1991 / 1995

Community and Memory in Contemporary Art: D. Liškevičius, “Peace” #11

One of the most important themes that emerges in many community-based art projects is the history or memory of communities. The importance of such a theme is undoubtedly contributed by the fact that the end of the 20th century, as well as the end of the 19th century, was marked by a crisis of memory: modern societies are accused of being “incurable amnesiacs”, lacking “living memory”, historical awareness, etc. On the other hand, they are described as suffering from “memory obsession”, experiencing a museum mania, an epidemic of commemoration and a passion for heritage.

According to some memory researchers, these strategies of public and private memorialization testify to the fear of oblivion experienced by modern society. On the other hand, today’s cultures of memory encourage the writing of a new history – as the French historian Pierre Nora argues, memory has acquired a new charm and importance as “the revenge of the oppressed, the offended and the unfortunate, as the history of those who had no right to History”.

Many authors say that memory enriches civil society, develops our democratic right to truth. Memory, contributing to the creation of self-awareness, allows us to reassess our possibilities, encourages us to act independently. Moreover, memory, understood as what is transmitted from the past to the present, is essential for the functioning of any collective, because every group needs a collective self-awareness. This chain of memory and tradition allows societies to move forward, reproduce themselves, and at the same time change.

Paul Ricoeur, Tsvetan Todorov and Avishai Margalit argue that memory must be evaluated according to how it is able to help others. The memory of the past can be useful to us if it does not only reproduce memory, but also serves justice. Memory, which is used to establish certain versions of the past as “more just”, can foster conflict. However, when memory is open, it can become a means of cooperation and dialogue with the past.

However, memory not only provides identity and stability to groups in society, but also has the potential for resistance, conflict and change. Conflicting or counter-memory (a term proposed by Michel Foucault, contre-mémoire), describes other voices that have been silenced for a long time. As an alternative narrative that questions the dominant discourse, counter-memory has political significance. By questioning the dominant model of the past, counter-memory turns memory into “contested territory”.

Memory (often traumatic) and a sense of shared experience bring communities of memory together and are an essential condition for their existence. Most of our communication takes place in these memory communities, which give us a sense of security and help us establish social connections. In addition, memory communities can thus become “filters” that connect history and biography and determine the ways in which publicly articulated memories are received.

Memory communities are also becoming objects of research in contemporary art practices. For several decades now, art has become one of the mnemonic practices that help to objectify memory. Artists are interested in those groups of society that have not had the opportunity to talk about their history until now, whose memory has long been forgotten or pushed to the margins of History. Artistic creation in the field of memory issues often contributes to the questioning of “grand narratives” and the opening of counter-memories that have not received the attention of historians for a long time.

The constant interest in the past in Lithuania, as in many other Eastern European countries, could be interpreted as a response to destabilizing changes, as a symptom of fear or anxiety about the present. Moreover, during the years of occupation, artists (and not only them) did not have the opportunity to talk about their history – neither about the history of the nation, nor about the stories of their families, the fates of those who were exiled, killed or tortured. So, after regaining Independence, it was time, as Nora said, to re-establish the identity of the nation. Like many artists in post-Soviet countries, for the past few decades Lithuanian creators have begun to rethink the history of the nation, often using counter-memories – stories forgotten or silenced during the Soviet era.

One of the most recent cases of such rethinking is Dainius Liškevičius’ project “Peace”. In 2014 The project exhibited at the Baltic and Swiss contemporary art exhibition “Storytelling” at the National Art Gallery not only presents the history of one house in a “museum” and documentary way, but also explores the memory of the community. This installation tells the story of a typical block house in Kaunas. Its residents came from various parts of Lithuania, most of whom received compensation for their expropriated houses and land. In addition to traditional holidays prohibited during the Soviet era, this house also created its own traditions: the community celebrated the anniversary of the house’s founding together, went with their families to the surviving ancestral homes, and organized excursions to important historical sites. The territory of the house was distinguished by its well-groomed environment, where the community publicly