Anna Novikov

by Anna Novikov Since the last decade a revival of patriotic attire can be observed in many post-communist countries of Central Eastern Europe (for instance, Hungary, Poland, Ukraine, Russia) and Central Asia (Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan). It manifests itself in various ways: neo-folk elements, traditional embroidery, festivals and the reenactment of historical scenes, religious symbols, photographs of politicians, and many more. Combat trousers and T-shirts printed with famous historical battl..

Attention is also paid to Twardowski’s successors such as Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz, Tadeusz Czeżowski, and Kotarbiński, who were guided by the idea that ‘the subjects of humanities are expressions of mental products’ (p. 281). Darius Łukasiewicz, speaking of Czeżowski’s ‘Brentanian turn’ (p. 122), admits a definite influence of Jan Łukasiewicz even in the adoption of Brentano, and explains how Czeżowski nevertheless kept his footing in both moral aspects of philosophy and accurate methods, as many LWS scholars did. The moral connotation that Czeżowski found in Twardowski’s theory of action and products also resonates with Kotarbiński’s formal analysis, as Marta Zaręba discusses. Her paper builds a firm bridge between the LWS and the Anglo-Saxon modus operandi. Stepan Ivanyk’s chapter, entitled ‘The Lvov-Warsaw School as a Multicultural Phenomenon, Ukrainian Aspect’, deserves special mention, for it deals with the Ukrainian city that nurtured the ideas of the School. It is indeed important to understand that the Galicia’s capital Lvov on the side of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the reborn capital Warsaw that belonged to Imperial Russia for centuries faced varying socio-political circumstances. Hence the philosophy of the LWS, which in principle reflected contemporary problems and maintained the sense of reality, might have resulted in different investigations. As he points out, Twardowski was as much remarkable to Ukrainian students as for Poles. Neither nationality nor ethnicity mattered to Twardowski in his teachings. The luminary opened his lectures to Jewish students, too (p. 57). Marcin Tkaczyk’s contribution also emphasizes the influence that the LWS exerted on the theologians of the Cracow Circle, including Józef M. Bocheński and Jan Salamucha, who held the applicability of formal argumentations in high regard. Both authors took regional dynamics within modern Polish cities into account. Overall, the editors of this book have succeeded in providing new research perspectives on the LWS. They have not, however, discussed the concept of European culture enough. In order to understand the LWS’s role more precisely, it is necessary to rethink the history of the School in the wider social and intellectual contexts of the twentieth century.

This article deals with two little-known disputes over the national identity of a population in the interwar border area of Eastern Upper Silesia. This area was transferred from Germany to Poland after World War I as a result of a plebiscite. Its local population, the Silesians, did not consider themselves entirely German or Polish, but still underwent a process of Polonization. The plebiscite took place in Upper Silesia in 1921, prompting international controversy and internal debate within the Polish state about how to define the nationality of the Silesians in the context of their internationally protected rights as a "minority." As this article shows, the Silesians were utilized by Central and Western European politicians as objects of international diplomacy and by the Polish authorities to advance their internal policies. The story of "Maurer's children" and Silesian children born out of wedlock illustrates the reaction of the Silesian population to the interwar politics of nationalization. These cases attracted international attention from 1926 to 1928 and brought questions of national minorities, bilingual children, and self-definition of nationality vis-à-vis the state's requirements to the level of international debate.

Whether they prefer revealing clothes or more modest, conservative attire, Russian women have many opportunities to display their patriotism nowadays: either by wearing T-shirts with the portrait of the president or by emphasizing their Russian Orthodox religious identity by donning traditional Sarafan dresses and festive Kokoshnik headgears, that are seen as typical elements of Russian national attire. The surge in patriotic attire is, however, not specific to women or Russia.

Embroidered Ukrainian dresses and shirts, the so called Vyshivanka, appeared at 2015 Paris Fashion Week.[1] Combat trousers and T-shirts with famous historical battles as well as folk motives on dresses and shirts featuring gods from Slavic mythology are also popular in Poland. During the pan-Turkist Kurultai assemblies the followers of Turanism wear Central Asian Chapan-overcoats, often with a modern twist, and Malakhai nomadic hats. Female South-Siberian dancers as well as Kazakh and Kirgiz pop singers are inspired by amazons and perform dressed in chain armor, helms and holding swords.

