Identitetas kaip kentauras – dvigubos vizualinės ir kognityvinės prigimties

Abstract

Pastaruoju metu vis daugiau kalbama apie identiteto apraiškas mūsų miestuose, bet tikrai ne visuomet išgirstame iš esmės suvoktą, o tuo labiau pritaikytą ir respektuojamą tapatumą juose. Norėdami jsigilinti į šio reiskinio suvokimą ir jo apibrėžimo kriterijus, daugiau dėmesio skirdami Viiniaus tapatumui iki XX a. pr. kalbamės su VGTU Architekturos fakulteto dėstytoju, architektu, architektūros tyrėju doc. dr. Vytautu Petrušoniu.

Lately, there is increasingly more talk of the manifestations of identity in our cities, but it is far from often that we hear of a deeply understood and, even more so, a well-adapted and respected identity within them. In order to delve more deeply into the understanding of this phenomenon and the criteria by which it is defined, focusing more on the identity of Vilnius up to the early 20th century, we were talking to doc. Dr Vytautas Petrušonis, a teacher of the Faculty of Architecture at VGTU, architect and architecture researcher. Speaking of a city's identity, it is important to first of all agree on the categories in which we should discuss it. In my theoretical papers, I tend to reveal identity through certain determinations that we could sense, discover, remember and understand when we see them in exposition, time or image. After a general feeling forms in this way, there comes a thought that it is namely these things that uniquely evidence the identity of Vilnius, but here we run into a methodological problem because visual things alone cannot form the concept of identity, even though they could be called signs of identity, for example, the old town with its crooked streets, the urban composition of the upper and lower castles, even though structurally similar things are also characteristic of other cities. Perhaps it is not so good to talk about genesis and development without knowing the imagery but, on the other hand, there is more to it than what Vilnius old town represents with its crooked little streets. And again, it acts as a certain culture and induction, some things that formed in other cities of the European civilisation. Also, the influence of the catholic, orthodox world should not be forgotten. If you walk around Užupis, you can notice certain characteristic formative principles that came from Greece through Byzantium and were written about in the 4th century by Julijonas Aškelonietis, an architect of Greek origin, who also developed the idea of the principle of apopsis. In his book Lietuvos urbanistikos istorijos bruožai (Features of the History of Urbanism in Lithuania), Kazys Šešelgis mentions the following hypothesis: There already were cities in the eastern Russian duchies of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, but not in Lithuania itself, so it can be stated, based on certain commonalities with the urban model of the old Russia that this was where urban culture came from. Speaking of identity overall, we must observe the whole situation in a very multi-layered, multi-network manner, and be able to join everything into a whole. Identity studies are necessary to be respected now and in the future, but to do that, we must understand the mechanism of determinations.