1916年「黑人女性全國聯盟」接管「道格拉斯之家」動機之研究

The Case Study of the National Association of Colored Women and the Douglass Home

「黑人女性全國聯盟」(the National Association of Colored Women)從「道格拉斯紀念館與歷史協會」(The Frederick Douglass Memorial andHistorical Association)手中接下管理「道格拉斯之家」的任務。當「邦聯之女聯合會」觸發了創造南方歷史的動機，造成黑人歷史上的危機之際，「道格拉斯之家」是黑人歷史發展延續性的具體展現。她們將「道格拉斯之家」視為黑人文化的公共財、以道格拉斯的成就喚醒種族的自信心、用「道格拉斯之家」延續爭取內戰歷史解釋權的角力、並藉此證明黑人女性的能力。透過這個研究，我們也可以瞭解黑人女性在保留和宣揚黑人文化的過程中，居間扮演了保管者(preservers)和行動者(agents)的角色。在本研究中，「黑人女性全國聯盟」運用「道格拉斯之家」為媒介，不僅讓黑人歷史成為國家的歷史記憶中的一部份，也進一步重新界定黑人的自我認同。在提昇對於道格拉斯記憶過程中，既強調黑人在內戰中為美國的貢獻，有助於黑人社會整體意識的凝聚，也凸顯他們與白人社會的不同。於是，種族記憶與個人記憶變得息息相關；記憶承擔更多的責任，每個人都有責任記得和保護這些記憶。

An agrarian crisis emerged in the Late Imperial Russia. Whereas peasants and government maintained different viewpoints concerning the causes and resolutions of the crisis, both agreed that land-hungriness was the main reason for the agricultural defects. Imperial officials attempted to introduce individual ownership of land, which was quite successful in Western Europe, in order to substitute for the traditional peasant idea of the usufruct of land as well as commune ownership, i.e. common ownership. Under this principle, the ownership nominally belonged to landowners, while the usufruct of land belonged to peasants permanently. Russian government endeavors encountered strong opposition from the peasantry. Russian peasants believed that the main contributor to the agrarian crisis was that too many landowners held too much land while not cultivating it. Consequently, they demanded a national-wide partition of land, including land belonging to the nobles, government, and church. Furthermore, Russian peasants desired periodic partition of land, on the basis of one cultivator's capability and number of dependents in one's family. Peasants' ideas about land ownership and land use were embedded in the context of their living experiences, cultural values, and traditional customs, especially their commune lives. During the period of Late Imperial Russia, many modern activities and institutions had penetrated into the rural world. Peasants were already experienced in market economy and land trade. They had bought a lot of lands from ex-landowners. Many peasants had owned private lands. Nevertheless, they did not want to apply the principle of individual ownership to their own lands, and asked to preserve the common ownership of the land. They neglected the fact that they gained ownership of private land from their petitions to the government. Many peasants used the elite language, which they newly learned from the political and intellectual elites, to defend their demands as they deemed the new land ownership model unsuitable to their interests.