In the last decade, due to the development of the media and socio-political changes, a transnational revival of patriotic attire can be observed. This attire is on the one hand a result of the current biased re-writing of neo-national historiography within Russia, the post-Communist countries of Central Eastern Europe and Central Asia. On the other hand, this patriotic attire is conducive to the creation of a new tradition in strengthening unity within each group. Such re-invented fashion visualizes the ideology of those who wear it. A revival of patriotic attire manifests itself in various ways: neo-folk elements, traditional embroidery, festivals and the reenactment of historical scenes, religious symbols, photographs of politicians, and many more.

This article is a brief summary of my current research project, which analyzes this phenomenon of patriotic attire and its role in the re-invention of history. On the one hand, I Materialsammlung zum Thema „Wahlen in Russland“trace the performative and populist aspects of its visual manifestation, where all the sartorial elements mentioned above tightly connect to the appearance of such new cultural fusions as “Slavic Yoga”, “Turk Runes”, “Polish Zumba”, “Golden Warrior Woman”, “Hipster Perun”, “Central Asian Barbie” and “Eco Baba-Yaga”. On the other hand, I analyze the political ideology which stands behind this patriotic attire and its usage in politics.

Since the last decade a revival of patriotic attire can be observed in many post-communist countries of Central Eastern Europe (for instance, Hungary, Poland, Ukraine, Russia) and Central Asia (Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan). It manifests itself in various ways: neo-folk elements, traditional embroidery, festivals and the reenactment of historical scenes, religious symbols, photographs of politicians, and many more. Combat trousers and T-shirts printed with famous historical battles as well as folk motives on dresses and skirts are now popular in Poland; during their annual patriotic assemblies, Hungarian right-wing activists wear Mongolian inspired attire; Kazakh female pop singers dress themselves up as nomadic amazons; and Russian girls wear blouses with portraits of Putin.
The full version of the article is on:
http://trafo.hypotheses.org/7082

This event, organized by the Forum Transnationale Studien together with EUME (Europe in the Middle East- the Middle East in Europe) research program seminar as a host, and the Berlin-Branderburg Ukrainian Initiative, took place on the 9th of December. The program of this evening has been of interest to me for some time, since it looked like a promising combination of scholarly and journalistic discourse, which could potentially bring a stimulating discussion.

ה-3 באוקטובר 2016, ראש השנה, הוכרז על ידי כלי התקשורת בפולין, ובעקבותיה בכל העולם, כ"יום שני השחור": יום התנגדות מסיבית ויוצאת דופן של נשים פולניות שלבשו שחורים, השביתו את מקומות עבודתן ויצאו להפגנות ענק בוורשה, קרקוב, פוזנן וערים נוספות. המחאה החלה בעקבות חקיקתו של חוק חדש האוסר על הפלות, שעבר מעט קודם לכן בפולין בקריאה ראשונה.
בשנה שעברה ניסתה כבר ממשלה הפולנית החדשה להעביר את החוק, אך הדבר נכשל. הניסיון השני, כעבור קצת פחות משנה, הוכתר בהצלחה. גם לפני כן חל איסור על הפלות בפולין, אך היה מותר לגרום להפלה מסיבות רפואיות שהיו עלולות לסכן את האם או כשהיה מדובר במום אצל העובר, וכמוכן במקרים של אונס. החוק החדש אסר גם את האפשרויות הללו. לפי החוק, אשה שתפיל שלא מרצונה (הפלה טבעית), תהיה חייבת לעבור חקירה משפטית כדי לוודא שאין זה מקרה מכוון. בכך, לטענת המפגינות, הממשלה החליטה להשתלט באופן מוחלט על גופן ועל חייהן.

