Folklorization of the collective farm life in ethnographic and historical narratives.

Tyrimui pasirinkta etnografiniai naratyvai ir žodinės istorijos, kuriuose atsispindi ankstyvasis kolūkių gyvenimo laikotarpis. Tas tautos gyvenimo tarpsnis buvo sudėtingas, tačiau jo refleksija sakytinėje tradicijoje iki šiol menkai domėtasi, nes dėl ideologinių bei politinių aplinkybių beveik nebuvo kaupiama medžiaga šia tema. Nepaisant to, XX a. pabaigoje pradėtų vykdyti etnografinių lauko tyrimų metu užrašyti buvusių kolūkiečių pasakojimai bei skelbti negausūs tekstai leidžia teigti, kad vykstant prievartinei kolektyvizacijai buvo kuriami įvairūs anekdotai, eiliuoti tekstai, kupletai - to laiko realybės atspindys ir netgi tam tikras pasipriešinimo sovietizacijai aktas. Negalima pamiršti, jog pasakota iš praėjusio laiko nuotolio, pasakotojams dažnai jau kūrybiškai traktuojant praeities įvykius, todėl pasakojami dalykai neretai yra įgiję apibendrintą, nekonkretų laike ir netgi erdvėje pavidalą. Kaip tik dėl šių ir kitų aplinkybių dalį etnografiniuose ir istoriniuose naratyvuose esančios medžiagos galima interpretuoti kaip savitus tautosakinius tekstus. [...]The present research is focused on the ethnographic and historical narratives reflecting the early period of existence of the collective farms, data on which was not accumulated during the Soviet period because of ideological and political reasons. On the basis of fieldwork results and published sources, it is attempted to reveal the peoples attitudes towards the process of collectivization and. the leading figures of the Soviet government of the time, preserved in the memoirs of the post-Soviet period. The newly recorded materials are compared with other folklore texts, while reflections of the former collective farmers on the realities of the collective farm life that used to be so familiar to them, are analyzed. After summarizing the discussed research materials, it can be stated that ethnographic and historical narratives do not belong to the traditional folklore. Nevertheless, historical past is represented in these folklorized narratives in the general manner, and free interpretations of the historical reality are just as common here as in traditional folklore. Glimpses of the collective farm life are supplied with individual experience of the storyteller, with migratory or local tale motifs, humorous stories and anecdotes, quite truthfully reflecting pictures of the Soviet life and the Lithuanian collective farm realities. From such perspective, these narratives can be regarded as unique pieces of folk creativity, because here, by means of irony and derision a particularly complicated and even tragic period of the national history is described. Besides, the narratives in question foreground an assumption that various constructions and interpretations, spreading around at the time of the forced collectivization embodied not only reflections of the Soviet reality, but also means of resistance against Sovietization. The analyzed period of existence of the collective farm system embraces the initial time of collectivization. People used to be forced to join the collective farms, which is testified also by the narrative depictions of the various actions undertaken by the authorities. The active promoters of collectivization are as a rule described as loyal servants of the Soviet regime (and the occupants). Among such, the so-called stribai (members of the units of the armed civilians) are described in particularly negative light and especially sneered at. Elements of folklore can be detected in popular interpretations of the names given to the collective farms, and in ironic characterizations of their leaders. Heads of the collective farms receive negative evaluation from the historical perspective, such attitude being based on their affiliation to the social layer of the Soviet functionaries. Analysis of various poetical texts, songs and humorous stories describing other active figures of the collective farms also makes up an important part of the study. In folk narratives, the real methods of establishing collective farms and actions of those involved in this process are interpreted ironically; many stories still remembered nowadays resemble anecdotes. Analysis of the scope of the collected materials clearly reveals the process of growth and strengthening of the folkloric dimension in the oral history taking place along with increasing time gap between the Soviet regime and the present. The historical panorama of the collective farm system, made up from numerous variants of the stories, is also shifting. Even illegal acts, like stealing of the collective property arc now viewed from the time perspective as the only means of survival remaining for the collective farmer s driven to the state of utter despair. The Soviet time reflections presented by oral history are similar in narrative structure and form to the traditional folklore dealing with social and national relationships, which is also characterized by prevalence of the stereotypical opposition of one's own vs. alien. The narratives describe two main groups of the collective farm figures. The first group consists of the heads of the collective farms and sometimes also of other leaders which are close to them in term so foffice; along with the collective farm as such, this group belongs to the side of alien. Anothe r group is mad e of the ordinary collective farm members, which typically provide the information on the regime and the Soviet realities and are generally regarded as own. Such dichotomy is grounded in realities of the middle of the 20th century, since at the time of collectivization, the ordinary villagers used to be made heads of the newly established farms, as these farms used to be typically formed on the basis of a single larger village. Naturally, any ordinary villager who was barely literate could be made head of the collective farm. Memoirs of the historical facts and events, while passed from one generation to another, acquire creatively processed narrative forms. From such perspective it is evident that historical narratives, unlike classical folklore, hardly always reflect the long-term folk expe ­ rience and wisdom. The process of their formation is much shorter, since these narratives have only existed in the memory of two or thre egenerations. The historical narratives and ethnographic fieldwork data deal with the collective farm period that was experienced only by several generations: from 1952, when the collectivization was formally accomplished in Lithuania, until 1992, when the collective farms were abolished. [...