|
Peculiarity and dissimilarity are the features that make a city more captivating. However, the competition between the cities is stipulated by the unpleasant epithets that refer to Điauliai, Kaunas and Panevëţys.
Such negative image reduces the city’s appeal, estranges the potential tourists, the organizers of cultural programmes, serious investors of industrial development. Every country for the attainment of prestige not only propagates its best achievements, but also consistently denies or overcomes the negative image. Normally, such actions of a country, city or organization are directed towards wry and repellent view that is called “counterpropaganda”. It is rather complicated job that needs stability and sequence. Generally the departments of public briefing and the related detachments of culture, casework, law and order, economics and analogical organizations of governmental institutions do it.
The influence of the marginalian stereotypes of the Điauliai city is stipulated by negative cultural, social, economical duration of situation and the negative results of the remembrances of different generations. The longer process of the social phenomena is, the more individuals are influenced by its impact, and it becomes more difficult to overcome the negative emergent images. The impact of symbols or nicknames is determined by poetic, creative abilities of single artists, culture critics to expand, strengthen or degrade the power of its image. The suppression of negative symbolism is related to purposeful movements of the artists, other creative people and the actions of persuasion.
The remembrances of the elder generation about the “sweat suit guys”, spiteful and overt words of historians, politicians and journalists towards “the destitute” of Điauliai and those who constantly “scoff the marshmallows”– influence more than unformed promotion of standard face of the city. At all times Điauliai was ascribed to have lots of social labels. By the Second World War this city was more considered as the centre of drapery: combers, curriers, the citizens of district Gubernija, however not the constituency of the newspaper “Dawn”, fans of P. Viđinskis or theatre. In the period of Soviet, by the revolutionary movement, the city had a tag of being the town of the cyclists or workers-cyclists. As often as not the agents of culture or politics, pleading themselves for torpidity made an appeal to Điauliai as the private “military” city. Soon those images were added by the propositions that it is named as the city of “marketers” and “knitters”.
The image of “sweat suit guys” effloresced at the period of 1978 - 1986 in Điauliai city. It was not emphasized that the city was the centre of dancers, singers or poets. Finally, after entering the NATO in 2004, Điauliai was related to the name of roughnecks, who persecuted the foreign working soldiers in Zokniai air base. Điauliai was not ever famous for being solid and attractive academic city, however the whispering of bad university had already spread, nevertheless that none economical, educational or employment indicators militated against it. It only proved that nobody strived to deny or embrace these stereotypes, aspiring to amplify the previous image. For instance, the city’s image of cyclists could longer exist as the representative emblem, but for that purpose it was demanded to explicate the nets of cycle-tracks, supervise it, stimulate the development of such tracks and service trade. Contrarily, the cycle-tracks are less maintained. The cycle-tracks to Rëkyva. and garden-plots from the southern part of the city looks appalling. After all, it has the greatest number of cyclists. The city’s image of cyclists gradually vanishes itself: because there is no well-groomed and famous sport of cycling, national or international actions of cyclists and the museum of bicycles makes no better sign as well. Accordingly, the power of the stereotypes was not used; the positive capital of the label “cyclists’ city” was wasted.
In spite of great number of artists, the city did not become Mecca of Lithuanian artists. Though some positive attempts towards these stereotypes were made. Firstly, at the 7th, 8th decade the cheerful painted facades of the houses supplemented the glorification of city’s walkway (the part of Vilnius street-boulevard). Additionally, by the recovery of independence and after it a good deal of actions while drawing on the dumpsters, and fences were organized (remember the fence of the “Rűta” company in the crossroad of Tilţë and Vytautas streets in Điauliai city.) Later the artistic actions of the city’s domestication have drained off, giving place to wild, and eventually stylised “graphiti” (the most significant “graphiti” is made at the city centre, amphitheatre, representing the city’s marginalism). Still, “graphiti” despite the grace of different artists or officers of the city or institutions towards such form of art remained being the marginalian art. It could not happen differently. “Graphiti” as the painting or writing on the walls is related to alternative, underground movements and despite the separate cases of pastiche and adaptability, this form of art cannot become the representative label of the city. Therefore, when the drawings on the city walls rotted away, the artistic actions of signs on fences of pupils faded, the initiatives of the last masters of “graphiti” crumbled, the remains of the lesser architecture decayed the informal public space of art started to vanish, contracting to galleries, timid and rear actions or performances. Informal drawings began changing into the standard, unoriginal promotions and inartistic showcases (the same Điauliai Rűta fence is covered by the faceless adverts). In this regard, the city is not divergent comparing to Panevëţys or Alytus.
To summarize, it is important to note that concerning various reasons, the culture of the city pays less attention to the symbols, emblems and actions, publicity and openness, polemic and criticism, which have the historical profound and republican fascination. Firstly, the post-war history of Điauliai is little sentimentally and pleasingly refreshed. The culture of Jewry is not retrieved, the life details of the county are little refreshed, the history of the newspaper’s “Dawn” followings has not become as an attractive phenomenon, the Soviet experience and the symbolic water recourses are not used, the little publicity of artistic ensembles is shown and the involvement in the city’s cultural, polemic space is insignificant as well. However, it does not mean, that this city is dead. Probably it is slowly rousing up. Ten years ago we had a discussion with the colleagues that Điauliai had little cultural events. Three four years ago, we asked different organizations to combine the timetables of its cultural events, in order to be in time. Nowadays five or six major or lesser shows are organized per day and nobody is excited about it. Whereas, my critique shows, that lot symptoms are seen of awakening memory, the efforts to think and create significant images and emblems, to fight with negative stereotypes and to develop lively, beneficent symbols of culture.
|
