INTANGIBLE INDUSTRIAL HERITAGE OF VELA LUKA: ORAL HISTORIES OF FABRIKA, AMBALAŽA AND GREBEN

INTRODUCTION

This paper draws on the research conducted in the years 2014 – 2018, supported by Siva Zona association, based in Korčula.¹1 In 2010, one

of the authors began conducting ethnographic research by recording the memories of her grandmother and her grandmother’s colleagues. Formal research, as part of the “Industrial Heritage of Korčula Island” project, started within the aforementioned association and included more extensive interviews with both old and new informants, as well as systematic archiving and digitalisation of materials, audio tracks, photographs, etc. The project aims to encompass scientific and artistic recording, along with the interpretation and revaluation of intangible industrial heritage, which is primarily a collective memory. So far, a number of articles and expert texts have been published,²2 the topic has been presented at several international conferences,³3 and an art workshop with the local community is planned to take place by the end of 2018, with the aim of encouraging intergenerational connectivity.

The rich industrial history and heritage of the island of Korčula, as well as the recent decay of a large part of its industrial facilities, form the basis for this research. In the 20^th century, the economy of the island of Korčula was largely based on its prosperous industry, which included shipbuilding, fish processing and the manufacturing of packaging, the textile industry and production of paint, adhesives, varnishes, as well as electronic devices.⁴4 Vela Luka is a small town with approximately 4000 inhabitants. In the second half of the 20^th century, the landscape of Vela Luka was marked by four factories: Jadranka (the so-called Fabrika), a fish processing and canning factory founded in 1892;⁵5 Greben (the so-called Škver), a

The factory in Vela Luka was one of small shipyard founded in 1948;⁶6 8. mart (the so-called Ambalaža), a tin packaging factory founded in 1965;⁷7 and TEU (the so-called Elektronika), an electronic component factory founded in 1974.⁸8 Agriculture had been the dominant sector in Vela Luka until the 1970s, when industry, commerce, tourism, health and other sectors took over (Barčot 1993:49) (Figure 1).

Figure 1 Shipyard Greben, Vela Luka, 1970. Courtesy of Udruga Likovno stvaralaštvo Vele Luke

them, and its founding was initiated by the Viennese industrialist Carl Warchanek, who bought a fish-salting machine in 1889 to Bobovišće Bay and started production in 1892 (as of 19 February 2017, the Vela Luka Municipality listed it on its website:http://www.velaluka.hr/dokumenti.asp?id=120).

These industrial plants (exceptTEU) intensified their production during socialism, in the period of post-war modernisation and industrialisation, which significantly influenced local conditions and enhanced the standard of living in the long term. Industrialisation resulted in increased employment and improved living conditions and mobility, along with transforming the local space by loosening traditional social control (Cifrić 1987:41).⁹9

ETHNOGRAPHIC TURN AND RESEARCH POSITIONING

The dominant narrative adopted by experts and researchers with regard to industrial heritage is based on common historical insight and is mostly presented through articles published in local journals or almanacs, focused on factual aspects such as dates of opening, production capacities, lists of the owners and managers, economic plans and strategies, etc.¹⁰10 Conversations with informants and the inspection of archives, libraries and private collections both show that the official written history of industry is focused on the formal framework, representative and famous moments and achievements in the history of the factories.¹¹11 Such material is limited by its singular perspective and has been recorded exclusively by men. There is a disparity not only between the narrowness of recording formal elements and the wide scope, complexity and subversiveness of the lived experience,

In 1974, Dalmatinska plovidba joined the electronics factory Greben-Elektronika, establishing itself as two basic units of associated labour – OOUR Brodarstvo and OOUR Tvornica elektronskih uređaja (As of 19 February 2017, the Vela Luka Municipality listed on its website:http://www.velaluka.hr/dokumenti.asp?id=117). Elektronika is a newer factory with a much smaller economic and symbolic role in the community, and is, therefore, not included in this research.

There was a parallel, non-official and “alternative” historical narrative of the place, particularly concerning the workers’ experiences of the factory, working conditions and everyday life. In order to engage with this alternative narrative and the potentials of oral history, more nuanced research and the methodological approach positioned within the ethnography of everyday life was adopted. This implied placing emphasis on the workers’ immediate experience. These “ins” and “outs” of everyday labour history remain in the memory of those who lived through them and that memory is a valuable source of information that can further be described as a memory of work (Pinar and Gimenez, as quoted in Castillo 2011:4).

