Monument Discourse and the Hungarian Case

CEU eTD Collection Monument discourse and the Hungarian case: In partialfulfillment oftherequirements forthedegree of Competing political interpretations in Budapest’s monuments for the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 Associate Professor Balázs Tréncsenyi Central European University Professor István Rév History Department Budapest, Hungary Second Reader: Victoria Harms Supervisor: Master ofArts Submitted to 2007 By CEU eTD Collection Further copies made accordance in with such instructions may notbemade without Copies Copies by anyprocess, either infullor part, maybemade accordancein with only the instructions given bytheAuthor and lodged the Central in European Library. Copyright thein text ofthis thesis rests with the Author. This page must form a partofany suchcopies made. Details may beobtained from the librarian. the written permission oftheAuthor Statement ofCopyright CEU eTD Collection II Politics and art: changes and continuity...... 31 I. Memory and representation ...... 11 inplace and time Introduction...... 5 Table ...... 3 of Content Table ofContent II.3 Art in Contemporary Hungary...... 55 II.2 Politics in Democratic ...... 40 Hungary II.2 Opposition, transition ...... 32 and 1956 ...... 31 II.1 Introduction I.2 Memory...... 12 I.1 General Introduction...... 11 II.3. 5 Conclusions...... 66 II.3. 4 Institutional framework in the 1990s...... 63 II.3. 3 The golden era of the 1980s...... 59 II.3. 2 Art in Hungary ...... 56 as ‘counter-culture’ II.3. 1 Introduction...... 55 II.2. 3 Towards Polarization...... 51 II.2.3 The 1990s...... 47 II.2.2 Changes during the first ...... 43 parliamentary term II.2.1 The first elections: new profiles, ...... 40 old images II.2.2 Reorganization in new parties...... 35 II.2. Opposition in the 1980s...... 32 I.4 Conclusion...... 30 I.3. 3 ‘New Berlin’: Jewish Museum and Holocaust Memorial...... 25 I. 3. 2 James Young’s studies of Holocaust Memorials...... 23 I.3. 1 General Introduction...... 21 I.2 5. Symbolic overwriting and iconoclash...... 19 I.2. 4 Monuments and iconology...... 18 I.2. 3 The political cult of the dead...... 17 I.2...... 15 2 Places of memory I.2. 1 Communicative, collective and cultural memory...... 12 3 CEU eTD Collection ilorpy...... 109 Bibliography ...... 103 Conclusion Budapest’s monuments for the Hungarian Revolution of 1956...... 68 III. discourse Monument andtheHungarian case:Competing political interpretations in III.3 The50 III.2 Post-Communist ...... 74 Monuments for ‘56 III.1 ...... 68 Public Art in Transition II.2.4 The ‘new’ National Heritage...... 90 III.2. 3 Reconciliation versus Revenge...... 84 II.2.2 The populist tradition...... 77 III.2.1 Plot301...... 74 III.1.3 Iconoclash Survivors...... 73 II.1.2 Iconophilia ...... 70 and Iconoclasm II.1.1 General Introduction...... 68 I.. 96–20 ...... 101 III.3.3 1956 – 2006 III.3. 2 The New ...... 96 Central Monument III.3.1 Polarization...... 95 th anvray...... 95 anniversary 4 CEU eTD Collection monuments as well as the current ideological ideological as polarization. well current as the monuments its and legacy revolution’s the over fights fierce the understand to impossible is it evaluation a critical without because attention deserves monuments these of Thehistory characteristics. unique features in Hungary ’56 andmanifestations of to approaches the In thisrespect, interpretation andmeaning. ‘correct’ the lacks about memory consensus social the nowadays, revolution Hungarian the of commemoration the to regard With claims. political present-day goalsas aswell future self-image, for acollective foundation as memory serves social the The of framework common notions Hence, past. create references. of the and set belonging, patrons. respective andthe of convictions interests political in to the relation language their symbolic recent political development. Therefore, this paperanalyzes a selection of ’56 monuments and potential in monuments forconnecting Hungarianthe inrevolution 1956 to country’sthe analytical reveals the look acloser simultaneously. However, broke out riots unrelated, Seemingly Monument. anew over by Central 2006, wasaccompanied a public controversy 50 celebration The the inof andmeaning. style greatly public spaces differs in monuments seems little surprising. However, range the monuments of set upin Budapest’s is It believed memory a widely the ’56 led thus, that peaceful ismanifestation of to transition; in1989/90. regimes thechangeof led ultimately to eventthat as anational-historical of 1956 Introduction In general, historicalnations commemorate events whichloom as forces in unifying Revolution the commemorates Hungary a democratic republic, to transition Since the Monument discourse and the Hungarian case: Competing political interpretations in Budapest’s monuments for the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 th anniversary in 5 CEU eTD Collection Livingstone; Religion and Cultural Memory. Ten Studies 2 divide], (Berlin: Jovis Publ.2000), pp. 199-212. dernach dem Ende Ost-West-Konfrontation CompensationHungary’s on public places], inAkademie Künste.der 1 Boros who has already analyzed language symbolicthe of ‘56 monuments is Géza these among prominently Most monuments. Hungarian of landscape symbolic the 1994). Moderne 4 Monument,Memorial, Museum], (Frankfurt am Main andNew York: Campus Publ.1999), pp.59-77. Theodor(eds.).Grüter 3 Verlag c1999). C.H.Beck (München: cultures], high ancient in identity political and Remembrance Writing, Memory. [Cultural is it insists Koselleck Thus, struggles. political by accompanied was monuments of raising cases as the ‘Unknown Soldier’ in France entered the canon of national symbols. Usually, well-known before such contested often were they Thus, structures. power ideologies and the raising ofmonuments. Since the19 the accompany that claims political the out points Koselleck introduction, programmatic selection of articles by the famous German social historian Reinhart Koselleck memory. of of examples places significant memory in manifestation of material the explains places additionally construction memoriessocial of present-day 1956 of the Aleidarevolution. Assmann, in the a play role All three types memory. cultural and the collective the communicative, the layers: three into function its differentiates and memory, social of construction JanAssmann by AncientEgypt, wasof historian the proposed concepts memory most the convincing of One countries. European inWestern common practice hasbecome monuments of evaluation the memory, of social of emergence concepts since the For example his pioneering first study and BOROS, Géza. “Gloria Victis. Wiedergutmachungthe auf Ungarns öffentlichen Plätzen“most [Gloria Victis. recent publication: ASSMANN, Jan. ASSMANN, Jan. KOSELLECK, Michaeland Reinhart Jeismann(eds.): ASSMANN, Aleida. „DasGedächtnis derOrte“ [The memory of places], inUlrich Borsdorf Heinrichand Apart from from Aparthistorians few history have of the DualMonarchy,art the researched only The importance of The importance of monuments for national isidentity for example approved by a [The political cult of the dead. Warrior memorials inModernity], (München: Wilhelm Fink Publ. Das kulturelle Gedächtnis. Schrift,Erinnerung undpolitische Identität infrühen Hochkulturen Orte der Erinnerung: Denkmal, Gedenkstätte, Museum th [Monuments and cultural memory after the end of the east-west of the end the after memory cultural and [Monuments century, they have served as legitimation of of political legitimation have as served they century, . (Stanford: Stanford University Press 2006), transl. by Rodney Der politische Totenkult. Kriegerdenkmäler in der Denkmäler und kulturelles Gedächtnis [Places of Remembering: 3 1 2 . Monuments are . On the contrary, the On . . He outlines the . Heoutlines 4 . In the In . 6 . CEU eTD Collection Culture: The Case of Hungary”, in Hungary”, of Case The Culture: 6 2006). Spring 2002; also “Creating Communities: The Post-Communist City-Text ofBudapest”, in 5 is by public in networks informal these Budapestnumberof places a limited decided actors; of appearance 1980s.The the during established thecityscape were of shaping the dominated come from and what is their historicalthey do context?Where differences. these of origins the research will I Following, revolution. the to will identify in symbols those which repeatedly appear Budapest’s placeswith public regard I such? as monuments the of styles and symbols various the through conveyed are differences ideological Which toeachother? memory relate of in manifestation the participants how dothese mainmonuments of followin raising Whoand thequestions: the engages I Therefore, is memory in visualized. revolution the styles the of which range of artistic presents aunique monuments approach forto theHungarian revolution of 1956. this paper in Thus, general. policies andcultural commemoration the evaluating approach Palonen Emilia like Others, in detail. monuments the behind network political the reveal nor ideology respective the origins of the neither does, they scrutinize made, wereasBoros if attempts Even yet. evaluated been not have memory revolution’s the of manifestation the to committed far Remarkably,political region actors necessarily the to the of apply Europe. so Central common West European ideas about collective identity or political ideologies do not monuments. of implications and meaning full engage in necessary history to interdisciplinary of understandapproach social the an and art to SZELENYI, Sonja, Ivan Szelenyi and Imre Kovach. “Interests and symbols in Post-Communist Political PALONEN, Emilia. “Postcommunist Histories in Budapest: The Cult of Great Men”, University of Essex, I will argue that the personal institutional that framework personal I will the andthe connections argue that A brief survey of ’56 monuments in Hungary’scapital Budapest reveals large the such Moreover, studies. to or newcomer is respectively, latecomer, a Hungary 5 or Sonja and Ivan Szelenyi together with Imre Kovach American Sociological Review , Vol. 61, No.3, June 1996, pp.679-722. 6 have taken a broader a taken have Tr@ansit online 7 CEU eTD Collection complexity of complexity memory of constructions isnot restricted towritingwhich includes butalso visual written sources and I do not aim at on a review exclusively of literature. thesis my base not do I On theMoreover, contrary,translations. I will obtained highlighthave I relevant, thewas it where However, some information. to access limits language Hungarian the of knowledge most commonly used and best reflect the intentions of the different political actors. My scarce are which interpretation iconological an for monuments those selected have I paper, following function andof a democracy. fails mechanisms acknowledge this procedures, the to Furthermore, reactivation ideological againsturbanites. populists of the polarization reproduces that situation fragmented current, the to led it Ultimately, claims. political of a battlefield into turned revolution Hungarian the of interpretation and commemoration the Consequently, authority. decisive with invested was its memory reforms, of political accelerator an as revolution the assessing of return failed By memory,values. establishcontributed to the ’56the democratic re- to mainly which movement, opposition democratic so-called the that show will I Moreover, camps. political opposing even different, into dispersed elite political emerging The fell movementapart. the also imploded Kádár dissident when regime 1980s.Finally, the the infirst, movementopposition inside returned, convictions opposition different the the during binary the show, Iwill Nevertheless, period. as campscussed duringthe Communist were interwar reproduce the political and These period. of urbanites struggle between populists the transition the surfaced after that ideologies inpolitical differences the Yet, legitimation. as political used first was legacy revolution’s the when eighties in the be based to seems also today in Hungary is witnesses that polarization political the Superficially, interrelations. maintainclosely mutually productive artists andpolitics, who connect useful and Basically, approach derives from Jan Assmann’s concept of social memory. For the For memory. social of concept Assmann’s Jan from derives approach Basically, Thus, I will argue that the political culture did not only return to its interwar state. 8 CEU eTD Collection both cityscapes have changed dramatically. Certainly,the memory of the Holocaust cannotbe Berlinsignificantchanges underwent incity planning. Since the in changes political 1989/90, memory and, third, offer a comparison in commemoration policies. Third, Budapest as well as to approach different a country’s present they Second, monuments. of analysis the in model as a first role at serve JamesYoung, historian cultural American of the Thestudies Germany. in the Holocaust of andrepresentation of commemoration the developments recent to Iwill it. In addition that, to has refer asKoselleck ‘political conceptualized of cult dead’ the between the forms of communicative, to maintainorder standards. academic collectiveArtists, Zsolt and Keres Young of Association of the the chairman or Katalin György, architect the House, Terror cultural memory.contemporaries. I will addressFor obstacles my example,to some research; of information the I needed could only be provided by thethe artist Györymembers atbothinstitutions. at Yet, times the temporal my proximity of thesis posed Jovánovics, the from staff support have received I researchers, andaccredited employees to only accessible historian Áron Máthé at the Liberty at the Radio Free Europe/ Radio of clippings newspaper the have consulted I example, For possible. as precisely as my information sourced have I Still, available. readily not are that files times Consequently, institutional insufficient. sources or archival and Iaccessed documents critical evaluation. thisapproach topicfrom position the of for a an butprecisely outsider offers advantages representations such as monuments. Additionally, I will show that it is not only possible to Following, Ipresent the main elements of the concept of social memory differentiating Due to the unique approach of this thesis,literature on the topics I will cover proved at Open SocietyArchive Ħ , provided me with vital information which I treated with due care in , and the files atthe Budapest Galéria . While the latter are latter . While the 9 CEU eTD Collection Studies 8 democratic Hungary ColumbiaUniversity Press 2002); also LászlóSCHMIDT,Mária and Gy.(eds.), Tóth K.Király (eds.), 7 by Béla Királyi and LeeW.Congdon as well SchmidtandMaria László György Tóth articles of analytical collection the Besides of authors: or bias the commitment political to the shifts andtrends. At thisIrely point, literatureon secondary which often difficultproves due decade. This political history proves forrelevant the topic sinceidentifies it majorideological following inthe system multi-party the of consolidation the to movement opposition the Revolution meaning. thepolitical their 1956, and Iwill of political retrace from developments context. interesting equated with Hungarianrevolution;the however, thesynthesis cases these of an provides two development of the Hungarian Left andthe elections onnational reported has regularly Racz,who Barnabas consulted have I these, to Inaddition active politicians. paperas in this appearagain of authors the new Central Monument and, second, in the riots and re-staging of 1956 in the fall of 2006. as a reflection of political positioning, and as wellfightpreviously polarization process described Budapest’s streets over places seems to culminate 50 tothe isdedicated section separate in, first, the controversy overA in ideologies art Hungary. memory,and contemporary of concept history political the of the the createsasynthesis between This and chapter artists patrons. the of political convictions revolution.iconological The analysis identifies recurrent themes and which features the reveal chapter. for analytical the will be institutions relevant that and trends art artists, the some of introduces Also, this overview and art politics. between the relation close highlights For example RACZ, Barnabas. “The Left in Hungary and the 2002 Parliamentary Elections“, in Elections“, Parliamentary 2002 the and Hungary in Left “The Barnabas. RACZ, example For Individual articles as indicated inthe following body of text. Compiled in CONGDON, Lee W. Béla and , Vol.55,No.5, 2003,pp.747-769. The second chapter frames the context of recent Hungarian monuments for the for monuments Hungarian of recent frames context the The secondchapter In the third chapter, I will present a selection of monuments for the Hungarian The Ideas of the Hungarian Revolution, suppressed and victorious 1956-1999 (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press 2000). 8 . Then, a brief history of contemporary art in Hungary art contemporary of history brief a Then, . th anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution. The From tototalitarian (New York: Europe-Asia 7 . Most . 10 CEU eTD Collection Press Ltd. c1992 (1960)), e.g. p.12. 14 Modernity], (München: Wilhelm Fink Publ. 1994), pp.7-22. politische Totenkult. Kriegerdenkmäler in derModerne 13 Press), pp.14-36. Mediaand Karlsruhe (ed.): 12 Monument,Memorial, Museum], (Frankfurt am Main andNew York: Campus Publ.1999), pp.59-77. Theodor(eds.).Grüter 11 Gallimard 1984), pp.XV-XLII. problematic of places] in 10 “Conclusion: The Legendary Topography of the Gospels”,pp.194-235. university of Chicago Press 1992), transl. reprint from 1941, orig. 1925.Singled out here is chapter:the 9 eye’ ‘innocent the of coinage Gombrich’s in Ernst originates monuments Modernity to introduction programmatic and‘legendary topography’ frameworks] studiessociaux’[social his ‘cadre the basesof 1925 approachon MauriceHalbwachs’ Assmann extent, a large To connotations. symbolic their and 1956 of Revolution Hungarian these of All typesmemory. cultural and collective communicative, of definition three-fold Assmann’s of social memory will proveI.1 General Introduction relevantI. Memory and representation in placefor and time the analysis of monuments for the recent concept of concept recent mechanism, such activity behind incorporated andconsequenes in origins are Latour’s Bruno and function The overwriting. symbolic of power the encountered already Halbwachs memory] of [places mémoire’ of de ‘lieux the concept introduced conceptual context and present Aleida Assmann’s connection of memory social and of connection places AleidaAssmann’s and present conceptual context HALBWACHS, Maurice. HALBWACHS, GOMBRICH, E.H.. KOSELLECK, Reinhart.“Einleitung“ [Introduction]Reinhart ,in Koselleck Michael Jeismann(eds.):and LATOUR, Bruno. “What is Iconoclash? Or is there a world beyond the image wars?” in ZKMHeinrich and Borsdorf Center Ulrich in of for places], memory [The ArtOrte“ der Gedächtnis „Das Aleida. ASSMANN, The History. and Memory [Between lieux“ des Le problematique Histoire. et Mémoire „Entre Pierre. NORA, In the following chapter, I will present the concept of social memory based on Jan 13 as a point of reference to the former street fighters. The iconological analysis of analysis The iconological fighters. street former the to reference of as apoint Art Orte der Erinnerung: Denkmal, Gedenkstätte, Museum Lieux de mémoire Iconoclash & Illusion. A study in the psychology ofpictorial representation Beyond the image wars religion, andart in science, On collective memory 12 The political dead.Warrior cultofthe memorials in . Furthermore, I will address Reinhart Koselleck’s [Places of Memory]. Vol I„LaRépublique“ Republic],[The (Paris: 9 . Ed., transl. byLewis(Chicago A.Coser London: and The . While French in1984,the historian Nora Pierre [The political cult of the dead. Warrior memorials in (Cambridge andLondon: MIT [Places of Remembering: 10 I will preserve the 14 . W.J.T. Mitchell . (Lonon: Phaidon Der 11 11 . CEU eTD Collection 18 17 transl. by Rodney Livingstone, p.3. Borsdorf and HeinrichTheodor (eds.).Grüter Erinnerung“ [Collective cultural and Memory. Phenomenology functionand of counter-remembrance], in Ulrich 15 memory: social of emergence norms and values like just constructions social are memories these insists that memory. He and cultural collective communicative, between Assmann, differentiates memory, of Jan social theorist acknowledged internationally and Rememberingmodelling is a creative, process” I.2 Memory too. sculptures, to applied bejustly which can iconology, of theories Gombrich’s re-assessed has 16 indicated. otherwise except my are own, All translations Prozeß.“ modellbildender kreativer, ein ist Erinnerung Speichern. Festhalten, Bewahrung, einfach ja nicht ist „„Erinnern Remembering: Monument,Memorial, Museum], (Frankfurt/Main New and York: Verlag Campus 1999), p.16: added, shortened, or modified or added, shortened, may Hence, aspects in a socialbe framework. inremembering memories contextualizes that religiousindividual ortheinfluences community. national group Society,consequently, a family, ofthe if consists this matter no community, respective the to is subdued process Maurice Halbwachs in1925.When humans reconstructpastexperiences, he claims, this HALBWACHS, here 1992, chapter: “The Reconstruction of the Past”, pp.48-51. Ibid., p.7f. ASSMANN, Jan.„Kollektives und kulturelles Gedächtnis. Zur Phänomenologie und Funktionvon Gegen- ASSMANN, Jan. ASSMANN, “Remembering”, writes Jan Assmann, “isnotsimply saving. codifying, storing, memory and collective cultural I.2. 1Communicative, The importance of the ‘cadres sociaux’ for individual memory was first pointed out by reactivated in the treasure stores of in storesof a people. treasure the reactivated ‘great stories’, sagas legends,and scenes and thatlive constellations can be or the of images, and myths of ‘imaginery’ the forms, symbolic of arsenal the traditions, cultural of archive the to turn individual the and collective the Both Religion and Cultural Memory. Ten Studies 18 . Consequently, society also has the power to invest to power the has also society Consequently, . Orte der Erinnerung: Denkmal, Gedenkstätte, Museum 15 16 . The German specialist on Ancient Egypt . The latter form the framework for the 17 . (Stanford: Stanford University Press 2006), [Places of 12 CEU eTD Collection 23 22 21 Critique of a community members acceptable and accepted become hence, individuals, socialization, of ispart memory 20 19 membersprovides group “a with view”:point common of memory. communicative the of description the fulfill experiences maintains. Moreover,a single individual memories that of thecomplexity heacknowledges instead, of reference; the collectives layers of different efforts some of the former street fighters others” with in communication itself constitutes memory individual put into sharingbetween individuals 80 to100years. and, embraces “Every therefore, a time span about of their livesthe of theirelders. Thisemotional exchange isbased oncommunication and interaction respect and members appreciate ofageneration generations.beholds theyounger to future It memory by between establishes ties handing andgenerations down memoriesexperiences to repressed or individuals with beliefs rootin that previous eventimes if havethey been forgotten previously politicized forms of remembering”, which one can witness in commemorative practices commemorative in witness can one which remembering”, of forms politicized to susceptible isparticularly memory “Collective institutionalized: are communication from derive which norms and values the that say, is to That memory. collective Ibid., p.11. J.ASSMANN and CZAPLICKA, 1995 p.128f. J.ASSMANN, 2006, p.3f. ASSMANN, Jan and John CZAPLICKA. “Collective memory and cultural identity”, in Ibid., p.85f. , No., 65, Cultural History/Cultural Studies 1995, p.127. Assmann distinguishes the latter from ‘bonding’ or ‘collective’ memory which memory ‘collective’ or ‘bonding’ from latter the distinguishes Assmann Here, Assmann distinguishes between the three forms of memory: Communicative memory: of forms three the between distinguishes Assmann Here, Communicative memory passes through a stage ‘objectivization’ to the level of level the to ‘objectivization’ astage through passes memory Communicative common identity identity common span and apoint of several view that generations. semantics, a connective theygenerate inlarger groups jointhereby together Wherever people producing forms of memory that are designed to stabilize a 19 . 21 . Communication and interaction takes place on numerous levels levels among and numerous place on interaction takes and . Communication 22 . Assmann does notpresuppose the nation as the ultimate point 23 20 . Communicative . New German 13 CEU eTD Collection serves as its distant basis. In addition to that, cultural memory may not only expand only not may memory cultural that, to addition In basis. distant its as serves it life,but of isan every-day part memory. not active It of collective openness manipulative memory. Cultural memory isolates the foundation of culture without the present-day cultural andimplementation of perseverance and,second, the scripture of importance Deuteronomy prescribes waysremember to and, thus, serves as example tohighlight, first, the canbeovercome. writing, caesuras Through forpreservedmeaningmaintains Europeansand thewriting up present though day to has been Ancient Greece studies. of Assmann’s form, forms thebackbone in which written 28 (München: C.H.Beck Verlag c1999), p.299. Hochkulturen heretical, thenoninstrumentalizabe, disowned.” includes and subversive, age-old, out-of-the-way, and discarded; and in contrast to collective, the encompasses bondingmemory, memory, communicative to it in contrast memory, “Cultural manipulations. beliefs- own their to according institutionalization this actively can they alive, are participants former the as long As objectivization. of remembering Moreover,Hungarianthe thememory in is Revolution the past. of the process which cult soon, of belongs bonding,collective form dead,to the tothis turn of I will political The together. individuals bonding of force exercise Such siociogenetic the practices rituals and tradition example for are these manifestations; in its visible and concrete identity 27 26 memory.” from it,whichallows the group to reproduce its identity. Inthis sense, objectivized culture thehas structure of its consciousness of unity specificityand uponthis knowledge derivesand formative and normative impulses 25 24 rituals or flags holidays, memorials, around in and manifested J.ASSMANN, 1992,pp.296-300; 1999,pp.24-29; 2006, pp.18-20. ASSMANN, Jan . ASSMANN, J.ASSMANN, 2006, p.27. J.ASSMANN CZAPLICKA, and p.128: “’concretion 1995, of we agroupidentity’: that Withthis bases mean Ibid., p.7. Mainly,Assmann bases his studies on the Exodus of the People of Israel from Egypt Cultural memory may embrace thousands of years, and is less subject to islesssubject and years, of thousands may embrace memory Cultural . [Cultural Memory. Writing, Remembrance politicaland identity ancientin highcultures], Das kulturelle Gedächtnis. Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identität infrühen 24 . Objectivization makes. Objectivization 26 Often it is codified it Often 14 28 27 25 . . . CEU eTD Collection Memory Counter-Memory.and (Spring, 1989),p.5. 31 plurielle et individualise.” Transl. my own. qu’il y a autant de mémoires fait, l’a que des groupes; Halbwachs comme […], qu’elle sacré le est, pardans nature, souvenir multiple le et démultipliée, installe Le mémoire collective, revitalisations. soudaines de et deformations ses de successives, inconsciente vulnerable l’amnésie, de et á toutes souvenir lese du utilisations etdialectique manipulations,la á ouverte susceptiblepermanente, de longuesévolution en latences est elle titre, Gallimard 1984),problematic of places] in pp.XV-XLII.30 Orig.: identities“La that differin time and placemémoire and draws its dynamism from these tensions and contradictions.”memory estis complex, pluralistic, and labyrinthe;la it encompasses vie aquantity of bonding memories andtoujours group consisting of numerous national and regional identities atthe same time. J.ASSMANN,portée 2006, p.29: “Cultural par 29 les groupes vivantes et á ce Les lieuxdemémoire time indefinitely into butit thepast, also different embraces groups andidentities samethe at record straight” record accounts and presentations,– history andboth as well memory as to“setting– contribute the historical theaccuracy of she careabout would proclaims, people Furthermore, categories. theoretical two between these interdependence the underestimating for Nora reproaches introductory in Zemon an Davis, essay of separation of history and memory soon met critique: The famous American historian Natalie itsprovoked enthusiasticWhile responses, hiscondemning appearanceNora’s concept upon attractive, since it defines various levels of memory and their interaction. DAVIS, Natalie Zemon and Randolph STARN. “Introduction” in “Introduction” STARN. Randolph and Zemon Natalie DAVIS, The History. and Memory [Between lieux“ des Le problematique Histoire. et Mémoire „Entre Pierre. NORA, To stick to the previous example, Greek Antiquity is seen as common heritage for all European states 29 . I.2. 2 Places ofmemory I.2. 2Places In French1984, the historian published Nora Pierre first the volume his of compilation Les lieuxdemémoire fragmented, collective, plural collective, plural fragmented, individual.and and multiplied definition by is it that collectives; beyond memory isno there Memory kinds longsensitive abuses, of uses and to latencyandsudden reactivation. investforgetting; unconscious rememberingof its consecutive deformations, it ispermanentsubject to evolution, forvulnerable dialectical open changesof remembering and for all Memory is life thatis always owned by those alivewith and, therefore, itis always sanctity […], as Halbwachs claimed, that 31 . Thus, from from . Thus, pointa historian’s more ofview,Assmann’sconcept proves including the definition: Lieux de mémoire amounts amounts to seven volumes with lastthe publishedin one 1993. [Places of Memory]. Vol I„LaRépublique“ Republic],[The (Paris: Representation 30 Representations in the crucial year of yearof crucial 1989, in the , No. 26, Special Issue: Special 26, No. , 15 CEU eTD Collection 36 35 die Konstruktionvon Bedeutsamkeit und die Kontinuität der Überlieferung.“ ‚Gedächtnisort’‚Gedächtnis zum DieOrte derOrte’. leisten,sollendann Kultur waszutraut, mehr sichdie nicht kulturelle Wissen, das die Orte rahmt und stützt, versiegt oderabbricht, kommt es zu einerVerschiebung vom 34 33 32 ceremonies as and sites of placesrituals neglectand re-occur After aperiod objects. of silence, people or like latency’ a museum in‘placesof memory survived has that with maybe reactivated places location. However, material from places’ the is independent that floating significance memory with places of tradition” of continuity and significance of construction the longer: any maintain cannot itself commemoration shift thesecultural framesends, andsupports knowledge placesceasesor which places of to places of memory. the “Where practice. commemorative the cherish who people are long asthere as ‘remember’ The places areplaces canonly insists that community, on dependent respective the she constructions meant to continuememorials. into whatturn camps cultureextermination former or dead fallen the mourn battlefields places ofmemory as purely material givens describes spouse, Assmann’s Jan Assmann, Aleida alike. entities symbolic and material, they they markedby are symbols of a previous presence orpresentabsence event; past memory a significant of recall meaning.Places places with these which empowers community particular ofthat by members be like atext the read places can explains that places, where a numinous being is thought to reside, and places of memory. A. Assmann A.ASSMANN, 1999, p.74ff. J. ASSMANN, 1999, p.31. Ibid,p.76: „KeinGedächtnis derOrte[…] ohne bestimmte Formen einerkulturellen Mnemotechnik. Wo das Ibid., p.63. ASSMANN, Aleida, 1999, pp.59-77. Like Jan Assmann, who insists that collective and cultural memory memory cultural are retrospective collective and insists that JanAssmann,who Like includes which of ‘place’, importance to the raises awareness Nora Nevertheless, Places assuch cannot remember. Butthey maya symbol into turn empowers which 34 , thus, the fight over authentic places ofthe revolution. places authentic fight the over , thus, 36 . Jan Assmann explains the dynamic of forgetting, repressing and re-appearance. forgetting, repressing thedynamicof . JanAssmann explains 35 . The memory of places can recall long forgotten or repressed events, 32 . She differentiates between holy holy sacral between or . She differentiates 33 . For example, . For 16 CEU eTD Collection exercised. Yet, the revolution was not forgotten, and made its great comeback in the 1980s. bevisualized not could or ’56 as memory here,the a revolution case of am addressing I 40 39 gehört zur politischenKultur.“ gedenken,der gewaltsam Umgebrachte, derer, dieim Kampf,im Bürgerkrieg oderKrieg umgekommensind, 38 Verschweigung.“ 37 removal or re-assessment to becomes subject itmeaning, its loses memorial the vanish if these practices; commemorative from derives significance with ritualsmeaning their commemoration and ceremonies; bestowed onlythrough monuments are heexplains toAleida and Inaccordance Jan Assmann’s ‘unity’. concept, that remains in all cases monuments of these message common most the while specificities arches. triumphal or pyramids obelisks, like ‘Pathosformeln’ or crosses, saints, women, angels, feature they Often, borders. national across other each resemble memorials insists, in battle, in civil war or war, is part ofis part theof human culture.political To commemorate the fallen, the violentlyculture” murdered, those who died famous German social historian Reinhart Koselleck claims that “commemoration of the dead places.The in these dead the of presence the senses to our loci’ directs ‘Genius a place. term describe‘genius loci’ meaning, to abstract the cultural the issignificance in captured that neglect” symbolic but of an experience, earlier suppression mean “psychic not here does Latency monument for fallen warriors, a change of meaning comes to light: While for decades politics and religion merges country home their for died who those KOSELLECK, 1994, p.10. Ibid., p.9f. zu Gefallenen Der Kultur. menschlichen zur gehört gedenken zu Toten „Der p.7. 