Contested memories and identities: transformations of mnemonic landscape in post-Soviet Riga, Latvia.

拉脱维亚记忆政治文献中的两个突出主题可以确定：与邻国俄罗斯的“记忆战争”（Berg and Ehin 2016），以及拉脱维亚人和讲俄语的人之间的内部种族记忆分裂。在乌克兰危机之后，许多观察家同样指出，拉脱维亚及其主要城市内部的这种种族分歧是种族或国际冲突的潜在根源（例如Miller 2016年11月16日）。该研究项目旨在通过对世界上这一具有重要战略意义的地区的记忆和空间的关注来扩大学术辩论。为了抓住这种亲缘关系，本研究项目建议研究里加的记忆景观的转变——“一个多民族和双语的后社会主义、后苏联和后工业城市”（Nawratek 2012:1）。虽然没有试图忽视城市的任何维度，但这个博士项目将试图通过关注后苏联记忆动态，找到有助于我们理解里加多方面配置的综合。因此，这个项目的潜力是双重的。首先，这个项目试图概念化空间记忆的新思维方式。里加提供了一个富有成效的案例研究，进一步概念化空间和记忆之间的联系，建立在以前的学术成果（诺拉1989）；(Ochman 2013)。其次，该项目有可能为理解后共产主义城市环境中记忆的复杂性提供经验依据，这可能有助于拉近拉脱维亚和里加不同的“记忆社区”。因此，这个项目是在记忆研究、文化地理和日常生活研究的交叉点上构思的。主要研究问题成为后苏联记忆和空间的动态问题。为了探索这些动态，将解决以下问题：1。在这个景观中捕捉到什么样的国家/城市身份和记忆（自上而下）？如何在苏联、后苏联和拉脱维亚语词义变化的背景下理解它？居民对这个记忆空间的感受如何？在白话叙事中是否存在不同尺度（如地方、国家、欧洲）的相互作用？后苏联时代的拉脱维亚在接受其（城市）共产主义过去方面取得了多大的成功？2.1列宁纪念碑本身留下的空白空间是否成为了msammoire或一个有限的空间（见附录C）？关于国家/城市身份与记忆之间的互动，博物馆的常设展览告诉了我们什么？商品化和地方品牌化的动态如何促进这些？3.1居民对这个地方的记忆-时间理解是什么？

Two prominent themes within the literature on Latvian memory politics can be identified: 'memory wars' with neighbouring Russia (Berg and Ehin 2016), and internal ethno-mnemonic split between Latvians and Russian-speakers. In the wake of Ukrainian Crisis numerous observers equally noted such ethnic divide within Latvia and its major cities as a potential source of ethnic or international conflict (e.g. Miller 16 Nov. 2016). This research project seeks to broaden academic debate through the focus on memory and space within this strategically important part of the world. To capture this kinship, this research project proposes to study the transformation of the mnemonic landscape of Riga - 'a multiethnic and bilingual postsocialist, post-Soviet, and postindustrial city' (Nawratek 2012:1). While not attempting to disregard any of the dimensions of the city, this PhD project will try to find synthesis that helps us understand Riga in its multifaceted configuration through the focus on post- Soviet memory dynamics. Thus, the potential of this project is twofold. Firstly, this project seeks to conceptualise new ways of thinking about memory in space. Riga provides a fruitful case study to further conceptualise links between space and memory, building upon previous scholarly output (Nora 1989);(Ochman 2013). Secondly, this project has the potential to provide empirical grounds for understanding the complexities of remembering in post-communist urban settings, that might help to bring different 'communities of memory' in Latvia and Riga a little bit closer.As such this project is conceived at the intersection of memory studies, cultural geography and everyday life studies. Main research question becomes that of dynamics of post-Soviet memory and space. To explore these dynamics, the following questions will be addressed:1. What national/urban identity and memory is captured within this landscape (top-down)? How is it understood within a context of changing meanings of Soviet, post-Soviet and Latvian?1.1. What are residents' perceptions of this mnemonic space? Is there an interaction of different scales (e.g. local, national, European) in vernacular narratives?2. How successful has post-Soviet Latvia been in coming to terms with its (urban) communist past?2.1 Does empty-space left by Lenin's monument itself become Lieux de Mémoire or a liminal space (see Appendix C)?3. What does the museum's permanent exhibition tell us about interaction between national/urban identity and memory? How do dynamics of commodification and place branding foster these?3.1 What is residents' mnemonic-temporal understanding of this place?