The research started with semi-structured and informal conversations, recognising the extent of the unexplored topic, as well as the interestingness and “silence” of the female perspective. Further research confirmed the existence of a wider “alternative” narrative and extremely rich, emotionally powerful and vivid memories of the work in factories. Interviews with some of the informants were conducted several times, but this, however, did not diminish their interest in recounting their story. On the contrary, women proved to be a lot more open, honest, and engaged in sharing their experiences and memories of episodes which were sometimes more intimate. Through conversations held with women, it was easier to discover the unwanted, informal and living history of industrial work, probably in part due to their perspective on factory work remaining only at the level of family intergenerational storytelling. On the other hand, women, unlike men, were less burdened by the formalism of talking and representation. Their presentation is similar to the concept of subjectivity as referred to by Prica:

Male and female informants, whose testimonies were usually obtained through semi-structured interviews, were mostly employed in the factories during the post-war period of Vela Luka’s industry, and in the later transitional period.¹²12 Among them, women’s memories appeared on several occasions as a kind of opposition, criticism and subversion of the representative narrative, especially when they talked about relationships of power, hierarchy, illegal work, politics and female subordination to the factory’s managers. Referring to historian John Gills, ethnologist Renata Jambrešić Kirin underlined the role of women as keepers of heterogeneous, experiential anti-memory and “rivals” to official historical discourse based on authoritarian systems of knowledge (Jambrešić Kirin 2009:65). The interviews conducted with the managers and directors of the industrial plants and the town’s mayor have revealed a perspective on industry more in line with the official and representative written narrative presented in existing literature. These antithetical positions were compared at the formal level and linked to a specific set of gender norms and roles espoused by all three plants in Vela Luka.¹³13

When talking about the industrial heritage in Vela Luka, it is necessary to mention the canons of “intangible cultural heritage” defined by UNESCO’s Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (UNESCO 2003).¹⁴14 “Intangible cultural heritage” covers a wide spectrum of practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills and other elements that communities, groups or individuals recreate and recognise as part of their cultural heritage, transmitting it from generation to generation (UNESCO 2003: Article 2.1). “Intangible cultural heritage” is manifested, inter alia, in the domains of oral tradition and expressions, social practices, traditional craftsmanship, etc. (UNESCO 2003: Article 2.2).

In this paper, we argue that there is a need to expose working-class- centred histories on the island, based on the uses of tangible and intangible remains associated with the lives of the working class. Intangible forms of heritage include forms such as songs, poetry and traditions, which are

perceived as some of the most powerful expressions of working-class heritage (Mizell-Nelson 2011, as quoted inBurger 2013:12; Bowan and Pickering 2011, as quoted inBurger 2013:12; Attfield 2011, as quoted inBurger 2013:12). Previously mentioned definitions of intangible heritage are set out in a broad sense and cannot be precisely framed, in the same way as the term culture is closer to a dynamic rather than a static concept. According to Šošić’s definition, there are certain immaterial, spiritual components of the term “cultural heritage” that are linked to the concept of significance (koncept značajnosti), exceptional universal value or national heritage. In that sense, cultural heritage is an important aspect of identity of narrow and broad communities, and of each individual (Šošić 2014:859).

This is where we discover a vivid and rich local memory related to the experience of working in factories which, as the factories employed hundreds of locals, has profoundly marked several generations and almost every family in the village. The informants hold a strong sense of belonging and identity, as well as an emotional, private, family and economic connection to the identification with the factories. In that sense, the awareness of individual micro(hi)stories that are mutually distinct but also interlinked and upgraded can also be perceived as an intangible heterogeneous collection of identities and a multifaceted, multi-dimensional testimony of several decades of local history.

On the other hand, examples of tangible traces include the factories themselves, social housing complexes, sites of strikes and trade unions activities, as well as places of recreation and social life (Burger 2013:12). Within contemporary scientific discourse in Croatia, although evaluated and popularised as an important and ubiquitous phenomenon, industrial heritage has mostly been researched and presented through the tangible, spatial, urban, architectural, economic or historical dimension, with a potential for restoration and revitalization.¹⁵15 The identification and valorisation of industrial heritage became important in the 1980s, mostly

through plans for the revitalisation and reuse of industrial infrastructure. It was predominantly focused on Zagreb; specifically, on Paromlin and Gredelj (Bunijevac 2007:34).¹⁶16

As Vela Luka’s industrial plants cannot meet architectural or historical parameters for protected tangible heritage, the paper considers the construction of local memory associated with work-related culture that further leads to a recognition of intangible working-class-centred heritage, marked by industrial development and the subsequent decline.

