Archieven: Events

Architects, heritage demolition and politics of professionalization: the heritage debates in Bulgaria

Elitza Stanoeva (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences)

Abstract

In societies undergoing profound transformations, the architectural heritage of the recent denounced past is often stigmatized as a cultural product and therefore symbol of the ousted regime and is accordingly subjected to demolition. I will discuss how the fate of such heritage – monuments, signature buildings and other sites – was debated, contested and reevaluated by architects who felt excluded from the decision-making process on what in their mind were problems pertaining to their own expertise. Thus, architects spearheaded the heritage debate driven by what I define as ‘politics of professionalization’ – that is, a pursuit for expert agency and public recognition. The research I will present focuses on Bulgaria in three periods of political transformation: nation-state building after 1878, state socialism after World War II and liberal democracy after 1989. I will discuss how architects’ reassessment of the heritage of the immediate past ran parallel to the evolution of their corporate organizations and interests, and was respectively linked not only to other problems of urban planning but also to issues of professional identity.

Biografie

Elitza Stanoeva holds a PhD in History (TU Berlin, 2013). As a postdoctoral researcher she has held fellowships in Germany, Austria and Bulgaria. Recently, she was at the European University Institute in Florence as a Research Associate in the ERC project PanEur1970s (October 2016 – September 2020) and at the Center for Advanced Study in Sofia as a Visiting Fellow (October 2020 – July 2021). She is author of the book Sofia: Ideology, Urban Planning and Life under Socialism (in Bulgarian). Her latest publications include: “Balancing between Socialist Internationalism and Economic Internationalization: Bulgaria’s Economic Contacts with the EEC”, in Romano and Romero (eds.), European Socialist Regimes’  Fateful  Engagement  with  the  West:  National  Strategies  in  the  long  1970s (London: Routledge, 2021); “Squeezed between External Trade Barriers and Internal Economic Problems:  Bulgaria’s Trade with Denmark in the 1970s” (European Review of History: Revue européenne d’histoire 27:3/2020); “Exporting Holidays: Bulgarian International Tourism and the Scandinavian Market in the 1960s and 1970s” in Pedersen and Noack (eds.), Tourism and Travel during the Cold War: Negotiating Tourist Experiences across the Iron Curtain (London: Routledge, 2020). Her ongoing research is focused on urban history and memory politics in socialism and post-socialism; détente and East-West economic cooperation; Cold War tourism.

Freising en de Slaven onder bisschop Abraham. Een op tekststudies gebaseerde benadering van missie en pastorale zorg onder de Karantanen in de 10e eeuw.

Anke Lenssens (Universiteit Gent)

Abstract

De Karantanen waren het eerste Slavische volk dat zich tot het christendom bekeerde. Hun bekering gaat terug tot de 8e eeuw, honderd jaar voor de komst van Cyrillus en Methodius. In tegenstelling tot hun beroemde opvolgers lieten de Beierse missionarissen van de Carantani geen literatuur achter met liturgische en pastorale teksten in de Slavische volkstaal. De enige taalkundige overblijfselen van de Beierse missionaire inspanningen zijn de zogenaamde Freisingse Monumenten, drie korte teksten over zonde en boete in een verder Latijnse codex uit de 10e eeuw die in verband kan worden gebracht met bisschop Abraham van Freising (957-994). De relatie van deze teksten met de activiteiten van het bisdom Freising onder bisschop Abraham is lange tijd onderwerp geweest van wetenschappelijke speculatie, maar onderzoek naar de Freisingse Slavische missie is nooit veel verder gegaan dan de nauwgezette, maar geïsoleerde studie van de drie teksten in kwestie. De contextualisering van de drie teksten binnen het manuscript zelf en binnen de rijke handschriftentraditie van Freising onder Abraham is nooit systematisch ondernomen. Onderzoek bleef filologisch en taalkundig, waar het cultuurhistorisch had moeten worden. Het project wil deze volgende stap zetten en de Freisingse Monumenten in hun cultuurhistorische context plaatsen door middel van een etnografisch geïnformeerde analyse van het hele corpus van het 10e-eeuwse Freisingse manuscripten en fragmenten in het gebied dat ooit werd bewoond door de Carantani.

Biografie

Anke Lenssens is doctoraatsonderzoeker aan de Vakgroep Talen en Culturen (Oost-Europese Talen en Culturen) van de Universiteit Gent sinds januari 2021. Haar onderzoek focust zich op de missiegeschiedenis van Karantanië, met onderzoeksinteresses in vroegmiddeleeuwse geschiedenis, kerkgeschiedenis, Slavische taalkunde en vroegmiddeleeuwse schrijfcultuur. Het project waar ze momenteel aan werkt, heet: “Freising en de Slaven onder bisschop Abraham. Een op tekst gebaseerde benadering van de christelijke missie en pastorale zorg onder de Karantanen in de 10e eeuw”.

