Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine: Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Weitere Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | Slovenian |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Ljubljana
Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU
2011
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Ethnologica - Dissertationes / Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU
2 |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Beschreibung: | Literaturverzeichnis Seite. - Englische Zusammenfassung: Processes of creating cultural heritage |
| Beschreibung: | 327 Seiten Illustrationen 25 cm |
| ISBN: | 9789612543433 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV043332129 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20160601 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 160201s2011 a||| |||| 00||| slv d | ||
| 020 | |a 9789612543433 |9 978-961-254-343-3 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)951065982 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV043332129 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rda | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a slv | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 | ||
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Fakin Bajec, Jasna |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine |b Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe |c Jasna Fakin Bajec ; prevod Alenka Ropret |
| 264 | 1 | |a Ljubljana |b Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU |c 2011 | |
| 300 | |a 327 Seiten |b Illustrationen |c 25 cm | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Ethnologica - Dissertationes / Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU |v 2 | |
| 500 | |a Literaturverzeichnis Seite. - Englische Zusammenfassung: Processes of creating cultural heritage | ||
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Kulturerbe |0 (DE-588)4033560-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 7 | |a Kras / Kulturna dediščina |2 ssg | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Karst |g Landschaft |0 (DE-588)4097690-7 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Karst |g Landschaft |0 (DE-588)4097690-7 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Kulturerbe |0 (DE-588)4033560-4 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ropret, Alenka |4 trl | |
| 810 | 2 | |a Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU |t Ethnologica - Dissertationes |v 2 |w (DE-604)BV041551228 |9 2 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028752279&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028752279&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-028752279 | ||
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 306.09 |e 22/bsb |g 4973 |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804175878661341184 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | Vsebina
Predgovor 7
Uvod 11
Dediscina - kulturni in ekonomski kapital 11
Struktura monografije 14
Predstavitev obravnavanega prostora 16
Potek raziskave 20
Metodoloski okvir raziskave 23
Preteklost skozi objektiv sedanjosti 25
Kras v procesu zgodovinskopoliticnega, druzbenega in kulturnega razvoja
Razumevanje preteklosti v toku 25
Druzbenih sprememb 27
Predmoderna doba 27
Moderna doba 31
Postmoderna doba 43
Dediscina - vez med preteklostjo in sedanjostjo 53
Zgodovinski razvoj pojma dediscina 61
Dediscina kot materialna in nematerialna kulturna prvina 61
Dediscina kot socialna praksa 70
Diskurz o dediscini 83
Dediscina in kolektivni spomin 89
Dediscina in tradicija 101
Socialnopoliticna uporaba dediscine na Krasu 113
Dediscina skozi teorijo identitetne dinamike 113
Vloga dediscine pri vzpostavljanju nacionalne identitete 117
Vloga dediscine pri vzpostavljanju prostorske in lokalne identitete 119
Proces ustvarjanja kraske dediscine skozi dinamiko spreminjanja
kolektivnih identitet 128
Spreminjanje kraske krajine 128
Kolektivne identitete na Krasu do druge svetovne vojne 132
Oblikovanje jugoslovanske identitete po drugi svetovni vojni 136
Od jugoslovanske proti slovenski identiteti 149
5
Obdobje po osamos vojit vi Slovenije 162
Arhitekturna dediscina - simbol kraske identifikacije 187
Razvoj kraske arhitekture do prve svetovne vojne 188
Po prvi svetovni vojni ponekod nova arhitektura,
vecinoma pa majhne spremembe 197
Spremembe po drugi svetovni vojni - modernizem v kraski arhitekturi 198
Moderna tradicija kraske arhitekture po osamosvojitvi Slovenije 210
Kraska arhitekturna dediscina med tradicijo in inovacijo 215
Ekonomska uporaba dediscine na Krasu 217
Vloga dediscine pri oblikovanju podobe turisticne destinacije 217
Stanjel - biser Krasa? Dolgotrajna pot prenove kraskega naselja 226
Zgodovinski in arhitekturni razvoj naselja 228
Revitalizacija in vloga etnologije pri celostni prenovi naselij 237
Glavni koraki pri revitalizaciji vasi 240
Vloga dediscine pri razvoju turizma na kraskem podezelju 264
Razvoj kraskega turizma na podezelju pred drugo svetovno vojno 265
Upad kraskega turizma na podezelju po drugi svetovni vojni 268
Kraski turizem na podezelju v samostojni Sloveniji -
stari vzorcU nove vsebine 274
Predstavitev osnovnosolskega projekta Krizem krazem
po Komenskem Krasu 279
Prakse ustvarjanja dediscine v Vaski skupnosti Volcji Grad
od leta 2003 do 2007 282
Sklepne misli 285
Dediscina med tradicijo in inovacijo 287
Viri in literatura 293
Processes of Creating Cultural Heritage 319
Janez Bogataj
Pogled na Kras s Krasa 323
A Look at Kras from Kras 325
6
Processes of
Creating Cultural Heritage
Inhabitants of Kras between Tradition
and Challenges of Modern Society
The monograph Processes of Creating Cultural Heritage. Inhabitants of Kras Between Tra-
dition and Challenges of Modern Society analyses the role and importance of cultural
heritage as cultural and economic capital (Graham 2002), which serves the actors of
Kras local communities as an element of common and spatial identity as well as a market
product in promoting the local features within tourism. Based on contemporary envi-
ronmental approaches such as emphasised in conventions of Unesco and the Council of
Europe, heritage has also been asserted as a major category in creating developmental
programmes aiming at sustainable development of local areas.
