Page 104 - Dark Shades of Istria
P. 104
Trans-Border Region of Istria
cial reasons for this attitude cannot be neglected. In any case, tourism
can offer many development opportunities for this heritage, which is at
least partially exploited in nearby Vodnjan and Bale (i.e. military fortifi-
cations).
5.4 Chapter Conclusion
As an Upper Adriatic region, Istria has had a dynamic 20th century:
this includes three military conflicts and the Cold War, the ‘dungeon
of nations’ and three totalitarian regimes, a revolutionary takeover of
power and an almost constant open border issue (even today), which
made this area one of the (South) European hotspots; Istria, where the
Italians behaved as a culturally superior nation for centuries, acquired
the image of an area of conflicts, intolerance and lack of understanding
(Ashbrook, 2006, p. 28; Orlić, 2012, p. 13; Šetić, 2008, p. 105). Regardless
of the complex socio-political situation, the area simultaneously devel-
oped economically, and is more developed today compared to the neigh-
bouring regions in Slovenia and Croatia. The Istrian Peninsula is also
an internationally recognisable tourist destination and the most touris-
tically developed part of both countries. Hence, ‘Istria is both a brand for
autonomy and a brand for the Croatian tourism’ (Banovac et al., 2014,
p. 463).
However, there is still untapped potential, like the exploitation of mil-
itary heritage, which reflects the past identity and development of Istria
(Pula) – see Urošević (2013). If we take into consideration the claims of
McKay (2013), McKenna and Ward (2007), and Reynolds and Lake (2010)
– see sub-chapter 2.4 ‘Warfare Tourism’ – the orientation toward mili-
tary heritage can be understood as a continuation of sentimentalisation of
armed forces and militarisation. Therefore, as we can see from the previ-
ous sub-chapters, the Istrians somehow dissociate themselves from their
military history – also for economic reasons.
In these circumstances, a special ‘Istrian-style memory’ was developed.
Memory that depends on the relations between Istrian Slavs and Ital-
ians, who still live separately, and where conflicts still arise at the moment
when various memories meet – see Hrobat Virloget (2015, pp. 547–548),
and Hrobat Virloget and Čebron Lipovec (2017, p. 66). It can be linked to
‘Istrianity,’ which is not a homogenous phenomenon. As a result, it can
be claimed that ‘Istrian-style memory’ is not homogeneous, either. It is
merely a reflection of the Istrian social reality marked by pluri-identity,
multiculturalism and dynamic history; a ‘memory system’ composed of
104
cial reasons for this attitude cannot be neglected. In any case, tourism
can offer many development opportunities for this heritage, which is at
least partially exploited in nearby Vodnjan and Bale (i.e. military fortifi-
cations).
5.4 Chapter Conclusion
As an Upper Adriatic region, Istria has had a dynamic 20th century:
this includes three military conflicts and the Cold War, the ‘dungeon
of nations’ and three totalitarian regimes, a revolutionary takeover of
power and an almost constant open border issue (even today), which
made this area one of the (South) European hotspots; Istria, where the
Italians behaved as a culturally superior nation for centuries, acquired
the image of an area of conflicts, intolerance and lack of understanding
(Ashbrook, 2006, p. 28; Orlić, 2012, p. 13; Šetić, 2008, p. 105). Regardless
of the complex socio-political situation, the area simultaneously devel-
oped economically, and is more developed today compared to the neigh-
bouring regions in Slovenia and Croatia. The Istrian Peninsula is also
an internationally recognisable tourist destination and the most touris-
tically developed part of both countries. Hence, ‘Istria is both a brand for
autonomy and a brand for the Croatian tourism’ (Banovac et al., 2014,
p. 463).
However, there is still untapped potential, like the exploitation of mil-
itary heritage, which reflects the past identity and development of Istria
(Pula) – see Urošević (2013). If we take into consideration the claims of
McKay (2013), McKenna and Ward (2007), and Reynolds and Lake (2010)
– see sub-chapter 2.4 ‘Warfare Tourism’ – the orientation toward mili-
tary heritage can be understood as a continuation of sentimentalisation of
armed forces and militarisation. Therefore, as we can see from the previ-
ous sub-chapters, the Istrians somehow dissociate themselves from their
military history – also for economic reasons.
In these circumstances, a special ‘Istrian-style memory’ was developed.
Memory that depends on the relations between Istrian Slavs and Ital-
ians, who still live separately, and where conflicts still arise at the moment
when various memories meet – see Hrobat Virloget (2015, pp. 547–548),
and Hrobat Virloget and Čebron Lipovec (2017, p. 66). It can be linked to
‘Istrianity,’ which is not a homogenous phenomenon. As a result, it can
be claimed that ‘Istrian-style memory’ is not homogeneous, either. It is
merely a reflection of the Istrian social reality marked by pluri-identity,
multiculturalism and dynamic history; a ‘memory system’ composed of
104