De Cynisch-Stoïsche diatribe in middeleeuwse Kerkslavische literatuur: Griekse invloeden en Slavische ontwikkelingen

Simeon Dekker (Universiteit Leiden)

Abstract

De Cynisch-Stoïsche diatribe is een dialogische manier van polemiseren die als eerste is toegepast in de teksten van een aantal Hellenistische filosofen, zoals Teles, en in de Romeinse tijd steeds populairder werd, o.a. door de werken van Epictetus. In het Nieuwe Testament is deze techniek vooral gebruikt door de apostel Paulus, en in de daaropvolgende eeuwen door de kerkvaders, met name Johannes Chrysostomus. Zijn homilieën zijn samen met andere patristische teksten vanaf de 10e eeuw in het Slavisch vertaald, zodat ook de diatribe in het orthodoxe Slavische gebied is doorgedrongen. Met name het homiletische genre bevat veel elementen van de diatribe.

Het hoofdkenmerk van een diatribische homilie is dat er een polemische dialoog wordt gevoerd met een fictieve tegenstander, die door de prediker wordt gekapitteld om zijn ketterse of moreel verwerpelijke standpunten. Tegelijkertijd worden de hoorders van de homilie onderwezen in de orthodoxe leer. Polemiek en didactiek functioneren dus op het fictieve respectievelijk niet-fictieve niveau. Beide niveaus worden dikwijls van elkaar onderscheiden met behulp van talige markeringen, zoals parenthetische werkwoorden, vocatieven en andere typische formules die vanuit het Griekse origineel een Slavisch equivalent hebben gekregen.

In deze lezing worden de resultaten besproken van een onderzoeksproject dat tussen 2017 en 2022 aan de Universiteit van Bern is uitgevoerd. Aan de hand van zowel uit het Grieks vertaalde als origineel Slavische teksten, daterend uit de 11e tot de 16e eeuw, wordt aangetoond in hoeverre de diatribe zich in het Kerkslavisch heeft weten te etableren en te handhaven. Enerzijds werden de dialoogstrategieën op Slavisch terrein verder ontwikkeld dan in de Griekse originelen, anderzijds geraakten bepaalde kenmerken van de diatribe met de tijd afgezwakt.

Biografie

Simeon Dekker heeft Engelse Taal & Cultuur en Slavische Talen & Culturen gestudeerd in Leiden en Sint-Petersburg. In 2016 is hij in Leiden gepromoveerd op een proefschrift over de pragmatiek van de Oud-Russische berkenbastbrieven uit Novgorod en omgeving. Van 2017 tot 2022 heeft hij als assistent (post-doc) aan de Universiteit van Bern onderzoek verricht naar de retorische strategieën van de Cynisch-Stoïsche diatribe in middeleeuwse Kerkslavische teksten. Momenteel werkt hij als docent Russisch aan de Universiteit Leiden.

Cerise lecture: Russian Exceptionalism between East and West: the Ambiguous Empire’

Cerise lecture by Dr. Kevork Oskanian (University of Birmingham, UK)

This lecture will introduce ‘Hybrid Exceptionalism’ as a critical conceptual tool aimed at uncovering Russia’s self-positioning between East and West.

This lecture will introduce ‘Hybrid Exceptionalism’ as a critical conceptual tool aimed at uncovering Russia’s self-positioning between ‘East’ and ‘West’, and its hierarchical claims over subalterns situated in both civilizational imaginaries. It will discuss how, in the Tsarist, Soviet, and contemporary eras, distinct civilizational spaces were created, and maintained, through narratives and practices emanating from Russia’s ambiguous relationship with Western modernity, and its part-identification with a subordinated ‘Orient’. The Romanov Empire’s struggles with ‘Russianness’, the USSR’s Marxism-Leninism, and contemporary Russia’s combination of feigned liberal and civilizational discourses will be explored as the basis of a series of successive civilising missions, through an interdisciplinary engagement with official discourses, scholarship, and the arts. The talk will conclude with an exploration of contemporary policy implications for the West, and the former Soviet states themselves.

About the speaker:

Dr. Kevork Oskanian is an Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Birmingham, UK. He obtained his PhD at the London School of Economics’ Department of International Relations, and has previously taught at the LSE and at the University of Westminster. His current research interests include the International Relations of Eurasia, and post-liberal approaches to International Society and the state.