1994, KOSELLECK, J.ASSMANN, 1999,p.29: „Latenz bedeutet dannnicht psychische Verdrängung, sondernsymbolische I.2. 3 The political cult ofthedead I.2. 3Thepolitical Nevertheless, Koselleck continues, the symbolic language might offer national offer might language symbolic the continues, Koselleck Nevertheless, the uses Assmann event. of a past traces read the can one memory places, In authentic 37 . The return of something forgotten may asbasis particular In the serve renewal. . Theof forgotten for return something 40 38 . In a brief history of modern ; hence, the commemoration of 39 . Iconologically, he 17 CEU eTD Collection HackettPubl.Company c1999 (1976)), p.7. 45 44 43 exaggerated. largely been has iconography and iconology between difference [Visual History.(Göttingen:A Reader], VandenhoeckRuprecht 2006), & p.8f. According to Mitchell, the science of42 Imagery41 to Visual History. An Introduction], in G. Paul (ed.). “invisibleviewer. images this worldideas”an Through interrelation establish of andthe the sheapplies symbols between artist, the a relationship Iconology presupposes Gombrich. Ernst and Aby Warburg Panofsky, of Erwin heritage intellectual based are the on iconolgy andthe inquiry of andcultural theory historical of asobjects Visual representations solidarity impose meaning may monuments on viewer,today’s innerthe unity create and social though, it gained recognition Memorial inwas in Washington only asecond accepted addition to one by veterans;soon, the as the central site internal functions. Remarkably,he explains at Maya that outset the of YingLin’s Vietnam official commemoration.monuments served as force againstexternalunifying now enemy, an mainlythey fulfill Since it did not what itwhatsees is byneed regulated andprejudice” butandas and memberonly a dutiful alone, of howa complex but capricious organism. Not self-empowered instrument an as not “functions eye’ non-‘innocent the that notes Goodman attitudes symbols and shared sphere presupposing samecultural the still belong to they exceeds theone of her/ artistsmay but knowledge that hisaudience, the Meanwhile, possess message. image’s an convey to applies meansthe artist the on focuses therefore, Iconology, approach fashion taste. previous a knowledge, not of or painting awareness without viewerdoes the describe that is eye” to unbiased “there eye” no or of“innocent uses theterms GOODMAN, Nelson. GOODMAN, Ibid., c1992, p.256. GOMBRICH, E.H. c1992, p.7. PAUL, Gerhard. „VonderHistorischen Bildkunde zurVisual History. Eine Einführung“ [From historical Ibid., 16. I.2. 4 Monuments and iconology I.2. 4Monumentsand Since the 1980s, imagesSince the 1980s, surfaced asindependent sources of art and social history 41 . Language ofArt. Anapproach toatheory ofSymbols 45 . VisualHistory. Studienbuch Ein . (IndianapolisCambridge: and 43 . Gombrich 42 18 44 .. . . CEU eTD Collection 49 48 47 c1987), p.2; 30. since it recalls the biblical creation of ithumankind. creation theof recalls biblical since The imitation experience”. artistic of body, is human the Mitchell assures, a “godlike activity” in our place charged highly most the “is emphasizes, Mitchell body, human The religion: an politics merges which martyrs, of depiction in the mastered is dead the of cult political monument a of history art and social the to iscomplementary iconology that explains Hungarian revolution, reinforces thus, theirmeaning. practice andexperience enhanced through be might understanding individuals the framework; social same the within comprehensible 46 with of social, value” andconceptions political cultural imagery notion language andof asakindserves of theories mind relay art, the of connecting the new religion; but to convey the notion of authenticity, and therefore legitimacy in ideaconstructed Judaism. enhanced opposition powerof the old of opposition This to from Judaism to Christianity.his studies, MauriceHalbwachs, founding the theoretician memory, focuses of the shift on He explains that a new idea, such as the Christian faith, was commemorative function; butalso, the original meaning maybe covered by a new one A.ASSMANN, 1999, p.62. KOSELLECK, 1994, p.10. c1999, p.10. GOODMAN, MITCHELL, W.J.T.. Aleida Assmann explains that places may not only be re-activated in their re-activated be only not may places that explains Assmann Aleida I.2 5. Symbolic overwriting andiconoclash I.2 5.Symbolic Koselleck in monuments? manifested memory to relate as that howdoes However, W.J.T. Mitchell from the University of Chicago, is particularly interested in “how the in “how interested is particularly Chicago, of University the from Mitchell W.J.T. confront all o the past, if itleast at preserves the form of the past. It enframes the is not if possiblehad Butthis society does been only some time ago. rejected which beliefs recover will they that even or partially, least at themselves within beliefs those carry already they that its members must persuade [society] Iconology.Image,Text, Ideology 47 ; the repetition of specific symbols for the . (Chicago . (Chicago London:and Chicago University Press 46 . Symbolsmeaning and their are 48 . The . 49 . In 19 CEU eTD Collection groups become groups natural memories”; the of supporters a new henceforth, community’s elements, but slowlyJewish which preserved a calendar, new or holy rites, places, with (new) overwritten altered their context and meaning. Therefore, “the traditions of older possible – or it is toppled and even removed.] even and toppled is it or – possible are These not endlessly reception. expansive.its limit Either which amonument’s boundaries, message up sets is ritually amonument of repeated ormessage it is dedicated anewself-explanatory – [Every if vergessen.“ rituell wiederholt werden, oder Denkmals eines das Denkmal wird Botschaft – die soweit kann möglichEntweder – umgewidmet, ausdehnbar. sonst gestürzt beliebig odernicht sind Sie wird. freigegeben Rezeption 54 53 52 51 50 stability durability notionthe and of created and its owncredibility increased memory, which Jewish collective already existing Rome inAleida Assmann’s account example of Jerusalem the passingduring of time convincingly hasproved for Halbwachs, or the as groups, numerous for sites commemorating and sacred as serve can places emerge; adaptable to a new commemorative framework toanew commemorative adaptable in removed, toppled or case lost have theirthey and prove not significance original do something realizedthat if “as the destroyer suddenly preserved, images areoften destroyedcarefully argues.Atimages,of newicons, sameideologies the BrunoLatour time, and though, the KOSELLECK, 1994, p.10: „Jede Selbstaussage eines Denkmals setzt Grenzen, innerhalb derer seine derer innerhalb Grenzen, setzt Denkmals eines Selbstaussage „Jede p.10: 1994, KOSELLECK, Ibid.,223ff.;A.ASSMANN, 1999, pp.66f. Ibid., p.219. Ibid., p.215. HALBWACHS, c1991, p.86. Eventually, due to this process of re- and overwriting, “a duality of locations” may locations” of “a duality re-and overwriting, of this process due to Eventually, Iconoclasm is another form of over- or rewriting, since it is often followed by a wave rewrites them by changing their position in andspace.time it […] significance. hadlost speak, whenthesetraditions darktimes the to from, so …[sic] obscure become increasingly has that a past from them detaches its upin new current and the of thesetraditions memories community the takes and familiarideas. new elements that it pushes to forefrontin a totality of remembrances, traditions, Consequently, faith emerging Christian the and culture embraced elementsof the else had been destroyed by mistake, something for which atonement was now was atonement which for something mistake, by destroyed been had 50 51 53 . The pre-existing culture, Halbwachs continues, was continues, Halbwachs culture, pre-existing . The . Also Koselleck insists that monuments might be might monuments that insists Koselleck Also . 54 . 52 20 CEU eTD Collection 57 feelings”. own destroyer’s on the destruction of effects the finally, and, iconoclasts, effects thisdestruction has on those who cherished those images, how this reactionis interpreted by the with regard to the iconoclasm questionof cases of “the presented inner goals ofKarlsruhe in iconsmashers,art] and the roles religion they science, give to in the destroyedof images war images,the theBeyond [Iconoclash. monuments Hungarian forIn relation about the Revolution 156, usingthe controversy to of 56 p.14. Press), MIT London: and (Cambridge art and religion, science, in wars image the Beyond Karlsruhe: Media and 55 Koselleckbelieves bewords, with expressed whatcannot can art articulate question. Only into memorials and monuments limits of and possibilities alsocalled the It representation. overdue” Metaphorically, itseeks tocapture Metaphorically, continuity at the same time. re-directed beginning or new couldam signal since thedestruction arisen has consequences For this the and new destroyer icon the of phenomenon,intentions the about uncertainty new a emphasizes, Latour times, Latour coins the term ‘iconoclash’. I.3 The Holocaust memorial for the Europe’s Murdered Jews Murdered Europe’s the for memorial The Holocaust I.3 effects destruction the has onboth sides –perpetrators and victims the and motivations, and interests iconoclast’s the consequences, as well as reasons its into face investigation hasto inthepresence iconoclasm any yet come. Therefore, is to certainty since markersChristian structured has it appears in been byhistory, agesuch determined our KOSELLECK,1994, p.20. Ibid., p.26. The 2002 exhibition 2002 The p.26. Ibid., LATOUR, Bruno. “What is Iconoclash? Or is there a world beyond the image wars?” in ZKM Center for Art While in Halbwachs’ account the symbolic overwriting of the Jewish culturewith theJewish of overwriting symbolic the account While inHalbwachs’ The Holocaust, Koselleck recalls, posed a particular challenge to historical to Koselleck challenge a particular recalls, posed The Holocaust, I.3. 1 General Introduction I.3. 1General entertain, tomaintain, to collect truth and sanctity? palm turnedillusions, to let the air dispeldisenchant, disappoint,out?one’s to show up,to debunk,denounce, to to Or asis it on theif contrary inwork a toat cautious hand the the if role production exact the andcatch, about carefulis uncertainty there when hand happens of what , a mediator. Is toit a handelicit, with a hammer ready to expose, to to educe, to welcome, to generate, to 55 . Previously, iconoclasm was usually religiously motivated. However, in modern Iconoclash.Jenseits der Bilderkriege Wissenschaft, in Religion undKunst 56 . 21 57 . CEU eTD Collection programmatically featured the pretext “The Biography of “The Biography a Memorial of the pretext Icon” featured programmatically title whose Museum” Ghetto Warsaw Rapoport’s “Nathan on pioneering article 1989 edition of and history social interpret together andto monuments. understand In the trendsettingspring and London:and Yale University Press 1993), pp.1-5. the passing during of meaning time. Seeoriginal YOUNG, their James. preserve actually monuments whether asks, legitimately he as Therefore, such. self-referential not are They symbols. persisting and rites through only meaning their maintain and derive 60 of Interpretation earlier, in 1988, he had already published Representations 59 58 as as well opponents initiators, audience,the the the architect, the account: into policies in monument involved andaspects sides all of He takes time. course in the experience might a monument that meaning change of idea,to the first very the from process entire the recalls study. of field separate isa in itself topic this of evaluation an while monuments, ’56 of analysis the for context as serve that elements those on focus only will I works, his in ‘Memorial for Europe’s Murdered Jews’ in Berlin asthey are assessed by James Young.Even the and memorials of Holocaust assessment the on concentrate will hereI However, while it inGermany nation’s the commemorates andcrimes previous its victims. own of victimization the a nation, former the commemorates since level is crocked comparative site of commemoration for various, even divergent groups ithow becamethe alsosketched out but monument, to this approach Rapoport’s only retrace has suggested Koselleck did as Young, James Massachusetts, of University Amherst the Studies at Judaic of Professor However,the context. Berlinthe inappropriate for mightseem Murdered Jews Europe’s a distorting Memorial or Inaccordance to Aleida Assmann’s descriptionof places ofmemory, Young insists that also monuments YOUNG, James. KOSELLECK, 1994, p.10 “The Biography of a Memorial Icon: Nathan Rapoport’s Warsaw Ghetto Monument”, in Young analyzes monuments not only in respects to their aesthetic means, but also Indeed discuss to the visualization of collective memory ’56 andof theShoa ona , No.Special 26, Issue: Memory Counter-Memory.and 1989),pp.69-106. (Spring, One year . Representations Holocaust Memorials and Meaning.The Texture ofMemory on “Memory and Counter- Memory”, “Memory Counter- on a and Young published Writing and Rewriting theHolocaust: Narrative and Consequencesthe 60 . 58 : Younghistoryart brought 59 : Youngdid not . (New Haven (New . 22 CEU eTD Collection 2003), p.76. Remembrance. Representation and the Holocaust (eds.). Jacobowitz Florence and Hornstein Shelley in Monument”, of the End the and memory, Counter- “Memory, James. YOUNG, conscience”. and heart, mind, viewer’s the and memorial the between The most important ‘space of memory’ forthese artists has not beenthat in the ground orabove it, but seemsthat space to embody boththe Germanmemorial dilemma and the limitations of thetraditional monument so well. the counter-monument holds immense appeal. As provocative difficultand as it may be, no other memorial form watchhing Germany’s memorial culture come to terms with the Holocaust, the conceptual torment implied by Vol.18, No.2.(Winter, 1992), p.269. In justified 2003, he interesthis similarin a vein:“For American an 63 62 1986-1987”, in 61 fulfilling in mightresult Holocaust fora closure, raisingmemorials the hefearedthat because In earlythe and mid-1990s, Youngviewed Germany’spolicies monument highly critical that observation the from arises His interest inart. representation (memory) Holocaust of limits possibilities/ the moment?” to time? this […] Andhowdoes memory a pasttimeof understandingof shape memory present the memory, to place place, to time of relationship the is What memory? on façade a time, on borders impose monuments] [the do “How representation: of limits or possibilities and memory, social Young intentions, discovers patrons’ artistic consideration, and the on mindsthe of living”the nightmare weighslike “The a memory dead generations on Germanof ‘Historikerstreit’: the remark Eley’s Geoff prove in Hungary as aswell in Germany monuments of history complex and politics. The memory,history, art and between social concepts rejected interrelation the YOUNG, James. “The Counter-Monument: Memory against itself Germanyin Today”, in YOUNG, 1993, p.15. ELEY, Geoff. “Nazism, Politcis and the Image of the Past: Thoughts on the West German Historikerstreit German West the on Thoughts Past: ofthe Image the and Politcis “Nazism, Geoff. ELEY, juries to an extent unknown in other countries in other unknown extent an to juries design occupy historical and questions ethical, Artistic, anddebated. explicated scrutinized, is endlessly turn, every at monument, Every occupation. paralyzing even self-reflective, atortured, remains [..] in Germany memorial-work Holocaust Since memory monumentsand are social constructionsinfluence that publicopinion Since 1989, Young has intensively focused on Holocaust memorials inand focusedHolocaust hasintensively Germany Since on 1989, Young ofHolocaustMemorials I. 3.2JamesYoung’sstudies 62 Past andPresent 61 , No. 121(Nov. 1988), p.171. . , (Bloomington andIndianapolis: Indiana University Press 63 . Critical Inquiry Image and 23 , CEU eTD Collection cannot apply Shoaaswell cannot the to as the emerginggap: generational their being” brazen, painfully memorial self-conscious spaces conceived to challenge thevery of premises […]: conundrum memorial Germany’s of results compelling most “the are monuments’ ‘Counter- themselves? it experienced never have themselves they when Germany, in culture Jewish of absence the conceptualize millennium of the turn atthe can artists 69 68 (New Havenand London: Yale University Press 2000), p.2. 19 –in their narratives that state representing acknowledges the difficulties posed not only by the traditional function of monuments and monuments its through representation has beenalways of decisive significance memory of interplay the him, To commemoration. of visualization artistic of from appropriate most the as ‘counter-monuments’ as to he refers what perceives Young Consequently, havethey represent void the immeasurable to the that has leftin Nazigenocide Europe. is absent; what re-call memorials Holocaust victims, own its commemorates Germany Since 1939. Instead of reconstructing the fountain in its ofreconstructing1939. Instead in the fountain form,old the only Hoheisel re-built in hadbeena donationAschott which Nazis destroyed by by Jewishcitizen Sigmund the the achieved already in Hoheisel 1987 by Horst who reinstated ‘Aschott-Fountain’the in Kassel, 67 66 solution’ ‘final afinal draw wish line past to Germany’s under Nazi 65 64 forget desirethe to YOUNG, 2000, p.7. YOUNG, 1993, p.13f. YOUNG,James. YOUNG, 2000, p.191. See TILL, Karen SeeTILL, YOUNG, 1993, p.5. to the next generation next to the transmission events’ these and events both of record composite a as itself history it sees has been history outside waysitthe of but of passed down, Holocaust the Not only thisdoes generation of intuitivelyartists graspits inability know to the 69 . These monuments materialize absence, loss. This seeming impossibility was impossibility seeming This loss. absence, materialize monuments These . 66 . The new Berlin: y, politics, place to the country’s obligation to remember its history; at the same time Young At Memory’s Edge. After-Images ofthe Holocaust inContemporary Artand Architecture 64 . Many shared this view on the so-called ‘Schlussstrich-Mentalität’, the ‘Schlussstrich-Mentalität’, so-called view. Many on the shared this 67 . , (Minneapolis: University of Minesota Press 2005), p.1ff. 2005), Press of Minesota University , (Minneapolis: th century perception of glorification – do and 65 . However, itis. However, impossible find a to 68 , but how 24 , CEU eTD Collection because rather because approval meet Young’s means, they different haschosen artists of every these one Although 72 71 70 different five of capital “the as because controversies numerous opened has task This country’s new self-image as well as to staging Germany’s the shaping city the according to shifted towards andGermany, earlier debates attention past in the city’s central locations. memorial ultimate asthe discourse mind: the inmonuments rightly German differentpart of history overthe debates kept this people’s the continuous only recurring, the Shoah.Instead, the tocommemorate formemorial Germany installingsigns the anti-Semitic street of ‘Thirdthe in Reich’ neighborhoods today’s and Schnock Frieder reminded Berlin’s citizens of theirformer fellow Jewish by citizens Stih yearsRenata earlier, In asimilarway intwo 1995. facades on Berlin’s Jewish presence mechanically lowered until itcompletely sank into ground the on November 10,1993. was monument the year Every monument: the of disappearance the through materialized lead with covered soft ‘Absence’ couldscratch in viewers their was thoughts. which Peace’ in This Hamburg-Harburg. monument of remarkable consisted aluminum pillar an for and Fascism against Monument ‘disappearing the built Gerz Jochen and Shalev-Gerz fountain’s outline boundary andthe input back stones Beforeplace. Hoheisel, in 1986, Esther Ibid., p.76. YOUNG, 2003, p.76. YOUNG, 1993,pp.63ff. where every new generation will find its own significance in this past. memory, places for changing capacity spacesthe buildinto these to attempted they have monuments, ‘counter’ and otherwise invisible, of disappearing, memory, at their actions and motives formemory within these spaces. In the cases artists would force both visitors and local citizens these to dailylives, lookfrom memory,our detached of sites self-contained withinthan creating themselves for For years, Young declared that it was impossible to find one single, ‘the’ central ‘the’ single, one find to impossible was it that declared Young years, For is example Attie’sAnother Shimon of projections ofvanished ‘counter-monuments’ I.3. 3 ‘New Berlin’: Jewish Museum and Holocaust Memorial and Holocaust Jewish Museum I.3. 3‘NewBerlin’: 72 . When Berlin was made the capital of of a united capital wasmadethe . When Berlin 71 25 70 . CEU eTD Collection continuity together across that which is forever gone. That is the meaning of my design for an integrated an for design of my meaning the is That gone. forever is which that across together continuity 78 77 2003), p.52. Remembrance. Representation and the Holocaust “philosophical problem” the addressed design perfectly The deconstructive der Rohe, struck him. Thus, he van Mies or Benjamin, Walter Liebermann, Max of home the in Berlin, culture Jewish and Jewish culture in contemporary in Jewish culture Germany contemporary of absence asthe as well in Berlin, history German-Jewish and German of interrelations the increatingage” an“antiredemptory avoid in Jewish cityscapethe via by past Berlin’s of concept re-inscribing ‘counter-monuments’ ina debate reflects the the started 1970s,also an end to by DanielLibeskind, whichput the cityscape surrounded the fate of the Jewish Department of the Berlin Museum. The design life the memory” of guarantee lieinactually only memorial that perpetual its irresolution, an can unfinished process memory with may holocaust in Germany “surestengagement he that the believed therefore, memorials Young addressed inhis fiercely analyzes were indebated Germanpublic; the 76 Holocaust. the of the difficulties of the contemporary post-Holocaust generationto assess the history, memory and representation 75 74 73 andcontested” represented restaged, more city than where, city, nationalismand any have beenstage andmodernity German other itisof ‘unstableopticidentity’ the nation the historical represents – for Berlin the Germanys, Libeskind explains in his brief: “The visitorto this museum has to keep inmind that it is not easy to put YOUNG, 2000, p.163. LIBESKIND, Daniel „Trauma“, in Shelley Hornstein and Florence Jacobowitz (eds.). Jacobowitz Florence and Hornstein Shelley in „Trauma“, Daniel LIBESKIND, YOUNG, 2000, p.5ff. This term reflects the impossibility of salvation from theHolocaust memory as well as YOUNG, 2003, p.61. TILL, 2005, p.5. Berlin in of integration Jews total was the assimilation, star longer no shone.That IsawthatBerlinphotographs. void organized a around was and astarthat around music, pictures, the eyes and looks ones: books, para-architectural of the people, based historical design the museum the of both architectural documents, on and The significance of Berlin is already visible in the above-mentioned examples. All the All examples. above-mentioned in the visible already is Berlin of significance The 76 . 74 . One of mainthe controversies city-planningof andshaping 73 . 78 . , (Bloomington andIndianapolis: Indiana University Press 75 . Libeskind describes how the absence of Jews of absence how the describes . Libeskind 77 of of representing Image and 26 CEU eTD Collection by TV presenter Lea Roshand historian Eberhard Jäckel in 1988. 79 2003, p.57f. Also YOUNG, 2000,p.170. disconnection/ connection, of disorder/ orderwill be understoodintellectually kinetically.”and LIBESKIND, the void,museum,Jewish a museum,They completely are bound together, totally interpenetrated integratedand through through the absence – forhim theGerman as if location to appears about the debate the out Konrád points Moreover, so much has been reducedthe to ash.monumentality The rather state recalls he claims, monumentality, II’s ‘Eisenmann Jews. murdered the commemorating of instability/reproaches stability, of of Hungarian émigréKonrád, György thenpresident of Berlin’s Academy of He Science. thethe politicalNazis’ use extermination and wascontested. also debates, its appropriateness arouse II’ ‘Eisenmann of aesthetics abuse of theelectionsquestioninto of wascalled 1998 theentire only project once more. Not the memorial, of the after Kohl era, legacy of the As courtesies. face ithad political to until revisions numerous whichJews questionthanEventually,jury Eisenmann’s expert ‘Waving the chose Peter Field of Pillars’ underwent that thethe sincerityRebecca DaniKaravan, James waslaunchedHorn, Whiteread Turell and Rachel inlate1997. victims of internationally Eisenmann, artistshis Peter renowned pupilDanielLibeskind, JochenGerz, themselves.competition had already upon decided a winnerin 1994, anew between competition such Jewonly and foreigneron jury,the as he emphasizes.repeatedly Although first the assessment closurewould of commemoration prevent the andassureits continuous of Holocaust the he insisted situation, unsolved memorial. The of a central theproject around debates endless andseemingly heated complex, of the heapproved Moreover, locations. commemorative central as ‘NeueWache’ the of inauguration as Center asKohl’s well of Topography Terror memorialHolocaust MurderedJews Europe’s thein hadfollowed about debates to 1997. He YOUNG,pp.184-191. 2000, The idea of Memorial acentral forEurope’s Murdered Jewswas proposedfirst One of the main opponents of this memorial and the project as such, was the was such, as project the and memorial this of opponents main the of One Nevertheless,in 1997 hebecamethe ‘Findungskommission’the speaker of and the Despite his earlier skepticism,Young joined ‘Findungskommission’the for the 79 . 27 CEU eTD Collection 84 83 authentic message of history: the loss of relatives, the murdered.] monument went there, mega- looked ofthe down proponents to thesebelligerent shelvesand noisy the if of absencebe nice, would It beneath their cobblestones. feet ofthe andunderstand, surface the exceed that even not does this is that the memorial, subterranean this than work humbler a create could [Nobody Getöteten.“ der und verstünden, dass es geradedasist, was authentischvon jenerGeschichte kündet:Verlust Angehörigen, der Anhängerdes Megadenkmals einmal dort hingingen, vorihrenFüßen denRegalen zu des Mangels hinabblickten Straßenpflaster hinausragt,könnte schaffen.niemand Es diewenn wäreschön, lautstarken, kämpferischen 82 81 und kulturelles Gedächtnis nachdem Ende derOst-West-Konfrontation (ed.), Künste der Akademie in in Berlin], Memorial Holocaust the on Reflections mean? work this 80 writing Assmann’s function onthe memory attention and insistence directs which again of to stories, mindhe pastcan and bebooks culture through callsinto second, the life; that accessed only Jewish Ullmann of theelimination underground. viewerof First, absence, the reminds bookshelves burningopens theviewon empty aglasswindow of onBebelplatz, Nazi book 1996 Memorial forcalled Burnt Books ‘Bibliothek’ by Micha[Library] Ullmann already memorial:existing the becauseita moredisgust of the humbleness covers appropriate public was committing a sacrifice itself. The size as well as the political debate provoke his however, immortalizes the humiliation and extermination thehumiliation immortalizes however, II’, ‘Eisenmann sheer sizeof The offspring. own of pictures the one’s to Jewish children of exterminated pictures if related one becamecomprehensible, of only Nazi horror crimes includes inlistUllman’s ‘counter-monuments’, of his design too His previous contempt of he of His debate, admits,the contempt previous was“a bystander only position an academic commemoration of Holocaustthe in heintoGermany, turned spokesmanthe of project. the nation German the uniqueness of the Holocaust and the incomprehensibility of crimes committed on behalf of ASSMANN, 1999, p.32. Ibid., p.22 and 24. das über einmal nicht das Mahnmal, unterirdische das als Werk stilleres „Ein p.23: 2000, KONRÁD, YOUNG, 2003, p.68. KONRÁD, György.kündet „Wovon diese Werk? Gedanken zumHolocaust-MahnmalBerlin“ in [Whatdoes 82 Jan Assmann on the other hand, approved of such a central hand, Jan Assmannmonument because ofsuchacentral approved on of other the the . Konrád explains that commemoration would only become honest, the extent and extent the honest, become only would commemoration that explains Konrád . 84 . Although Young opposed the idea of a central location for the for location central a of idea the opposed Young Although . 83 . , (Berlin: Jovis 2000),pp.19-41. 81 . On the authentic location authentic the On . 80 Denkmale . Young . 28 CEU eTD Collection 88 87 86 memory for in Germany motives today vanishingthan the monument.” YOUNG,self-abnegating 2003, p.59. conflicted, the represents better emblem single no perhaps fact, In peacelessness. and might ofGerman victims Jewish of memory the for room make to be demolished would peace, of to light: “Alandmark celebrating Prussian might crownedand by a chariot-borne Quadriga, Romanbetter goddess the even memory Holocaust of German complexity the brought which idea, an such of approve to government German the for impossible was it that admits Young However, capital. German new of the center the within ‘absence’ manifesting memorial perfect asthe Gate Brandenburg the up blowing suggested had Hoheisel 85 longerbe heroic can no has asKoselleck they explained, monuments, War unprecedented I,the killing and extermination humanof life change did function the of did notform new socially critical art trends like the crisis modernityof during and after World War World Second While the andreactionary. it pre-modern as contempting hence archaic, competitions official from exempt media. andart Youngexplains,inmodern were Still, theinterwarperiod, artists avant-garde and conservative, most thus traditional, is the It one power. of state probably of glorification their 19 with arestill stigmatized Monuments such: as monuments towards attitude changing a prove in Germany Shoa the for memorials could afford” defended ‘Eisenmann II’: In the ongoing debate over the monument, he he overthe debate Intheongoingdefendeddeclared, saw the II’: ‘Eisenmann matter Atafinal of indebate. public hearing public ‘Bundeshaus’ inMarch the 1999, Young made pass final its which political decision, organ was competentto judgmentbecame a are considered to be progressive milestones in the history of monumental art. victims, has modified the artistic The concepts approach, too: of Libeskind and Eisenmann nation’s of the commemoration memory, troubled the Holocaust German of peculiarity memory” public for consequences have eventually may art public in avowedly forms mass taste, we must recognize publicfollow Youngtook for he intoaccount, also opinion “rather believes than patronizing that public taste carries weight and that certain conventional KOSELLECK, 1994, p.19f. YOUNG, 2003, p.63. YOUNG, 1993, p.11. YOUNG,p.191. 2000, Also, praise Young’s of Horst Hoheisel’s concept fits into this distinguished position. At last,At did Young notbetray his skeptical previous Afterposition. the expert jury had 85 . He had carefully followed the debate, andin his engagement that was soon to 87 . Inreturn, modern critiques perceived as monuments th century function of representing and representing of function century 88 . In the end, the 86 . The . 29 CEU eTD Collection 89 Young shows that thenotion of continuity and eternity is misleading; even meaningthe of perception of itsa community past. and and images particular impose to means common are monuments that out, points Koselleck legitimate events, monuments forthenation’sprevious past Whileprimarily martyrdom. recalling dead present-day to pay tribute generations to future andbeholds forges home unity country, defense the of claims in for death thenation, and sacrifice ultimate the of depiction the that Heshows collectives. project the intentionsmanifestation in places are social constructions that are open to contestation and changes. of the its and Memory persevere. to in order reinforced and be repeated initiators to needs however, memory, This memory. with places invest to possibilities explains Assmann Aleida functions. and into the future.mechanisms itsmemory, different heassesses andcultural collective communicative, between memory andnegotiating her and through actions reflections. cultivating for isresponsible each But memorial. the visiting from abstain to opts she if even herself ofmemory acarrier becomes German every its meaning; on reflect leftto is herself viewer the concept imperfect this to a commitment Making memorial. a central found having despite negotiated remained Holocaust primary perpetually the fulfilled; theof memory goal YOUNG, 2000, p.223. Thus, monuments capture memory of a specific group at a specific moment in time. Reinhart Koselleck analyzes the significance of the cultJan Assmann definition a provides thorough socialof memory. distinguishing In of the deadI.4 Conclusion for political Germany falls now burden living amassivesilence,the gesture with on only response of on such memory But because[…]. the Jews murdered can tothisrespond act to Germany’s newfound willingness and reflects government the partof the culture German of and heart the at void self-inflicted largethe of at world the and Germany consciousness. reminds recreation Bundestag – the commerce– aplace or empty housing, of It isIn the end,a by choosingcourageous to create a commemorative space in the centerand of Berlin difficult act of contrition on 89 . 