Search

Straipsnyje paliečiamos dvi tarpusavyje susijusios temos: teatro, žiniasklaidos ir skaitmeninių tinklų sąveika bei teatras, veikiantis kaip viešoji sfera. Abu klausimai pateikiami per trijų Baltijos šalių šiuolaikinio teatro atvejų analizę: analizuojami du Henriko Ibseno Visuomenės priešo pastatymai (Jono Vaitkaus spektaklis, 2011, ir latvių režisieriaus Alvio Hermanio interpretacija, 2013) ir estų teatro NO99 politinis projektas Vieningoji Estija (2010). Analizė skirta ne tiek šių kūrinių draminėms ar estetinėms struktūroms, bet jų komunikacijai, nes žiniasklaidos ir interneto tinklo panaudojimas buvo svarbi visų trijų teatrinių įvykių dalis. Koks šiandien yra teatro kūrėjų Baltijos šalyse santykis su žiniasklaida ir skaitmeniniu tinklu? Kokiomis sąvokomis šiandien galima aprašyti santykį tarp gyvo, fizinio, įvietinto dialogo ir medijų sferos? Koks galėtų būti teatro komunikacinių praktikų indėlis į demokratijos ir viešosios sferos raidą? Ar teatras gali radikaliai ir kritiškai paveikti demokratiją, kurioje dominuoja elektroninės, skaitmeninės ir socialinės medijos? Teorinį tyrimo pagrindą sudaro Jürgeno Habermaso viešosios sferos samprata, tačiau atsižvelgta ir į šiai teorijai būdingus prieštaravimus bei jos tolesnę raidą Thérèse F. Tierney, Geerto Lovinko, Christopherio Balme’s ir Luke’o Goode’o šiuolaikinės teorinės žiniasklaidos, socialinių medijų ir tinklų refleksijose. Sąvoka „skleisties estetika“ (angl. distributed aesthetics) yra siūloma kaip tinkamas analitinis įrankis politinių projektų šiuolaikiniame Baltijos šalių teatre tyrimui. Trijų teatro spektaklių iš Estijos, Latvijos ir Lietuvos analizė atskleidžia, kad masinėmis medijomis įvietintos meninės praktikos įgyja galimybę pasiekti neribotą suvokėjų skaičių ir paskatinti tolesnes diskusijas tokiose vietose ir bendruomenėse, kurias tradicinė teatro komunikacija paprastai aplenkdavo. The article deals with two interconnected issues: the issue of theatre interacting with the media and digital network, and the problem of theatre functioning as a public sphere. Both questions are addressed by the analysis of three case studies from contemporary Baltic theatre: two productions of Henrik Ibsen’s "An Enemy of the People" staged by Lithuanian director Jonas Vaitkus in 2011 and Latvian director Alvis Hermanis in 2013, and the political project of Estonian theatre NO99, called "Unified Estonia" performed in 2010. The focus of the analyses is not on the dramatic or aesthetic structures of the productions, but on their communication as in all three cases the communication using the media and the network was an important part of the theatrical events. How the theatre producers in the Baltic States approach and deal with mass media and the digital web? What new concepts of the relationship between live physical, placed dialogue and distributed media communication are there in contemporary public sphere? What could be the contribution of the communicative practices of contemporary theatres to the development of democracy and the public sphere? Should theatres offer a radical subversion or rather a critical intervention into the political democracy dominated by electronic, digital or social media? The theoretical background of the analyses is supported by the Habermasian concept of the public sphere, but it also considers the contradictions of this theory as well as its further development in contemporary reflections on the media, social media and the network by Therese F. Tierney, Geert Lovink, Christopher Balme and Luke Goode. The concept of distributed aesthetics is discussed as a proper analytical tool for conceptual analysis of the political projects in contemporary Baltic theatre. The analysis of the three theatre productions in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania point out how local artistic practices through mass media can reach an indefinite number of recipients and inspire further discussions in the places and communities that were usually ignored by traditional routes of theatre communication. The article stresses the possibility and the need for contemporary theatre to shift, intervene, move beyond live experiences, be in more than one place and time in the age when public and democracy does the same.

