Память о войне 60 лет спустя: Россия, Германия, Европа ред. по М. Габович (review)

390 Рецензии/Reviews и продолживших играть свою роль в истории. В монографии фактически предложен анализ конкретных механизмов власти (в данном случае – судебной власти, соединенной с административ- ной) и дана оценка их эффектив- ности. Иными словами, работа внесла вклад не только в изучение собственно дореформенного суда, но и в создание той самой инте- гральной картины имперского управления на местах, о которой уже было упомянуто выше и кото- рая основана именно на концепте “эффективности”. Таким образом, рецензируемое исследование находится в русле передовых тенденций российской и мировой исторической мысли, является новаторским и ориги- нальным. Автора можно поздра- вить с несомненным творческим успехом, а коллег по цеху – с появлением новой страницы в современной историографии рос- сийской государственности. Anika WALKE Память о войне 60 лет спустя: Россия, Германия, Европа / Cост. и ред. М. Габович. Москва: “Новое литературное обозрение”, 2005. 784 с. (=Библиотека журнала “Не- прикосновенный Запас”). ISBN: 5-86793-405-5. On September 1, 1939, German troops entered Polish territory, thus launching what is now chronicled as World War II. Seventy years later, it is timely to reflect on the memory of a war that turned large parts of Eastern Europe into rubble and cost millions of lives. Pamiat’ o voine, edited by Mikhail Gabowitsch, provides abundant material for understanding how this war shaped public consciousness, politics, and cultural artifacts in countries affected first by German invasion and occupation, later by the struggle for liberation, and eventually by the geopolitical reorganization of Europe during the early stages of the cold war. Focusing on both German and Russian societies, the book assembles 43 articles by 46 authors, resulting in 784 pages that are heavy in weight, both physically and morally. The book is the second edition of a collaborative issue of the Russian journal Neprikosnovennyi zapas and the German monthly Osteuropa, which was published in May 2005, on the occasion of the 391 Ab Imperio, 4/2009 sixtieth anniversary of the end of World War II. This ambitious project presents the texts of historians, sociologists , cultural anthropologists, and analysts of literary works, films, music, and visual culture.Anumber of translators should be commended for their high quality work in making mainly works by German scholars accessible to a Russian-speaking audience. Introduced by translations of canonical texts, such as Maurice Halbwachs on collective memory, Harald Welzer on social memory, and Theodor W. Adorno on “working through the past,” nine sections touch upon a broad spectrum of what in recent years has begun to shape the field of “memory studies .” Contributions range from seven general surveys of collective memory in Germany and Russia, to country profiles outlining debates in Latvia, Italy, and formerYugoslavia, to detailed analyses of government bodies in determining practices of commemoration, monuments, and cultural productions. The editors argue that public memory of the war has not previously been a central issue of Soviet /Russian scholarship and critical inquiry (P. 8). However, several ongoing research projects by Russian scholars aim to fill this gap, as demonstrated in the informative and rich analyses included in the book. Consequently, it comes as no surprise that the first edition of the book sold out within six weeks of publication, and one would hope that the second edition has a broad enough circulation to satisfy the demand for scholarly investigation into the vital issue of the politics of memory. Research projects begun in the 1990s, such as the analysis of opinion polls regarding the significance of World War II for Russian society (Lev Gudkov), or analyses of memorials to the Great Patriotic War (Natalia Konradova and Anna Ryleva) and the war in Afghanistan (Natalia Danilova) show the potential of studying memory to help understand more general trends in the political-social transformation of post-Soviet societies. As a whole, the contributions by Russian scholars are original and full of new insights, while most of the texts on Germany put forth accounts of the rather familiar history of denial, oblivion, and late conversion to a more conscious discussion and examination of individual guilt, collective responsibility , and the events in general. However, “Germany” seems to identify mainly West Germany; only one article (by Monica Flacke and Ulrike Schmiegelt) is specifically devoted to East German practices of commemoration. Given the strong political ties between the USSR and the GDR, a focused analysis of the intersections of cultural, political, 392 Рецензии/Reviews and personal forms of remembering is necessary.1 While most articles on the German discourse included in the book outline the ups and downs of German society’s confrontation with the past, the reader is left with the impression that eventually Germany and its citizens “learned their lessons ” and have now internalized a considerate and critical attitude toward the Nazi regime as a regime with deep roots in German culture and history. “Working through the past” seems to have come to an end with Germany’s reunification. For instance, none of the articles address the at times heated confrontation with the past in reunified Germany – for example, when the writer Martin Walser was compelled to...