Cultural Landscapes as Symbols of National Identity-Protection or ...

REVIEW 259Cultural Landscapes as Symbols ofNational Identity-Protection or Change?The Shifting Aspects of Landscape IdentityAna KUÈANSUMMARYThe problem of landscape identity is particularly present in the view of the currentchanges in rural land-use patterns, where, as a consequence, the identities oftraditional rural societies seem threatened. The problem lies in the perception ofspatial identity as a physical phenomenon, while in reality it is an ever evolvingrelationship. The social conception of the national space is shaped within theprocesses of communication, and tends inevitably towards uniformity, regardlessof its actual geographical diversity. Specific landscapes within national spaceemerge as representative of the whole, usually appearing as symbolic places oras conceptualized landscape types composed of various and distinct landscapefeatures. Following the survey of historical relations between the generation ofnational consciousness and space, the research continued with the analysis ofpictorial presentations of landscapes in tourist and political advertisments andwith a public opinion survey. The results show that national identity is definednot only by symbolic places but also by special landscape types and that thepopular conception of national space does not exist as an absolute: It changes indifferent time periods and adopts various meanings among particular social strataor groups depending on the context of its use. The study confirmed the existenceof a motif that is no longer linked to a precisely specified place and thus loses theparticularities of a concrete location. No longer linked to a specific geographiclocation, it assumes the role of the representative of the whole in the conception.Thus the concept in all its forms does not necessarily relate directly to thecontemporary physical reality of the environment.KEY WORDSidentity, landscape, social conceptionE-mail: ana.kucan@bf.uni-lj.siDepartment of Landscape ArchitectureBiotechnical Faculty, University of LjubljanaJamnikarjeva 101, 1000 Ljubljana. SloveniaReceived: December 23, 1998AGRICULTURAE CONSPECTUS SCIENTIFICUS, Vol. 64, No. 4, 1999 (259-268)

CULTURAL LANDSCAPES AS SYMBOLS OF NATIONAL IDENTITY - PROTECTION OR CHANGE?263individual groups within the society relative to their social standing or thelocation of their residence, and whether there were differences as regardsthe intention of the conceptions, that is, differences between the spatialconception that is supposedly transmitted between generations, a kind of“fatherland education,” and the conception used to establish and maintainone’s self-image in relation to other people. The questions were combinedwith photographic representations of various Slovene landscapes.Given the subject of discussion, and in order to achieve the greatest possiblevalidity, it made sense to carry out a public opinion survey on the basis ofa representative sample whose structure would reflect that of thepopulation. The representative sample was determined by the Center forthe Research of Public Opinion and Mass Communications at the Facultyof Social Sciences, which also carried out the survey. In composing thesurvey, the attention was primarily devoted to the problem of how to bestdescribe the landscape space of Slovenia without imposing our ownconceptions on those surveyed. Therefore, the questionnaire retains thethree levels of landscape unit size classes- place, motif, component—andasks about them with both photographs and text. The space is describedby using carefully chosen spatial units that can act both as individual unitsand as general phenomena, depending on the context of conceptualization.The survey asked about motif at two levels: about the characteristics orselected components of the space which in various combinations formedlandscape patterns and about the landscape types or broader landscapepatterns with which we can describe the diversity of the Slovene space.In contrast to the other two parts of the research, the survey, throughrecognizing the characteristics and significance of the landscape units thatbuild the conception of Slovenia in the perception and assessment ofindividuals, was aimed at discovering more intimate layers of the placeattachmentof the population to the place they live.Illustration 2. The creation ofpictograms for the description oflandscape motifs.ACS, Agric. conspec. sci. Vol. 64, No. 4, 1999

