"Покрштавање Велике Кнежевине Литваније" ("Christianization of Great Duchy of Lithuania")

,
(Association for the Development of Serbian Studies, Novi Sad)
SERBIAN STUDIES RESEARCH

. 7 / Vol. 7
. 1 / No. 1
2016
, 2016
Vol. 7, No. 1, 2016
Publisher
Association for the Development of Serbian Studies, Novi Sad
Editorial Address
Stevana Hristia 19, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia
tel.: +381 65 641 3628; fax: +381 21 6396 488
email: serbian_studies@hotmail.com
Editorial Board
f University of Novi Sad (Serbia)
Boris Bulatovi (editor-in-chief),
Tomislav Longinovi, University of Wisconsin, Madison (USA)
Goran Maksimovi, University of Ni (Serbia)
Ljiljana Bogoeva Sedlar, University of Arts in Belgrade (Serbia)
Slobodan Vladui, University of Novi Sad (Serbia)
Persida Lazarevi Di Giacomo, Gabriele dAnunzio University of Chieti-Pescara (Italy)
Slobodanka Vladiv-Glover, Monash University, Melbourne (Australia)
Alla Tatarenko, Ivan Franko National University of L'viv (Ukraine)
Miroljub Jokovi, University of East Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina)
g
Tatjana Tapaviki Duronji, University of Banja Luka (Bosnia and Herzegovina)
Motoki Nomachi, Hokkaido University, Sapporo ( Japan)
Cover Design
Nenad Svilar
Print
NS MALA KNJIGA PLUS, Novi Sad
Journal Description
Serbian Studies Research provides scholarly articles in the fields of Serbian linguistics and literature,
international relations, cultural studies, history, sociology, political science, economics, geography,
demography, social anthropology, administration, law, and natural sciences, as they relate to the hu-
man condition.
Annual Membership
Institutional: 45 usd (including subscription)
Individual: 15 usd (including subscription)
Peer Review Policy and Frequency

All research articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer-review process, based on initial edi-
tor screening and anonymized refereeing by at least two anonymous referees. Serbian Studies Research
is published annually.
Indexing and Abstracting Information

EBSCO Publishing (full-text database)
. 7, . 1, 2016
(),
19, 21000
.: +381 65 641 3628; : +381 21 6396 488
email: serbian_studies@hotmail.com
( ), ()
, , ()
, ()
, ()
, ()
, ' ()
-, , ()
, ()
, ( )
, ( )
, , ( )
008/009+3+8
300

EBSCO Publishing ( )
Serbian Studies Research .

/ CONTENTS
/ ARTICLES
Dr Nataa Kovaevi
Eastern Michigan University (USA)
ENJOY YOUR BOMBING: SLAVOJ IEK'S ETHNIC
HIERARCHIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
.
. ()

II . . . . . . . 31
Dr Vlaho Bogii
Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krlea Zagreb (Hrvatska)
MIROSLAV KRLEA I SRPSKI PISCI: KNJIEVNOST
KAO IDENTITET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

( )

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
.
()

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

()
--:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Dr Vesna Cidilko
Humboltov univerzitet u Berlinu (Nemaka)
DOKUMENTARNO I IMAGINARNO U VELIKOM RATU
ALEKSANDRA GATALICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Dr Zoran Boi
Univerza v Novi Gorici (Slovenija)
DIDAKTINI MODEL UNE VERIGE ODLOMKOV:
NA PRIMERU NOVELE TANTADRUJJ CIRILA KOSMAA . . . . . . . 135
.
()
. . . . . . 153
Dr Abdul Azim Akhtar
Glocal University Saharanpur (India)
PLASSEY PLOT IN 1757: ENGLISH ENIMITY, MARWARI
MONEYBAGS, FRENCH FRIENDSHIP & NAWABS . . . . . . . . . . . 167

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
CONTENTS
ARTICLES
Nataa Kovaevi, PhD

Eastern Michigan University (USA)
ENJOY YOUR BOMBING: SLAVOJ IEK'S ETHNIC
HIERARCHIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Nayda Ivanova, PhD
St. Clement of Ohrid University of Sofia (Bulgaria)
MECHANISMS OF TRANSFORMING THE PROTAGONIST
SYSTEM IN THE BULGARIAN TRANSLATIONAL RECEPTIONS
OF MOUNTAIN WREATHH BY P. P. NJEGO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Vlaho Bogii, PhD
Miroslav Krlea Institute of Lexicography Zagreb (Croatia)
MIROSLAV KRLEA AND SERBIAN WRITERS:
LITERATURE AS IDENTITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Dragana Bedov, PhD
Andri Institute - Viegrad (Bosnia and Herzegovina)
NIKOLAJ TIMENKO AND SLOBODAN JOVANOVI:
EXAMPLE OF SPIRITUAL CONNECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Jelena . Marievi, PhD
University of Novi Sad (Serbia)
ASPECTS OF BAROQUE DESCRIPTIONS OF TIME AND SPACE
IN THE PROSE WRITTEN BY MILORAD PAVI . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Nataliya Bilyk, PhD
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv (Ukraine)
SEMANTIC EFFICIENCY OF INTERTEXTUAL DIMENSION IN
MILETA PRODANOVIS NOVEL GARDEN IN VENICE . . . . . . . . 109
Vesna Cidilko, PhD
Humboldt University of Berlin (Germany)
DOCUMENTARY AND IMAGINARY IN THE GREAT WAR
BY ALEXANDER GATALICA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Zoran Boi, PhD
University of Nova Gorica (Slovenia)
DIDACTIC MODEL OF A LEARNING CHAIN OF
FRAGMENTS: A CASE STUDY OF SHORT STORY TANTADRUJ
BY CIRIL KOSMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Vladislav B. Sotirovi, PhD
Mykolas Romeris University Vilnius (Lithuania)
CHRISTIANIZATION OF GRAND DUTCHY OF LITHUANIA . . . 153
Dr Abdul Azim Akhtar
Glocal University Saharanpur (India)
MONEYBAGS, FRENCH FRIENDSHIP & NAWABS . . . . . . . . . . . 167

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187

()
:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
.
. ()

II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

()
:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

( )

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
.
()

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

()
--:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

()

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

()
:
. . . . 135
.
()
. . . . . . 153

()
1757. :
, ,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
Serbian Studies Research
Vol. 7, No. 1 (2016):
( ) 11-30. 11
UDC 1:327.2 iek S.

Dr Nataa Kovaevi1
Eastern Michigan University
Department of English Language and Literature
United States of America
ENJOY YOUR BOMBING: SLAVOJ IEKS

ETHNIC HIERARCHIES
Abstract: This essay analyzes the post-communist criminalization of Eastern Europe,
focusing on narratives that use the 1990s wars in the Balkans to externalize irredeemable crim-
inal behavior (authoritarianism, violation of human rights, ethnic cleansing, economic plunder
and speculation). This language is also used by the warring sides in the Balkans to demonize
the enemy and invest their own causes with legitimacy. I subject to critique the resulting eth-
nicization of these discourses as Serbs, Croats, Moslems and Albanians each portray them-
selves as bearers of democracy and multiculturalism, a strategy which in fact resonates with
the Western treatment of the conflict (with Serbs as the uncontested underdog). To tease out
the complexities in these discourses, I turn to Slavoj ieks writing about the Balkans, read-
ing it in relation to his own attempts to present himself to Western leftist-liberal audiences as
a native expert on real existing socialism, as well as his protests against Western multicultur-
al fascination with both non-Western writers and communist dissidents like himself. While
iek critically dissects the New World Order, the alleged humanitarianism of NATO inter-
ventions and Orientalist discourses about and within the Balkans, his own thinking about the
wars is nevertheless embedded within the theoretical accouterments of multiculturalism, iden-
tity politics, ethnicization of responsibility for the war, and demonization of the evildoers.
Keywords: Slavoj iek, the Balkans, 1990s Yugoslav wars, liberal discources, multicul-
turalism, nationalism, NATO, humanitarian imperialism
This essay analyzes the post-communist criminalization of Eastern Europe,

focusing on narratives that use the 1990s wars in the Balkans to externalize irre-
deemable criminal behavior (authoritarianism, violation of human rights, ethnic
cleansing, economic plunder and speculation). Other Eastern European countries
positions on the Balkan wars serve to measure their allegiance to democracy, transi-
tions, protection of human rights (and to disassociate themselves from old and new
1
nkovacev@emich.edu
12 | Nataa Kovaevi
Orientalisms). The same language is used by the warring sides in the Balkans to de-
monize the enemy and invest their own causes with legitimacy. I subject to critique
the resulting ethnicization of these discourses as Serbs, Croats, Moslems and Alba-
nians each portray themselves as bearers of democracy and multiculturalism, a strat-
egy which in fact resonates with the Western treatment of the conflict (with Serbs as
the uncontested underdog). Such treatment of the wars exposes the blind spots in
political debates from left to right, even in the most qualified apologies for NATO
military interventions in the Balkans. I propose that we think this event through the
tradition of Western imperialist desire to articulate, categorize and ultimately re-
solve the mess in both the Balkans and Eastern Europe, as well as through Hardt
and Negris (2000) discussion of the contemporary logic of Empire and establish-
ment of the right to intervene.
To tease out the complexities in these discourses, I turn to Slavoj ieks writing
about the Balkans (and Eastern Europe in general) as a case study. I read ieks writ-
ing about the Balkans in relation to his own attempts to present himself to Western
leftist-liberal audiences as a native expert on the Balkans and on Eastern European
real existing socialism, as well as his protests against Western multicultural fascina-
tion with both non-Western writers and communist dissidents like himself,f exempli-
fied by Geoffrey Harphams statement that iek challenges Western thought hav-
ing emerged from the black lagoon of Stalinism (2003: 467). Western imperialist
(or, in Hardt and Negris definition, Imperial) discourses overtake ieks writing
about the Balkans, problematizing its stated radical or leftist allegiance. While iek
critically dissects the New World Order, the alleged humanitarianism of NATO in-
terventions and Orientalist discourses about and within the Balkans, his own think-
ing about the wars is nevertheless embedded within the theoretical accouterments
of multiculturalism, identity politics, ethnicization of responsibility for the war, and
demonization of the evildoers, in this case Slobodan Miloevi and the Serbian na-
tion. While in no way justifying Miloevis many political and economic crimes,
I hope to show how this results in ieks problematic endorsement of the NATO
bombing of Serbia, a frequent dismissal of Croatian, Slovenian and other national-
isms in the Balkans and a general inability to articulate the Balkans as anything else
but a symptom of and for the West: as a monstrosity produced by the New World
Order and a problem for the West to resolve.
How can we intervene in the Balkans via the former Yugoslavia? The prominent
discourses surrounding the 1990s Yugoslav wars treat them as paradigmatic of the
post-communist turmoil whose extreme(ist) articulation finds fertile ground in the
(historically bloody, bellicose) Balkans. As Andrew Hammond contends, for west-
ern commentators elsewhere in the [Balkan] peninsula, the representation of Yugo-
slavia formed the pre-arranged interpretative framework which needed very little
Enjoy Your Bombing: Slavoj ieks Ethnic Hierarchies | 13
modification when accounting for Romanian orphanages, Bulgarian poverty, Alba-

nian anti-government protests or any of those other post-communist crises (2005:
139). The tragedy of Yugoslavia is thus both spectralized, multiplied, repeated, al-
beit less bloodily, among its Balkan neighbors and remains unique in the sense that
its unpredictability marks a definitive disappearance of communism in Eastern Eu-
rope: if such a relatively liberal, multicultural, softly authoritarian communist soci-
ety can fall victim to internal war, what hope is there for others?
Yugoslavia becomes a metaphor for lost chance, which was always-already lost.
The duplicity of trauma: Western shock at the Yugoslavs suicidal destruction of its
multiethnic tolerance at the same time as this tolerance is retroactively inscribed into
Yugoslavias communist legacy precisely as a condition of possibility for such trauma,
for the articulation of Western shock at the lack (as a negative, colonial attribute) of
the will to preserve national harmony. That this retroactive inscription serves, most-
ly, to open up the discursive space for Western mourning is affirmed by accounts
which strip communist Yugoslavia of the very possibility of multiethnic tolerance of
the progressive, Western, kind. The pluralism of Yugoslavia was only possible with
the iron fist of empire, the imperial inhibition of identity (Mousavizadeh: 193).
David Rieff informs us, we had been lulled into a false sense of what Yugoslavia was
becoming by ... much pro-Tito propaganda (1995: 36). He admits that there was a
South Slav culture common to Croats, Serbs and Moslems, but is quick to disas-
sociate it from its Yugoslav trappings: though not Yugoslav in the sense of either
the pre-World War II monarchy or the Titoist dictatorship (1995: 71).
The war is always there, always to come, and yet its arrival is greeted by surprise:
Yugoslavia only becomes the possibility of multiethnicity post-mortem, when it is
safely dead, can no longer speak for itself and becomes a site for the projection of
Western multiethnic desire, which is also the desire to rescue, restore multieth-
nicity to this troubled land. The real Yugoslavia is much more threatening because
its Yugoslav identity (like the phenomenon of Yugonostalgia among the warring
ethnics) exceeds explanations supplied by narratives of iron-hand communism and
of liberal-democratic multicultural tolerance.
One way to explain why the war happened, in its extreme racist version, is by
simply criminalizing the Balkan peoples as automatons in the morality play of irra-
tional ancient ethnic hatreds. This version is typically related to Western justifica-
tion for its (alleged) non-involvement in the conflict, as there was nothing one could
do about it. The Clinton administration, for instance, was accused of such distanc-
ing from the conflict before it finally intervened. European discomfort with mil-
itary intervention in former Yugoslavia was ascribed to a similar misrepresentation
of the issue. In Critical Geopolitics, Gearid Tuathail illustrates an instance of the
politicization of the seemingly neutral geographic discourse by discussing Clintons
14 | Nataa Kovaevi
fear of involvement in the dangerous quagmire, the wild country that is Bosnia
(1996: 220). According to Tuathail, this enables moral invisibility to the conflict
as it upholds the image of the wild Balkans which are unresolvable and which will
only expose American troops to danger (1996: 220). Instead of washing ones hands
of the conflict with many European countries, by calling this a civil war where no-
body should intervene; with the Clinton administration, by using the term humani-
tarian disaster rather than its proper name, Holocaust or genocide Tuathail rec-
ommends a moral engagement with this Holocaust, lamenting that the subsequent
intervention came too late.
Tuathails book, inspired by Derridean deconstruction, importantly promotes
a critique of such seemingly universalist, neutral language like moral responsibility,
exposing the politics behind explaining, rationalizing conflicts through the allegedly
apolitical language of geography, cause and effect narratives, and employment of cer-
tain key iterative terms that reduce the singular complexity of any event. Yet he suc-
cumbs to similar temptations in his case study of the discourse on Bosnia. The very
use of the term Holocaust or genocide to explain what happened in Bosnia, Croatia,
or Kosovo could be what Derrida means by an iterative term: a word that acquires
its meaning exactly as it is used in different con-texts, as it reinvents both itself and
those con-texts, as it is repeated with a difference.
Arguably, using terms such as the Holocaust (or even the more general term
genocide) importantly historicizes the Yugoslav war horrors as similar to the horror
of World War II in order to elicit a certain ethical response a diplomatic and/or mil-
itary engagement designed to prevent the bloodshed, invoking the lessons learned
from history. Simultaneously, however, the use of such terms downplays the singu-
larity of the 1990s wars in former Yugoslavia. It potentially blocks a multi-faceted
discussion or understanding of the wars by always-already approaching them with
the same ethical outrage that followed the World War II horrors. It problematical-
ly freezes the wars many actors in the imagery of Nazi-like depravity, which relies
on a depoliticized language of ethics and morality. In light of the discourses about
the wild Balkans, or wild Serbs, it can also cast the wars as an inevitable repetition
of the same (ancient ethnic hatreds), as an obscene repetition of that which must
never be repeated, the Holocaust. This repeated Holocaust almost provides the on-
lookers with obscene pleasure as they, too, can repeat history, but with a difference
the extremists are now in Eastern rather than Western Europe, and we can now
do something to prevent disaster.
I am teasing out the terms of Tuathails discourse because it encapsulates key
rhetorical gestures used by many commentators on the Yugoslav wars who are ha-
bitually associated with progressive liberal or leftist politics. My primary concern is
not the blatantly racist discourse which blames Yugoslav disintegration on some ge-
netic abnormality of the participatory nations, but rather this progressive, humani-
tarian discourse which, finding fault rather with iron-hand Titoism or manipulative,
latter-day communist-nationalists such as Miloevi or Tuman, advocates a military
intervention in order to rescue the people. In addition to Slavoj iek, on whom
this essay dwells in more detail, Susan Sontag, David Rieff,f Vclav Havel, Ken Loach,
Jrgen Habermas, Milan Kundera and others have called for a humanitarian action
in Bosnia and Kosovo invoking a similar language of ethical, moral responsibility in
face of the renewed Holocaust identified by Tuathail.
The problem with this war is precisely that it is irreproachable: this is not the
morally dubious, virtually unilateral, poorly justified intervention in Iraq by the glob-
ally unfashionable US Republicans. This is, according to Edward Said, a war of lib-
eral columnists and intellectuals, and according to Alex Callinicos, it is supported by
the Western left and NATOs liberal apologists (Said 2000: 343; Callinicos 2000:
176, 78). I argue that the intervention in the 1990s Yugoslav wars also marks a pas-
sage to what Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri term Empire: the perfecting not of
imperialist powers in the old sense but rather of the right to intervene, a new pro-
duction of norms and instruments of coercion (2000: 9). Empire is not formed on
the basis of force, but on the basis of presenting force as being in the service of right
and peace; depending on the establishment of a consensus about the use of force,
Empire is called into being based on its capacity to resolve conflicts (2000: 15).
It is precisely the aforementioned leftist and/or liberal lament over Europes or
Americas non-intervention that calls Empire into being: the internalization of the
discourse about the good use of force on rogue or terrorist states such as Yugo-
slavia, or more precisely, Serbia. It is not so much that diplomatic (or, if absolutely
necessary, military) intervention as a political tool to forestall disaster and under-
mine such disastrous political leaders as Serbias Miloevi should be dismissed
altogether, but that the particular type of intervention established through the Yu-
goslav wars, justified by its aim of restoring multiculturalism and its humanitarian
mission, was problematic on several counts. What is obscured in such a discourse
is the way this intervention, ostensibly aimed at rescuing multiculturalism from the
Holocaust, adopts racist undertones in the designation of Serbia as a terrorist state
and in an open demonization of Serbs (not just politicians, but the people) as ag-
gressors and evil expansionists. The irreproachability of humanitarianism, therefore,
makes it almost impossible to raise the question of ensuing civilian deaths among
Serbs (not to mention the political questions of their right to self-determination,
territory, etc.). Like Giorgio Agambens (1998) homo sacer, Serbs can be sacrificed
with impunity, they remain in the liberal blind spot as collateral damage. This dis-
criminatory approach is obtained through a hierarchical political discourse similar
to the one surrounding the American intervention in Iraq, discussed by Judith But-
16 | Nataa Kovaevi
ler in Precarious Life as an establishment of grievable casualties through detailed

