The role of museums of contemporary art in the re‐telling of historical accounts in Lithuania and Latvia

Abstract

Museums of History and Art provide accounts of the past and the transition of nations into their current situation. They follow a certain line of interpretation of past events which reflect the dominant belief system in a nation. These narratives told in this process leave room for interpretation. Which particular string of the available narratives is followed while neglecting the others, and is influenced by the current self‐understanding of a nation and its political considerations. Latvia and Lithuania, two Baltic Nations, were planning to set up museums of contemporary art in 2009 and in 2011, respectively. Due to the financial crisis at this time, however, both projects have been put on hold. Based on interviews with key personnel and experts, the paper shows how the museums in both countries interpret their Soviet past and align it with the new European master narratives.

Keywords:

• Lithuania
• Latvia
• historical narratives
• museum of contemporary art
• state‐building process

Acknowledgement

The authors want to thank the Oesterreichische Forschungsgemeinschaft for funding the research through the MOEL‐scholarship

Notes

1. These dates reflect the scheduled openings at the time of the study.

2. Aesthetics is used in the sense of the ‘other’ in communication and perception in order to correct single‐edged, rational considerations (Baumgarten [1750/1758] 1983).

3. The terminus was coined by Maxim Gorky in 1932.

4. In a similar vein, Jetelová (2001) describes the situation of contemporary art in Western countries: ‘non‐conformist’ or maybe too critical art would not find an adequate funding. Although not forbidden, one could describe this system as a subtle censorship by the market.

5. At the time of writing, both countries have been heavily struck by the financial downturn of the years 2008 and 2009.