Nom de carnet:
Date de publication:
Lundi 28 Avril 2025 - 14:45
Publié ici :
28 Avril 2025Mis à jour le :
28 Avril 2025Zone géographique:
- Europe
Source:
http://cefres.hypotheses.org/feed
Report from the 2nd international workshop “Dislocated Landscape”
Dislocated Landscape: Disruptions and Reconfigurations in the Humanities and Social Sciences since the Russian Invasion of Ukraine. Second international workshop with CEFRES non-residential fellows, Prague, October 22-23, 2024.
A review by Bleuenn Bidois and Nathan Ridel, completed by Mateusz Chmurski.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Humanities and Social Sciences in (and dedicated to) Central and Eastern Europe have been constantly reshaped. Disrupting the post-Cold war order, the Russian invasion has led to several reconfigurations in contemporary societies, economies, or cultures. With its geopolitical impetus, the conflict has also not only impeded but also initiated or strengthened research endeavours. While numerous conceptual, thematic, or institutional changes that have occurred recently will need to be seized and analysed in the years to come, this dislocated (academic) landscape shall (and needs to) be questioned already.
In continuation with the 2023 edition of the workshop with CEFRES non-residential fellows in humanities and social sciences, the 2024 edition aimed at mapping this “Dislocated Landscape”: addressing methods, models and objects at the centre of current academic attention of the 21 non-residential fellows in Humanities and Social Sciences present at CEFRES, representing 9 academic cities all around Ukraine. The event reunited chairs and discussants from CEFRES Platform partners: the Czech Academy of Sciences, Charles University, but also other French and Central European academic institutions. Three preliminary assumptions constituted the framework of the symposium:
1) While Ukrainian academia is facing the war and its consequences daily, it is also developing ties with its growing scientific diaspora. Security threats, mobility challenges and administrative barriers are only a few of the difficulties being faced. Still, researchers circulate to and from Ukraine, remote programs attempt at connecting and developing science with technological means at our disposal, and the “most documented war” opens a series of epistemological, ethical, legal, or “simply” technological questions (discussed e.g. recently at June 4-6, 2024 symposium at the Centre for Urban History in Lviv). It is also an evident proof of efforts to develop documentation and research in the face of violence, but also to invent new research tools, propose new analytical models, or evaluate the impact of processes and reconfigurations that have occurred.
2) In the meantime, Western academics try to “retrospect and prospect” (Johnson 2023) to urgently react on ongoing events on popular (and political) demand. Numerous ongoing reconfigurations of institutions, positions and research programs testify to a situation where expertise (and often experts themselves) suddenly appears painfully lacking. As a result, Ukrainian scholars in the West moved suddenly from facing epistemic mistrust to experiencing epistemic exploitation (Khromeychuk 2022: 194). Symbolic measures are being (finally) taken: to quote only one but significant example, a chair of Ukrainian Studies has been recreated after years of absence at Sorbonne University, in the Central-European Studies Department, becoming the second active in all France.
3) It may appear that instead of speaking about, academia is finally speaking with Ukrainian research. No atter how uneasy it is to say at this stage, in the rapidly changing context of “a palimpsest of narratives” growing constantly in density (Korablyova 2022). Therefore, it seemed even more important to regularly take a step back, if it is possible, and have a joint, interdisciplinary reflection on recent evolutions in academia across disciplines, no matter how difficult any attempt on a synthetic approach may appear.