Šio darbo objektas – politikų kuriamas įvaizdis rinkimų metu. Darbo tikslas – išanalizuoti įvaizdį kaip rinkimų kovos įrankį. Darbo uždaviniai: ištirti politiko įvaizdžio reikšmę rinkimuose; išanalizuoti žiniasklaidos svarbą politinėje komunikacijoje; išnagrinėti auditorijos skilimo priežastis ir įtaką politinei komunikacijai; ištirti įvaizdžio svarbą ir įvaizdžio kūrimo procesą šalies praktikoje. Darbe keliamos prielaidos, kad įvykus technologinei medijų kaitai, pakito žiniasklaidos vartojimo įpročiai, jų turinys, o žiniasklaidą kaip pagrindinį kanalą politinei komunikacijai išnaudojantys politikai susidūrė su problema, kokį savo įvaizdį kurti, kad jis sudomintų ne tik kuo daugiau skilusių auditorijų, bet ir prisitaikytų prie pakitusio žiniasklaidos priemonių turinio. Stengdamiesi prisitaikyti prie skirtingų auditorijų, politikai ima komunikuoti skirtingus savo įvaizdžio aspektus, formuoti skirtingus pranešimus, neretai net vienas kitam prieštaraujančius. Politiko įvaizdis praranda vientisumą. Prielaidoms patikrinti darbe atlikta mokslinės literatūros analizė, taikant analitinį, loginės analizės metodą, taip pat atliktas tyrimas - kokybinis ekspertų interviu. Darbe prieita prie išvados, kad įvaizdis yra pagrindinis rinkimų kovos įrankis, susidedantis iš politiko įvaizdžio politiniame kontekste ir jo asmeninio įvaizdžio. Išanalizavus žiniasklaidos svarbą politinėje komunikacijoje, prieita prie išvados, kad jos, kaip pagrindinio kanalo, būtinybę nurodo ne tik teoretikai, bet... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] The main goal of the thesis was to analize image as a powerful tool in successful elections. Importance of political image, its creation stages was analyzed in this thesis. According to the Public split theory, assumptions were made that after media had changed technologically, the public split, its consumptional habits changed, turning back from mass to individual. The hypothesis of this thesis was that changing of media made impact to split political image. The tasks for reaching this purpose was: to analyze importance of image in the elections; to analyze the importance of media in political communication; to research causes of the audiences split and their influence to political communication. There were several methods used in the thesis: method of comparative analysis and theoretical literature contents; quality interviews of Public Relations experts, who participated in creating image of different politicians and shaped their electoral campaigns. To achieve the goal of this work and to verify the hypothesis, several tasks were formed: to study the image as the main tool of struggle in the political communication in Lithuania; to study means of image creation in the country; to evaluate the integrity and effectiveness of the political image; to study the importance of the image and creative process in practice. The research performed and theoretical material analyzed proved the importance of the political image, named the stages and means of its creation, pointed the... [to full text]

Straipsnyje aptariamos sparčiai populiarėjančio socialinio meno vertinimo problemos. Radikaliai pažeisdamas modernybei būdingos meno autonomijos ribas, socialinis menas perkelia kūrybos ir sklaidos procesus į visuomeninių santykių sferą, tad jo interpretacijose susipina estetiniai, etiniai ir politiniai aspektai. Čia mėginama suformuluoti tokios meninės veiklos vertinimo kriterijus ir išbandyti juos projekto Šančiai – draugiška zona atvejo analizėje.