narratives of lost lives which are to be mourned (Daniel Pearl, WTO victims) and,
conversely, of non-grievable casualties through an omission of intimate informa-
tion about persons killed, through a practice of effacement and denominalization
(Iraqi insurgents, Palestinian terrorists) (2004: 38).
In a similar sense, then, Serbian casualties in the Yugoslav wars have by and large
remained poorly marked, indeed unmarkable in the Western media, to use Ju-
dith Butlers phrase, resulting from what she calls a discursive dehumanization:
like the dead Iraqi insurgents and civilians, the Serbian military and civilians fit no
dominant frame for the human, their lives are not narrated and therefore cannot
be mourned (2004: 345). In this nihilistic political interpellation, Bosnian Mos-
lems and Kosovo Albanians become biopolitical objects of intervention as much as
Serbs. The decision on their life and death, although it has a seemingly more favor-
able outcome and although they are seemingly humanized through endless per-
sonalized stories of wartime suffering is likewise imagined to be the prerogative
of the imperial police. The excuse of protectionist humanitarianism eventually be-
comes a vehicle for exercising all sorts of forbidden pleasures: destroying the evil-
doers civilian infrastructure, testing out controversial weapons and promoting rac-
ist fantasies about the other.
Rather than seeing the conflict as a singular constellation of narratives, circum-
stances and events that combined to produce the war, this ideology relies on the
politics of blame and collective guilt, ethnicized (for the most part) as Serbian and
on the politics of reward for the good ethnicities, (for the most part) Moslem, Alba-
nian, or Croatian. So tenacious is this simplistic division into aggressive and victim-
ized ethnicities that Moslem, Albanian and occasionally Croatian nationalism and
chauvinist policies are frequently justified as defensive and democratic, or are even
glossed over. The point is not that we should redistribute the guilt equally (some-
thing that iek, as we will see, finds fault with) or gloss over Serbias undoubted-
ly gruesome share in the war the responsibility must be acknowledged but rath-
er that this facile system of ethnic meritocracy widens the rift among and within
countries emerging from the former Yugoslavia instead of healing it.2 The discourse
2
In an article published in the Serbian literary magazine Re, Drinka Gojkovi affirms the necessity of
mapping the coordinates of Serbias collective responsibility for the wars. However, she argues that this
will not come out of either external imaginings of Serbs as primitive mythomaniacs or self-centered
provincials, blind to crime (Gojkovi charges world moralizers Susan Sontag, Thomas Friedman and
Michael Ignatieff with promoting such an image and for mandating Serbias punishment and self-flag-
ellation), or from internal imaginings of Serbs as innocent victims (1999). Rather and this is where
the insistence on assuming collective responsibility carries true ethical potential Gojkovi believes a
confrontation with ones guilt is possible by engaging with the host of texts published in Serbia that crit-
of being or not-being European (civilized, modern, democratic, capitalist) preced-

ed the Yugoslav wars. The secessions from old-fashioned communist Yugoslavia
cannot be understood outside of global identity politics, outside of the attempt to
escape the stigma of being in the backwards, non-European, communist Balkans. It
encouraged a proliferation of highly dependable client states, fighting each other
for Western recognition in domains of democracy, human rights and economic re-
form (Hammond 2005: 149).
It is in this con-text that Western intervention, diplomatic as well as military,
becomes schizophrenic: on the one hand, it attempts to preserve multiethnic toler-
ance and cooperation and on the other, it plays favorites among the assorted eth-
nics, encouraging them to national self-determination, to marketing their cultural
specificity, in short, to re-inventing themselves as independent nations. On the one
hand, support for Bosnia as a symbol of multiculturalism and on the other, support
for Bosnia as a state where identity politics takes over. Promoting national emanci-
pation from what Dubravka Ugrei jokingly calls, parodying Croatian nationalist
discourses, the prison of nations that was communist Yugoslavia contradicts man-
dates to downplay nation-building in order to foster true multiculturalism and tol-
erance of minority rights. The difficulty of reconciling the allegedly long-awaited,
open assertion and emancipation of national identity, on the one hand and nurtur-
ing of meaningful multiculturalism where the new nation would decenter itself as a
primary nation-builder, on the other, is paradigmatic of problems facing liberal mul-
ticulturalist ideology everywhere.
Perhaps this is why most newly independent countries in the region still have
problems with overcoming nationalism: it was a key strategy in the process of justi-
fying secession by employing insular, self-contained discourses of victimization. The
attempt to escape the backwards Balkans and join Europe was articulated as a nec-
essary disassociation from ethnicities seen as Balkan or Oriental (Serbs for Croatia,
Moslems/Albanians for Serbia and Macedonia). The process of ethnic differentia-
tion was encouraged both from the inside through openly racist narratives about
us Europeans and them Orientals and from the outside through the more
subtle narratives of cultural racism about, for instance, democratic, hard-working,
tolerant Slovenians and authoritarian, shifty, corrupt, and narcissistic Serbs. The
near impossibility of carving an ethnically pure space for the transcendental fulfill-
ment of European fantasies of belonging, together with the fashionable ideology of
icize its recent politics and behavior in the wars, highlighting complexities beyond the binary of crim-
inal or innocent Serbs. For Gojkovi, any meaningful assumption of responsibility also takes time, be-
yond instantly proving to the international community that one has transformed into a democratic
country (1999).
18 | Nataa Kovaevi
multicultural pluralism, has made this process perpetually delayed. Full emancipa-
tion is thwarted because of all those non-European others living in our midst;
despite the attempt to escape, once and for all, its in-between civilizational status,
the Balkans are still stuck in-between.
In spite of this paradox this crisis of identity which ensures enduring con-
flict post-communist rescuing of the former republics from the Yugoslav prison
of nations is hailed as liberation, as emancipation. For all their shock and mourn-
ing over the death of Yugoslav multiculturalism, liberal discourses enshrine the su-
periority of their own version of multiculturalism over that exercised by communist
Yugoslavia by presenting the latter as fake, as a forced arrangement. It is imagined
as an oppressive regime that did not allow for much articulation of national or reli-
gious identity (the inner self,f the essence supposedly yearning to breathe free,
to be vindicated) in order to prevent conflict. Given the history of national conflicts
in the Balkans, this is seen as a potentially necessary but ultimately misguided pol-
icy, since suppressing ethnic hatreds could make them even stronger (hence the
1990s wars, such theories conveniently say). Or, in another version, Yugoslavia su-
perficially acknowledged national and religious differences, creating an artificial-
ly harmonious community. Communists simply did not know how to foster true
multiculturalism where one would assert ones cultural-linguistic-religious identity,
as well as reach out to others.
In the discourses surrounding the 1990s wars, Bosnia, especially Sarajevo, be-
comes curiously exempt from the superficial multiculturalism of communist Yugosla-
via. Almost ubiquitous laments over a multicultural Sarajevo that is being destroyed
appear in academic, as well as popular press: Bosnians are not breaking away only
from the economically inefficient, defunct communist Yugoslavia, but also from a
nationalist-chauvinist Serbia, which nonetheless stubbornly preserves the cumber-
some communist apparatus of the dead state.3 Among other things, here we can sur-
mise the paradigm that made some nationalisms more multicultural and others more
chauvinist. Bosnian, like Croatian, plea for independence is a welcome anti-commu-
nist gesture, whereas the Serbian plea for a centralized federation is perceived as a
dangerous allegiance to communist authoritarianism. At stake is not a polemic in-
quiry into the multicultural fabric of Bosnian society in order to evaluate the validity
of such discourses, but rather the very discursive imagining and articulation of Bos-
3
In an article published in The New Republic, Patrick Glynn aptly summarizes the justification for favor-
ing some nationalisms over others: State Department officials in 1991 regarded the Slovenian, Croa-
tian, Macedonian and Bosnian leaders as at least nascently democratic and pro-Western in orientation.
It was . . . the still-Communist regime in Serbia that was repressive and prone to violence (Mousaviza-
deh 1996: 133).
nia in this manner: its ossification as a fetishized site of liberal desire where the free
world can mourn its own late involvement which led to Bosnias unnecessary sacri-
fice. Its establishment as a Western fetish, or what Ivaylo Ditchev aptly calls the cre-
ation of capitals of victimhood such as Bosnia or Kosovo which can attract geopo-
litical investors, virtually crystallizes in the recent trend of taking foreign tourists in
Sarajevo to the sites of major executions, carnage and concentration camps (2002:
246). It is this ontological reification of Sarajevo as Auschwitz after Auschwitz, as
multiculturalism under siege, that somehow becomes its final image, precluding an
in-depth inquiry into conditions that led to the war, especially those that helped dis-
credit the Yugoslav option and promote nationalist politics on all sides.
Simultaneously, this casting of Sarajevo as a pluralist paradise that needs to
be rescued sets the stage for a second death of Yugoslavia, after it has already died
through multiple secessions: Sarajevo can finally be disassociated from its Yugoslav
context, it can repeat its multicultural heritage, but get it right this time in a mod-
ern, liberal-democratic milieu. Preserving Bosnia is thus emphatically not about pre-
serving old Yugoslavia (which, as David Rieff and others tell us, could only come up
with ramshackle multiculturalism). Bosnia, yearning for life in the midst of a siege
and mass murder, eventually survives as a revised, improved Yugoslavia enlight-
ened through humanitarian imperialism. Serbia, on the other hand, not only literal-
ly brings death to everyone, but is portrayed as an obscene (vampiric) repetition of
a dead state, of the oppressive, communist Yugoslavia.4 It is this insistence on bury-
ing, once and for all, a state proclaimed to be dead, this discursive silencing of the
pre-1990 Yugoslav option especially of the Yugoslav identities and social fabrics
that this essay hopes to problematize. At stake is not only the question of us and
them, of who did what to whom and to which extent, but of how the Yugoslav (or
another supranational) option was ethnically cleansed, splitting the populace irre-
vocably into national entities, into us and them.
I now turn to Slavoj iek, by far the most influential and well-known intellec-
tual from former Yugoslavia among Western academics, who casts the Yugoslav wars
as the question of ethnic entities always-already invested with presence, self-same,
monolithic and of their respective responsibilities in the war. It is not so much that
he discounts the tradition of Yugoslav multiculturalism (he acknowledges the con-
structed nature of ancient ethnic hatreds), but rather that he follows a Western hu-
manitarian logic in separating evil nationalists from noble multiculturalists and es-
4
Also see Tomislav Longinovi intriguing essay on the Western gothic imaginary which frames the
serbs as perfect phantoms, skeletons in the closet of Europe, whose obstinate resistance to bombs
and starvation is a vampiric one, since it is the secret of those who stand outside of reason and the light
of day (2002: 467).
20 | Nataa Kovaevi
tablishing hierarchies between entire entities thus qualified. Predictably, this leads
him to pick Serbs as the main culprits who must be stopped bombed while often
dismissing or glossing over the other nationalisms in the region as defensive, unim-
portant, or multicultural. ieks political transparency consists not so much in co-
inciding with the majority opinion in this assignation of blame, but in his discursive
participation in the implicitly racist language of imperial intervention. The purpose
of correctly identifying the enemy is to facilitate a correct Western involvement in
the wars; a castigation of one entitys cruelty in the name of multiethnic tolerance
justifies cruelty against this entire entity.
In this, ieks writing on the Yugoslav wars, like much of his writing about for-
mer Yugoslavia, Eastern Europe and real existing socialism, targets primarily West-
ern audiences. Yugoslav wars are already global: iek is not addressing internal
complexities, antagonisms, or dialogues taking place, or wondering what kind of
outside intervention would be necessary to forestall intensifying conflict or increas-
ing accounts of ethnic cleansing. Rather, he always-already considers Yugoslav wars
as if from the outside the acceptability of intervention is already inscribed in the
very breakup of Yugoslavia, before the war has even started. This fixes Yugoslavia in
a position of impossible self-sufficiency and independence, political as well as sym-
bolic. Its internal conflicts are not merely mediated by global identity politics and
fantasies of European belonging versus rejection. Rather, for iek, Yugoslavias tra-
vails are but another adverse symptom of the New World Order, a spin-off of global
capitalist antagonisms and a problem for major Western powers to resolve. Yugosla-
vias legitimacy and the legitimacy of what comes after its breakup depends on
Western standards and recognition:
I think a very simple thing that the West should have done in 90, 91, is to es-
tablish the fact that Yugoslavia no longer exists and then to set a certain series of
minimal criteria and every entity which is of course not only political democra-
cy but also respect for national ethnic rights and so on and so on and then on-
ly states which respect this will be recognized. Instead of this, the West, I claim,
played a game which was for a long time basically a pro-Serb game. (1999b)
This position is all the more significant as iek gains legitimacy before his West-
ern audiences as an insider, as someone who knows intimately the dynamics of the
Yugoslav system and its breakdown. Hence, his approval of the outside military in-
tervention gives even more political leverage to Western supporters of the NATO ac-
tions against Bosnian Serbs and Serbia proper. iek both revels in and attempts to
combat his somewhat controversial, yet exotic status among Western academics. He
has reacted vehemently, for instance, to Geoffrey Harphams (2003) presupposition
of a difference between him and Western theorists based on the worst clichs about
communism: for instance, that ieks alleged disregard of the boundaries of critical
academic discourse has to do with the bursting forth of creative energies contained by
iron-curtain communism (where, supposedly, no philosophical thought was allowed).
To Harphams proposition that iek may be a sublime theorist or an ob-
scenity-obsessed Thing engaging in para-academic intellectual activity (in the
smoky bars of Slovenia) and pushing the limits of critical discourse with the goal of
overthrow[ing] Western thought, iek responds, Is anyone who deploys a crit-
ical distance towards the predominant model of academic knowledge really either
pretending to be a genius transcending the limits of ordinary mortals or an obscene
Thing? (Harpham 2003: 467; iek 2003: 495). Harphams qualification of iek
as a para-academic not only ignores the facts iek rejects the mystique of the
term by explaining that he was denied employment as a real academic in commu-
nist Slovenia but also invests him with the aura of intellectual transgression, of the-
ory and debate being steeped in real life (smoky bars again), just like iek is im-
plicitly venerated for talking about a communist system in which he actually lived.
iek himself reinforces this authority, coming out as somewhat of a rebel in left-
ist circles that have taken a keen interest in him. Because of his native expert knowl-
edge his foreignness and his supposed flair for transgression he can both correct
those misguided Western leftist who fetishize Cuban or Yugoslav communism and
make controversially nostalgic comments about certain aspects of real existing so-
cialist regimes which most Western leftists would find unsavory. iek occupies a
similar position vis--vis Western blaming of Serbs and NATOs subsequent interven-
tions against this enemy. He outrages (or believes he does) leftist opponents of the
bombings by openly supporting NATOs mission to stop Serb-orchestrated genocide.
He reacts against the leftist relativization of blame, the argument that all sides in the
war are equally nationalist and thus guilty (suggested, for instance, by Alain Badiou)
(1999c). He corrects the mistaken leftist assumption that Miloevis Yugoslavia in-
herits the multicultural spirit of Titos state (1999b). But in this iek is less of a con-
troversial rebel than he would wish: ieks portrayal of the war and support of the
bombings, despite his astute criticism of the ideology of humanitarian intervention or
even the humanitarianism of the intervention, nevertheless recapitulates the main-
stream concepts of a multicultural, human rights discourse that it seeks to transcend.
For iek, a virulent critic of the New World Order, the very humanitarian-
ism of NATO interventions is suspect on the grounds that it is always followed by
the vague, but ominous reference to strategic interests (1999a). The NATO ac-
tions in Bosnia and Yugoslavia are justified on the basis of an ethical normativity
of universal human rights which assert themselves even against state sovereignty;
although there is no explicit reference to political or economic interests, iek ar-
22 | Nataa Kovaevi
gues, this newly emerging normativity of human rights is nevertheless the form of
appearance of its very opposite (2001: 245). It seems, however, that a humanitarian
intervention would be acceptable for iek if it could truly deliver what it promis-
es, that is, punish a country that violates human rights: Is not this the only hope in
our global era to see some internationally acknowledged force as a guarantee that
all countries will respect a certain minimum of ethical (and, hopefully, also health,
social, ecological) standards? (1999a). Positively valorizing the concept of Empire
discussed by Hardt and Negri, iek, therefore, does not question the very establish-
ment of the right to intervene. Rather, the problem lies in the occluded interests of
the force that intervenes, as well as in the ideology of humanitarian intervention itself.
This militaristic humanism, by assuming a purely ethical or moral legitimation,

depoliticizes the military intervention, changing it into an intervention in humani-
tarian catastrophe rather than in a well-defined political struggle (2000: 57). It
sets the ground for an intervention on behalf of an ideal subject-victim who is not
a political agent, but someone who is simply caught up in the madness of the con-
flict and whose suffering must be stopped at all costs (2000: 58). The intervening
force makes sure that the subject-victims are not allowed to cast of this helpless-
ness by asserting themselves as a sovereign and self-reliant political subject (2000:
59). Predictably, then, NATO intervenes in Kosovo on behalf of the terrorized and
displaced Albanians, the privileged and passive humanitarian victims. However,
it becomes fearful and hostile when it discovers recalcitrant political subjects in
Kosovo: not only the Kosovo Liberation Army engaging, without NATO consent,
in murder, drug and human trafficking, but Albanians in general opposing the NA-
TO mandate in post-liberated Kosovo because they now see outside management
as occupation. It seems that this politics of victimization is a larger phenomenon for
iek, and humanitarian interventionism, which reduces singular political struggles
to a US police intervention against terrorists or unlawful combatants that dis-
turb global order, is but one of its manifestations.
The intervention among both terrorists and victims interpellates them in
the biopolitics of what Agamben (1998) terms mere life. Here, iek echoes my
earlier observation that both sides are patronized because, rather than being treated
as sovereign independent citizens, they are granted certain human rights: the right to
live, eat, have shelter and express ones religious, cultural or linguistic identity (2002:
92). The main problem of todays global political climate, for iek, is that this bio-
politics of mere life, predicated on the ideology of victimization and harassment,
becomes the ultimate political horizon paralleling the establishment of liberal de-
mocracy as the political master-signifier. To extend my earlier argument that a liberal
ideology of humanitarian interventionism is irreproachable, this type of politics al-
so precludes opposition: we cant say were against human rights and in favor of ter-
rorists, against liberal democracy and in favor of fundamentalism or totalitarianism.
But despite this critical problem with the ideology of humanitarian intervention-
ism, iek supports NATO actions in former Yugoslavia even as they polarize the
populace into helpless, passive victims and incredibly politically powerful terrorists.
Indeed, like many former Yugoslav republics, he appropriates the position of a victim
in hopes to capture Western political attention and thus ends up blaming NATO for
intervening too late and for playing a pro-Serb game in the meantime (for Serbs, of
course, it is a pro-Croat or pro-Moslem game; for Bosnian Moslems, it is a pro-Cro-
at or pro-Serb game). iek does not subscribe to the explanation of the conflict as
a pathological inter-ethnic showdown and insists that these myths are manipulated
by nationalist politicians on all sides to gain popularity.5 He also identifies Europe-
an fantasies of belonging which take place through a disassociation from ones Bal-
kan neighbors, where the multiple displacement of the frontier clearly demonstrates
that . . . we are dealing not with real geography but with an imaginary cartography
(2000: 4). Thus, iek argues,
For the nationalist Slovenes the [European-Balkan] frontier is the river Kolpa,
separating Slovenia from Croatia; we are Mitteleuropa, while Croats are already
Balkan, involved in the irrational ethnic feuds which really do not concern us
we are on their side, we sympathize, but in the same way one sympathizes with
a third world victim of aggression. (1992)
But as with many liberal or leftist commentators, this gesture primarily serves
to disprove the claims that there is nothing we can do about centuries-old Bal-
kan conflicts and to argue instead that a military intervention is desirable and possi-
bly beneficial. In iek, the patronizing, liberal racism of humanitarian intervention
overrides, and overshadows, the traditional Orientalist racism of refusing to inter-
vene in the wild Balkans.
Indeed, iek perhaps unwittingly reinforces the discourse of a seemingly be-
nevolent, humanitarian intervention to aid victims (who are nonetheless invested
with a clear ethnic identity). His critique of Western political responses to the Saraje-
5
See, for instance, The Metastases of Enjoymentt where iek argues that the Western gaze is thorough-
ly responsible for its own seduction by the myth of Balkan primordial cruelty: in ex-Yugoslavia, we
are lost not because of our primitive dreams and myths preventing us from speaking the enlightened lan-
guage of Europe, but because we pay in flesh the price of being the stuff of others dreams (1994: 212).
Yugoslavia is not the other of Europe, but rather Europe itself in its Otherness, the screen on to which
Europe projected its own repressed reverse (1994: 212).
24 | Nataa Kovaevi
vo siege disaster points to a libidinal economy of Sarajevos victimization, Western-