The organizers: Pavlo Khudish, Mateusz Chmurski & Valeriya Korablyova
The symposium, opened by HE Ambassadors of Ukraine and France to the Czech Republic, Vasyl Zvarych and Stéphane Crouzat, started with a panel discussing the evolutions of legal landscape in the context of the ongoing war and growing UA-EU convergence. The war has accelerated both structural reforms and deeper legal transformations in Ukraine, and has profoundly impacted Ukraine’s legal system, accelerating reforms while revealing structural vulnerabilities. According to Mykola Gnatiuk (Kyiv-Mohyla Academy), martial law, in particular, had a dual effect on public procurement: it has revealed persistent issues such as corruption, while simultaneously prompting efforts toward greater transparency and efficiency—key criteria for EU accession. The Europeanization of Ukrainian public law, as observed by Tetyana Karabin (Uzhhorod University), has progressed beyond legislative alignment, reflecting deeper transformations in institutional logics and legal norms, influenced in part by the long-standing presence of European soft law. At the same time, wartime realities have brought renewed attention to human rights, including the legal recognition of same-sex partnerships observed by Victoria Gerbut (Uzhhorod University). These legal adaptations respond to urgent practical needs on the front lines while also signalling Ukraine’s shift away from Russian values and toward European standards.
The second panel of the symposium was dedicated to the impact of war and imperial legacies on Ukrainian cultural heritage and identity, with a particular focus on religious sites and the postcolonial rethinking of historical narratives. Anna Yanenko (Shevchenko University of Kyiv, Institute of Archaeology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine) analysed how sacral spaces have been historically targeted by totalitarian regimes, a trend that persists today with hundreds of religious buildings damaged since 2022. Yet, she argued, this ongoing destruction has contributed to a redefinition of sacrality, as ordinary monuments and buildings increasingly acquire commemorative and symbolic functions. Nazar Kozak (Ethnology Institute, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine) claimed in turn that a postcolonial lens remains essential for approaching heritage reconstruction, especially in addressing how Soviet-era restorations served to obscure or appropriate Ukrainian identity under imperial aesthetics. The application of postcolonial theory was also extended by Roman Dzyk (Chernivtsi University) to broader academic fields, offering tools to better understand the nature of Russian imperialism and the distinct forms of cultural domination experienced by Ukraine (distinct from Western colonial models). According to Diana Hryniuk (Shevchenko University, Kyiv), the ongoing war has further underscored the urgent need for state-supported digital preservation strategies and emergency protection plans for museums and cultural collections.
The Russian invasion has also brought renewed attention to the visual dimensions of violence and identity construction in post-imperial contexts. Violence, both physical and symbolic, was examined by Sergii Shevtsov (Mechnikov University, Odesa) as a foundational element in the shaping of identity and territorial belonging, raising questions about its role as a recurring mechanism of self-definition in response to domination. Contemporary Russian state narratives were shown by Viktoriia Myronenko (Karpenko-Kary University, Kyiv) to draw on deeply rooted ideological tropes, including notions of racialized purity and exceptionalism, which echo the visual language of Nazi ideology: the legacy of Soviet propaganda continues to inform current strategies of visual persuasion, notably in the depiction of national superiority and imperial legitimacy. This resonates with earlier struggles for Ukrainian independence, as observed by Vasyl Derevinsky (University of Construction and Architecture, Kyiv) underlining recurring patterns in both imperial repression and civic resistance. In parallel and in response, artistic practices were presented by Natalia Marakhovska (Mariupol University) as instruments of social repair and intercultural dialogue, particularly through inclusive creative workshops designed for displaced Ukrainian populations. In this context, art emerges not only as a means of expression, but also as a space for learning, healing, and cultural resilience.
A subsequent panel was devoted to the role of language in shaping identity and cultural practices in the context of war. All presentations insisted on the transformative impact of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine on linguistic practices, ideologies, and transmission. Natalia Matveieva (Hnatiuk University, Ternopil) observed how the increasing use and perception of Ukrainian as a mother tongue reflects a broader shift in national consciousness, accompanied by a growing rejection of the Russian language. This transformation is not limited to individual preference but speaks to a collective redefinition of linguistic belonging, where the mother tongue is increasingly understood as the language of the motherland. Among younger generations, and particularly within Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar communities interrogated by Ivanna Tsar (National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine), the war has intensified efforts to preserve and reclaim endangered languages as acts of cultural resistance. Beyond everyday usage, Oleksii Ankhym (Franko State University, Zhytomyr) claims on the example of German-Ukrainian authors, these dynamics also manifest in literary production, as exiled Ukrainian writers construct a transnational space that bridges multiple linguistic and cultural frameworks, challenging conventional notions of national literature. At the same time, the generational shift brought by the digital age has introduced new cognitive patterns—referred to by Maryna Litvinova (Educational and Scientific Institute, Makarov University, Mykolaiv) as “mosaic thinking”—that reshape how information is processed and transmitted, creating both opportunities and frictions within traditional educational models.
