AND POST-COMMUNIST ROMANIA Simina B
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CURATING COMMUNISM. A COMPARATIVE HISTORY OF MUSEOLOGICAL PRACTICES IN POST-WAR (1946-1958) AND POST-COMMUNIST ROMANIA Simina Bădică A DISSERTATION In History Presented to the Faculties of the Central European University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor in Philosophy Budapest, Hungary CEU eTD Collection 2013 Supervisor of Dissertation: Professor István Rév ________________________________ Copyright Notice and Statement of Responsibility Copyright in the text of this dissertation rests with the Author. Copies by any process, either in full or part, may be made only in accordance with the instructions given by the Author and lodged in the Central European Library. Details may be obtained from the librarian. This page must form a part of any such copies made. Further copies made in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the written permission of the Author. I hereby declare that this dissertation contains no materials accepted for any other degrees in any other institutions and no materials previously written and/or published by another person unless otherwise noted. CEU eTD Collection Abstract This dissertation is an attempt to look at history museums historically, to establish genealogies of their discourses and curatorial practice in times of social change. The thesis proposes a genealogy of exhibiting communism, crucial for understanding current attempts at building museums of communism. The Romanian communist regime’s self-representation in museums is both model and anti-model for current exhibitions on the recent past. The thesis also highlights the transnational network of museums that shaped the form and content of Romanian museums in the 1950s and 1990s. The thesis argues that museums of communism of the 1950s are linked with the post-1989 (anti)communist museums not only by subject, inherited buildings and artifacts but also by curatorial practice. My second argument is that curatorial practice, in general, is historically determined and the museum does not function if the content of the museum and the museology that exhibits it stand in contrast. The most important museums established in 1950s and 1990s Romania are the focus of my research: Doftana prison-museum, the Romanian-Russian museum, the museum of party history and the Lenin-Stalin museum, for the 1950s and the Sighet Memorial-Museum and the Romanian Peasant Museum for the 1990s. Soviet museology is analyzed for its impact on Romanian museums. In order to document CEU eTD Collection the survival of Soviet museology in post-communist museum practice, the thesis looks at the new relationship between object and text, original and replica, visitor and exhibit as explained in the manuals and museums of Soviet museology. These early 1950s museums of communism, largely forgotten, and only mentioned, if at all, as an anti-model are interesting as part of, probably the first, organized network of museums in East-Central Europe, incorporating both Soviet and European tradition in museology and equally working toward the emergence of a new genre. I argue that, even though their narrative has been refuted, the museum genre they created successfully survived the demise of communist regimes. An important argument for the success of this “museum of communism genre” is its apparently unproblematic contemporary use in establishing museum of (anti)communism ever since the 1990s. The communist past as a traumatic event is currently exhibited in museums of (anti)communism mainly established in former prisons and heavily drawing on Holocaust museography. The fact that this specific museography of the Holocaust emerged in the 1950s from museums exhibiting antifascism (in its communist variant in Soviet occupied countries) implies that current attempts to commemorate victims of communism actually use the memorialisation means and techniques pioneered by communist museums themselves. CEU eTD Collection To Mihai, who believed I could conclude this when I had lost hope CEU eTD Collection CEU eTD Collection vii Acknowledgments Eight years have passed since I started doctoral work and it is time for me to say thank you to all the wonderful people who joined me in this journey. Thank you, Mihai, Vlad and Toma for being part of my life. I did not have a family of my own when I started thinking about this dissertation. In the eight years that followed I met and fell in love with my husband and we gave birth and fell in love with our two sons. Family life made PhD research both impossible and bearable. Impossible because of shrinking (to disappearing) working hours and bearable for the never-ending amount of positive energy that a family has to provide. Motherhood made my PhD project sometimes feel like a child’s play; as much as I would like to say that this dissertation is the hardest thing I had to do in my life, it is not: mothering is. Thank you, Professor István Rév for inspiration and for never tiring of asking questions. Thank you, Professor Sorin Antohi for being the first to believe I could write a dissertation. There is one person who was not beside me when pursuing doctoral work yet whose influence was tremendous; she actually became a character in this dissertation. Thank you, Irina Nicolau for being my first mentor and for teaching me to forget CEU eTD Collection Rembrandt and the cat and save the little mouse instead! viii Thank you for friendship and stimulating conversations, Viviana Iacob, Ioana Macrea-Toma, Simona Niculae, Gabriela Cristea-Nicolescu, Maria Falina, Bogdan Iacob, Vladimir Petrovic. Thank you, fellow researchers for sharing your knowledge, ideas and sometimes even archival data, Cristian Vasile, Valentin Săndulescu, Oana and Constantin Ilie, Mihai Burcea. Thank you, colleagues at the Romanian Peasant Museum for introducing me to the amazing world of museums. Thank you, Ioana Popescu for assigning me curatorial tasks that have enriched my understanding of how exhibitions actually function. Thank you for pure friendship and support at times when academic work and family life was overwhelming, Livia Otal, Dragoș Bucurenci, Ioana Hodoiu, mother and father. I was lucky to be recipient of several grants which made this journey financially possible. Central European University awarded me full doctoral stipend for three years. I afterwards received the Europa Fellowship at New Europe College, Bucharest and a doctoral fellowship from Volkswagen Stiftung. I was a Visegrad Fellow at the Open Society Archives and a recipient of a write-up grant from Central European University. They say the journey is better than reaching the destination and this is certainly true for this particular journey. I have grown together with this thesis and I feel so much richer now than I was eight years ago. As much as I enjoyed the journey, CEU eTD Collection I actually truly like the place where it has taken me. 1 Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................ iii List of Illustrations ......................................................................................................... 4 List of common abbreviations in the dissertation .......................................................... 7 Introduction: Historicizing Museums ........................................................................ 9 Main arguments of dissertation ................................................................................ 11 Methodologies: archival research, museum studies, networks ................................ 13 Sources. Current situation of museum archives in Romania ................................... 18 Structure of dissertation ........................................................................................... 21 Chapter 1. Prisons, museums, ruins: Doftana and Târgu Jiu. .............................. 25 1.1. Prehistory of the Doftana museum. From model prison to ruins. ..................... 28 1.1.1. A visit to Doftana prison in 1930 ............................................................... 34 1.1.2. The seeds of the story: Hitlerism in Doftana in 1933 ................................. 39 1.1.3 The earthquake on November 10, 1944 as premeditated murder ................ 42 1.2. Exhibiting walls. Turning ruins into museums ................................................. 47 1.3. Inventing artifacts – dealing with the dearth of objects .................................... 58 1.4. Doftana on the European map ........................................................................... 65 1.4.1. A memory institution: The National Federation of Former Antifascist Political Prisoners and Inmates (FIAP)...................................................... 67 1.4.2. Was Doftana a part of a network of Holocaust memorials? ....................... 76 1.5. Prisons, museums, memorials: the contact zones ............................................. 89 1.6. Failed musealisation: the Târgu Jiu Camp Museum ....................................... 100 1.6.1. Camp days in Târgu Jiu for political inmates ........................................... 104 1.6.2. Concentration, hard labor and transit camp in Târgu Jiu and Bumbești - Livezeni.................................................................................................... 114 CEU eTD Collection 1.6.3. Ruins of the camp or ruins of the museum? The Târgu Jiu camp after the war: destruction, reconstruction and failed musealisation ....................... 120 Chapter 2.