Topos https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos <p>The Journal for philosophy and cultural studies<em> Topos </em>is an academic peer-reviewed journal.&nbsp;<em>Topos</em><em>&nbsp;</em>emerged in 2000. The publisher of&nbsp;<em>Topos</em> is <a title="European Humanities University" href="https://en.ehu.lt/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">European Humanities University</a> (Vilnius, Lithuania).&nbsp;</p> <p><em>Topos </em>is included in&nbsp;the following datebases:</p> <p><em>- DOAJ&nbsp;(Directory of Open Access Journals)</em></p> <p><em>-&nbsp;EBSCO-CEEAS (Central &amp; Eastern European Academic Source)</em></p> <p><em>- Philosopher’s Index</em></p> <p><em>-&nbsp;Scopus</em></p> <p><em>Topos</em>&nbsp;is published 2 times a year in print and online versions. <em>Topos</em> is a non-commercial journal that provides open access to its contents,<em>&nbsp;</em>which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. All papers submitted to the Editorial board are double-blind peer-reviewed.&nbsp;</p> <p>Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.&nbsp;</p> <p><em>Topos </em>accepts materials in Russian, Belarusian and English (in particular cases publications in other languages of the region are admissible).&nbsp;<em>Topos&nbsp;</em>does not charge APCs or submission charges.</p> <p><em>Topos</em>&nbsp;uses CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license (license URL:&nbsp;http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0).&nbsp;<em>Topos&nbsp;</em>allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions.&nbsp;<em>Topos&nbsp;</em>also permits that authors post items submitted to the journal on personal websites or institutional repositories after publication, while providing bibliographic details that credit its publication in&nbsp;<em>Topos</em>.</p> Европейский гуманитарный университет / European Humanities University en-US Topos 1815-0047 <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">This journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions. </span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">Topos</span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> Journal uses CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license (license URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0).</span></p> DECOLONIZING KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION IN BELARUS AND UKRAINE https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1378 <p>DECOLONIZING KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION IN BELARUS AND UKRAINE</p> Tatiana Shchyttsova Valeria Korablyova ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 5 17 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-5-17 EXPLANATORY POTENTIAL OF THE POSTCOLONIAL APPROACH FOR UNDERSTANDING THE RUSSIA–UKRAINE WAR https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1379 <p>Abstract. The escalation of the Russia–Ukraine confrontation into a fullscale&nbsp;war in 2022 reinforced questions about the deficiencies of the mainstream&nbsp;IR theoretical paradigms in exploring and explaining the development&nbsp;in Eastern Europe. In this article, we examine the explanatory&nbsp;potential that the postcolonial approach in IR can contribute to elucidating&nbsp;Russia’s aggressive behaviour and, no less importantly, Ukraine’s desperate&nbsp;resistance to the invasion. This includes examining the coloniser–colonised dichotomy within the historical context of Russia–Ukraine&nbsp;relations, the Russian neocolonial agenda in independent Ukraine, and the&nbsp;applicability of the concepts of the Other and Subaltern to Russian perceptions&nbsp;of Ukrainians. We offer substantiation of the premise that, although<br>the status of Ukrainians within the Russian Empire and the Soviet&nbsp;Union differed from the experiences of overseas colonies, there are still&nbsp;common features — such as predatory exploitation of human and natural&nbsp;resources, enslavement and forced relocations, and cultural suppression&nbsp;and marginalization of indigenous people — that support the application&nbsp;of a postcolonial approach. The perspective highlighted with the help&nbsp;of the postcolonial lens fills in the gaps inherent in other theoretical approaches,&nbsp;<br>addressing the coloniser’s tendency to use power to retain hegemony&nbsp;and revealing how Russian hybrid perception of Ukrainians as the&nbsp;same people to Russians, but subaltern, shaped Ukrainian culture of resistance&nbsp;to oppression.<br>Keywords: International Relations, Postcolonialism, Neocolonialism, Ukraine,&nbsp;Russia–Ukraine war.