This chapter aims both to narrate and examine the unique story of the nationalization of a local population in the interwar Central European border area through the education system. I deal with the question of Polonization of a non-national group of Silesians in the area of Eastern Upper (or Polish) Silesia which, after the plebiscite and the shift of the borders became a Silesian Voivodeship (province) as a part of the newly created Second Polish Republic.  At the time of the plebiscite, the Silesians had to decide about their national and linguistic affiliation, when most of them considered themselves neither German nor Polish in national terms.
My focus on the Silesian society, in a wide and comparative context of international political and diplomatic background enables me to place this “micro” history case within the “macro” history of Central Europe between the wars. Despite the regional specificity of Eastern Upper Silesia and its capital Katowice (Kattowitz), the main questions of national belonging and nationalization, of the multi-national state and of the national, linguistic or religious definitions of minorities versus their own self-definition were common to all the successor states during their interwar existence. Such questions of self-definition which differ from the national definition of the authorities, and of forced inculcation of nationalism created by the state, are real and relevant in many regions of the world until the present day.
Eastern Upper Silesia as a politicized area of international importance is highly amenable to my methodology of examining “macro” history through “micro” history. In such an area the nationalization process of minorities at a “micro” level can therefore reflect lesser-known aspects of the “macro” history of political and diplomatic history of interwar Europe. My approach will create a link between “micro” and “macro” histories by tracing the implementation of important international or internal Polish decisions through the process of nationalization into the daily life of the Silesian society.
This chapter concentrates on one of the most important litmus tests for nationalization – the education system. Here, apparently, the significance of the changes, following the process of Polonization, was substantial. On the one hand, a new Polish language education system was created. On the other hand, minority schools for the German speaking population were set up. It is important to see how in fact, the two types of state schools divided children from the same society, in the same area, and tried to create, in a brief time, two different national affiliations – Polish and German. Here, three test cases- the process of creation of minority schools; the highly ideological school subject of history; and the school celebration of the national state holidays - will be examined as the clear examples of the Polonization process in the area.

This article aims to narrate and examine a unique story of ‘Polonisation’ of a certain population group in the interwar Central-European border area. It deals with the question of belonging and affi liation of a group of members of a Jewish organisation in East Upper Silesia. The area, which was transferred to Poland from Germany after WWI, experienced an intensive process of nationalisation, or Polonisation.
The article focuses mostly on the former German city Kattowitz, or Katowice, which after the border shift became the capital of Poland’s new province, the Silesian Voivodeship. A period of thirteen years has been taken into account: from
1921, the year of the plebiscite in Upper Silesia, until 1934, when Poland and Germany signed the non-aggression pact. Both the plebiscite and the signing of the non-aggression pact were crucial for the Upper Silesian minorities. At the time
of the plebiscite, these minorities had to opt for a national affi liation, while none of them considered themselves completely German or Polish. Therefore, after the plebiscite and with the borders rearranged, these groups should have been fit for
getting Polonised. The article focuses at the Jewish test case, in a wide and comparative context of international political and diplomatic background. It therefore places micro-history cases within the macro-history of Central Europe between
the two World Wars.

This book both narrates and examines the story of the nationalization of a local population in an interwar Central European border area using a wide and comparative context that relies on the international political and diplomatic background of the time. It concentrates on a time period of thirteen years, from 1921 (the year of the plebiscite in Upper Silesia) to 1934 (when Poland and Germany signed the non-aggression pact). After the plebiscite, the area of Upper Silesia was divided between Germany and Poland, and the part which was shifted to Poland experienced an intensive process of nationalization or what will be called “Polonization”. The study focuses on the city Kattowitz/Katowice, a politicized area of international importance and which after the shifting of the border became the capital of the new Polish Silesian Voivodeship.

The attire of the Jews of central and eastern Europe was depicted in paintings, caricatures and photographs and was described in Jewish and non-Jewish texts in the course of several centuries. At the same time, the diversity of the sources depicting in words or/and images the varied Jewish population of this vast region often hinders attempts to understand and analyze the development of Jewish clothing. This workshop will focus on visual and textual depictions of early modern and modern central and eastern European Jewish attire and the relationship to the attire of their non-Jewish neighbors. We invite scholars from various disciplines-design, textiles, material and visual culture, art history and fashion history-to discuss central and eastern European Jewish dress and its details in the early modern and modern periods and to compare it to the dress of the surrounding populations. We would like to stress the methodological aspects of this issue, and hope that such a discussion will contribute to the history of interaction between the Jewish and non-Jewish cultures. We envision this online workshop as a series of 10 to 15 minute presentations followed by discussion, as well as a broad conversation in which the participants will share their experiences of working with online research and digital sources and of major challenges faced by historians of Jewish dress.