Recent worldwide social changes (transnationalisation, universalization, globalisa-
tion, relocalisation/glocalisation, development of high technology, mass media boom),
which in Slovenia have been related to its independence and accession to the European
Union, have also made possible for the handling and creating of the heritage as well as
the recreation of local history to become the domain of general population, rather than
being limited to the expert and scientific public within public cultural institutions, as
was the case only three decades ago. This is why the empirical part of the research fo-
cuses on the Kras region, particularly the village communities in the Komen Kras area
(Komen municipality). There the author has analysed the social processes and practices
that are used by inhabitants of Kras as well as expert and political public to ascribe de-
signating, marketing or other meanings or values to certain elements of the past. The
analysis has considered both general social changes and processes typical of the modern
and postmodern era, as well as specific local, political, cultural and economic features.
With regard to time, the empirical ethnographic research into the creation of heri-
tage, its meaning and role in the Kras region focuses on two historical periods, i.e. the
age of modernity, reaching its peak in Europe in 18th and 19th centuries, and the age
of postmodernity, which in the West began in the second half of the 20th century. As
in Slovenia the features of modernity (industrialisation, urbanisation, secularisation of
values and norms, centralisation of state administration) were most prominent in times
of the socialist Yugoslavia, and the features of postmodernity after its independence and
the introduction of democracy, the research focuses primarily on the developments after
World War II (alongside a short presentation of the 18th and 19th centuries). The rese-
arch was directed at the analysis of why the local population s and authorities’ attitude
319
Jasna Fakin Bajec
towards creations of the past was changing through diverse social-political systems and
style currents. The emphasis was on interpreting the research findings that examined
closely the experience, knowledge, opinions and expectations of the local population
who only began participating in constructing cultural heritage in recent decades. Due
to different expert approaches, the locals were often excluded or disregarded in expert
discussions on the revitalisation and preservation of cultural elements of the past. Based
on rare domestic and many foreign findings that the author has used to establish the
theoretical and partly methodological research framework, special attention was paid to
social negotiations in constructing the meanings of cultural elements (such as the stone,
the Kras house). Also presented when interpreting research results were overviews and
syntheses of post-structuralists’ and postmodernists’ theories on constructing heritage
(Smith 2006; AlSayyad 2001a; Davison 2008; Byrne 2008; Graham 2002; Kirshenblatt-
-Gimblett 1998 et al.), identity (Hall 1996; Praprotnik 1999; Cohen 1985 et al.), space
(Tilley 2006; Urry 1995, 1996; Appadurai 1996) and nationalism (Stih 2006; Lofgren
1989; Rizman 1991 et al). The theories presented were then checked, argued and supple-
mented with examples of events in the Kras region. The interpretation of research results
was based on an analysis of the field materials gathered, i.e. 32 interviews on political,
cultural and social conditions in the selected historical periods, and on the opinions,
views and ideas on creating and using heritage in a certain living environment. Materials
from two local newspapers (Primorske novice; Kras - a magazine on the Kras region and
Kras landscape) were used as additional historical materials supplementing the narrati-
ves of the interviewees.