ers unavowed desire to preserve it in a kind of atemporal freeze, between the two
deaths . . . a victim eternalized in its suffering (1994: 213). To counter this racist sus-
pension of the victim, which provides the Western gaze with a safe, mediatized out-
let of otherness, iek argues for a more radical humanitarian action, beyond pro-
viding just enough humanitarian aid for the city to survive, exert[ing] just enough
pressure on the Serbs to prevent them from occupying the city (1994: 213). The
problem lies not in ieks argument for putting an end to the siege through outside
intervention, but rather in his redoubling of Sarajevos final image as the victim and
of the terms of intervention which sacrifices terrorist Serbs with impunity and res-
cues victimized Bosnian Moslems by investing them with an idealized (yet patron-
izing) lack of political agency.
ieks explanation of the wars echoes my earlier discussion of liberal humani-
tarianism which justifies independent Bosnia as a project of isolation and improve-
ment of the best legacies of former Yugoslavia and castigates Serbia as an im/potent,
rump embodiment of a superseded communist state, lashing out in its dying throes.
The political lines are drawn according to unambiguous and apparently fixed bina-
ries: challenging a presumed leftist idealization of Miloevis Serbia as a successor to
Titos Yugoslavia, iek proposes that Alija Izetbegovis Bosnian presidency, rather,
more faithfully preserves the former states heritage. The popularity of Titos portraits
in 1990s Bosnias political offices proves its continued devotion to multicultur-
alism. Bosnia is frequently lauded as the most tolerant and open of former Yugoslav
republics, a place where being-Moslem did not mean some fundamentalist mad-
ness, but led to an original rock music scene and cultural scene in general. Hence,
the war between Bosnia and Yugoslavia was the war between what was, to put
it conditionally, good about the old Titoist legacy, the war between the idea of
a multi-cultural, tolerant why not use these terms? Yugoslavia and the new
logic of nationalism. (1999b)
iek is not an unambivalent apologist for real existing socialism of Titos Yu-
goslavia, but he redeems its multicultural legacy, which, even if [it] is a purely ma-
nipulative ideological invention, nonetheless it produces certain material effects
(1999b). Izetbegovis Bosnia, especially Sarajevo, is thus transformed into a leftist
fetish: it is invested with the utopian element of old Yugoslavia.
While Bosnian Moslems and frequently Kosovo Albanians are the only enti-
ties behaving in a civilized manner in former Yugoslavia, Miloevis Serbia destroys
the very utopian element of Titos Yugoslavia while preserving its most regressive as-
pects. Serbia has fallen prey (quite willingly, though) to a nationalist neo-Commu-
nist leader and therefore the fight against Miloevi by the seceding republics run-
ning for their lives is likened to the Allies fight against Hitler (1999a). iek evokes
stereotypical tropes of the Holocaust and Hitlerism used to explain Miloevis reign
over Serbia, contributing to the irreproachability of Yugoslavias breakup by cater-
ing to both leftist and liberal imaginations. The multiculturalist republics respectful
of communist Yugoslavias legacy seek refuge from a nationalist monster; the dem-
ocratic republics respectful of Yugoslavias liberal legacy seek refuge from an ortho-
dox communist. Of course, this is a problem, not because the image of Miloevis
Serbia is inadequate or unreasonable, but because such an argument obscures the
legacy of other deadly nationalisms in the region. ieks discursive framing of Yu-
goslav wars is torn between this acknowledgment of the rise in nationalism in all re-
publics and the insistence on blaming some nationalisms and exculpating others.
iek explains how nationalist politics gained ground across former Yugoslavia:
every nationality has built its own mythology narrating how other nations deprive
it of the vital part of enjoyment (1993: 204). Thus, Slovenes are deprived of their
potentially Western European affluence by Serbians, Bosnians, . . . because of their
proverbial laziness, Balkan corruption, dirty and noisy enjoyment, while Serbs are
robbed of the results of their hard labor by Slovenian unnatural diligence, stiffness
and selfish calculation (1993: 204). But the darker (reverse, as it were) side of na-
tionalisms other than Serbian is suppressed in iek, for what matters is not their
ideological overlap but rather their concrete manifestations at least the ones
that iek selectively discusses. Thus, iek follows a Western humanitarian logic
in exonerating weaker nationalisms (Bosnian, Kosovar) and castigating stronger
nationalisms (Serbian and by means of subtraction, the Croatian) (1999c). Even
the yakking popular on the Left about the [pro-fascist] Ustasche symbols in Tud-
jmans Croatia means little set against the Serbian aggression against Bosnia in
1992 (1999c).
iek acknowledges that even the 1990s Bosnian presidency is not completely
innocent in that they played a strange game: let Serbs and Croats fight each other
and then well take over (1999b). This statement allegedly invests them with polit-
ical agency, on which iek insists in order to combat the ideology of (self)victim-
ization, but it nevertheless comes across as no more than a token gesture intended
to provide balance. This becomes especially apparent in ieks problematic insis-
tence that even Croatian nationalism, which openly embraced the fascist symbols
and ideology of the World-War-II Nazi puppet state, has its redeeming moments:6
6
Not surprisingly, iek ennobles Slovenias nationalist secession in the same way they too preserved
the respect for Titos legacy.
26 | Nataa Kovaevi
even such a degenerate, sad regime as the Tudjman regime in Croatia still ac-
knowledges Tito and the old Yugoslav legacy as a legitimate tradition. Even if
he is and he definitely is a proto-fascist figure, Tudjman still includes Tito
within the great Croat legacy, or however he puts it. (1999b)
Why this insistence on differentiation between entire nationalisms, already as-

sumed as givens? If Croatian, Bosnian, Slovenian and other nationalisms have their
redeeming sides, counterparts, or at least complexity (oppositional parties?), then
how is it credible that only Serbian nationalism is monolithic, straightforward, and
fixed? Most significantly, how does this forward the multicultural politics that iek
allegedly espouses when it not only contradicts his theorization of the rise in antag-
onistic nationalisms everywhere in Yugoslavia but also elevates certain ethnics (and
their enjoyment of their nations) above others? This alleged insistence on mul-
ticulturalism which obscures its racist side, its unacknowledged reverse, as iek
would say, strengthens the interventionist ideology of liberal humanitarianism which
he sets out to challenge. The main culprit in this politics of blame is undoubtedly
Miloevi and even Serbian politicians before him (so Serbian politics is monolith-
ic not only synchronically but also diachronically).
In ieks historical cause-and-effect narrative, it is Serbia which sets the stage
for the first (symbolic) death of Yugoslavia: by denying autonomy to its provinc-
es Kosovo and Vojvodina in the 1974 Constitution and by sanctioning Miloevis
takeover of power in the late 1980s. While no doubt significant, this originary mo-
ment of breakup is exposed to challenge for instance, why not date the breakup
of Yugoslavia to the rise in Albanian nationalism and calls for independence in the
1970s and 1980s? Or to the nationalism of the so-called Croatian Spring in the
1970s? Or to Slovenias and Croatias calls for independence in the 1980s? My goal
is not to blame any single event or entity for Yugoslavias breakup, but rather to
highlight the need of looking at all of them together, considering their interactions
in the particular political and economic constellations whose complexity iek dis-
counts with a specific ideological goal in mind.
ieks unapologetic support of NATOs punishment of Serbia results from
the war situation presented in such binary terms and from a unified historical nar-
rative which monopolizes the discourse of the breakup through a rationalization,
a cause-and-effect unfolding that points to indisputable Serbian delinquency. Un-
like liberal apologists who justified the intervention by saying that it punishes poli-
ticians rather than ordinary people, iek has no qualms about bombing Serbs as a
people. Although he identifies many problems with the humanitarian intervention,
iek nevertheless believes the NATO action to be justified, replying to the pseu-
do-Leftists who are squeamish about the bombing: Precisely as a Leftist, my an-
swer to the dilemma Bomb or not? is: not yet ENOUGH bombs and they are TOO
LATE (1999a). It is not just about getting over the years of entertaining illusions
that one can make a deal with Miloevi, a claim that not only installs Miloevi as
the ber-Serb who fully represents and embodies the nation, but also strips Serbs
of the power of negotiation, since one cannot negotiate with terrorists (1999a). It is
also about punishing Serbs for their nationalism:
When the Western forces repeat all the time that they are not fighting the Ser-
bian people, but only their corrupted regime, they rely on the typically liberal
wrong premise that the Serbian people are just victims of their evil leadership per-
sonified in Milosevic, manipulated by him.7 The painful fact is that Serb aggres-
sive nationalism enjoys the support of the large majority of the population no,
Serbs are not passive victims of nationalist manipulation, they are not Americans
in disguise, just waiting to be delivered from the bad nationalist spell. (1999a)
The effectiveness of the NATO bombing as a humanitarian method and a dem-

ocratic tool for re-educating bad nationalists into good multiculturalists is a topic in
its own right. What is at stake in ieks nihilistic politics is the very biopolitics of
mere life which can justify the collateral damage among not merely Serbian na-
tionalists, but Serbs as an undifferentiated, cancerous body all the more ironic as
cancer is on the rise in Serbian bodies since the bombing, because of all the materi-
al manifestations of the NATO intervention that iek chooses to discuss in theo-
retical terms. Indeed, ieks approach, while seemingly devoted to the utopian ex-
cess of Yugoslavias ideology of multiculturalism, insists on a clear delineation of
differences among the warring ethnics, contributing to the vying for Western acco-
lade by former Yugoslav republics through a denigration of others.
Although iek opposes the biological racism of primordial hatreds, he nev-
ertheless sets the stage for a seemingly more liberal racism through the discussion of
guilt in ethnic rather than political or economic terms and the mobilization of ethnic-
7
The Clinton administration and NATO commanders frequently emphasized that their actions are re-
ally meant to protect the people from Miloevis government. However, their official statements and
media apparatus nevertheless exposed the people as a target, for what else could account for a deliber-
ate disabling of civilian water and electricity supplies and the arrogance reflected in NATO spokesman
Jamie Sheas remark, We are able to turn off and on the light switch in Belgrade? That the bombing
provided a significant dose of enjoyment of the justified hatred of Serbs as a people is confirmed by
Thomas Friedmans statement which admits to targeting the nation, not only its leaders: We are at
war with the Serbian nation and anyone hanging around Belgrade needs to understand that. This notion
that we are only at war with one bad guy, Slobodan Miloevi (who was popularly elected three times),
is ludicrous (11 May 1999).
28 | Nataa Kovaevi
ity as the zero degree of either assertive, self-defensive politics or aggressive, destruc-
tive fascism. In this way, Croatian ethnics can always be half-exonerated for their na-
tionalist enjoyment, regardless of the singularity of the situation in which they find
themselves, whereas Serb ethnic fascism will be replicated mimetically at different
historical moments, whether we are speaking of 1974, 1986, or 1992.
What haunts, exceeds ieks discussion is the existence, however utopian in
(spite of) its impotence, of a pro-Yugoslav reformist party as an option in the Bos-
nian elections in the 1990s and the fact that most Moslems, Serbs and Croats didnt
vote for it. Even if this pro-Yugoslav option embodied in the party was clearly pow-
erless and superseded, it would still be possible to speak of a pro-Yugoslav political
attitude, a gesture of respect for Titos ideology of multiculturalism. This attitude
would likely oppose the politics of ethnic identity, of blame and guilt, as well as of a
discursive denigration or support for bombing of any one of Yugoslavias nation-
alities. Instead, the former Yugoslav republics have gained independence, but have
nurtured it as introverted new nations. They have not, as iek claims, preserved
the spirit of Titos Yugoslavia, nor have they formed some sort of loose confederacy
which would have challenged the nationalist-chauvinist Miloevi government with
the full force of its multicultural utopianism.
LITERATURE:
Agamben, G. (1998) Homo Sacer: sovereign power and bare life, trans. D. Heller-Roa-
zen, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Callinicos, A. (2000) The ideology of humanitarian intervention, in T. Ali (ed.)
Masters of the Universe: NATOs Balkan crusade, New York: Verso.
Ditchev, I. (2002) The eros of identity, in D. Bjeli and O. Savi (eds) Balkan as
Metaphor: between globalization and fragmentation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Friedman, T. (1999) Steady as she goes, The New York Times, 11 May: A23.
Gojkovi, D. (1999) ta emo sad? (What Do We Do Now?) Re: asopis za kn-
jievnost i kulturu i drutvena pitanja, 1. Online. Available HTTP: <http://www.
freeb92.net/casopis_rec /arhiva/Gojkovi.html> (accessed 15 November 2005).
. (2005) The Danger Zone of Europe: Balkanism between the Cold War and
9/11, European Journal of Cultural Studies, 8: 13554.
Hardt, M. and Negri, M. (2000) Empire, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Harpham, G. (2003) Doing the impossible: Slavoj iek and the end of knowledge,
Critical Inquiry, 29 (3): 45385.
Longinovi, T. (2002) Vampires Like Us: gothic imaginary and the serbs, in D.
Bjeli and O. Savi (eds) Balkan as Metaphor: between globalization and fragmen-
tation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mousavizadeh, N. (1996) The Black Book of Bosnia: the consequences of appeasement

by the writers and editors of The New Republic, New York: Basic.
Tuathail, G. (1996) Critical Geopolitics: the politics of writing global space, Minne-
apolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Rieff,f D. (1995) Slaughterhouse: Bosnia and the failure of the West, New York: Simon
and Schuster.
. (2000) The treason of the intellectuals, in T. Ali (ed.) Masters of the Uni-
verse: NATOs Balkan crusade, New York: Verso.
Sontag, S. (1995) There and here: A lament for Bosnia, The Nation, 25 Decem-
ber: 81821.
. (1999) Why are we in Kosovo? The New York Times Magazine, 2 May: 525.
iek, S. (1992) Ethnic dance macabre, The Guardian, 28 August. Online. Avail-
able HTTP: <http://egs.edu/faculty/iek/iek-ethnic-danse-macabre.ht-
ml> (accessed 20 November 2005).
. (1993) Tarrying with the Negative: Kant,t Hegel and the critique of ideology,
Durham: Duke University Press.
. (1994) The Metastases of Enjoyment: six essays on woman and causality. New
York: Verso, 1994.
. (1999a) Against the double blackmail: NATO intervention in Kosovo, Yu-
goslavia, New Left Review, March April. Online. Available HTTP: < http://
www.egs.edu/faculty/iek/iek-against-the-double-blackmail.html>. (ac-
cessed 20 November 2005).
. (1999b) Human rights and its discontents, Lecture at Bard College, 16
November. Online. Available HTTP: <http://www. egs.edu//faculty/iek/
iek-human-rights-and-its-discontents.html>. (accessed 20 November 2005).
. (1999c) NATO, the left hand of God? Nettime, 29 June. Online. Available
HTTP: <http://egs.edu/faculty/iek/iek-nato-the-left-hand-of-god.ht-
ml>. (accessed 20 November 2005).
. (2000) The Fragile Absolute, or, r why is the Christian legacy worth fighting for?,
New York: Verso.
. (2001) Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism? Five interventions in the (mis)use of
a notion, New York: Verso.
. (2002) Welcome to the Desert of the Real! Five essays on September 11 and relat-
ed dates, New York: Verso.
. (2003) Critical response I: a symptom of what? Critical Inquiry 29 (3):
486503.
30 | Nataa Kovaevi
: -
, 1990-
(,
, , ). , , -
-
. ,
, , , -
. , -
( ).
,
, -
- ,
-
. , ,
, - -
( ),
, , -
.
: , , 1990-, -
, , , ,
Received 30.09.2016 / Accepted 10.12.2016.

Vol. 7, No. 1 (2016):
( ) 31-49. 31
UDC 821.163.41-13.09 Petrovi Njego P. II

. 1
.

II
:

. (1891), . (1949) (2013). -
( 188) -
.

, . -
,
.
: , , -
, ,
-
. ,
-
, ,
2. , -
,
1
naida_iv@yahoo.com (Nayda Ivanova, St.Clement of Ohrid University of Sofia, Department of Slavic
Linguistics, Bulgaria)
2
-
(. 2009: 29-35).
32 | .
- -
, .

19. (-
(1891) . (18471927)3); 40-
20. -
(. . . (1949) . (19011993)4);
21. -
( II . (2013)
) 5.
( 188)
-
, -
6.

, .
,
,
-
, , -
.
1.
( 128), -
-
, , -
/
(13 ,/
,/ !). -
3
.
4
.
5
.
6
. -
( 1947), ( 2014:134-136).
-
II | 33
, -
(-) .
- -
(.
. 3, 1969: 13, -
: 1) ( ), ; 2) .: -
, , , ).
(46 / -
/ ). ,
( 1232) -
(20-21 ,
/ / ); -
(27 -
,/ , !).
-
,
-
, ;
.
1.1.
1.1.1. -
. ,
, -
. -
, -
(. : ; , ( 1975 . I:
41)): / , ,/ -
!
-
, -
: .
, 7,
7
. , , , . ;
-
( 1995 . 8: 99).
34 | .
, -
, ( 1993: 598).

, , -
8, -
( 1994: 39-40):
;/ .

, : ,/
. 2728, -

()
. / -
. , -
28.
1.1.2. -
. -
,
, -
.
() -
. -
, -
: ,/
,/ !9
-
, : 10,
: / -
.
8
. , . . Strix bubo, , - ; -
- , ; , , ; (
1975 . I: 85).
9
3 : ,
.
10
. ( ) ( ).
-
II | 35
,
-
. -
, -
,
. -
: , ,/
(sic!)/ (sic)!.
, , -
.
(-
), .. . -
, :
/ , !
,
, , . -
.
1.1.3. -
. -
, -
.

(. : (
1967 . 1: 121)): ... ,/ , -
,/ !
, , -
-
: 2.
. -
, -
8. -
,
I 13. 14. .
-
( ): /
. -
, .
-
36 | .
-
. -
.
, -
, . -

19. ( ) -
-
.
( ), ,
, , -
11: , ,/ , ,/
.