Lietuvoje informacijos sklaidą visuomenėje kuruojančias institucijas siejantis viešosios erdvės laukas dažnai pajungiamas privatiems, komerciniams interesams, todėl stiprėjant pilietinės visuomenės poreikiui dalyvauti priimant ir įgyvendinant sprendimus siekiama nustatyti socialinį įsitraukimą (dalyvavimą) ir e. dalyvavimą lemiančius veiksnius. Vienas aktyviausių pilietinę veiklą įgyvendinančių organų - nevyriausybinės organizacijos. Lietuvoje e. dalyvavimas dažniausiai suprantamas kaip viešųjų paslaugų teikimas ar e. komercija Siekiant aptarti e. dalyvavimą kaip komunikacinę sąrangą, stiprinančią dalyvaujamąją demokratiją ir pilietiškumą, neatsiejama viešosios erdvės, kaip informacijos sklaidos lauko, dimensija. Moksliniam tyrimui pasirinktas objektas - nevyriausybinių organizacijų e. dalyvavimo raiškos - Lietuvoje dar nenagrinėtas. Kyla mokslinė problema: ar trečiojo sektoriaus veikloms įgyvendinti pasitelktas e. dalyvavimas ir visuomenei aktualiems klausimams svarstyti ir viešinti išnaudojama viešoji erdvė gali paskatinti pilietiškumą, dalyvaujamosios demokratijos įsitvirtinimą ir užtikrinti visuomenės e. dalyvavimą? The public sphere uniting the Lithuanian institutions that supervise information dissemination in the public usually attracts private and commercial interest; therefore, with an increasing demand of civil society to participate in decision-making and implementation processes, it is necessary to define the factors that determine social involvement (participation) and e-participation. Non-governmental organizations are most active institutions implementing civil activities. In Lithuania, e-participation is usually considered as the provision of public services and e-commerce. In this article, e-participation is discussed as a communication framework enhancing participatory democracy and citizenship. According to this communicative aspect, e-participation is also analyzed as an integral part of the public sphere and as a dimension of information dissemination. The research analyses the expressions of non-governmental organizations' e-participation, which have never been studied in Lithuania. The research is focused on the following scientific problem: may the e-participation used for the implementation of third sector activities and the public sphere used for the consideration and announcement of urgent issues encourage active citizenship, establishment of participatory democracy and ensure public e-participation?

Straipsnio tikslas - pristatyti pagrindinius viešosios sferos teorijos teiginius, išnagrinėti jos taikymo galimybes ir būdus žiniasklaidos tyrimuose bei Lietuvos laikraščių tyrimui nepriklausomybės atkūrimo metu ir vėliau. Straipsnyje nagrinėjama viešosios sferos teorija kaip teorinis pagrindas Lietuvos laikraščių raidos nuo 1988 metų tyrimui. Akivaizdu, kad nepriklausomybės atkūrimo metu, nuo 1988 metų iki 1991 m. pabaigos, spauda išgyveno pakilimo laikotarpį. Smarkiai išaugo laikraščių skaičius ir tiražai, spaudoje vyko intensyvios diskusijos visuomenei reikšmingomis temomis. Nepriklausomybės įtvirtinimo etape, maždaug nuo 1991 metų pabaigos, periodinės spaudos pobūdis keitėsi. Sumažėjo laikraščių skaitymas, nuslūgo diskusijos, spaudoje reiškėsi komercializacijos ir koncentracijos tendencijos. Šiems ir vėlesnių metų pokyčiams aprašyti gerai tinka viešosios sferos sąvoka ir viešosios sferos teorija. The puropose of this article is to introduce basic propositions of the public sphere, and to analyze the possibilities and means the public sphere may be applied within media research as well as to Lithuania's newspaper research during and after Lithuania’s restoration of its independence. The theory of the public sphere is examined and used as a theoretical backbone within the article. When Lithuania reaffirmed its independence (1988–late 1991), the country's press quite obvioulsy survived a period of upheavel. The number of newspapers and their circulations skyrocketed, and an intense discussion took place, a discussion whose topics were of great concern to society. During the period Lithuania solidified its independence (more or less since the end of 1991), the press's character has changed. The reading public has diminished, dicussions have abated while the press has been portraying tendencies associated with commercialization and saturation. The concept and theory of the public sphere are therefore very appropriate when describing those changes noted above as well those that were to occur later. The concept of the public sphere, especially in the German language, has a rather long history. However, when analyzing its use in contempory sociological theory, particualarly when applying it to media analysis, it is agreed that research generally began with Jürgen Habermas and his work, "The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere", (Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit, 1962; new edition, 1990.) Utilizing the concept of the public sphere as a basis for media research, its empirical application is a tremendous problem: until now, there is hardly any information which would empirically examine the public sphere. More specifically, it goes unsaid that a great deal of research has analyzed different narrow apsects of the media as well as public discourse, both of which comply to the field of the public sphere (e.g. the discourse of separate topics, narrower theoretical views such as schedule construction, etc.). Nevertheless, there is a lack of research which would determine the essential features of the public sphere and would thereby empirically investigate the public sphere as such. Consequently, the author is of the belief that a means is in need of being found in order to apply the theory of the