Lietuviu English
Your location: MainJournalArchyvai17 Volume
Meniu
Journal
  Archyvai
  4 Volume
  5 Volume
  6 Volume
  7 Volume
  8 Volume
  9 Volume
  10 Volume
  11 Volume
  12 Volume
  13 Volume
  14 Volume
  15 Volume
  16 Volume
  17 Volume
  18 Volume
  19 Volume
  Editorial Board
  Guidelines
Special Publications
E-version of the publication
Contacts and links
Draugai
Tinklapį kūrė
č4
Girius MERKYS
 
  Archyvai (17 Volume)  
   
 
ISSN 1392-0448. LIETUVOS ISTORIJOS STUDIJOS. Nr. 17
films and programs due to a lack of understanding of the individual specific features of the cinema and television, and the failure of historians to popularize their research. Stumbling blocks on the part of audio-visual communications specialists arise from the artistic / individual / creative documentary tradition in Lithuania which developed during the Soviet period. This tradition gave rise to attempts to transform history to conform more to the author’s vision of the past than to provide information based on the latest advances of formal, academic history. By trying to consider history emotionally and subjectively, the authors of Lithuanian documentary films and programs in the period of national revival and the first years of independence (till 1993) usually failed to provide a new, individual take on the history of Lithuania; rather, they reproduced interpretations of Lithuanian history produced in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

The enhanced role of historians in the creation of Lithuanian documentary film and television is connected with changes in self-conception among audio-visual communications specialists (authors and their „supervising“ critics) as well as among historians; these changes were visible by 1993. Out of this cooperation between audio-visual communications specialists and historians, there appeared works in Lithuanian audio-visual culture in which, because of the specific nature of cinematic and televisions methods, „neuralgic“ themes in terms of historical consciousness were actualized (popularized), single-sided assessments of the past were rejected, and a history „open“ to multiple viewpoints and to corrections in the future was created, thus demonstrating the problematic nature of history and more closely approaching the status of a scientific reconstruction.

86

‹‹ Rodyti atgal
pages
Rodyti toliau ››

 
   
   
2005 - 2006 © c4 dizainas ir programavimas giriaus