WORKPLACE, LABOUR AND FEMALE EXPERIENCES

Most of the interviews with the older informants about Fabrika and Ambalaža deal with the period immediately after WW2, marked by mass employment and industrial renewal.¹⁷17 Much of the early industrial period, the end of the 1940s and early 1950s, is recounted by the oldest Vela Luka inhabitants, who were, at that time, the youngest female workers recruited and sent to work in the fish processing factory Jadranka, starting their job before finishing their four-year primary school education.¹⁸18

The Seven-year Primary Education Act was adopted in 1946, according to which all children were required to attend school for seven years (seven-grade primary schools) (Mirošević 2007:160). Considering

that this Act probably only applied to the children who began attending school that year, it was, therefore, feasible to have a third-grader working in a factory. As informants point out, although these girls were allowed to drop out of school, it was forbidden to employ children under the age of 16.¹⁹19 So, for the youngest, the first years of their employment went unrecorded and some even had two employment record books, one for in-house records and one for the inspectorate.²⁰20

The issue of employing a large number of underage female workers²¹21 opens up dilemmas and, among others, an interpretation according to which the decision to employ a young female workforce was planned by the factory management. D. M. pointed out the likelihood that these girls were deliberately chosen as workers:

In the broader context of intense modernization after WW2, there were staff shortages on the islands during the massive reconstruction and industrialisation period (Jovanović et al. 2010:157). In 1946, Fabrika in Vela Luka employed a total of 83 female workers and clerks, and only a few men.²³23 Explaining the argument about labour shortages, historian and archivist Tonko Barčot²⁴24 states the following:

Post-war employment of underage groups certainly raises specific issues related to, among other things, the politics of that time, marginal aspects of employment, as well as the frequency and efficiency of such practices in other Yugoslav factories. In the case of underage female workers in Vela Luka, it seems these workers did not have much choice: “Who asked me to go to Fabrika? Nobody but trouble – it led me there. Who else was going to feed me?”;²⁵25 that they had to work in extremely poor and difficult conditions, especially during the early period; that they had difficult access to education (not counting the subsequent additional “qualifications”), leaving most of them semi-literate and, thus, forced to remain in the same workplace;²⁶26 and that, due to illegal employment during their first years of work, they were deprived of the work time accrued in that period.

It should be concurrently noted that, in addition to the frequent mentions of the hardships they had to endure, O. D. says: “I wouldn’t wish my youth or my past upon a dog, God forbid!”²⁷27, none of the workers approached this issue without recognizing the meaning, benefits and subsequent effects, both on the private and collective level. Their discomfort reveals the paradox of simultaneous satisfaction and dissatisfaction and, more often than not, remains at the level of a statement rather than revolt. The older informants often emphasize their sense of belonging, gratitude and nostalgia for socialism: “Tito filled our stomachs”.²⁸28

The industrial renaissance in the mid-1950s brought about a period of accelerated and increased production and improved working conditions. The new factory building for fish processing was built in 1954, with the third largest production capacity for fish processing in Yugoslavia. The old building was redesigned and Vela Luka got another new factory – a tin packaging factory (Šeparović 2005:37–38).

The new factory was considered to be somewhat better than Fabrika, whose main drawback was having to work in a polluted environment. A lot of women from Fabrika, which became infamous as the worst and toughest place to work in Vela Luka, came to work for Ambalaža, which offered a higher pay. I. M. S., a male worker formerly employed by Ambalaža, pointed out the differences between the old and the new factory, along with the “benefits” that women got when they switched jobs:

lot of female workers testify to the absurdity and formality of the so-called kvalifikacija

– the qualification programme they had to attend: “You had to attend the programme for 6 months (…) I went for a little while, then I said I would quit because I didn’t know anything (…) You had to use the map, do math (…) Those who could not do math – all the same, they would pass as well.” (M. O, female worker formerly employed by the fish processing factory and tin packaging factory, interviewed in 2010).