30 CEU eTD Collection 90 iconology its aesthetics of and a monument, full understanding enable approach historical social and art interdisciplinary an only that statement Koselleck on based is it art, periods Revolution covers of1956.Sinceit of two contemporary history aswell political as II.1 Introduction II Politics and art: changes and continuity attention. international have that attracted trends iconological their works remain significant andmeaningfulfor also future generations. They have set new that memory, so of collective instability and uncertainty visualize the means to and aesthetic artistic possibilities of representing memory.findhad Consequently, to artists newsymbols new imply also they way, in anew monuments and politics of interrelation the highlight the same time. But these memorials – or ‘counter-monuments’ respectively – do not only controversial levels numerous since and on memory,they art history upon politics, touch at are Monuments memory. collective and representation of difficulties the shows in Germany – or an image of the past – that is nolonger present. Young’s analysis of Holocaust memorials past a materialize monuments end in the that out he points Moreover, flexible. is monuments legitimize the new reform course ultimately led to the system’s implosion. The development The implosion. system’s led the to ultimately newcourse reform the legitimize to attempts butthese MSZMP; the elite of ruling by thenew answered were counterrevolution the re-evaluate to claims Oppositional eighties. the of movement opposition the in originates latency from return the case, this In forgetting. symbolic of years after latency of places from re-appear may memory explains, Assmann As legitimation. political of source monuments, I will present the emergence of the revolution as symbol of moral authority and KOSELLECK; 1994, p.10. This chapter sets the context for the analysis of monuments for the Hungarian the for monuments of analysis the for context the sets chapter This In order to understand the reasons for the various political actors, who invest in ’56 90 . 31 CEU eTD Collection economic crisis soon economic Untilcaused soon visiblecleavages, too. crisis social legacy 1956 was then,of the decadeof severe the Then, bloc’. of Eastern barrack the happiest founded ‘the which hadonce Revolution, suppressed and victorious 1956-1999 HungarianRoundtable Talks ofLee 1989“, W.“The in CongdonandBéla K.Király, András. BOZÓKI, see ORT, the in participants of the evaluation an For Hungary. in goods consumer 91 1972 from since. The1980s reform Kádárist theera the 1968 to declineof experienced and ever in 1956, suffered of had severerevolution repercussions Hungarian the participated II.2 Opposition, transition and 1956 system current between the andalso have previous the institutional but survived. contacts exist continuities stylistic only not since artist a specific for decisions following explain that surface will ties institutional Moreover, Revolution. Hungarian the for monuments have present-day main designed that some artists of the sceneintroduces art into the concentrate I institutions avant-garde, brief the andon outlook artists sincethe1970s.This back in ofcontinuity basic trends While reach that to Hungary.I discover institutionalization sinceaddress theideological 1990. development I will movementof focused opposition the ontheprotagonists Consequently,then I while political concepts urgently needed legitimation in newthe democratic environment. when period, transition during the accelerated shifts Ideological wereannounced. as elections fellas soon apart Thus,the movement political differentconcepts. butalso to adhered groups events. the link between asymbolic creating of anniversary revolution, the the revolution surrounded dates negotiated of Hungary’s The ‘New Economic Mechanism’ introduced in 1968 raised the standard of living and increased the range of range the increased and of living standard the raised 1968 in introduced Mechanism’ Economic ‘New The In the late 1970s, Hungary’s opposition movement entered the political arena. Many arena. political the entered movement opposition 1970s,Hungary’s late In the in the 1980s II.2. Opposition introduce In a contemporary I history the and subchapter, third of its art age different two to belong only not did opposition the of members the However, (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press 2002), pp.245. The Ideas of the HungarianThe Ideasofthe 32 91 ; CEU eTD Collection April, 2000,April, accessed strategies movementthe should pursue – for example between KrassóGyörgy astudent MSZMP in the communist reform the by wasinstance ideas amemberof whose wereabsorbed so-calledthe Lukács’ kindergarten, 95 94 Mikes. Mécs, Tamás György Krassó, Domokos Koszeg, Ferenc Gaspar Miklos Tamas, György Konrád, Szilagyi, Sandor Kis, Janos Szecsi, Margit Keszthelyi, Varga, Gabriella Lengyel,Sándor Judit Vásarhélyi, Radnoti,Sandor Sándor Lezsak, Csoori, Miklossignatory list names the followingBéla persons Vásarhélyi,whichwill return throughout this thesis: Peter Bokros, Robert Jenö Nagy,Gondos, ImreHungarianRevolution Anniversary”, October 28, 1986, RFE/RL Background Reports. Among others the Palinkas, László93 IstvánRajk,between1959 1963. and Csurka,Judit92 Gyenes, Gyula Perlaki, Miklós GáborHaraszti, Demszky, Janos Sándor Kenedi, Rácz, ÁrpádJeno Göncz,Szell, Zsolt Kis, and in Vásárhelyi Miklós István Csurka showed already mid-80s the system, ’56 did not pose a rolemodel for political action as such, as discussions between János for from dissidentcomplete differedconcepts Hungary’sremoval future reform to the of Hungarian the agenda was revolution RainerWhile oppositionists,on of János explains. of unity, former the arenow dissidents deeply overdivided revolution’sthe legacy. afeeling momentarily that created revolution led apeaceful,negotiated for to are-assessment request the camps.While inthe into sometimes different, ideological 1980s, opposing another transition the following leading positions took Many ofthe late1980s evaporated. a unity soon dissidents to that alludes movement’ mere the ‘opposition Moreover, term by was mainly intellectuals. carried in change early the 1990s Hungarian diaries journals, Most books, abroad. etc of however, only these, returned the after Association of Freedom inFighters inCleveland 1959and who others continued publishing by largely nurtured Hungarian whofoundedexiles, several like theWorldassociations ANDOR, László. “Has the dictatorship over needs ended in eastern Europe?” in Europe?” eastern in ended needs over dictatorship the “Has László. ANDOR, RAINER,János. “The Roundtable Talks of 1989”, (Budapest:CEU Press 2002),pp.211-222. accessed . OSA fonds PL Box, Folder, Report 48-1-65; Vladimir V.Kusin. “East EuropeanDissidents' Appealon Forexample, thecurrent ’56 Institute isasuccessor Nagy of theImre operatedwhichBrusselsInstitute in Since Miklós Vásárhelyi’ article in Paris-based the article Vásárhelyi’ Since Miklós andit movement lacked reveal popular that dissident of support Recent evaluations the http://www.dsp.org.au/links/back/issue14/14andor.html 93 92 . However, nowadays, they have dissociated themselves from one from themselves dissociated have they nowadays, However, . . 95 . Differences also occurred in respect to the means and Irodalmi Újság in April 2007. LINKS 94 , No. 14, January to . The former for in 1983, the 33 CEU eTD Collection background report, Munich 21, June 1988. 97 most popular radio magazines. This simple change in terms after an after30-year- changeinterms an official magazines. Thissimple most radio popular for Imre Interior the ’56 as Pozsgay referred to a“popular one in‘168hour’ uprising” of the by was crushed police the in– in for Rácz Mécs participated 16, 1988– which exampleArpádGöncz,Sándor and Imre But in contrast to such signs of opening and tolerance, the opposition’s demonstration on June questions. historical with dealt also Science, Academy of of the president Berend, then T. the Iván by headed subcommittee a development; economic and social the analyzes to committee MSZMPCCestablishedaspecial the Following TIB, leadership. the theparty over took the reform communists economy, simultaneously Hungarian with health condition his deteriorating getting and older – most prominently was AsKádár unheard. pass the Central notCommittee did voices Imre these Certainly, change. Pozsgay, Rezs Alliances’ later in which turned the SZDSZ urgedforto historical and re-assessment political Freeof ‘Network the Additionally, protagonists. TIB’s the Mécswere Rácz, andImre Nagy’s rehabilitation. Erzsébet Nagy, Judit Gyénes, Ella Szilágyi, Miklós Vásárhélyi, Sándor TIB, ‘Committeethe for Historicalin Justice’, June 1988 whichcontributed immensely to buried models andan in future at oppositional state conference December, werediscussed. tobe thought were andhisassociates minister prime revolutionary the where Cemetery, Five years1981. pictures BBCbroadcasted road, of down 301 inthe Plot Rákoskeresztúr Krassó had organized the first commemoration ceremony of the revolution in his apartmentin harassment. Rajk, wasthe son of Hungary’s most probably famous 1949 show trial victim 96 different leaderDemszkyRajk in1956,andGábor and László whowereallactive producers of OSA fonds HU Judit Pataki, “Demonstration for Nagy’s rehabilitation brutally halted in Budapest”, RFE/RL RÉV, István. Despite their differences, former political prisoners and relatives founded the famous samizdat Prehistory of Postcommunism. Retroactive Justice literature, wherefore they were all subject of police surveillance and of police surveillance allsubject they were wherefore literature, 97 . On January 27, 1989, based on the committee’s report Minister. OnJanuary based onthe report 27, 1989, committee’s , (Stanford University Press 2005 ), pp.60. Ę Nyers, Miklós Németh – 34 96 . CEU eTD Collection legitimation and played into the hands of the opposition movement opposition the of hands the into played and legitimation itself in distress, Imre Konya claims, Poszgay took down the lastfounding pillar of the party’s Union With backfired. economyin completely the Soviet and decline the though, attempt, 100 Revolution. A history in documents”, (New York andBudapest: CEU Press 2002), pp.5553-558. Declarationon 1956, January 31, 1989”, inCsaba Békés, MalcolmByrne, János Rainer. The 1956 Hungarian 99 98 Unions LIGA.József Antall,instancefor his preserved position as mediator independentan Hungarian MNP, Bajcsy FriendsNational Zsilinszky Party BZSBT, Independent Trade and Independent Smallholders’ Party FKGP, the Hungarian Social Democratic Party MSZDP, the Associationthe Oppositionof Young Roundtable and organizations) Democratsaffiliated (furtherparty ‘Thirdthe Side’ MSZMP, between the negotiated which consisted FIDESZ, was Forum by LawyersFJF apeaceful transition invitationthe Independent the 1989, dueto of the Hungarian the Democratic question regimethe assuch and mushroomed.Alliance civicorganizations from Starting March 22, Forum MDF, of thewhen to Pozsgay publicly interpretation,admitted party’sthe he unjust openedthefloor to Free Democratsto retirement. Still, the directionSZDSZ, of reforms continued to be thea matter of debate in the PC. But to social reconciliation“itcan lead Moreover, reforms. necessary and serve theplanned might change terminological and a national consensus”,zeal with great he explained in upon had and as been press appearance which echoed commented well foreign domestic to his party fellowshis radio Threedaysafter watershed: causeda interpretation a counterrevolution, of ‘original sin’ was the best way forits opponents to de-legitimize the communist regime.” p.269. also BOZÓKI,p.256.2002, “To remindthe public that Kádár the regime beeninstatebornhad of a Hungarian Revolution, suppressed and victorious 1956-1999, Doc. No. 119. “Extraordinary Meeting of the HSWP Political Committee Discussing Imre Pozsgay’s See OSA fonds HU 300 40 2 Box 1989. KÓNYA, Imre. “Hungary’s negotiated revolution“, inLee W.Congdon andBélaK.Király, Already in Kádár May been1988, had named which Honorary President, surmounted II.2.2 Reorganization newII.2.2 Reorganization in parties 98 , Pozsgay hadexplain, Pozsgay to hisautonomous move. Hebelieved that (New York: Columbia University Press 2002), 100 . The Ideas of the 99 . This . 35 CEU eTD Collection cautious due to the unpredictable reactions of Union. of Sovietthe duetotheunpredictablereactions cautious martyrers andremained tothe andrespect honor speeches expressed Remarkably, their had earned additional merits based on their continuous opposition to the Kádár regime. publishing.had Rácz Budapestworkers’ of been presidentthe council.All greater the them of started upauniversity chair and where he States took the hehad escapedto revolutionaries; Mécs. been the spokesman Nagy the of hewherefore government hadbeen imprisonedjust like Imre Királyi had Vásárhelyi themselves; in revolution the participated hadactively these Allof speeches. hadMécs delivered Imre Méray, and Tibor Király, Béla Vásárhelyi, Rácz,Miklós Sándor been tranquility calls peaceand for the the in to tuned aftermath, its as aswell commander revolution the of memories vivid had certainly who system non-violent Party the change; aday announced reconciliation of and the dissidents, of in 1989 a transition violencecaused bloodshed ultimately peaceful and the National memory of lasting the consideration; into of ’56 istaken afterlife literature, the all recent forum for In theirprovided anexcellent theopposition requests. organizations with transitory Guard June 16,1989,which Square on Heroes on Finally, wasorganized ceremony. ceremony the on behalf of the 102 pp.263; Folgen Budapest:CEU 285- 300;PAUL,Press 2000), pp. Lendvai. William Newton-Smith, IstvánRév (eds.), 101 Mátyás Sz the TIB. In April the PC fell apart when Miklós Németh, FJF. leadthe Konya party Imre colleague At later sametime,1988. his the Gyula Horn Kálmán Kulcsárbefore hejoined MDF the founded had which been at ameeting inLakitelek in fall the of and OSA fonds HU 300 40 2. Neier, Aryeh Elkana, Yehuda Dahrendorf, Lord in Prophecy“, Self-Not-Fulfillling “The István. RÉV, [The Hungarian uprising of A revolution1956. and itsaftermath], (Munich: C.BertselmannPubl. 2006), Alongside these talks, form and procedure of the Nagy reburial were discussed with Ħ rös banning the demonstration rös planed reburial alongside thenprivate the 102 . As only a consequence, former ’56 and membersTIB like The Paradoxes ofUnintendedConsequences Der Ungarnaufstand 1956.Eine Revolution undihre 101 . All sides favored a favored sides All . . (New York and 36 CEU eTD Collection like Gyula Horn, Mátyas Sz communists reform which in party successor immediate the became MSZP Party Socialist dissolved with hard-linersthe forming Workers the Hungarian Party, while Hungarian the minister inas prime career asecond pursue to was and minister foreign interim becamethe while Horn 1994 –pushed informer Gyulain University Californialeft 1990, forat the – the history achair Horn of for a fullreformers the hand gained upper claiming Forinstance, 1956astheir predecessor. Berend and rehabilitation peaceful, the completely remained ceremony reburial the Kádár away.Since János passed of Nagy. On October 7, the MSZMP andmartyrs,announced: heroes Orbán as national Lossonczy Gimes, Szilágyi, and Maléter, in Heroes’in Square”, RFE/RL background report, Munich, 16 1989.June 104 http://www.fidesz.hu/index.php?CikkID=68476 103 alternative” radical and October 1989and the party program of is these days summarized inthe “liberal,key words: After announcement declaredhonorary member. the itselffree of FIDESZ elections, in a party underFIDESZ leadership the of LászlóKöver and Orbán Viktor voted Sándor Rácz beto generation samizdatproduction the of which again wasslightly In tradition older. the 1956, of founded in February in1988; its profile and activities it wasdistinct from youngerthe hadin been 1956.It revolution of the thebeginnings ofyouth,had recalling the advantage FIDSEZ as metaphorically. as well literally stage, political the entered speech controversial OSAfonds HU 30042 BoxPataki. 1988/1989,Judith “Fidesz delegate’s speechat Nagy ceremony reburial FIDESZ-MPP. “The History of FIDESZ”,publ. November27, 2006, onthe party’sown homepage On Augustwhen 16, Nagy Imre officially was by rehabilitated Supremethe Court, On the same day, the leader of the Young Democrats, Viktor Orbán with a reform course of Nagy. of Imre course reform have suddenly up torealize thatwoken they arethemselves the continuing whonot long dishonoured ago Primethe [Nagy]Minister Revolution the and people those see when that we incompatible. Westand dumfounded […] are communism and democracy fate isthat their learned from have The lesson we 103 . While the elder speakers at the reburial ceremony honoured Nagy, honoured ceremony reburial atthe speakers . Whiletheelder Ħ rös or Miklós Németh were to find a new home. 104 37 CEU eTD Collection andmost but appeared, of parties neverby them or short-lived passed any significance. gained ahugenumberof organizations mentioned. Furthermore, were revivedwhichIhavealready and popular sovereignty as the prime and unifying interests of dissidents of various colors. of various ofdissidents interests unifying and prime the as sovereignty popular and 107 106 105 state building aconstitutional granted to generally law a large importance number whichreflected overall lawyers the of students, or in more the region; they youth. radical membership The the represented contained opposition Alliance. new liberals prominentand further like dissidents Mécs, Göncz, Demszky and joined Rajk the November 1989 in Free Democrats Allianceof liberal found the they liberalism” tendency of human rights “represent longa order to In had “parents’” worldview. their Lukács-Kindergarten abandoned the of fellows his and Kis János example, For parties. different into dispersed members Kádár the regime towards opposition its discovered recently whichhad only win it electorate, was timethe to Now bureaucracy. both sides of the ORT, it had been representatives of theOn elite, the concepts. intelligentsiapolitical their with andterms to come to themselves busied come activism political for spring 1989. Miklós Németh took the post of interim prime minister. Democratic elections were announced Republic of Hungary. Basedappeared unarmed, when on the symbolicon date of October 23,amendments Sz that had completely setting:opposite Inorder to ensurebeen the public peace, police andmilitary only worked out by the ORT earlier, G.M. Tamás as well asImre Konya András and Bozóki identify civil society,constitutional state, civil rights 2000, ANDOR, BOZÓKI, 2002,pp.246. FIDESZ whose members ranged from 16 to 35 years old, was a unique phenomenon years35 old, wasaunique 16 to from membersranged FIDESZ whose of 31 1988, the events Recalling the The following months the opposition members and those who saw the time for http://www.dsp.org.au/links/back/issue14/14andor.html 106 . Quickly, the samizdat periodical 105 107 . In the short period of transition, the opposition . In addition to these, some of the historical parties historical the of some to these, addition . In st anniversary of place revolution the took ina Beszel Ę came to stand for Hungary’s Ħ rös declared the Democratic 38 CEU eTD Collection symbol for reforms which in the end, led to a peaceful, democratic transition. Two of these foundation and historical narrative; it thus, lost all legitimation.political ’56was used a as itself, Hungarian by initiated moral its party the MSZMP deprived of revolution, the generation born after latter, change of in they form joinedregimes Inthe by were this possible. a younger 1954 who contributed the made which movement dissident in the formed and 1980s inthe hibernation political their to the return of 1956.many Moreover, formerof those ’56 whoparticipants hadstayed in from Hungary, returned The re-evaluation transitionthe in Hungary evolved around the anniversary ofof dates Hungarianthe revolution. the with of importance regime the the1956 during change.The key associated events highlights the MDF and from Antall József Minister 1990:Prime offices after important state mostPresident two occupied the Árpád Göncz oppositionalfrom intelligentsia opted either for membership in the MDF or SZDSZ. the SZDSZ.spared outthe most party importantin theHungarian 1989/90, Democratic Forum. The However, this short subchapter 109 MOP after Krassó’s death in 1991. Groups and Parties”,RFE/RL background report, September12,Sánor 1989. Rácz as new filedleader ofthe in members, publications etc. OSA fonds HU 37-6-109, Zoltan D.Barany. “Hungary's Independent Political 108 Bozóki claims too, characteristics, as essential with parties itselfParty civil becamesociety disappeared, identified notonly social with movement but such the once andorganizations prevailed. Only parties of political 1989 skepticism towards 30 organizations listed for candidates thefirstround of elections. Political by founded likewise dissidents Jen Prisoners Hungarian October Party,Of thethose, name reflecting which have the atcommitment least proved to ’56 orenduring the Association are for of example György Krassó’s MOP, the BOZÓKI, 2002, p.250. RFE collected emerging of alist parties the organizations,and explicating foundingtheir date and program, I will present both I will following moreparties becausepresent both detailed inthe chapter, theseparties This wave ofnew organizations was a striking development, because until the summer Ę Fonay Fogacs and Ferenc 109 . Nevertheless, so far I have I far so Nevertheless, . 108 . All inall, . All 39 CEU eTD Collection Liverpool). 110 out. point will I as extents heritage cultural of Hungary’s reminiscence Additionally,alluded all economy. market social claims, advocated Nigel Swain All parties, have undergone. the Hungarian Revolution of 1956, I will 2006, whichfinal will in for chapter empirical ontheNewCentral the Monument re-appear retrace the ideological changes the ‘system-changing have remained parties’ different With inparliament. polarizationrespect tothe in camps losthave decade;onlythe the historical the by influence their of assuch end the parties Hungary Democratic in II.2 Politics symbol for its own means. the evokes generation younger the while revolution, in the participation their from authority moral ‘56ers derive former The inyear’s and last riots culminated controversy: monument of a crash that early roots the candetect one Here, political camps. thedifferent between numerous interpretations, also the form and content of today’s democracy widen the divide Hungarianin role. only 1956is which ‘56ers still important play politics to Not an open in developments recent the contrast here depicted as transition apeaceful of common goal revolution because or important they politicaltook positions following 1990.Finally, the Hungarian the for in monuments interest their to due either return will here, mentioned have I persons the of most Moreover, understanding. ‘right’ the concerning generation next the and eye-witnesses between gap generational the (de-)legitimation, political of means currents will return with new vigor: the instrumentalization of the revolution’s heritage as a SWAIN, Nigel. “Extremist Parties in Hungary“, Working Paper No.7, General Series (University of (University Series General No.7, Paper Working Hungary“, in Parties “Extremist Nigel. SWAIN, While the election campaign in early 1990 indicated restoringhistoricalindicated in continuities,While early1990 campaign election the old images new profiles, elections: first II.2.1 The 110 , but to different to but , 40 CEU eTD Collection 113 1993), pp.138. Democracy Right-Wingand Politics in Eastern Europe in the 1990s, (New York: Columbia University Press 112 Vol.7, No. 4August 1991, pp.3. 111 wallsin 1990 early fairly they symbols emotions”, onBudapest’s sights appeal wereacommon predictable to family “timeless since these However, care. party’s portray the to andchildren families the MSZP chose to convey security through social reforms; the campaign posters showed balanceThus, perception negative the to from MSZMP. re-founded the clear differentiation power” timeless with infused symbols “primehistorical national from predecessors stockpile symbolicpre-existing clusters of the in it find did them of Most votes. their cast to electorate the convince to profiles ideological like the myth about the Rose Hill Pact – causedpublicunrest Hill Rose Pact the about like themyth sincetaste further andreal already about the – ORTrumours during discoveries corruption election campaign. Moreover, former Communists did show in their ranks, which left a stale heritageChristian in featured more prominent KDNP’sthe profile. Hungary’s logically, but, countryside; the from voters its of most drew also it in that FKGP tothe is close Party Democratic Christian The resurrected in countryside. the voters previous property focusedvein,a similar more itsappeared once program. InFKGP the on ontheir popular party 1945andafter lastsubdue the to Communist tothe Hence,take-over. private most the been had it since tradition their on draw could instance for Party Smallholders’ integrated in MDF. the integrated Kádárist MSZMP did disperse into non-socialist parties, too: Imre Pozsgay for example was resurrected Social Democratic Party, too. Yet, it needs beto noted that former members of the VASARY, 1991, p.5. KÓNYA,p.267; 2002, also HELD, “Building Joseph. Civic Society Post-Communistin Hungary” in VASARY,“Comrades, Ildiko. it’sover!: The electioncampaignHungary in 1990”, in In the run-up to Hungary’s for searched new elections, the first democratic In parties run-upthe to The Socialists hadstand considering adifficult the anti-Communist spiritduring the 113 . Still, it had to compete for the social democratic constituents with the with constituents democratic social the for compete to had it Still, . 111 aswell anti-communist TheIndependentas slogans. 112 . In addition to that, it lacked a Anthropology Today 41 , CEU eTD Collection No.154Summer 1999, accessed via Warsawthe Pact from from withdrawal troops own andthecountry’s quickHungary, Soviet the of withdrawal a warned duringanti-Semiticliberal.requested currents of It and and theanti-gypsy transition first party logo. According its to self-image and membership, party the itselfconsiders social- designed not only most with of these hisphotos geometric typical abstract butalso forms the 118 MDF preferred neutrality. See VÁLKI, László. “Hungary’s Road to Nato”, in theof success greatest Antall the of besome to considered are membership NATO era. potential Hungary’s about However,negotiations these actions117 only became possible116 after(1991), p.113 the coup in Moscow115 in 1991; until then,114 the theMDF background accessed with a populist writersStephen’s Whilethejoined urbanintelligentsia andCrown. SZDSZ,those the critics president. preserved his mayorposition as of Budapest since 1990,and János Kis became party’sthe firs has Demszky parliament, into voted immediately were Rajk and Göncz others, Among ranks: party the in filed Movement, Solidarity Polish the as well as West the to relations had inexperience conveyed andits leaders’ age theelectorate, attract eventually party’s the not However, did profile too.Incontrast the posters, nationalhistorical they others, omitted tothen or symbols and applied FIDESZ reliability? its image ofyouth fresh and on its playfulstart inventive and profilehistorical from while distinct their samecompetitors atthe timestability conveying the MDF emphasized at the beginning: Constitutional liberalism, Christian morality, Christian liberalism, Constitutional beginning: the at emphasized MDF the SWAIN, [date missing], p.2. RACZ, VASARY,1991, 1991, p.6. p.113. RACZ, Barnabas. “PoliticalThe Pluralisationin Hungary: The 1990 Elections”, in withdrawal VASARY, 1991, p.6. from the Warsaw Pact, the withdrawal of Soviet troops and first The SZDSZ ran the most ‘rational’ poster campaign, Vasary analyzes Vasary campaign, poster ‘rational’ most the ran SZDSZ The MDF posters often featured the ‘Kis Cimer’, the Hungarian coat of arms with St. The transitory new parties with how tobuildwere confronted question the apolitical 117 . The cosmopolitan intellectuals of the dissident movement, those who also 115 . The party filed in 6 http://www.hungarianquarterly.com/no154/003.html th 118 and, therefore, last in last elections. the therefore, and, . Gergely distils the main currents and values and currents main the distils Gergely . The Hungarian Quarterly Soviet Studies 116 , Vol. 43, No. 1. ; László Rajk ; László ,Vol.XL, 114 42 . CEU eTD Collection the problems of privatisation sufficiently privatisation of problems the addressed had revolution negotiated not the thatit surfaced soon themselves with liberals, the policy, too. stationed in Hungary, which will play an important role in the first government’s foreign werestill introops Soviet keep inmind that 1990, respect one hasto In that of populist. the Hungarianthe revolution. Alreadyin 1930s,thethe idea of was a third road typicalthe theme represent to symbols Hungarian ‘authentic’ for preference MDF’s in the later shows tradition Gy. Tóth (eds.). 119 tendencies” social influencing and power “Lawpreserving meansof isoneof the state. in stress a legal,constitutional delegatesfrom Independentthe Lawyers’ Forum joined the MDF reinforcing the party’s strongest party – obtained the seat of presidency in return second SZDSZ–the the in parliament, votes achievemanageable to order majority. In the Christian Democrats. Still, this centre-right coalition did not make up a parliamentary populism, anti-Bolshevism, legacy the 1956, aswell of the‘thirdas road’ 123 Republic. Third of the minister prime first the became ORT of the mediator the also its president, György Szabad did likewise becameand the first parliamentary president. Antall prominently 122 121 http://english.mti.hu/default.asp?menu=6&cat=35 120 implement its worldview lastingly: During the election campaign, the SZDSZ had accused the accused had SZDSZ the campaign, election the During lastingly: worldview its implement lackedobvious party astable the that base electoral GERGELY, András. “József Antall: Prime Minister of the change of regime”, in Maria Schmidt and László and Schmidt Maria in ofregime”, change of the Minister Prime Antall: “József András. GERGELY, GERGELY; 2002, p.156; HELD, 1993,p.136. KÓNYA, 2002, p.269. GERGELY, 2000,p.152; BOZÓKI,2002, pp.260. Not only Kónya joined the MDF For to become Hungary’s first Ministerthe of the Interior, exact election results I refer to the official data published by MTI on While at first a suicidal economic program was a reason for the MDF not to align term parliamentary the first II.2.2 Changes during The MDF decided to form a coalition with the Independent Smallholders’ Party and However, the new government used its position and superior constitutional position to position constitutional superior and position its used government new the However, From totalitarian to democratic Hungary 122 , Kónyaargues.This neglectbackfiredandquicklyitbecame 121 . As already mentioned, quite anumber of quite mentioned, . Asalready (New York: Columbia University Press 2000), p.150. 123 . 120 . 119 . Thepopulist 43 CEU eTD Collection other incidents, he attacked the American, Hungary-born philanthropist George Soros, who ad he In rhetoric unbearable. 1993, leftfound became party the to his Among ownassociation. of anti-nationalism radical were accused was too nationalisticMDF the While nationalism: of extent right the over clashed SZDSZ and forMDF Regularly, the liberals, too close which had suddenlybecome aviable to option after coup in the inMoscow August1991 a Horthyiste style of alliances in Transatlantic and interestEuropean new byAntall’s pleased not were governing,elements the latter MDF was “increasingly loosing the ‘democratic’ from from name”its loosingthe‘democratic’ “increasingly MDF was years,first the within the that Heldexplains However, right. conservative the tendency to holiday. national conviction wasin manifested making August20 Christian coalition’s The holiday. revolutionary national the declared was 15 March revolution” the of tendencies leftist the and content distance from to nameof“inleftist omitted itself the MDF order Imre Nagy, purposefully law Nationalthe draftearlierin Assemblypresented to into 1990, contrast the spring scripts a In elements. Christian-democratic-conservative and national-populist leftist, own party’s fractions and once in Antall power, pursued a‘third way’ policy negotiated that between the accessed in 124 tendencies leftist its for Forum p.559. politics in today's Hungary: SandorCsoori in the populist-urbanite debate” in 127 126 p.221. Nagy. party cadre From to martyrer ofHungarian the uprising], (Paderborn Munich:and Schöninghpubl. 2006), 125 László Gy. Tóth (eds.), 128 SZELENYI, Sonja et al.. “Interests and symbols in Post-Communist Political Culture: The Case of Hungary”, VÁLKI, 1999, HELD, 1993, p.136. János. RAINER; FRICZ, Tamás. “The Orbán Government: An experiment in Regime Stabilization”, in Maria Schmidt and Schmidt Maria in Stabilization”, Regime in experiment An Government: Orbán “The Tamás. FRICZ, American Sociological Review The shift to the right evolved mainly around István Csurka, whose anti-Semitic whose Csurka, István around mainly evolved right the to shift The During the election campaign, the MDF had presented the political centre with http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-16971999.html http://www.hungarianquarterly.com/no154/003.html Imre Nagy.Vom Parteisoldaten zum Märtyrer des ungarischen Volksaufstandes From totalitarian democratic to Hungary , Vol. 61, No.3, June 1996, pp.443. 124 . However, the party was fragmented into numerous 128 . , St. Stephen’s Day, the most important . 125 (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press 2000), . Following, instead of . Following,instead 23, October of ; BRODY, Ervin C. “Literature and “Literature C. Ervin BRODY, ; The Literary Review Literary The 126 . The party’s rightist , 3/22/1995 [Imre 127 44 . CEU eTD Collection European European Conference of Political Prisoners, Fónaydeclared: and aparadoxical populism celebrated inrevival 1990s the vigor itsinitial hadreceived trend the However, elements. freeitself radical of these to tried opposition MDF László “Deep the of Hungarians” and Németh’s cosmopolitans, (Jewish) thebinary toresemble when the clashes started MDF worldview. However, this continued populistin tradition returned and 1980sandthe 1990sreclaiming firstauthentic roots, at the for lastforce time. the cultural This hadappearedasapolitical populism and interwar period, cosmopolitan intellectuals and Hungarians ‘real’ reminded of an confrontation:earlier In the His extremeMIÉP, right Hungarianthe andTruth Life Party,in enteredparliament 1998. 