264Ana KUÈANRESULTSThe Changeability of the Conception-A Shifting IdentityWhile the first part of the research was rather informative, both the secondand the third part questioned the existence of various conceptions of the sameconcept: they intended to discover whether differences exist in the conceptionof a Slovene space relative to its use. Following the research model aboutvarying conceptions of the same concept (Roth and Frisby 1986), it is alsopossible to conclude that within one social group in the same time periodthere are many perceptions of the same object, depending on its use. If it isthe perception that defines the identification (recognition) of space or theidentification of an individual or a certain community with the space theyinhabit, and the perception itself is also conditioned by the use (Canter 1977),then very probably there are differences in the meanings of individual partsof space, either in the places or in the landscape types and individualcomponents. The reason probably lies in the use of the conception, that is inthe purpose the concept is activated for. First is certainlyan individual’s personalassessment one’s desire to convey a particular perception within a certaincommunity (more precisely, to transmit values between generations, that is,the “fatherland education”), that makes it possible to maintain the continuityaspect of group identity. Second is the communication of one’s self-image tothe outside world (specifically, establishing one’s identity by comparison withother groups in other spaces - the differentiation aspect).Results from the analysis of the propaganda material proved that the conceptionof the space is relative to the time-dynamics: the analysis revealed time periods,which differ by the part of the territory included in a particular relatedconception, and by motifs, that is by specific aggregations of individuallandscape components that can be encountered in various spatial contexts,which define the periods in terms of contents. Some of these motifs are presentIllustration 3. Some mostfrequent motifs describingSlovene landscapesIllustration 4. Comparison between personal, “fatherland education”,and presentational conception.ACS, Agric. conspec. sci. Vol. 64, No. 4, 1999

CULTURAL LANDSCAPES AS SYMBOLS OF NATIONAL IDENTITY - PROTECTION OR CHANGE?265Illustration 5. Maps of Slovenia showing thedistribution of locations of the pictorialrepresentations of landscapes included inadvertising material in different time periodsin all of the detected periods, and as such they act asconnectors providing continuity, while the others piledifferently in different periods. Some of the laterappear more often than the others, and only in specificcontexts of meaning. This is most expressive in thepictorial language of political propaganda.The results clearly showed the differences in the sizeclasses of landscape units: “the national” identifiesconceptually with entire regions and areas, as well aswith concrete places or even with individual landscapefeatures, i.e. selected landscape components. Theconception binds all of them indiscriminately into somesort of a spatial collage; therefore, in the conception,even geographically distant landscape features canform one image, unrelated to size and position.The research confirmed, that some forms of theconception act as a prototype, a landscape motif(s)without clear connections to a certain place (orlocality), thus creating the general landscape image ofSlovenia. The social conception is, therefore, also anideological construct: it seems independent of thechanges which reformed landscapes in the course ofhistory; it neglects geographical diversities, and oftenbecomes an object of manipulation. Especially, whenparticular social groups use commonly acknowledgedsymbols to generalize its own system of values overthe entire nation.Despite some formal elements of continuity, the socialconception of space in Slovenia also demonstratessome shifts in meaning in different time periods. Recentpolitical propaganda pushes the conception back intothe frame of the era when the idea of national identitywas established in the 19th century. Today, however,the formal elements carry a different meaning: theydo no represent liberal progressive ideas as they didas the symbols of establishing national identity withinthe Austro-Hungarian empire, but a rather nostalgic,traditionalistic, even conservative point of view. In thecontinuity within the media image, the only exceptionis presented by the period following Word War II, whenthe spirit of building a new society prevailed, and thespirit of technology and progress became evident inthe landscape conceptions, even on tourist posters.Then, industrialization was an external sign thatYugoslavia - which at the time Slovenia was a part -was capable of overcoming economic backwardnessand guaranteeing progress. The healthy and idyllic ruralworld depicted by some popular painters was then notsuitable for the “official” presentation of the country;furthermore, the spatial components, which denotedthe former social order, were disappearing. However,in parallel with the pictorial material, through whichSlovenia presented itself in the framework of the thennew Yugoslavia (from 1945 on), the places whichremained were those that ideologically acceptablepositive factors and personalities linked to the nationalidentity and the struggle for its existence. Although notalways against it, Slovenia did not entirely consent tothe “Yugoslav” concept: It still searched for andACS, Agric. conspec. sci. Vol. 64, No. 4, 1999