Regarding its contents, the work has been divided into six parts. The introduction
presents the monograph’s purpose, research hypotheses, the course of research, a short
history of the region explored and the methodology. It is warned at the very beginning
that alongside the expert public, local actors are also of key importance in processes of
creating heritage in a certain local environment, yet in contrast to experts they ascribe
different meanings and importance to the heritage elements, depending on the experien-
ce, needs, desires and expectations.
Part two defines the social role of the past in three historical periods (pre-modern,
modern and post-modern age). In the time of pre-modern, the so-called traditional so-
cieties, the past represented a model, an example for the present and the future. That is
to say, the tradition as transmitted orally had an authoritarian social role that had to be
followed by everyone, had to be respected and not doubted. It was based on unchanging
religious dogmas, which often induced negative valuation of any changes, novelties and
of progress. Based on progress, reason, free choice and decision, the modern era also in-
duced changes to the importance of the past. The latter had lost its authoritative role and
became an important element in constructing the national identity and in displaying the
nation’s progress. Since the past was used to understand and explain the current soci-
al-political and cultural formations (the nation, national history, national culture), the
interpretation is selective, often black-and-white, unilateral, canonised, etc. Its globalist
technological changes and currents having brought a breath of fresh air to the modernist
320
Procesi ustvarjanja kultume dediscine
views of the role of tradition, past, history, space and identity, the postmodern age sees
the past as a signifier of new collective identities (local, transnational, multinational)
and as an aesthetic element of the predominant visual culture, which is used not only for
marking the community, but for marketing purposes.
In part three, a contemporary definition of heritage is presented based on the fin-
dings of part two, as devised from the development of the term heritage through histo-
rical eras and from the tasks and importance of protective institutions (such as Unesco,
Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of Slovenia, museums). This has been
done by taking into consideration the findings of postmodernist constructivist theories
and the importance of representations (Hall 2003) that pay greater attention to agency
or the role of actors. The latter use social processes and practices to provide meaning to
material and immaterial components of the culture, in which they live and which they
help develop. The importance ascribed to cultural elements personally may either match
or cancel each other with the negotiated importance ascribed to a cultural element in
a certain society or community. Social negotiation is held in discursive practices rela-
ted to systems of political power, while diverse discourses (i.e. expert, political, public,
local) shape the actions that popularise the formation of heritage at a certain location.
Although in expert literature, heritage is primarily defined as a construct of the present
comprising the sources to define its past intending to anticipate the future, the attention
when researching the importance of heritage has to be paid to the actions of local actors,
as it is their experience, needs and expectations that the role and use of heritage for a
better future depends on. Also presented thoroughly in this part is the role of heritage as
a homogenising agent that enables local actors to feel their association with the commu-
nity. When shaping the contemporary definition, the role of memory in conceiving the
heritage and the difference between heritage and tradition are also presented.
The key parts are chapters four and five, where the theory and field examples are
used to show the social-political and economic role of heritage in the Kras region. Part
four focuses on constructing collective identities (national, regional/local, European)
and on the role of heritage in the identification process. Alongside types of creating,
explaining and representing Yugoslav and Slovenian national identities as well as Kras,
regional and village local identity after World War II, it is presented in detail how archi-
tectural heritage, particularly stone, have become an important symbol of Kras identity.
The last part presents the role of heritage as an economic product in creating a tou-
rist destination. It includes a detailed analysis of the revitalisation of the old part of the
Stanjel village, the most important tourist spot in Komen municipality. As renovation
processes had until recently been managed by several foreign and Slovenian experts, and
since there have been little result in contrast to all the projects and the money invested,
the analysis provides guidelines on how to activate better the local inhabitants who have
to become the main actor in the development of the famous Kras village. Also presen-
ted is the (non)-use of the local past in the development of countryside Kras tourism in
socialist and post-socialist times. While analysing the issues of revitalising a culturally
protected settlement and the role of heritage in the development of countryside tourism,
321
Jas na Fakin Bajec
the Contemporary tendencies of using heritage within sustainable development are pre-
sented, and so are the roles of the ethnologist and cultural anthropologist in the com-
prehensive protection of heritage in settlements and in shaping tourist contents. In the
process of shaping the development guidelines, it is essential to know the history of the
way of life in the chosen environment, and to integrate local inhabitants in setting the
development guidelines, particularly their wishes, complaints, experience and expecta-
tions, as, otherwise they would not participate in the development and the expectations
of the expert public would not be realised.