</p> Olena Khylko Maksym Khylko ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 18 41 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-18-41 DIALECTICS OF INTERNAL COLONIZATION https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1391 <p>Abstract: The postcolonial paradigm has evolved through various conceptual&nbsp;advancements, from the anthropological concept of “skin” as the basis&nbsp;of dual oppression based on class and race to the semiotic treatment&nbsp;of “skin” as a social interface constructed in practices of “writing on bodies”&nbsp;and discourses. The decolonization in our region raises a new set of&nbsp;problems.&nbsp;On the one hand, it refers to a complex cultural palimpsest. As&nbsp;a basic text of modernity, we have the colonization of the countryside by&nbsp;the city. But on top of the division of the city and the countryside other dividing&nbsp;lines are superimposed: ethnolinguistic divisions (Russian, Ukrainian,&nbsp;Belarusian) and the divisions of imperial and democratic forces. On&nbsp;the other hand, the figure of the Russian colonizer has a specific, neurotic&nbsp;character — a “neurotic view” of its position in the world, the fear of being&nbsp;colonized. And this neurotic fear is displaced from external enemies to internal&nbsp;ones. The Russian Empire, confronting external forces, constantly&nbsp;encounters not only an imaginary enemy, but imperceptibly turns back to&nbsp;itself as a colonized colonizer.<br>Keywords: Postcolonialism, Decolonization, Discursive “skin”, Cultural Palimpsest.</p> Andrei Gornykh ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 42 53 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-42-53 DECOLONIZATION OF HISTORICAL MEMORY IN UKRAINE DURING THE RUSSO-UKRAINIAN WAR: MONUMENTS AND TOPONYMS https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1381 <p>Abstract: The article discusses the politics of memory in Ukraine during&nbsp;the war. The main component of Ukraine’s politics of memory during the&nbsp;war is Decolonization, as a continuation of Decommunization, which began&nbsp;in 2015, and Derussification, which began at the initiative of some local&nbsp;authorities and right-wing activists after the full-scale Russian invasion.&nbsp;Decolonization of memory involves the removal of symbols — names&nbsp;and memorial signs, which are considered markers of Russian imperial policy&nbsp;— from the public space. Ukraine wants to get away from the influence&nbsp;of Russian historiography, to shape its own national historical narrative&nbsp;and politics of memory, connected with the European tradition. The&nbsp;expected result of Decolonization is to destroy any cultural and historical<br>connections between Ukraine and Russia so that no one considers&nbsp;Ukrainians and Russians to be either “one nation” or “brotherly nations.”&nbsp;I see decolonization as a reactive process to the Russian invasion and Putin’s&nbsp;de-Ukrainianization policy, which had no preconditions in Ukrainian&nbsp;society. The article analyses the destruction or appropriation of Soviet/Russian monuments and the renaming of toponyms. Monuments&nbsp;and toponyms&nbsp;associated with Russia and the USSR, with the beginning&nbsp;of a full-scale invasion, began to be perceived as markers of the invader,&nbsp;with which the empire “branded” its own territory. It is believed that by&nbsp;destroying them the victim can fight back by breaking historical ties with&nbsp;the aggressor. A key concept used in Ukrainian narratives in the context<br>of Soviet/Russian monuments and toponyms was the cleansing of sacred&nbsp;land desecrated&nbsp;by enemy markings as well as the cancellation of Russian&nbsp;culture and language.<br>Keywords: Ukraine, Retrotopia, Decommunization, Historical Memory, Memory Politics.</p> Yurii Latysh ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 54 92 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-54-92 “BE NOT WISE IN YOUR OWN CONCEITS”: IS DECOLONIZING ACADEMIC HUMANITARIAN STUDIES POSSIBLE IN BELARUS? (a historian’s perspective) https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1382 <p>Abstract. This article reflects on the possibilities of decolonizing academic&nbsp;research in Belarus. The text is built on the discussions held during the&nbsp;conference The Decolonization of Education and Research in Belarus and&nbsp;Ukraine: Theoretical Challenges and Practical Tasks in Vilnius (September&nbsp;2023), as well as the analysis of academic research and the author’s work&nbsp;experience of more than ten years in a state university. The author discusses&nbsp;the impact of initial and technical-procedural factors on the success&nbsp;of decolonization of Belarusian studies. The situation of the memory&nbsp;war, attacks on history, and the current Belarusian academic environment&nbsp;are referred to the former group of factors, while an ambivalent receptivity&nbsp;of Belarusian scholars and lecturers to new ideas, as well as the uncertainty&nbsp;about the the foundations for a new postcolonial discourse make&nbsp;up the latter group. The paper concludes that positive changes are possible&nbsp;subject to the success of the following processes: the staff of state&nbsp;universities and academic institutions overcomes their habit to uncritically&nbsp;follow orders from “above”, the lustration of personnel is carried out,&nbsp;a common language is found that facilitates dialogue with the public, and&nbsp;new research topics are explored (filling in the “knowledge gaps”). Otherwise,&nbsp;decolonial ideas could be quickly discredited and limited to a narrow&nbsp;intellectual sect while also preserving the foundations of the old system.