266Ana KUÈANIllustrations 6.Pictorial depictions ofthe current attitude ofthe conception ofnational space in threedifferent time periods:a)the painting Rodnagruda Native soil,by Maksim Gaspari,a pre-World War IIpostcard,b)a tourist “propaganda”from 1949: Turizem -izvrševalcem petletke.Tourism – to theexecutors of theFive-Year Plan.c)election poster fromparliamentaryelections in 1992:Vrnili bomo slovenijidušo, srce in nasmeh.We will give backthe soul, the heartand the smile toSlovenia.ACS, Agric. conspec. sci. Vol. 64, No. 4, 1999

CULTURAL LANDSCAPES AS SYMBOLS OF NATIONAL IDENTITY - PROTECTION OR CHANGE?267established its own identity within the multinationalstate. For this purpose, the geographic characteristicsof its territory offered Slovenia numerous easilydiscernible identification components, and it looked forothers within its heritage. This heritage comprised therural idyll and the spatial components that guaranteedSlovenia’s existence.CONCLUSIONThe results, rendered by all the three parts of theinvestigation, including the results of the questionnaire,must therefore be read in two ways:• AS PHENOMENA - characteristics, samples• AS EXPLANATION - circumstances, valuesIn the Slovene national conception, landscapes certainlyplay an important role as the carriers of identity. Theresults confirmed the original hypotheses aboutlandscape components and patterns as the carriers ofnational spatial identity, as well as that the forming ofa conception involves permanent interweaving of therelationship between physical and symbolic factors.The results from all three parts of the study haveindisputably confirmed the introductory hypothesis thatthe national identity is not only tied to the territorydefined by borders but to other spatial units as well. Itis not only a matter of being attached to places to whichspecial importance is attributed in the system of socialvalues. The national identity is also tied to a certain socialconception of space, built from selected landscape typesand individual spatial components. The deliberatelychosen systematic cross-sections of the study show thechronological sequence of the formation of theconception and its verification in the conceptions of themodern public. Thus, it also discloses the mutual linkageof closed working units and their flowing into a whole.The results also showed that neither the landscape typesnor the individual landscape components in the senseof national identification are absolute categories, butrather that their role within the social conception of thespace is changing. The continuity of the nation’sidentification with space is certainly based primarily oncertain “sacred places of the nation.” Thus, speciallandscape types and motifs appear in the continuityconception which at the same time determinedifferentiation with respect to others. In the Slovenespace, it is primarily the mountain landscape type linkedto the cultural (agrarian) landscape that is most oftenreflected in the image of populated mountain valleys.The second element of the social conception of the spaceis the domestic landscape with its typical components:fields-meadows, vineyards, “kozolci,” and small churcheson elevations. The place most frequently chosen asrepresentative is Bled, which combines the most typicalcharacteristics of both.Although we are aware of its diversity, once we crossthe reference threshold of “Slovene,” we refer toSlovenia as a homogenous territory from the landscapepoint of view. As we have seen, the landscape typerepresenting it is a kind of a spatial collage rather thana homogenous conception. There is an ideal conception,somewhat removed from reality, with which we Slovenesas a group identify ourselves. It is probably the questionof a cultural mythos through which the exceptionalityof the Slovene space is confirmed. This links us toourselves from the past (continuity), and at the sametime distinguishes us from others, even from those whoare similar (differentiation).This, of course, refers to the currently predominantconception. We have seen now one and then anothersignificance layer come to the fore. In any case, there iscertainly a gap between principles and practice: 50%of the population still lives in a predominantly ruralspace but only 6% lives from it. In this sense the“newcomers” are transforming rural landscapes into aspace that is attractive for living in accordance with theirsomewhat idealized view of the countryside. The newcommunication technologies offer almost everyone theadvantages that the modern way of life and workdemands, thus enabling a very high quality of life inrural environments. In this way, the rural landscapes inSlovenia are being slowly transformed into a “modernArcadia” (Marušiè 1995), tending toward a uniformenvironment in the physical and cultural sense. This is,however, precisely that the origin of many spatialconflicts.The ideal conception is undoubtedly also the result ofthe picture conveyed by the media and other ideologicalapparatuses, reflecting and simultaneously impacting thevalue system. While, within the value system, there aredifferences between the principle values and those bywhich we orient ourselves in practice as individuals oras a society, the manipulation of the spatial identity,which occurs on the national level, can be counterproductive.Creating an unrealistic image of space andbecoming infatuated with it can blur the vision and blindus to serious problems in the environment. Therefore,it makes no sense to limit the spatial identity only tothe components established as national symbols duringthe periods of endeavors for nationhood. The knowledgeabout the processes of establishing the social conceptionof space, provided by the present study, is certainlyuseful information. But only further studies will be ableto provide more precise answers to the questionswhether the development will indeed mean a loss ofidentity or will it bring qualitative change. Thecountryside - and not only in Slovenia - stands on thethreshold of major changes, as much in the sense ofsocial as of spatial restructuring: the laws of the Europeanand world markets have already brought much fasterchanges than those we witnessed in the not so distantpast. Assuming that the need for the preservation of thepatterns of land-use is demonstrated, even if onlybecause of the principle of protecting our cultural andnatural heritage, it will not be possible withoutsubstantial financial support from the state. Here it isACS, Agric. conspec. sci. Vol. 64, No. 4, 1999