The final part of the assignment synthesises the role of heritage between tradition
and innovation. Tradition does not illustrate the regular, fixed, authentic transfer of past
knowledge, meanings and experience, rather, it depicts a continuous practice that keeps
being changed, supplemented and improved due to current needs and expectations. Our
life being a continuous process striving for further development of the society, the tradi-
tion is intertwined with innovation and innovation changes into tradition, whereas the
cultural elements that are designated heritage, are the bond or the medium to connect
the past with the present and the future, but the shape, function and meaning of the
cultural element change in the process. This is why we can never have the final word on
Kras heritage, as heritage is a term the contents of which are shaping and changing con-
tinuously. If alongside the culinary specialties the main specialties of Kras are stone and
stony items, a stony house, then in the next century when the social-political, economic
and cultural circumstances are different, the specialties might be a standard building,
concrete, iron and plastic - i.e. elements that in todays society don’t embody positive
values and meanings.
322
Procesi ustvarjarija kiritume dediscine
Pogled na Kvas s Krasa
Janez Bogataj
Knjiga Jasne Fakin Bajee ni aktualna zgolj zaradi obravnave niza vprasanj o kulturni de-
discini Krasa, temvec predvsem zaradi sprememb, ki so jih v pogledu kulturne dediscine
dozivljali pokrajina in njeni prebivalci v zadnjih dveh, treh desetletjih. Tudi zunaj tega
casovnega okvira lahko govorimo o skoraj mitskem vrednotenju Krasa kot pokrajine,
kar je svojevrstno poudarjeno tudi v nekaterih umetniskih interpretacijah, se zlasti lite-
rarnih in likovnih. Vrhunec vrednotenj Krasa in njegovih naselij pa je izrazen v podobi
nekaksnega »muzeja na prostem«, torej konstrukta, ki je nastal zunaj Krasa.
Za prebivalce pa je v zadnjih desetletjih mnogo pomembnejsa tista posebnost Krasa,
ki je verjetno njegova glavna znacilnost v celotnem zgodovinskem razvoju: to je polozaj
pokrajine, njena lega na sticiscu z romanskim svetom. Krasevci so v razlicnih druzbenih
in drzavnih sistemih dozivljali razlicne zivljenjske, torej gospodarske in druzbene usode,
ki navsezadnje sooblikujejo tudi novejse lokalne poglede na prihodnji razvoj pokrajine
po vstopu Slovenije v schengensko obmoeje.
Klavrna je bera strokovnih spoznanj, ki jih pogosto vsaj posredno uravnavajo poli-
tiene smernice in so v nasprotju s potrebami gospodarskega, druzbenega in duhovnega
zivljenja prebivalcev Krasa. Spoznanj ni stevileno malo, a so vsebinsko neproduktivna.
Danés se ne moremo vec strinjati z mislijo, da naravne znacilnosti kraske pokrajine ne
omogocajo ugodnih zivljenjskih razmer, saj seje pogled nanje v sodobnosti spremenil in
Kras postaja vabljiva pokrajina za obeasno in stalno naselitev. Ker lezi na geografsko in
politicno zelo obcutljivem ozemlju, se v spremembah rabe tega obmoeja skrivajo stevilne
nevarnosti in pasti, ki se jih nosilci »novega« razvoj a Krasa pogosto ne zavedajo, ko npr.
snujejo nove tipe mestnih naselij v ruralnem okolju, za navrh pod sumljivim poime-
novanjem »kraska vas«. Vse to se dogaja pod zvenecimi oznakami: varovanje kulturne
dediscine in identitete Krasa, upostevanje trajnostnega razvoja, spostovanje okoljskih
zmoznosti idr.
Vprasanje kulturne dediscine Krasa, po Bourdieuju kulturnega in ekonomskega
kapitala, odpira danés niz protislovnih opredelitev in tudi konkretnih resitev. Kapital
kraskih vsakdanjikov in praznikov je sooblikovalec lokalne in regionalne identifikacije,
hkrati pa tudi trzno blago, ki prebivalcem omogoca gospodarski, druzbeni in kulturni
razvoj. Zato je popolnoma razumljivo, da Krasevci na sestavine kulturne dediscine veze-
jo dolocene odnose, pomene in razumevanja, kar vse ustvarja paleto socialnih, celo estet-
skih praks in procesov. Zaradi tega je raziskovanje oz. analiza nacinov oblikovanja, rabe
in reprezentacij kulturne dediscine v vaskih skupnostih na Krasu izjemno pomembno.
