English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article concentrates on the role of social and spatial processes that influence how architectural sites of the past are deemed part of the cultural heritage. It will focus on the contested architecture of collective farms in post-Soviet Estonia. By analyzing urban–rural dynamics and mnemonic processes dealing with controversial historical periods, it will demonstrate the complex negotiations that are involved in heritagization processes. These complicated processes are illustrated by analyzing three case studies, which show how heritagization is a heterogeneous practice, negotiated on multiple levels in communities, on the collective and private levels, but also between the state and the private sector. The article argues that rural/urban representation and relational dynamics play an important role in heritagization processes. Though the collective-farm architecture was built during the ideologically contested Soviet period, the attitudes towards these premises are intertwined with multi-layered patterns of remembering, which are embedded in local social relations and community identity.

Invisible Legacies and Rural/Urban Dynamics in Heritagization Process of Soviet-Era Collective Farm Buildings