Dr. Kevork Oskanian

Cerise lecture: ‘Constitutionalizing the disregard of European Court of human rights’

Cerise lecture by Dimitry Kochenov (The CEU Democracy Institute)

Aim of the lecture is the critical analysis of the amendments to the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation, which entered into force on 4 July 2020.

The aim of the lecture is the critical analysis of the amendments to the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation, which entered into force on 4 July 2020. The talk will focus on the amendments having implications for the dialogue between international courts and tribunals and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The lecture will demonstrate that the amendments in question are not at all revolutionary and codify the established practice of the Russian Constitutional Court / draw on federal legislation. The amendments allow for non-execution of the decisions of international courts and tribunals which are found by the Russian Constitutional Court to be in conflict with the national Constitution, thus qualifying the operation of the monist approach to international law in the Russian constitutional system. The approach taken by the Russian Federation will be considered in the global context of the rising scepticism vis-à-vis the decisions of international courts and their transformative potential. A detailed note published by ILM and co-written with Prof. Paul Kalinichenko (Kutafin University, Moscow), which the lecture is loosely based on, can be found through this link.

Livestream available

Free registration: https://webappsx.ugent.be/eventManager/events/CERISEKochenov

Dimitry Kochenov

Being ‘Yugo’: The Reappropriation of a Label in the Swiss Diasporic Context.

Lecture by Dilyara Suleymanova (ZHAW, Zurich),  Discussant Prof. Dr. Pieter Troch

Migrants from former Yugoslavia constitute one of the most numerous and significant diasporic communities in Western-European countries, including Switzerland. The label ‘Yugo’ is a widely used term (in the media and the everyday language) to refer to migrants from former Yugoslavia and their descendants. Being underpinned by derogatory connotations and orientalising discourses that construct the ‘Balkans’ as the European ‘inner Orient’, this label is used in a variety of contexts as a tool of othering. In this presentation, I will look into the ways this identity label (as well as the related term ‘Balkanese’) is reappropriated and used by the diasporic youth – children and grandchildren of migrants who were born or grew up in Switzerland. I will in particular demonstrate and discuss the ways in which this label is re-appropriated by the diasporic youth to construct a common identity which transcends potential intra-ethnic conflict lines and tensions. At the same time, it is used to strategically to differentiate oneself from the majority Swiss society, to delineate and self-exoticise diasporic youth identity and lifestyle.

Cerise Lecture: Russia’s war on independent media: How to survive the “long winter”

Cerise Lecture by Galina Timchenko (CEO of  Meduza independent news agency)

On the 26th of October 2021, Galina Timchenko, CEO of the Meduza independent news agency, will be delivering a lecture on the state of affairs in the media background in Russia, explaining how the restrictions on independent journalists imposed by the Russian government can affect the development of journalism in the country.

She will portray the evolution of the political landscape in Russia and introduce some novel concepts as the ‘new iron curtain’, ‘sleeping laws’ and ‘foreign agents’ which appear quintessential for a media business in Russia. A particular emphasis will be put on the idea of the new reality constructed by the official government-run media implying the creation of the ‘enemy face’ of the Western world.

She will also dwell on possible outcomes of such restrictions for the media and IT businesses under siege, and will suggest three ways of survival for the media labeled as ‘foreign agents’. Apart from that, the consequences that the repression of the media may produce on the society and journalism in the country, as well as possible scenarios of resistance to it will be touched upon. The question whether independent media have a future in Russia remains the most controversial issue.

Online Summer School: Russia in Covid times

Focus and goals

Russia remains a key player in international affairs during the COVID-19 outbreak. When the COVID-19 crisis erupted, Russia took several decisive steps to safeguard its sovereignty and increase its soft power capabilities: closing its border to China and developing its own Sputnik-V vaccine for use throughout the world. Over the course of the pandemic, Russia’s preparedness also ran into several difficulties: low levels of domestic interest in vaccination, questions over Sputnik’s effectiveness and production capabilities and concern that the state was more interested in using vaccines as a tool of international diplomacy over domestic needs. COVID-19 thereby serves as a critical issue to assess broader political and societal factors in Russia and its relation to the international system. What exactly is Russia’s role in the world? Does international/regional prestige outweigh domestic demands? How should we envisage the Russian domestic realm, the economic situation, and the means that are employed by the Kremlin to address challenges at home and abroad? This summer school aims at exploring and explaining these questions with a specific focus on the effect that the COVID-19 crisis has had on Russia’s political and societal life over the past year

Application

We encourage students from 2nd and 3rd-year Bachelor’s, Master’s programme and starting PhD students to apply. Each applicant is asked to fill in an application form to provide personal information regarding education and research interests. Furthermore, we ask each potential participant to write a motivation letter of maximum 500 words. Participants are expected to be fluent in English. Accepted UGent students can participate free of charge. Non-UGent need to pay a fee of 70 euros. The deadline of application is June 27, 2021. Interested students can apply here.

