evropska konvencija o krajini - Ministrstvo za infrastrukturo in prostor

48Delavnica 1 / Workshop 1polje mitskega, ji preprečuje, da bi se posodobilain postala, v skladu s sodobnimi družbenimispremembami, manj urejena in manj pregledna.Ena predstava, sprejeta kot nespremenljiva,zagotavlja varnost in vzpostavlja jasno sliko otem, kaj je v pomenskem smislu središčni in kajobrobni prostor. K njej se zato zatekamo zlasti vodbobjih dejansko ali namišljeno ogroženeistovetnosti, saj nam daje občutek pripadnostiprostoru, ki ga naseljujemo. Kot je ugotovil žeangleški geograf Lowenthal, so krajine zaustvarjanje iluzije varnosti najustreznejše – vsajv preteklosti so se namreč zelo počasi, komajopazno spreminjale 8 .Ker so skupinske identitete vselej vsaj delno,nacionalna pa v celoti, zgrajene na mitologijah,ni presenetljivo, da so te mitologije tudi dejavnikioblikovanja pomenske členitve prostora.Raziskava je raziskala, kako je k členitvinacionalnega ozemlja prispevala slovenskanacionalna mitologija. Ob dejstvu, dageografske in klimatske značilnosti določenegaobmočja vplivajo na izbiro določenih rab in tudina to, kako se posamezne rabe prostorskostukturirajo, da na stukturiranost prostoravplivata družbeni sistem in ekonomska moč, nemoremo zanikati vpliva ideologije in političnestrategije, ki podobe krajin ne določata nič manjkot gospodarski sistem.Kako poteka izbiranje posameznih krajev inkrajinskih tipov oziroma »investiranje smisla«?Izbiranje prvin v t. i. podobo nacionalnegaprostora, izbiranje »slovenskih« krajin potekapreko osebnih mnenj, vendar je na končni ravnipredvsem rezultat sistemskega delovanjaideoloških aparatov države 9 , zaradi česar jelahko podoba, s katero se kot nacija (ali skupina)istovetimo, v marsičem različna od stvarnosti.Ključna pri tem je razlika med objektivnimi,fizičnimi prostorskimi strukturami tersubjektivno sliko, ki se (je) konstituira(la) in sevzdržuje in spreminja v procesih družbenekomunikacije.Na skupinski ravni, zlasti na nacionalni, seosnovna istovetnost, »občutenje doma«dopolnjuje z občutenjem domovine, ki je lahkoideological background of this relationship areall current issues within Europe. Within thisnewly emerged all-embracing community someparts are still strongly rooted in their individual orcommon past. The assumptions governing therelationships toward landscape are quite insidious,including the assumptions behind the conceptsof nature and its protection 7 . It is importantto be constantly reminded of their mighty presence.The nostalgic obsession with the past positions»the image of the homeland« in the field of mythand allows it to deny its own modernisation andto continue to stay orderly and secure. One image,accepted us unchangeable, provides (imagined)security and constitutes a clear distinctionbetween what it symbolically central and whata marginal space. It acts as a refuge for the sentimentalorientation in times of actually (orseemingly) threatened identity, because it providesa felling of belonging to the territory ashome. As was quite wittily observed by a Britishgeographer David Lowenthal landscapes are themost suitable tool for the creation of the illusionof safety – until our times they were a subject ofa very slow, almost unperceivable change 8 .While common identities are at partially, nationalidentities are entirely built on mythologies,thus it is not surprising that these same mythologiesare also the factors of the symbolic articulationof space. Research on the case ofSlovenia examined how Slovenian national mythologycontributed to the articulation of thenational space. In spite the fact that geographicand climatic characteristics of a certain areacondition the selection of the specific land useand the structural articulation of the land useand that articulation of space is also due to thesocial system and the level of economic power,the influence of the ideology and political strategycan not be denied – they condition the appearanceof landscapes no less that the economicsystem.The selection of the specific places and landscapesinto the general conception is based onthe assignment of meaning. Specific landscapesor places emerge as representative of the whole,8Glej David Lowenthal, »Landscape as Living Legacy«, v Meto Vroom ed. The Landscape of Symbols (Wageningen, 2002): 13-26.See David Lowenthal, »Landscape as Living Legacy«, in Meto Vroom ed. The Landscape of Symbols (Wageningen, 2002): 13-26.9Ideološki aparati, kakor jih je opredelil Althusser, so prisotni v vsaki institucionalizirani skupnosti, tudi v Evropski Uniji.Ideological apparatus as defined by Althusser, are present in any institutionalized society, also in European union.10Glej David Lowenthal, »Past time, Present Place: Landscape and Memory« v The Geographical Review 1(1975): 1-36.See David Lowenthal, »Past time, Present Place: Landscape and Memory«, The Geographical Review 1(1975): 1-36.