in Fabrika, there was no fish, no ice, you worked in dry conditions. The women were very satisfied there.”²⁹29

On the other hand, O. D., a female worker formerly employed by both factories, described Ambalaža in these words:

D. M., a daughter of one of the female workers, recalled her strong impressions upon entering the factory:

As for the Greben shipyard, workers’ memories mostly turn to a specific period; the 1960s and 1970s, the “golden age” that presented the most productive time when the shipyard specialised in fiberglass manufacturing, when the plant complex was upgraded. At that time, Greben enjoyed a noted status among other shipyards in Yugoslavia. Unlike Fabrika and Ambalaža, Greben started as a typical male industry based

on traditional materials and it held onto its “male identity”. On the other hand, in 1961, when the first fiberglass boat was manufactured in Greben as a harbinger of a promising shipbuilding material (Tabain 1993:97), the shipyard started employing large numbers of female workers. They were hired to perform one of the toughest jobs “in the plastics sector”, in the often claustrophobic space of the lower deck and in tanks with extremely toxic evaporations. This position was specific and highly gendered, as well as physically invisible.

When discussing the working conditions in Greben, what dominates are stories about the efficiency, specificity and reputation of the factory as one of the most significant financial and symbolic bases of the town. Greben can primarily be seen as a symbolic “monument” of Vela Luka’s economic success and local pride that will later outlive both Fabrika and Ambalaža. It is important to recognise the value that the industrial sector had for how the workers physically and mentally shaped their identity, for linking with “effective labour” (Castillo 2011:6) (Figure 2).

Figure 2 Female work in fish processing and canning factory Jadranka, Vela Luka, 1950. Courtesy of National Archive in Zagreb

HEROISING WORK

Effective labour is inseparably linked to the heroisation of work introduced through Soviet concepts of shock labour and Stakhanovism. During the post-war period, Yugoslavia adopted the model of an individualised hero of labour. Putting into practice shock labour, heroism and emphasising the moral motivation of workers, the influence of the new, “recommended” self-sacrificing work and of the attempts at emancipating women through compulsory labour (Matošević 2015:47) is reflected in the dynamics applied to industrial work in Vela Luka. Although it is unclear whether material gain or symbolic acknowledgement played the key role in motivating competitive labour, today’s reflections by the workers on the honorary title of udarnik refer exclusively to the symbolic “moral” category.³²32

Of all three factories, it can be said that the most detailed, strongest and oldest workers’ memories are those related to post-war Fabrika. The informants often mention competition, some emphasise the fact that women, due to their outstanding work, would raise their own quotas, making their job even more difficult as a result. J. B.: “You were working more to earn more, and they raised the quota, but how could we know!?”.³³33 M. B.: “Since we were working to meet the quota, we would compete to see who would do more, who would stay longer, who would skip lunch. Always staying late, always first to come, never coming late…”.³⁴34

Explaining the differences between the political strategies of the former so-called East and the former West, and the importance of symbolic compensation, Primož Krašovec highlights:

The conversation with the eldest informants gives the impression that effective and shock-work was an efficient individualised stimulant, a moral category, a part of the initial worker’s zeal and a way to overcome physical and mental difficulties in post-war years – something which the informants are often proud of even today.

In addition to the title of udarnik, the Directive on Allocating Transitional Flags to Work Collectives, with criteria such as the best execution of the production plan and good work discipline, also acted as an incentive for competing (Matošević 2015:105). Fabrika’s large hall was filled with elongated tables with 12 women gutting fish. Some tables won flags for outstanding productivity and effort, which was and still is a source of pride for the workers – M. B.:

Most of the older informants emphasise the uniqueness of this group of women who, in addition to exceeding their quotas, filled the entire factory with song. M. P.:

As mentioned before, the memories of working in the factories of Vela Luka, especially Fabrika and Ambalaža, evoke ambivalent narratives and conflicting feelings. At times, memories of this period could be attributed to feelings of nostalgia for lost youth and the dissatisfaction with the current political and economic situation. In addition to the ideological constructs of socialism, the position of the former worker can be linked to the wider concept of the modern belief in the future and progress, whereas it also reveals a clear paradigm shift, signifying the end of the modern era. Among others, the decisive element for understanding the structure and practice of socialism is a command economy based on industrial work as a precondition for the accelerated modernisation of society (Paić 2014:9). The prefixes post-, neo-, meta-, and trans- are connected to the redirection of ideas with which modernity once started in the fury of progress, and later ended as a paradigm of melancholy and decline, as the global order of neoliberal dystopia (ibid.:6–7). It could be argued that the informants observe the new social and political circumstances from a “bound” perspective, projecting the values of work and asceticism established during the early stages of socialism onto the present time, which they simultaneously experience as “worse” – without a clear vision of a sustainable future; and “easier” – with better living conditions and higher standards.

