Authors

Discussion

In 2010, the Fidesz-KDNP coalition won a two-third parliamentary supermajority. This unprecedented win paved the way towards Hungary becoming an illiberal state. These 16 years of supermajority rule have been a unique opportunity in Hungary’s post-socialist history for a governing power to assert its own mnemonic vision. This paper will examine how official memory narratives changed during this time, which were utilised, and crucially, to what effect.

In 2000, Foote et al posited that the “patterns of destruction” exhibited by political iconoclasm offer insight into national interpretations of contested historical events. As monuments are “impregnated against attention” and “withdrawn from our senses”, examples of banal nationalism, they are everyday representations of official memory (Musil, 1927; Billig, 1995). As such, by centring their day-to-day invisibility, iconoclastic interactions with monuments can be framed as instances of feedback to official top-down narratives. By examining these instances, patterns in reaction to official memory can be detected. This method of centring patterns instead of individual instances of iconoclasm is an innovative way of tracking the acceptance of official memory narratives and revealing sites of contestation.

How effective has the post-2010 Hungarian state been in asserting its mnemonic vision? Through the lens of the iconoclasm of this era, I will examine how these narratives are rejected, or even sometimes strengthened by an often-disengaged public. I will identify instances of iconoclastic action by doing a content analysis of various Hungarian media outlets for such incidents. By examining examples of official memory, such as commemorative speeches, statue erections and removals, and their interplay with iconoclastic action, this paper will shine a light on issues of contested memory in contemporary Hungary.