: / , !
,
-
.
1.1.4. -
, .
-
-
(. ,
( 1978, . 5: 168169)); (,
: , -
, , ( 1974, . 1: 651) ( -
, , );
.
( -
, (, ).
-
(), ().
(), -
(), ().
11
. 1998.
-
II | 37
, ,/
/ -

.
/ ,/

.
/ /
/ -

!
*
-
. -
.
-
(,
, , ), ( ),
(), (), -
( ).

;
, -
, -
, -
(, );
,
. , -
, , , , -
.
-
, . -
( ); , -
;
. -
-
,
, ( )
. -
,
( ).
-
.
38 | .
2.

-
-
.
: 1) -
, , -
( 4953) 2) -
( 59-63).
2.1. 4953
,
, , ;
; ,
, -
, : 49 ,
!/ / /
/ .
2.1.1.
-
.
, -
--
, .
( 49),
( 73), -
-
( 8485).
.
52 !
, !
, !
-
II | 39
-
49 -
. .

.
:
; / .
. -
, ( 1977 .
3: 36) ( 1993: 408) -
: 1. , () 2. ().

-

. -, -

(. ) (. , , ). -
-
, ,
. -
, ,
: 1. () 2. (),
.
52 !/50 , ,/

/
!
, !/ ,/

,/
/

.

, !/ ,/ /

?

. -
, . , -
-
.
-
/, .
. -
(. :
40 | .
) -
-
.
(), , .
, .
,
.
, -
/ . -

.
,
. -

;
-; ( ), -
; -
-
, . .
-
( ), -
(), .
( ) (!) -
( ), (-
). ( ) (.
-
); , -
( ).

, -
. -
-
,
()
().
-
5253. -
,
.
-
II | 41
2.2. -
-
, ( -
) (, .
): 59
/ / /
/ ?
, , -
61,
(. <https://
www.rastko.rs/knjizevnost/nauka_knjiz/ideretic-senka.html>. 15.10.2016, -
1990: 5254).
2.2.1.
;/ / -

,/ ,/ ;
!/ ?/

/ / !
56-60 !/ / ,

/ /

?
2.2.1.1. -
, 5357, : -
,/ ;/ , , ,/ -
/ ,
,/ ). -
-
. -
,
-
19. .
-

. 3. 1. -
, .
-
-
( ). , -

42 | .
( ) (. -
);
(
) , ; -
, , (-
), .
-
, -
; ,
, ; -
, ; -

, ;
, ;
.

( , ; -
, .). -
-
,
.
, -
-
-
.
-
, -
( .
1998: 111118). -
-
( -

).
, -
-
-
II | 43
, -
.
-
:
1)
-
-
;
2) , -
-
.
-
, -
-
,
, -
.
-
,
. -
-
, .
1. -
- -
, ,
. ,
.

, -
-
.

- -
. -
-
44 | .
,
.
, -
,
-
,
. (: 52 , !/ ,/
; 60 ?/ -
). , -
/ ,
() (: 50 -
; , : ).
-
. ,
,
,
-- , -
.
-
-
. -
-
, -
.
, ,
, -
-
.
,
,
, -
, (: ; : -
/ ; : , ).

()
-
.
--
, (.
-
II | 45
(
,/ )
() () (
). , -

, (. : 4
; ). -
-

- - -
-
, -
.
2. -
. -
, . -
, ,
.
- -
, , -
.
, ,
(, ), -
( ). -

. ,
,

-
.
19.
.

. -
, -
, -
.
. -
46 | .
-
, (( ,
(( ..) ;
; 24)12.
,
, . -
.
, -
. -
( -
), ,
. -
- . -
,
.
-
.
-
, -
, ,
-
. ,
.
,
.

40- 20. -
-
, -
.
,
, .
, -
.
12
.

. ,
.
-
II | 47

.
, -
, -
.
: . , . , . , . , . , . ,
. . . -. ,
: , 1993 (Blgarski
tlkoven rechnik. Sofija: Izdatelstvo na blgarskata akademija na naukite, 1993).
, . -
. : .
,
28. 29. 1998. -
, . . . : -
, 1998. 149161 (Bunjak, Petar. Neka stilska obeleja
Gorskog vijenca u poljskom prevodu Henrika Batovskog. U: Prevoenje Gorskog
vijenca na strane jezike, ed. N. Vukovi. Podgorica: Crnogorska akademija nauka
i umjetnosti, 1998. 149-161).
, . . . . 1975;
1977, : (Gerov, Najden. Rechnik na
blgarskija ezik. Fototipno izdanie. Chast prva. 1975; Chast treta 1977, Sofija:
Blgarski pisatel).
Dereti, Irina. Semantika senke u Gorskom vijencu <https://www.rastko.rs/
knjizevnost/nauka_knjiz/ideretic-senka.html>. 15.10.2016.
, . . .
. , . 43, . 2 (2014): 127
145 (ovi, Branimir. P. A. Lavrov prvi prevodilac i tuma Njegoeva Gorskog
vijenca. Nauni sastanak slavista u Vukove dane, vol. 43, no. 2, 2014: 127-145).
, . . , .
361 (1947): 2838 (Leskovac. Mladen. O prevodima Gorskog vijenca. Letopis
matice srpske, no. 361 (1947): 28-38).
: , V. . . :
, 1995 (Rechnik na blgarskija
ezik, Tom V. Glaven redaktor K. Cholakova. Sofija: Izdatelstvo na Blgarskata
akademija na naukite).
48 | .
: . .
1990. . : ,
1967. . : ,
1969 (Renik srpskohrvatskoga knjievnog jezika. Novi Sad Zagreb: Matica
srpska Matica hrvatska, 1967-1969).
, . . : -
. . DC. -
. 41. :
, 1990 (Stevanovi, Mihailo. O jeziku Gorskog vijenca. Beograd: Srpska
akademija nauka i umetnosti, Nauna knjiga, 1990).
: . . .
: 7+, 1994 (Blgarska mitologia. Enciklopedichen rechnik.
Sstavitel Anani Stojnev. Sofia: 7M+LOGIS, 1994).
: . , . -, . .
. . :
, 1974 (K. Nicheva, S. Spasova-Mihajlova, Kr. Cholakova. Frazeologichen
rechnik na blgarskia ezik. Tom prvi. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Blgarskata akademia
na naukite, 1974).
, . . :
, 2009 (Hlebec, Boris. Opta naela prevoenja. Novi Sad
Beograd: Budunost Beogradska knjiga, 2009).
, . . , , .
: , 1988 (Shvejcer, Aleksandr Davidovich. Teorija perevoda. Status,
problemy, aspekty. Moskva: Nauka, 1988).
Nayda Ivanova
MECHANISMS OF TRANSFORMING THE PROTAGONIST

SYSTEM IN THE BULGARIAN TRANSLATIONAL
RECEPTIONS OF MOUNTAIN WREATHH BY P. P. NJEGO
Abstract: In this article, the main strategies in transforming the protagonist system of
the poem Mountain Wreath by P. P. Njego, as displayed in its three translations into Bulgar-
ian, namely, the ones provided by P. Ivanov (1891), D. Panteleev (1949) and A. Romanov
(2013) are explored. The investigation is based on some key metaphors, comparisons and al-
-
II | 49
legories, which reveal the image of the Muslim invaders, as represented in the first monologue
by Bishop Danilo. In turn, the influence of the Bulgarian late Revival, socialist and post-mod-
ernist cultures on each translator in respect with the purpose of his translation, as well as the
impact of the aforementioned cultures on the mechanisms of selection of translational corre-
spondences are examined. The analysis shows both the significant role and the lack of well-ex-
plored text-forming functions of the translational transformations, as well as the way the lat-
ter are determined by the socio-cultural situation in which the given translation occurred.
Keywords: Njego, Bulgarian translations of Mountain Wreath, the first monologue by
Bishop Danilo, the image of enemy, translational transformations of protagonist system

Vol. 7, No. 1 (2016):
( ) 51-74. 51
UDC 821.163.42:821.163.41

Dr Vlaho Bogii1
Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krlea (Zagreb)
Leksikografski odjel
Hrvatska
MIROSLAV KRLEA I SRPSKI PISCI:

KNJIEVNOST KAO IDENTITET
Apstrakt: Autor u radu izvodi zakljuak o poticajnoj uzajamnoj upuenosti srpske i hr-
vatske kulture u promatranom razdoblju, pri emu je referencijalnost knjievnosti u sredi-
tu neposrednog razumijevanja kao samostalan okvir, prije jugoslavenskog i evropskog kon-
teksta. Krleinu utvrenom poloaju u knjievnohistorijskom razmjeru, prema recepcijskom
dosegu djela i knjievnim krugovima kojima kao pripadnik ili antagonist pridonosi, ovdje se
dodaje i itanje prema kojemu je ivei sa srpskom kulturom, otkad je 1912. doao u Srbi-
ju, odnosno otkad je 1922. u srpskoj javnosti prepoznat kao autentian glas potencijalne pro-
mjene, pa do svoje smrti 1981. godine memoriran u opem vrijednosnom katalogu iz koje-
ga se ona razumijeva u sebi i kao historijsko bie.
Kljune rijei: Miroslav Krlea, Ivo Andri, Milo Crnjanski, Dragia Vasi, srpska i hr-
vatska knjievnost
Pod naslovom Da ne bi bilo zabune urednitvo Nina (1935) donosi biljeku za

koju su umoljeni od strane Milana Dedinca, Duana Matia i Marka Ristia, a ri-
je je o tome da su u antologijiskom izboru Ideja (Naa poezija posle rata) pre-
tampane izmeu ostalog i neke [njihove pesme], objavljene pre nekoliko godina po
raznim asopisima. Ovo je pretampavanje izvreno bez nae dozvole. Ne obazirui
se na to da li su, po Zakonu o autorskom pravu, Ideje imale pravo ili ne da to uine,
hoemo samo da naglasimo jedno: u sluaju da su nam Ideje traile takvu dozvolu,
ove se pesme kao ni ma koji nai radovi, u tome listu ne bi pojavile, jer je za nas na-
a saradnja u Idejama unapred iskljuena.2
1
vlaho.bogisic@lzmk.hr (Vlaho Bogii, Miroslav Krlea Institute of Lexicography Zagreb, Depart-
ment of Lexicography, Croatia)
2
NIN, I/1935, br. 17, str. 6; Ideje (19341935), list koji je kao tjednik pokrenuo i ureivao Milo Cr-
njanski, posebno je potaknuo iritaciju na graanskoj i revolucionarnoj ljevici koja je u njegovoj idejnoj
52 | Vlaho Bogii
Neto prije nego se naao na popisu suradnika kojima je Crnjanski osnaio per-
spektive svoga lista, Ivo Andri je, budui da je doputenje od njega zatraeno, otklo-
nio uvrtenje u antologiju hrvatske lirike. On je, pretpostavljajui da bi se takvo od-
bijanje trebalo podrazumijevati, Mihovilu Kombolu ipak svoju poziciju obrazloio:
Ne izgleda [mi] razumljivo ni opravdano da se danas izdaje jedna antologija ogra-
niena na jedno pleme. [] Ne bih nikada mogao uestvovati u jednoj publikaciji
iz koje bi principijelno bili iskljueni drugi nai meni bliski pjesnici samo zbog toga
to su ili druge vere ili roeni u drugoj pokrajini.3 Andri podsjea da je jo 1917.
godine, kao jedan od osnivaa i urednika Knjievnog juga [] zastupao najire gle-
dite jedinstva, pa 1933. godine ja ne mogu zastupati druke gledite. Kada, me-
utim, za deset godina (1942) opet otkloni uvrtenje u antologiju, s drugim plemen-
skim atributom, uinit e to s drukijim obrazloenjem: on se, kae, dodue osjea
srpskim pripovedaem, ali ne moe biti javno vidljiv dok je njegova zemlja okupira-
na, da bi Borislavu Mihajloviu, u slobodnoj zemlji, usmeno posve izravno i analog-
no dopustio ono to je svojedobno Kombolu uskratio.4
koncepciji vidjela povezanost s rastom nacistikoga pritiska. U prvome su broju svoje priloge, izmeu
ostalih, objavili Andri, Vinaver i Isidora Sekuli.
3
Cit. prema aneta uki Perii, Pisac i pria, Novi Sad: Akademska knjiga, 2012, str. 332.
4
Kada sam pripremao antologiju Srpski pesnici izmeu dva rata i, ne elei da pesnika mlade hrvat-
ske lirike uvrstim u srpske pesnike bez njegove dozvole, rekao Andriu da me njegovi stihovi stavljaju
pred dilemu, odgovorio mi je okolino ali jasno: Ako su vam problem moji stihovi, slobodno ih izosta-
vite. Ja nisam pesnik. Ali ako je u pitanju naslov vae antologije, imate moju punu suglasnost. Bori-
slav Mihajlovi Mihiz, Autobiografija o drugima [ir.], II, Beograd: BIGZ, 1992, str. 137.
Kada se navodi Andrieva prepiska s Kombolom u pravilu se isputa njezin nastavak, odnosno Kombo-
lov odgovor Andriu: razlozi za izdavanje ove antologije vrlo su prosti i jasni i oni su u prvom redu prak-
tine prirode. Kod nas se jo uvijek s mnogo neznanja govori i pie o knjievnom radu u pojedinim dije-
lovima drave. [] Doe li rije na takve stvari u Beogradu i Ljubljani, dobiva se stalan odgovor: zato
ne izdajete antologije po primjeru g. B. Popovia i ist. knjievnosti kao to je Skerlieva? Kombol utoli-
ko upuuje Andria da je dokumentovanu istoriju novije hrv. knjievnosti obeao nedavno zagrebaki
univ. prof. g. Antun Barac (nekadanji suradnik Knjievnog juga i jugoslavenski orijentiran), a antolo-
giju novije hrvatske lirike spremao je g. Geca Kon, i to u redakciji g. Milana Begovia. U svome se pr-
vom obraanju Andriu Kombol pozvao i na Krleu, od kojega je i dobio njegovu adresu. Kombolovo
pismo Andriu uva se u Andrievoj ostavtini, Arhiv SANU, inv. br. 2570.
S Milanom Begoviem kao urednikom je i objavljena antologija Hrvatska proza XX. stoljea (I II, Za-
greb: A. Velzek, 1941 1942), a u nju su, prilagoene korijenskom pravopisu, uvrtene i dvije Andrie-
ve novele. Andri zacijelo nije mogao utjecati na to izdanje, ali se na njega ni poslije nije osvrnuo, kao
to ga u pravilu previaju i njegovi biografi, moda i stoga to je prireiva, i to u entuzijastikom du-
hu tadanjega poretka, bio Marko Fotez. Fotez bi se s podsjeanjem na Andrieve korienske prie u beo-
gradskom ambijentu koji je poslije 1945. dijelio s Andriem zatekao u identinom tipu nelagode kao i
sam andri kada je izlagana forografija s potipisivanja pristupa Kraljevine Jugoslavije Trojnom paktu. U
antologiji se za Andria kae da je postao jednim od najiztaknutijih naih novelista uobe.
No, kako je u Andrievu odgovoru Kombolu, a i u slinim prigodama, rije prije o nelagodi da oituje
svoje stvarno gledite u razumijevanju srpskog i jugoslavenskog atributa kao sinonima (pritom se doista
Miroslav Krlea i srpski pisci: knjievnost kao identitet | 53
Problemi kulturnog rasporeda to proizlaze iz identifikacijskih gesti, kakve u na-

vedenim primjerima oituju Marko Risti i Ivo Andri, u historiografskom narativu
tumae se u pravilu s obzirom na njihova idejna polazita, koja se potom prenose u
konkurentska ili konfliktna ideoloka sporenja. Premda nije figura bez idejnih svoj-
stava, Andri se kao pojava (samo)razumijeva s obzirom na onaj segment znaenj-
skoga polja pojma vlast koji se primarno ne odnosi na poredak ili vladavinu, pa onda
ni na nositelje promjene ak ni kada je rije o revolucionarnoj pobuni ve na teh-
nologiju vlasti: razumijevanje uspostave i odranja vlasti kao pretpostavke (kultur-
nih) oblika i normi na kojima se drutvo zasniva. Kada se taj problem svede na bio-
grafije uoava se kako se one u nas kritiki, studijski ne razmatraju po sebi. Razlog
na koji je pritom vano upozoriti, jer zadire u problem vlasti, odnosi se na kontinui-
tet i diskontinuitet u osobnim i kolektivnim biografijama dvadesetoga stoljea: dok
se u svakoj osobnoj biografiji, dok ne bude prekinuta, kontinuitet uspostavlja sam
po sebi, razliite kolektivne biografije, one koje se primjerice odnose na uena dru-
tva, nacionalne kulture ili drave izrazito su obiljeene diskontinuitetima. Kod nas
je realna politika situacija dovela do toga da su kulturne veliine poimane kao bia
pod posebnom zatitom, kao imena izvan diskusije. Bez obzira na krupne meusob-
ne razlike, oznaavajua imena kao to su Krlea, Andri ili Vidmar uspijevala su po-
stizati prividno samorazumljive aplauze bez ozbiljnih, barem eventualno osporava-
juih reagiranja.5 Pukotine koje doista postoje izmeu spomenutih kulturnih bia
mogu se razaznati i u pojedinanom djelu svakoga od njih, kada se to djelo ralani
na razdoblja. U tim rascjepima sigurno ima vrijednosnog supstrata politike pro-
mjene, ali i razumijevanja vlasti kao povijesnoga alata i osobnoga izazova pojedinca.
radi o naelu ukljuenja, a ne iskljuenja, kako Andri kae Kombolu, nije bitno gdje su pisci roeni, a ni
koje su vjere ako je okvir jugoslavenski, odnosno srpski) dokumentira njegov pismeni rad na ispitu za
diplomatsku slubu (1922). Odgovarajui na temu Koliko je bilo srpskih drava i kako su one postale, An-
dri, nakon to je zavrio izlaganje, proiruje zakljuak zapaanjem proitavi sve, vidim da sam ispu-
stio jo dve srpske dravne tvorevine, od kojih je jedna republika Dubrovaka. Miladin Miloevi,
Andriev ispit za prijem u diplomatsku i konzularnu slubu, Arhiv, 2013, br. 14, str. 223241.
5
arko Puhovski, Marksovska kritika i komunistiko dokidanje kulture, Vidici, 1979, br. 8.
54 | Vlaho Bogii
Podsjeajui da su Andri,6 Krlea, Ujevi i Crnjanski7 pripadnici generacije