<br>Keywords: Academic Research, Belarus, Decolonization, Memory War, Self-colonizing, Reforms</p> Maxim Karaliou ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 93 104 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024--2-93-104 ПОСТКОЛОНІАЛЬНІ СИНДРОМИ: ПСИХОЛОГІЧНИЙ ВПЛИВ НА ВИБІР МОВИ В УКРАЇНСЬКО-РОСІЙСЬКОМУ ДВОМОВНОМУ СЕРЕДОВИЩІ https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1383 <p>Abstract: The article presents the results of a survey that is a follow up of&nbsp;research on Ukrainian-Russian bilingualism, which began in 2011 in Vinnytsia&nbsp;(Central Ukraine). The target audience comprised high school students&nbsp;aged 15–18 (483 respondents). In this survey, we aimed to determine&nbsp;whether there have been changes in the psychological factors influencing&nbsp;language choice in bilingual settings compared to a similar survey run in&nbsp;2016. The survey was conducted using a questionnaire distribution method.&nbsp;The survey results reveal an increase in interest in the Ukrainian language&nbsp;compared to 2016. According to the findings, most students identify&nbsp;Ukrainian as their mother tongue. Throughout the observation period, the&nbsp;percentage of students recognizing Ukrainian as their native language has&nbsp;remained high (from 87 % in 2011 to 96 % in 2024).&nbsp;Regarding language tolerance, the latest survey indicates that the number<br>of Ukrainian-speaking respondents switching to Russian when addressed&nbsp;in Russian has sharply decreased: in 2016, 31 % of respondents stated they&nbsp;would respond in Ukrainian, while in 2024, this figure was 67 %. Since&nbsp;2018, the percentage of high school students starting a conversation with&nbsp;a stranger in Ukrainian has increased from 70 % to 94 %.&nbsp;A comparison of psychological factors indicates polarization of attitudes&nbsp;between Ukrainian-speaking and Russian-speaking high school students.&nbsp;Among Ukrainian speakers, the three main reasons why respondents do&nbsp;not use Russian are: 1) “no need to use Russian” (59 % in 2016 and 73 % in&nbsp;2024); 2) “secondary unattractive language” (increased from 24 % in 2016&nbsp;to 62 % in 2024); 3) “consider Russian language unprestigious” (13 % in 2016&nbsp;and 45 % in 2024).&nbsp;External factors (war with Russia) and internal factors (willingness/unwillingness to be tolerant towards someone who speaks another language)&nbsp;affect the change of attitude towards the choice of language in bilingual&nbsp;conditions.<br>Keywords: Ukrainian-Russian bilingualism, Bilingualism, Psychological Factors Influencing Bilingualism Formation, Language Tolerance, Language<br>stability, language prestige, language pendulum effect.</p> Taras Tkachuk ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 105 128 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-105-128 “THE PAST IS IN FRONT OF US”, OR APPROACHING ONE POSSIBLE HISTORY OF BELARUSIAN THEATRE https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1384 <p>Abstract: The article navigates both the existing models of the Belarusian&nbsp;theatre history, challenging the narratives constructed by Soviet&nbsp;historiography, and the nationally oriented models that emerged during&nbsp;the post-Soviet era. By focusing on the decolonial methodology and&nbsp;performative theory, particularly the bodily approach, the author suggests&nbsp;a reevaluation of key concepts such as “tradition” and “experiment” as the&nbsp;primary categories for structuring the theatre framework concept. The&nbsp;central argument is that decolonizing the theatre history goes beyond&nbsp;the emancipation of the cultural narrative within the geopolitical&nbsp;binary “centre-periphery”. The issue is more complex, as it involves&nbsp;a mode of imagination including the emancipation/decolonization/decentralization of theatrical production methods. This approach might&nbsp;facilitate the emergence of multiple historical narratives.