While language emerged as a central vector for expressing cultural resistance and reimagining identity, questions of heritage, memory, and the long-term effects of violence were explored through a historical and artistic lens. Drawing on distinct yet interrelated case studies, the following contributions examined how violence (physical, symbolic, or structural) shapes the negotiation of identity and belonging across time and space. The complex postwar return of Jewish Holocaust survivors to Transcarpathia scrutinized by Pavlo Khudish (Uzhhorod University) revealed deep tensions surrounding property restitution and postwar coexistence, particularly between rural and urban. Bohdan Shumylovych (Lviv Center for Urban History) mobilized in turn the concept of “quiet trauma” to interpret recent Ukrainian visual art, particularly works produced in the wake of atrocities such as those in Bucha, which function not only as individual expressions but also as collective attempts to process trauma hard to verbalize, illuminating the role of art in making visible the invisible scars of war. Finally, in Vadym Adadurov’s paper (Catholic University, Lviv) the life of Eli Borschak served as a powerful case study in the strategic reinvention of identity under pressure. His successive transformations—from Jewish heritage to Russian Orthodoxy, to Ukrainian nationalism, and finally to intellectual exile in Paris—highlighted the malleability of identity as both a means of survival and a reflection of shifting political landscapes.
The last panel of the symposium was dedicated to the economic impacts of the war in Ukraine and offered perspectives on both current challenges and future evolutions. The war has generated not only destruction and disruption but also opportunities to rethink economic models, Volodymyr Momot (Nobel University, Dnipro) claims, discussing that the rise of circular economic practices as a pragmatic response to widespread shortages. Despite structural obstacles, these practices have driven grassroots innovation and were framed as a potential foundation for more sustainable economic reform in the future. Ukraine’s IT sector, observed by Ilona Dumanska (Khmelnytsky University), reveals itself as remarkably resilient amid conflict, was presented as a case of successful adaptation. Its growth—fuelled by its inherently digital structure, strategic government support, and entrepreneurial dynamism—has earned the country the label of “digital tiger,” and illustrates how certain sectors can thrive under conditions of crisis. Economic modelling was also brought to bear by Nataliia Dziubanovska (West University, Ternopil) on questions of migration and trade. Correlations between Ukrainian asylum applications and trade volumes with Visegrád countries were thus analysed to show how population movements can serve as early indicators of shifting trade dynamics. These findings offer important insights for policy design in future crises. Complementing this approach, advanced tools for forecasting trade between Ukraine and EU member states in wartime conditions were introduced by Olesia Totska (Volyn University, Lutsk), underscoring the growing importance of predictive analytics and seasonality indices in developing responsive and forward-looking economic strategies. Taken together, these perspectives offered a nuanced view of economic resilience, adaptation, and the strategic planning required to meet both immediate needs and long-term goals.
Autres billets du ou des carnets de l'IFRE
 CEFRES
Atelier EHESS-UMIFRE coorganisé par le CEFRES, l’EHESS, le...
|
 CEFRES
Written by Marek Kettner (Faculty of Arts, Charles...
|
 CEFRES
The international symposium Central-European Masculinities...
|
 CEFRES
As part of the TANDEM project « Home Beyond Species », Petr...
|
 CEFRES
A review by Pierre Maunaury-Lecerf, stagiaire au CEFRES
The...
|
 CEFRES
Review written by Astrid Greve Kristensen (PhD student,...
|
 CEFRES
Belarusian exiles in Central and Eastern Europe after 2020...
|
 CEFRES
This workshop, coorganized by CEFRES in partnership with...
|
 CEFRES
Leyla Dakhli (dir.), L’Esprit de la révolte : archives et...
|