323
Jasna Fakin Bajee
Zanimivo je, kaj sami Krasevci razumejo pod pojmom kulturna dediscina in katere so
osrednje vrednote njenih opredelitev. Te vrednote se oblikujejo v konkretnih politienih,
druzbenih in kulturniih razmerah ter vplivajo na oblikovanje odnosov do dediscine s
strani Krasevcev na eni in strokovne javnoste na drugi strani. Avtorica knjige je raziska-
vo usmerila na spremembe odnosov lokalnega prebivalstva in oblasti do sestavin kultur-
ne dediscine v okviru dveh druzbeno- politienih sistemov, geografsko pa je osredinjena
predvsem na vaske skupnosti zahodnega ali Komenskega Krasa (Komen, Sveto in Volcji
Grad), nekateri primeri in primerjave pa vkljucujejo se druge kraske mikroregije.
Tudi na Krasu so druzbeno-politieni interesi soustvarjali pomene in uporabo kul-
turne dediscine. Uporabljena in poudarjena je bila (in je) kot znak identifikaeije oziroma
simbol narodne in lokalne istovetnosti. Najizrazitejsa znacilnost in celo simbol kraske is-
tovetnosti je prav gotovo arhitekturna oz. stavbna dediscina, in podobe o njej so pogosto
stereotipne. Prav v njeno sodobno stavbno podobo se verjetno najdosledneje preslikujeta
dva pogleda oziroma dvoje razumevanj Krasa: tisto od »zunaj« in t. i. lokalno ali od
»znotraj«. Zunanji pogled je moeno prezet z idealistienimi in tudi instrumentalizirani-
mi naravnanostmi, notranjega pa intuitivno usmerja sistem vrednot in norm, ki so jim
podlaga specificne gospodarske, druzbene in duhovne potrebe. Zato ne presenecajo npr.
tudi razlicne oblike obujanja ritualnih praks in pojavi t. i. kraskega folklorizma, kar ima
seveda lahko usodne posledice za sodobno razumevanje kraske kulturne dediscine. To
paje neposredno povezano s pomenom invlogo kulturne dediscine pri oblikovanju eko-
nomskih, zlasti turistienih produktov. Kulturna dediscina postaja pomembna sestavina
v oblikovanju podobe in razpoznavnosti Krasa kot turistienega cilja, motiv in orodje de-
stinaeijskega menedzmenta. Pri oblikovanju stalisc in percepcije sestavin kraske kultur-
ne dediscine je bilo narejenih kar nekaj napak, morda celo ve£ kot pri vprasanjih stavbne
ali bivalne kulturne dediscine. Pogosta spremljevalca razvoja kraskega turizma sta od-
sotnost strokovnosti in povrsnost pri naertovanju: predvsem so umanjkale predstavitve
lokalne preteklosti, tako v casu socializma kot tudi postsocializma. Znacilen primere je
Stanjel, ki sicer velja za najpomembnejse turistieno sredisce v obeini Komen, hkrati pa
je tudi »lokaeija«, na katere hrbtu so se lomila (in se lomijo) stevilna kopja naertovanja,
prenove, trajnostnega razvoja, komunalnih vprasanj idr.
Temeljita analiza tega dogajanja, domaeih in mednarodnih, tudi ne prav posrecenih
ukrepov, je avtorici omogocila, da je postavila model, ki izraza sodobne tezenje za upo-
rabo kulturne dediscine v trajnostnem razvoju vasi Stanjel in predvsem tudi realno vlogo
etnologa ali kulturnega antropologa pri naertovanju bodoeega razvoja oz. oblikovanja
turistienih vsebin. Zaenkrat namrec to strokovno podroeje obvladuje turistieno ljubitelj-
stvo na eni in pogosto strokovno slabo argumentirani predlogi, zal pa tudi prepovedi in
drugi birokratski ukrepi na drugi strani.