to je dala najvee pisce srpske i hrvatske knjievnosti 20. veka, Jovan Dereti tom
jezgru pridruuje potencijalno ravnopravni, ali tragino prekinuti talent Milutina Bo-
jia.8 Uvrsti li se umjesto Bojia naratajno priblinog Dragiu Vasia, poetna Krle-
ina srpska knjievna generacija oituje razmjer za koji bi se moglo uzeti da nadilazi
i okvir epohe: Ivo Andri, Milo Crnjanski, Dragia Vasi.9
Tumaei kakvo je mesto Ive Andria, kakav je njegov poloaj u istoriji nae
[srpske] knjievnosti, a prema tome i kojega drugog pisca, pa i Krlee, Dereti isti-
e da je re o kompleksu odnosa i veza kakav se oituje u tri segmenta: 1) odnos
datog pisca, u ovom sluaju Andria, prema njemu savremenoj knjievnosti, 2) nje-
gov odnos prema ranijoj knjievnosti, prema piscima koji su stvarali u prethodnim
epohama, 3) odnos drugih pisaca prema piscu o kojem je re. U prva dva sluaja pi-
sac se samoodreuje prema knjievnosti a u treem sluaju knjievnost se samoodre-
6
Ivo Andri (18921975) stekao je prvu knjievnu afirmaciju u hrvatskoj kulturi, pripadajui i do po-
etka 1920-ih, kada prelazi u Beograd, krugu nacionalistike omladine koja je u Srbiji vidjela uporite
za emancipaciju i drugih junoslavenskih narodnih zajednica pod habsburkom dominacijom. Premda
je kao profesionalni diplomat do 1941. uglavnom ivio u europskim sreditima, srpska ga kultura u tom
razdoblju identificira kao snanu figuru vlastite nacionalne projekcije to se u prijelaznom, revolucio-
narnom dobu (19441947) potvruje koincidiranjem verifikacije kanonskog prvenstva njegova pripo-
vjednog opusa i politikog jugoslavenstva kao redigirane konstitucijske osnove. Za Andrievu i Krleinu
koegzistenciju u kulturnom krugu elite Titove epohe nije karakteristian konkurentski odnos, za kakav
ni psiholoki nisu bili disponirani, koliko distinkcija jugoslavenstva kao politikog, odnosno kulturnog
svojstva koju je zastupao Andri, nasuprot identitetskoj osnovi takva, junoslovjenskog osjeaja na koje-
mu je Krlea inzistirao. Tipoloki su u ovom istraivanju ta dva, po ostvarenosti reprezentativna, naina
usvajanja srpskoga diskursa kao vlastitoga stila dalekosena jer dokumentiraju validnost kritikog po-
maka iz hijerarhijskoga kljua.
7
Milo Crnjanski (18931977) kretao se do dolaska u Beograd 1919. habsburkim reljefom kao i Krle-
a i Andri; ratne je godine, takoer poput njih, dijelom proveo u bolnicama, ali ne kao internirac ili re-
konvalescent, ve kao ranjenik sa galicijskog bojita. Unato brzoj knjievnoj afirmaciji, potom i opusu
koji nije zapostavio, a i ideolokom usmjerenju koje mu nije oteavalo karijerne izbore, u drutvenom se
rasporedu jugoslavenske kraljevine nije etablirao, ostavi poslije revolucionarnoga prevrata u graanski
nesigurnom emigrantskom poloaju u Londonu. Kada mu je doputeno da se vrati u zemlju, nije bio u
prilici raspraviti svoje nesporazume s Krleom, ako su za takvo to vie i imali motiva, jer su se i Crnjan-
ski i Krlea, svatko iz vlastitoga idejnoga, prije nego kulturnoga predteksta pouzdavali u knjievni, kao
svijet s kojim se ovjek i drutvo mijenjaju, svodei svoje biografske misije vie kao kanonske, u pribli-
nom rasporedu, nego identitetske u za svoje doba vidljivom horizontu.
8
Jovan Dereti, Istorija srpske knjievnosti [ir.]4, Beograd: Prosveta, 2004, str. 968.
9
Kada bi se Deretievo generacijsko preciziranje u dijakronijskom rasteru blago pomaknulo, kao za Dra-
giu Vasia, zahvatilo bi, pored Tina Ujevia, kojim se u ovom istraivanju podrobnije ne bavimo, i dru-
ge identitetski poticajne knjievne figure, primjerice Rastka Petrovia. Isto tako, iri bi okvir, s pristu-
pom slovenskoj, a poslije i dugim participacijama, pomogao pri rekonstrukciji interkulturalnog modela,
posebice stoga to je Krleina kulturna vizija bila tako koordinirana. No ovdje je rije o knjievnosti kao
identitetu u hrvatskoj i srpskoj kulturi kao zasebnim i uzajamnim entitetima.
uje prema piscu i njegovu delu, kada je samo to delo postalo deo tradicije.10 Dok
se Dereti, s obzirom na Andria, bavi prvim dvama segmentima, ovaj deo istrai-
vanja usredotoen je na trei: suodnos pisca s drugim piscima, kao tradicijom u oba
pravca, a ponajprije kao suvremenicima, i u tom kompleksu posebno prema proble-
mu vlasti koja je kada se misli na identitet historijski fenomen, bez obzira na formal-
na i idejna polazita koja ju utemeljuju ili se na njih poziva.
Andri i Crnjanski formirani su, zajedno s Krleom, u habsburkom kulturnom
okruenju, slom toga svijeta tovie izriito ih je biografski obiljeio, dok je Dragi-
a Vasi batinio iskustvo prvog modernizacijskog razdoblja konstitucije Srbije kao
europske kraljevine. S Krleom se za graanskog razdoblja u takvu voru utemelju-
ju Milan Bogdanovi11 i Marko Risti, odnosno Stanislav Vinaver, a u (post)revolu-
cionarnom rezimeu Milovan ilas, Oskar Davio i Dobrica osi, da bi Danilo Ki
simboliki zatvorio takav, antologijski, presjek knjievnog stoljea, epohe koja vie,
dosljedno zaraenoj europskoj kulturi, nije mogla raunati s idejnim koncepcijama
tek kao akademskom, diskurzivnom sferom.
Na sredini razdoblja kojim se bavimo, poetkom pedesetih godina XX. stolje-
a, Ivo Andri navrava ezdeset godina ivota i njegova je biografija zaokruena. Bi-
lo je u njoj ozbiljnih potresa, emocionalnih i problema sa zdravljem, Andri je pri-
tom stekao iskustvo i tamnice i ministarskoga kabineta, a kada za nekoliko godina
(1961) njegovo ivotno djelo bude potvreno Nobelovom nagradom teko e itko
doivljajno moi sporiti da nain kojim se kretao svojim ivotnim putem kroz Eu-
ropu, zakrenu preprekama, nije obiljeen smislom i vrijednosnim sustavom, ukrat-
ko da je time izraen i neki nadosobni kontinuitet.12 Od kada kao desetogodinjak
1903, u trenutku sloma obrenovievske Srbije, dolazi s njene granice u Viegradu u
sarajevsku gimnaziju, Andri je tijekom pedeset godina vidljiv na drutvenoj sceni,
10
Jovan Dereti, Mesto Ive Andria u istoriji srpske knjievnosti [ir.], Sveske Zadubine Ive Andria, sv.
7, 1991, str. 184.
11
Milan Bogdanovi (18921964) meu sredinjim je figurama srpske kulture prvoga jugoslavenskog
razdoblja; nakon kratke akademske karijere preuzima vodee uloge u kazalitu i knjievnosti; 1928
1932. urednik je Srpskog knjievnog glasnika; knjievni modernizam shvaa s obzirom na drutvenu od-
govornost pisca. Poslije povratka iz njemakog zarobljenitva, od 1946. opet je profesor, pa upravnik
beogradskog Narodnog pozorita (19491962). Pisao je o Krlei i druio se s Krleinima. Podsjeaju-
i kako je o Srbiji nauio mnogo toga, Krlea istie Bogdanovia kao prioritetnog uitelja; u prepi-
sci s Belom iz Beograda ponekad prima potu na Bog- danovievu adresu, referira se i na njegove osob-
ne prilike, a Bogdanovi uz Krleino pismo u sijenju 1946. Beli dopisuje: Posle dosta godina hteo
bih da vas vidim. Nadam se da ete nam uskoro biti gost. Krleu smo, kao to vidite, prisvojili.
12
Nobelovu nagradu za knjievnost dodjeljuje se za nadvremensku, kontemplativnu dimenziju iskustva,
no primjetno je dovoljno je spomenuti Andriu priblian Sartreov primjer kako Nobelov komitet,
drei se vlastitog civilizacijskog poslanja, nije neosjetljiv na referencijalnost laureatove biografije.
56 | Vlaho Bogii
a da ono to pritom tumae te vidljivosti zbunjuje ostaje upravo sama ta injenica

kako to da se tip te vidljivosti nije mijenjao premda su se prilike bez kojih ne bi mo-
gao biti vidljiv vie puta znaajno promijenile?
Andri je stupio na drutvenu scenu u sarajevskoj gimnaziji, a taj se iskorak po-
vezuje, pomalo i mistificira, s protuaustrijskim pokretom Mlada Bosna, koji se doi-
sta s ozbiljnim posljedicama artikulira u Bosni u ozraju balkanskih ratova. No Bo-
sna Andrieva djetinjstva nije jednoznano pod austrijskom upravom, kako bi se to
arhivskim itanjem mirovnih memoranduma moglo pomisliti. Granica na Drini je
s obzirom na okupacijski i aneksijski kompleks, a i prilike u Srbiji, prilino zamre-
na. Dok je rije o okupaciji, beki vojni aparat usklaeno napreduje: izgradnjom us-
kotranih pruga, kola i uprave, a kada Bosna i Hercegovina bude anektirana, teita
su bitno promijenjena: Bosna i Hercegovina postaje gotovo kolonijalni kondomi-
nij Bea i Pete, granica sa Srbijom dobiva novo znaenje, a s obzirom na to znae-
nje dramatino se mijenja i poloaj do tada dominantnoga turskoga naslijea. Kada
se pritom spominju i Andrievi rani zagrebaki nesporazumi, za studentskog razdo-
blja, posve se gube iz vida znaenjske silnice toga austro-ugarskoga mikrokozmosa.
Njemu je nepodnoljiv ivot u viegradskom azilu svoga tetka austro-ugarskog i-
novnika, moda jo i vie nego u zagrebakim malograanskim salonima,13 ali se is-
todobno vrlo dobro snalazi sa habsburkim podanicima iz Dalmacije ili doivotno
ostaje pod afirmativnim formativnim dojmom habsburkoga ambijenta u Krakovu.
U pamfletu Nezvani neka ute, nakon habsburkoga sloma, za Andria se pitanje
kraljevina ili republika doima irelevantnim. On inzistira na narodnom jedinstvu i to
kao pitanju preko kojega jugoslavenski intelektualac ne moe mirno prei.14 Andri-
a se, po svoj prilici, nije osobito dojmio ni Solunski proces, kao ni prethodni krva-
vi obraun na beogradskom dvoru: u prototekstu njegova jugoslavenstva su vie tzv.
veleizdajniki procesi kojima se propituje gimnazijalce i studente o prirodi njihove
vrijednosne privrenosti Srbiji. ini se da je kraljevskoj administraciji, gdje su mu
praktino bili povjereni vanjski poslovi, kao i Gestapu, koji ga je s ambasadorskog
13
Ovi gragjani [Viegrad, 1913] me formalno duevno natiu na raanj. Danas sam nervozan jae
i ne mogu da ti piem sve o njima samo ti velim da ih mrzim do kriminala. Ivo Andri, Pisma, Novi
Sad: Matica srpska [ir.], 2000, str. 40.
14
Ivo Andri, Nezvani neka ute, Novosti, 12/1918, br. 299, str. 3. Objanjavajui udnovat naslov
svoje Istorije Srba u Novom veku Milorad Ekmei se za sintagmu Dugo kretanje izmeu klanja i oranja
poziva na ocenu dugog hoda srpske istorije koju je 1919. napisao knjievnik Ivo Andri: Zakljuak o
stvaranju Jugoslavije 1918. bi bile rei mladog pesnika Ive Andria 1919. da je time zavrena ona kobna
linija srpske historije to se bez prestanka kree izmeu klanja i oranja. (Dugo kretanje izmeu klanja i
oranja2, Beograd: Zavod za udbenike, 2008, str. 378).
Zanimljivo je da se upravo 1919. Bela Kangrga oituje Krlei o nerazumijevanju Srba i Hrvata u Lici fi-
gurom o oranju koje ih povezuje (usp. bilj. 173).
poloaja dopratio u Beograd a raspolagali su s dovoljnim zbirom injenica to su

govorile da je Andri u odnosu na njihov, pojedinani, vrijednosni sustav neto Dru-
go, pa bi ga bilo dobro drati na distanci ili mu stati na put bilo kulturom ophoe-
nja koja podrazumijeva klasine atribute odgovornosti u situacijama i prilikama to
se konvencionalno dre nepredvidivim. Budui da revolucionarni pokreti znaju po-
vjerovati da su i sami proniknuli u mehanizme nepredvidivosti, suivot novoga, ko-
munistikoga, narataja jugoslavenskih nacionalista i Andria nije ostao tek pragma-
tian, poprimio je razmjer kolektivne biografije, te postupno prerastao u kulturnu i
povijesnu injenicu.15
Andria je ilas upoznao ve poetkom 1945,16 ali je Andri u to vrijeme vie
impresioniran mladim bosansko-hercegovakim rukovodstvom, koje odlikuje osje-
aj nacionalnoga vitalizma, vole zemlju i dat e sve od sebe. Nakon etvrt stoljea
od teksta Nezvani neka ute Andri u Rodoljubu olakoviu prepoznaje lik iz legen-
de, opet za njega nije rije o reimu koliko o narodnom jedinstvu koje se sada zove
nacionalni vitalizam. Prisnost sa Zogoviem i ilasom prekinut e njihovo otpa-
danje od vlasti, ali bliskost sa olakoviem nee prestati.17 Dok je rat intenzivniji ne-
go prethodnih godina, s tisuama palih vojnika, mobilizacijom popunjenih partizan-
skih jedinica nesviklih ofanzivnim operacijama od Batine do Trsta, te neselektivnom
retorzijskim amputacijama u pozadini, koje su u Beogradu i Zagrebu izazvale pored
15
Tri su vana svjedoka Andrieve prilagodbe promijenjenim drutvenim okolnostima. O svojim susre-
tima s njim, usporeujui ga pritom dakako i s Krleom, iscrpno piu Branko Lazarevi (Dnevnik jedno-
ga nikoga [ir.], III, Beograd: Zavod za udbenike, 2007), Bogdan Radica (Hrvatska 1945, Mnchen
Barcelona: Knjinica Hrvatske revije, 1974; Radica, 19041993, bio je publicist i diplomat, upuen u
europsku kulturnu i politiku scenu; u Beogradu je 1940. kod Gece Kona objavio Agoniju Europe, zbirku
razgovornih portreta europskih intelektualaca, kao svojevrsni prolog katastrofe) i Milovan ilas (Vlast i
pobuna, Zagreb: EPHLiber, 2009).
Andri u proljee 1945. predlae Radici da ne naputa zemlju, neka se povue u Split i baci na pisanje
romana iz dalmatinskoga ivota, jer ne treba imati iluzije da e ovaj reim dugo trajati. Za razliku od
Radice, Branko Lazarevi svoje je memoarske biljeke ostavio kao posthumnu grau, otklanjajui tako
naknadnu redakturu svjedoka vremena, ali takoer fokusira Andrievu nepostojanost. Kontrastnim ita-
njem njihovih svjedoenja, ukljuujui ilasovo, tim prije to su proeta i meusobnim razmatranjima,
dobija se slika situacija u kojima se Andri naao. Stjee se tako dojam da je Radica, koji je svoje uspo-
mene objavio 1974, vie nego o Andriu, koji je u meuvremenu postao svjetski poznat pisac, ugoa-
vao vlastitu sliku o ilasu, jer kada prepriava negativne ocjene to ih je o ilasu sluao ili sam bio svje-
dokom neugodnih situacija kao da u njegovu dranju trai, pa onda i stilizira, klice pobune po kojoj e
postati iroko prihvaen upravo u krugu Radiine osporavateljske geste komunizma, pri emu ga od An-
dria vie zanima i nepobunjeni Krlea.
16
ilas je tada sa suprugom Mitrom Mitrovi, koja je u revolucionarnoj vlasti bila zaduena za organiza-
ciju kulturnog sektora, ivio u istoj vili kao i Radovan Zogovi, a Andria su zajedno pozivali na ruak.
17
Rodoljub olakovi (19001983) pobrinuo se da i u grobljanskoj aleji, rasporedu sjeanja ostane uz
Andria.
58 | Vlaho Bogii
zbiljnih frustracija i fatalne psiholoke posljedice, Andri tijekom 1945. objavljuje

