Abstract: In the 19th century, Mennonites of German origin began to found numerous settlements in Central Asia. Of the once large number of German settlers, only a few remain in the Republic of Kyrgyzstan today, most having emigrated to Germany after the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, the village of Rot-Front in Kyrgyzstan is an exception: there are still German-Mennonite families living there who maintain a relationship with those who once left. The aim of this article is to investigate these relations with regard to the creation of transnational spaces. Memory can play a central role in the process of formation of such transnational spaces. This article explores these processes through the lens of cultural geography, applying insights of theories of practice to the study of memory landscapes using the case of the village of Rot-Front in Kyrgyzstan. The study is based on a case study approach, including field observation, qualitative interviews, biographical records and discourse analysis. The results of the study unfold in four ways: First, the formation of a collective identity is the main characteristic associated with the village of Rot-Front. Second, the role of artifacts play a minor role in memory practices. Third, the individual memory of Rot-Front is idealized by today’s ‘senior’ generation and fourth, the close exchange between those who emigrated and those who stayed is the basis of a transnational social space of Rot-Front, which will exist only as long as the generations have a personal bond with Rot-Front.







Excerpt: The term postcolonialism has a long and contested history. Indeed, there was at one time an active debate within the field of postcolonial studies on the insertion of a hyphen between the “post” and the “colonialism” of the term. Some argued that the absence of a hyphen mistakenly suggested the end of colonialism, thus making it more palatable in the West. Others suggested that that same absence foregrounded the continuity into the present of the relations and practices of classical colonialism, despite the latter’s formal demise. Thus, there is a sense in which hyphenating the two terms honors the contextual specificity of contemporary states trying to carve out a post-independence national identity after the formal dissolution of European empires, while removing the hyphen may erase the ways that formal independence can mask the colonial continuities that continue to shape the present. Implicit in this debate is the question of how much and what kind of rupture the formal departure of colonial rulers provides in the liberation of the colonized. But also implicit are two much less scrutinized assumptions: First, that the post of colonialism can only occur after the departure of the colonizers, which, second, is also the point at which anticolonialism, whose aim is to evict the colonizer, ceases. Rejecting both these assumptions, Somdeep Sen’s Decolonizing Palestine takes up as its subject of study the complicated relationship between the “post” and the “anti” of colonialism in the context of ongoing settler colonialism. What if postcolonialism and anticolonialism remain deeply imbricated, before and after the departure of the colonizers? How does that relationship manifest itself in the conditions of ongoing settler colonialism? What, in such conditions, does real liberation from colonialism look like?