaper articles, and archival records. The theoretical framework builds on concepts from nationalism studies, memory studies, as well as cultural and political geography. The analysis demonstrates that the studied memorial sites are used as follows: 1) to depict the nation's objects of identification for demarcating the national Self from the Other; 2) to promote myths of victimization for unifying the group and justifying atrocities; 3) to silence narratives and memories that contradict or challenge those of the own group; and 4) to mark territory as an integral part of the spatial narrative in which public places are transformed into “owned” places. All four practices are closely interrelated and give the memorial sites meaning and authority to convey the Bosnian-Serbian nation-building project.

The American landscape is increasingly populated with memorial tourist sites showing a devotion to the past. In the last published statewide study of Tennessee historical roadside markers, Jones (1988) analyzed the 1,170 roadside markers across the state. In his analysis, markers devoted to black history or white women accounted for only 0.7% (n=8) and 0.8% (n=9), respectively, of all markers. At the time of this study there were more roadside markers solely dedicated to David Crocket (0.9%, n=11) than to either of these groups. Additionally, Native American people merely accounted for 3.0% (n=35), while white men accounted for 11.7% (n=137)–including 3% dedicated to Klu Klux Klan Founder Nathan Bedford Forrest (Jones, 1988). This particularly visible expression of public history serves primarily to preserve a white, Protestant, male history of the area (Jones, 1988). Using data on the 313 historical roadside markers erected since 1988, we (1) update the analysis of Jones (1988) and (2) discuss the lack of a “just representation” of non-white male history in these markers that has carried forward to 2019. The study is informed by social representation and critical race theory.

Seit einigen Jahren kursiert im Internet der Begriff Yolocaust als Bezeichnung für ein vorwiegend jugendbildkulturelles Phänomen, welches das als unangemessen empfundene Erstellen von Foto­gra­fien im Stile der jugendlichen Selfiekultur in Holocaust-Ge­denk­stätten und das anschließende Teilen dieser Bilder in den sozialen Netzwerken meint und welches oft als Symptom einer gestörten Erinnerungskultur gedeutet wird. Dieser Beitrag er­schließt anhand der Plattform Instagram zunächst die graduellen Ausprägungen dieser Bildkultur und sucht anschließend über die Analyse der Programmatik und der allgemeinen Bildkultur des Netzwerkes nach Erklärungsansätzen in der medialen Eigenlogik. Abschließend wird nach pädagogischen Konsequenzen für die Vorbereitung des Gedenkstättenbesuchs gefragt, ohne eine pau­schale Verurteilung der Bildkultur anzustreben.

SANTRAUKA Sovietinės okupacijos metu žuvo ir nukentėjo apie 350 tūkst. Lietuvos gyventojų. Visų jų atminimui nuo 1941 m. su pertraukomis buvo statomi įvairių tipų paminklai. Tyrimo objektas – rezistencijos dalyvių ir sovietinio genocido aukų įamžinimo paminklais procesas, jo ypatumai ir kylančios problemos, taip pat vietovių ir statinių, įamžintų paminklais, apskaitos ir įpaveldinimo klausimai. Jie iki šiol nenagrinėti ir nėra sulaukę tyrimo. Darbo tikslas – atskleisti Lietuvos gyventojų sovietinio genocido aukų ir rezistencijos dalyvių atminimo įamžinimo ir įpaveldinimo procesus bei su jais susijusias problemas. Tam įgyvendinti yra iškeliami šie uždaviniai: 1. nustatyti paminklų statybos etapus ir statytojų grupes, jas apibūdinti; 2. išsiaiškinti, kaip vykdoma vietovių ir statinių, pažymėtų paminklais, apskaita, koks šių objektų skirstymas; 3. apžvelgti, kaip vykdomi vietovių ir statinių tvarkymo bei įamžinimo darbai; 4. išsiaiškinti, kokios yra įamžinimo ir įpaveldinimo problemos. Tyrimo chronologija – tyrimas pradedamas XX a 5–uoju dešimtmečiu, kadangi jame prasidėjo pirmoji paminklų statymo banga ir įamžinimo darbai. Procesas nėra baigtinis, jis vyksta ir dabar, todėl apsibrėžiame 2006 m. Remiantis darbo tyrimu paminklų statyba sovietinio genocido aukų ir rezistencinio judėjimo dalyvių atminimui Lietuvoje vyko trimis etapais, kur memorialinių vietovių teritorijų tvarkymą, paminklų statybą ir memorialinių statinių ženklinimą vykdė įvairūs žmonės ir organizacijos, kuriuos... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / SUMMARY OF MASTER’S WORK During the Soviet occupation, around 350,000 Lithuanian residents suffered and died. From 1941 on, with interruptions, monuments of various kinds have been built to commemorate all of them. The subject of this investigation is the process of immortalizing members of the resistance movement and victims of Soviet genocide in monuments, the specific features of and problems encountered in this process, as well as issues concerning the inventory and memorialization of sites and buildings recognized as monuments. These have not been the subject of any study hitherto and have not been the focus of investigation. The goal of this work is to disclose the processes and associated problems of commemorating and memorializing Lithuanian victims of Soviet genocide and members of the resistance. To achieve this goal, the following tasks were formulated: 1. to determine the phases of monument construction and groups of builders, and to characterize them; 2. to explain how inventory of sites and buildings recognized as monuments takes place and how these objects are categorized; 3. to survey how work is carried out for the maintenance and commemoration of sites and buildings; 4. to ascertain the nature of problems involved in commemoration and memorialization. Based on the work of our investigation, the construction of monuments commemorating victims of Soviet genocide and members of the resistance movement took place in three phases in Lithuania, a process in which... [to full text]