tri nova, velika romana. Njegovo proglaenje za pravoga lana Srpske akademije na-
uka 24. januara 1946. obostrano je svean in, kao da su se jedan veliki pisac i jedno
ozbiljno drutvo nali u toki koju se teko moe pomjeriti.18
Andri je ubrzo zaokupljen trima dunostima: predsjednik je Saveza knjiev-
nika Jugoslavije,19 potpredsjednik je Drutva sovjetskojugoslavenskoga prijatelj-
stva,20 a i poslanik je u Narodnoj skuptini Bosne i Hercegovine.21 Lazarevi je ve
potkraj 1946. u svome dnevniku napisao opsenu psiholoku studiju o Andriu s ob-
zirom na zbunjenost, pa i otpor beogradske graanske sredine prema njegovoj br-
zoj integraciji u novi poredak. Vraajui se Andrievu sluaju, potaknut susretom s
njime, kae da bi hteo da ga opravda, ali mu to ne polazi za rukom, jer mu je neo-
bjanjivo otkuda on s ovim janiarima iz Crne Gore, sa ovim ruskim poturicama.
Lazarevi pedantno prati kako je akademija dospjela u krizu jer se nije htjela impli-
18
U Londonu je (1947) izaao prirunik The World of Learning, shematski prikaz znanstvenih, kultur-
nih i umjetnikih ustanova. Jugoslavenska javnost se oko tog prirunika prilino uzrujala, jer su prirei-
vai uvrtavali podatke prema vlastitom kriteriju, pa se u nazivima institucija i nomenklaturi pobrkalo
mnogo toga. Spomenuta akademija i nadalje se tako atribuira kraljevskom, a njezina zagrebaka suspen-
dirana posestrima hrvatskom.
19
Ni na jednom od kongresa knjievnika Andri nije odrao zapaeniji govor, uglavnom nije govorio ni
na brojnim smotrama kojima je prisustvovao, na prvom kongresu knjievnika problemski referat pod-
nio je Zogovi, a na treemu Krlea. Knjievnik treba da ima punu slobodu razvijanja, ali vi ete se u
tome sigurno sloiti sa mnom, ja sam protiv toga da se pod izgovorom obrane slobode knjievnog stva-
ranja, pie i ono to je tetno rekao je maral Tito delegaciji Prvog kongresa knjievnika Jugoslavi-
d 4/1946, br. 47. str. 5).
je, u kojoj su bili i Andri i Krlea (Naprijed,
20
Drutvo za kulturnu suradnju sa SSSR-om bilo je razvijeno u svim federalnim jedinicama, a Andri je
u nekoliko navrata u razdoblju do 1948. putovao u sovjetsku Uniju, i to ne samo u Rusiju. Pri njegovoj
nominaciji za dunosnika drutva prijateljstva sa postojbinom slavenske i boljevike ideji sigurno se vo-
dilo rauna o svojevrsnom rehabitacijskom kontinuitetu diplomatske prakse. Dunosnici takvih druta-
va posjeivali su se meusobno ali i koordinirali u meunarodnim odborima, na kongresima pisaca, sla-
venskim kongresima, konferencijama za mir i slinim manifestacijama ne uvijek ogranienim samo na
sovjetsku sferu. Andri je tako sudjelovao na slavenskom kongresu u Beogradu (1946) ili skupu za mir u
Zagrebu (1951). Za potvrdu Andria kao dunosnika spomenutoga drutva sigurno je bila potrebna su-
glasnost Moskve. Moskva je pritom bila u delikatnoj situaciji jer joj nisu mogli biti nepoznati Andrievi
memorandumi u svojstvu berlinskoga ambasadora, u kojima je svojoj vladi suzdrano govorio o poten-
cijalu slavenske ideje. S druge strane sam je Andriev poloaj u Berlinu iz doba sovjetskoga paktiranja s
Hitlerom bio zazoran. Andriu se simboliki spoitavala nazonost na jugoslavenskom parafiranju Tre-
eg pakta, to je dijelu beogradske javnosti moglo izgledati iritantno, ali objektivno nije imalo posebno
znaenje. Svakako manje sporno od okolnosti da je kancelarija Reicha dovela Andria u travnju na pre-
daju akreditivnih pisama Hitleru, sa slovakim ambasadorom. Rusa se to tie utoliko to su i sami pri-
znavali toga slovakog ambasadora, odnosno njegovu kvislinku vladu.
21
Krlee, naprotiv, nije bilo u sazivu Ustavotvornog Sabora Narodne Republike Hrvatske koji je 18. I.
1947. donio prvi hrvatski Ustav. Popis zastupnika usp. prema Ustavotvorni Sabor, Zagreb: Sabor NRH,
1949.
citno podvrgnuti elji vlasti da je instruira oko novih lanova. Lazareviev informa-
tor Branislav Petronijevi je cinian oni bi svakako postupili po nagnuu vlasti da
je vlast to od Akademije izravno traila, a ovako su Aleksandar Beli i Andri ostali
usamljeni, pa je Mitra Mitrovi preko zajednikog radnog odbora vlade i akademi-
je na neodreeno vrijeme prolongirala njezino djelovanje. Lazarevi izvjeuje kako
je Andri postao sad neki sveti Sebastijan na koga su uperene sve strele. Gaa ga ko
stigne i ne bira se oruje. Ali ni oni (crveni) mnogo ne govore o njemu, a kad me
ko od njih i upita o njemu, upita me kao da bi hteo da zna ta o njima govori i kao da
sumnjaju da im je iskreno pristupio22.
Govorei nad mrtvim Andriem, Krlea kae da za njegovu umjetniku kari-
jeru doista nije vano, no ipak treba naglasiti, kako je svojim Nobelom pobudio po-
zornost meunarodne tampe ne samo na svoje djelo, nego na nau suvremenu bele-
tristiku uope, u cjelini. U tom pogledu on je odigrao ulogu dostojnog predstavnika
jedne, do tog trenutka, vie-manje nepoznate literature, o kojoj [] Zapadni svi-
jet nije imao pojma. Krlea je u pravu kada u tome vidi problem kojega je bio svje-
stan i s njime se nosio i Crnjanski: Ima u sluaju Crnjanskog jedna pouka. Moe-
te na Zapadu biti ne znam kako velik pisac, ali ako ste iz male zemlje, teko ete se
tamo iskazati.23 Crnjanski je i prije nego t je kao emigrant u Londonu 1945. de-
finitivno spoznao to ogranienje pokuao utjecati na promjene u kulturnom i dru-
tvenom statusu knjievnosti. Povod mu je bila stogodinjica prve tampane knjige
u Beogradu (1932), a kao zagovornika kulturnog optimizma, prema kojemu je no-
va knjievnost poslije ujedinjenja trebala dobiti zamah, moralo mu je biti teko za-
paziti, kako je, upravo suprotno, relativno, pre rata naa knjiga imala veliku prou,
a jo vei ugled, da bi se sad uglavnom po svim naim knjiarama videla tuinska
knjiga.24 Crnjanski je poraznim kulturnim prilikama zateen u istom trenutku kada
Krlea zbog njih odlazi iz zemlje, a Andri pie Kombolu da ivi na strani pa ih ne
22
O Andrievoj iskrenosti ipak nimalo ne dvoji Josip Barkovi koji je sa skupinom hrvatskih pisaca bio
na pruzi
p u Bosni. Oni su pourili
p u Sarajevo
j kako ne bi zakasnili na Andrievo predavanje
p j o Vuku Ka-
radiu. Nakon predavanja piscima se pridruio predsjednik lokalne vlade Rodoljub olakovi, to je
Barkovia posebno dirnulo, a naveer ih je du umne Miljacke ispratio Andri. Pokazao im je zgra-
du policije naglaavajui kako pokoljenja iz vremena Austrije i stare Jugoslavije dobro je pamte. Jo-
sip Barkovi, S grupom knjievnika od Srajeva do Doboja, Naprijed, 5/1947, br. 38, str. 5.
23
Enes engi, S Krleom iz dana u dan, IV, Zagreb: Globus, 1985, str. 122.
24
Crnjanski se u Vremenu (Mi postajemo kolonija strane knjige) osvre i na hrvatske knjievne prilike:
Dovoljno je spomenuti da u Zagrebu za nau knjigu nema mesta [] kada i najpoznatija hrvatska Za-
bavna Biblioteka, meu do sada izdanih svojih 500 knjiga ima svega, kako sama kae, desetak domaih
da svakom bude jasno o emu je re [] kao to je zbog tuinske kulture, tuinske knjige, govora, po-
zorita, sva Hrvatska do nedavna bila u knjievnom paenitvu. Usp. Stanko Tomai, Beogradska knji-
evna afera, Zagreb: Binoza, 1932, str. 1011.
60 | Vlaho Bogii
razumije najbolje, no umjesto da se rasprava, ije je teite dobro pogoeno, razvi-

je, ubrzo se pretvorila u osobni spor Crnjanskog, prvo s Milanom Bogdanoviem,
koji je u Politici komentirao njegove prijedloge, a onda sa sve irim krugom intelek-
tualaca ne samo iz Beograda.25
Bogdanovi apostrofira svoju duboku veru u moan talent, ali podsjea da ni-
je ni prvi ni poslednji lini i knjievni prijatelj g. Crnjanskog koji ovako prolazi. Po-
kazalo se da g. Crnjanski ne moe da bude ni prijatelj ni drug, i da njemu drugarstvo
i prijateljstvo imaju smisla samo tako ako su mu svi momenti toga drugovanja, pa i
oni najintimnijeg meusobnog poverenja, material za upotrebu.26 Suzdran i distan-
ciran, Andri je koncentracijsko svojstvo o kakvom govori Bogdanovi dobro razu-
mio. Makar manje poznat u ovoj zemlji, i van Jugoslavije uope, nego njegov kole-
ga Jugosloven Ivo Andri, Krlea je bio figura istovjetnog statusa. I kada je Andri
iao da primi 1961. Nobelovu nagradu za knjievnost u Stockholm pria se da je re-
kao svom vedskom izdavau koji ga je pitao ta moe da uini za njega: Objavite
Krleu.27 Andri je upravo u Londonu razradio figuru o knjievnosti iz koje dola-
zi kao europskoj kulturnoj periferiji: Ta Evropa, o kojoj govori svome vedskom
izdavau, za nas ne zna, mi smo iz nje odsutni. Prevoenost pritom nije izlazak iz
kurtoazije, prijevod po sebi ne omoguuje vidljivost.28 Crnjanskom se 1930-ih ini-
25
Meu potpisnicima koji su se u Politici (23.III.1932) pridruili Apelu dvadeset i est knjievnika i
javnih radnika da se osudi nain vreanja, insinuiranja i sumnjienja kojim g. Milo Crnjanski vodi svo-
ju kampanju protiv strane knjige u drugoj je grupi mlaih knjievnika i umetnika naveden i Milovan
ilas. Politika je sutradan (24. III) donijela pod naslovom U odbranu knjievnog posla potpise knjiev-
nika, likovnih umjetnika, muziara i arhitekata grada Zagreba [kojima] iz principijelnih razloga najo-
trije osuuju metode Crnjanskog, a sadri veliki niz utjecajnih imena irokoga graanskoga spektra:
Ljubo Babi, Milan Begovi, August Cesarec, Ivo Tijardovi, Dobria Cesari, Antun Augustini, Ja-
kov Gotovac, ali i Mile Budak, uro Vilovi, Bla Jurii; Krlea je u to vrijeme u Varavi.
26
Bogdanovi aludira na gestualnost Crnjanskoga kakva se oitovala i u pismu Marku Ristiu (12. I.
1932): Poto Vi pripadate grupi koja ne deli literaturu od privatnosti, a i ja ne volim, ako do sukoba
doe, da se obazirem, to Vas molim, da ovim pismom prekinemo nae buroasko prijateljstvo, razume
se, sve do njegovih i najbanalnijih znakova. Radovan Popovi, Beskrajni plavi krug, Beograd: Slube-
ni glasnik, 2009, str. 198.
Kada je Risti, a i Bogdanovi, poslije doao u poziciju kulturnoga arbitra, Crnjanski se graanski dosto-
janstveno drao s obzirom na takvo kulturno sjeanje, ali se pri procjeni Ristieve kritike estine, s me-
tarofom o mrtvim pjesnicima, ono kao kontekst ponekad zanemaruje.
27
Times je (redakcijski) nekrolog Krlei objavio u broju od 30.XII.1981.
28
O tome je, kao sudbinskom kompleksu periferije, povodom svoje kronologije o Krlei govorio Stanko
Lasi. Usp. Gordogan, 1982, br. 12, str. 119.
Andri je u Londonu govorio engleskim kritiarima (1959): Kad sam bio djeak, umro mi je ujak. Mo-
ja majka je pola na potu, gdje je bio jedini telefon u mjestu, da se javi svojim roacima. Posmatrao sam
njen profil dok je nervozno podeavala ruku na velikoj telefonskoj kutiji. Majka je vrlo dobro ula svo-
je roake, ali oni nisu razumjeli ta ona govori. Vikala je u telefon, ali njeni roaci nikako nisu mogli da
lo kako je strane knjige toliko da je ona domaa ve time zaguena, da bi se 1950-ih,

kada se provodilo kulturno planiranje kakvo je zagovarao traila otvorenost.29 U tom
su trenutku Crnjanski iz Londona i Krlea iz Beograda zapravo na istom tipu objek-
tivne distance od knjievne kulture epohe kojoj pripadaju, za pristup njezinu dijalo-
kom sreditu potreban je pored potencijala djela i profil pisca, osvjetenost vlastite
pozicije kakvu se u punom smislu ne moe dobiti izvana, pa ni skretanjem pozorno-
sti vanim priznanjima.
Razlike u angamanu30 sigurno su knjievnost i u drutvenom razumijevanju pi-
saca svodile u niu razinu vidljivosti, ne samo stoga to bi Andri bio visoki dravni
inovnik a Krlea graanin bez sigurne drutvene legitimacije, nominalno slobodni
umjetnik. Za cijelog razdoblja jugoslavenskog drutvenog kompleksa, unato cen-
zuri koja poredak na kakvom se zasnivao tipoloki dijeli na parlamentarnu i narod-
nu demokraciju,31 reprezentativnost knjievnosti, kao umjetnosti, reflektirana je iz
regulatornog mehanizma drave, dakle vlasti, i to vlasti jednako kao dominantne i
pretendentske vokacije. Dok bi angaman za umjetnika koji iz kulturne autonomije
u kakvoj su participirali mladi Andri, Crnjanski i Krlea tei suverenom, cjelovitom
modelu u konstitucijskom pogledu naelno mogao biti neutralan,32 tip vlasti koji se
s prevratom profilira takav doivljajno, jednako kao i u historijskoj zbilji, jedva moe
opstati. Mehanizmi preuzimanja poluga moi, represivnost vojnog i policijskog apa-
rata, (ne)vjerodostojna javna uprava tek su inicijalni segment kataloga problema s
je uju. Majka je bila oajna U takvoj je situaciji, gospodo, i naa jugoslavenska literatura. Mi u Jugo-
slaviji vas odlino ujemo, ali vi nas slabo ili uopte ne ujete i ne znate da mi postojimo u literaturi.
Gojko Beri, Zbogom XX. stoljee, Zagreb: Profil, 2013, str. 196.
29
Bavei se Krleom na Plenumu knjievnika 1954. godine u Beogradu, jednoj od kulturnih konferencija j
iz doba otvaranja spram umjetnikih praksi zapadnoga kruga, Stanislav Vinaver zapaa da on u te en-
berge i Stravinske, u Klea i Eliota, nije jo dovoljno prodro, ali i sam zagovara celog oveka: Dana-
nji pogled na svet veruje u celine. Stanislav Vinaver, Beogradsko ogledalo, Beograd: Slubeni glasnik,
2012, str. 368369.
30
Nisam samo ja angairan! Angairana su bila i druga dvojica mojih kolega, ali na drugoj strani. Jedan
je sluio do posljednjeg dana monarhiji i posljednji posao na kojem je radio bio je pakt s Hitlerom, a Cr-
njanski je sluio svojim publicistikim pperom najreakcionarnijim, pa ako hoete i faistikim snagama,
za cijelog ivota kraljevine. Enes engi, S Krleom iz dana u dan, II, str. 286.
31
U drutvu se bez obzira na karakter poretka uvijek strukturira veina. Takva politika veina koja legi-
timira vlast, ne mora po sebi reflektirati veinska drutvena raspoloenja, kao to i pretendentske pozici-
je mogu raunati upravo s kulturnom promjenom kao pokretakim kompleksom, no u promatranom je
razdoblju, unato implicitnoj ili ak doktrinarnoj upravnoj disperziji, sa sputanjem kulturnih poslova na
nie razine vlasti, to drutveno podruje, ve iz vlastite insuficijencije, ostalo u njezinoj interesnoj sferi.
32
Za umjetnike je prakse u modernim europskim konstitucijama pitanje kraljevina ili republika, cen-
tralna ili federalna uprava, uglavnom retoriko, ili akademsko; kulturu se u toj vrsti rasprave uzima po-
vratno a ne programatski.
62 | Vlaho Bogii
kojim se pisac, angairan u veem ili manjem stupnju, suoava po definiciji svoje kul-
turne misije, ak i kada je ona svedena u kontrolirani aspekt. U oba je jugoslavenska
politika sustava Krlea takvu kontrolingu bio suprotstavljen, doivljavajui pritom
represivni aparat, pogotovo njegovu mutnu dravnu genezu, tekom i postojanom
prijetnjom slobodi drutva. Stoga Krlein problem s Andriem nije tek karijerni, a s
Crnjanskim, ili Vinaverom, ideoloki. Njemu nije prihvatljiva moralna, identitetska
osnova neutralne pozicije pisca koji je u stanju kreirati potentne svjetove prema re-
presivnom karakteru poretka kojemu takav pisac onda ne samo slui, nego i pripa-
da.33 Bez obzira, dakle, je li rije o naem ili totalitarnom u drugoga, za Krleu je, ba-
rem programatski, nemogue pristati na takav krug, metaforu vjeala. Razumije se
da takva pozicija takoer podrazumijeva ogranienja, pri emu se obino upuuje
na Krleino aboliranje Titova staljinizma, no mimo i prije toga, a i u jezgri istraiva-
nja kojime se bavimo, zapaa se njegov razliit pristup biografskom oteanju te vr-
ste, kada je, naime, rije o naima iz drugoga, intimnoga registra, onda su i diferen-
cijacijske nadgradnje suptilnije.
Afektacije slikara Dobrovia o propasti zapada evidentira tako u fantazije,34 a Cr-
njanski mu se ne iskupljuje, jednako kao ni Vinaver, ni dugogodinjim egzilom. Vi-
naver je i kao zatoenik njemakog logora ostao ponajprije germanofil,35 dok je izbor
33
Kada Krlea u Panorami pogleda, pojava i pojmova (IV, Sarajevo: Osloboenje, 19822), autorizira gledi-
te o srpskim oficirima kao koru koji je kompaktna drutvena grupacija on se doista bavi kontinuitetom
drutvenoga stanja u kojemu se klasno kao interesno teko strukturira naspram formativnog, dravnog,
odnosno stalekog. Pri razumijevanju takve procjene opet je historiografska dedukcija tek sekundarna.
U jugoslavenskoj je kraljevini oficirski kor nominalno doista ostao gotovo iskljuivo srpski, ali u federa-
ciji nije, pa bi identitetsko razumijevanje semantikoga uporita trebalo iz nacionalnoga atributa vratiti u
dravni. Oficiri su, tako, bili srpski, jugoslavenski, ili francuski, izvedeni iz dravnoga osjeaja, a Krlein
srpski identitet se takvom doivljaju sustavno opire.
34
Poslije nervoznog rastanka na stanici [] (katastrofalan poraz engleske flote kod Narvika), kada mi
je na rastanku, ve za kretanja voza, uzvratio da sam politiki kreten, s obzirom na moje prognoze [] u
vrijeme bitke kod Narvika, kada je Petar, jo uvijek opsjednut svojim antizapadnjakim, antiholandskim
manijama da itavu Evropu treba da proguta poar uivao u narvikim batinama Miroslav Krlea,
Dnevnik, III, Sarajevo: Osloboenje, 1977, str. 4748.
35
Stanislav Vinaver (18911955) dospio je u Petrograd u doba Revolucije kao srpski diplomat, nakon to
se kao asnik dobrovoljac Srpske vojske, jedan od simbolike skupine kaplara, probio do Krfa. Vinaver
je poetkom 1920-ih bio blizak skupini srpskih republikanaca, s kojom e se i Krlea povezati kada doe
u Beograd. Premda mu materinji jezik nije bio srpski, jer potjee iz idovske porodice poljskih i njema-
kih korijena, razvio se upravo u srpskog jezikotvorca, ne samo preko prijevoda klasinih predloaka,
ve i europeizacijom diskursa, zagovaranjem poetskog moderniteta. Krlea svoj otpor spram Vinave-
ra saima u (neobjavljenoj) opasci, marginaliji na predloak enciklopedijskog lanka (Draka Reepa)
o njemu: Da je Vinaver u svojoj ivotnoj i knjievnoj genezi vrludao i lutao i to jo ironino [Reep]
komentira (da je to enigmatski reeno). Nisu Vinaverova lutanja i vrludanja bila ni po emu enigmatska
i poznato je kako je on vrludao i lutao, pa kad se ve ta njegova vrludanja i lutanja spominju, neka se ka-
e i u emu je stvar ili neka se preuti. Ja sam za to da se preuti, jer da se objanjava koji ga je avo no-
Dragie Vasia36 predoen s nevjericom, a ne otklonom: eto nije jasno kako se zate-
kao u okruenju ratnoga militaristikoga taba kraljevskog pukovnika Drae Mihai-
lovia. U samome korijenu Krleina odnosa s Vasiem barem su dva presedana ko-
ja tu vrstu narativa ine loginom, ali ne i cjelovitom: Vasievo shvaanje majskoga
prevrata i njegovo sudjelovanje, kao asnika srpske vojske, u bregalnikoj bitci. Dru-
gujui s Dragiom (19251928), mnogo mi je priao o svome gornjomilanovakom
djetinjstvu. Iz tog obrenovievskog kraja su i Lunjevice, djedovi Dragini, i ja sam jed-
nog dana na Dragiinu radnom stolu primijetio fotografiju jednog, po svemu graan-
skog, otmjenog mladia, sa velikim upavim bernandincem. Tko ti je to, zapitao
sam Dragiu, a on mi je kao apologet 1903. odgovorio zbunjeno: Kralj Milan,37
ponirui tako u one predjele, izmeu zbilje i fikcije, to e ih Krlea, nerijetko i kao
snove u kojima je Dragia est gost, razvijati kao spoznajni, iskustveni trezor.38 Krlea
sio u Berlin i koji ga je demon nadahnuo da se oduevljava svime ime se oduevljavao izmeu dva rata
itd., nema smisla o tome govoriti. Arhiv Leksikografskog zavoda Miroslav Krlea.
Krlein i Vinaverov odnos trpio je, pored vrlo vane a neoitovane srodnosti u pobijanju kulturnoga mi-
tomanstva, od razliitog shvaanja europskoga nasljea, kada je rije o ruskim ili njemakim, ali i doma-
im refleksima toga duha. No da na Vinavera nije zaboravio i da mu je zapravo bilo ao zbog tih njegovih
demona svjedoe Krleini dnevniki zapisi s aluzijama na Vinaverove, premda mu ih izravno ne autori-
zira, dobrohotne primjedbe, poput one o poticajnoj dokolici, ili (1952) Narodna poslovica lepo ka-
e: Ne kukaj na tuem groblju. Miroslav Krlea u Svedoanstvima nije posluao narodnu mudrost
(Beogradsko ogledalo, Beograd: Slubeni glasnik, 2012, str. 21): A to dirate u grobove, ovjee, pa
dobro, a gdje diram u grobove, ime, a gdje mi ivimo da se nekrolozi smatraju povredom grobljanskog
mira, pa da, upravo u tome i lei stvar, a vama, drue, ini se, fali smisao za snalaenje. (Miroslav Kr-
lea, Dnevnik, V, Sarajevo: Osloboenje, 1977, str. 306)
36
Dragia Vasi (18851945) je s ugledom ratnika, odvjetnika i pisca dojmljive lirske proze u Beogradu
1920-ih oporbenjak, blizak republikanskim novinama Progres. Boravio je i u Moskvi, pa se unato njego-
vu potonjem dramatinom zaokretu u radikalno nacionalistiku strukturu, kada je, uz Slobodana Jova-
novia utemeljitelj ekstremistikog Srpskog kulturnog kluba, pekuliralo kako je ostao na vezi sovjetskih
slubi. S tim je moda bio povezan i njegov poloaj u etnikom stoeru, kojemu se 1941. na Mihailovi-
ev poziv pridruio. Trag mu se pod nejasnim okolnostima gubi za bijega pred partizanima. Nataa Va-
si, bila je Vasieva druga ena, nakon to je prethodno bio u braku s Radojkom, keri politiara Stojana
Ribarca. Krleini i Vasievi bili su bliski prijatelji. U fragmentarno sauvanoj prepisci vidljivo je Vasie-
vo oduevljenje zagrebakim krugom u kojem se zatekao na proputovanju i elja da im uzvrati gosto-
primstvo. Krlea je s Vasievima bio u Hercegovini i Dubrovniku 1923, vjerojatno je s Vasiem prvi put
putovao i u unutranjost Srbije (Poarevac), a ostali su u korektnim odnosima i kada su se idejno uda-
ljili, pa Vasi vie nije, za razliku od Knjievne republike, htio suraivati u Danasu. Nekadanji odvjetnik
prvih komunistikih zavjerenika, Vasi je i nadalje na Krlein nagovor bio spreman u visokim vladinim
krugovima intervenirati kada bi se koji od njih naao u smrtnoj okolnosti. Takvo njegovo dranje manje
udi povee li ga se s kontaktima to ih je odravao s Mustafom Golubiem, koji se s reputacijom prvo-
razrednog Staljinovog obavjetajca potkraj 1940-ih vratio u Beograd.
37
Miroslav Krlea, Dnevnik, III, Sarajevo: Osloboenje, 1977, str. 222.
38
Andri Dobrici osiu: Pazite se, Dobrice, historija ima vie lica. Ona nikad nije jedno po injeni-
cama. Samo su u srcu injenice jedno. Istina je po sredini srca. Ne urite. Srodite se sa injenicama. Ne-
64 | Vlaho Bogii
se u Beogradu, poslije 1922. zbliio s nekima od presudnih glasnika promjena u srp-

