The fact that crime (or any criminal act) is socially constructed is perhaps most conspicuous in the case of politically motivated actions. This is especially evident in dictatorial or authoritarian regimes, where the law classified certain forms of behavior as deviant, while broad segments of society perceived them in ways that differed substantially from the authorities’ interpretation. The study examines how state security, essentially functioning as political police, constructed a criminal offense through the 1973 proceedings brought against the musician János Bródy. Naturally, interpreting the statements (and other public expressions) he made at a Diósgyőr pop festival as a political crime required a pre-established interpretive framework. This entailed both the legal provisions to create the abstract concept of the offense in question and an official view of popular music and youth subculture as inherently hostile forms of behavior and potential political threats. The study discusses the practices of state security, and Kádár-era prosecutors and courts not so much in the context of repression as in that of surveillance and punishment as a generative exercise of power. Besides the official and administrative forms of law enforcement, the case also provides an opportunity to examine the “popular” understanding of legality and normativity.

On 10 December 1956 the precinct party secretary was chased across his village, before he was beaten and murdered in Gyón (Pest County). Due to the retributions following the suppression of the revolution, the case of his murder is very well documented. However, the researcher has to bear in mind that this vast documentation was recorded after the events: the documentation is retrospective and entirely consists of products of remembering processes. In order to interpret the real contents of these sources, the main characteristics and psychology of human memory must be considered. Understanding the processes of remembering is invaluable in revealing what happened in the interrogation rooms and courtrooms after the crime and reconstructing the experience of the participating individuals. The historical event on 10 December 1956, thus, cannot be separated from the traces of memory transmitted for the historian through the subjective experience of the eyewitnesses. Consequently, although the answer to the question of what ‘really’ happened in Gyón on this day is not possible, a very complex and detailed account of the case emerges from these sources.

Nincs absztrakt.