130 129 the radical rhetoric of Jen whichhe dueto for Historical had founded, Committee exampleJustice, himself letthe once its for of populism.acknowledge Vasarhelyi Miklós rightist the deviation hesitated to to come home” wanted Hungary becausethey Auschwitz they after peoples,to among and that back come other asthereexisted in asmany “statingJews came convictions Hanák that historian the Péter populist Sandor member Csoori writer andlengthy MDF alsoclashed by provoking a respond alone wasnot Still, ideology:scholarship a fewyears inhis Csurka The earlier. anti-Semitic Csurka USwith the for andCommunication. Remarkably, a Soros hadvisited Culture in into Centre democratic the Soros invested he setup since 1986when the change Hungary BRODY, 1995, HELD, 1993, p.146. Still, the continuation of the populist tradition and the separation of Jews, of separation the and tradition populist the of continuation the Still, Though, the shift to the right was not only perceivable in the MDF which also which MDF in the perceivable only not was right the to shift the Though, known.worryingin eyes our and nobody is pointing atthem.make Wehave to thepast lookingwithout arejust Ex-communists destiny.be our atpeacewith can't WhenbearI can't toseehow they They compromise.speak about oursuffering.don't I I watch TV I remember when after the end of the war http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-16971999.html 129 Ę . Nevertheless, notdisappearfrom Csurkadid scene: political the Fónay, the president of the radical POFOSZ. At a Central Eastern 130 . . 45 CEU eTD Collection ‘ill-considered and impulsive. No organiser can be responsible for what comes out of people’s throat’”. of people’s out comes what for be responsible can organiser No impulsive. and ‘ill-considered who wasBoross, standingPeter withMinister other member “Interior of passivity the government duringdeliberate for the incident,organizers said the government opposition the accused allegations SZDSZ the weresince incident”; the regretted Antall Jozsef Minister “Prime as reported were demonstration skinhead the to leaders RFE “CNO 23October 0071A-Wire 1991” and “24October 1992. FF0075 B-Wire”. The reactions by MDF 132 131 strongly Kónya alone: Imre not were fighters freedom self-declared these compensation, continues process cleavingthat the ofmany with events of 1956” other ‘unidirectional’ who haveallegedly betrayed theideals of revolution.the “The Tellingly, Rainerstates: memory of this momentAssociations of gracefellows. former their confronting like started and gave out themselves singled radicals theway dissidents of POFOSZto a ‘divergent’ or the Association older Remarkably, of the generation out street. politicsthe of culture: the Hungarian political memory, of ‘56ers in a confront popular representative President Göncz was kept from delivering his key speech his key from delivering waskept Göncz President ceremonies, Already ’56 the 1991and commemorative anniversary organisations. during 1992 Pongratzpig farmer inArizona. Until his to Hungaryin return 1991, he founded and chaired numerous a as down settled finally and intervention Soviet second the after Austria led to escaped had He nationalistic them mainleaderthe fighterswas Gergely Pongratz, of of street Alley inthe Corvin the 1956. protests which created such an atmosphere that RAINER, 2002, on quoted Fonay In addition to the return of populism, a new phenomenon appeared on the horizon of horizon the on appeared new phenomenon a of populism, return the to In addition On March On March of national15, 1992,acrowd for the skinheads gathered holiday.Among countries' people. If don'tdogovernments anything about it, weshould. small the on trampled Moscow lives. our destroyed and came communism 133 http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Cafe/1718/jjpoliticalprisoners.html OSA fonds HU-OSA 300-40(Hungarian (Subject Unit)-2 English) BOX Filesin 87. see 133 . In their calls for revenge and 132 . 131 46 CEU eTD Collection 137 136 135 p.2. party’s the have might clarified which party the of restructuring necessary the undertake dismembering of the extremesJózsef right Antall elements. Péterin Boross,1993 who privatization. playeda structured based on stabilization succeeded Antall,a role dresseddid notas well as TheMSZP parties. in conservative ruling the as as well disappointment for Kádárera the theitself party’s short-lived.following nostalgia nurtured proved transition the Theeconomic repercussions infragmentation the tradition leading toof theEuropean social democracy, and promisedas well as literally on Budapest’s main squares, Kossuth,and Heroes Freedom Square. economicAntall mildlysuch reacted incidents,to extreme and rightist thus, provided grounds in public inof Rácz had MOP,which Krassó’sthe death after beentakenoverby Sándor 1991 134 country’sthe restoration The “apparent changedattitude. prewar politics”of realize to failed which rhetoric anti-Communist its reactivated MDF the in mind, Vilnius and Hungary nowas in exception Central WithEurope. Eastern socialistvitoriesinthe Warsaw successor party majority gainedthat in an absolute second in election In the 1994. that, communists by run still was media state the along with claims shouted that PeaceTreaty slogansPongratz 1920Trianon the renouncing files service secret opposed president,whenthe heannounced abstain from revengeful investigations of the to SZELENYI et al. 1996, p.468. SWAIN, [date missing], p.6 OSA fonds HU 300-40-2, Box 87;CNO 0071 A-Wire 23 October1991. NALEPA, Monika. NALEPA, Numerous reasons contributed to the MDF’s lossof voters. Certainly, the death of PM II.2.3 The 1990s In contrast to these noisy radical right-wing organizations, it was the MSZP, the itwas the organizations, right-wing noisy radical these to In contrast 23,1991,theMoreover, rioting duringdemonstrations skinheadsbehind onOctober 134 The problem ofCredible Commitments inTransitions toDemocracy . 135 . Politics of the street is also the explicit policy , Dissertation2005, 137 seemingly 136 47 . CEU eTD Collection From totalitarian to democratic Hungary 140 139 Elections in Hungary in 1994”, in 138 time at the party opposition strongest the MSZP, the alliance with ittook even sametime, the at and government centre-right the from enough itself differentiate not did it hand one the on forlimit membership was abolished. The rumpyetlacked party independentan profile, since 35-year-age of the Asre-orientation part SZDSZ. leavingfor the latter the with which ended party chair in a revealed rupture leadershipthe between Orbán Viktor Fodor,and Gábor continued 19 down into 2002. liberals’the numberin from mandates dropped 94 in 1990 to69.Moreover, the decline has MSZP the with coalition exactly in SZDSZwhothe elections tothe run-up the in1994publicly hinted atapossible inWhile MDF 1989/90,SZDSZmembershadthe for leftist theirtendencies, attacked it was itand Janus-faced” argues, “ambiguous appeared representative. articulate contrast to campaign election second during the the MDF the peace”slogans repeated its family” “God, and“wine,wheat, country, juniorAntall’s partner, radical populistHungary’s regentAdmiral Miklós Horthyin The Independent 1993. Smallholders’ Party, of ceremony reburial a nostalgic in indulged party the József Instead, position. right not and centrist Torgyán had become the FKGP’s most presidency wentfrom Péter Tölgyessy to Iván Pet such as compensation mediaor control, whilethelater requested both. Onlyin 1992, after the investigating pastinvolvement in secret service activities,it disagreed with the MDF on topics TÓTH, László. “The post-communist government inHungary”, inMaria Schmidt and László RACZGy. Kukorelli,and 1995, Tóth p.258. (eds.), VASARY,p.3; RACZ, 1991, and Barnabas IstvánKukorelli.“The ‘Second-Generation’ Post-Communist At the party’s fifth congress in 1993, FIDESZ undertook significantAt party’s fifth in the undertook FIDESZ congress 1993, The changes. its The term, profile. Racz experiencedover During struggles SZDSZ also the first 140 . Although this policy became reality after the ballots were sealed, were ballots the after became reality . Although this policy Europe-Asia Studies (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press 2000), pp.462. 138 . This time, however, itfailed to please voters, since in , Vol.47,, No.2, March 1995,p.262. Ę , the social element gained the upper hand. 139 . In addition to the questions of 48 CEU eTD Collection 143 142 141 Bokros Lajos Minister Finance package named Bokros the after welfarebenefits, on down stabilization cutting policy country” the in leader “the popular political least as ended his however, Horn term appeared guaranteed; success From two-thirds outset, majority.this aspresident. wasre-elected 1995,Göncz In balanced the potentials aMSZP of a safea coalition, victory which with 54% addedupto of became the inpopulation the new prime rashly ignoringminister.surveys indicated the strong commitment that socialist to values and policies party acted buriedimmediately the successor media which contrary,responses those the During the campaign,in 1994 parliament into it made barely the Democrats Young the thus SZDSZprofile; a clear and orientation missed Voters consideration. into and the MSZP had 144 Studies the of successes the over-stressed mistakenly believes, Fricz parties, ruling both campaign, election the During an advantage. burden morethan asa appeared conditions accompanying struggling economy as well social membership insecurity. Atthisas EU point, andthe SZDSZthe accession, and EU Hungary’s negotiating While abroad. MSZPperception country’s the to paid seemed to forget that their privatizationfightagainstcorruption. ordered earlierand campaign promises about electorates sat at home suffering from a RACZ, Barnabas. “The Hungarian Socialists in Opposition: Stagnation and Renaissance”, in Renaissance”, and Stagnation Opposition: in Socialists Hungarian “The Barnabas. RACZ, RACZ,2000, p.323; compare the earlier publication SZELENYI et al., 1996, pp.697-722. FRICZ, 2000, pp.522. Ibid., pp.324; FRICZ, 2002, p.528. Vol.52, No.2, 2000, p.323. Racz insists that the electoral success of the Socialists was not unexpected; quite on quite unexpected; wasnot of Socialists the success electoral the insists that Racz In addition to these disappointments, the public resented the attention the coalition the attention the resented public the disappointments, these to addition In 143 . In contrast to the expected social security, the Horn government pulled out a pulled out government Horn the security, social expected to the In contrast . 142 . After short considerations to nominate Miklós Nemeth, Gyula Horn 144 . Moreover, another scandal, the ‘Tocsik case’, renounced case’, ‘Tocsik the scandal, another . Moreover, 141 . Europe-Asia 49 CEU eTD Collection 149 148 147 146 145 viewedfor by brief critically the Except from centre-leftothers. 1994 until government 1998, democracy is to commitment FIDESZ-MPP’s and thesucceeding term that, Orbán’s attitude as well as party’s the in change the on light positive sheds period campaign of analysis Fricz’ while However, representatives. with entered 14 MIÉP Csurka’s István instead, KDNPhad –partly Forum’sdue to shift right–notto the made intoparliament, it while The new MDFbecame partners. ruling FKGPandthe the the Predictably, is remarkable. camp. political the lead centre-right take the of to party’s claims the supported bourgeois Hungary a on the focus Moreover, attractive. and credible appeared alternative andcompetent 1994-98 balance sheet thus, inexperienced image thus, itself from youngIn Friczits party argues,the and, liberated headquarters. general, radical, of party within andthe outside imagehadbeenof amatter radical controversies which hardto sell of wages was even reduction or stagnation briefly: apolicy tank think analysis, historical and political economic, for institute an ‘Szászadvég’, with agreement titlenew and itAlso program “For aCivic Hungary".titled ran the signed a cooperation solidarity” its FIDESZ polished“national strongest parties, image and centrist-bourgeois calledfor as MSZP, and ready to turn towards a new party. In response to the decline of the two previously FRICZ, 2002, p.530. See History “The of Fidesz” on party’sthe official homepage FRICZ, 2002, p.530. RACZ,2000, p.325. FRICZ, 2002, p.530. Although didFIDESZ-MPP need a coalition govern,to comeback the after 1994’s 5% After two governments, the public was left disappointed with the MDF as well as the 147 . Since 1995, the party carried the addition MPP - ‘Hungarian Civic Union’ in its 145 . To the regular voter the fact that the Bokros package meant package Bokros the factthat the voter regular . Tothe 149 148 . Instead, the change in appearance to a politically responsible a politically to appearance in change the Instead, . . Moreover, the leader Orbánparty’s Viktor backed upfrom his 146 http://www.fidesz.hu/index.php?CikkID=68476 . 50 CEU eTD Collection 152 151 Vol.55, No.5, 2003, p.747. 150 Conciliatory Council, lednegotiations in which of name the trade unions the and workers, the were Additionally,rather arbitrarily.interpreted dissolving Constitutional Court much in power handsthe of executive,the oppositionists rulings cried. Moreover, by the sincetrend 1990” “right and proclaims apolitical polarization of 2002 detects elections Racz evaluating the in Hungarian politics? conviction. Thus, it is worthwhile to ask whatin political exactly shift general happened the symbolizing atforces the end of centre-right of the mainstead 20 the to image liberal at electorate turn the millennium.of moved party the the its Therefore, awayfrom founding their absorbed FIDESZ nineties, of the beginning at the right conservative the dominated chairmanSmallholders’ Independent the with agreement a coalition signing prevent József not did reservation Torgyán,itis by undertone” sometimesideological a forceful thwarted and Sándor because even if attitude party] […the forDemocrats hasstriven andtask-oriented apragmatic Lezsák of the MDF. While both of these parties disputes, increased the prime minister’s control affairs. state control over primeincreased the minister’s disputes, inter-coalition implemented not dueto but by created government previous the regular post a Office, of a Prime Minister’s The establishment had nor Horn executed. neither Antall move necessary a administration, and bureaucracy of old the replacement and centralization of regime” achange less than and FRICZ, 2002, p.537. FRICZ, 2002, p.533. in Elections“, Parliamentary 2002 the and Hungary Leftin “The Barnabas. RACZ, However, stretching the break between parliamentary sessions to three weeks, put too weeks,put three to sessions between breakparliamentary stretching the However, II.2. 3TowardsPolarization After the electoral victory, Orbán declared: “It is more than a change of of government achange ismore than “It declared: victory, Orbán electoral After the 150 . Although according to Friczis. Although to unacceptabletothe “[populism]Young according 152 . The new centre-right government aimed at aimed government centre-right new The . 151 . Nevertheless, this supposed this Nevertheless, . Europe-Asia Studies th century 51 , CEU eTD Collection SZDSZ refused approval the Status – or Benefit foreign relievedgovernment’s policy from that EUaccession list. priority the Interestingly, Law in official terminology the interpreted EU’s intervention itself: asarbitrary fed This intounderstanding the – was passed governmentforby interfering andviolating its neighbor’s sovereignty. FIDESZin return a 92% vote;Hungarian the criticized heavily only EU the country’; ‘home in their thebenefits Hungarians ethnic lawwhich granted 2001status the around erupted that scandal the considering euphemistic citizen” averageHungarian majority the and with the question, Fricz too, for “shifting FIDESZ-MPP praises from minorities emphasis concern to Esztergom andback Budapest. to in mass an ecumenical to Museum, National the of out moved was mainland, a Christian into Hungary first turned who medieval law king, the crown of andthe had relevant the passed government The in parliament. crown Stephen’s of St. placement the covered broadcasting television of Hours celebrations: millennium the during public the to communicated ChristianLutheran, Orthodox –Catholic,historic Protestant churches drewthe subsides increased anddemographic situation underlined the preference of bourgeoisthe middle class.Also, Calvinist interwarperiod.Raisingthe benefits whichseemed family in of reasonable regard Hungary’s – stressed valuescloser according to the new image of bourgeois Hungary which were reminiscent of to the state. Impressively, these relationships were 155 154 153 which meant basically ignorance of oppositional opinions majority possession majoritarianitself,exercised a of FIDESZ government the a policy, once more emphasized party’sthe anti-Socialist attitude. Ingeneral, notin although RACZ,2003, p.753. FRICZ, 2002, p.549. RACZ,2003, pp.749. Looking atHungary’s foreign policy which since 1920usually includes minority 155 . 153 154 . In the domestic sphere, FIDESZ domestic sphere, the . In . This evaluation seems rather evaluation . This 52 CEU eTD Collection Controversy”, in Márton Szábo (ed.). Szábo Márton in Controversy”, (Budpest:B’rith B’nai Lodge 2004), pp.303; also PÁL, Gábor. “Hate Speech. The History of a Hungarian (Budapest:Hungarian Academy of Science 2006), p.18-21. János Dési,had been phenomena András absentpreviously which fromdenial legislation holocaust and speech’ as well‘hate for as pubic measures awareness.ounitive over Fordebates further heated Gerto led readingcommunity I like to referto See 156 and Party Hungarian Justice Life opposition of wrongly, from rightly FIDESZ-MPP ties andsupport or parties, accused the parliamentto anti-Semiticopened thefloor to stances Regularly,on federallevel,too. the MIÉP of the Theentrance voters. SZDSZ of fortress –a earlier mentioned is –likeIalready traditionalthe between division populistsintocosmopolitans mind. and The capital Budapest calls ultimately which respectively, anti-Semitism or philo- of other each accused The parties office, Medgyessy resigned. A newspaper revealed the possible engagement of and of PM the engagement possible the newspaperrevealed A resigned. office, Medgyessy in years only After two government. coalition of a MSZP-SZDSZ prime minister next centre-right –was marginal,but in the end the Socialist Péter Medgyessy became Hungary’s vs. social-liberal – camps political two the between difference The MDF. and SZDSZ In four2002, only it parties madeinto National Assembly: the FIDESZ-MPP,MSZP, party. risethe newcatch-all this in of their 1998aswellto respond adequately defeat to in in relapse democracy, return. Hungary’s economy slightly recovered during this governmentit term,experienced a elevated family as religiouswell as valueswhile supporting ethnocentric views. While theForum’sThus, populistnationalist FIDESZadopted anti-Socialist, strong ideology. to It the mid-90s discovered the vacuum left after the defeat of and disillusionment by the MDF. period. However, the formerly liberal Young Democrats looking for an attractive profile in outlined above, it embraced values that had been essential to the MDF in the transition FRICZ, p.553. The 2002 trial 2002, against György Lórántand HegedMetes The relationship to the Liberals deteriorated during FIDESZ-MPPgovernment. the deteriorated Liberals tothe The relationship At beginningthe newmillenniumthe of it to was up SZDSZ the and theMSZP to 21 the entered FIDESZ-MPP Ę , Tibor Szeszlér, László Varga (ed.). 156 On Politics. Rhetoric,Discourse and Concepts, . st century as the main centre-right party in Hungary. As Anti-Semitic Discourse Hungary in 2002-2003 Ħ s Jr. fors Jr. incitement the against eBook Papers, Working 53 , CEU eTD Collection 157 sorted out in concrete party profiles. Following, Iaddress interrelationthe of politics and art inherited this oppositionistlack of orientation. At least adecade passed until the camps were emerged parties a Ihave that differentopposition’, term which the deliberately avoided, argued, that argued, Halbwachs Maurice Already revolution. Hungarian of the interpretation its own elaborate could camp each passing, time the with Instead, discrepancies. ideological their out itlastbecame1990, however, thatduringworked 30years obvious the the hadnot ‘56ers for thesame ‘fought’ one tomeetcommonon necessary, After cause, because grounds. united preciselyin their 1980sit opposition. During the was still andeven possible were Whilein opposition they hadcollapsed. Kádárregime the after with challenges the neither nor ‘56ers dissidents the as the such didhavecould apolitical conceptthat meet up during the last20 and years. more Theinstability shifts and during the 1990srevealthat of Thirdthe Republic. mostthe ideological important Hungary and shifts trends as experienced since founding the reveals analysis this However, Revolution. Hungarian the of anniversary 50h the on chapter in thelast development political tothe will return I was re-elected. in Hungary minister Gyurcsany officeovertook the firstminister. Forthe in of time, 2004,aprime prime parliamentary MPsin Kádárnine the serviceAn investigative during secret other activities era. committee headed by Imre Mécs confirmed the claims. In 2002, Ferenc HALBWACHS, c.1992,p.194 discussions passionate of to giving rise arouses deepemotionspeople, ingroups that nature is event casewhen the of a is the especially This its characteristics. determine to difficult quite becomes itthat so be changed, will its features some of that chances the increases which witnesses if direct the presence is itprecisely Closely related to the strong ideological differences of the so-called ‘democratic Summing up, the previous two subchapters history Hungary’s presented Summing previous two up, the political 157 . 54 CEU eTD Collection twentieth century 158 II.3 Art in Contemporary Hungary Contemporary in II.3 Art visual visual […] precededby arts more half than the greatpoliticala decade turnabout of 1989” years of years of decade,possibilitiesthe younger artists.opened up forThus, the main problem of 1990s the Onlysuffered from inlack of infrastructure. and last institutional orientation the in generation younger rapidly has decreased, the art Hungarian incontemporary foreigners international merits abroad. However, since the previous state-funding system and interest of gained for havingalready recognized they regime.were the Moreover, themselves to committing fully not for retribution as style art ‘national’ authentic the as generation older visual arts. era of contemporary can also be The1980s, but asort considered investors. therefore, of of state golden Western same the nottime, non-conformist this generation enjoyed the support only toleratingthe of and gallery soon openingslong thathad broken stiffnessthe of official cultural Atpolicies. experienced an enormous multiplication of styles and trends with new workshops, groups in ‘Iparterv’ groundbreaking 1980s,Hungary the exhibition 1968.In exhibition first the of since the freedom greater experienced hadalready artists is that reason of regime. One Furthermore, personal as well as institutional havecontinuities survived the political change of ’56 was first taken to the streets with regard to monuments, and then in 2006,literally. Asof Iwillshow IIIandIV,the1956. inChapter fierceover fight ‘authentic’the memory of both of these foci facilitates analyzing current monuments for the Hungariansynthesis The Revolution1970s. the since in Hungary developments in stylistic interest special a with ANDRÁSI, Gábor. “The Eighties. ‘The Avant-Garde is Dead’”, in Dead’”, is Avant-Garde ‘The Eighties. “The Gábor. ANDRÁSI, II.3. 1Introduction Artdidstartanew not in 1990; on quite contrary,“Hungary’sthe revolution in the On contrary,the 1990s marked the are by elevating the non-conformistmiddle and . (Budapest: Corvina 1999), p.218. The HistoryofHungarian Art in the 158 55 . CEU eTD Collection 159 162 accessed 161 (Vienna and Dresden: Overseas Publishers Association 1999),pp.4-57. Öffentlichkeit.Ungarn Kunst in20. im Jahrhundert [The second public.Hungary Artin the century],20th in 160 May 22, 2007. Hungarian Art in thetwentieth century generations was the so-called Zugló Circle. Since 1963, artists gathered in Sándor Molnár’s in Sándor artists gathered 1963, Circle. Since so-called Zugló generations wasthe existed apartfrom that andwas tohave dogma official the subsequenton animpact Andrási states inconsistently, Gábor applied rather visual arts changethe of regime. after specificartists to commissions granting for and of reasons practices the background to and inbrief since 1990.This perseverance history outlook serves Hungarian art as changes address institutional the 1960s.Then,Iwill since late the approximately visual arts and prohibition. Miklós Szabó, historian and dissident himself, explains: assupport, whichspells for is tiltás”, toleration tûrés, “támogatás, his out reign remembered joinedregime,Aczél György Aczél.had crushing regime the the after of ’56the revolution; by well-known the compellingmost and cultural probably of Kádár- policy-maker the termsitForgács historian Éva art theprominent –as “counter-culture” presentthe Contemporary – DunaújvárosArt claims “Hungarian contemporary art is thatit is closed”, János Szoboszlai from the Institute of SZOBOSZLAI, János. “… and the background”, on ANDRÁSI, Gábor. “All at the same time: Art in the late fifties early and sixties”, in SZABÓ, Miklós. “Kádár’s Pied Piper”, in FORGÁCS,im Niemandsland“ Éva.„Kultur [Culture in noman’sland],Hans in Knoll(ed.).“Die zweite but which nobut posed either, threat wereallowed tobepublished. use, had which for direct no works regime meantthat the latter The "toleration". "functional" whichtwo types of was "support", permission: enjoyed bypolitically a relaxationThe meant censorship, "3 T's" between a distinction expressing of works created in a spirit of identification with the regime, and II.3. 2 Art in as‘counter-culture’ II.3. 2Artin Hungary http://www.hungarianquarterly.com/no147/p91.htm However, this policy was never explicitly introduced and particularly in respect to inrespect introduced and particularly wasneverexplicitly thisHowever, policy The visual Gábor Andrásiarts, was explains, governed bythe introduced 3T’s policy . (Budapest: Corvina 1999), p.145. The Hungarian Quarterly 159 . Consequently, in the following subchapter I will I subchapter following in the Consequently, . http://www.policy.hu/szoboszlai/back.htm . , Vol. XXXVIII, No. 147, Autumn 1997; 162 . The first important group 161 The History of accessed on accessed 160 – of 56 CEU eTD Collection Painting”, in Painting”, 164 163 165 artists – Miklós Erdély, László Méhes, János Major, András Baranyay, Tamás Szentjóby – Szentjóby Tamás Baranyay, András Major, János Méhes, László Erdély, –Miklós artists 1920s the of geometric andabstract 1960sreliedtrend the on byKassákin constructivism the pushed Malevitch andarttheories byKandinsky, and translated avant-garde personification Hungarian the of Mondrian. Kassák,legacy inLajos re-discovered the of in district Zugló,Budapest, apartment afancy Despite differences in message as Imre Bak emphasized, the the samethe new insubjectivity literature of their own tradition: Kassák and the European School This direction was complemented by liketrends and PopArt intheir minimalism geometric languageand pictorial consciousness international of awareness their showing neo-avant-garde Hungarian the of dynamics the Molnár,Ludmil Sándor István demonstrated LászlóNádler, and EndreTót Siskov Lakner, Imre Bak, Krisztian Frey, Tamás Hencze, György Jovánovics, Ilona Keserü, Gyula Konkoly, inexhibition, which arthistorianthe included Sinkovits Péter manyformer Zugló artists. financial freedom. its artists granted functioned which Kaderschmiede, as It expectations. fulfilled official founded newcomers promote hadbeen1966 onwards.in Thisinstitution 1958to that the careers, pursuingindividual dispersed art abstract andAmerican basedon European tradition work legacytheircontinuing Kassák’s they Molnár and the sculptor Tibor László Hortobagyi, Halmy, Miklós Endre Attalai, Gábor also Hencze, later Tamás CsikyDeim, – did not represent a uniform style, but in addition to ZWICKL, András. “Beyond the limits of Panel Painting: Surnaturalism, the Zugló Circle and Gesture FORGÁCS, 1999, p.46. FORGÁCS, 1999, p.48ff.;ZWICKL, 1999, p.166ff. One year later, ‘Iparterv II’ followed and included further examples of Hungarian furtherof examples followed andincluded II’ ‘Iparterv yearlater, One In 1968, Galeriethe in Müller hosted Stuttgart groundbreakingthe I’ ‘Iparterv 163 The History of Hungarian Art in the twentieth century 164 . The members of the Zugló Circle – besides Molnár and Bak, István Nádler, Pál . Although met trendthis resistance from authorities,the and soon the group 165 . Young Artists’ Studio . (Budapest: Corvina 1999), pp.162ff. embraced these artists from 57 CEU eTD Collection 167 166 the twentieth century Similarly,infolklore the 1970s, respondedtoofficial socialist realism photo- and was in roots the ideology.political return reflected arise field,to this as populism of and scientific the In tendencies. related its and abstraction of trends European modern the to wasareaction culture authentic Hungarian of contemplation The in the1930’s. Circle partly Kassák’s‘Munka’- to access weredenied his contemporaries of he some paintings, and motifsand abstract in surrealist their blended folklore working place.Becausethey Vajda’s the been had Szentendre Applied Arts. Academy tothe of accepted been had Birkás Jovánovics Bak, or to in who contrast together, came artists amateur in Szentendre too sculpture, andÁkos Birkás by and adopted ‘Youngthe Artists’ Studio’ butmet resonance great in Hungarian society under Socialism. This directions wasnot only pursued by Kocsis Imre of picture a accurate gave Méhes and Lakner of hyperrealism the foundations, its social garde avant- neo reputed internationally the over control regain to attempt an in down location the shut officials art, subversive years of Afterpresenting three Theatre. Kassák banned performances and experimental theatre groups like the István Kovács Studio orPéter Halász’ which the firstvisualfeatured poetry alsoorganized of Group’ aseries programs a mainstead in a former chapel ‘Chapel in György There, Balatonboglár. Creative Galántai’s non-figurative painters and in sculptors ‘Szürenonthe In 1970, someGroup’. of them found and surrealist united Csáji Attila members: ‘Iparterv’ solely of consist not did generation whocombined neo-avant-gardeinternational andthe traditions domestic However, trends. ANDRÁS, Gabor. “The Seventies. Defining Reality: Figurative Trends”, in Trends”, Figurative Reality: Defining Seventies. “The Gabor. ANDRÁS, ZWICKL, 1999, p.180. 166 However, the 1970s brought rise to a contrary riseIn the a contrary 1970sbroughtHowever, too.‘Lajos the trend, Vajda to Studio’ . Whileremained Art marginal Pop toHungarian interest of dueto artists lackthe of 167 . . (Budapest: Corvina 1999), pp.182ff. The HistoryHungarian of Art in 58 CEU eTD Collection 171 170 169 168 changes and worked with ‘new sensibility’ like their Western international Western Their likecolleagues. ‘new changes with sensibility’ their and worked radical –underwent Nádler István Hencze, Tamás Birkás, Ákos Bak, Imre – generation of older the became Some markers. the fragmentation andmaterial Stylistically aesthetically. as well as politically for Hungary, decade dynamic and athriving became soon but garde”, complains public could never seize upto impactthe of Hungarian first the she avant-garde, of littlethe and interest the lackof discourse the argues. However, himself,Forgács Kassák Lajos to comparison reservations some –offer Miklós leadershipskills Erdély, –with whose stayed and youngerthe generation found anewand teacher, theorist programmatic thinkerin expelled” were or voluntarily country the left succession in Méhes László and[…], then Tót membersKassák of Lakner, Halász Studio the and like “Szentjóby, Péter generation progressive onesof this Less conceptual tolerable and pictoral art. movedto on lattereven an earned the M exhibition at the which style, neo-geometrical in a working began Bak Imreand Maurer Dora Tamás Hencze; newin interest ethnography it was accompanied a with geometricism; also, wellas neoavant-garde as hyperrealism the withdrew into an alternative rather self-referential public sphere an self-referential into rather alternative withdrew these provocation, of instead However, Szirtes. and János Sugár János Rosk´, Gábor progressive artists such as András Böröcz, Áron Gábor, Zoltán Lábas, László László Révész, ANDRÁSI,1999, p.207f. FORGÁCS, 1999, pp.52ff. Ibid., p.207. Ibid., p.186. II.3. 3 The golden era ofthe1980s II.3. 3Thegolden The 1980s started with the seemingly pessimistic outlook of “deathof avant- the the outlook pessimistic with seemingly the The 1980s started In the tradition of Kassák, Ilona Keserü, Tibor Csiky, János Fajo; István Nádler, 170 . Andrási agrees to this perception of the new generation consisting of also of consisting new generation the of this perception to agrees . Andrási 168 . Ħ csarnok in csarnok Most of soon artists1977. these 171 . 169 . Those who Those . 59 CEU eTD Collection 172 Szoboszlai contradicts him in that he refers to the retrospective exhibition of Erdélyi’s oeuvre in the M 1998.in SZOBOSZLAI,the in “…andthebackground”, oeuvre of Erdélyi’s exhibition retrospective the to refers he that in him contradicts Szoboszlai nor legacyhis becomehas part of the conventional wisdom if the Hungarianintelligentsia.” However, ‘unguarded Money […]’, he had irritated the authorities. Unfortunately up until now,neither Erdély’s activity during 1956the revolution, when put he outboxesdamaged Budapest in action art storefronts with anotesaying:his Since public. general ofthe majority the to unknown totally remained and acknowledgement, official no had he that in typical was career his Meanwhile him. with contact in were or circle to his belonged Europe 175 174 173 art], (Munich: Matthes & Seitz c1999), pp.23-30. MalereiSkulptur Installation Videokunst 2007. Hungarian Pavilion at the Venice Biennale which two yearshad been still earlier whichtwo VeniceBiennale Hungarian at the Pavilion National followed in Gallery samethe year,Bak,Nádler1986. In designed andBirkas the extension M the of art contemporary the – Ernst Museum in the wereexhibited works institutions: Such garde, Erdélyi “remained totally unknown majorityto the generalthe of public” avant- neo the scene after art andthe artists of position isolated the basedon claims, Sugár any artist about eratoits father the of founding connected also significant but discourse. all differentgenrescovered notonly art Until in1986,‘Indigo’ death Erdély’s intellectual forum for Hungary’s a andprovided exercises of creative continued histeaching hewherehe foundedHungarian non-conformist Group’ ‘Indigo scene: 1978, the In art fragmentation marked Miklós decade.this maintained hisErdély strong influence on the Szirtes, György Sz János Támas Sóos, Féher, László Kazovszkij, El Kelemen, :Károly namely generation, Essen onlyexhibitedbutin inthe not in also Galerie Müller Stuttgart in Museum Folkwang the hadrecognition in perseveredappearance ‘Iparterv’; sincetheir were thus,theirthe works HOHNISCH, Dieter. “Rückblende“ [Retrospect], in Barbara Sietz (ed.). Sietz Barbara in [Retrospect], “Rückblende“ Dieter. HOHNISCH, SUGÁR, János. Ibid., p.219ff. “Schrödinger’s ANDRÁSI,1999, p.213ff. Cat in the Art World”, in , (London: University of Arts 2006), p.213: “Many of the leading personalities in Hungarian art either art Hungarian in personalities leading ofthe “Many p.213: 2006), ofArts University (London: , 172 Also,Eighties saw the star rising middleof the post-conceptual and post-modern The representatives of this ‘new sensibility’ were quickly incorporated by incorporated official ofquickly the The representatives werethis ‘new sensibility’ . Moreover, they had enjoyed scholarships and travel grants from abroad. Ħ Ę csarnok– already in already in Budapestcsarnok– 1984,the 1985andthen Gallery the nyei, Gábor Szörtsey, Gábor Záborszky [Contemporary Hungary.Art in Painting Sculpture InstallationVideo http://www.policy.hu/szoboszlai/back.htm East Art Map.ContemporaryEast and Eastern Art Zeitgenössische KunstausUngarn. 