Kulturno dediscino Krasa so seveda ustvarili ljudje, prebivalci, Krasevci, izbrali in
dolocili pa so jo »strokovnjaki«. Zato ne preseneca, do so bile posamiene akeije in de-
javnosti v zvezi z dediscino, med lokalnim prebivalstvom sprejete naklonjeno, mnoge
pa tudi upraviceno zavrnjene. »Kljucni akter sprejemanja strokovnih pogledov in upo-
stevanj politienih zakonov je lokalno prebivalstvo, ki s strokovno ovrednotenimi kul-
324
Procesi ustvarjanja kuitume dedisc ine
turnimi prvinami zivi, nekateri prebivalci pa za razliko od strokovnjakov ali politikov
v vrednotenih kulturnih posebnostih vidijo drugacen pomen in vrednote.« To je popol-
noma razumljivo in logicno, tezje paje (bilo) sprejemljivo za strokovne okvire, ki pogo-
sto ne vidijo, da je vitalnega pomena spoznavanje clovekovih praks, torej praks nosilcev
kulturnih procesov v razlicnih casovnih obdobjih. Problematika je torej precej sirsa od
vtisa, ki so ga posamicne stroke in strokovne prakse skusale narisati s kamnitnimi hi-
sami, kamnoseskimi izdelki in kamnom, vonjem in okusom prsute in terana. Krasevci
ne ohranjajo in razvijajo kulturnih prvin iz preteklosti zaradi kakih identifikacijskih in
predstavitvenih motivov, ampak predvsem zaradi svojih konkretnih zivljenjskih, gospo-
darskih potreb, zelja po druzenju, tudi zabavi, medsebojni komunikaciji idr.
Knjiga Krasevke, dr. Jasne Fakin Bajee, ki temelji vecletnem raziskovanju, je celovi-
to, izvirno in predvsem strokovno utemeljeno znanstveno délo o kulturni dediscini Kra-
sa. Zares je skoda le, da prihaja v javnost po tolikih letih in desetletjih, tudi po pogosto
zgresenih poskusih in posegih v zivljenje ter zivljenjsko okolje ljudi na Krasu. Preprican
sem, da bo v veliki meri lahko v prihodnje usmerila stevilna strokovna in politicna izho-
disca za trdnejse in predvsem strokovno utemeljene odlocitve. Te so se dozdaj pogosto
medile, ce se izrazim s primero, predvsem ob manjsih ali vecjih kolicinah narezanega
prsuta in kozarcih terana!
A Look at Krasfrom Kras
The book by Jasna Fakin Bajec is not topical only due to her exploration of a series of que-
stions on Kras cultural heritage, but particularly due to the changes that the landscape
and its inhabitants have experienced in the perspective of cultural heritage in the past
two or three decades. Even outside this timeframe we may speak of an almost mythical
valuation of Kras as landscape, which is also emphasised peculiarly in certain artistic
interpretations, particularly in literature and painting. The peak of valuing Kras and its
settlements, however, is expressed in the form of a “skansen museum”, i.e. a construct
that was made outside Kras.
In recent decades, the Kras specialty that was much more important to its inha-
bitants was what is possibly its main feature in its entire historical development - the
position of the region, its immediate contact with the Romance world. In diverse social
and political systems, the people of Kras experienced different economic and social life
fates, which has eventually shaped the recent local views on the future development of
the region following the Slovenian accession to the Schengen area.
The yield of expert findings is miserable, and they are often regulated at least indi-
rectly by political guidelines, thus being in conflict with the requirements of the econo-
mic, social and spiritual life of inhabitants of Kras. It is not that findings are few, they are
not productive as regards contents. Today we can no longer agree with the thought that
325
Jasna Fakin Bajec
natural features of the Kras landscape fail to provide favourable living conditions, as the
view of them has changed recently, thus making Kras a tempting landscape be it for tem-
porary or permanent residence. Being located in a very vulnerable area both geo graphi-
cally and politically, the changes to uses of the area conceal several dangers and traps
that the bearers of the “new” development of Kras often fail to understand; i.e. when
designing new types of urban settlements in the rural landscape, and in addition giving
them the suspicious name “the Kras village” of all the possibilities. This is all being done
under fancy slogans: protection of cultural heritage and Kras identity, consideration of
sustainable development, consideration of environmental capabilities, etc.
The issue of Kras cultural heritage, which according to Bourdieu is cultural and eco-
nomic capital, now opens up a series of contradictory definitions and concrete solutions.
