Civil society can be easily defined when it comes to an institutionalized part of it, i.e., by analyzing formal civil society organizations, finding out what they can do, what and how they do it, and what their binding interactions with government and business as well as their governing structure are. In other words, civil society can be defined by clear laws which determine its boundaries and the possibilities of their formation. Meanwhile, problems arise when trying to discuss informal civil society’s contribution to the formation of civil society’s boundaries. How do the groups of non-institutionalized civil society function? What structure is there between them and their relations with government and business? How do they contribute to the formation of boundaries? The aim of the article is to discuss the preconditions shaping the boundaries of civil society in the Lithuania of the recent past. It is believed that civil society is both a cooperative solidarity and a cooperation area (Tocqueville 1996, Putnam 2001, Seligman 2004), and that civil society becomes an arena of conflict by having opinions and ideas of pluralism and diversity (Walzer 1998, Keane 1998; Kubik 2006). During interaction, citizens have an opportunity not only to declare, but also to give meaning to specific targets and to form a number of expectations. Success or failures of civil society participants as well as legitimized or delegitimized goals help to define the boundaries of civil society. By studying the specific strategies and activities of citizens in accordance with the details of the context, we can get a clearer image of the boundaries of civil society.

Metmenys was a journal of culture and the arts in which many noteworthy emigre Lithuanians published their texts. In this article we will examine only those eleven essays that its editor-in-chief Vytautas Kavolis was able to publish during the last ten years of his life (1986–1996). Though living in the diaspora Kavolis ceaselessly investigated various cross sections of Lithuanian culture with respect to its modernization, cultural transformations, religious and moral norms, and social attitudes. The main purpose of this essay is to clarify whether and how Kavolis reacted to processes in his homeland; which details of the general context appeared the most important to him; and how changing political and social circumstances affected the range of his themes. Interested in a wide range of topics, Kavolis investigated everything from cultural and civilizational breaks and transformations to the challenges of globalization and liberal values. Virtually all of his Lithuanian-language writings have been published in Metmenys, and all relate in one way or another to Lithuania. Using argumentative provocations and theoretical references Kavolis drew the outlines of Lithuanian civil society and tried to set the reborn country on a proper, promising, and culturally perspicacious path of development. He often pointed out phenomena to be researched and problems to be solved; he appreciated and reacted to the concerns of intellectuals living in Lithuania and attempted to deconstruct the stereotypes arising therefrom. In delineating the perspectives of Lithuanian civil society, Kavolis championed liberal values. The quest for an independent society that keeps its distance from bureaucracy was for Kavolis an important factor in post-totalitarian states in which a nomenklatura administrative style was still alive and could again mutate into controlling structures. Hence a liberal attitude could and should become a self-regulatory

The successes and failures of participants in civil society in specific situations as well as legitimized or delegitimized goals help to define civil society. By studying the specific strategies and citizens’ activities with respect to the details of the context, we can get a clearer image of the peculiarities of civil society. The paper, devoted to a well-known civic dispute involving the historic Romuva movie theater, discusses the functionality of civil society during this conflict. The study is based on the case study method; therefore the data representation is contextual and cannot be generalized to the whole of Lithuania, but it can provide plenty of information on the analyzed object. Post-communist civil societies face different challenges than Western societies, as they have arisen in a different context; hence they face a specific problem: to form, justify, and legitimate the civil society. By analyzing the civil struggle surrounding the Romuva cinema, we examine the lack of civil society legitimacy in the face of the different interests of citizens, business, and government. What challenges and problems confront citizens who take it upon themselves to defend the public interest? The study showed the lack of legitimacy of noninstitutionalized civil society groups. In view of the activities of government bureaucracies, or rather of their failures, and the pragmatic interests of businessmen, it turned out that citizens’ enthusiasm, creativity, and critical reasoning are not sufficient in order to protect the public interest, as noninstitutionalized civic groups’ activities are not considered legitimate and thus are often not taken into account.