skome drutvu,39 a prvi u tom nizu, vjerojatno ne tek kronoloki, bio je Vasi. Advo-
kat i autor dojmljive, melankoline proze, utjecajan publicist i oporbenjak, proveo
je Krleu organskom, unutranjom Srbijom: Bio sam napravio plan za na zajedni-
ki put u neka mesta u Srbiji, pa sam i pisao nekim svojim prijateljima od kojih sam
dobio srdane pozive za gostovanje tvoje i moje. Molim te, dragi Krlea, javi mi od-
mah ta si odluio o dolasku. Ja bih hteo da ne poe dok se tesno ne dogovorimo
te da ja na vreme budem u Beogradu, jer se nadam da mi nee uiniti na ao da bez
mene provede i jedan as ovamo.40 Drugom prigodom mu je ao to se zbunjen
nisam smogao javiti bar sa nekoliko rei zahvalnosti gospoi Beli i tebi za onako sr-
daan i bratski doek u Zagrebu kako prilikom prolaska za Nemaku tako i prilikom
povratka. Neto sasvim srodniki oseam sad prema Vama i nikad ne bih umeo izra-
ziti koliko ste mi mili i blizu. Hteo bih tako da uvek budem s Vama dok Vam ne do-
sadim, da Vas sluam i da Vas gledam. Ali eto kako je ivot surov i baca oveka as
ovamo as onamo te mu samo na sekunde daje zadovoljstvo, uivanje i sreu. Kako
sam se samo prijatno oseao u onoj staroj sobi prijateljice gospoe Bele, za onaj sat
koji je proao kao sekunda. Makar ih je surovi ivot, unato kumovskim sponama
do kakvih se u srpskoj tradiciji i u moderno doba ozbiljno dri, doista udaljio, nisu
se zaboravili, pa Vasi pomogne kad ustreba: Potovana i draga Bela, Vae sam pi-
smo primio u subotu, te toga dana nisam nita mogao da uradim, a sutra dan bila je
nedelja. Tek jue bio sam u Umetnikom odeljenju, gde mi je Velmar Jankovi rekao
da je stvar svrena i tantijema za 20% za Ledu odobrena. Predmet je jue imao biti
ekspedovan za Zagreb. Dakle sve je u redu,41 a Krlea od sjeanja na Dragiu nee
odustati ni kada dou vremena u kojima bi se takvo to dobro vidjelo, nee zatajiti
pjesmu koju mu je posvetio, niti se libiti oprotajne dnevnike biljeke: Volio sam
Dragiu, a gdje se izgubio, tko bi znao.
ka se pretope u vas. Neka vie ne budu znanje. Neka postanu iskustvo. Dobrica osi, Pievi zapisi
19511968 [ir.], Beograd: Filip Vinji, 2000, str. 368.
39
Premda je tono da Republikanska stranka predstavljala je u graanskoj Jugoslaviji beznaajnu gru-
pu kabinetskih liberalnih intelektualaca, bez veeg broja pristalica i veeg uticaja na razvoj graanskog
politikog ivota, pa i to da nije bila pod pritiskom reima, jer je svoju aktivnost provodila u okviru
akademskih teoretisanja i opte graanske liberalne ideologije (list Republika ipak je 1925. zabranjen;
Nikola uti, Liberalizam Dragie Vasia u Kraljevini Jugoslaviji, u: ivot i delo Dragie Vasia, Gornji
Milanovac: Muzej rudniko-takovskog kraja, 2008, str. 110) s gledita rezultata historijskog procesa a i
po reprezentativnosti biografija rije je o respektabilnom krugu.
40
Fragmentarno sauvana (Katalog Rukopisne ostavtine Miroslava Krlee) Vasieva pisma Krlei iz to-
ga, poetnoga razdoblja njihova prijateljstva nisu datirana. No, kako se u njima spominje bolest Vasie-
va oca, svakako idu u razdoblje sredina 1922. kraj 1923, jer je Vientije Vasi umro 7.XII.1922.
41
Katalog Rukopisne ostavtine Miroslava Krlee.
U vrlo osobnom angamanu Krlea u Zagrebu (d)oekuje i Marka Ristia42: ja

sam vam ve nekoliko puta pisao i bezbrojno puta usmeno izjavio da bi mene li-
no neobino radovalo da ostanete u Zgb, da se definitivno odluite na zgb boravak,
da se agramirate, agramizirate, dijagramizirate, da se pretvorite u naeg sugraani-
na (stalnog), da postanete odbornikom Kluba zagrepana itd. itd.43 im se potkraj
1933. nastanio u Beogradu, Krlea je javio Beli: Marko R. je simpatian i pametan
mlad ovjek, od mnogih koje sam ovdje upoznao jedan od daleko najsimpatinijih,
a kada ga obveze oko asopisa obuzmu radio [je] tri dana od 10 jutro do tri izju-
tra neprekidno, uz jedinu pomo Markovu.44 Krlea se s Ristiem sreo ve za svo-
jih prvih poslijeratnih beogradskih boravaka, da bi poetkom 1930-ih postali prisni.
Krleini i Ristievi45 su bili u ivom prijateljskom odnosu: samo je njihova polusto-
ljetna, reprezentativno sauvana korespondencija rijedak dokument dubinski op-
serviranoga doba. Risti i Krlea su se uzajamno i javno podupirali zapravo do kraja,
a Risti je bio ne samo glavni suradnik Krleinih asopisa Danas i Peat, ve i oso-
ba od njegova osobnog i idejnog povjerenja. To se donekle promijenilo u sloenom,
ponekad proturjenom, rasporedu dunosti to su ih poslije preuzeli za Titovu kul-
turnu politiku. Ristievi su s Krleom u Osijeku na premijeri Logora, zajedno odla-
ze u Varadin dok se ekaju prvi otisci Petrice, Krlea je pak gost u Vrnjcima, a Bela
izraunava koliko bi Ristieve kotao boravak u splitskom pansionu gdje se redovito
ljeti odmara. Krleini borave u Parizu u organizaciji Ristieva poslanstva kada Krle-
mdival Yougoslave, na ije otvaranje 8.III.1950. u Muse
a priprema izlobu Lart
42
Marko Risti (19021984) ve je kao student putovao po Europi; diplomirao je knjievnost u Beo-
gradu, gdje je 1920-ih meu pokretaima avangardistikih asopisa. Oduevljen je nadrealistikim po-
etikama, pa je njegovo obimno utjecajno knjievno djelo anrovski hibridno, s esejistikom osnovom,
uz snanu poetsku i osobnu projekciju. Nakon komunistikoga prevrata bio je do 1951. Titov velepo-
slanik u Parizu, potom dunosnik javne uprave za meunarodnu kulturnu suradnju; 19521963. glavni
je redaktor Enciklopedije Jugoslavije za Srbiju.
43
Krleino pismo uva se u Ristievoj ostavtini (Arhiv SANU), a sadri i detalj o novinama koje je po-
krenuo Crnjanski: Hvala vam na Idejama. To postaje sve gluplje, sve beznadnije i nepismenije, ali ne-
mojte zaboraviti da ni Goebels ne govori mnogo pametnije, a vidimo sa zornim rezultatom da takav na-
in miljenja odobravaju milijuni.
44
Pisma Miroslava Krlee Beli Krlea (1934).
45
Risti se 1926. oenio Jelicom evom ivadinovi (19061995), iz obitelji utjecajnogg lijenika koji
je imao sanatorij u Vrnjakoj banji. Obiteljj doktora ivadinovia krae je
j vrijeme
j ivjela
j u Zagrebu
g , na
to Krlea moda aludira pozivajui Ristie u takav status. evin mlai brat Stevan (Vane Bor) vratio
se u Francusku na studij, budui da je za rata bio u Nici, u zanimljivom krugu budue srpske knjievne
elite, ukljuujui Ristia. Ristievi su 1927. u Parizu, zajedno s Borom (koji e stei ugled meu europ-
skim nadrealistima), sudjelovali u knjievnom okupljanju.
66 | Vlaho Bogii
des monuments Franais poziva Association Franaise daction artistique, posebno