<br>Keywords: Belarusian Theatre, History, Decoloniality, Body, Performance</p> Tania Arcimovich ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 129 144 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-129-144 EXPLAINING THE “WESTSPLAINERS”: CAN A WESTERN SCHOLAR BE AN EXPERT ON CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE? https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1385 <p>Abstract: Following the 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the terms&nbsp;“Westsplaining” and “Westsplainer” gained momentum. They are used&nbsp;as a reaction to commentaries that are delivered by established Western&nbsp;intellectuals who lack proper knowledge of the region. Many people&nbsp;from Central and Eastern Europe, as well as some of their Western colleagues,&nbsp;tend to find such commentaries not only useless but also harmful.&nbsp;Far from being a purely theoretical academic contemplation, this type of&nbsp;commentary uses influential Western media forums to provide policy advice&nbsp;that is often based on false assumptions and projections. At the same&nbsp;time, some Westerners may feel wronged here, as the term “Westsplaining”&nbsp;could sound as a strong attempt to deny them the right to participate&nbsp;in expert debate based solely on their personal background. Without&nbsp;claiming a monopoly on the definition, the author attempts to explain why&nbsp;the term makes sense and how it can be used critically without being reduced&nbsp;to a vulgar ad hominem.<br>Keywords: Belarus, Central and Eastern Europe, Knowledge Production,&nbsp;Russia, Ukraine, Westsplaining</p> Aliaksei Kazharski ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 145 155 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-145-155 UKRAINIAN CULTURAL STUDIES AS A “RISKY PROJECT”: REVISION OF THE POST-COLONIAL EXPERIENCE https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1386 <p>Abstract: The article explores the current state of Ukrainian cultural&nbsp;studies, tracing its origins from the late 1980s and its development within&nbsp;Ukrainian universities and the cultural market, with an emphasis on decolonisation&nbsp;processes. It seeks to validate discussions among representatives&nbsp;of various cultural studies schools (Kharkiv, Kyiv, Odesa, Lviv, Ostroh),&nbsp;offering insights into the challenges and progress in the field. The&nbsp;analysis draws from two key discussions: the Vilnius conference “The Decolonisation&nbsp;of Education and Research in Belarus and Ukraine” (September&nbsp;2023) and the UAC Lviv event “Culturology as a Risky Project” (December&nbsp;2023). Despite the establishment of cultural studies following Ukraine&nbsp;obtaining independence in 1991, the field continues to grapple with its objectives&nbsp;in the context of ongoing social and cultural shifts. The article&nbsp;questions whether cultural studies can liberate itself from the legacy of&nbsp;colonised discourse and speculates on its future trajectory amid decolonisation&nbsp;efforts. By examining political and methodological factors, the&nbsp;authors conclude that Ukrainian cultural studies navigate a complex landscape&nbsp;of evolving educational paradigms and societal expectations, defining&nbsp;the unique experience of the “Culturology project” in Ukraine.<br>Keywords: Cultural Studies in Ukraine, Culturology, Decolonisation,&nbsp;Post-colonial Studies, Post-Soviet Thinking, Ukraine, Education, Ukrainian&nbsp;Association of Cultural Studies (UAC), Decolonising Practices.</p> Olha Mukha Oksana Darmoriz Oleksandr Kravchenko Zoriana Rybchynska Oksana Dovgopolova Dmytro Shevchuk ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 156 183 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-156-183 DEVELOPING FUNCTIONAL MULTILINGUALISM IN STUDENT AUDIENCES WITH BELARUSIAN MAJORITY: PRACTICAL PROPOSAL https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1387 <p>Abstract: The proposal contained in the title is linked to the development&nbsp;of multilingualism in student audiences with a Belarusian majority, regardless&nbsp;of the students’ main (first, native, etc.) language. The advantageousness&nbsp;of multilingualism in the educational process is a matter of wide&nbsp;consensus in the thematic literature. The idea of perceiving the entire linguistic&nbsp;repertoire of students as a valuable resource is developed based on&nbsp;approaches such as systemic functional linguistics, translanguaging and&nbsp;linguistic anthropology in education. The text considers the specifics of&nbsp;the application of these approaches in the Belarusian context. Multilingualism&nbsp;in Belarusian education is rather a declared condition than the&nbsp;real one, despite a high social need for it in society. The recommendations&nbsp;formulated in this paper deal with the main aspects of the organization&nbsp;of teaching aimed at the development of multilingual skills in Belarusian&nbsp;students. It is suggested that, in the first place, the practical level&nbsp;of language proficiency must be identified at university, since the school&nbsp;marks often fall short of indicating the actual ability to use the language.