Programme

The summer school will take place from July 12 till July 16, 2021 in an online format. Students will participate in seven interactive classes, covering a wide range of topics addressed by leading experts to examine the impact of COVID-19 on Russia, whilst gaining a better understanding of Russian politics and society in general. Participants are encouraged to be active in order to create a stimulating and interactive learning environment. In this light, participating students are asked at the start of the summer school to choose a topic relating to the overall focus of the summer school, which they will present at the final day of the summer school in cooperation with other students to a panel of experts. A detailed overview of the programme can be found on the second page of the brochure.

Online Panel Discussion: Assessing the Sputnik-V Vaccine

Online Panel Discussion by M.D. Asmik Asatryan, M.D. Irina Levchenko, Prof. Dr. Susanna Kharit, Prof. Dr. Geert Leroux-Roels

 

At a time when vaccination campaigns within the EU are reaching full steam after EMA’s endorsement of the vaccines by Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson, there is a remarkable silence about the Russian Sputnik vaccine.
Yet, Sputnik-V was the first vaccine to be officially announced in the battle against the coronavirus and it was presented with much bravado by the Russian authorities. Reports about steps being skipped in test phases of the Russian vaccine and its purpose as a geopolitical tool aroused suspicion in the West. Today, still, the general public very much perceives Sputnik-V as second tier despite the proven high effectivity of the vaccine.

  • But how much do we actually know about the vaccine?
  • How does Sputnik-V work in practice, and how does it compare to Western vaccines?
  • Could a better understanding of the Russian vaccine lead us to new insights that are important for the further development of the other vaccines?
  • Can the Russian vaccine realistically complement the European vaccination strategy?
  • What does the Russian vaccination strategy look like, and what can we learn from it?

To answer these underexamined questions, the Russia Platform is organising a high-level panel discussion with Russian experts Asmik Asatryan, Irina Levchenko & Susanna Kharit and specialists from Ghent University / Ghent University Hospital (UZ Ghent) Elizaveta Padalko, Geert Leroux-Roels & Hans Nauwynck.


Speakers:

M.D. Asmik Asatryan works as physician/immunologist at the Saint Petersburg State Hospital Nr. 88 and is specialized in infectious diseases, vaccinations and the organisation of health care.

M.D. Irina Levchenko is deputy chief supervising physician at the Saint Petersburg State Hospital nr. 88. She is an expert in paediatrics and the organisation of healthcare, including vaccinations both in children and adults.

Prof. Dr. Susanna Kharit works at the Department of Infectious Diseases in Children of the Saint Petersburg Pediatric Medical University. She is also Chief Freelance Specialist for Vaccine Prevention of Children of the Health Committee of St. Petersburg, a member of the Independent Expert Expert Council on Vaccine Prevention of the Russian Federation and member of the Euro-Asian Society for Infectious Diseases.

Prof. Dr. Geert Leroux-Roels is the founder of the Center for Vaccinology (CEVAC) and is associated with both Ghent University and Ghent University Hospital (UZ Ghent). He has conducted numerous studies about vaccinations, resides in various advisory boards and is an established name in international scientific societies.

Moderators:

Prof. Dr. Elizaveta Padalko is Head Clinical Biology at the Ghent University Hospital while also being active as lecturer at the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences at Ghent University. Her work focuses in particular on the evaluation of diagnostic methods in infectious serology and molecular diagnostics.

Prof. Dr. Hans Nauwynck holds the position of Head of the Laboratory For Virology of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine at Ghent University. He specialises in research into viral diseases in animals and advocates for more intensive research into bacteria and viruses in animals and humans.

 

GEANNULEERD – (Mis)Managing the Past: Politics of ‘Decommunisation’ in Ukraine, 1990s – 2021

Georgi Kassianov (Lublin)

The paper provides a brief outline of the politics of ‘decommunisation’ undertaken by different mnemonic actors in Ukraine since the end of 1980s. ‘Decommunisation’ is the process of dismantling the legacies of the communist state establishments, culture, and psychology in the post-communist space. Special attention will be paid to the final ‘decommunisation’ effort in 2015 – 2021, after special ‘decommunisation’ laws were passed by the Ukrainian Parliament. The presentation will analyse interests and roles of political actors, societal responses and political outcomes of ‘decommunisation’.