გამოთხოვება წარსულთან, რომელიც 1921 წელს დაიწყო

Abstract

The paper deals with the dynamic of the practice of remembering and forgetting of the Soviet past in Georgia from the period of Perestroika to the restoration of independence. The theses of Jan and Aleida Assmann regarding interrelation of memory and identity, constant transformation of memory, on the influence of historical pre-figuration and emotion on the processes of remembering and forgetting comprises theoretical foundation of the research. The Perestroika weakened prohibitions and restrictions imposed by the Soviet regime. Spontaneously and sometimes quite consciously, it launched the process of revisiting the past – one of the crucial foundations of collective memory. The “new past” should serve as a basis of the legitimization of new future. History became the focus of interest for different groups of the society . The politics of Glastnost enabled discussion of the previously tabooed issues and changes gradually came to all realms of memory . The publication of the poem “25 February 1921” by Kolau Nadiradze in 1985 was one of the first testimonies to the change of attitudes to the Soviet past. This fact gave an impetus to the process of revision of the standard vision of the Soviet period. This fact was followed by several attempts of reconstruction of memory through the “revenge on the past” (P. Norra) and “active forgetting” (A. Assmann). The flag of the Democratic Republic of Georgia (1918-1921), which was prohibited for years, emerged to the forefront of memory and it was staged at all protest demonstrations. Together with the fl ag, forgotten heroes also were back from the past, those who waged active struggle against the Soviet regime: cadets who perished at the vicinities of Tbilisi in 1921; Maro Makhashvili – a student of Tbilisi State University who served as a nurse at the military front; Khaikhosro Cholokashvili – one of the leaders of the anti-Soviet movement, etc. The poem of Kote Makashvili – father of Maro Makashvili, became popular; the poem is dedicated to Maro and represents a kind of sorrow for the daughter and for the motherland. The banners with the inscription Glory to Independent Georgia! appeared on demonstrations. April 9, 1989 as a paradigmatic event united the elements of trauma and triumph. Like other similar events, the April 9 had a resonance (A. Assmann) which recalled some significant and painful events of the distant and near past. On the other hand, the April 9, 1989 became as starting point for the future history and memory. On the backdrop of silence of the Communist government, or with its participation, the names, facts and events erased from memory during the Soviet period were resurrected through the communicative memory and later moved to the cultural memory through texts, memorials, celebrations, rituals and other cites of memory. In 1989-1990, historical names were restored or the names of famous Georgian public or historical figures were given to the cities, districts, streets, squares, parks, metro stations, which previously were named after revolutionaries or communist party figures. The dismantling of the monuments of Soviet public figures – the symbols of the Soviet system – was the sign of active forgetting and testimony to the revenge on past. Thus, as it is common to the transition era, the counter-memory of the Soviet period gradually became a normative, official memory; the repressed, almost forgotten voices came back to the center of attention and were transformed into a shared memory. The “old”, Soviet memory which was reflected in monuments or rituals was losing its emotional attachment and, according to A. Assmann, was moved from the memory to history, thus becoming “possession” of historians and a subject of scientific study.