“Vandalism committed by politicians!” – Riga City Council receives massive backlash for decision to remove Monument to Andrejs Upīts

“The transformation of the Monument to Andrejs Upīts as object of cultural and historical heritage creates a precedent for the further damaging and destruction of the original cultural heritage of our nation and country. This barbaric act actually means causing irreversible damage to the century-old monument in Kronvalda Park,” Dr.philol., writer and publicist Māris Ruks comments in the letter sent to highest ranking civil servants and other public figures, urging them to not remain passive observers of a process in which Latvia’s cultural and historical heritage is being erased.

As it is known, on the 16th of October Riga City Council made the decision on the removal of Monument to Andrejs Upīts (by sculptor Alberts Terpilovskis). Removal and relocation is to be completed within three months of the day the decision was made.

“The decision by Riga City Council is nothing more than an act of vandalism committed by a handful of politicians in the backdrop of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Following the demolition of monuments praising the Soviet regime, we can see a wave of attacks on our own cultural and historical monuments. It is unacceptable that in this war on monuments, primitive and ideological stencils destroy evidence of the history of our Latvian folk culture and writing.

This process is starting to resemble China’s “cultural revolution” in the 60s, when monuments, libraries and monasteries were being destroyed in a wave of hysterical “cleansing”.

Clearly what is happening now is linked to the wish of certain political parties to earn political dividends for the next round of elections,” says the author of the letter.

“The history of Latvia and the Latvian people is harsh and contradictory. Facts of Upīts’ biography are used by politicians to paint him as a collaborator – a hero of the Socialist Labour of the USSR, held the position of Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Council of the LSSR, as well as contributed to the occupation of 1940. This is true, but with politicians using such criteria superficially, we would have to reconsider and review monuments and memorials dedicated to other people, as well as our attitude towards them. Do the actions based on the illusions of Kārlis Ulmanis in the summer of 1940 and his signatures on the documents of the occupying power really negate his contribution to the creation of the Latvian state? In Soviet history books Upīts is listed alongside Rainis [Jānis Pliekšāns], Latvian riflemen were divided into “reds” and “whites”, so should we also damage the monuments to Rainis and the riflemen?!

There were large popular rallies about the independence of Latvia at the foot of the Upīts Monument in front of the Congress Hall, and there were waves of flowers left at the monument. Upīts remains a popular figure for a large number of Latvians, and this is thanks to his positive contribution. He is the most prolific Latvian writer, playwright, publicist, outstanding literary critic, an important contributor to the wealth of our literary language. It was thanks to his heritage that it was possible to maintain Latvianness during the Soviet years. To make him a monster, a criminal in the years of Soviet rule, does not correspond to the historical truth and does not stand up to criticism,” the letter stresses.

“Such political decisions, including Riga City Council’s decision to publicly deface Upīts’ monument, indicate that the real objective is dividing, not unifying, society and the nation. This is an internal destabilization of civil society.

In a civilized society, taking care of cultural and historical heritage means preserving it in its original form.

This decision of the Riga City Council is an unprecedented case when it is decided not to clean, restore, move, store or return a cultural and historical monument to the donors, but to permanently damage it and exhibit it in a damaged way in public. At all times, in all cultures, there have been historically significant personalities with different ideological beliefs. We should remember that the open letter of the defenders of the Upīts Monument, signed last year by about thirty well-known museum workers, historians, literary scholars, states that “no documentary evidence can be found in the state archives” to prove that Andrejs Upīts was directly responsible for political repressions – neither in 1919, when the writer was in a political position for less than five months, nor after 1940. Even in 1919, while serving as the head of the Art Department of the Soviet Latvian Education Commissariat,

Upīts’ policy was focused on culture, not other issues related to the repression of contemporaries, and this fact is often called into question in public today without any documentary justification.

Anyone can find reasons to damage works of art and original works dedicated to the memory of important people, but this is unacceptable in a society that respects its history and culture.

The precedent with the planned defacing of the Monument to Andrejs Upīts is, in our opinion, a sign that this hysteria must come to an end once and for all. If the dismantling of the monument is allowed, then there will be no obstacles to reviewing other cultural and historical monuments in Latvia in the near future to destroy them,” Ruks points out.

“It is not permissible for some people to embezzle authorship and, using the status of a deputy, to accept remuneration from the budget for causing damage to monuments in a country ruled by law. Monuments belong to the people, not to a handful of Riga City Council members. It should be noted that the decision of the Riga City Council also indicates a gross violation of the copyrighted heritage, as well as a conflict of interest in the desire to make money, because the planned defacer of the monument, is one of the current deputies of Riga City Council, Ivars Drulle. We invite you, using your influence and public authority, to do everything possible to prevent the implementation of such a decision of the Riga City Council,” as mentioned in the letter addressed to the President of Latvia Edgars Rinkēvičs, Speaker of the Saeima Daiga Mieriņa, Prime Minister Evika Siliņa, Minister of Environment Protection and Regional Development Inga Bērziņa, President of the Latvian Academy of Sciences Ivars Kalviņš, Rector of the University of Latvia Gundars Bērziņš, Chairman of the Riga Latvian Society Guntis Gailitis, and Director General of UNESCO Audrey Azoulay.”