The capital of Kras everyday life and holidays contributes to local and regional identifica-
tion, at the same time serving as a market product that provides the inhabitants with the
economic, social and cultural development. This makes it perfectly understandable why
inhabitants of Kras bind certain relations, meanings and interpretations to the elements
of cultural heritage, which creates a range of social, even aesthetical practices and pro-
cesses. This is why research into or analysis of ways of shaping, using and representing
cultural heritage in village communities of Kras is extremely important. It is interesting
to consider what Kras inhabitants understand as cultural heritage and what the main
values of their definitions are. These values are shaped in specific political, social and
cultural conditions, influencing the formation of attitude towards heritage both among
inhabitants of Kras as well as the expert public. The author of the book has directed her
research into the changed attitudes of the local population and the authorities towards
elements of cultural heritage within two social-political systems, whereas geographically
she has been focusing mainly on village communities of Western or Komen Kras area
(Komen, Sveto and Volcji Grad), while some examples and comparisons include other
micro regions of Kras.
In Kras as well, the social-political interests have helped shape meanings and the use
of cultural heritage, which has been used and emphasised as a symbol of identification or
a symbol of national and local identity. Undoubtedly, the most prominent feature, even
the symbol of Kras identity, is architectural, building heritage, its notions often appea-
ring stereotypical. It is its contemporary architectural image where two perceptions or
two views of Kras are probably reflected most consistently: that from the “outside” and
the so-called local or from the “inside”. The external perception is permeated strongly
with idealist and also instrumentalised attitudes, whereas the internal one is directed
intuitively by the system of values and norms based on specific economic, social and spi-
ritual requirements. This is why there is no surprise e.g. in various types of reviving ritu-
al practices and in the emergence of the so-called Kras folklorism, which naturally can
influence fatally the contemporary understanding of Kras cultural heritage. This then is
related directly to the meaning and role of cultural heritage in shaping economic, parti-
cularly tourist products. Cultural heritage has been becoming an important element in
shaping the image and recognisability of Kras as a tourist destination, a motif and a tool
326
Procesi ustvarjanja kultume dediscine
of destination management. Several mistakes have been made in shaping the viewpoints
and the perception of elements of Kras cultural heritage, maybe even more than is the
case with building or residential heritage. What commonly goes hand-in-hand with the
development of tourism in Kras is the lack of expert knowledge and careless planning:
particularly absent were presentations of the local past, both in socialist and post-socia-
list times. A typical example of that is Stanjel, otherwise considered the most important
tourist spot in the municipality of Komen, however, this is the location where several
battles have been fought over planning, renovation, sustainable development, urban fa-
cilities, etc.
Based on a thorough analysis of the developments, local and international, inclu-
ding the steps that were not particularly well-chosen, the author was able to set a model
expressing contemporary tendencies in the use of cultural heritage in the sustainable
development of the village of Stanjel, as well as a realistic role of the ethnologist or cultu-
ral anthropologist in designing the future development or designing tourist contents. By
now, this expert field has been controlled partly by tourist amateurism and partly by we-
akly supported expert proposals, but also prohibitions and other bureaucratic measures.
Naturally, Kras cultural heritage has been created by people, inhabitants, the popu-
lation of Kras, but it has been chosen and selected by “experts”. It is therefore no surprise
that among the local population some heritage campaigns and activities were received
warmly and many were declined justifiably. “The key actor in adopting expert views and
considering political laws is the local population that live with the expertly valuated cul-
tural elements, and some inhabitants, in contrast to experts and politicians, see different
meaning and values in the valuated cultural specialties.” This is quite understandable
and logical, yet the expert circles find it difficult to understand it, often failing to see the
seminal importance of learning about human practices, i.e. the practices of those who
perform cultural processes in various periods of time. The issue therefore is much wider
than the impression that individual disciplines and expert practices wanted to create
using stone houses, stonemason items and the stone, the smell and taste of prosciutto
and teran. It is not due to certain motifs of identification or presentation that inhabitants
of Kras maintain and develop past cultural elements, but primarily due to their specific
living and economic requirements, desires for socialising, entertainment, mutual com-
munication, etc.
The book by a Kras inhabitant, dr. Jasna Fakin Bajec, which is based on years of
research, is a comprehensive, original and particularly well-founded scientific work on
the cultural heritage of Kras. It is only a pity that it should be made public after so many
years and decades, and so many failed attempts and interventions in the life and living
environment of Kras. I am convinced that in the future it will be able to direct several
expert and political starting points towards firm and expertly founded solutions. So far
they have often borne fruit, if I may use a simile, particularly with smaller or larger quan-
tities of sliced prosciutto and glasses of teran!
