GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR IN HISTORICAL MEMORY

The fundamental characteristic of a viable society is respect for one's ancestors and keeping their memory alive. We felt this secretly throughout the 1990s and 2000s, and it is particularly acute today [1, с. 40]. Whatever our opponents did to besmirch their good name, but most of us cherished this memory, and this memory has preserved and continues to preserve us, each individually and as a nation. In the processions of the Immortal Regiment and at soldiers' graves, we physically feel their sacrifice strengthen our will, and memory and sorrow turn to strength. But for this memory to truly keep our people alive, we must keep it clean, thwart any attempts to obscure, denigrate, and obliterate it.

The subject of historical memory and its comprehension is of undoubted importance in the formation of civic solidarity in society, in ensuring the connection between generations, in the involvement of citizens with the state [2, с. 98]. At the international level, the harmonisation and convergence of historical narratives in different countries seems to be the key to a constructive dialogue between societies and on contemporary issues, overcoming existing negative stereotypes of the perception of other states and peoples [3, с. 53]. Thus, it is quite appropriate to say that historical memory is a value that determines both social and political behaviour in a meaningful way.

Over the past three decades, the increased attention to the rethinking and reconstruction of historical memory in the world has been due, not least, to Central and Eastern Europe. In many countries of this region these processes have been driven by the formation of new independent states and the collapse of the socialist system. Here historical memory began to play a key role in the national formation of states and in the formation of new values and attitudes in public opinion. The direct link between the value of historical memory and nationalism, understood both in a broadly civic (positive) sense and in some cases also in a narrowly negative sense, linked to national exclusivity, is perhaps clearly illustrated by this example [4, с. 140].

The formation of historical memory, including memory of the Second World War, can be done in different ways [5, с. 74]. There is expert knowledge, accessible to a fairly narrow circle of specialist historians who are familiar with the sources and possess professional methods of historical research. On the one hand, it is easier for them to agree with each other (which was shown, for example, by the Russian-Polish commission of historians on resolving difficult questions at the turn of the 2000-2010s). But, on the other hand, according to the principle "one cannot live in society and be free from society", the specialist historian is not free from it either. Perhaps it is the willingness of a number of history professionals to develop narratives (or counternarratives, whatever) that are politically relevant to their societies in their research that has played a far-reaching role in the escalation of the wars of historical memory.

As for broad public opinion, it is understandable that the formation of historical memory in it is not primarily through scholarly monographs and articles. Here the key role is played by the information and cultural space [6, с. 127]. Therefore, the transmission through it of historical knowledge (and sometimes historical myths) is one of the main tools of this kind. Speeches by politicians, statements by parliaments and political parties on historical issues, popular science interviews with historians, documentaries and feature films, prose and poetry, and much more serve as mechanisms for this [7, с. 105]. Therefore, the importance of understanding such mechanisms of the transmission of historical memory, understanding the principles of their functioning, and the dissemination of certain historical assessments and attitudes in public opinion are of particular importance when analysing the politics of historical memory.

One important aspect of this approach focuses on the analysis of the image of war in modern cultural and information space. It is linked to different philosophical conceptions of war, as well as more simplified and stereotyped media narratives, which reveal images of war to a wider public in one format or another. Here we may focus on the juxtaposition and contrast of two of these narratives. One of them, relatively speaking, is the heroic one, where the emphasis in presenting the war is on deeds and valour; this approach is closely linked to military ethics, which is traditionally centred on notions of bravery and honour. This narrative often focuses on war in the context of defending the life, freedom and independence of one's homeland. The other narrative is the tragic one. Here the horrors of war, its many casualties, destruction, war crimes, the cynicism of adaptation to war and human grief take centre stage.

Enshrining respect for historical memory in the basic law of the country will make it possible in the future to put this work on a solid legal footing, to make respect and veneration of the valour of our ancestors an indisputable social imperative, based, I stress, on a solid civic consensus.

It should be noted that the anniversary of the victory and the end of the war is now the focus of many expert studies and is widely represented in the information and cultural space. But it is important to ensure that this appeal to historical memory is not overshadowed and curtailed immediately after the anniversary dates. It is essential for the formation of sustainable public opinion that remembrance of the war and the victory is not presented solely as a one-stage campaign, but has a consolidated and systematic continuation after the anniversary itself.

References:

1. Zaitsev Korniliy TO THE 75th ANNIVERSARY OF VICTORY IN THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR // Bulletin of the EDC. 2020. № 2.
2. Krupa T.A. THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR IN THE HISTORICAL MEMORY OF YOUTH // Contentus. 2020. № 5. 
3. Penkina Olga Vladimirovna, Potapov Andrey Evgenievich, Shakhtorin Alexander Aleksandrovich MYTHS AND FACTS ABOUT THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR // Society: Philosophy, History, culture. 2021. №3.
4. Natalia Vladimirovna Mikhailova, Natalia Lvovna Fedneva MEMORY OF GENERATIONS AGAINST FICTIONS ABOUT THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR // Bulletin of the Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. 2020. №6.
5. Vusatyuk O.A. The war for Historical Memory. How to stop the "zeroing" of the Great Patriotic War // Free Thought. 2020. №3.
6. Tetuev Alim Inzrelovich HISTORICAL MEMORY OF THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR IN NARRATIVE SOURCES // IAEK. 2020. №3.
7. Kovtun N.V. THE THEME OF MEMORY IN MODERN PROSE ABOUT THE GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR // Culture and text. 2020. № 4.