초록 열기/닫기 버튼
This paper focuses two main points. Firstly, the way that Soviet local officials and elites of the front region, especially Leningrad and Sevastopol, commemorated World War II during the postwar Stalin years. Secondly, the way that Stalin regime responded to the practice of commemorating the war. Both Leningrad and Sevastopol located in the wartime front region, experienced a siege by the Nazi German army from the beginning of World War II. While Leningrad was liberated by the Soviet army in 1944, after the 900-day-siege, Sevastopol, a home port of the Soviet Black Sea Fleet located in the Crimean Peninsula, was occupied by the German army after the 250-day-siege for two years. By the end of the war Leningrad party and governmental officials had a strong sense of local patriotism, because of their own sacrifices and ability to survive without military or material support from Moscow during the siege. Based on the local patriotism, the local elites frequently eulogized the effectiveness of their wartime leadership, however remained silent on the role of Stalin and the central government during the siege of Leningrad. The Stalinist leadership, which could not allow such “anti-party” behavior from the local elites, persecuted them by using coercion, such as imprisonment. In contrast, the Stalinist leadership agreed to Sevastopol officials’ reconstruction plan, which was heavily drawn from history and culture, while it criticized a Moscow officials' reconstruction plan that emphasized socialist ideology and the victory of war. Therefore, it has been shown that the Stalinist leadership controlled war memories of local elites not only by using coercion, but also through accommodation, only when the local memories of the war would not undermine the authority of the Stalinist government.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
memory of war, localism, Stalinism, center-periphery, front region
