O. A. Bogatova. The Frames of Provincial Student Youth's Memory of Mass Political Repression: between Family Narratives and Digital Ecosystems

https://doi.org/10.15507/2413-1407.129.033.202504.715-734
EDN: https://elibrary.ru/cprtva
УДК / UDC 37.025:332.025.28–057.875

Abstract

Introduction. The relevance of this study stems from the political use of difficult memories in contemporary Russian discourse and the lack of research on the memories of the centennial generation regarding mass political repression during the Soviet period. The aim is to characterize the scope of centennials' memories of repression in family history, taking into account the sources available to them, technologies for accessing information, and the interaction of family memories with the official memory regime.

Materials and Methods. The empirical basis of the article is based on quantitative (online questionnaire survey of students of universities and colleges of the Republic of Mordovia, n = 700, multi-stage combined sample) and qualitative (30 in-depth interviews with students of the National Research Mordovia State University of various fields of study) sociological research conducted in 2023.

Results. The main sources (including oral recollections of family members, textbooks, artistic and popular science films and literature, traditional and digital archives, thematic websites) and technologies for accessing information about mass political repression have been identified. It has been shown that, when motivated, students use neurosearch, digital archives, and genealogical websites (MyHeritage, Geni.com) to fill in gaps in their knowledge about their family's past. Forms of incorporating family memories into the public narrative (local history competitions, publications, museums) have been identified. The typological characteristics of the mnemonic behavior of centenarians are defined: pluralistic agonism or avoidance of mnemonic conflicts. The mode of communication about the Soviet past is characterized as pluralistic and pillarized, generally corresponding to the dominant historical narrative, which condemns political repression but avoids assessments of the Soviet period as a whole. The prevailing methods of managing the content and structure of family memory about repression are revealed: individualization of family history, historicization in the form of deactualization or meta-historical reflection, and the construction of one's own narrative of national history (among history students).

Discussion and Conclusion. The study questions the universal value of the concept of transgenerational trauma, showing that the discussion of family memories among centenarians is based on a choice between agonistic and evasive attitudes. This allows us to characterize the mode of communication about repression as divided but not split. The results confirm the validity of the relational approach and point to the need for its application in further generational studies, as well as the importance of studying the social factors of framing family memories in the process of their transformation into “post-memory”.

Keywords: digital memory, memory ecology, social memory, memory frameworks, Soviet past, mass repression, mnemonic regime, mnemonic actors, student youth, generation Z

Conflict of interest. The author declares no conflict of interest.

Funding. Тhe research was supported by the Svetoslav Foundation for Russian Civilization (Project No. 1/2023 on the topic “Representations of historical memory in social media as a factor in constructing the Russian identity of young people: digital challenges and solutions”).

For citation: Bogatova O.A. The Frames of Provincial Student Youth's Memory of Mass Political Repression: between Family Narratives and Digital Ecosystems. Russian Journal of Regional Studies. 2025;33(4):715–734. https://doi.org/10.15507/2413-1407.129.033.202504.715-734

REFERENCES

1. Gorshkov M.K., Barash R.E. Historical Memories of Russians Today (History of the XX Century Russia in the Optics of Families’ Stories). Sociological Studies. 2024;(99):125–137. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) https://doi.org/10.31857/S0132162524090119

2. Zevako Y.V. Constructing (Post)Memory of Traumatic Past: Teenager’s Ideas about the Era of Political Repression of the 1930–1950. Journal of Frontier Studies. 2021;6(1):93–143. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) https://doi.org/10.46539/jfs.v6i1.277

3. Kravtsova A.N., Omelchenko E.L. Public Perceptions of Russia’s Gulag Memory Museums. Problems of Post-Communism. 2023;70(5):570–580. https://doi.org/10.1080/10758216.2022.2152052

4. Shor-Chudnovskaya A. Young Russians’ View of Their Family’s Soviet Past: Nostalgic, Post-Utopian or Retrotopian? Mir Rossii. 2018;27(4):102–119. https://doi.org/10.17323/1811-038X-2018-27-4-102-119

5. Beshkinskaya V.S., Miller A.I. The 75th Anniversary of the Victory of Russian Memory Politics. Preliminary Conclusions. Russia in Global Affairs. 2020;18(3):200–232. https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6374-2020-18-3-200-232

6. Riazanova S.V., Mitrofanova A.V. The Palette of Memory Sites of Political Repressions: Monuments and Counter-Monuments. Perm University Herald. History. 2022;58(3):152–162. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) Available at: https://clck.ru/3Pb4gp (accessed 01.02.2025).

