Apie dabartį ir istorinę sąmonę

LTŽmogaus (ypač to, kuris savo darbais formuoja visuomeninę sąmonę) istorijos suvokimas, atsakomybės ir pilietiškumo jausmas yra vienas svarbiausių kultūros raidos klausimų. Kad galėtų liudyti istoriją, asmuo privalo turėti gyvą istorinę sąmonę. Dabar vis labiau ryškėja voliuntarizmo apraiškos, kai subjektyvi nuomonė pateikiama kaip visuotinai priimtas faktas ar neginčijama tiesa. Lietuvių liaudies teatras, visais laikais egzistavęs ir plėtojęsis kaip savaime suvokiamas reiškinys, mokslinėje plotmėje ir informaciniuose leidiniuose staiga imamas neigti. Šiame straipsnyje bandoma atsekti to vyksmo priežastis ir argumentuotai paneigti kultūros faktų neatitinkančius teiginius. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Brandi asmenybė; Esminė V. Maknio paklaida; Istorinė sąmonė; Klojiminė kultūra; Liaudies teatras; Mokslinė etika; Požiūriai į lietuvių liaudies teatrą; Teatrinė liaudies savimonė; Teatro istoriografija; Tradicija; Attitudes toward Lithuanian folk theatre; Barn culture; Folk theater; Folk theatre; Historical conscioousness; Historical consiousness; Mature personality; Scientific ethic; Scientific ethics; Self- consciousness of folk theatre; The essential V. Maknys error; Theatre historiography; Tradition.

ENFolk theatre must be viewed as a cultural tradition or heritage. Our philosopher Antanas Maceina says that "the tradition is never obsolete because it is the creative expression of people <...>, the tradition is all that people created during centuries <...>, cultural tradition is the embodiment of people’s experience forms". However, the problem of the given case lies not in the tradition itself, but in the valuator’s personality. Historical consciousness comes to the fore. One may be the connoisseur of the global theater culture, but will not be compared to a Japanese who saw the fate of kabuki theatre or a Greek shielding Dionysiacs in ones genetic memory. Their historical consciousness is different. Teaching about an individual within history and its historical consciousness is the most important reference for contemporary cultural valuator. Individual has to develop from history and be responsible for the nation’s historical interpretation. The perception of folk theatre is within Lithuanians blood. Forbidden nature idolatry, deprivation of press, the abolished state; but we have saved various forms of folk performances. It lies in our historical consciousness. Woe to those who did not experience the forbidden fruit and did not inherit with the mother’s milk. The negation of Lithuanian People’s Theatre is the consequence of spiritual disability or the complete atrophy of historical consciousness.The main cultural conflict tangled up when the theatricologist Irena Aleksaitė published brutal article about the works of the Lithuanian theatre history patriarch’s Vytautas Maknys works, and unreasonably argued that "a key theatre historian’s error is the isolation or the identification of Folk theatre". First, Folk Theater is neither structure nor organization. As a folk song or folk architecture, or cross working, it is the consequence of the manifestation of people’s creativity. Neither folk singers, or carpenter had any organizational structures, but nobody doubt that the individual people or groups of people were folk masters or folk singers who preserved and developed the spirit of the nation. Acting is also an integral part of folk art. Theatricologist may have ones own view, but cannot impose it to the entire nation. After the publication of the mentioned I. Aleksaitė’s article all information about Lithuanian folk theater as ethnic cultural object was cleared off from the encyclopedic publications. A natural question occurs: what can condition such important issues of national culture and whether such things are legal. [From the publication]