The “silenced” histories of the workers and their subsequent marginalisation have been further accentuated by recognising today’s regression as part of the “post-udarnik” and transitional period, with which the older informants find it difficult to identify. Matošević states that the notion of the “forgotten udarnik” enables us to trace the “granted” habilitation and “relocation” of socially-marginalised work into the symbolic centre, as well as the subsequent return to the “margins of society” (...). The fact that the “symbolic residue” in the post-udarnik period is not “marketable” in any form has resulted in what we might call the “udarnik’s melancholy” (Matošević 2015:132).

Still, to initiate discussion regarding the memory of udarniks is to encourage the local community to reflect on the working-class lifestyle in the contemporary context. The narration of memories related to the local udarnik history is an important element of intangible industrial heritage. They also prove to be very much alive in the current oral history of our informants. As a matter of fact, these bittersweet memories enable them to relate quite directly to their personal tie to industrial labour, the physical space of industrial architecture and the social relation they built while working there (Figure 3).

Picture 3: Ship Kar in front of the fish processing and canning factory Jadranka, Vela Luka, year unknown. Courtesy of Udruga Likovno stvaralaštvo Vele Luke

INDUSTRY IN THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION

The period of transition brought dramatic changes to the local economy in Vela Luka. A disregard for agricultural production, the low price of agricultural products, dependence on foreign loans³⁸38 and structural discrimination of poor parts of Yugoslavia that produced raw materials were slowly affecting and weakening industrial production (Dobrivojević 2014a:35). At the same time, the Yugoslavian model of industry was not sustainable as it was invasive, over-productive and ecologically problematic³⁹39 (Cifrić 1987).

The Croatian economy suffered through deindustrialisation, which was a result of the collapse of the socialist regime, the development of heavy industry, the civil war in the 1990s, coupled with material loss, liberalisation through the process of transition and market deregulation (loss of the ex-Yugoslav market) (Penava and Družić 2014:161).⁴⁰40 Croatia’s accession to the EU lasted for 10 years, which entailed the weakening of the competitiveness of the local economy, exacerbating tensions between the left-wing and right-wing parties (Aralica 2014:41).

The Greben, Jadranka (Fabrika) and Ambalaža factories closed down, all of the workers were left jobless, and the real estate was put up

for sale. The destruction of the Greben shipyard slowly began as early as 2002, with the culmination of several unsuccessful directorships that lead to enormous losses and, on many occasions, even bankruptcy. During the 1960s and early 1970s, Greben had the most diversified production, ranging from lifesaving equipment and lifeboats to fishing vessels, patrol boats, landing crafts, fast boats, passenger boats and sailing yachts. According to the informants, it employed up to 500 people in that period (working in three daily shifts), thus providing wages, paid vacation, healthcare and a regular daily meal.

In 2016, the factory filed for bankruptcy, leaving the remaining 120 employees jobless.⁴²42

The story of Jadranka is somewhat similar to Greben. The factory had a lot of successful moments, one of which was the period of the late 1960s and 1970s, when production grew dramatically, as did the number of employees (around 200). The crisis in the fishing industry, together with the unsuccessful management of the factory, resulted in its closure in 2005. Some of the spaces are still being used, but only as cold stores and storage rooms for local fishermen. This is also about to change as the local government initiated a big infrastructural project for the construction of a new ferry port on the site.

The Ambalaža factory was established in 1965, employed up to 60 people and started with the production of packaging for the fish industry. The 1990s also brought different restructuring and conversions. Finally, in the late 2000s, Ambalaža was struck by the crisis in the fishing industry, which soon led to bankruptcy and the dismissal of the workers employed

there. The factory was up for sale until recently, when it was bought by a private owner in 2016.

In such a social and economic context, it seems even more important to record the memories of the workers reflecting on their working-class culture in a diachronic discourse, as an incentive for dialogue or a corrective social model. This could trigger a move from memory to action, an invigoration of and education on continued struggles for workers’ rights and better working conditions through the memorialisation of past workers’ experiences, movements and strikes, with the aim of creating meaningful change for the future (Sevcenko, as quoted inBurger 2013:7).