173 . Stylistic and material and . Stylistic accessed in May in accessed 174 175 . However, . Ħ csarnok 60 CEU eTD Collection 176 179 ‘post- neo avant gardist’the in trends. interest unusual decades’ the to exhibitions contributed Szentendre and Szombathely Vác, centre, art as Pécs of emergence the and Budapest of Outside 1979.” in opened Pécs, in gallery art new the as well as art, Important roles were played the during decade by PécsMuseum,the with considerable its traditionof modern Budapest Gallery, Óbuda the Gallery (until 1987) and the Lajos Street Exhibition House (from 1982on). ‘branches’, the Ernst Museum and the Dorottya Gallery (director: Katalin Néray); also at the two affiliates of the 177 categories. Ministerof fromCulture 1956 until1967, whichseparated artinto supported,tolerated prohibitedand (Budapest 1995),pp.13-16. Frank refers to officialthe three t-policy established by György Aczél, Deputy 178 pluralism and variety in the arts, as well as a continual quest for new values/ works of possible value”. 1979-1994 Christmas suffered was from policein harassment, founded ‘Inconnuthe Group’, 1978.Inthe 1982 manifesto, its members Péter Bokros, Tamás Molnár, Tibor Philippi, and of of survival” from Academythe and the official institutionsart intothe underground, had been“a question away paths creative on wandering generation, ‘Iparterv’ the For in society decisively: role installation single a just with institution, trading art official the Gallery, Dorottya entire the filled example Lugossy, TamásLugossyfor Trombitás, Körösényi, GézaSamu. Sassand Valéria Tamás for Mária of a matter conceptualization also became Space Szala. andRajk, Tibor László Attila architectural the of Bachmann,Gábor F.Kovács, entered designs postmodernism standards alwaysvalued independentfrom artistic quality times theand official at contrary to has institution this that out points foundation its since director its been has who Zsigmond, categories” and prohibited tolerated the to whobelonged artists andyoung-at-heart through its first exhibition ‘Trends 1970-80’ because itprovided grounds for “mostly young founded in1979,and of although already officialinfrastructure the part new sentout signals been had Gallery Imre Budapest Varga. The sculptor bytheconformist conceptualized FRANK, “Towards János. a New BudapestCorpus”, in Galéria (ed.): HONISCH, c1999, p.27. (ed.): Galéria Budapest in director-general”, the from message “A Attila. ZSIGMOND, ANDRÁSI, 1999, p.198ff. “From1984,exhibitions of significance couldbe theM seen at Installations, performance and object art were popular genres of were popular Also, this period. of genres art object and Installations, performance (Budapest“My 1995),p.8: colleagues I have,and outset, since the strivenforcomplete openness, 177 . 179 at first.About at theonly for still that group provocation opted and, thus, 178 . However, this newly gained freedom altered the position of art and its and art of position freedom the altered gained newly this . However, Budapest Galéria, 1979-1994 Budapest Galéria, Ħ csarnok its and 176 . Attila . 61 CEU eTD Collection and distribution, hardly reached beyond those who were already involved.” already were who those beyond reached hardly distribution, and production its for required conspiracy necessary to the due which activities, samizdat of case by the exemplified somehow like a philosophical question: cananything be valid if no one knows about its existence? […] This is hundred people […] could benefit from thepotentials and output of this intellectually booming period. It’s not cultural production censored, was that itself. media […] As censorship mainstream the prevented and public and controlled general the distribution to access only andlublicity was It onlypublic. few a general of the realm slightest hope of a practical result. There were no contacts with the so-called ‘first publicity’, whichwas the was plenty of time fortalks, meetings, discussions, making contacts, partying and of course in most cases not the 181 180 bigger, it was still more explicit in the sense that its demands are articulated and have notdo been its audience century.might the beginning Although appearance atthe not of need since its avant-garde marked the had which criticism social exercised The Samizdat in general.on society littledu tothe interest impact lost whileauthorities provocation ceased and support makingalivingfrom as state well foreign investments, reasonsas for imposenot existential difficulties longer. Beingaccessany tothemain granted institutions the works the andonly afewsmallexperts segmentof connoisseurs, society, and ‘understood’ received ininsulated was in ‘a Itwas socially art which isolated. public second sphere’ avant-garde neo the since mentioned, already as hand, one the On situation: this explain arguments and politicizing were productions still of subjectconfiscations and Twoconvincing arrests. enjoyed Whilethe visual creative underground. arts politicized and productiveautonomy, is sharply contrasted– or maybe even beaccount. to needs into taken of visual arts reception ambivalent due – to the repressionforms; however, to understandsceneart problemsroots in thecurrent that timethis the of Samizdat and different havetaken probably would change political art,the or samizdat sphere, whether the literal history inin Hungary’sart andwithout impact; the its dissident socio-political cultural the intendplay notevaluation of to 1980scertainly the does of significance decade the this down Magdolena Serf Magdolena SUGÁR, 2006, p.212: “Looking back, it was like an incubator or aresort: itwasn’t difficult to survive, ANDRÁSI,1999, there p.248. The gradual opening of The institutionsHungary’sgradual opening of to in contemporary artists Eighties the 181 . In addition to that, the new liberal attitude towards domestic visual artists did Ę]Ę declared illegality as their primary means of “art=politics” means of primary as their illegality declared 180 . This . 62 CEU eTD Collection 183 182 establishment of the Institute for Contemporary Art in Dunaújváros. Since the state lost its Hungary Keser in Ilona Pécs under Art of new School apart exhibition featuresof but currentthe generation innovate programs. in also Also 1990,the from the intoturned anagencyyoung for in artists 1990. ItsStudio Gallery not does houseonly capital. inContemporary Art Association Young 1989. The independence, Artists’ gained(FSKE) In 1997, theSciences decentralization Academy of of the aspresident Konrád resided György Berlin, where and Frankfurt Herder Awardin 1998, and exhibitions of Hungarian were hostedcontemporary inart Biennale, Gyärgy Jovánovics in was1995, Birkás exhibited in Vienna in1996,Bak received the furthered Venice generation HungarianPavilion Feher designedthe lasted: In1991,Lászlóat the ‘Iparterv’ Thesuccessof the ofArts. Academy of the Department Intermedia found newly by the inthe positions teaching Sugárreceived János Maurer or Jovánovics, Dóra like György artists unemployable Previously representatives. national ‘real’ the into artists conformist ceased, taboos control had scene.in State network in diversified. art institutional the 1980s, the Already the were broken and the re-evalution argues, signalledof the creative end of this golden era art since Andrási 301 byJovánovics, plot for Rakoskeresztur the design and competition-winning the 1945Lachaise) in Pére monument canonized the following (stylistically Nagy Imre of reburial the for Rajk the non- previous interpretation and knowledge as in The the visual by catafalque arts. Bachmann and HONISCH, c1999, p.30. ANDRÁSI,1999, p.346. II.3. 4 Institutional framework in the 1990s framework in II.3. 4Institutional Also in Budapest, euphoria was nurtured by nurtured for Museum Ludwig the opening the euphoriainAlso was of Budapest, There is consent among the art historians, that the change of regimes caused euphoria 183 . Ħ generated an additional creative centre in centre creative anadditional generated 182 . 63 CEU eTD Collection 189 188 187 186 Béke. of László directorship XLIII,No.166, Summer 2002; 184 185 Zolt Keres to participate in projects and competitions issued by the Ministry National by the for or Culture andissued Ministry in participate the competitions to projects agrees inadequate”,down is“The financialstate cut visual too. events on sponsorshipof support, presently art claimsterritories” SzoboszlaiEuropean lost their political sex appeal and the attention of the West has shifted towards new market international the andfrom isolated remains scene art Hungarian the Zsoltthat criticize Erdösi and Aknai Furthermore, Keres currentinstitutional the system andinternational producingcapable domestic stars?". of "Is question programmatic ranunderthe ICA-D atthe debate market, aheated a striving art have contributed to the centre’s re-evaluation of contemporary art contemporary of re-evaluation centre’s tothe have contributed Zwickl András or Péternak Néray, Miklós Katalin like Németh, Lajos art experts important most in currently some of the already 1986; its creative critical started activities and the Soros Center for Contemporary Art (now Center for Communication and , short 3C’s) the followingthe year, the opened Bártok 32 Gallery upon his return in 1991 activities he until within wasarrested together Konrád Switzerland1974 andexpelled to in artistic inhadleadingfigurewho numerous engaged St.Auby, generation older of another Várfok, Delceg and Eri Galleriesand In abroad. 1983, theLigetGallery opened, in Vienna-based 1989 the Knoll Gallery, to name a few, but here artists Hungarian in promoting importance gained galleries trade, art lasting the over monopoly examples followed SZOBOSZLAI, „… in the background“, on background“, the in „… SZOBOSZLAI, SUGÁR,2006, p.211. AKNAI and Erdösi, 2002, SZOBOLOSZLAI,1999, p.305. Vol. Quarterly, Hungarian The in Market”, the and Art “Contemporary Erdösi. Anikó and Katalin AKNAI, SUGÁR, 2006,p.213f. In 1996, washe rewarded with asolo exhibition inthe M 189 Nevertheless, institutions thismushrooming while new of conveys impression of the Ħ on Liszt Férenc Tér on May 26 . Most galleries are non-profit enterprises, andmake to aliving younger artists have 188 . The former financial security of Western investors vanished just like the new the like just vanished investors Western of security financial former The . http://www.hungarianquarterly.com/no166/17.html 187 http://www.hungarianquarterly.com/no166/17.html . Sugár explains, that after the fall of the Iron Curtain “Eastern th , 2007. http://www.policy.hu/szoboszlai/back.htm Ħ , the current chairman of the FSKE 186 . . 185 Ħ ; conversation with csarnok under the . Furthermore, . 184 . Tamás 64 CEU eTD Collection 191 190 http://www.hungarianquarterly.com/no166/17.html market nationally and internationally foryoung artist. waveof which galleries – thanks to their innovative concepts –appear morepromising andmight open the reanimation of the dockyards of London, Lisbon or Hamburg” or Lisbon London, of dockyards of the reanimation of of Bencsik, MEOgallery“aCentral the equivalentEuropean cultural curator the unknown the public.When informationto besides that leaked through Fabényi Barnabas remained when applicants the out, broke Thescandal of director. position the over decides entity; however, financially t receiveslegal Itis an independent a is topic of debate. and regularly stars, therefore, into artists its budget from Hungarian thein turning role Ministry essential an plays still exhibitions, of temporary for Culture venue official have emerged investors engage notyetscene, private Institute’ incultural country’s the While institutions somelike foreign within Hungary Helvetia’ the‘Pro ‘Goethethe or Cultural budget Fondwhich state Heritage rather arbitrarily, the disperse claims. Szaboszlai previously ratherconservative Fabényi, policy who hadbeen appointed duringunder the Although in from visual of thesignalsBudapest. appointmentarts ashift away the the currently position uncertain highlights scandal arbitrarily. The Petrányi appointed Bozóki a roundtable Square, anddemonstration Heroes on butthen CultureMinister of András Szilágyi and the ICA-D’s director Zsolt Petrányi competed over this position. FSKEinitiated M of the as director five-year-term Fabenyi’s Júlia In 2005, scandal. ‘Pétranyi-Fabényi’ the during among artists the dissatisfaction and outrage developmentthe independent of visualan scene whichhasledart tothe eruption of Moreover, theirregular and intransparentdecisions of federalthe institutions have prevented See Foundingonaccessed charterits May 2007. Ibid.; also SZOBOLOSZLAI,1999, . Moreover, the authors claim that the MEO belongs to a new Ħ csarnok was over. The M was over. csarnok 192 AKNAI and Erdösi, AKNAIand 2002, 192 , the architect Gábor architect , the Ħ csarnok, as the csarnok, 191 which also which 190 65 . CEU eTD Collection 193 194 7, 2005. was followed byavacuum in made afew newartists which only appearance their between thebe drawn can continuity presence of lines Therefore, regimes. of change the preceding developments and the 1980s, even until the 1970s. The goldensubsequent chapter. era of the Eightiesinwill aspects attention re-appear the tothose inthat todraw exclusively rudimentary order have been excluded. Also, the explanations of stylistic developments have remained summary, many trends brief very in this and Certainly, significant artists. contemporary significant most the of some presents personalitiesalso – for example the Béla Balázs Second,arts. introduces it not only mostthe important institutions in artisticthe scenebut Studio – inof 1956 ways.a two First of itall,outlines thestylistic tradition of contemporary visual Keres chairmain FSKE to according this choice happy” about were “rather andartists’ legislation, Orbán in their basic forms can be distinguished throughout Hungarian behistory:in official basic forms can art throughout Besides theirdistinguished major trends since three Kassák.Consequently, Lajos has theavant-garde characterized that conformist artists preserved non- These art. of Hungarian representatives leading asthe havebeen canonized artists the tradition of art its abroad, inreception marginal homeremained its Still, most country. progressive the as a ‘counter-culture’ anditsEighties ambivalentthe olderrole insociety. While applause generation received to the official dogma in art the of peculiar role the to asrepercussions canbeperceived in visual arts disinterest current the However, artist. non-conformist of the reimbursement is retrospective the reason FÖLDES, András. “Nem hozta apapírformát Bozóki”, on See ANDRÁSI Zwickl, and 1999, pp.255ff. II.3. 5Conclusions As it was shown, infrastructural As it based was infrastructural largely trendsaredeficiencies and shown, stylistic on This chapter serves the analysis of recent monuments for the Hungarian Revolution Hungarian the for monuments recent of analysis the serves chapter This Ħ , the new director and have contested remained new his , the director approach http://index.hu/kultur/pol/mucs0707/ 193 . publ. on July on publ. 194 . One . 66 CEU eTD Collection cultures in the era of postcommunism], (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Publ.2004), p. 49-55. der Zukunft. Osteuropäische Kulturen imZeitalter des Postkommunismus 196 Europe 1944“ Katherinein Verdery Ivoand (ed.),Banac Soul” the “Historical and Layers of Heritage”:National Conceptualizations of Hungarian Folkthe Culture, 1880- movement in1930.the Ashort history of andHungarianpopulism folklore: HOFER, “The Hungarian Támas. century; aftersome modifications and witha changing political connotationit was embraced by the populist 195 culture combined with socialist realism, Weibel coins the term “Retroavantgarde” theterm Weibel coins realism, socialist with combined culture in folk interest the this trend, For inspiration. of creative a resort became culture ‘ancient’ situation correctly; at the same social time,Western rolemodels did notsuffice either.contemporary Hence,the only their own reflect not would it since avant-garde own their to withdraw not could they hand one the On follows: as Europe Eastern in Central avangardist like political neoavant-garde the trend in folkauthentic Hungarian returned butnever culture became 1970s, the avibrating or between and progressivism, dogma official Asathird road tolerance andacceptance. relative gained avant-garde neo and avant-garde the Eventually, art. abstract from derived geometricism which was 1970s, this developed. progressive the numerous In directions dogma of realism, here persistent the education, institutional the dominated that style attractive to art critiques to attractive mentioned. –and seldom therefore less remains folklore Hungarian of tradition unofficial likewise the today until Henceforth, WEIBEL, Peter. “Der Kalte Krieg und die Kunst“ [The Cold War and Art], in GROS, Boris (ed The discovery of authentic Hungarian folklore in a politicized context first emerged at the turn of the 20 (New Haven: Yale Center forinternational and area studies, Slavica Publ.1995), pp. 65-81. National character andNationalIdeology inInterwar Eastern 195 . Peter Weibel sums up the dilemma of neo- [Back from the Future. East European East Future. the from [Back .). Zurück aus 196 67 th . CEU eTD Collection Suhrkamp Publ.c1997), orig. 1991, pp.7-16. Vom Roten Stern zur Stephanskrone 198 Vol.90, No.3, July 2000, pp.305-309. Attila Toth and Anett Arvay. “Hungary after 1989: Inscribing a New Past on Place” in Place” on aNewPast Inscribing 1989: after “Hungary Arvay. Anett and Toth Attila 197 Transition in Art III.1 Public monuments forthe Hungarian Revolution of1956. Competing political interpretations inBudapest’s III. Monument discourse and the Hungarian case: 1867 itson monarchicfoundation,is not only nostalgia for the country’s prosperity following the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy by legal approval. Dalos provides more examples and reveals a strong nostalgia for the insteadjustification council of support; districtand prosecution, even the change the sealed andit utca, “Münnich Férenc with utca” replaced Nádor met understanding, their action little considerate way; when György Krassó and the MOP illegally took down the street sign ina conducted names: wasoften Re-naming of management street peculiar bemoaned the names.street Already in one1991, György of Dalos, mostthe prominentdissident writers, Assmann had explained, such a construction of cultural memory selectively installs past the installs memory selectively cultural of aconstruction such hadexplained, Assmann As War.World Second before the in place were already explains, names,Dalos street of the Most Monarchy. of Dual the part theHungarian andre-established claimed regency Hungary ‘rewritten’ history symbolic andfollowed overwriting by was re-investmenta persistent of cityscapethe with activity, iconoclastic by accompanied was regime of Thechange visual representations”. DALOS, György. “Der große Kampf um die Straßenschilder” [The big fight over street signs], in See also the section“Commemoration, National Identity, and Political Iconoclasm” in FOOTE, Kenneth, II.1.1 General Introduction II.1.1 General Ausgleich This manifestation of the cultural memory that bases contemporary bases memory again This manifestation Hungary of cultural the that contemporary “1956 revolution has and“1956 been throughadazzling revolution celebrated commemorated array of ; moreover, it is reminiscent of the Interwar period, when Admiral Horthy 197 198 [Hungary.From Red StartoStephen’s Crown],(Frankfurt amMain: . Obvious cases of symbolic overwriting are the changes of . Geographical Review Ungarn. 68 , CEU eTD Collection 202 201 Tr@ansit online Spring 2002; also PALONEN, Emilia. “Creating Communities: The Post-Communist City-Text of Budapest”, in 200 199 therefore, they are “particularly susceptible to politicized forms of of forms remembering” politicized to susceptible they are “particularly therefore, memory collective the of part and memory objectify to means are Memorials meaning. change of regimes. As I already proved their recalling of the revolution varies in content and from many exile the these, returned after to shows.Inaddition of 1980sopposition the history short the as alive, still are participants Many memory: cultural and communicative between threshold the at lies which memory, social Hungarian of element new inherently monuments with number of a striking Greatest its 19 Hungarian capital remembers andstreets squares the to men’:in Notonly respect great the andof adds the‘cult footsteps University specialized Budapest’sfollows cityscape. politics of the Essex on of She Dalos’ provides forwith that the meaning significance present draft the current political situation as it is reflected is in as itdebate. reflected situation this political current draft the 50 the for raised Monument Central the about controversy most recent addressthe will Finally, indicate. I campsas ideological subchapters the respective tothe preferences aesthetic the Iwill relate initiators. their and of 1956 revolution moral authority as much as possible. survivors try shape shapeor to its through their manifestation and eye-witness’ accounts memorythe of 1956 is raisedan to essential of element Hungary’s newnational history, the ASSMANN, 2006, p.7. FOOTEet al. 2000, pp.301-334. PALONEN,Emilia. “Postcommunist Histories in Budapest: The Cult of Great Men”, University of Essex, ASSMANN,c1999, p.296. But the scope of “inscribing a new past on place” new on apast “inscribing of scope But the Consequently, I will present a selection of recent monuments for the Hungarian for monuments recent of a selection present will I Consequently, 2006). th century greatness, but also honors the country’s 200 . 201 199 wenteven further: 1956isan th anniversary anniversary following,and, . Emilia Palonen from the from Palonen Emilia . 202 . While . 69 CEU eTD Collection 203 Budapest Galéria (ed.): 205 “procedures for the establishment of public outdoorworks of arts”. 204 szobrai Budapesten. 1945-85 http://www.budapestgaleria.hu Similarcontent inHungarian Budapest Galéria. “Egy kis törtenelem” [A short History], Summit its budget from municipality.the Inits “Shorthistory”, the BG underlines its function as in the shaping of the cityscape. This decentralization is reflected in numbers: individuals, civicinstitutions, organizations,can enterprises etc. now legitimately participate decentralized,meaning it the differentwas district to transferred private Moreover, councils. change,and during competency the city’s was the cartography public the over art lastmonument1987, the up by was official Municipal Council set the (“Fövarosi Tanács”); capital’s premises. As such, the monitoring, surveillance of the construction as well as maintenance of all monuments on the isit the for artisticfreedom.today, Still responsible and greater allowed tolerable artists earlier,already duringoutpointed thestateinfrastructureit opened toless 1980s, the addition to the heroes of Socialism and Hungarian national heroes in Socialist disguise administration according to officialthe ideology: peasants, workers, children in and animals Europe expressing Europe Hungarian Iconophilia. monuments in1,100 pieces Budapest addedupto whichisin high asignificantly number plaques statues, January and styles. In 2005, accompaniedof byadiversification describes arthistorian it andas Géza cultural advisor, This democratization Boros, See the catalogue of the February 12- March 8 BOROS, “Budapest’s Géza. Sculptures andCommemorative PublicPlaques in Spaces1985-1998”, in at presentation Sister”, Hungarian The “Budapest. Attila. ZSIGMOND, 87 by foundationsNGO-s, and enterprises, and 9by individuals.private by 27by institutions, public Budapest Municipality,107 bydistrict governments, placed new Of arts worksof areasafter on 1990,20werefinancedpublic 249 the February 17-18, 2005, White Papers, ©2005 by The Sister City Program of the City of New York, p.5. II.1.2 Iconophilia and Iconoclasm II.1.2 Iconophilia During the Kádár era, the cityscape was monitored and designed by and central the monitored designed was cityscape the During theKádárera, The Budapest Galéria Budapest Galéria, 1979-1994 , (Budapest 1986) . The former also contains the BG’sbylaws and the as well as a description of the is an example of institutional continuity; however, as I have I as however, continuity; institutional of example an is Budapest Galéria th 1985 exhibitionof the Budapest Galéria. (Budapest 1995), transl. Chris Sullivan, pp.7-15. is an independent institution that receives that institution independent an is Sister CityProgram Public Art 204 Negyven év köztéri 205 203 , was . In 70 CEU eTD Collection http://www.szoborpark.hu/index.php?ContentId=11&Lang=en 209 208 207 206 new shelter for Marx, Engels, Béla Kun or the participants of the Spanish War of Spanish the participants the Béla Kunor for Engels, Marx, new shelter was [Szoborpark] opened in June 1993, and – mostly – attracting foreign providestourists a physically and from symbolically their original sites and political meanings” statues itetal.,separated “for argueFoote intentional”, and necessary was “The distance realist socialistmonuments in a park situated on the capital’s periphery in the XXII. district. the Budapest Galéria. The winning concept by EleAkos BudapestGaléria. the architect winning The the concept by announced Assembly a supervised competition, General Alap]Kulturalis Budapest the support the of ’56, Memorial Cultural the Committee National the Found [NKA- Nemzeti end was one on behalf of the works’ This revision”fueled debate about “revenge the historical in which proposal artefact. or the “historical a of value and some maintain still documentary they because be demolished not should they nevertheless value” lackfreedom but and sovereignty, of remain of in assymbols to not oppression, capital the were monuments hand on since one these the park, in art a separate public realist-socialist collect to all iconoclasm: literary László suggested On historian July 5, 1989the Szörényi finein art contemporary places public to display few havestarted organizations figurativerecently, only style, a artist tradition of statues in Hungary.which were partof “erathe 1867-1918”,national of highlight monuments, 19 the While less than by isismonuments. argued, dominated 1%figurativemillennium The in celebrations 1896, of public art in Budapest it art, Public monuments. city’s tothe awareness raise public to and attempts artistic quality is of a non- professional institution which reflects on Hungary’s long tradition of statues, maintains their Basic informationis provided Statue by Park’sthe homepage, accessed January 2007 FOOTE, et al, 2000, p.308. BOROS, 1998,p.8. ZSIGMOND, 2005, pp.1-4 or Budapest Galéria. “Egy kis törtenelem”, Complementing the return of iconophilia, Budapest also exercised a peculiar form of form a peculiar exercised also Budapest iconophilia, of return the Complementing 206 . http://www.budapestgaleria.hu Ę d suggested collecting d suggested 207 208 . In . In 1991, with . Statue Park th 209 century . This . 71 CEU eTD Collection 212 munkásmozgalom története Committee of the Hungarian Socialist Workers’ Party (Budapest: Corvina Press); orig Revolutionary Workers Movement inHungary. 1944-1962 213 Bertelsmann Publ. 2006), pp.191-213. Revolution undihreFolgen 211 210 districts on its homepage listing artist, investorand title are documented by the Budapest Galéria whichpublishes its data according to Martir Emlékm of of 1956” was installed in Republic Square; however,it hasbeen left ever untouched In 1991, afoundation for anew stone memorial reconciliatory for “martyrs the andvictims base remains on Republic Square,which “disfigures squarethe like anenormous wound” Kalló) of heroes the (again people’s the by Only statues power wasinstalled. Viktor the forin whenamural Interestingly monument wasreinforced long1983, then this executed. by deception in ‘traitors’, giving the werevisuallyof to for people:the pardoned latter The of Hungarian history is for the time being postponed.rather part assessmentthis of indicates the that city’s periphery Kádár tothe of era the sculptures movingnor explained. constructive,destructive Instead, asLatour the monuments and fully is neither that removal the of uncertainty the callsto attention procedure iconoclasmic revolution inrevolution December 1956 fortress as lastof the councils the having workers’ After the crushed Mechanism’. Economic ‘New the introduce to about was regime Kádár the when consolidation of a time in place unveilingbe drowning. the sky hands or falling outto stretched took to – seems Its 1956 in October forces and fascist, Horthyist,workers hadbeenbetrayedthat revisionist by deceived and the the wherethevictimshas counter-revolution: commemorated of itthe Square since1960 LENDVAI, Paul. „Die Zweite Revolution“ [The second Revolution], in Revolution], second [The Revolution“ Zweite „Die Paul. LENDVAI, BOROS, 1998,p.10. Dezs NEMES, to: torefer I like of 1956 interpretation Communist official the For Budapest Galéria. Also, Viktor Kallo’s Martyr Statue was moved to the Ħ ; bronze 6,6m, Köztársaság tér; p.68.likewise all monuments, statues and memorial plaques 211 Megyven Év. Szobrai Köztéri Budapesten.1945-1985 . The huge bronze statue depicts bronze. Thehuge his who statue ‘the nameless’ worker –with http://www.budapestgaleria.hu (Budapest: Kossuth Kiadó 1972). [The Hungarian Uprising of A revolution1956. and itsaftermath], (Munich: C. 212 , this monument offered a compromise between the state and , publ. by the Party History Institute of the Central 210 ; itstand inused to Republic . (Budapest: 1985). ViktorKalló: Der Ungarn-Aufstand 1956. Eine . AMagyar forradalmis. Ę (ed.). History of the 213 72 . CEU eTD Collection Vérmez interesting history of streetthis and its symbolic topography I like to referto: MURÁNYI, Gábor. “History of leaders were executed and later honored with a literary monument ‘Vérmez temporarily in Vérmez 215 Commemorationof the Communist Dictatorships in Europe in the 21 „Erinnerungsorte andie kommunistischen Diktaturen imEuropa des 20.Jahrhunderts“ [Places of forthe Hungarian Revolution Budapest],1956 in Documentary ProjectA Kaminsky, supervisedby Dr. Aufarbeitung. Emlékm 214 218 MPs signed the petition Fidesz- Many relating it areferendum. to their criticism initiate to ofsignatures Hungary’scollected ’56 dependenceDeported on Group oil the importsand MVSZ from Russia.Hungarians of accessedApril 16, 2007; 217 216 away or kept” away or down,taken be dilemma shouldsculptures to the pulled of solution reflective […] whether sheet, “providing with foundartist statue Tamás bycoveringtheliberty a a huge unique way Szentjóby white at one at departure, the anniversary onFreedom 1992, thefirsttroops’ In star of SovietSquare. the andfive-pointed the with crowned themonument Soviet the as well as Hill Gellert on statue sameliberty time a concretePark. Twomonuments within the capital’s premises are subject of recurring discussion: The and abstract, blasphemous andcouncils memorials were removed from from cemeteries” were removed memorials since referendum in April 2007, which aimed atits removal agreement betweenit by isitis fenced in.However, underseverepolice protected surveillance and a bilateral the Hungarian in fall during2006. Therefore, the of theas riots vandalism, avictim witnessed regularly of and Russian state which also put an end to another Noteworthy, MSZP the movedout ofitsheadquarters Republicat inMarch Square 2007 settledand Inscriptionof this very small stone: „1956/ Mártírjainak/ És/ Áldozatainak/ Felálítandó/ Megbékélés FOOTE et al., 2000, p.309. LOGAN, Michael. “Abkommen mitRussland. KeinReferendum fürSowjetdenkmal“, in BOROS, 1998,p.10. Ę 214 Ħ III.1.3 IconoclashSurvivors . In time and Space” and time . In / Jelélül“, [Foundationstone of the future monument forthe martyrs and victims of 1956]; Stiftung The about Socialistdebate cease publicartdidnot with openingof the Statue the Cemeteries are another peculiar case, since “no matter how politically offensive, no how politically matter offensive, since “no case, peculiar areanother Cemeteries . Noteworthy, none of today’s ’56 monuments commemorates workers’ the commemorates none ’56monuments . Noteworthy, of today’s 215 Gedenkortezur Erinnerung der ungarischen Revolution 1956 in Budapest . 216 Ę . The monument for the “Soviet Heroes of the glorious Liberation” is utca [Field Of Blood Street] which is named after the Jacobite conspiracy of 1795. Its http://www.budapester.hu/?do=article&id=2460 http://hvg.hu/english/20070321_vermezo_eng.aspx 218 . Kerepesi Cemetery in Fume street is street in Fume Cemetery . Kerepesi 217 st . century], (Berlin2006), p.57. . In April 2007, the World Association publ onMarch 21, 2007. Ę ’ by Sándor Petöfi. For an [Places of of memory Budapester , No. 16, 73 CEU eTD Collection III.2 Post-Communist Monuments for ‘56 for Monuments III.2 Post-Communist 221 220 Cemetery”DENT; in Bob. Budapest 1956. Locations of Drama, (Európa: Budapest 2006), pp.300-307. 