Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Landscape
Vol. 5:3 (2019) ► pp.248–280

Vilnius memoryscape

Razing and raising of monuments, collective memory and national identity

| University of Wolverhampton
Through the lens of semiotic landscapes, I analyse here collective memory formation in the Baltic republic of Lithuania. A theoretical focus on power relation in “monumental politics”, the concept of memoryscape (Clack, 2011), Van Gennep’s 2004 sociological application of liminality, and a methodological approach that “treats space as a discursive as well as physical formation” (Jaworski & Thurlow, 2010) are combined to examine the process of monument destruction, creation, and alteration in post-Soviet Vilnius. I argue that cultural landscapes represent not only relationships of power within societies but are also used as a tool of nation-building and power legitimation. I highlight a fourfold process: (1) razing – monumental landscape cleansing; (2) raising – the return of memory via the creation of national historical continuity symbols and of new lieux de mémoire (Nora, 1996) and the memorization complex (Train, 2016); (3) polyphonic memorial narratives of empty spaces; and (4) the memory limbo helix or recursive memories.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methodological considerations
  • 3.Lithuanian social revolution, landscape transformation and memory politics
  • 4.Collective memory formation
    • 4.1Razing of Soviet monuments as part of memoryscape cleansing in Vilnius
    • 4.2The return of memory – raising of new monuments and reconstruction of national identity
    • 4.3New lieux de mémoire and memorization complex
    • 4.4Polyphonic memorial narratives of empty spaces
  • 5.The memory “limbo helix” or recursive memories
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 November 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.18022.moo
References (60)
References
Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Ashworth, G. J., Tunbridge, J. E. (1999). Old cities, new pasts: Heritage planning in selected cities of Central Europe. GeoJournal, 49(1), 105–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, J. (2013). Ethnography, Superdiversity and Linguistic Landscapes: Chronicles of Complexity. Clevedon, Buffalo & Toronto: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bonnemaison, J. (2005). Culture and Space. Conceiving a New Cultural Geography. London and New York: I. B. Touris.Google Scholar
Certeau, M. (1985). Practice of Space. In Certeau, M. & Blonski, M. (Eds.) On Signs (pp. 122-145). Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Clack, T. (2011). Thinking Through Memoryscapes: Symbolic Environmental Potency on Mount Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. In T. Myllyntaus (ed.) Thinking Through the Environment: Green Approaches to Global History (pp.115–135). Cambridge: White Horse Press.Google Scholar
Code of Administrative Offences of the Republic of Lithuania. (2008). Retrieved from [URL]
Cosgrove, D. E. (1998). Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Cosgrove, D. E. & Daniels, S. (2004). The Iconography of Landscape. Essays on the Symbolic Representation, Design and Use of Past Environments (Cambridge Studies in Historical Geography). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Czepczyński, M. (2008). Cultural Landscapes of Post-Socialist Cities: Representation of Powers and Needs Aldershot: Ashgate.: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2010). Interpreting Post-Socialist Icons: from Pride and Hate Towards Disappearance and/or Assimilation. Human Geographies – Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, 4(1), 67–78.Google Scholar
(2016). Haunted Landscapes. Post-Socialist memory limbo of contemporary Poland. Mesto a Dejiny, Recenzovaný Vedecký Časopis, 5(2), 68–79.Google Scholar
Davoliūtė, V. (2008). Lithuania and the New West-East Migration, OIKOS: Lithuanian Migration & Diaspora Studies, 6.2, 73–80.Google Scholar
(2013). The Making and Breaking of Soviet Lithuania. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Drėmaitė, M. (2017). 1990–2000: The Architecture of Freedom. [Reserach Project]. Retrieved September 10, 2018, from [URL]
Foote, K., Tóth, S., Arvay, A. (2000). Hungary after 1989: Inscribing a New Past on Place. The Geographical Review, 90(3), 301–3. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forest, B. & Johnson, J. (2011). Monumental Politics: Regime Type and Public Memory in Post-Communist States. Post-Soviet Affairs, 27(3), 269–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forest, B., Johnson, J. and Till, K. (2004). Post-Totalitarian National Identity: Public Memory in Germany and Russia. Social and Cultural Geography, 5(3), 357–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gehlbach, S. (2010). Reflections on Putin and the Media. Post-Soviet Affairs, 26(1), 77–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gellner, E. (2008). Nations and Nationalism (New Perspectives and the Past). New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Gordon, A. (2001). Making Public Pasts: The Contested Terrain of Montreal’s Public Memories, 1891–1930. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
Graham, B. (1998). The Past in Europe’s Present: Diversity, Identity and the Construction of Place. In Graham, B. (Ed.), Modern Europe. Palce. Culture. Identity. (pp. 19–52). London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Gromilova, A. (2014). Changing Identities of the Baltic States: Three Memories in Stone. CES Working Papers, VI(2A), 94–110.Google Scholar
Haggrén, H., Rainio-Niemi, J. & Vauhkonen, J. (Ed.). (2013). Multi-layered Historicity of the Present: Approaches to social science history. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Halbwachs, M. (1925). Les Travaux de l’Année Sociologique, Paris: F. Alcan.Google Scholar
Hall, S. (2002). The work of Representation. In Hall, S. (Ed.), Representation, Cultiral Representation and Signifying Practices. London & New Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