public sphere. It would first and foremost decribe the public sphere and its essential, central concepts, allowing one to investigate the public sphere itself - and not simply a single apsect of a discourse within the public sphere. Secondly, it would describe the public sphere in specific terms which when used in empirical research would comply with its concepts. The content in the article is supported by the analytical public sphere model formulated by Friedhelm Neidhardt (1994). F. Neidhardt distinguished four aspects of the public sphere: the arena of the public sphere (the phyiscal and symbolic spaces in which participants of the public sphere meet), the media, the public, and the speakers. In this article, F. Neidhardt’s applied list is modified: media shall be incorporated within the arena of the public sphere - as the media is only one of the spaces of the public sphere, though indeed an important one. Hence, according to this model three public sphere structural elements are distinguished, each of which truly normative requirements are applicable: arena of the open sphere, or channels, actors, the public. [...] In the attempt to convey the directions of public sphere theory as applied to the development of Lithuanian newspapers, some features of Lithuanian newspapers are presented according to their abstract research dimensions. In Lithuania, during the post-communist years of transformation (i.e. Lithuanian’s reaffirmation of its independence and afterwards) the public sphere developed anew - the space where topics of importance to society are communicated. As Lithuania reasserted its independence (i.e. from 1988 onwards), the character of the country's public sphere began to change: expressions from governing and alternative public spheres began to take form as a new inclusive - though like before, uncontrollable - public sphere, which nevertheless, retained its functions. It is possible to apply this phenomenon, namely the development of Lithuanian newspapers during Lithuania's struggle for independence (1988-1991) as well as the time period which followed (as Lithuania consolidated its independence) to research of the public sphere and its normative model model. During the years Lithuania reaffirmed its independence, newspapers conformed more to the normative requirements of the public sphere than the period that was to follow. Thus, the theory of the public sphere offers a new viewpoint to media studies which when used in empirical media research may be quite productive. The normative model of the public sphere, especially its analytical portion, may convey new - until now unresearched - aspects of the development of Lithuanian newspapers from 1988 into the 1990s when Lithuania solidified its independence.

Alain Finkielkraut is considered as one of the most important figures in the intellectual scene of French socio-political thought. Our aim here was to present his work as rooted in the philosophical thinking of both Emmanuel Lévinas and Hannah Arendt. Therefore, we emphasized the connection between Finkielkraut’s analysis of the crisis of contemporary culture and his interpretation of Lévinas’s philosophical thought, as well as Arendt’s which, we believe, does not seem obvious. In the first part of our paper, we focused on the main notions developed by Arendt and Lévinas that also became essential to Finkielkraut’s critical approach – which is the notion of Otherness, responsibility, justice, understanding of politics and public sphere. We attempted to grasp the connection between two crucial issues: his ethical-political reading of Lévinas, as well as Arendt’s thought and his critical approach applied to investigate socialcultural situations, states and events. By doing so, we attempted to not only demonstrate the aptness and importance of Finkielkraut’s readings of Lévinas and Arendt that constitute considerable contributions to understanding both thinkers, but also the originality of his work that, as we believe, is of great relevance to the dilemmas of (post)modernity. The second part is based on different efforts to illustrate with examples the way the notions derived at the level of philosophical thinking are translated into the social-political mode of interpretation introduced by Finkielkraut. The necessarily selective presentation of examples starts with the issue of contemporary crisis of education. Then we deal with Finkielkraut’s concept of imaginary Jew, to pass on to the reflection on the idea of humanity and associated with the former criticism of the so called sentimental reason. In all the aforementioned examples, the notion of Otherness, as we demonstrated, plays a crucial role, be it the reflection devoted to the Jewish identity or to the idea of humanity. In his analysis, an author of In the Name of the Other insists that the exaggerated interpretations of Otherness often lead to a crisis in many spheres of socio-political practice, not to mention that they also lead to misreadings of Lévinas’s thought. With the notion of humanity, Finkielkraut not only refers directly to Lévinas’s philosophical thought on the notion of Otherness, but also to Arendt’s political thinking, which seems easier to omit. To make the way Arendt and Lévinas provide Finkielkraut’s commentary with a deep philosophical background more visible, we shall quote the answer given to his opponents, who we call the defenders of the Other at all costs: “(…) j’ai envie de rappeler, avec Hannah Arendt, que ce n’est pas l’homme gui habite la Terre, mais le hommes dans leur pluralité infinie, et avec Lévinas, le philosophe par excellence de l’alterité, qu’il y a toujours péril à mettre les nomes propres sous la coupe d’un nom commun fût-ce le nom de l’Autre”.