268Ana KUÈANvery important to know the socially established valuesystem - the system of principle definitions, whichsociety forms in relation to the space in which it livesand their disharmony with the prevailing behavior.In spite of the universal models for managing thephysical environment, it could be possible to preservethe spatial identity in this respect as well. One of thehindering factors in Slovenia is certainly the physicalspace; other factors undoubtedly include culturaldifferences based on historical memory. Neither the realspace nor the social conception of it are constant butdepend upon the times—they emerge and complementeach other in the course of constant change. From thiswe can conclude that any form of inclusion in the worldintegration processes will not mean a loss of identitybut rather its qualitative change only.REFERENCESBRAUDEL, F. (1988) The Identity of France. History andEnvironment. Collins, London.symbolic landscapes, Wageningen, Netherlands,September 1994. Unpublished version, 18 p.CANTER, D. (1977) The Psychology of Place. TheArchitectural Press, London.COSGROVE D., DANIELS S., Ed. (1988) The Iconographyof Landscape. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.DANIELS S. (1993) Fields of Vision: Landscape Imageryand National Identity in England and the UnitedStates. Princeton University Press, Princeton.KUÈAN A. (1996) Dejavniki nacionalne prostorskeidentitete na Slovenskem. (Aspects of SpatialPerception in Relation to National Idetity.) DoctoralThesis. Department of Landscape Architecture,Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana.KUÈAN A. (1997) Modern Social Conception of SloveneSpace. (Slovenski prostor v sodobni družbenipredstavi.) In: Acta Geografica 37 (1997): 111-169.Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academyof Sciences and Arts, Geographical Institute, Ljubljana.LENZ-ROMEISS F. (1970) Die Stadt – Heimat oderDurchgangstation? Calwey Verlag, Muenchen.LOWENTHAL D. (1994) Landscape as Living Legacy. In:International symposium on Symbolic Landscapes,Wageningen. Unpublished version.MARUŠIÈ J. (1995): Razpotja urejanja in varstvaSlovenske krajine. (Crossroads of Planning andConservation of Slovenian Landscape.) In: Veselaznanost O okolju. (Merry Science. On Environment.)KUD France Prešeren, Ljubljana.ROTH I., FRISBY J. (1986) Perception and Representation:A Cognitive Approach. Open University Press,Philadelphia.SMITH A. D. (1991) National Identity. University ofNevada Press.VODOPIVEC P. (1996) Pogovor (Conversation). In:Crnkoviè M. Ed. Slovenska smer (the Direction ofSlovenia). Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana.ACS, Agric. conspec. sci. Vol. 64, No. 4, 1999