Oldal 186 [186]
184 GÁBOR MÁTÉ
diverse purposes, for instance, political messages, or one may find and express
ones identity in it, define a landscape as legacy, or involve it in individual or
collective acts of memory. British historian Simon Schama holds that the role of
human imagination and gregariousness are so important that landscape is more a
product of culture than of nature. It is the projection of the imagination onto
trees, waters, and rocks (Schama 1996: 61).
One of its most important aspects is perhaps its use as a “projection screen” for
mediating political messages to a target audience. In the 18" and 19" centuries,
the “moral landscape” was the symbol of orderly, ethical, better living and good
government. This — as Sandor Békési writes — turned into the “homeland” in the
age of Romanticism and at the same time into a surface of reference for Romantic
art, geography, ecology, and nature protection’ (Békési 1999). From the 20" century
onwards, human beings gradually came into possession of incomparably larger
amounts of natural resources for realizing their plans of transformation, which
they had previously relegated to the category of wayward imagination. This occurred
not only in the Age of Reason and with Western capitalism coveting more and
more energy, but also in the Socialist block with its radical industrialization. There,
the utilitarian view resulted in immense programs designed at transforming nature,
making people believe that nature could be subdued by humanity (see: Hajdú
2006). Our current concepts of the landscape imbued in ideologies are increasingly
influenced by the ever “louder” ecological crisis, which has led to the transformation
of production, strengthening of nature and environmental protection, and also to
the growing presence of Green political parties.
In Western Europe, characterized by a diversity of juxtaposed landscapes,
landscape has become heritage. This implies many different identities (on this
topic, see Csorba 2010). Researchers who value diversity created institutions and
fortified with legal protection the requisites of the past. In addition to open-air
museums showing the material cultural heritage of the past, from the 1960s, eco
museums intent on conserving the morphology and values of the landscape began
to appear as well (Borelli — Davis 2012). Connected to this is the common
experience that the transformation of the landscapes has accelerated and the sight
of change is a permanent source of tension. Changes since our childhood make
us ponder visions of mortality, and decay. For those born in the 20" century, this
implies the experience of the disappearance of the landscapes of the peasantry, i.e.,
of small-scale landscapes (see: Békési 1999). Therefore, in addition to becoming
heritage, landscapes also represent longed-for states with “imagined” characteristics.
This is partially due to their monetary value in the tourism industry.
On a related note, landscapes are also fields of rivalry. It is typical of our age to
have a simultaneous conglomerate of diverse ideologies, religious dogmas, and
political orientations, sometimes all influencing a certain space. An apt example
is prehistoric Stonehenge, “where archaeologists, tourists, Druids, New Age
travelers, English Heritage and the National Trust all have their own images,
symbolism and views regarding the ways in which the area should be preserved
and its landscapes managed and consumed.” (Whyte 2002: 8).
The encounter of different value systems and attitudes can be observed in
connection with the “one-thousand-year-old border in Gyimes” about which one
> Questions of landscape and nature protection are also discussed in Anna Varga’s essay.