219 scandalously removed from their graves. constructive nor destructive nor constructive neither is it maintenance; and removal destruction, between compromise a iconoclash: original meaning Heroes” to the is hiddenbehinddisperse smallplantedtreestrying to attention and coverthe andHonor Gratitude “Eternal inscription the coffin. amassive Nowadays, concrete around exhumed21 and from plot honored with simple square gravestone arranged in a circle were of martyrs counterrevolution the The official Cemetery: Kerepesi in was installed violated recently: On May2 On recently: violated was staged reburial 6,1956 buriedandLászo Rajkon grantof andwherethe October are Kállai Éva ‘empty’ section next famous to the plot 301,where –aswas soon discoveredmore – than design 300,the calledfor competition anopen to plot Bizottsága) Igázságtétel (Történelmi Justice for Historical The Committee cemetery. Rákoskeresztúr newpublic the backto transferred were Szilágyi József and Gimes, Miklós Maléter, Pál Losonczy, Nagy, Géza power, it still houses a huge Communist pantheon, where also György Lukács,Mez it also György Imre where pantheon, power, housesahugeCommuniststill whoinclude Besidesdied these those foreign during memorials counterrevolution. the for a to War wasextended World Second in the Hungary who‘liberated’ heroes Soviet for the Thesection ‘heroes’: former heroes – and national mainaccumulating Budapest’s cemetery LATOUR, 2002,p.14. STIFTUNG AUFARBEITUNG, 2006,p.112. “Kerepesi 41: chapter in cemetery ofthis complexity the of overview informative and precise a offers Dent III.2.1 Plot 301 III.2.1 Plot Following the ceremony in Heroes Square on June 16, 1989, the bodies of bodies the Juneof Imre inFollowing 16,1989, Square on the Heroes ceremony 219 . In . In 1963, József Schall’s‘Memorial the Victims to of Counter-revolution the 220 . This very and practical affordable fits solution Latour’s concept into of 221 . Yet, the long-preserved sanctity of cemeteries has been has cemeteries of sanctity thelong-preserved . Yet, nd , 2007, the bones of bones , 2007,the JánosKádár hiswifewere of and 74 Ę CEU eTD Collection Art], (München: Matthes &Seitz 1999), p.103. MalereiSkulptur Installation Videokunst 223 the memory of the nameless mob from which we came, with which we united and to which we willdivide], (Berlin: Jovis return.”2000),p.204. Boros Publ. quotes letter Andor’s as: “A huge natural rock be to shall there dernach dem Ende Ost-West-Konfrontation CompensationHungary’s on public places], inAkademie Künste.der 222 István Eörsi execution Andor’s István rescued before Eörsi writer the which Andor, István revolutionary the from letter a through revolution the to monument which consist of an open grave, a chapel the threefold analyzes and ’56 monuments, on specialist Boros, Géza names and dates. a only natural rock. The latter is related whose meaning isnot readily does available.not It include anyinscriptions explanations, or time banned artists,designed ahighly complex, neoavant-gardistmemorial, constructivist long- ofand protagonists 300 bodiesinterred. wereJovánovics, one ‘Iparterv’ the György granite hexagonal1,956cm ispillar sunk.The invitation competition a paved requested only and turn around walk back.Straight ahead, an sheencounters ‘open ina grave’ which visitor can funeral Egyptian The chambers. ancient the symbolisminit, of to alluding huge of millionin years,40tons.A is which situestimated rock carved weighs rectangular those that made up the Itstreets symbolizes in Budapest the purgatory arises.istower visitorin walk like The invited tothrough construction, chapel the apassway. the 1950s. rehabilitationA small revolutionaries. the to Thengiven honor belated the recalls which the shroud, with covered visitor of the be isto revolution; seems which stoppedsarcophagus a placed Jovánovics construction the of top On bynecropolis: a three large stones tothe gravestones of revolutionaries the sunken leads the past resemblingon a curved pathwhich bird’s eye view facilitates accessing this complex composition. Meanwhile, the visitor walks a acathedral’s Certainly, he plancupola. explains ground the that Furthermore, reflects death” and life between invisible, and visible between fight this is It darkness. and light between fight metaphysical “the representing relief minimal of style unique his applied FÖLDENYI, László. „György Jovánovics“, in Barbara Sietz (ed.). Sietz Barbara in Jovánovics“, „György László. FÖLDENYI, BOROS, Géza. “Gloria Victis. Wiedergutmachung auf Ungarns öffentlichenPlätzen“ [Gloria Victis. [Contemporary Hungary.Art in PaintingSculpture InstallationVideo [Monuments and cultural memory after the end of the east-west of the end the after memory cultural and [Monuments 222 . László Földenyi writes thatJoánovics Földenyi writes . László Denkmäler und kulturelles Gedächtnis Zeitgenössische Kunst ausUngarn. 223 75 . CEU eTD Collection Andrassy ut on June 2nd, 2007. 2nd, June on ut Andrassy 225 224 to an end he gave in to Erzsebet Nagy’s request to attach her father’s grave. Therefore, one attach father’s Therefore, hergrave. Nagy’s to an in request Erzsebetend to hegave to afigurativefavored but Jovánovicscomingnot totouch himself insisted plotthat sculpture. instead, monument301; Imre hadopposedtheneoand,avant-garde plot daughter Nagy’s bury famous fatherherin Erzsebetto Nagy adjacent the had decided learntthat Jovánovics only being which course of the are slowly construction, However, during occupied. andAndrás B.Heged revolutionariesother in 2005following AnnaKéthly sheafter had passedawayin Vienna its nowKopácsi members,reserve for Sándor graves the amongst wherefore was buried surrounded that the “threeyears offighting andbuilding”. TheTIBhad askedhim to fights personal and political the into insight provides Jovánovics Moreover, times. primeval of traces animal fossile ithad preserved because his attention caught immediately where it For example, he explains that he found monument. the a timeless he created applied symbols and means the all through Instead, monument non-political adeliberately design to achieved – symbols historicizing or Christian traditional, by avoiding – Jovánovics emphasizes that Boros space. Thus, city the to back monument the connect additionally necropolis the of back the in stones basalt the cemetery, new the of corner far very in the is outside monument the but city, change of in regimes stored municipaland Since placedepots. the revolution took in the Antall. József with alongside wreaths laid Mitterand inaugurationthe for in the anniversary Kohl 1992,Boris Jelzin,Helmut and François where during beThe opengrave isits centre could staged. space ceremonies official where The following explanations are based ona conversation withGyörgy Jovánovics in the artist’s studio on BOROS, 2000,p.204. Talking to the artistin persona Therefore, Jovánovics used the basalt cobblestones that were removed after the Ħ s among others. Initially, plot 300contained the 72additional graves 225 , his inspiration and concept becomes even clearer: concept and, his inspiration in situ stone in a quarry in southern Hungary, insouthern in aquarry stone 224 76 . CEU eTD Collection criminals like Ferenc Szálasi, the fascist Arrow Cross leader, have been buried there. buried been have leader, Cross Arrow fascist the Szálasi, Ferenc like criminals the plots 301 andof especially glorification 298 the is morallythat said also indefensible,conversation our since in not only Jovánovics political victims ofbe reconstructed. the even regimes,cannot yetor but also researched 227 226 Inconnu Group Inconnu wassimultaneouslythat Group set upon plot 301. withconfronted libeldirect in and aggression originated that monument opposing the of the alsocriticism but experienced apoliticalDuring struggle. time the of construction, hewas revolution’s memory. Theartist resigning laughs,since he isneither Jewish nor Communist. visualizing ofitbeing the accusations aJewish,notworthy of Communist work art the of have been buried in plot 301 and Uncle János Szabófrom Széna tér as well as László Iván Kovács from the Corvin Alley 7Ħ in a large, white stonemore victims than 300 other buried301. Their inplotnames – if uncovered –areinscribed plate on the side the to ofwas du respect since martyrs revolutionary ‘famous’ the glorify hence, the and, elevate plot. Among others,into István the ground Angyal and smallerof the than the traditional graves. He insists that he did not wish to decision not to forget anybody who sacrificed his life ‚for everybody’“ Koselleckthis supports is position him which for a „consequence of a basic democratic with higher symbolic meaning surrounding the that of statues andtribal monarchic kings. claims, is a symbol of democracy which can also befound in Heroes Square which invests it “Prime 1956”and Jovánovics unknown Minister asymbolic the for one victims. The latter, nowadays finds an extension on plot301, for which the artist created a gravestone for Nagy, Fora more detailed list and life stories: DENT, 2006, pp.327. Dent notes that not all biographies have been KOSELLECK, 1994, p.15. zoltó Group, József Dudás leading street fighter who stormed the Szabad Nép building II.2.2 The populist tradition II.2.2 The populist Besides these questions of representative art, Jovánovics faceonly Besidesrepresentative these didnot public art, of questions Furthermore, against built common were sunk Jovánovics practice gravestones that In the summerwas 1993, Jovánovicssprayed of monument with David stars 227 . 226 . 77 CEU eTD Collection 229 228 ally with Hitler Germany. The political implications immediately caused tensions with the with tensions caused immediately implications political The Germany. Hitler with ally on the political agenda, this isit construction oldthat putthe which question Hungarianthe minority of in back Romania had been the main reasonbe it symbol a Magyar more,primordial century.alludes to though, Even after the 1920 Trianoninnumbers in kopjáfa funeral appeared Protestant of the significant 18 decoration the Treaty to emptiedthe and internationalistpresumably Communist idea explainsemblems. Boros thatre-activating folk Hungarian culture offered analternative to 1940s and 50s,the“National Pantheon”,a wooden with through floralgate folk reliefs and the of victims political the for 298 plot adjacent the enters visitor the Moreover, symbol. Hungarian mythic a be to said is which one, original the around spiral in a assembled competition moreand once preferred wayof the provocation. Today, kopjafák the are Bokros, TamásMagdolenaBokros, and Molnár, Philippi, Serf Tibor Péter an entire has turnedgarden kopjáfak, intotraditional of Transylvanian woods. grave June16,1989, kopjafá outasasingle Whaton started hundred explains. Jovánovics artists, 1980s together. confrontation, they since tostage used dissidentthe anniversary ceremonies during the forgrounds criticism.Additionally,he expresses over disillusionment Inconnu’s the he fact means deliberatelyoffered then traditional that MDF.The governing omitted recalls his that didwork notreceive support –neitherfinanciallymorally nor – from the moreover, artist the government by explicitlythe discouraged not was side,which civic Rákoskeresztúr Cemetery. ButJovánovics monumentdid notonlymeet from opposition in monuments contrasting the than better populist-nationalist and urbanites cosmopolitan Nothing probably quick illustrates the return of Interwarpolarizationthe between FOOTE et al., 2000, p.313. BOROS, 1999,p.210. The Inconnu Group “undemocratically surpassed” the competition of more than one Ę]Ę 228 . Foote et al. explain that the refused to participate refused inthe to 229 . Problematic in Problematic . 78 th CEU eTD Collection succeeding generations will remember theglorious because dies heroes of1956.”never Stiftung Aufarbeitung, country, home 2006, pp.13.his for life his sacrifices Who patriotism. exemplary heroes’ of the memory obelisk andwas is16,5mhigh inaugurated onOctober 23, 1996.Theinscriptionsays: eternal “[…]Tothe Nemethand György Lassanthe artist Karoly Ócsai built this monument onthe Tabánhill inBudapest. The Emlékm 231 monuments, 230 this folklorist cult and finely picks out its artificial cultandthisfinely out picks folklorist character of origin the researched Kovács detail, In explains. Kovács Nora government, neighboring Prime Gyula Minister he Gömbös; theAcademy attended from Fine Arts 1963,of 1957 to Interestingly, was bornin1926 thenephew radicalright-wingas Gömbös of 1932-36 the in plot 298, which Committee martyrsengaged Gracious of 1999,the In already counter-revolution. the had from both sides, butin were1958 some exhumedand in reburied forSchall’s pantheon the László 21 containedaddressedfirst 21 of plot plotKerepesi the Cemetery. casualties at Notably, Gömbös set up the historical tradition. byits great legitimized monument apeoplein nation beyond agreatits Carpathian the andpicture reaching Basin borders, titled mission cultural The kopjáfa collectiveand the Turul self-thematizing”. envision Hungary’s “12 means: “History such kindisaform of of andservecontemporary highly selective Gloriousgreatness.as But Assmann insists, such investmentinto cultural the memory are always Days”. past Hungary’s to kopjáfak the allude and past future, endlessly the into monument his expanded Jovánovics While claims. Jovánovics justkitsch”, is noart, “There message. century in first 8 inthisregion Árpad,brought the whosettled theMagyars legendary the king for Revolution the 1956. Theof myth of claims thatthis Turul the eagle-like birdonce Carpathian is Basin only superseded by crowning an obelisk with Turul the as a monument memory presents theHungarian that nation greatas the dominating Magyars of the Commissioned by the Gracious Foundation(Kegyeleti Alapítvány) and the FoundationMemorial ’56 (’56-os Nora. KOVACS, Ħ Alapítvány), by supported former and emigrants streetthe fighters TiborHornyák,József Vajda Mostly, kopjáfa have not left their original territory, the cemetery: I have already 231 (Budapest: Collegium Budapest Press 1997), MA Thesis Department of Political Science. . Henceforth, the plot adjacent to Jovánovics conveys a completely different acompletely Jovánovics conveys adjacentto plot the Henceforth, . Kopjafas :theanthropological deconstruction ofHungarian graveposts as national 230 . This creation of a cultural of . This creation 79 th CEU eTD Collection 234 233 (Budapest: Enciklopédia Kiádo 1999), p.206. 232 produce, whereforeproduce, they were apopular symbol for opposition in explains, 1989/ 90,Boros claim for eternity legitimate collective’s the becomes it Ultimately, world. this to kingdom heavenly in the belief Christian the transport that invoked, iconologically and semantically death, of instance final itis KoselleckGömbös’explains monuments tothecross. the that whichstandsopposite martyrdom is the depictedand on of sanctified victimsof the already that defeat, the meaningreflects of tied symbolic aheroes the the hewatchesover with 1956. It while robe hands dominate thiswooden kopjáfáksection. which crucifix alludingtothe are Christ’s year,death ‘1956’. insertion butalsoa installed the the In Committee Gracious 2006, for 300 –reservednot ‘56ers.Thus,many thedo onlyfeature birth gravestones the of and Since 1989, several smaller memorials were installed privately. is Thesection – like plot here. on All Day gatherSaints candle vigilances for usedto relatives Kádár the era, during Novemberand 4,1956, the malicious by attack Bolsheviks!”the “Commemorating claims: 4 November for stone the right, the to front the In alive!” is longmemory nation as your asthe dreams and protect Wewill heroes! “Rest, declaring: him while ground angel over figure an watches ison abronze relief:A the kneeling features hole middle inthe with with symbolic flag the one topped a metal a middle, separate the and November 4 etc. Debrecen andSzentendre in Budapest, had officialcommissions 1960s, Gömbös received in Budapest studied I’ generation of ‘Iparterv the asmost in period same the KOSELLECK, 1994, p.14. pp.54. 2006, Aufarbeitung, Stiftung FITZ, Péter (chief ed.). (chief Péter FITZ, Still, the kopjáfák pose a very practical While easyto poseavery are cheapand Still, they kopjáfák practical problem: the The twelve grave stones, one standing for the revolutionary days from October 23 October from days revolutionary the for standing one stones, grave twelve The th , are placed on brick stones in the national colors red, white and green. In green. and white red, colors national in the stones brick on placed are Kortárs Magyar M 234 . Ħ vészetiLexikon [Contemporary Hungarian Artists Lexikon], 233 Dent explains that explains Dent 232 . Since the 80 CEU eTD Collection 239 238 Galéria which publishes its data according to districts on its homepage 237 236 235 Tér” of Széna executed and victims tothe Honor A symbols. you andpatriotism reads:“Through plaque setaneternal courage model. role Councils in 1919. Once more, hejoined the Communist Partyin 1945 of Republic theHungarian Army of in theRed a commissar been healso had fact that Horthy’s army in the in he hadbeenasergeant since Interwar counterrevolution, a reactionary of theconstruction supported period. However,death hisin Due adaptations: heto participation ’56,his to wassentenced case 1957; Dent remarks, theinformsburied in 301. Dent ideological reader,thathehadplot the several undergone prosecutors ignored inL onone facades hangs the of the which Szábo Uncle for plaque memorial a designed Gömbös László Additionally, in Buda. carvingthe illegally.‘1956’ – also SzénaSquarewasone of ofstreet majorthe fighting sites with up anatural set rock Political Prisoners) of Hungarian (Association POFOSZ later, years andL Square the 40 the for comeback aslight with inthe 1990s, hasdecreased Kopjáfák numberof the monuments, impressive more in interests and capacities financial the as well as force political patriotism and cultural folk heritage its on agenda where the MDFhad wonthe 1990 elections it because was primarily Forum the which put inkopjáfák districts, the arthistorian appeared addition usually to that, claimsthose that the wood sooner or later decays. Thus, they were often later replaced by new monuments. In Stiftung Aufarbeitung, 2006, p.18 2006, Aufarbeitung, Stiftung DENT, 2006, pp.77. All monuments, statues and memorial plaques listing artist, investorand title are documented by the Budapest KOVÁCS, 1997,p.31. BOROS, 1999,p.211. One example of the early appearance of kopjáfák in the cityscape is the corner of Szená of is corner the in cityscape the kopjáfák of appearance early of the One example In 1991, the MDF added a square stone with the same inscription, ‘1956’, accumulating ‘1956’, same inscription, with the square stone added a MDF In 1991, the th anniversary anniversary in 1996 Ę vöház street, where seven of these grave poles were put in illegally. were Two grave putplace poles wheresevenof vöházthese street, 236 . Ę vöház street 237 . Szábo, as I have already mentioned, is mentioned, already asIhave . Szábo, 239 235 . In the late 1990s, plans of new of . Inthelate 1990s,a plans . With the decline of the MDF as a http://www.budapestgaleria.hu 238 . 81 CEU eTD Collection also poses also poses artisticmonuments accumulationof problems:and The overburdensstyles this overwriting erasing meaning, which aims at previous from effacinghistory,events earlier but symbolic a severecaseof only represent not Squaredoes Széna period. Interwar during the courtyard commemorated the Communist victims imprisoned in prisonthe thatwas run here Rév at the very same place used regularto reinforcement of itsstand significance for the ’56 memory.Moreover, according toIstván an office building wherepillar a small monument right in the Association Freedom of Hungarian Fighters installedmemorial yet another plaque on the next to Arvai’s monument. However, this small space does not experience a 240 between their works similarities Pátzay from Academy justifyFine Arts whichat the mightof iconological the 1956-61, the ties. Interestingly, the artist, Ferenc Arvai,born in 1935, was like Gömbös a student of Pál lifethan flag figure pole. Thebare-footed fly, seems to losing his and only coat by held back Like a crucifix Arvai’s figure stretches out his arms, face to the sky, and holds on to the larger imitatedpaving down on ground street to the asmallsegmentof coveredwith a shroud unveiled pillarFerencváros in here; a limestone frontit,of afigure lies crushed andface inmemorial frontof Square.In Catholicthe on 1993, themunicipality Church Bakats of physical figures. of restraining extreme Another caseof obviousthis symbolism presents the isthrough filled with revolution of the often date‘1956’. Thecrushing the the depicted figure is trappeddown to ahuge steel flag with symbolicthe hole in middlethe whichis again coalition MSzP andSzDSz (Emlékhely 56). In 2001, with municipality of support the districtthe which was then run by a citizens of the Quickly, would disappear. monument the whether concerns raised shopping centre the district organized themselves in an association called Memorial Place 56 242 241 For electoral result of the district see district ofthe result electoral For FITZ, 1999, p.85. p.90. 2006, Aufarbeitung, Stiftung 240 , the POFOSZ and the MDF a fourth monument was installed. A installed. was monument fourth a MDF the and POFOSZ , the http://www.vokscentrum.hu/m01/o0002.htm 242 . For For . 50 the th anniversary, the Australian anniversary, the Independent . 241 82 . CEU eTD Collection brief explanations: 245 2007. 244 243 remove illegal ones to is“impossible” it also but Revolution, Hungarian the to monument new a for initiative surroundstaboo that all Notonlyhas’56 monuments: the Galéria itself never rejected asingle its questionable claimisnot removed.from Andrea Csik BudapestGalériathe approves the of out point and Lendvai verified asDent not issue and contested a is still victims of number the as well as fire opened which ÀVH the was it that claim this police. However, of ÁVH duetothekillermen, blow of afiringsecret squad” ground the the onto fell people dead “several hundredsof it the commemorates that informs The inscription ‘Bloody anniversary the Thursday’.of 25,1991, monumentby onOctober Makovecz Imre Square. Typically for the timewish to leave their mark on such authenticof places. transition,such theartistic POFOSZ considerations onceitssmall eachone preventing identity.in aswitnessedsquare of However, Rákoskeresztúr, more illegallyare rarely taken set intoup this account by the political investors who all Hungarian art trend of folk-populist and representative isthe a of trees another Heimitates wood. through derives inspiration from Hungary’s folk culture andhis buildings’ interiors alludewalks to Technical in University he directly1959, experienced the Hisrevolution. architectural style indesigned Expo HungarianPavilion the in at the from 1935and Born Sevilla. graduating the spheresacredness. into of the past moves the Memory out: has pointed Nora Pierre Like 1981, Makovecz started lecturing at his Alma Mater, the Technical University or the or TechnicalUniversity the his AlmaMater, lecturing at Makovecz started 1981, The artist maintains his own homepage where his most important works are presented. Moreover, he gives he Moreover, presented. are works important most his where homepage own his maintains artist The Conversation withAndrea Csik in the department of Budapest Galéria in Kossuth alley onFebruary 22 DENT, 2006, pp.98; LENDVAI, 2006, pp.89. Martyrdom and sacrifice are also the main themes of the symbolic grave on Kossuth In addition that, Makovecz to was One officially accepted: yearin earlier 1990, he 245 http://www.makovecz.hu/ . After two decades working for design studios and the Pilis Forestry, in Forestry, andthePilis fordecades working design studios . After two 244 . Dedications to martyrs are literally untouchable on moral grounds. . 243 . Nevertheless, the grave and grave the Nevertheless, . 83 nd , CEU eTD Collection 246 come notfrom did roof firing the building of that the the indicate bullets on one of the Ministry’s of Agriculture arcs across the street. Little black tiles symbolizing the topography the Kossuth of Square carefully, readtheimplications to of memorial the plaque earnsits attention messageswithout being contextualized in any haveread way. Visitors to it inBudapest, place mostpublic the representative of SquareinfrontKossuth parliament, of the coat emblem the ofsupports it since arms representation national of function a topped conveys which gravestone with St. Stephen’s revolutionthe in 1956.Aflag pole flying the’56 symbolic flag wasplaced behindthe crown on Makovecz’ memorial. and which been haddown from the torn star, knowingly buildings public during and places Situated on Soviet symbols flag. Onthe viewerdetects sickle like the revolutionary pictorial ground, the the carrying jubilantly a and chest bare with aman shows It relief: abronze featured Gömbös. Similar to the ‘12 glorious days’ which he will raise three years later, the gravestone by László a gravestone with grave symbolic Makovecz’s reinforced POFOSZ the later, I will address in a following subchapter. in foreign Housewhich narrative the Terror effaces oppression the victim of uninterrupted of into which a turns Hungary periodization same The his earsindespair. his head and covering destroyed from 1944 to1995”:Behind steel bars, in cell aconcrete a malefigure sits bowing still were lives whose yet die, not did who those all of memory the “In monument a he raised Academy Appplied In of Dózsa 1996, on György Arts. with Square, together LászlóPéterfy witnesses and succeeding generations both try witnesses andsucceeding invest both thewith meanings past servingtheir generations to since coincident eye- a delicate itposes here memory; of collective manifestations the are The memorial plaque by plaque memorial The The 40 which by MáriaLugossyreturn theofficialmonumentI will In 1996,asareaction to to III.2. 3 Reconciliation versus Revenge III.2. 3Reconciliation th anniversary anniversary revolution the or in afrenzyushered of monuments. Anniversaries 246 . 84 CEU eTD Collection 248 tér”. “Vertátunk Tamás Somogyi, Tamás Szabó, ZoltánSzentirmai, Tamás Varga and Tamás Vigh. Budapest Galéria Fonds Box 247 and Enik ismonument’s purpose tobring historical the personality close tothepeople” is “bridgethe in designed such awaythatthebypassing peopleThe could walkacross. supposes theinner dilemma Nagy faced during the revolution. explains Additionally, Boros monument last between located Freedom Soviet on and which the Square parliament, the is Square looks towardsparliament. symbolically Vertátunk the railingandholds to on notresemble minister prime – it the figure does style realist water which tank. Thedespite – a stands József Fintaof onabridge spanning by that aImrewinning statue concept Nagy Statue curatory’ andinvited artists known for theirexpertise in sculptures and monuments in well-known actors cultural and political Budapest’s sphere –shefounded ‘Imre the Nagy Sarlós, János Schiffer, Rudolf Ungváry, János Vészi, as well as Attila Zsigmond – all of them AndrásB.AndrásFaragó, Heged commemoration father. her of with Together ÁrpádPresident Göncz and Demján, Sándor for a popularity, enjoyingGöncz, unsurprisingly second term. great was re-elected busydevastating defeatand restructuring, reforming their Árpád andre-considering profiles. their from to recover yet were parties centre-right conservative, assembly. The national itselfand with dressed provideda Socialist-liberal thirds in asafe profile, two majority the party, tomerely ??? %. A coalition with the SZDSZ, which had sorted out theirfragmentation inlandslide the governing first the1994degrading victory theMDF, democratically elected a year:had celebrated MSZP The of situation that political the Briefly, Irecall own cause. BOROS, 2000,p.131. Paulikovics, Iván Melocco, Miklós Tamás, Körösényi Gál, András Borbás, Tibor were artists invited The The ’56 Memorial The ’56 alsoinvited Gáti, MáriaCommittee Memorial Gábor Berhidi, Lugossy, Mária the designed era, oftheKádár sculptor official the of son Imre Varga, the Tamás Varga, Erzsebet Nagy, as Jovánovics recalls, was still not satisfied with the insufficient Ę Sz Ę ll Ę ssy to designssy to a central monument on Kossuth Square which would serveas Ħ s, Károly Karsai, Sándor Kopácsi, György Kopácsi,Litván, András György Karsai, Sándor s, Károly 248 . 247 85 . CEU eTD Collection und Erstickung.”] 251 withoutpage numbers). Age 250 (catalogue without page numbers). catalogue 249 pilgrimage” of place and for asanctuary space[…] sacred ecclectic 301.for Together plot with Pál Deim, she hadthen baroque- “aconceptualized sumptuous competition in TIB’s the place hadmade second Mária who Lugossy, to price give first the and SZDSZ MP Imre Mécs. Again, none of Árpádthestate ceremonies. was of Göncz background patronage under the Thecompetition to artists were newcomers. The jury decided to suffocation” forces,and “elemental “toalludes their erosion up. It wasset to carvedfragmented, top polarity the violenceof andlove, and memory suffering hope, life and denial, and death” beyond Hungary. In her works, her personal herstyle aswell as founded ownsymbolic language, herfame which inand “Duality is a leitmotif”,in first thesings 1980swearingappeared, Lugossy neoavant-garde the of out had developed because “the works symbolizetrained sinceWhen goldsmith,humankind’sevolution. themes, they arerecurring are charged by born materials favourite the bronze, figures 1950 the or of glass emergingFaces of out and Kovács states. fed “traditional expectation”, butheld It sky back by to the material. burstthe to bent dramatically with a barechest, bronze amalefigure of voluptuous the familiar: Out reinforced since the flame hasneverbeen off turned 1996 intoitsince an turning Eternal flag. 23 toNovember 4 Square. Originally, the flame which is placed on the top, was supposed to be lit Kossuth of side from other the on memorial – Gömbös Makovecz the of thesymbolism Octoebrcounters BOROS, 2000, p.203. [“Der fragmenthafte Quader verweist auf elementare Energien sowie auf deren Erosion deren auf sowie Energien elementare auf verweist Quader fragmenthafte [“Der p.203. 2000, BOROS, LECHACZYNSKI, Serge.„Foreword“ in Márianna Mayer (ed.): KOVÁCS, Péter. “The attraction of the Public Space”, in Márianna Mayer (ed.): Mayer Márianna in Space”, Public of the attraction “The Péter. KOVÁCS, . October5 –November 7, 2005,(Budapest: M In meter1996, Lugossy`sfour tall black polished granite with square stone the Ice Age 251 . October5 –November 7, 2005,(Budapest: M . On the side, a Kossuth coat of arms – without the Crown – is encarved which th of every year. However, the symbolic claim of eternity of the granite is Ħ csarnock NKA, Dr. and JúliaFabényi( (catalogue 2005), Ħ csarnock NKA, Dr. and JúliaFabényi( 2005), Lugossy Mária 249 . The proposal appears proposal . The Lugossy Mária . Exhibitioncatalogue . Exhibition . 250 . 86 Ice CEU eTD Collection 253 252 orIlonaleader Szabó. LászlóIvánKovács streetfighters executed like ’56the façade. ‘legends’ Theycommemorate Film newPalace’s Corvin on the plaques with Every messages. year,plastered differentinstall organizations and available the explicit who needs to walk the lane, bases between and its meaning interaction memorial visitor work Jovánovics the on the look and the details andWhile isit of revolution. the an place since authentic maincommemoration their steadof reflect upon them, the Corvin biblicalhave of image Goliath. organizations and David the These chosen Allyas Corvin Ally is foughtevokes improvisedpartially Sovietthe warfare.from their with the Pest who It tanks boy young the Srac”, “Pesti the of symbol the prefer these Instead, organizations. right-wing in location capital.central the in square representative Budapest important most of the theconditions suite therefore, and less monumental itwas because justified monument was choiceLugossy’s of the competition, of the stage initial already at the nothave he do develop Although voiced his space to theirfull impact. enough reservation monuments different the meaning, with is overcharged square the that complains Jovánovics of ItisKossuth. Rakoczi heroes. between statues and national the situated pantheon of about the age and social background of the fighters, as Dent shows in of brief as Dentshows overview of fighters, age andsocial background the the about however, There have revolution; in debates beennever-ending the hewasreleased 1963. years13 after imprisonment Jáncsi,sentenced to János, or Ally. was atthe of group Pongrátz fighters wasamongandhadjoined of street youngest picture Varga János.Thelatter the the Alapítvány) commissioned Lájos Gy BOROS; 2000,p.207. BOROS,Géza. The location on Kossuth Square appears most important: ’56was mostintoThe location Kossuthimportant: Squareappears elevated on the For the anniversary celebration in 1996,the anniversary celebration For the Nevertheless, Lugossy as well as Jovánovics’ monuments met fierce opposition from the Emlékm Ħ ’56-nak , (Budapest :1956-os Intézet,1997), p.145. 252 . The main reason, still, was the lack of a monument in a monument a of lack the was still, reason, main The . Ę rfi to design the ‘Pesti Srác’ which imitates a famous Association of the Boy from Pest the Boyfrom of Association (Pesti Srác (Pesti 253 87 , CEU eTD Collection 256 Rainer’s 2002 two-volume biography in Hungarian. biography 1896-1958],(Paderborn: Schöningh Verlag 2006). This German edition isanabbreviated version of politische Biographie1896-1958 255 254 literature Hungarian Revolutionof1956 potential ‘national as accommodate to is ImreNagy difficult in particular: sculpture Várga’s Imre Nagy but hero’, as Janos M. adult. of an thedeath than greater is of always a child sacrifice the makes clear, Rainer,Boros more, even rebels; young the of theout martyrs made intervention second the currentEventually, directormatch of theup to andgood evil fight.in Theimprovised an unjust Molotov cocktails of ‘56ers the thecould not tanksbetween fight fundamental the Goliath, against David of fight biblical the to refers It andlad: weaponry of the Soviet Army; yet they managed to resist. of of variousthe actors fragmentation the reflects grasp will people the the Nagy to of members inwhich tried cabinet leaders onthe continuousAccounts workers’, military, sessions with and different student achieves diversitythe torepresent and in of intentions actors fall thaterupted the 1956. of Srác, Pesti northe Nagy ‘hero’, neither that out be pointed needs to it However, monument. avant-gardist a post with as well as hero their with cityscape the conquered Socialist the approval “popular with Thus, electoral the uprising”. re-naming1956a Imrewhen Pozsgay of intention primary the been had revolution the on based Communism a reform of heritage prime minister of process sincethe in1989. ever rehabilitation Nevertheless, claiming the havein revolutionary Moscow challengedthe period ‘heroism’ the of during Interwar the martyr of the ’56, he is ‘merely’ a reform Communist. Dubious files about Nagy’s activity LENDVAI, 2006, pp.78; RAINER,2006, pp.130. RAINER, János M.. János RAINER, DENT; 2006, pp.201. Consequently, Gy Consequently, 254 . Why are these factors so important? Boros explains the symbolism of the Pesti the of symbolism the explains Boros important? so factors these are Why . 