When talking about the “future” in Vela Luka and the post-industrial period, it is obvious that the service sector was supposed to replace the loss produced by the ruined industrial sector. It was primarily tourism that was seen as a force of economic growth. This is the case with the island of Korčula (specifically in Vela Luka), where tourism is used to replace the central role industry had played earlier.⁴³43 The mayor recognised tourism (the service sector) as the future plan for Vela Luka:

He also highlighted the importance of the industrial and production sectors in Vela Luka, stating that

Modern Vela Luka mostly developed in the second half of the 20th century, an extremely productive period that defined not only its present appearance, but also created the foundations for the functioning of the city, as well as public infrastructure that is still in service: the health resort Kalos, hotel accommodation, the nursing home, the hospital, the high school, the cultural centre, roads, water supply, the ferry terminal, etc.⁴⁶46 These elements can be seen as a link between the past and the present, industrial and post- industrial, socialism, transition and capitalism, or simply – the present and past generations. In the discussion about the current state of the economy in Vela Luka, D. M. states:

The combination of policies of full employment, ideologies of collective ownership, and social construction of identity through productive work meant that a job not only provided a wage, but also mediated a set of social, economic and cultural relations between the individual and the wider community (Pine and Bridger 1998:8). Bringing together the voices of the workers presents an attempt at the valorisation of their local working-class-centred heritage which seems to be disappearing in light of rapid post-industrial change (Figure 4).

Figure 4 Paper wrapper for cans, fish processing and canning factory Jad-ranka, Vela Luka, 1970’s. Courtesy of Centre for Archival Collections Korčula-Lastovo

CONCLUSION

In order to attest to the workers’ experiences of factory labour, working conditions and everyday life in the second half of the 20th century, a methodological approach positioned within oral history and the ethnography of everyday life was required, focusing on parallel and “alternative” historical narratives. In this context, women’s memory proved to be more open and less burdened by factographic formalism of telling and representation. The discovered subjectivity, micro(hi)stories and the lived experience allowed, among other things, to form a kind of opposition to the dominant presentation of the local industry, but also a more complex view and awareness of the rich intimate, emotional and familial categories of intangible industrial heritage. This heritage is recognised through the concept of significance (koncpt značajnosti) and is reflected in a strong collective memory and specific work experience that has mentally and physically marked several generations, and is today dominantly inherited through familial oral history.

The phenomenon of udarnik, the success of industry in Vela Luka, especially the perseverance of the female workers in Fabrika and Ambalaža, and also the productivity and specificity of production in Greben, are an important aspect of local pride and identification with industrial heritage, and, subsequently, of the valorisation of working-class-centred heritage. The examples of working conditions in factories discussed through the interviews and “informal conversations” show how, in the context of industrial Vela Luka, the oldest stories are very often subject to incoherence of memory, including opposed perspectives and testimonies, due to differently conditioned moments of remembering and interpreting. Those ambivalent valorisations often marked the workers’ memories in heterogeneous, ambiguous and multi- layered testimonies that require further research.⁴⁷47

Since there are no consistent plans for the regeneration of the industrial plants in Vela Luka at the time of writing, this paper can be regarded as an attempt at the (re)valorisation of intangible industrial heritage, manifested in working class testimonies and the memories of the workers, and their

inseparable tie to the present identity of the local community. Our initial goal was also to create a basis for future collaboration with artists. We see this as an opportunity to reintroduce topics focusing on industrial labour, female memory and working-class heritage to the community of Vela Luka. We are working on different participatory methodologies implemented by artists through workshop formats, bringing together local participants of diverse generations. Our idea is to continue discussing the relations between industrial heritage and local identity, and how they are being transformed and translated for the younger generations (born after 2000). In this way, we are also able to put our ethnographic research directly into practice.⁴⁸48 This also gives us a chance to discuss parts of our research and working materials together with our informants and the broader local audience. Through direct engagement, we are trying to invent a sustainable way of being in the community and narrating multiple post-industrial realities in Vela Luka. We are still examining and testing to see which means should be used to keep the intangible aspects of Vela Luka industrial heritage alive and, at the same time, relevant for the locals.

SOURCES