7. Efremenko D.V., Malinova O.Ju., Miller A.I. Politics of Memory and Historical Science. Rossiiskaya istoriya. 2018;(5):128–140. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) https://doi.org/10.31857/S086956870001569-6

8. Miller A.I. Politics of Memory in Post-Communist Europe and its Impact on European Culture of Memory. Politeia. Journal of Political Theory, Political Philosophy and Sociology of Politics. 2016;(1):111–121. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2016-80-1-111-121

9. Alexander J.C. Culture Trauma, Morality and Solidarity: The Social Construction of ‘Holocaust’ and Other Mass Murders. Thesis Eleven. 2016;132(1):3–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0725513615625239

10. Blackburn M., Klimenko E.V. Introduction to the Special Issue on Under Communism’s Shadow: The Memory of the Violent Past in Present-Day Russia. Communist and Post-Communist Studies. 2024;57(3):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1525/cpcs.2024.2332820

11. Blackburn M., Khlevniuk D.O. Escaping the Long Shadow of Homo Sovieticus: Reassessing Stalin’s Popularity and Communist Legacies in Post-Soviet Russia. Communist and Post-Communist Studies. 2024;57(1):154–173. https://doi.org/10.1525/cpcs.2023.1817401

12. Miskova E.V. The Trauma of Stalinist Repression in the Context of Collective Trauma of Genocides. Family Psychology and Psychotherapy. 2019;(4):31–49 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) https://doi.org/10.24411/2587-6783-2019-10005

13. Linchenko A.A. “We are the Time”: the Dynamics of Time and the Sense of the Past in the Narratives of the Family Memory. Pt. 2. Tempus et Memoria. 2022;3(1):29–45. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) https://doi.org/10.15826/tetm.2022.3.029

14. Hoskins A. Memory Ecologies. Memory Studies. 2016;9(3):348–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698016645274

15. Hoskins A., Halstead H. The New Grey of Memory: Andrew Hoskins in Conversation with Huw Halstead. Memory Studies. 2021;14(3):675–685. https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980211010936

16. Bull C.A., Hansen H.L. Agonistic Memory and the UNREST Project. Modern Languages Open. 2020;(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.3828/mlo.v0i0.319

17. Letnyakov D.E. The Historical Memory of Russian Society: Towards an Agonistic Model. Universe of Russia. 2023;32(1):109–129. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) https://doi.org/10.17323/1811-038X-2023-32-1-109-129

18. Olick J.K. Memory is not a Thing, it is not an Object. Memory is an Ongoing Process: Interview with Jeffrey Olick. The Historical Expertise. 2018;(4):11–21. https://doi.org/10.31754/2409-6105-2018-4-11-21

19. Ushkin S.G. Not Only Social Networks: Channels of Dissemination of Fake News in the Views of the Population. Galactica Media: Journal of Media Studies. 2024;6(2):162–176. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.46539/gmd.v6i2.460

20. Bogatova O.A., Dadaeva T.M., Shumkova N.V. Student Youth in the Space of Historical Practices and Narratives (Regional Dimension). Integration of Education. 2024;28(1):98–110. https://doi.org/10.15507/1991-9468.114.028.202401.098-110

21. Khlevnyuk D. “Silencing” or “Magnifying” Memories? Stalin’s Repressions and the 1990s in Russian Museums. Problems of Post-Communism. 2023;70(5):508–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/10758216.2021.1983443

About the author:

Olga A. Bogatova, Dr.Sci. (Sociol.), Professor of the Chair of Sociology and Social Work, National Research Mordovia State University (68/1 Bolchevistskaya St., Saransk 430005, Russian Federation), ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5877-7910, Researcher ID: AAZ-1398-2021, Scopus ID: 6505697029, SPIN-code: 4533-7204, bogatovaoa@gmail.com

Availability of data and materials. The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the author on reasonable request.

The author has read and approved the final manuscript.

Submitted 06.04.2025; revised 15.05.2025; accepted 20.05.2025.