256 Imre Nagy. Ę . rfi’s lad balances not only the abstract granite monument by Lugossy, by monument granite abstract the only not balances lad rfi’s [Imre Nagy. From Party Soldier to martyrof the Hungarian uprising. A political Vom Parteisoldaten zum Märtyrer des ungarischen Volksaufstandes.Eine , in his, detailed biography out points 255 . Although heis a Institute for the Institute for 88 CEU eTD Collection that rose against Soviet oppression, and evoke the injustice of the battle: young, brave boys brave young, battle: the of injustice the evoke and oppression, Soviet against rose that They youth the inBudapest. depict theirfame events the gained coverage of to world thanks 259 via accessible 2005; theatre’s façade. A critical orbituary was published by PARTOS, Gabriel in 258 257 of Year’Award:the fighters. street Soviet soldiers, Dent criticizes18. Moreover, when whileinto usuallyburstout tears Pongrátz publicly recalling the killing the romanticizingmoustache, wasaged 24in 1956 whilethe averageageof Corvinistakan the estimated was effect ofthe the 'Bajusz', as known Pongrátz Pestitanks: fight to kids these sending of Srácrightfulness the symbol and emphasis this questions debates that to calls attention Dent andtheirsacrifice. comrades his of youth the emphasized he which in television, on accounts eye-witness provide to invited heregularly hadbeen transition, the Since Kovács. from László fighters Iván Corvin maintained donation. the revolution, heobtainedthe of with leadership private During ‘museum’ for revolution the in small Hungarian the Southern town of Kiskunmajsa which he Upon Gergelyhis he in arrival aquite Budapest,established Pongrátz. questionable private polarization of versusof polarization evil good by justified is nameof the freedom cause nation the and inthe for greater of life the TIME Magazine. New York. Monday, Jan. 7, 1957; “Freedom's Choice”, © 2006 Time Inc. In 2005, Pongrátz’ DENT, 2006, pp.201. coffin was placed in front of the Corvin Film Palace and a memorial plaque put on the Several photographers like Erich Lessing, Jean-Pierre Pedrazzini or George Sadovy George or Pedrazzini Jean-Pierre Erich Lessing, like Several photographers Typically, the imagery Typically, imagery the boysthe from of Pest survived inthe Westand among theexiled One of the fiercest opponents of left-wing politics, was the post-transition returnee Fighter. Freedom thetanks: Hungarian his with Soviet dauntless himself during contest in the streets of Budapest; history would know him by the name he had chosen for 23 ontheeveningof Oct. he hadworn that anddetermined, relentless, desperate intense, face, the by him know would History nameless. not was he but names, hefaceless; hadmany henot faces,but was The Man Yearhadmany the of 259 TIME Magazine TIME http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050528/ai_n14645431/pg_1 honoured the Hungarian Freedom honoured Freedom the Hungarian theFighter with 1956‘Man 258 . The Independent (London), May 28, 257 : Taking : 89 CEU eTD Collection another plaque financed by Corvinthe Alley companions (Corvin közi bajtársak). track indicatesCommittee for’56 (’56-os KegyeletiBizottság). The amorphous surface imitates the imprints of chain a tank a cross. 262 It was installed261 das politische Heildeson ganzen Volkes verbürgen hilft“. Transl. my own. the wall now 260 opposite to the Pesti Srác. In 1994, the boysthe from narrative reinforcing the Pest; thus, right-wing Theopening the of associations. artist added for compensated officially been never has which suffering, fightersstreet former of the by theirmanifestations these that out points Boros ’56 monuments: illegal to regards memory functions as a symbolic reimbursementthe political salvation of the entire nation” for theirwarrants it as long as itself, in legitimation a sacrificealready “is Koselleck, Reinhart says individual”, and sacrifice of a child voluntary sincethe ofmartyrs master image the isFighters Freedom nowadays, the as symbol much greater than theagainst tanks brutally freedom for struggle the crushing independence. and By using the youth sacrifice of an adult. “The violent death of an ‘56er organizations for hasregularly likeworked Gulácsy-Horváth Gömbös, Just belongingof together. these in flag.revolutionary impression standsright giving front flagthe pole The‘Pesti the Srác’ of flag the which of againflies the 1956ers hugefor post afla once buildapedestal Horváth’s ZsoltGulácsy-in amonumenttoo. inaugurated 1996, movie administration theatre’s cause.The greater the lives for home and freedom, whogave their memory their elders of party’, the Socialists, symbolically demandas compensation butalso challenges thelegitimacy of ‘successor the such. Moreover,only not does Pest from boy the monuments, located itcentrally two beholdsraises government the younger generations to preserve the Already in 1990, Gulácsy-Horvath designedhad a simple bronze plaque in the ofname Graciousthe BOROS, 2000,p.207. er solange Rechtfertigung, eine bereits liegt Einzelnen jedes Tod gewaltsamen „Im p.14 2004, KOSELLECK; The policy of the Corvin Film Palace resembles the one of the Budapest Galéria with In February 2007, the Terror House In February Terror opened2007, the atemporary commemorating exhibition II.2.4 The ‘new’ National Heritage II.2.4 The ‘new’ National 262 . 260 . 261 . In a year, when the left-wing 90 CEU eTD Collection 267 to Hungarian Interwar reference lacks revisionism catalogue the of the Equally Trianonpeople.” Treaty Hungarian as wellof the as the spirit democratic the crushing attemptson fromembarked and 1945-48. government puppet- a installed Nazis The plenipotentiary. German the Veesenmayer, ofEdmund hands the in power rested Real victory’. ‘final of interests the in resources human and material country’s the over control absolute authorities”, the exhibitioncatalogue informs the visitor: “Hitler’s Germany occupied Hungary orderin to secure legislation inEurope after World War Iin1920 is ignored andcollaborationwas only conducted by “Hungarian Heritage 2003), transl. Ann Major, p.7. While the fact that Hungary was the first country to ratify anti-Semitic isFascism” of “House the amonument claims that soil for four decades” over Hungary’s lost sovereignty was on March 19, 1944.Occupying forcesits werestationed on fora long itself established duration. which rule, bySoviet wasfollowed occupation withstarts departure the of troops Sovietthe Juneon “Thebut 19,1991:Nazi short, disastrous re- only narrative national the by Germany Nazi endedoccupation the House with Terror the under regency Horthy’s background to the Arrow Cross’ rise to power; it fails to contextualize Interwar Hungary 266 Budapest] in 265 264 263 museuminin anew opened 2004 Pávautca Holocaust is marginalized ÁVH took over. István Rév as well as Palonen criticize that the presentation of the fascist rule police,renamed renamed ÁVO, secret Political Communist 1945the after since 1937, and 60. út in Andrássy building in this victimized been have who those, for memorial itexperiencedictatorship;(and fascist) functions theprevious Communistasa second, tourist attraction.campaign. First,However, election it FIDESZ of then itgoverning the asapart criticized largely Museum of was this haswas become established an essential part to educateof Budapest’s the cultural younger life andgeneration a great who did not RÉV, 2005,p.293. SCMIDT, Mária(ed.): SCHNEIDER; Chaim. Richard “DasHolocaust-Museum vonBudapest“ [The Holocaust Museum of PALONEN, 2002, p.6. RÉV, István. “Underground“ Retroactivein Justice,(Stanford: Stanford University Press 2005), pp.240-303. In drawing parallels to Rome’sIn parallelsRév drawing Revolution, Fascist toof the 1932 Exhibition István The neo-renaissance building by Adolf Feszty by Adolf Feszty CrossThe neo-renaissance buildinghadbeen the Arrow occupied Die Zeit 263 , Nr. 24, June 3 . Moreover, Panonen explains that the exhibition does not discuss the 264 Terror House. út60 Andrássy ; public. Public criticism in Hungary only ; criticismand when inHungary abroad Public public. ceased 266 . rd , 2004; accessed via http://www.zeit.de/2004/24/Ungarn-Kasten?page=all , (Budapest: NKA, Ministry of National Cultural 267 265 . One reason is the reduction of the . Hungarian history . Hungarian history in as presented 91 CEU eTD Collection the “dramatic narrative” or reaction and counter-action between suppression, revolution and revolution between reaction suppression, and or “dramatic narrative” counter-action the February February 24, 2002 leaving the country.The sequence concludes museum’sof with shots the opening on Soviet Hungary troops and visithis confederates; John the of II to and last the Paul Nagy Imre of reburial the as well as Romania, in villages Hungarian of demolishing the 270 May 31st, 2007. 269 268 massthe of demonstrations B against the late1980s,protests the are highlighted in secondthe tolast room: Itshows video screenings of latter of the characteristics respects.The innumerous arequestionable itperception presents manage”.donation they “somehow money, affordslotthanks support; exhibition of to a up-to-date the however, decreasing state since Socialistthe powerreturned government to in House suffers Terror 2004, the from resents, Unfortunately, Máthé it“although is in different”. Yad Vashem Memorial Jerusalem, famous the on isbased Tears’ of ‘Hall The is it amemorial. as museum a isasmuch House target audiencethe of museum Máthé, the is Terror theyounger to generation.According remarkably, visitor; the intimidate effects light and music dramatic with underlines witnesses canwalkvisitor through movie, andthe which a as astatue building the conceptualize to wanted Kovács that explains Áron Máthé, curators, One the of movie “Mephisto”. ?date? István Szabó’s of the setdesigner designed byAttila F.Kovács, itMoreover, its derives from its power emotions: play Famously,on thebuilding was and reconciliation sober evaluation prevent and would exclude perspectives, different againstbased specific of polarization past the discourse good on the of evil,would which a reproduces House same vein:TheTerror in as the argues continuity. Palonen are presented historical discourse from 1989-91 asa 1944 to time of suppression byforeign which powers, SCHMIDT,exhibition catalogue 2003, p.67. The following information PALONEN, 2002, p.7. is taken from a conversation with Áron Máthé in the Terror House Museum on How does the commemoration of 1956 fit in this concept? Máthé explains that it does concept?suits Máthéexplains in How fit commemoration the that this 1956 of The accuracy of the exhibition as well as the historical narrative and the national self- national andthe narrative historical the as well exhibition as The accuracy the of 270 . 269 Ę s-Nagymaros dam and . Video screenings of eye- screenings of . Video 268 92 . CEU eTD Collection interestingly, the ’56 Institute, research and documentary centre of the Hungarian Revolution, Hungarian the of centre documentary and research Institute, ’56 the interestingly, project; history a neworal it haslaunched far,but so centre a documentary as functioned of chair. the are members FIDESZ, for members MPs of and both Várhegyi, andAttila Szájer József critique: respective disperse the to although tries Máthé undeniable, the Young Democrats-Civicare Union 1996 to prepare for takeover government prepare 1996 to in acontract hadsigned FIDESZ-MPP with which theregime-change” since experiences the governmental which analyzed tank “’Századvég’, athink the linkedto is it also Schmidt, nomenclature did not lose its privileged positions neither in economy“old the since nor society”important so is Hungary in especially which remember” to obligation Prime Minister’s from personal advisor She explains1998-2002. herin engagement “the its itsonly Mária but biased narrative, director implications: also Schmidtwas political Its the 273 of assessment], (Köln, Weimar andVienna: Böhlau Publ. 2005), pp.161. Ostmitteleuropa. Formen Auseinandersetzung der memorial],Volkhardin Knigge and UlrichMählert (eds.): und lebendige Gedenkstätte.“ [The Budapest Museum ‘House of –Museum Terror’ of history recent vital and 272 271 devices” asrhetorical areused death and victims death. exileor independence: from the worldall over portraying follow thefought main for Hungarians whoforchoice names of “martyrs”the is played anda room writtenwith postcards by Hungarian emigrants announcesthe in tape aaudio stylizedwhich gallows A with room ishome) reproduced. On etc. bike, leaflets rusty brickthe haza!” “Ruszkik walls the1956slogan (Russians go unanimous TIME magazine freedom fighter, glass bottles turned into Molotov cocktails, a retaliation. In the basement, a hall assembles pieces of the street fights: the trench coat of the FIDESZ-MPP official party history on SCHMIDT,Mária, „Das BudapesterMusem >Museum des Terrors< –Museum dermodernen Zeitgeschichte RÉV, 2005,p.296. Institutionally, Máthé insists, it relies on its own board of historians; it has not Consequently, Rév analyzes that the Terror House “is a total “is House space,where Terror that the propaganda atotal Rév analyzes Consequently, http://www.fidesz.hu/index.php?CikkID=68476 [CommunismGermany in Central Eastern Europe.and Forms 273 . The links between the Terror House andthe House Terror the between links . The 271 . The weakness of the Terror House is not Der Kommunismus in Deutschland und . 272 . Through 93 CEU eTD Collection PM candidate which on a naïve level confirmed fears of naïveCommunistsof fears of confirmed level a return the PM candidatewhich on party Socialist Némethas successor Miklós MSZP. In2001,the debatednominating publicly MSZMP the of illegitimacy of claim the re-stages but compensation, for demands political behavior can relieve them off their responsibility their off them relieve can behavior human rights and outright war crime. Henceforth, neither the previous nor theirfollowing peoplethe insuchinstitutions, she supported committedclaims, served, crimesor against of Most […]”. positions public responsible and administrative took and actively participated who dictatorships, both of systems totalitarian the of maintenance and establishment the perpetrators in organizations and represented ’56 monuments,their appearin museum’sthe list of fighter by street the voiced regularly compensation of claims members.The staff 276 Verantwortung.“] eigenen der von Freispruch als nicht gelten Verhalten gezeigte Karriere weiteren der Laufe im das sowie Laufbahn spätere oder frühere Ihre mit. Anstifter als wirkten oder Beschlüsse derartige genehmigten Verordnungen, diesbezügliche erließen teil, Verbrechen diesen an nahmen Täter Die wurden. verletzt Rechtsvorschriften eigenen die selbst bzw. geschahen Kriegsverbrechen wo wurde, verstoßen Menschenrechte gegen wo eindeutig ein, Positionen verantwortliche dort nahm verantwortungsvolle Positionenbekleideten. Ein Großteil dieserPersonen diente solchen Institutionenoder totalitärenSysteme mitwirkten, aktiv teilnahmenoder inöffentlichen Ämtern beiderDiktaturen während der zwei Periodender fremdenBesatzung Ungarns an derErrichtung und Aufrechterhaltung der 275 274 Pesti Srác. Among others, former president of the POFOSZ, Jen the and kopjáfák of use the through conveyed already were that interpretation ’56 of elements from populist leadershipthe of combines MDF:TheMuseum the centre-right, the tradition others are members of the Institute’s board of trustees. Mécs, Litván György Domokos (passed awayinNovemberKosáry, 2006), János Rainer and Kende,Imre figureslikePéter and public academic noteworthy, politicians cooperation; form inthesamefield.However, of any ejects Máthé works which grew outof TIB the RACZ,2003, p.757. SCHMIDT,2005, p.165, footnote 10paraphrased above: diejenigen [“All sind als Täterzu betrachten, die SCHMIDT,exhibition catalogue 2003, p.70. Reproduction of Wall“The of the perpetrators”. The narrative displayed in the Terror House proves that FIDESZ-MPP had taken over hadFIDESZ-MPP taken that House proves in Terror the displayed The narrative 274 . In a footnote, Schmidt defines perpetrators as everybody “who contributed to contributed “who as everybody Schmidtdefines perpetrators . In a footnote, 275 . The Terror House does not only echo the Ę Fónay, appears on the list of 276 94 . CEU eTD Collection III.3 The 50 III.3 The parties. andand associated FIDESZ-MPP the 278 broadcasted were following and Esztergom followed in by of mass hours media coveragethe and documentary.and ceremony The building. parliament then into crown St.Stephen’s transferred couple of films. Moreover,277 I like to refer once more to the further MPs.Ferenc Gyurcsany notoriously who was aleaderyouth of Communistthe new legislation ten including claims passedthe verified Mécs Imre by headed committee on JanuaryA parliamentary security. 1, 2000, which party FIDESZ minister’s previous revealedorgan, prime with engagement the state the inofficial the Magyar Nemzet, down. to step Megyessyhad Péter Minister Prime Socialist yearslater, with 19 mandates.coalition of Onlytwo the 178 andtheSZDSZ MSZP with beginning of 21 the fancy new form. Even institutional the reflectsnetwork theideological divide which at the the reproduces ina and House divide between urbanites populists Ideologically, Terror the as in caseof the its in openingand ceremony perpetual the repetition exhibition. the imageHungarian national but consistently” “inflated Orbán’s charisma also successfully” anniversaries and holidays national and religious numerous staged FIDESZ-MPP when self-image new, conservative with a werere-invested Budapest’s places public of millennium turn the atthe Palonen pointsout, right alliance of FIDESZ-MPP and the MDF and the MSZP and SZDSZ on the other side. centre- the As between difference amarginal revealed Polls campaign. election of the midst the audience. of the manipulation itsTransferring function intomuseum, into such positions apedagogical and distorts turns RACZ,2003, p.758. PALONEN, 2002, pp.5. In addition to the Terror House, Palonen addresses the Millenium Park as well as a In 2002, the alliance of FIDESZ-MPP and MDF (188 MPs) was barely defeated by the III.3.1 Polarization When House celebrated Terror the its grantinopening February 2002, Hungary was in th anniversary st century has closed down to a polarization between the MSZP-SZDSZ 277 . Additionally, the party did not just “concentrate on the on “concentrate just not did party the Additionally, . 278 95 CEU eTD Collection 281 http://www.fidesz.hu/index.php?CikkID=68476 280 http://www.meh.hu/english/activities/events/en_20050216.html February 2005;14, publ.and by transl. the PrimeMinister’s Office,available at 279 forissueGaléria a to Office Budapest an open competition Primethe Minister’s called upon theidea. Hungarian supported the intellectuals InAugust2004,the SomeRevolution. 150 for the50 Monument anewCentral suggested GézaSzöcs writer 2002, the “To be proud when celebrating the revolution of 56 and to confess itsto leftist heritage” Communist Hungary, the government of Férenc Gyurcsany was re-elected. Party” People's Democratic Christian Hungarian and the Fidesz between bondin astrong resulted opposition theleaderof the toward attitude hostile unreasonably party's small the MDF, with list joint a had it in 2002 “whereas because fell apart alliance centre-right the However, renewal. Hungary’s upon called which similarly of debates us will nineties the take not any further” the past are reflected in terms comeand benevolence to with the needto newstart Underliningin own the […]”. its his words: “The politicalis“The Kádárera was a over.Onceandforall.declaration: false if It world,believed even it change is also over oncetradition. Awareand of the persistent sigma as the successorfor party, he offered reconciliationall. in the The Hungarian Left” expressedproudin Socialistthe heritage and it nested in its European “rebirth anew itpresented pastandthepartyimage:of the to Moreover, the approach The policies. future his outlined he inwhich Left” New Politics, New Hungary, “New on speech transition,over. OnFebruary took minister prime14, 2005,the deliveredhis programmatic KISZorganization inthe investmentand madeafortune1980s in an the enterprise during GYURCSANY, February 14, 2005, FIDESZ-MPP party history , November27, 2006, accessible via on in parliament delivered Speech Left”, New New Politics, Hungary, “New Ferenc. GYURCSANY; In mentioned samespeech the Gyurcsanydemanded above, from his members: party Monument III.3. 2The NewCentral Program” Governance “New Civic launched the same FIDESZ-MPP the At time, http://www.meh.hu/english/activities/events/en_20050216.html 279 280 . . In2006,for firstthe timeinpost- th anniversary anniversary of 281 . In 96 CEU eTD Collection 283 Ferencz. István and Lázár Antal wished the to group apartof revolution.Instead, the only commemorated monuments all says previous that The Group 1956. i-Ypszilon 23, thisemergedOctober placeon at that architects insist that they for idea the freedom homepage of explains and independence”, group’s the wished the visitors to membersstand individualities, community, to overcame of united the own inorder upas their interact and Hungary of remember citizens the when moment, unique that to commemorates monument the“The moment of unity walkisfrom to invited viewer columns the where the crowd. through becoming with one the with itsilence’ 1950s the of Behindreminiscent paved the‘squareof cobblestones expands and grow into an 8m tallwhen marched towardsBem they Square. Corroding columns iron emerge from ground the steel arrow-like bloc that faces Dózsa György all therevolution. – were after born Papp ut in a 56° angle.Group, whose members – Tamás Em belonged.János Rainerof the first79 applicants, Out prizethe wasawardedi-Ypszilon to 282 Jen others among which to rights voting without board a from advice expert for then János Schiffer Belting deputy-mayor affairs and MSZP cultural Attila Zsigmond, Dr. Júlia Fabényi, Géza Boros, sculptorssummoned and architects as wellconsisted as Dr. Hans of jury cooperation Katálinthis The civic’56organizations. andsome House, Szili (MSZP) prominent professionals, presidentof Academy the the mayorof Arts, GáborBudapest, Démszky, of Speakerthe of among others: Kosáry,project headed was supervised Committee by by ’56Memorial the Domokos the director of the Galéria,monument at (then) Felvonulási Square, where the Stalin Statue had been demolished. The I-Ypszilon Alkotócsoport Kft, Alkotócsoport I-Ypszilon The other members were: the sculptors Enik sculptors the were: members other The The new Central Monument was inspired by the photos of the students reaching hands reaching students the of photos the by inspired was Monument Central new The http://www.i-ypszilon.hu Ę di-Kiss, Katalin György, Csaba Horváth and Tamás Ę Sz Ę ll Ę ssy, Péter Csíkvári and Tamás Körösényi, the architects the Körösényi, Tamás and Csíkvári Péter ssy, . 282 283 . They . They received . The artists and artists . The Ę Fónay and Fónay 97 CEU eTD Collection interview Attila Zsigmond also criticizes and refutes those who claim that the current the that claim who those refutes and criticizes also Zsigmond Attila interview monumentas thepresentis In non-figurative more one appropriate. an accompanying concrete, less a revolution the of experience real no has who audience future the For memory. jackboots. Moreover, he says, that one has considerto the next generations and the changes of manner. Pétranyi raise Zsolt suggestionsin previous rejects to amonument form Stalin’s of make monument wouldthe practical useof fail to public inareasonableand place this since Moreover, public. broader to the poses construction problemsfor this the understanding heexpresses however, of impose revolution; interpretation the not a specific does monument humanize the abstract monument. András Bojár from the journal Makovecz suggests the that columnsfeature should round plates resemblingfaces to his ImreAttila unsurprisingly controversy: support; discussion aboutthe declares Zsigmond whathe would concept: about the think “Nice gallows”. ofGyurcsany asking Nagy Imre symbolic aphotomontage onKossuthSquaredepict grave between the former Workers’ and today’s Socialist Party. The poster viewed next to the of notion a continuity the reproduces Army, which Soviet the of and power approach the West from columns –commemorate East to and –sincethey resembledare arranged gallows in against Square”toprotest “gallows”:In their“Boots the the on September 2006 perception, demonstration a summoned example for Boy Pesti the of Association The opposition. 286 October23, 2006. “Background material. Central Monument of 1956the Hungarian Revolutionand War of Independence”, 285 284 question as the telling the ‘story’ of the Revolt could be” “visualize individuals the theirismoreof community.responsibility a general towards It Editorial board. „Eltér The official press release MEH No.146/06: PRESS OFFICE, Government CommunicationCentre GYÖRGY,Katalin, E-mail subject:“Re: monument”, 56 May 2007,18, 10:41, recipient: V.H. After the inauguration of the monument, the of inauguration the After was announced concept When winning the Ę vélemenek a vasek Ę l”, in Magyar Hirlap Magyar Hirlap 285 , it immediately met strong public strong met immediately it , 284 , October26, 2006, p.18. . Octogon 286 published asummary appreciates that this appreciates 98 CEU eTD Collection rakpart (Polytechnic Institute Quay)”,October 23, 2006. “Background material. Monument of1956HungarianRevolution the Warofand Independence M On 289 denvon Menschen auf der Straße hervorgebracht oder siesind einfach plötzlich da.” 288 of Independence.” War and Revolution Hungarian 1956 the of anniversary 50th the commemorate events of 1956October23, of and the revolutiontook spirit the place in of these values/ in Erected 2006to the responsibility towards the community as well as the stability of Hungariansociety and national unity – the the intention ofof the the Republic repression the during and of HungarysubsequentRevolution 1956 the in that freedom thisdecades,for memorial fought who eitherthose, withshouldremember forever arms symbolizeshall in hand or withthe power the power of desire of their to spirit,be free toand the point287 of self sacrifice. It is University.born in The artist, 1940, wasastudent at Academy the in of Arts 1956 whenthe Polytechnic the in at Szentendre VajdaStudio from Lájos the Csíkszéntmihály by Robert Consequently, afewhoursbefore the official monument, Boross unveiled thefigurative work issued Foundation autonomous aclosed in decisions competition. andwas their ‘Public for Foundation Freedom Fighters’ decide upon a second monument lettinga suggested Borosspresented an Theinitiative solution: alternative Minister Péter Prime former monument, new the to opposition the of name the In Office. Minister’s Prime for ameeting inthe called which festivity in Committee, program entire was chargethe of Palace of inArt 1989. postmodern itabstraction for background the of of reburialthe catafalque infrontof the used it for is made becauseit by revolution agenuinesymbol themselves people the the 1988 monumentLaszlo Rajk claims thatin thebecome a‘universal’ symbol as the earlier monuments analyzed prove. According Boros, to theflag withParisian the whole in Theflag and monument, “’56 the with hole inthemiddle re-namehas the Square”. place the the middle Cemetery is the true symbol table stone a on anexplanation flag and andplacea he concerns to tolerate decided of thePére ’56 Lachaise, as 1956. well of revolution Hungarian the for as monument a raise legitimately ancannot government Socialist The official press release MEH No.146/06: PRESS OFFICE, Government Communication Centre. Communication Government OFFICE, PRESS No.146/06: MEH release press official The BOROS, 2000,p.208. “DerArchitekt László Rajk sagt: ‘Solche Symbolewerden vonnie Künstlern, sondern We of Independence/ War and Revolution Hungarian 1956 the to “Memorial reads: inscription bi-lingual The Nevertheless, this compromise was invain: 11,2005 On October Memorial the Since the debate had not seized in the summer of 2006, the Prime Minister’s office 288 . Thus, he had 287 289 Ħ next to egyetem . The . 99 CEU eTD Collection to deal with any political question in this case.” debates. Itwas honorific for usto take part in conceptualization processof the monument. But we did wantnot is too much silence about history so every platform where it can be come forward become aground of political 292 291 NKA 2005), p.14. 290 fights political for grounds as art of theirwork which used debate public the over resignation – recollections Jovánovics’ to –similar Katalinexpresses György actors. political behalf on the of commitment and discipline democratic alack of reflects unfortunately, handled, was controversy the way The its own pitfall. became directly, intention artists’ the notarticulate does that concept y-Ypszilon of the The openness are different. means of communication the however, ismonuments alike; message two the of the Ultimately, nation!” Hungarian the We greet youth! Wethe greet 56revolution. “The of the cradle viewer: addressingthe slender plates, forsymbolizes freedom fight Theis the by andsurrounded independence. composition favourite artistic elements, but also –since Delacroix’ “Liberty leads the people” – commonly sides. is The leadgroup figure, byafemale is not only which of Csíkszéntmihályi’s one shows of a getcrowd people pressingfree fromforward to stylized confiningon both towers is meaning with symbolic that already a location intooverloaded figurative yetanother monument Square–itpresses Kossuth because similar to outraged – ‘Public for Foundation Freedom Fighters’ forunanimously voted this site. Jovánovicsis in folk home art, 1964. of the Szentendre, Hungarian to before hemoved October23 on Square “air wassizzling revolutionary with andhethought” was marchingamongst those Bem to Conversation with György Jovánovics in the artist’s studio on Andrassy ut on June 2nd, 2007. 2nd, June on GYÖRGY, E-mailKatalin. ut subject:“Re:monument”, 56 MayAndrassy 10:41,2007, 18, on V.H. recipient: Hungary“In studio artist’s the in Jovánovics György with Conversation CSÍKSZÉNTMIHÁHLY,Robert.“My Katalinlife” in T.Nagy (ed.). Although previously the place on the river shore had been ruled out by experts, the rd290 . Like Sz 292 . Ę llössy, Gömbös and Arvai he was a student of of astudent Pál andArvai hePátzay, llössy, was Gömbös Csíkszéntmihály Robert 291 . The limestone monument limestone The . , (Budapest: 100 CEU eTD Collection Akasemi Newsome, accessible on accessible Newsome, Akasemi 293 largest opposition makefailedparty to their use of constitutional of rights democratic the Thus, part. took lies’, of ‘minister the Minister, Prime the in which sessions parliamentary 1 October on campaign election municipal the for time In ‘56. to connection the and events year’s last the address to want I Briefly, screenings, even computer games re-enacting the street fights as a comic strip, – and riots. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlAiFjnTJJI of speechWittner’s was published onthe public internetopen forum has changed, hermartyrdom sinceiscontinues “Hungary still oppressed” memories membershipfor1956. Havingof FIDESZ-MPP enlisted shedeclares nothingthat death years one sentenced12 toand climbed evening shareher stage spent inprison,the to historic parallels, supposingly the Square was bydemonstrators the revolution. Evoking restaging occupied Mária1956 and 2006wasdrawninvesting with riots the symbolic meaning. weeks,Kossuth For Wittner, a former between connection Quickly, the accurately differentiate. not did police which the between street fighter who was roots in glorification the and usageof ’56. spent the partly subsequently that tradition a democratic a lackof to inaddition camps political the polarization of buthere, they reveal isthe of any interest not riots of the chronology The suppression. Communist continuous of symbol a as Monument Soviet the vandalizing fire, on cars setting building Freedom a mobSeptember the stormed MTV 17,during thenight same on Square, leaked presson tothe tape recorded lies.When secretly basedthe on were campaigning yearsprevious of that two in and April governing Gyurcsany congress ataparty admitting JANKOVICZ, Mária Oszkár.” Wittner: “’Hungary oppressed’”,still Caféis Babel,October23, 2006, transl. FIDESZ-MPP nurtured the symbolic parallel actively while it boycott all events, also all events, boycott it while actively parallel symbolic the nurtured FIDESZ-MPP The 50 III.3.3 1956–2006 September and October were marked by peaceful as well as violent demonstrations, violent as well by as marked werepeaceful September and October th anniversary turned in to a media spectacle: movies, conferences, documentary http://www.cafebabel.com/en/article.asp?T=T&Id=8526 st , a tape surfaced that recorded Primerecorded Minister that surfaced , atape 293 . . A video recording video A . youtube.com 101 , CEU eTD Collection available at 297 alignment Gyurcsány.and with faction SeeTRENCSÉNI, Dávid. “Something is anti-Orbán happening”,an of forming billionaire”, “the her, accusing January, in article controversial 296 http://hvg.hu/print/20070221_stumpf_istvan_szazadveg_foundation.aspx Orbán", February available21, 2007, at Viktor as same the and one no longer is "Fidesz Stumpf, István with See Interview explains. ‘Szazadvég’ tank the party experienced fragmentation during the past six months, asIstvánStumpf from theparty’s affiliated think 295 http://www.meh.hu/english/activities/briefing/1en_20061025.html Octoberpubl.and2006”, transl. Spokesman Office, on accessible 294 envisioned participants ita Stalinist againstMost was directed regime. but independence, concerns public raised events although the proximity of FIDESZ-MPPneither did the opposition manage to take the constitutional way of a vote of confidence.to the violent, failedresponsibility. totake MSZPconstructivelynot react did The obviousto the crisis, and neo-Nazi elements While he addressed thecomplexity of correctly revolution legacies,he the multiple and its of the October addressing in the demonstrators frontof building:the on down. Instead October 23,hefacing inparliament declared empty seats and opposition the election was a watersheditssupport requests ofGyurcsany’s Indeed, resignation. election asafederal referendum to for MSZP and SZDSZopposition. The party tried gainto momentum from thealike. scandal, and announced the municipal Still, Gyurcsány refused to step Mária Schmidt declared at aFIDESZ-MPP rally in front of the Terror House TRENCSÉNI, Dávid, Herparticipation thisin rally came as asurprise because Nemzet,Magyar the party’s publishedorgan, had a The ‘rightfulness’ of the riots and FDESZ-MPP engagement led – among other reasons to internal conflicts; GYURCSÁNY, Férenc. “Formal Address of Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány in the Parliament on 23 However, most fail to acknowledge that, ’56 was indeed a fight for freedom for freedom ’56 wasindeedmostacknowledgeand fail that, afight However, to symbolic of the ‘1956-2006’ hasprevailed,Despitecharge inter-party conflicts, can be hosted in the hearts and instincts of millions? of instincts and hearts in the hosted be can others of andacceptance for respect order, of democratic culture the freedom, perhaps a couple in canbe andinstitutions created Democratic rules of a matter a few or months of years. But how much time do we need to make sure that barricades and prevented from civilbarricades and prevented our rights practicing and units police with silenced are we when us, surrounds communism small everyday In neighbors mistrustour […]. members life, atour with look and stagesets the must hidefamilyof from again […].We opinions democracy evenfear wedidand among not Five years anxiety experiencing of ago, think http://www.168ora.hu/cikk.php?id=7149 168 óra , No.9, March9, 2007, available at 295 . Preparing for next. Preparing the national holiday on March 15,2007, http://www.168ora.hu/cikk.php?id=7391 294 168 297 . óra , No.4, February 2 296 : nd , 2007; 102 CEU eTD Collection Guardian Budapest on October 22, 2006, accessible on accessible 2006, 22, October on Budapest the Anniversary50th of 1956 Revolutionthe and Freedom Fight”, ataceremony the Operain House of 300 299 298 ‘Socialism with a human face’ participants aim generationshaping likewise whileparticipants thenext communicativeat memory, the former The memory. bonding collective, the to communicative the from shifts ’56 of memory differentmemory.cultural patrons belong for to The current generations; time the being,the and collective communicative, – memory social of levels different the from derive that Conclusion respected when it into turns acompromise-demanding commitment. Democracy is intois ademandturned that voiced ifserving is political specific butgoals, not procedures. basic democratic acknowledge fail to sides of polarization the both Moreover, authorize mannerininactions. and to currentpolitical are evoked used order a distorted historicfor precedent contemporary Hungary. anditsconcerning the Instead, meaning past in Hungary fundamental over Theconcerns: political elite is unable tofind a consensus Monument and awkwardthe solution of an monument‘alternative’ underline the deep divide will” free its own of Union European asthe such international organizations member of a couldbecome islaw,independent, thecountry sovereign there ruleof anddemocratic, and where where is The presencenot out: butpointed its isaresult of repetition. “Hungary past, the that situation” current the and 1956 between connection no “There's to say. false,” is absolutely Imre That's eventsMécs now. goingherereported 1956 tothe on place in the same setting as the street fights in 1956. “Some think it's legitimate to connect SÓLYOM, László. “The Address of Quoted TRAYNOR, in H.E. Ian.“Political turmoil and streetSólyom protests.Rebellion’s bitter legacy liveson”, in President DENT, 2006, p.231. authorThe recalls explanations by KirályBéla from 1983. of the Republic of Hungary on the occasion of The selection of monuments for the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 reflects the clashes the reflects 1956 of Revolution Hungarian the for monuments of selection The Finally, the events of 2006 as well as the controversy about the new Central new the about controversy the as well as 2006 of events the Finally, , October 19, 2006; accessible on 300 . 298 . ‘Politics of the streets’ as exercised in 2006 does nottake in 2006does as exercised thestreets’ . ‘Politicsof http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1925428,00.html http://www.keh.hu/keh_en/speeches/20061022opera_house.html 299 . President László Sólyom 103 The CEU eTD Collection the revolution as a symbol of national unity in order to attain political goals fails to fails goals political attain to order in unity national of symbol a as revolution the Constructing state. by ever-threatening the werecovered ideological differences the regime, Duringinteract. the Kádárist to grounds even not democratic findcommon opposition did and fight between membersJovánovics reflects, formerthe Group of Inconnu the the backartistic canbetraced tocamps traditions to andstyles prior World Second War.the iconological monuments for Hungarian the analysis of and revolution of 1956, political populists against urbanites returned tothe political symbolicandthe Thus, through agenda. of oldconflict Consequently, the period. infound Interwar the were historical predecessors emerging fronts looked for role models thatmight legitimate their different positions. Mostly, visible inthe but 1980s, surface they Oncenot did yet. an leftwithout enemy-other the political different the created, be can unity and identity who camps against enemy external the for camps. Searching political nowdiverse into apart onlyfell and goal common its lost find movement opposition one another. Thewhen fighting unitingthe of element ‘enemy’, disappeared, acommon the party-state the roots of this on contrary, the Quite meaning. of the term’s based clear on concept not were democracy fragmentation profiles themselvesforum Calls forsystem.of a multi-party and thewithin situated open were already theirnegotiate political had to yet camps different of The democracy. concept coherent wasnot1989, was announced 23,the October on immediately state by a one-party replaced Third Republic Democratic the and when unpredictable remained consequences the However, Party. Workers’ as well ruling as the the sides, opposition from reforms both accelerate today. course the country’s decidesover rightly revolution the claimingin legacy the of inoriginating evocation the 1980s, the revolution’s claims: present-day by motivated are both claims; political with memory the instills The dissident movement failed to establish a stable set of democratic principles. As the In the 1980s, there-evaluation of revolution the was requested asameans to 104 CEU eTD Collection 335. 302 301 symbolic weight Square,the Kossuth location In somesuch as continuously complemented. and reinforced overburdens symbolicmeanings were their to competition; weresubject inparticular Authentic places the away from Thus, publicsight. every-day could spaces with new beinvested meanings. place. in Park move, werereplacedOnly In anindecisive sculptures of outside Statue the city the and those manifestations previousthe regime. of of waspurged Firstconnotations: of cityscape all, the who are familiar symbols. their with with cityscape the shapes inefficiently and artificially the differentstrugglemonuments over’56 orwhether thisis conflict restricted tothe political elite which it public Moreover, infar in remains questionable how participates broader the ideological the surface. didnot brevity du temporary differences the to the and however, goals; political Republic imply alsothat Hungarian the revolution motivatedwas by a variety of intentions Thus, the history fragmentation. of afactor became it after, and Before Square. Heroes’ on ceremony ofreburial political ideologies revolutionary bloodshed of the dissidentthe mass, the absent external actors Soviet Union and the West still hadmovement vivid memories of the as well as in the Third ‘politics of the street’. through sides position securedtheir political the divide of Both democracy: parliamentary violation of deliberate a 2006 witnessed year on contrary, the the Quite yet. heardbeen can and should claim the memoryrhetorically “Sowhoasks owns 1956[…]?” and then answers “Nobody, notasingle group of 1956 as their own”acknowledge the complexity revolutionary the of in1956 demands as such.Lendvai See RÉV, István. LENDVAI, 2006, p.271. “Transition”, in I have identified different symbols whose iconological analysis revealed their political their revealed analysis iconological whose symbols different identified have I ’56 probablyled in temporary All unity to party,sides, the only 1989: opposition, the 302 . Thus, all participants insisted on the peaceful character of the of character peaceful the on insisted participants all Thus, . Retroactive Justice , (Stanford: Stanford University pp.304- Press 2005), 301 . But his justified claim has not has claim justified his But . 105 CEU eTD Collection avant-garde and folk art lived through their artistically formative years immediately following immediately years formative artistically their through lived art folk and avant-garde themselves prior the to transition. The elder generation which continued the cleavage between andadapted. revised are constantly entities; they stable arenot profiles party and camps political that shows account this Finally, community. the for responsibility solidarity emphasis on and its with thenationalismorganizations counters ’56 the of trend cosmopolitan Socialist-liberal, the Instead, revolution. the of element communist recurrent stigmatization ofsucceeding the MSZMP. Hence, this camp appropriates the reform Hungarianscompromise didnot regime; tothe instead, they from suffered foreign oppression. nationalist to itconnects Moreover, for reimbursement. request the to memory ultimately the relates claims which belief inAlluding thefight martyrdom. injustice tothe martyrdom of andthe of ‘56ers the sanctify the majorunity role ofof thisthe imagery nation, especially ThePesti defeat. commemorated uponj Srác plays unjust the theirthe returned whose fightwhich David cause.Henceforth, many greater when it‘56ers fightthe the implies one’s life for sacrificing is against a unity Goliath in iscommemorated spirit:sanctified more than the uprising as such. One reason is the higher moral authority of byReal the Christian9 nationalthe legacy missionand cultural back untilthe conquest of Carpathianthe inthe Basin it potentially constructs heritage. folkMoreover, tothe Hungarian cultural grave pole alludes wooden Transylvanian This implications. nationalist accumulated quickly it Communism, of dogma internationalist the to asareaction beit perceived can firstWhile culture. monuments. on statues of assembly is an it others, all for topography; its read still can implications and connotations th century the century symbolizes.as Interestingly,Turul crushing is revolutionthe of the So far, commissions were only granted to artists the despite of change regimes the has survived tradition Socialist Nevertheless, that had already established During the transition, the kopjáfa was re-discovered as a symbol of Magyar folk 106 CEU eTD Collection 11., No.10. October 11, 2006; accessed via 303 to establishclaims cannot monuments these beMoreover, developed. hadto representation publicthe asexpressed in re-installwishes to jackboots. Stalin’s of naivety the Radnóti to proved controversy recent The revolution. the of symbols common the memorial.of a Nevertheless, concept avant-gardist for aneo opted Wache’, Hungary place in Kollwitz’ to ‘Neue Piéta Kohl Käthe decided when Helmutarbitrarily chancellor a time at that amazed is himself artist The exceptional. and unique is 300 Plot Jovánovics aestheticHungarian low 1956 revealof onlya revolution level has halted. development aesthetic traditional monumentsthe preference patrons’persistent of duetothe artists. Moreover, ideasnewwas market and closed for relatively scene. Consequently, inthe downs art the As such, this belated compensation is justifiable; however,it correlated with financial cut- autonomy. theirartistic for preserving recognized were publicly tradition, neoavant-gardist postcommunist era. First, the non-conformist artists, whether belonging to the folklorist or the first the during artists new of rise the prevented changes transitory and framework institutional the that, to addition In ideas. novel inspire ever hardly they thus, media; challenging not are such as Monuments broken. is politics and art between connection the populistcamp.influence overthe transition,indecline the of became early ‘favorites’ intellectuals the 1980s, cosmopolitan the the after while Szentendretheirlife neo stories. The of avant-garde late1960s/70s the whoand its those experienced theand revolution the itself.traditional Thus, the Second World Lajos War and theVajda Communist Schooltake-over feature still in exercised great RADNÓTI, Sándor.“Kis emlékm Based on the peculiarity of the German RadnótiHolocaust claims that with the exception of Jovánovics’memory, work, the monuments fornew the ways of cases, Only in rare power. political of representation atraditional remain Monuments Ħ -esztétika” [Asmall the guide aestheticsin of monuments], http://beszelo.c3.hu/cikkek/kis-emlekmu-esztetika 303 . In many respects, . In . Beszél Ę , Vol , 107 CEU eTD Collection fights as in the case monumentsof for the Hungarian revolution of 1956. and fragmentation cause monuments Otherwise them. to is given that shape the takes and and generations,As future too. Assmann memory says the of isplaces made by people the remainnumerous interpretations it aspecificshould to Instead, open dictate interpretation. not does monument A ‘good’ represents. monument the what and sees she what upon reflect with? Like Jovánovics’memorial in amonument Rákoskeresztúr, should invite the viewer to should it serve political means, Radnóti insists. Why should one “like” a monument to begin present-day Hungary. were raised, probably bestifsymbolizes – not the revolution itself polarization –the of elementof a functioning fact democracy. for that The 50 the Memorial is set shows thatadiscourse grounds inherentandnecessary common on an Holocaust Berlin the Consequently, memory. social of element important most isthe memory of re-evaluation constant the debate, the insists, Young case, any In monument. the visiting from abstain to possibility the leaves also it but politics, party mere from apart parliament in made thedecision Notonly was grounds: democratic basedon was ‘Eisenmann II’ design for the finaldecision the Furthermore, conceptualization building. leadsand to reflection of A long process consideration. memory into of construction the has take to War thus, and architects the that, to addition andIn victims. nation’s the artist commemorate they since power, political belong to a generation that has no vivid memory of the Second World Monuments should not satisfy either personal preferences or emotional needs nor th anniversary two monuments 108 CEU eTD Collection ______.BOROS, Géza. [Gloria Plätzen“ öffentlichen Ungarns auf Wiedergutmachung “Gloria Victis. BOROS, Géza. in identity”, cultural and memory “Collective CZAPLICKA. John and Jan ASSMANN, AKNAI,Katalin andAnikóErdösi. “Contemporary andArt the Market”, in The Hungarian Bibliography BRODY, Ervin C. “LiteratureBRODY, and in in Ervin Csoori C. politics thetoday's Sandor populist- Hungary: BOZÓKI, András.“The Hungarian Roundtable in Talks of 1989“, Lee W. Congdon and Béla “Budapest’s______. andSculptures Plaques in Commemorative Public Spaces1985- ______. ______.„Kollektives und kulturelles Gedächtnis. ZurPhänomenologie Funktion von und András Zwickl. Szücs, György Pataki, Gábor Gábor, ANDRÁSI, in“Has Europe?”in ended needs over László.ANDOR, thedictatorship eastern ASSMANN, Jan. Borsdorf in Ulrich places], of memory [The Orte“ der Gedächtnis „Das Aleida. ASSMANN, http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-16971999.html Publ. pp.199-212. 2000), [Monuments and cultural memory after the end nachdemEndederOst-West-Konfrontation Denkmäler undkulturelles of Gedächtnis the east-west divide], (Berlin: Jovis Victis.in on Compensation AkademiederKünste.Hungary’s publicplaces], German Critique ancient high cultures], (München: C.H.BeckVerlag c1999). Hochkulturen http://www.hungarianquarterly.com/no166/17.html 166,SummerQuarterly, No. 2002; XLIII, Vol. urbanite debate” in debate” urbanite 1956-1999 K.Király (eds.), transl. Chris Sullivan, pp.7-17. inGaléria 1998”, (ed.): Budapest pp.13-33.1999), Campus Verlag andMemorial, NewYork: Monument, Museum], (Frankfurt/Main Museum Gedenkstätte, der Erinnerung:Denkmal, of (eds.). Grüter in counter-remembrance], Ulrich Borsdorf function andTheodor Heinrich and Phenomenology Memory. cultural and [Collective Gegen-Erinnerung“ Press 2006), transl.by Rodney Livingstone. http://www.dsp.org.au/links/back/issue14/14andor.html accessed2000, April, 14, January to Main Campusand NewYork: Publ. pp.59-77. 1999), Museum and Heinrich Theodor Grüter (eds.). as indicated in body as indicated the of text. the twentieth century Art inthe Das kulturelle ErinnerungDas kulturelle undpolitischeIdentitätinfrühen Gedächtnis. Schrift, [Places of Remembering: Monument, Memorial, Museum], (Frankfurt am Religion andCulturalMemory.TenStudies (NewYork: Columbia pp.233-266. University 2002), Press . [Cultural Memory. Writing, Remembrance and political identity in , No. 65, Cultural , No. History/Cultural 1995,pp.125-133. Studies The Ideas of the Hungarian Revolution,suppressedThe Ideasof andvictorious Emlékm . (Budapest: Corvina 1999) transl. by transl. Corvina 1999) John Batki. Chapters . (Budapest: Ħ ’56-nak The Literary Review Budapest Galéria, 1979-1994 , (Budapest : 1956-os, (Budapest Intézet, 1997). Orte der Erinnerung: Denkmal,Gedenkstätte, . . (Stanford: Stanford University . (Stanford: . inApril 2007. [Places of Remembering: , 3/22/1995accessed The History of Hungarian History of The (Budapest 1995), (Budapest LINKS , No. Orte New 109 CEU eTD Collection FRICZ, Tamás. “The Orbán Government: An experiment in Regime Stabilization”, in Maria Stabilization”, in Regime experiment An Government: Orbán “The Tamás. FRICZ, (ed.). in Sietz Barbara Jovánovics“, „György László. FÖLDENYI, Knoll in Hans land], in noman’s [Culture im Niemandsland“ „Kultur Éva. FORGÁCS, GYURCSANY; Ferenc. GYURCSÁNY, Férenc. “Formal Address of Ferenc Address “Formal Minister Prime of Férenc. Ferenc. GYURCSÁNY, GYURCSANY; GYÖRGY, Katalin, “Re:subject: E-mail May 56monument”, 10:41, recipient: 18, 2007, GERGELY, András. “József Antall:in Budapest(ed.): a “Towards Galéria New Corpus”, FRANK,János. Prime Minister of the change of regime”, in Maria “TheFIDESZ-MPP. FIDESZ”, History publ.of November2006, on 27, party’sthe own GOMBRICH, E.H.. Arvay.AnettKenneth,“HungaryFOOTE, Attilaanda NewPast Toth 1989:Inscribing after ELEY, Geoff. “Nazism,DENT, Bob. Politcis and the Image of the Past: Thoughts on the West German ______. “New Hungary,______. in Speech NewLeft”, on delivered NewPolitics, parliament “Introduction” in and DAVIS, STARN. Zemon Randolph Natalie street over fight big [The Kampf umdie Straßenschilder” große “Der György. DALOS, “My life”inKatalin Robert. T.Nagy CSÍKSZÉNTMIHÁHLY, (ed.). FITZ, Péter(chief ed.). Schmidt and László Gy. Tóth and(eds.), Schmidt Gy. László Tóth 1979-1994 Association pp.4-57. 1999), public.in Art Hungary in the 20th century],(Vienna andDresden: Overseas Publishers (ed.). http://www.meh.hu/english/activities/briefing/1en_20061025.html Office, accessible on Gyurcsány inon 23 October2006”,publ. the Parliament Spokesman transl. and V.H. (Lonon: Phaidon c1992), Press Ltd. orig. 1960. and(eds.). Schmidt Gy. László Tóth homepage York: ColumbiaYork: University 2000),pp.520-571. Press 110. (München: InstallationPaintingArt], & Sculpture Matthes Video 1999),p.103- Seitz Ungarn. Malerei SkulpturInstallationVideokunst on on Place” in Lexikon], (Budapest: Enciklopédia Kiádo1999),p.206. Historikerstreit1986-1987”, in Special Issue: Memory and Counter-Memory. (Spring, 1989),pp.1-6. York: ColumbiaYork: University 2000),pp.147-162. Press http://www.meh.hu/english/activities/events/en_20050216.html February 14, 2005; publ. and transl. by the Prime Minister’s Office, available at signs], (Frankfurtam Main: orig. Suhrkamppp.7-16. Publ. c1997), 1991, NKA(Budapest: pp.7-16. 2005), Budapest 1956.Locations of Drama Die zweite Öffentlichkeit. KunstinUngarnim20.Jahrhundert Die zweite Öffentlichkeit. (Budapest 1995),pp.13-16. http://www.fidesz.hu/index.php?CikkID=68476 Geographical Review Geographical Art Kortárs Magyar M Kortárs Magyar & Illusion. Astudy in the psychologypictorial representation of Past andPresent , Vol.90, No.3, July , Vol.90, 2000, pp.301-334. Ħ vészeti Lexikon vészeti From totalitarian todemocratic Hungary From totalitarian todemocratic Hungary , (Budapest: Európa Publ.2006). , No. 121 (Nov., No. 1988),pp.171-208. [Contemporary in [Contemporary Art Hungary. [Contemporary Hungarian Artists . Zeitgenössische Kunstaus Representations Csíkszéntmihály Robert . Budapest Galéria, [The second [The , No. 26, , No. (New (New 110 , . CEU eTD Collection KOVACS, Nora. JANKOVICZ, Oszkár.” Mária Wittner: “’Hungary is still oppressed’”, Café October Babel, isstill Wittner: “’Hungary oppressed’”, Mária JANKOVICZ, Oszkár.” KOSELLECK, Reinhart. “Einleitung“KOSELLECK,in Reinhart. Koselleck Reinhart [Introduction] , Michael and KÓNYA,“Hungary’s Imre. revolution“, negotiated in Lee W. Congdon K.Király,and Béla LATOUR, Bruno. “What is Iconoclash? Or is there a world beyond the image wars?” in ZKM in Werk? „Wovon Holocaust-Mahnmal kündetdieseKONRÁD, György. zum Gedanken (ed.). in Sietz Barbara [Retrospect], “Rückblende“ Dieter. HOHNISCH, Heritage”: National of Layers “Historical the and Soul” Hungarian “The Támas. HOFER, HELD, Joseph. “Building Civicin Society Hungary”Post-Communist in Democracy and ______.“Conclusion: The Legendary Gospels”,the in of Topography in (ed.): Mayer Márianna Space”, of Public “Thethe attraction Péter. KOVÁCS, KOVÁCS, Nora. MA thesis Central European University, Department of Political Science, HALBWACHS, Maurice. “The Reconstruction of the Past” in Past” the of Reconstruction “The Maurice. HALBWACHS, Publ. pp.7-22. 1994), political memorialsWarrior of dead. the incult (München: Modernity], WilhelmFink http://www.cafebabel.com/en/article.asp?T=T&Id=8526 transl.23, 2006, Science. Political of Department national monuments, Jeismann (eds.): ColumbiaYork: University 2002),pp.267-286. Press the HungarianRevolution,suppressedandvictorious1956-1999, The Ideasof and art and (ed.): Karlsruhe Media Art for Center dem Endeder Ost-West-Konfrontation in AkademieBerlin], Künste (ed.), der mean? Memorial in does this onthe Holocaust Berlin“ work Reflections [What pp.23-30. Hungary. Installation Sculpture Painting art],Video (Munich: & Matthes c1999), Seitz Kunst ausUngarn. Malerei SkulpturInstallation Videokunst pp.1995), 65-81. Europe Banac (ed.), and Ivo Conceptualizations of HungarianFolkthe 1880-1944“in Culture, Katherine Verdery Press 1993),pp.135-152. Right-Wing in in Politics York:ColumbiaEastern Europe 1990s,(New the University Press 1992),Chicago transl. from 1925,pp.48-51. 1941, orig. reprint memory 1992), transl.from pp.194-235.reprint1941, orig.1925, by transl.A. (Chicago Lewis Coser London: and Theuniversity Chicago Press of 0Ħ Mária 1998.No.38, csarnock andcsarnock NKA,Júlia Dr. Fabényi 2005). . Exhibition catalogue (Cambridge andLondon: MITPress 2002), pp.14-36. (New Haven: Yale Center for international and area studies, Slavica Publ. Slavica area studies, international and for Center Yale (NewHaven: . Ed., transl.. Ed., and byLewis A.Coser (Chicago London:The university of Kopjafas :theanthropological deconstructionHungarian grave of posts as Der politische ModerneTotenkult. Kriegerdenkmäler inder National character IdeologyinInterwar andNational Eastern (Budapest: Collegium Budapest Press 1997), MA Thesis Budapest Press 1997), MA Collegium (Budapest: Ice Age Akasemi Newsome, accessible on accessible Newsome, Akasemi , (Berlin: Jovis2000),pp.19-41. . October 5–November(Budapest: 7,2005, Denkmale nach undkulturellesGedächtnis Beyond theimage wars in science, religion, . On collective memory On collective [Contemporary Art in Zeitgenössische On collective Lugossy (New . Ed., [The 111 CEU eTD Collection PARTOS, Gabriel in ______.“Creating in of Communities: ThePost-Communist City-TextBudapest”, PALONEN, Emilia. “Postcommunist Histories in Budapest: The Cult of Great Men”, NORA, Pierre. „Entre Mémoire et Histoire. Le problematique des lieux“ [Between Memory [Between lieux“ des Le problematique Histoire. Mémoire et „Entre Pierre. NORA, ______. NALEPA, Monika. MITCHELL, W.J.T.. ______.“The Hungarian in and Socialists Stagnation Opposition: in Renaissance”, LIBESKIND, Daniel in„Trauma“, Shelley Hornstein (eds.). and Florence Jacobowitz RACZ, Barnabas. “Thein Left Hungary and the 2002 Parliamentary in Elections“, ______.“Backgroundmaterial. of Monument 1956Hungarian the Revolution Warand of “Backgroundmaterial.CommunicationPRESS OFFICE, Centre Central Government LOGAN, Michael. mit “Abkommen Russland. Kein für Referendum in Sowjetdenkmal“, Paul.LENDVAI, PAUL, Gerhard. „VonderBildkunde zurVisual History. Historischen EineEinführung“ (ed.): inMárianna Mayer „Foreword“ Serge. LECHACZYNSKI, MAGYAR Hírlap Editorial Board. „Eltér Board. Editorial Hírlap MAGYAR http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050528/ai_n14645431/pg_1 Tr@ansit online University of Essex, Spring 2002. I „La République“ [The Republic], 1984),pp.XV-XLII. (Paris: Gallimard and History. The problematic of places] in of places] problematic The andHistory. Dissertation 2005. London: University Chicago Press 2005). of Press c1987). 26, 2006,p.18. Europe-Asia Studies Europe-Asia Bertelsmann Publ. 2006). Hungarian of Uprising 1956. A andrevolution its aftermath], (Munich: C. Asia Studies 2006. M Independence On 2006. Monument of 1956Hungarianthe Revolution and War 23, of October Independence”, Vandenhoeck & pp.7-36.Ruprecht 2006), http://www.budapester.hu/?do=article&id=2460 Budapester JúliaDr. Fabényi 2005). catalogue Indianapolis: Indiana University pp. 43-58.2003), Press andtheHolocaust and Remembrance. Representation (ed.). [From historical science of Imagery to Visual History. An Introduction], in G. Paul Iconology. Image, Text, Ideology Iconology. Image, Visual History. EinStudienbuch Ice Age , No. 16, April 16,2007;accessed 16, , No. , Vol.55,No.5, 2003, pp.747-769. Der Ungarn-Aufstand 1956.EineRevolutionundihreFolgen Der Ungarn-Aufstand The problem of Credible CommitmentsinTransitions The problem of toDemocracy What dopictureswant? andLoves TheLives of Images 2006). . October 5 – November 7, 2005, (Budapest: M (Budapest: 5–November 7,2005, . October The Independent Vol.52,No.2, 2000,pp. Ħ egyetem rakpart (Polytechnic Institute Quay)”, 23, October (Polytechnic Institute rakpart egyetem Ę vélemenek a vasek a vélemenek (London),May28,2005;accessible via , (Chicagoand London:ChicagoUniversity . [VisualA History. Reader],(Göttingen: Lieux de mémoire de Lieux . Ę l”, in l”, Lugossy Mária [Places Memory].of Vol Magyar Hirlap , (Bloomington and , (Bloomington Ħ csarnock and NKA, , (Chicagoand . Exhibition . , October Europe- [The Image 112 , CEU eTD Collection SZABÓ, Miklós. “Kádár’s Pied Piper”,in SWAIN, Nigel. “Extremist Parties in Hungary“, Working Paper No.7, General Series SCHNEIDER; von“Das SCHNEIDER; Richard Chaim. Holocaust-Museum Budapest“ [The Holocaust ______.(ed.) modernen der –Museum des Terrors< >Museum Musem Budapester „Das Mária. SCMIDT, SUGÁR, János. “Schrödinger’s Cat in the Art World”, in World”, Art in the Cat “Schrödinger’s János. SUGÁR, Aufarbeitung. STIFTUNG M. János RAINER, ______.“Political in Pluralisation Hungary: The 1990 Elections”,in ______.RÉV,István.“The Prophecy“, Self-Not-Fulfillling inLord Dahrendorf, Yehuda István. RÉV, Press2002),pp.211-222. of 1989”, (Budapest:CEU ______.“The RoundtableTalks Elections Post-Communist ‘Second-Generation’ “The Kukorelli. István and Barnabas RACZ, SZELENYI, Sonja, Ivan Szelenyi and Imre Kovach. “Interests and symbols in Post- symbols and “Interests Kovach. Imre and Szelenyi Ivan Sonja, SZELENYI, “Kis emlékm Sándor. RADNÓTI, (University (University missing].[date Liverpool), of and EasternEurope 21 inthe in Europe Dictatorships Communist the of Commemoration kommunistischen im des Diktaturen 20.Jahrhunderts“ [Places Europa of andie „Erinnerungsorte A Kaminsky,by Dr. Documentary Project supervised Budapest Autumn Autumn 1997; accessed http://www.zeit.de/2004/24/Ungarn-Kasten?page=all Museum in of Budapest] Cultural 2003),transl.Heritage Ann Major Europe. Forms of assessment], (Köln, Weimar and Vienna: Böhlau Publ. 2005), Formen derAuseinandersetzung Ulrich Mählert (eds.): – Terror’ Museum history of recent memorial],and vital inKnigge Volkhard and of ‘House BudapestMuseum [The Gedenkstätte.“ undlebendige Zeitgeschichte (Berlin 2006). Unintended Consequences (eds.), Rév István Newton-Smith, William Neier, Aryeh Elkana, via. accessed in inHungary in1994”, University Press 2005), (chapters as indicated in the body of the text). Munich,uprising], (Paderborn, Vienna, Zurich: Ferdinand Schöningh Publ. 2006). Volksaufstandes 43, No.1.(1991), pp.319-347. Review in Hungary”, of Case The Culture: Political Communist http://beszelo.c3.hu/cikkek/kis-emlekmu-esztetika monuments], , Vol. 61, No.3, June, Vol. 61, 1996,pp.679-722. Prehistory of Postcommunism. Retroactive Justice, Retroactive ofPostcommunism. Prehistory [Places ofmemory for Revolution Hungarian the 1956in Budapest], Terror House. út60 Andrássy Beszél Imre Nagy. VomParteisoldaten zumMärtyrer des ungarischen [Imre Nagy. From Party Soldier to Martyr of the Hungarian Popular Hungarian Martyrthe of to Soldier From Party Nagy. [Imre , (London:University Arts 2006),pp.208-211.of Gedenkorte zurErinnerungderRevolution1956in ungarischen Ę , Vol No.10., Vol 11., October 11,2006; accessed via Europe-Asia Studies Europe-Asia http://www.hungarianquarterly.com/no147/p91.htm Der Kommunismus inDeutschland und Ostmitteleuropa. . (New York and. (New Budapest: CEU Press 2000),pp. 285- 300. Ħ Die Zeit -esztétika” [A small guide in the aesthetics of in aesthetics the guide [A small -esztétika” The Hungarian Quarterly [Communism in Germany and Central Eastern , Nr. 24, June 3 , (Budapest: NKA, Ministry of National , Vol.47, No.2, March 1995, pp.251-279. . East Art Map. ContemporaryEast ArtMap. , Vol. XXXVIII, No. 147, rd , 2004;accessed via American Sociological (Stanford: Stanford (Stanford: Soviet Studies The Paradoxes of st . century], , Vol. , 113 CEU eTD Collection ______.“Theitself Memory in Counter-Monument: against in Germany Today”, ______. Holocaust Memorials and Meaning. The TextureMemory ______.HolocaustMemorialsof andMeaning. VASARY, “Comrades,election it’s over!: in campaign Ildiko. in The 1990”, Hungary VÁLKI, László. “Hungary’s Road to Nato”, in ______.“Somethinghappening”, is SZOBOLOSZLAI,János. SZOBOSZLAI, János.“…and background”, the on ______. in Shelley Monument”, the of End the and Counter-memory, “Memory, James. YOUNG, in Boris GROS, War andArt], Kunst“ “Der Cold [The die und Kalte Krieg Peter. WEIBEL, TRENCSÉNI, Dávid. TRAYNOR, Ian. “Political turmoil and street protests. Rebellion’s László.ininTÓTH, Hungary”, “The Mariaand László post-communist Schmidt government bitter legacy lives on”, TIME Magazine.in New York. Monday, Jan. 7,1957; “Freedom's Choice”, © 2006 Time Inc. TILL, Karen. SÓLYOM, László. “ The Address of H.E. Sólyom President of the Republic of Hungary ______.„Selbstportraiteiner Generation.bildenden Orientierungspunkte zurungarischen on London: Yale University 1993). Press http://www.168ora.hu/cikk.php?id=7149 http://www.168ora.hu/cikk.php?id=7391 Inquiry Architecture Anthropology Today accessedviaSummer 1999, http://www.policy.hu/szoboszlai/back.htm pp.59-78. and theHolocaust (eds.). Jacobowitz Florence and Hornstein postcommunism], am (Frankfurt Main: SuhrkampPubl.p. 49-55. 2004), Postkommunismus (ed http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1925428,00.html The University Press 2000),pp.462-495. Gy.(eds.), Tóth Press 2005). http://www.keh.hu/keh_en/speeches/20061022opera_house.html accessible on 2006, 22, October on ofBudapest House Opera inthe ceremony a occasion the at Anniversary Freedom Revolution of of Fight”, 50th and 1956 the the (Vienna andDresden: Overseas PublishersAssociation 1999), pp.290-335. Ungarn im20.Jahrhundert (ed.). Knoll in Hans Nineties], inthe Arts Applied Hungarian of Landmarks ageneration. of [Selfportrait Jahre“ der neunziger Kunst .). Zurückaus Osteuropäischeder Zukunft. Kulturen imZeitalter des At Memory’s Edge. After-Images ofthe At Memory’sHolocaust inContemporaryArtand Edge.After-Images The new memory, Berlin: politics,place , Vol.No. 2. 18, (Winter, 1992),pp.267-296. Guardian , (New Haven and London: Yale University Press 2000). From Hungary totalitariantodemocratic [Back from European from East [Back cultures Future. intheeraof the , (Bloomington , (Bloomington and Indiana Indianapolis: University Press 2003), , Vol.7,No. 4August 1991,pp.3-6. , October 19,2006;accessibleon , October 168 , [The second public. Art in secondpublic.Art, [The Hungary in the 20thcentury], http://www.hungarianquarterly.com/no154/003.html óra , No.9, March 9,2007,available, No.9, at 168 óra accessed onMay accessed 22, 2007. The HungarianQuarterly , No.4, February 2 Image and Remembrance. Representation Image andRemembrance. , (Minneapolis: University of , (Minneapolis: University Minesota of Die zweite Öffentlichkeit. Kunstin (New York: Columbia nd . , 2007; available at , 2007; . . (New Haven and ,Vol.XL, No.154 Critical . 114 CEU eTD Collection ZSIGMOND, Attila. “Budapest. The Hungarian Sister”, presentation at presentation Sister”, Hungarian The “Budapest. Attila. ZSIGMOND, ______.“The Biography of a Memorial Warsaw Nathan Icon: Rapoport’s Ghetto ______.“A inmessage from Galéria(ed.): director-general”, the Budapest Memory. pp.69-106. (Spring, 1989), in Monument”, Galéria, 1979-1994 Program of the City of New York, p.5. Similar content in Hungarian Budapest Galéria. Public Art Summit Representations February February White ©2005by Papers, 17-18, 2005, Sister City The (Budapest1995), p.7. , No. 26, Special Issue: Memory and Counter- Sister City Program City Sister Budapest 115