Bayerlsche
£*?3atsb!bfioffrek
München
327
|
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Fakin Bajec, Jasna |
| author2 | Ropret, Alenka |
| author2_role | trl |
| author2_variant | a r ar |
| author_facet | Fakin Bajec, Jasna Ropret, Alenka |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Fakin Bajec, Jasna |
| author_variant | b j f bj bjf |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV043332129 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)951065982 (DE-599)BVBBV043332129 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02123nam a2200433 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV043332129</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20160601 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">160201s2011 a||| |||| 00||| slv d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789612543433</subfield><subfield code="9">978-961-254-343-3</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)951065982</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV043332129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">slv</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fakin Bajec, Jasna</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine</subfield><subfield code="b">Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe</subfield><subfield code="c">Jasna Fakin Bajec ; prevod Alenka Ropret</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Ljubljana</subfield><subfield code="b">Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU</subfield><subfield code="c">2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">327 Seiten</subfield><subfield code="b">Illustrationen</subfield><subfield code="c">25 cm</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ethnologica - Dissertationes / Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU</subfield><subfield code="v">2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Literaturverzeichnis Seite. - Englische Zusammenfassung: Processes of creating cultural heritage</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Kulturerbe</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4033560-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Kras / Kulturna dediščina</subfield><subfield code="2">ssg</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Karst</subfield><subfield code="g">Landschaft</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4097690-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Karst</subfield><subfield code="g">Landschaft</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4097690-7</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Kulturerbe</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4033560-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ropret, Alenka</subfield><subfield code="4">trl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="810" ind1="2" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU</subfield><subfield code="t">Ethnologica - Dissertationes</subfield><subfield code="v">2</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV041551228</subfield><subfield code="9">2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028752279&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028752279&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-028752279</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">306.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="g">4973</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Kras / Kulturna dediščina ssg Karst Landschaft (DE-588)4097690-7 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Kras / Kulturna dediščina Karst Landschaft |
| id | DE-604.BV043332129 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-07-10T07:23:17Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9789612543433 |
| language | Slovenian |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-028752279 |
| oclc_num | 951065982 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 |
| physical | 327 Seiten Illustrationen 25 cm |
| publishDate | 2011 |
| publishDateSearch | 2011 |
| publishDateSort | 2011 |
| publisher | Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU |
| record_format | marc |
| series2 | Ethnologica - Dissertationes / Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU |
| spelling | Fakin Bajec, Jasna Verfasser aut Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe Jasna Fakin Bajec ; prevod Alenka Ropret Ljubljana Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU 2011 327 Seiten Illustrationen 25 cm txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Ethnologica - Dissertationes / Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU 2 Literaturverzeichnis Seite. - Englische Zusammenfassung: Processes of creating cultural heritage Kulturerbe (DE-588)4033560-4 gnd rswk-swf Kras / Kulturna dediščina ssg Karst Landschaft (DE-588)4097690-7 gnd rswk-swf Karst Landschaft (DE-588)4097690-7 g Kulturerbe (DE-588)4033560-4 s DE-604 Ropret, Alenka trl Inštitut za slovensko narodopisje ZRC SAZU Ethnologica - Dissertationes 2 (DE-604)BV041551228 2 Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028752279&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 19 - ADAM Catalogue Enrichment application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028752279&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Fakin Bajec, Jasna Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe Kulturerbe (DE-588)4033560-4 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4033560-4 (DE-588)4097690-7 |
| title | Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe |
| title_auth | Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe |
| title_exact_search | Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe |
| title_full | Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe Jasna Fakin Bajec ; prevod Alenka Ropret |
| title_fullStr | Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe Jasna Fakin Bajec ; prevod Alenka Ropret |
| title_full_unstemmed | Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe Jasna Fakin Bajec ; prevod Alenka Ropret |
| title_short | Procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediščine |
| title_sort | procesi ustvarjanja kulturne dediscine krasevci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne druzbe |
| title_sub | Kraševci med tradicijo in izzivi sodobne družbe |
| topic | Kulturerbe (DE-588)4033560-4 gnd |
| topic_facet | Kulturerbe Kras / Kulturna dediščina Karst Landschaft |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028752279&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=028752279&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV041551228 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fakinbajecjasna procesiustvarjanjakulturnedediscinekrasevcimedtradicijoinizzivisodobnedruzbe AT ropretalenka procesiustvarjanjakulturnedediscinekrasevcimedtradicijoinizzivisodobnedruzbe |