&nbsp;The proposals then elaborate on the formulation, together with students,&nbsp;of motivations for learning languages – and in particular, the Belarusian<br>language. It is argued that young people often find such motivations beyond&nbsp;identitarian discourses of preserving the culture, history, or traditions,&nbsp;increasingly focusing instead on access to social capital, technology,&nbsp;mobility, artworks, and popular culture. The principle of multimodality in&nbsp;educational process is proposed, which can bring multilingualism into the&nbsp;new media dominated routine of young people. The capacity of the Belarusian&nbsp;language to serve for intercultural communication is discussed. It&nbsp;is argued that both the theory and empiric data should be multilingual to&nbsp;avoid hierarchical&nbsp;diglossia. Development of multilingualism among students&nbsp;also requires that teachers acquire and improve the necessary skills.<br>Keywords: Multilingualism, Inclusive Education, Translanguaging, Emancipatory<br>pedagogy; Belarusian language; practical recommendations.</p> Andrei Vazyanau ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 184 205 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-184-205 UNIVERSALIST CLAIMS VS. LOCAL PERSPECTIVES: DECOLONISING “ACADEMIC WRITING IN ENGLISH” https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1388 <p>Abstract: Many scholars and university students whose first language is&nbsp;not English need to write in English to publish in international journals&nbsp;and to attend international conferences. Gatekeepers — editors and conference&nbsp;organizers — screen submissions for linguistic competence but&nbsp;also for adherence to certain internationally accepted norms, such as&nbsp;writing that is argument-driven rather than descriptive or data-driven.&nbsp;Courses and training sessions I have taught under the general rubric “Academic&nbsp;Writing in English” (AWE) sought to improve students’ chances&nbsp;with international publications and conferences by encouraging them to&nbsp;strengthen their central arguments.&nbsp;While confident of the benefits of AWE instruction, I had an uneasy conscience&nbsp;about its not so hidden universalist claim that forms of Anglo-American academic inquiry are superior to others. Such claims, coupled&nbsp;with the presumption of their universal applicability, are today being challenged&nbsp;by decolonising critiques. Bluntly put, is Academic Writing in English&nbsp;guilty of neo-colonialism because it recommends norms developed in&nbsp;the global (north)west?&nbsp;There is more to academic writing in English, of course, than attention to&nbsp;an argument-driven structure. However, it is the promotion of such standards&nbsp;that makes AWE instruction vulnerable to the decolonising critique.&nbsp;To apply the critique to AWE pedagogy, this article reviews the impact&nbsp;of the decoloniality literature on education and research in Belarus and&nbsp;Ukraine, and highlights resistance in those countries against Russian cultural&nbsp;hegemony.&nbsp;After framing the topic and reviewing the cultural struggle in Belarus and&nbsp;Ukraine, I argue that for Academic Writing in English to be truly beneficial,<br>instruction must be self-critical, allowing and encouraging participants&nbsp;to engage in collective self-reflection to enable informed decisions&nbsp;regarding cultural norms.&nbsp;The focus on Academic Writing in English as taught in Eastern Europe&nbsp;suggests broader comparisons regarding the clash between universalist&nbsp;claims and local perspectives in other regions of the world.<br>Keywords: Academic Writing in English, Decolonisation, Decoloniality, Universalist Claims, Education and Research in Belarus and Ukraine.</p> Andrzej W. Tymowski ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 206 227 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-206-227 PARVULESCU, ANCA, and MANUELA BOATCĂ. Creolizing the Modern: Transylvania across Empires. Cornell University Press, 2022. https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1389 <p>PARVULESCU, ANCA, and MANUELA BOATCĂ. Creolizing the Modern: Transylvania across Empires. Cornell University Press, 2022.</p> Syeda Q. Masood ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 228 234 10.61095/https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-228-234 Download the full issue https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1390 * * ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 1 234 Contents https://journals.ehu.lt/index.php/topos/article/view/1377 * * * ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2024-12-30 2024-12-30 2 1 4