Lokalus etnografinis jaunimo tapatumas XIX a. pabaigoje – XXI a. pradžioje Lietuvoje : kultūros elementų savastis

Abstract

Remiantis 2004–2006 m. atliktais studentų lokalaus tapatumo tyrimais, straipsnyje siekiama išsiaiškinti, kokius kultūros elementus jaunimas sieja su etnografiniu tapatumu, kaip interpretuoja vietines tarmes, tradicijas, kaip suvokia lokalią „istorinę atmintį“, „etnografinį charakterį“, ar jaunimui svarbu priklausyti etnografinei grupei. Atliktas tyrimas rodo, kad svarbiausiais kultūros elementais, apibrėžiančiais etnografinę sritį, jaunimas laiko kalbą, tradicijas, charakterio bruožus bei istorinę savimonę. Dauguma tyrimo dalyvių pripažino, kad jiems nesvarbi etnografinė priklausomybė

The article discusses the role of the criteria of culture while constructing youth ethnographic- local identities. The world outlook of young people of the 21st century concerning the importance of identification with an ethnographic group is overviewed. The following conclusions have been drawn: according to youth, the most differentiating elements of culture are language (dialects), “historical memory”, traditions and the “ethnographic character”.In all ethnographic groups youth considers dialect to be the most significant (sometimes the only) element of culture which differentiates one ethnographic field from another. For the construction of ethnographic identity, “historical memory” is the most important to the Samogitian community, whereas in other communities it does not play such an important role. Most often an overview of selective, mythological history is displayed.As youth puts it, there are few life style ethnographic differences nowadays. Such culture elements as different eating habits of Samogitians and Aukštaičiai, hobbies of singing and picking mushrooms of Dzūkai, etc., traditional festivities, in youth’s opinion, partially or completely have lost their ethnographic peculiarities and are unable to represent an ethnographic originality.For the majority of youth (60%), dependence to an ethnographic group is unimportant. This lack of the significance of ethnographic identity, a decrease of its prestige might lead to its extinction