PERCEPTION OF MONUMENTS AND THE CITY ENVIRONMENT: CHANGEABILITY OF TRENDS AND SEMANTIC ASPECTS (Pilsetvides un piemineklu uztvere: iespeju un semantikas planu mainigums)

We know that while creating powerful images, the builders of ancient temples and sanctuaries also believed in their beneficial effect and potential to secure a channel of interaction between people and the divine energies of nature and the universe. Unfortunately, over the centuries monumental sculpture, in turning to the much more pragmatic tasks of serving various ideologies, lost both this transcendental orientation and the belief in the immortality of skillfully executed sculptures. More sensitive viewers took a dislike to the didactic, obtrusive, official tone of such monuments. However, it cannot be denied that at least the partial democratisation of public relations and commission practice enabled the erection of monuments not just to statesmen but also to creators of cultural values and contributors to some humane undertaking. Although these might feature repeated the standard busts and figures, attitudes towards the commemoration of popular cultural figures could be responsive and even warm-hearted. The true reputation of the cultural representatives, their output being rooted in the collective consciousness of the nation, adds to the perception in these cases. A typical example is the granite monument to the Latvian writer Rudofs Blaumanis by Teodors Zalkalns set up in the Riga canal parkland in 1929. From foreign examples one could name, for instance, the bronze monument to the world-famous Irish writer James Joyce, represented as a seemingly simple image in a distracted posture standing by the street in Dublin; there is also the Swedish poet Carl Michael Bellman's monument in Stockholm and several other intimately treated representatives of the creative professions in various cities all over the world.