Author
Abstract
Similar visual forms can have different meanings and the messages that symbols carry are context specific. Some of the symbols are inevitably contested due to their historical uses. This article explores what is probably the most notorious of contested symbols: the swastika and its local variant in Latvia, the ugunskrusts (Cross of Fire). With the aim of analyzing vernacular narratives connected with contemporary uses of the ugunskrusts in Latvia, the article focuses on situations in which there is a conscious choice to use the ugunskrusts with the intention of reclaiming and rehabilitating the symbol for artistic and spiritual reasons, based on a belief in the symbol’s benign nature and with the help of narratives of cultural heritage. Despite these claims, however, the cases are not just about symbols or cultural heritage, but are just as much about historical conflicts in the past and current political affairs. Thus, the article shows how different national experiences of crimes committed by totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century determine the interpretation of, and attitude toward, the use of symbols connected with these regimes. I examine how collective memory battles are mirrored in the use of this contested symbol. Despite the voices that deny the negative connotation of the symbol locally, the image of the swastika in the western world is inevitably tied to Nazism. Therefore, I look at how the attitude toward this symbol correlates with the interpretation of World War II in the collective memory of Latvia. The article is based on in-depth ethnographic interviews conducted since 2017.
Suggested Citation
Digne Ūdre, 2024.
"Vernacular voices and contested meanings: contemporary uses of the swastika in Latvia,"
Journal of Baltic Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(3), pages 545-566, July.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:rbalxx:v:55:y:2024:i:3:p:545-566
DOI: 10.1080/01629778.2023.2248099
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rbalxx:v:55:y:2024:i:3:p:545-566. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rbal .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.