Jaworski, A., Thurlow, C. (Ed.). (2010). Semiotic Landscapes. Language, Image, Space. London & New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Jones, R. (2010). Creativity and discourse. World Englishes, 29(4), 467–480. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, S. (2001). Modern Hatreds: The Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laclau, E. (1990). New reflections on the revolution of our time. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucija. (1992). Retrieved March 10, 2018, from [URL]
Lithuania’s Cunning Approach to Removing the Soviet Past. (2015). Retrieved from [URL]
Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Moore, I. (2018). Linguistic, Ethnic and Cultural Tensions in the Sociolinguistic Landscape of Vilnius: a Diachronic Analysis. In Pűtz, M., Mundt, N. Expanding the Linguistic Landscape. Linguistic Diversity. Multimodality and the Use of Space as a Semiotic Resource (pp.229–263). Bristol, Buffalo, Toronto: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nora, P. (1996). Realms of memory: Rethinking the French past, Conflicts and Divisions (Vol. 11). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, A. (2009). Language Conflict in Post-Soviet Linguistic Landscapes. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 17(1–2), 247–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). Linguistic landscape of Kyiv, Ukraine: A diachronic study. (2010). In Shohamy, E., Ben Rafael, E., Barni, M. (Ed.) Linguistic Landscape in the City. (pp. 133–150). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavlenko, A., & Mullen, A. (2015). Why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes. Linguistic Landscape, 1(1–2), 114–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic Decree on Language. (1989). Retrieved March 10, 2018, from [URL]
Proust, M. (1954). A la Recherche du Temps Perdu, du Côte de Ches Swann. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Republic of Lithuania Law on the State Language. (1995). Retrieved March 10, 2018, from [URL]
Risse, T. (2010). A Community of Europeans? Transnational Identities and Public Spheres. New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Samalavičius, A. (2016). The Genius Loci, Public Spaces and Transformations of Vilnius’ Urban Milieu. Lithuanus, 62(1). Retrieved from [URL]
Scollon, R., Scollon, S. W. (2003). Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shohamy, E. and Waksman, S. (2010). Building the Nation, Writing the Past: History and Textuality at the Ha’apala Memorial in Tel Aviv-Jaffa. In Jaworski, A., Thurlow, C. (Ed.), Semiotic Landscapes Language, Image, Space (pp.241–255). London & New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Shohamy, E., Waksman, S. (2009). Linguistic Landscape as an Ecological Arena: Modalities, Meanings, Negotiations, Education. In Shohamy, E., Gorter, D. (Ed.), Linguistic Landscape Expanding the Scenery (pp. 313–331). New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Skozylas, Ł. (2014). Skozylas, Ł. Panięć Spoƚeczna Miasta – jej “Liderzy i Odbiocry. Warszawa: Scholar.Google Scholar
Snyder, T. (2002). Memory of sovereignty and sovereignty over memory: Poland, Lithuania, and Ukraine, 1939 – 1999. In Werner Müller, J. (Ed.), Memory and Power in Post-War Europe: Studies in the Presence of the Past (pp. 39–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suziedelis, S. (2011). Historical Dictionary of Lithuania. Lanham/Toronto/Plymouth, UK: Scarecrow Press.Google Scholar
The Road of Freedom. (2010). Retrieved October 15, 2018, from [URL]
Tilly, S. (2006). Regimes and Repertoires. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turner, V. (1975). Dramas, Fields, and Metaphors. Symbolic Action in Human Society (symbol, myth, and ritual). New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Ufartas, A. (2017). Vilnius Central Square Monument Contest Winner Says Sculpture is “Dead.” Delfi. Retrieved from [URL]
Van Gennep, A. (2004). Rites of Passage. Routledge Library Editions.Google Scholar
Verdery, K. (1999). The Political Lives of Dead Bodies: Reburial and Postsocialist Change. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Volkova, E. (2013). Litovskih nacionalistov oskorbila kolbasa [Lithuanian nationalists were offended by sausages] Russian World. Retrieved from [URL]
Weeks, T. R. (2015). Vilnius between Nations 1795–2000. USA: Northern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Žemaitis, A. (2013). Double masted flag – a new type of monument in Vilnius. Retrieved November 10, 2018, from [URL]
Žilinskaitė, V. (2008). Lithuanian Code: Captures of History in Vilnius Cityscape. Informacijos Mokslas, 451, 90–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Dergacheva, V.E. & Yu.G. Chernyshov
2023. Features of the "Monumental" Policy of the United States in Relation to the Conflicts of the Cold War (on the Example of Monuments in Washington, D.C.). Izvestiya of Altai State University :3(131) ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo
Dergacheva, V.E. & Yu.G. Chernyshov
2021. Installation “Breakthrough”, Implementation and Memorialisation of the “Cold War” in the USA. Izvestiya of Altai State University :5(121) ► pp. 58 ff. DOI logo
Liu, Zhixin
2023. Liminalising and affectivising cityscape as a branding practice: a sociolinguistic ethnography in urban China. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Volvach, Natalia
2023. Shouting absences: Disentangling the ghosts of Ukraine in occupied Crimea. Language in Society ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Lazar, Michelle M.
2022. Semiotic timescapes. Language in Society 51:5 ► pp. 735 ff. DOI logo
Ong, Teresa Wai See
2021. Reimaging the Art Scene in George Town, Penang. In Handbook of the Changing World Language Map, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Tomaszewicz, Agnieszka & Joanna Majczyk
2021. In a Time Loop: Politics and the Ideological Significance of Monuments to Those Who Perished on Saint Anne Mountain (1934–1955, Germany/Poland). Arts 10:1 ► pp. 17 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.