Critical Heritage Studies in the Post-Socialist Space. Vulnerable Past Uncertain Future Institutionalization of Heritage in Times of Crisis

Pouvoir et patrimoine culinaire : institutionnalisation de la nourriture et transformation des espaces
Power and Culinary Heritage: Institutionalization of Food and Transformation of Spaces

• Aida Aaly ALYMBAEVA (independant researcher) :
  «Culinary Heritage in the Crossroads: Transformation and Institutionalisation in Central Asia»
  Drawing on ethnographic research in the Kyrgyzstani settlement of Chelpek and analysis of digital media
  discourses, this paper examines how food simultaneously signifies ethnic belonging and national identity at local,
  national, and digital levels. It traces how culinary practices, rooted in memory and everyday rituals, transform into
  institutionalised heritage through both grassroots initiatives and state-driven narratives. Central Asia’s position as
  a historical and contemporary crossroads shapes its culinary heritage, creating a space for negotiation between
  nomadic/sedentary constructed dichotomy, Soviet legacies, and post-socialist nation-building. The paper extends
  heritage studies by showing institutionalisation as a creative, multi-sited process that occurs within ongoing social
  transformations. Instead of viewing culinary heritage as a static tradition, I suggest that it emerges through
  dynamic contestations between local lived practices and formal efforts of heritage construction. This illuminates
  the tensions between vulnerable pasts and uncertain futures in the post-socialist space.

• Sergey ABASHIN (independant researcher) :
  «Tajik Qurutob: In Search of New National Brands»
  Food is one of Central Asia’s key brands, actively promoted as part of the region’s international (tourismrelated)
  image. As a shared cultural heritage and the result of migration, intermingling and exchange, food also
  becomes a battleground for competition between various nation states, each striving to establish its own brand of
  national dishes. This tension between transnational/regional and national representations of Central Asian food
  triggers numerous and sometimes heated debates, in which the ethnic origins of dishes are discussed alongside
  their class-based, traditional/modern, unhealthy/healthy, and authentic/inauthentic characteristics. One such
  debate concerns the question of who indeed owns the dish ‘qurutob’, which has become popular in Tajikistan in
  recent years and has already spread beyond its borders. The overview of various opinions on ‘qurutob’ presented
  in this paper will shed light on the identities and debates surrounding them that currently define the social and
  cultural landscape of Central Asia.

• Maria EMANOVSKAYA (independant researcher) :
  « La soviétitude de la nourriture en Russie post-soviétique »
  Since the end of the Soviet Union, questions of “culinary heritage” in Russia have largely remained
  outside the direct interest of central power, developing instead through a dispersed ecosystem of regional
  administrations, enthusiasts, amateur historians, chefs, and nationalist food entrepreneurs. In 2025, this relatively
  informal settlement was disrupted when the Ministry of Industry and Commerce created a special commission
  tasked with codifying “Russian cuisine.” This intervention has rapidly turned culinary heritage into an arena of
  open conflict. Who has the authority to define the national canon, whose regional and minority foodways count as
  “Russian,” and which pasts (and futures) this canon is meant to legitimate?
  This presentation analyzes the controversies triggered by the new State-led codification project as a
  window onto competing heritage regimes. It asks how “gastronomic patriotism” becomes institutionalized, and
  how the translation of everyday food practices into official heritage generates friction between long-standing
  actors of culinary heritagization and newly empowered doctrinal gatekeepers. Rather than treating these disputes
  as a search for historical “truth” or ideological conformity alone, I show how heritagization operates
  simultaneously as cultural governance and as an economic project, sometimes under conditions of legal or
  political pressure.

Zoom  Inscription : aleksandra.kolesnik@uni-bielefeld.de

Programme_CHS_25-26