|
Feminism, Modernism and Resistance to Empire in Ukraine |
|
Panels and Discussions |
Katherine YoungerUilleam BlackerTamara Hundorova |
|
Series: Panels and Discussions
|
Series: Panels and Discussions
|
|
Arts after Violence: How to Read the History of Ukrainian Art? |
|
Seminars and Colloquia |
Kateryna IakovlenkoKatherine Younger |
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
“Self-Organization” as Ukraine’s New Culture of Civic Engagement |
|
Panels and Discussions |
Kateryna IakovlenkoKatherine YoungerEmily Channell-Justice |
|
Series: Panels and Discussions
|
Series: Panels and Discussions
|
|
Reporting on the War in Ukraine |
|
Panels and Discussions |
Katherine YoungerNataliya Gumenyuk |
|
Series: Panels and Discussions
|
Series: Panels and Discussions
|
|
Years that Changed the Face of Europe: 1989 and 2022 |
|
Exhibition |
Dariusz StolaKatherine YoungerLudger HagedornTimothy Garton Ash |
|
Series: Exhibition
|
Series: Exhibition
|
|
Ukraine and the Future of Europe |
|
Conferences and Workshops |
Ivan VejvodaKatherine YoungerTimothy Garton Ash |
|
Series: Conferences and Workshops
|
Series: Conferences and Workshops
|
|
No End to History |
|
Lecture |
Katherine YoungerSerhii Plokhii |
|
Series: Lecture
Thirty years ago, the world lived through one of the most optimistic moments of the 20th century. Communism—and the Soviet Union with it—had collapsed, the Cold War had come to an end, and democracy was on the rise around the globe. We are now in probably the grimmest moment since the start of the 21st century. The Cold War is making its way back, hot war has returned to the geographic center of Europe, and democracy is facing the most profound challenges since the end of World War II. Nowhere were the expectations for the arrival of a new era so high, and nowhere did they crash with such tragic consequences, as in the former Soviet space. Looking back, we see that 1991 did not mark the end of history, either as the ideological evolution of humankind or as a scholarly discipline that has documented the lengthy and painful disintegration of most of the world’s empires. What we see today is the continuing process of the disintegration of the USSR, complete with efforts to establish spheres of influence, border disputes, and open warfare. We also see Russia’s return to the international scene as it attempts to claim the role of not only a regional but also a global power, akin to the role played by the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union. In this lecture Serhii Plokhii will discuss the developments of the last thirty years in the lands that once belonged to the USSR, bringing history in to explain the most recent developments in the region.
Read more
|
Series: Lecture
Thirty years ago, the world lived through one of the most optimistic moments of the 20th century. Communism—and the Soviet Union with it—had collapsed, the Cold War had come to an end, and democracy was on the rise around the globe. We are now in probably the grimmest moment since the start of the 21st century. The Cold War is making its way back, hot war has returned to the geographic center of Europe, and democracy is facing the most profound challenges since the end of World War II. Nowhere were the expectations for the arrival of a new era so high, and nowhere did they crash with such tragic consequences, as in the former Soviet space. Looking back, we see that 1991 did not mark the end of history, either as the ideological evolution of humankind or as a scholarly discipline that has documented the lengthy and painful disintegration of most of the world’s empires. What we see today is the continuing process of the disintegration of the USSR, complete with efforts to establish spheres of influence, border disputes, and open warfare. We also see Russia’s return to the international scene as it attempts to claim the role of not only a regional but also a global power, akin to the role played by the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union. In this lecture Serhii Plokhii will discuss the developments of the last thirty years in the lands that once belonged to the USSR, bringing history in to explain the most recent developments in the region.
Read more
|
|
Maria Winowska and the Search for a Modern (but Illiberal) Central and Eastern Europe |
|
Cancelled |
Katherine YoungerPiotr Kosicki |
|
Series: Cancelled
|
Series: Cancelled
|
|
Slavic Bazaar: Performances and Instrumentalizations of the Slavic discourse 1791 - 2017 |
|
Seminars and Colloquia |
Katherine YoungerLudger HagedornTomáš Glanc |
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
The ideology of Slavic unity and reciprocity has been a crucial pattern of European thought and culture since the beginning of the 19th century, and it is still relevant today.
In his presentation, Tomáš Glanc will discuss the development, the teleology, and the typologies of this heterogeneous discourse. The talk will outline performative practices of “Slaventum” rich in contradictions, geopolitical phantasms and geopoetic fictions. Glanc will use examples from different disciplines such as literature, art, linguistics, but also referring to political essays, institutional history, and the history of gymnastics.
Read more
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
The ideology of Slavic unity and reciprocity has been a crucial pattern of European thought and culture since the beginning of the 19th century, and it is still relevant today.
In his presentation, Tomáš Glanc will discuss the development, the teleology, and the typologies of this heterogeneous discourse. The talk will outline performative practices of “Slaventum” rich in contradictions, geopolitical phantasms and geopoetic fictions. Glanc will use examples from different disciplines such as literature, art, linguistics, but also referring to political essays, institutional history, and the history of gymnastics.
Read more
|
|
Limits and Divisions of Human Histories |
|
Lecture |
Andrzej NowakKatherine YoungerLudger Hagedorn |
|
Series: Lecture
The theory of history, as presented by Reinhart Koselleck (1923-2006), offers an intellectually tempting structure of three anthropological distinctions that prescribe figures of all possible histories (individual and collective): sooner or later, inside and outside, above and below. The first one signifies the span between being born and having to die, which makes every life unique and at the same time part of a particular generational experience. It could also be rendered as “old” and “new”. Uses of the second pair might be analysed as a contrast between public and private, or as a contemporary fear stemming from the contrast between “home” and “intruders”. The third pair Andrzej Nowak will try to “translate” not just in “master” and “slave” categories, but rather as “pupil” and “teacher”, or even “therapist” and “patient”. Nowak will try to read Koselleck’s structure in a perspective offered by spatial/temporal concepts of contemporary “Europe in progress” (or “Europe in crisis”), as well as in another, non-political perspective of esthetic renditions of the three above mentioned Koselleck’s abstract pairs ¬ in Andrzej Wajda’s “Birchwood” movie, the last scene of Richard Strauss’s “Rosenkavalier”, and in Philip Larkin’s poem: “An Arundel Tomb”. The question is whether love can be included into these conflicting pairs as a possible factor transcending their structures?
Read more
|
Series: Lecture
The theory of history, as presented by Reinhart Koselleck (1923-2006), offers an intellectually tempting structure of three anthropological distinctions that prescribe figures of all possible histories (individual and collective): sooner or later, inside and outside, above and below. The first one signifies the span between being born and having to die, which makes every life unique and at the same time part of a particular generational experience. It could also be rendered as “old” and “new”. Uses of the second pair might be analysed as a contrast between public and private, or as a contemporary fear stemming from the contrast between “home” and “intruders”. The third pair Andrzej Nowak will try to “translate” not just in “master” and “slave” categories, but rather as “pupil” and “teacher”, or even “therapist” and “patient”. Nowak will try to read Koselleck’s structure in a perspective offered by spatial/temporal concepts of contemporary “Europe in progress” (or “Europe in crisis”), as well as in another, non-political perspective of esthetic renditions of the three above mentioned Koselleck’s abstract pairs ¬ in Andrzej Wajda’s “Birchwood” movie, the last scene of Richard Strauss’s “Rosenkavalier”, and in Philip Larkin’s poem: “An Arundel Tomb”. The question is whether love can be included into these conflicting pairs as a possible factor transcending their structures?
Read more
|