The idea for this article emerged during an interview I was conducting with Olena Afanasieva, head of the NGO Center for Cultural Development ‘Totem’. During our conversation, she shared her vision of establishing a “Museum of Resistance,” featuring exhibits that narrate everyday life in Kherson under occupation. Kherson was occupied by Russian forces from 2 March to 11 November 2022, becoming the only regional centre captured during the initial phase of the full-scale invasion. Despite active civic resistance, including peaceful protests, the city endured a harsh occupation marked by repression, kidnappings, torture, forced passportisation, and attempts at Russification. The Armed Forces of Ukraine liberated Kherson on 11 November 2022 following a strategic weakening of Russian logistics, and residents greeted Ukrainian troops with visible support.

The everyday experiences of civilians during the occupation have been documented through various projects: the documentary “Window to Kherson”, the Ukrainian-Estonian project “Lament of Kherson region”, and the reportage collection “De-occupied: Stories of Ukrainian Resistance”. Human rights activist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Oleksandra Matviichuk, in the foreword to the book “De-occupied: Stories of Ukrainian Resistance,” points out:

It often lacks resonance against the backdrop of statements by politicians who suggest handing over the occupied territories to the aggressor country and satisfying its imperial appetites. The voice of the survivors makes such appeals immoral.

It often lacks resonance against the backdrop of statements by politicians who suggest handing over the occupied territories to the aggressor country and satisfying its imperial appetites. The voice of the survivors makes such appeals immoral.

In this article, I will discuss the everyday experiences of Kherson inhabitants during the occupation by examining twenty artefacts collected for the future “Museum of Resistance”, which will be dedicated to the lived experiences of occupation. These objects have come to be regarded as artefacts following the liberation of the occupied territories, as they bear witness to life under occupation and convey its stories. De-occupation has conferred upon them significant historical value. As stated on the website:

This museum is not only a way to commemorate and preserve the memory of those who fought for a free Ukrainian Kherson, but also a place where its identity is articulated. It is a museum that documents not only our losses, but also our choice, our right to be Ukrainians and Europeans, and our strength to stand by that choice.

This museum is not only a way to commemorate and preserve the memory of those who fought for a free Ukrainian Kherson, but also a place where its identity is articulated. It is a museum that documents not only our losses, but also our choice, our right to be Ukrainians and Europeans, and our strength to stand by that choice.

The artefacts collected by the “Kherson: Liberation of Memory” initiative for the “Museum of Resistance” represent a grassroots attempt to create such anchors. Rather than focusing exclusively on military artefacts or official documentation, the project emphasises everyday objects. These items capture the experiences of civilians who navigated the occupation through a combination of resistance and cultural continuity. The emphasis on everyday material culture aligns with broader trends in museum studies that prioritise bottom-up documentation of conflict experiences. Macdonald (2013) argues that contemporary memory museums increasingly seek to incorporate personal objects and narratives in order to humanise historical events and highlight the experiences of ordinary individuals. The Kherson initiative reflects this approach by inviting residents to contribute artefacts and stories from the occupation. The artefacts originate from diverse environments, such as private homes, workplaces, and public spaces, and represent different aspects of life during the occupation, including acts of resistance, survival strategies, and symbolic expressions of cultural identity.

Material culture provides a particularly valuable perspective for analysing such experiences. Heersmink (2023, p. 263) explores the relationship between cultural identity, collective memory, and artefacts, emphasising that “the use of cultural artefacts to remember events in the historical narrative of cultural groups is done on both an individual and collective level.” Thus, objects can function as mediators between personal memories and collective narratives (Macdonald, 2013). In contexts of war and occupation, everyday objects often acquire new meanings as they become associated with particular actions, emotions, or events. Moreover, as Broch et al. (2023, p. 353) hold, “objects and things also take on national identities through their conservation, their use in performances and the emotional weight we attach to them”. As these artefacts........

© E-International