Straipsnyje „Maišto kultūra Kauno literatų bohemiškosios savimonės kontekste 1919–1940 m.“ analizuojama keletas būdingiausių Pirmosios Lietuvos Respublikos literatų maišto raiškos formų: opozicijos valdžios politikos ir visuomenės atžvilgiu, konfliktai literatų bendruomenės viduje bei maištas kaip kovos prieš nuobodulį ir rutiną priemonė.

Mykolas Römeris was one of the most exceptional and colorful personalities in the history of Lithuania. Even before the First World War he was positively involved in politics and distinguished himself as an eloquent publicist. Later he became known as a good constitutional law expert, a pedagogue, and a university manager. Römeris was very active and talented in various fields. Practically all his life he was involved in at least several activities at any given time, and during the period of the First Republic of Lithuania in particular he managed to achieve a lot. Mykolas Römeris was elected rector of Vytautas Magnus University (VMU) for three terms in 1927 – 1928, 1933 – 1936, and 1936 – 1939. Here he distinguished himself as a good pedagogue, an authoritative specialist, a great organizer, and an influential social force. Although the period during which Römeris served as university rector was quite exceptional, his activities in those years have not been sufficiently studied. This essay attempts to begin filling this historiographical gap by analyzing VMU Senate reports, memoirs of Römeris’s contemporaries, interwar press articles, and other sources. The main conclusions are as follows. As rector of VMU, Mykolas Römeris tried to protect the university’s autonomy and to foster a peaceful academic life. He was on good terms with both professors and students; however he was strict with students who caused disturbances or instigated xenophobia. He not only encouraged students to form scholarly corporations, but also participated in various Lithuanian and foreign organizations himself and promoted the university’s cooperation with academic institutions in other countries.

Being the major public space of writer’s meetings, Konradas café was especially popular among the literati. Therefore, this article aims to analyse Konradas café as a space of active intellectual life on the one hand, and a place of banal scandals, on the other. A particular attention is given to the most characteristic situations and features of the café and its micro-society. Finally, the reasons of the popularity of the café and its role in the life of the literati are discussed. Due to the fragmentary sources, it is practically impossible to reveal a thorough and comprehensive picture of Konradas café. An attempt is made to portray at least a partial view of a daily life of one of the cafes in interwar Kaunas. During the discussed period of time, Konradas café in the Laisvės Alley held the status of the “second home” of the literati, and the centre of public life. Spending time in cafes became one of the ways of life. Literary intellectuals of different viewpoints gathered in Konradas café, often at the same table, to spend their time and discuss intellectual and common everyday topics. The reminiscences reveal a dynamic picture of the café, full of diverse visitors and “Konrad-like” stories. Although Konradas café was typically associated with the intellectual club of literati, its visitors were from the different layers of society.

Agricultural and industrial exhibitions took place during the period of the First Republic of Lithuania. Ten exhibitions were held in total and eight of them took place in Kaunas. The aim of these exhibitions was to present the state of agriculture and industry and to introduce innovations to the Lithuanian people. Thus, many different Lithuanian companies participated. Foreign exhibitors also took part in these exhibitions. The shows attracted tens, sometimes even hundreds thousands of visitors from the provinces of Lithuania and from abroad. This article will focus only on major Lithuanian agricultural and industrial exhibitions held in Kaunas. The aim of the first exhibition was to demonstrate the condition of Lithuanian industry and agriculture in the aftermath of World War II. However, later, the objectives were broadened. There was a desire to compare various exhibitions with each other in order to assess economic and industrial progress, to introduce innovations, to share experience, and to promote competitiveness and consumption. Agricultural and industrial exhibitions grew and expanded in terms of participating firms, the number of visitors, and exhibition turnover. At the same time, however, more restrictions emerged for these exhibitions. Individual exhibitors became subject to selection and, at the 1936 exhibition, foreign firms were prohibited from participating. The Agricultural Society, subsequently known as the Chamber of Agriculture, organized the exhibitions, which were supported by the government. These exhibitions were important events in Kaunas and attracted many people to the city. Therefore, preparation usually started well in advance, sometimes even a year before the opening. Pavilions were built and repaired; the Exhibition Square and the entire city were decorated; and visitor accommodations for the exhibition and additional cultural events were organized in the city. [...]

Bohemianism could be characterised by financial instability, looking beyond the material well-being and opposing the materialism and philistine nature of the rest of society. The origin of bohemianism in Lithuania was stipulated by several factors. In 1918-1940, Kaunas as temporary capital was the artistic and intellectual centre of the country; the foreign bohemian experiences were adapted in the city under distinctive local conditions. The preconditions for the formation of the bohemian were the individualism of literati, characterised by the search of original artistic style and posture, as well as the motivation to join Professional community. This article presents the analysis of the material aspects of literati bohemian life and their financial dilemmas in the temporary capital. In 1919-1940, living solely on literary work was difficult. The subsistence on literature alone or an attempt to live this way were associated with freedom, independence from government authorities, and the options, but only a few writers made a resolution for this and the ones who did were rather quickly disappointed and came back to various “business” plans. During the discussed period literati bohemianism manifested itself not in an attempt to make a living solely from a literary work, but rather in the volatility of unsystematic work, irregular income and inability to manage their financial economy. The priorities of distribution of material resources also reflected the propensity towards the bohemian lifestyle: only the writers of elder generation were concerned of permanent income and the development of their place of residence, whereas the younger generation considered these things less important – a part of low income was easily spent to satisfy the bohemian inclinations.