istiui (en prsence de) upravo Ristia.46
Krlea je precizirao kako se Petar Dobrovi u posljednje vrijeme njihova dru-
govanja osjeao malko malice, zapostavljenim, s pravom. Dolo je do poznate ab-
eracije u odnosu spram Marka. Marko je njega naslijedio i produio da prijateljuje
sa mnom u toj sjeni jednog mrtvog asopisa.47 Gotovo sve su Krleine srpske knji-
evne relacije, pa i one koje prethode tome odnosu, ukljuujui Crnjanskog i An-
dria,48 s iznimkom Vasia, odreene tim prijateljstvom. Krlein se poloaj u srpskoj
knjievnosti kritiki, ali i u osvrtima suvremenika, razumijeva kroz pripadnost tome,
jednom od sredinjih modernistikih krugova, no i u meusobnim odnosima koji
se u zbilji meu piscima ukrtaju, pa i unutar takvih skupina, Krlea je po pravilu uz
Ristia. Nakon revolucionarnoga prevrata takvi su biografski oiljci, iz prijateljskog
okruenja, prerastali u pukotine ne samo u kolateralnim aspektima razmrsivanja ide-
olokih sporova kakvi su slijedili s aferama glavnih politikih protagonista Zogovia,
ilasa i Rankovia, ve i u kulturnome frontu, pa je primjerice Milan Bogdanovi ot-
klonio suradnju sa srpskom redakcijom Enciklopedije sve dok joj je Risti na elu49, a
sam se Krlea u vie navrata zatekao pod povealom partijskih komisija, sada kao
forme vlasti, a ne ideoloke inspekcije. Prijepori su se i po sadraju prije odnosili na
drutvenu zbilju, a ne iz nje izvedeni idejni profil, pa se problem vlasti, kao shvaa-
nje dunosti, pojavio i u odnosu Krlee s Ristiem.
Risti je ve za izlobe u Parizu (1950) bio u glupoj situaciji: Slubeno je bio
okruen ljudima koji su na njega reali sa svih strana, a on je sam zaista bio na mojoj
strani rei e Krlea ali je bio bespomoan. Da zamasti mastilom svoje pero i da
46
Irina Aleksander jje u pismu (1947) upuivala Krleine na to da su se Ri- stievi promijenili: Be-
loko, u Parizu smo stanovali kod Marka i eve, koje smo katto, na vrlo kratke momente, uspjeli prepo-
znati, i obradovati se tome. Ostalo vrijeme naeg zajednikog boravka ostavilo je u naim srcima udnu
mjeavinu zauenja, saaljenja i raznih drugih slinih i oprenih osjeaja. Nema dvojbe da su se obo-
jica napadno promijenila, te da je sav onaj dio njihovog novog ivota u kojem su oni na visini ispunjava-
nja dunosti, odnosno gdje su glumaki najjai tamo su ljudski i prijateljski najslabiji, to se iz bogate
dokumentacije, koja se uva u Memoriji Bele i Miroslava Krlee, o parikom boravku za vrijeme izlobe
ne moe potvrditi. Ta dokumentacija sadri i pozivnicu za otvaranje izlobe.
47
Miroslav Krlea, Dnevnik, III, Sarajevo: Osloboenje, 1977, str. 50.
48
Risti je prijateljevao i sa Crnjanskim i s Andriem. No dok se s Crnjanskim nepovratno raziao, re-
laciju s Andriem je uvrstilo iskustvo ivota pod okupacijom (19411944), tim vie s obzirom na po-
vremenu upuenost obojice na Vrnjaku banju.
49
Bogdanovievo pismo (3.II.1953) objavio je Sava Dautovi (Krlea, Albanci i Srbi, Beograd: Narod-
na knjiga,
j g 2000, str. 120121), to ipak
p ne znai da jje pprekinuo suradnjuj s Enciklopedijom
p j jjer jje u njoj
j j
(1955) objavio i lanak o Andriu. ini se da je u vezi s tim lankom Bogdanovi upozorio Krleu na
Andrievo nezadovoljstvo zato to se u predloku signira hrvatsko obiljeje porodinog kruga iz kojega
potjee.
prekine neke stvari, to nije mogao.50 Kada se uskoro vrati u Beograd, gdje e izmeu
ostalih dunosti preuzeti i onu voditelja operativnoga enciklopedijskoga radnog sa-
stava za Srbiju, Risti se neposredno suoava s problemima koje je kada su se pojavili
u kontekstu izlobe zahvaljujui svome poloaju mogao izbjei.51 Ne dovodei u pita-
nje ni Krleinu idejnu osnovu za projekt a ni svoje osobno povjerenje u njega, Risti
se pri suoenju s partijskom komisijom, prema Krleinu dojmu, ponio prije diplo-
matski nego lojalno, tovie Krlea kao da je ostao zateen vlastitim zakljukom da
ga je izravnije od Ristia u zatitu uzela vlast.52 Krleu je taj incident asocirao na vrije-
me kada se beskompromisno stavio na Ristievu stranu,53 makar se u tome prijeporu
koji je doveo do Ristieva povlaenja iz urednitva Enciklopedije, odnos spram vlasti54
50
g S Krleom iz dana u dan, IV, str. 119; Krlea je, prethodno, asocirajui
Enes engi, j isti problem pi-
sao: aljem Ti za razonodu Povratak u oajnom izdanju Cankarjeve zalobe sa studijom Bojana tiha,
to je u svakom sluaju iznenaujue. On je bio polit. kontrolor da ne kaem komesar Izlobe i [kata-
loga] 1950. u Parizu, i on se jedini za razliku od Marka R. usudio usprotiviti ikanacijama s jedne i druge
strane [], a ovaj tekst o Filipu nije ba ni neinteligentan. Pisma Miroslava Krlee Beli Krlea (1975).
51
Marko Risti se u svojstvu glavnog redaktora, a na memorandumu Leksikografski zavod FNRJ / Re-
publika redakcija za SR Srbiju, 26. I. 1952. obratio Personalnom odeljenju Leksikografskog zavoda u
Zagrebu sa prijedlogom da se u vezi osnivanja Leksikografskog zavoda za NR Srbiju [!], a u cilju oba-
vljanja slube [] preuzmu i postave sledei slubenici [4]. Republikoj redakciji E. J. [a ne L. Z. !] za
N. R. Srbiju odgovoreno je 16. II. s potpisom direktora Miroslava Krlee da za sada nismo u mogu-
nosti da predloene imenujemo redovitim slubenicima, budui da ne raspolaemo slobodnim mjesti-
ma odobrenim nam sistematizacijom, pa su predloeni imenovani honorarnim slubenicima uz puno
radno vrijeme. Sam Marko Risti rasporeen je Rjeenjem od 5. X. 1953. za glavnog urednika srpske
redakcije Enciklopedije, 8. III. 1955. o tome je potpisao Ugovor s klauzulom da ovaj ugovor vrijedi sve
dotle, dok traje rad spomenute republike redakcije, ugovorom od 20. V. 1959. (dr. Marko Risti) ho-
norar mu je s 9.000 povean na neto din. 25.000, da bi Rjeenjem od 26. V. 1963. s Krleinim potpisom
ugovor, prema Ristievu prijedlogu, s 30. VI 1963. prestao vaiti. Arhiv Leksikografskog zavoda Mi-
roslav Krlea.
52
Krlea je u tom smislu lijepo govorio o srpskom partijskom rukovodiocu Dragoslavu Drai Markovi-
u, koji ipak u svojim memoarima relativizira da bi se s Krleom u toj prigodi bio posve suglasio,
g ali i po-
tvruje da je presjekao produbljivanje toga sukoba. Dragoslav Markovi, ivot i politika, Beograd:
Rad, 1987.
53
Nisam mogao shvatiti da se Marko mogao tako ponijeti, Marko koji je mene znao bolje j nego
g itko,
Marko zbog kojeg sam, branei ga kao nitko nikog nikada, uao 1939. u najlui okraj (Enes engi,
S Krleom iz dana u dan, III, str. 11), to je bilo tono, jer je Tito u Proleteru potpisao Neki nai asopisi
pruaju gostoprimstvo takvim tipovima kao to je nadrealista Marko Risti, intimus parikog trockiste
i buroaskog degenerika Bretona, pa Risti ak ni 1952. nije mogao kao nadrealist ui u Novu misao,
kada se Krlea opet solidarizirao s njime te ni sam nije uao u redakciju. Krlea je Ristia, s druge strane,
povrijedio jer je sporni enciklopedijski materijal, ukljuujui kontakt o tome s Ristiem, povjerio Bor-
j kojij jje u Zavodu bio ppolitiko- upravno
ku Vranicaniju, p lice, zapravo sigurnosni povjerenik. Sam Krle-
a se povjerava engiu da je meu njima otada velika provalija.
54
Ironino je da, s obzirom na Krleinu metaforizaciju srpskoga oficirskoga kompleksa, Ristia u ulozi
glavnog redaktora, upravo srpske redakcije, nasljeuje general.
68 | Vlaho Bogii
reflektira i neizravno: Risti je trajno osobno blizak Andriu, iji se tip kulturne pe-
netracije razvija obrnuto proporcionalno od njegovih prvih revolucionarnih pokro-
vitelja Zogovia i ilasa, a komplementarno s afirmacijom Davia i osia. Ne samo
to ni sam Krlea, koji na taj nain aludira na Ristia, nije mogao, a to znai ni htio
zadirati u drutvene pretpostavke Andrieva rasporeda, ve je Andrievu najbliu su-
radnicu Veru Stoji prihvatio u najui, Ristiev enciklopedijski kabinet.55 Risti jo
1956. pred Krleom nije skrivao da se, za razliku od vile Bistrica pri Triu56, na Bri-
onima ne bi dobro osjeao, koncept prihvaanja simbolikih punktova vlasti u njih
se dvojice oituje upravo u identitetskoj formuli malih razlika, ije su se raspravne di-
menzije kao pitanja nadrealistike poetike osobno uvali, da bi se pri zavrnom zbra-
janju sam problem vratio u poetnom obliku, naime da bi za prihvaanje drugoga tre-
balo biti odluujue to to on jest ili nije pisac, u smislu teksta koji je po sebi svijet.
Do Krleina se miljenja o knjievnosti, a ne samo njegovih knjievnih teksto-
va, u srpskoj kulturnoj javnosti dralo otkad se on u njoj javio kao sugovornik pa sve
do nemira koji je na samom kraju tako zamiljenog razgovornog luka, potkraj pie-
va ivota, izazvala zbirka pripovjedaka Danila Kia Grobnica za Borisa Davidovia.57
55
era Stoji (19021988) bila je bliska suradnica Iva Andria, nakon njegova povratka u Beograd 1941.
prekucavala je njegova dela, vodila korespondenciju, brinula se o autorskim pravima, bankarskim i
mnogim drugim praktinim poslovima (aneta uki Perii, Pisac i pria, Novi Sad: Akademska knji-
ga, 2012, str. 279). Umirovljena 1954. kao bankarska slubenica, nastavila je, budui poliglot, zapaenu
prevoditeljsku karijeru. Manje je, meutim, poznato da je Vera Stoji meu vanim suradnicima srpske
redakcije Enciklopedije, praktino njezinim organizatorima. To je posebno vano stoga jer je ona ima-
la iskustvo u tom poslu, bila je (1920-ih) sekretar Redakcije Stanojevieve Enciklopedije, a sam Stanoje
Stanojevi bio je njezin roak. Na Krleine zagrebake suradnike iz bivih enciklopedijskih sastava ne-
rijetko se gleda sa sumnjom, pa i njezin, ne i jedini takav primjer u srpskoj sredini, pokazuje koliko je za
kontinuitet tako zahtjevne djelatnosti vano iskustvo. Roksanda Njegu, sekretar srpske redakcije, obra-
tila se 14. X. 1955. izravno Krlei, oslovljavajui ga prijateljski dragi drue Krlea i podsjeajui ga kako
je o tome govorila s njime, a rije je kako nagraditi rad Vere Stoji: Dola sam do uvjerenja da je najbolje
odrediti joj stalni honorar od 4000 dinara meseno [polovica honorara glavnog urednika!], a uz to joj
lektorski posao plaati prema tabaku i prema uredbi. Stalni posao bio bi nagrada za njenu takorei sva-
kodnevnu pomo u redakciji. Krlea je osobno s Verom Stoji odmah potpisao odgovarajui ugovor,
da bi (1959) taj ugovor bio promijenjen u pogledu obrauna naknade za rad, sada joj je pripadalo 200
din. po satu. Arhiv Leksikografskog zavoda Miroslav Krlea.
56
Javio mi je Vidmar telefonski, da je Sv Jurij slobodan jula mjeseca i dao mi je rije da e Vas o tome
obavijestiti, jer mi je to javio da ja javim Vama. Pretpostavljam da je to doista uradio. (19. VII. 1954)
Arhiv SANU / Ristieva ostavtina; Za Brione Marko je j uglavnom
g ostao pri svome, kae da se ne bi ta-
mo dobro osjeao. (17. VI. 1956) Pismo eve Risti Beli Krlei, Memorija Bele i Miroslava Krlee / Mu-
zej grada Zagreba.
57
Danilo Ki (19351989) privukao je zarana pozornost javnosti profiliranom pripovjednom mani-
rom usredotoenom na jezinu i etiku nijansu. U Krleinoj knjinici uva se primjerak Kiove Poeti-
ke posveen s potovanjem i divljenjem 29. XI. 1974, i to u Zagrebu, to bi trebalo indicirati da su
se toga dana i sreli. Ki se i inae o Krlei javno oitovao kao o uitelju, a slijedee (1975) javlja mu se
Razlika i snaga njegova knjievnog autoriteta nije proizlazila tek iz programskih i in-
stitucionaliziranih aspekata kulturnoga spektra, pa ni s njima poslije povezanih me-
hanizama drutvenog rasporeda. Krlea je jednostavno slovio za itatelja s osjea-
jem, dekodacijskim talentom za umjetniku nijansu, koji se pritom znade uzdrati od
selektivnog impulsa vlastitih poetikih, idejnih i socijalnih preferencija. Polemika
shema, kada se njome koristio, zasnivala se i na strategiji totalne negacije osporava-
noga, ali je, ne samo retrospektivno, podrazumijevala diferenciranje supstrata spo-
ra prema ljestvici na kojoj se posredno dade procijeniti stupanj ne samo zastranje-
nja drugoga, s polemiareva gledita, nego i njegove ope relevantnosti. Ve naslovi
dvaju kljunih dokumenata koji reflektiraju takvu kulturnu napetost upuuju na ini-
cijacijski i afirmacijski kompleks kakav na pozadini epohe pokuavamo odrediti za
pisce Krlea je svoj odluni spis projicirao kao Dijalektiki antibarbarus, a Milovan
ilas58 usporednu biografsku grau retrospektira kao Vlast (i pobunu). Do pobune s
obzirom na vlast Krlea i ilas dolaze u razliitom, kako osobnom tako i opem vre-
menu, a da ih taj pobunjeniki refleks uzajamno ni u epilogu nee pribliiti. Pa ipak
je vlast, preciznije njezin barbarski gen, onaj topos historijske periode u kojemu je
kao u negativu sadran evidencijski otisak unutranje slobode pojedinca, iji se trag
moe pratiti u drutvenom reljefu.
u vezi sa Grobnicom koju je Krlea itao u rukopisu: Sa zadovoljstvom se prisjeam naeg zagrebakog
susreta i Vaih vedrih (uprkos svemu) opaski. Rukopis svoje knjige povukao sam hitro iz HIT-a, kako
ondanje komercijaliste ne bih dovodio u iskuenje, i predao stvar u ruke Goldsteinu. U najoptimisti-
kijoj varijanti, prua mi se perspektiva da dogodine od honorara iz LIBER-a platim veeru u Gradskom
podrumu, kao to sam obeao. Samo nemojte j sad rei, molim Vas, da se alim!, da bi 2. VIII. 1976. do-
pisao u pismo prijatelja Knjigu sam Vam poslao im se pojavila. itanje nije obavezno. Katalog Ru-
kopisne ostavtine Miroslava Krlee.
58
Milovan ilas (19111995) stekao je 1930-ih glas karizmatinog komunistikog intelektualca, pogo-
tovo u krugu tako senzibiliziranog dijela beogradskog Univerziteta, pa ga je, nakon potvrde revolucio-
narne predanosti iskustvom viegodinje tamnice, uzeo u Politbiro koji je organizirao partizansku borbu
i pripremio drutveni prevrat. U prijeporima s Krleom, ilas je u tom svojstvu tvrdo zastupao partijska
gledita, to je Krleu potaknulo da ga uzme za metaforiku figuru potencijalnoga rizika u vlastitom pre-
lasku partizanima, a poslije i kao dunosnika koji je sabotirao Titov plan njegove integracije u novi po-
redak. U Krleinoj su se predodbi pritom stopile vlastita povrijeenost i dojam koji je ilasa u javnosti
pratio kao prijekog ratnog zapovjednika. No, kada se pri sukobu sa Staljinom pokazala ilasova privr-
enost Titu, unato osobnim kontaktima to ih je imao s neprikosnovenim voom kominternovske ali-
janse, Krlea se s njime zbliio. Paradoksalno, razili su se kada je sam ilas spram imperativa autoriteta
doao na pozicije Krleine sumnje, zagovarajui demokratske institucije. U globalnom odjeku ilaso-
va disidentstva tako se redovito tumai i njihov odnos, koji je osobno zakljuen ilasovim respektom i
kritikim razumijevanjem, te Krleinim nervoznim otklanjanjem konzekvencija do kojih ga je ilas, pa
makar i stjecajem prilika, doveo.
70 | Vlaho Bogii
Na slian nain kao to je u doba Antibarbarusa bio upuen u Zagreb, Oskar Da-
vio59 je, zajedno s Dobricom osiem,60 bio odreen za vrlo uzak popis beogradskih
suradnika prvoga broja asopisa za koji je Krlea 1952. dobio suglasnost vlasti. Ka-
da osi u svome svjedoenju o toj situaciji izostavlja ilasa, koji je s Krleom u ne-
posrednoj konzultaciji o asopisu61, zacijelo, prije nego to o takvoj ilasovoj pozi-
59
Oskar Davio (1909 1989), pjesnik ija se nadrealistika poetika prelamala s nadrealnim biografskim
formama. Pokreui kao gimnazijalac knjievne listove, studirao je na Sorboni i diplomirao u Beogradu,
da bi, praktino odmah potom proveo pet godina na robiji zbog ilegalne komunistike agitacije. Una-
to tome je podvrgnut partijskom discipliniranju jer je (pod pseudonimom) objavio pjesme u Krlei-
nu Peatu (do ega je zapravo dolo preporukom Titu bliskih partijskih krugova), pa se 1941. zatekao u
Splitu, odakle je odveden u talijansku internaciju. Uspjevi se odande pridruiti partizanima, sudjeluje
u borbenim jedinicama, a potom s Visa prelazi u Beograd, gdje je, izmeu ostaloga, 1944. prvi sekretar
srpskoga knjievnoga udruenja. Avanturistiki duh ga nee napustiti, pa e, prije nego se njegov knji-
evni talent oituje u kanonskom razmjeru, stii kao reporter meu Markosove partizane, a polemiku
strast e zadrati i kao etablirani, zarana institucijski potvren (dopisno lanstvo u JAZU) pisac. Takav
ga je, aktivistiki naboj dodatno i uzajamno povezivao s Krleom, koji je odricao da bi njegova procjena
Daviova knjievnog formata bila odluujua, ali ga je postojano i precizno zagovarao.
60
Dobrica osi (19212014) povezao se s ilegalnim pokretom u poljoprivrednom tehnikumu u Alek-
sandrovcu, gdje su u komunistikoj agitaciji prednjaili mladi hrvatski polaznici. Prvoborac, te ubrzo
ideoloki komesar partizanskih odreda u Srbiji, u novoj je, revolucionarnoj vlasti odmah pozicioniran
kao istaknuta figura u obje vertikale vlasti: partijskoj i predstavnikoj. Za dvadesetogodinjega razdo-
blja,
j do sredine 1960-ih legitimiran
g je
j kao ppripadnik
p uegg Titova kruga
g (ima izravan pristup i uiva nje-
govu izriitu naklonost). To se odnosi i na osievu knjievnu karijeru, ukljuujui presedan da mu je s
naslova istraivanja ili razumijevanja okolnosti omoguen policijski pristup strogo distanciranom kom-
pleksu tzv. informbirovskih otpadnika. Svoje je knjievne ambicije ipak usmjerio na anrovski nepopu-
njen a atraktivan prostor ratne teme, da bi se herojskom kronikom o Prvom svjetskom ratu (Vreme smr-
ti) odvojio od protekcijske hipoteke poretka iz koje je izrastao. No, iako je inzistirao na disidentskom
karakteru svoje pozicije, nakon naputanja partijskih foruma, institucijski se okvir njegova (kulturnog)
djelovanja nije promijenio: odmah je primljen u SANU (to bez, makar preutnog, partijskog akrediti-
va ne bi bilo mogue), ostajui do kraja privren monolokom retorikom modelu u kojemu je formi-
ran. tovie, unato figurativnom
g oponiranju
p j Krlei, osi jje s njime,
j ppa i nakon svoje p besjede
j ppristupne j
(1978), bio u istom Akademijinom razredu i to u radnom sastavu. Kada se govori o osievoj knjiev-
nosti, posebno s obzirom na tezu te besjede o ratu i miru, na tipian se nain zaboravlja da imaginaci-
ja, pa ni knjievnost ne spada ni u razum ni u nerazum. Knjievnost esto podupire uznapredovali na-
cionalizam tako to ukazuje na to da smo svi imali istu slavnu prolost, iste velike bitke za nacionalno
osloboenje, istu vjersku toleranciju, ime se povijest pretvara u kulturno sjeanje (Gayatri Chakra-
vorty Spivak, Nacionalizam i imaginacija, Zagreb: Fraktura, 2011, str. 30).
61
Dragi Krlea, Ovih dana putujem u Makedoniju i tamo ostajem 34 dana (oko 6-og maja biu u Beo-
gradu), pa sam htio da se s tobom posavjetujem oko mog priloga za prvi broj Danasa. [] I u vezi s
takvim stanjem toga problema doao sam na misao da bih mogao da piem (makar i najoptije) o dva
pitanja (uvijek je ovjek kod ta dva u nedoumici koji pade da upotrijebi!): prvo, o ulozi svijesti u dru-
tvu, a posebno u socijalizmu, relativnoj i kao takvoj apsolutnoj, o mogunosti, odnosno nemogunosti
mijenjanja svijeta pomou svijesti, o izvanredno velikoj ulozi svijesti naroito tamo gdje su proizvodne
snage slabe, o tome da smo ba mi sve i svja, prije i iza nas niko i nita, ova tema mi izgleda vana iz mno-
go razloga: to je danas za nas svjesni politiki i drutveni elemenat za razvitak veoma vaan i drugo to
se taj faktor precjenjuje[] Ovdje inae nita novo. Odnos Svedoanstava i Knjievnih novina se
ciji ne bi bio upuen, rauna upravo s pretpostavkom da je ilasova kooperacija, pa

i kao moguega suradnika vertikalna, a ne horizontalna, po tipu poziva s prioritet-
no knjievnom referencijom. Premda ni u cjelini odnosa Krlee i ilasa nee osta-
ti razgovijetno to je Krlea najposlije mislio o ilasovu knjievnom talentu, osi
pripada posve skuenoj skupini srpskih pisaca koji su s Krleom stajali u bliskoj rela-
ciji, a da se ona raspala bez sadrajnoga ostatka. Nikako usamljen po ushienju s Kr-
leinom blizinom, koje se oituje u pismima i posvetama,62 osi e i svome razlazu
s Krleom pokuati uitati biografsku grau pa i vrijednosni supstrat,63 doputaju-
i pritom svome memoarskom iskazu prilino riskantan tip polemike objektivno-
sti64, podastirui sjeanja kako je o Krleinim ideolokim zastranjenjima pokuavao
polako i neizbeno zakuhava. To bi moglo umnogome da paralie rad beogradske grupe danas. No bilo
kako bilo izgleda mi da ne bi smjeli da to prenesemo i u Danas. Meni lino izgleda da ima mnogo sta-
rog i na jednoj i na drugoj strani, prije svega zato to izgleda da nikom nije jasno ta je to novo ta treba
dati naoj kulturi iako svi o tome priaju. A meni stvar izgleda prosta (iako tea), treba pisati, i to napi-
sano, ako valja treba da je to novo, a ne prie o novom. Od pria mala vajda. (28. IV. 1952) Pismo i-
lasa Krlei uva se u Memoriji Bele i Miroslava Krlee / Muzej Grada Zagreba.
Davio je u svojim sjeanjima detaljno opisao kako ga je ilas 1939. uputio u Zagreb, kako je ondje upo-
znavi Krleu shvatio da je rije o ovjeku kojega je konspirativno u Beogradu pratio na susret s Moom
Pijadom u bolnici, te kako e mu Krlea poslije obiljeiti ivot (Oskar Davio, Polemika i dalje, Saraje-
vo: Osloboenje, 1986).
62
Beli i Krlei / Mojim
j dragim
g prijateljima
p j j / ljubav
j i odanost bez / deoba / Dobrica osi / jjul 1961.
Primjerak Deoba s osievom posvetom uvao se u Leksikografskom zavodu Miroslav Krlea.
63
Oskar je pozvao Krleu i mene na ruak u svoj stan [XII/1964]. Gnevan na antijugoslovenske sta-
vove koji pobeuju u mimikriji samoupravnog poretka, ja sam podran od Oskara, estoko kritikovao
novu nacionalnu politiku vostva Saveza komunista, prepriavajui im diskusiju u komisiji za program-
sku deklaraciju. Krlea se estinom veom od moje oborio na moja shvatanja, prevodei temu raspra-
ve iz oblasti privrede u prostor optih politikih shvatanja
j u Srbiji,
j zamerajui nam izjednaavanje uloge
domobrana i etnika u Drugom g svetskom ratu. Dobrica osi, Pisci moga veka [ir.], Beograd: Za-
vod za udbenike, 2004, str. 36; osi se uivio u sveznajueg pripovjedaa nacionalne povijesne proze pa
je s Krleom poelio esto zaelim [1975] raspravljati otvorenim pismom, kao piscem Zastava o
njegovoj nacionalnoj ideologiji i hrvatstvu, poistovjeujui
p j se sa Camusom [!] i aludirajui na njego-
vo Pismo jednom njemakom prijatelju. Dobrica osi, Pievi zapisi p (19691980) [ir.], Beograd:
g Fi-
lip Vinji, 2001, str. 210. Nasuprot
p Krlei, osia je j u Hrvatskojj ozbiljno
j shvaao Franjo j Tuman, koji
u svojim zapisima (28. VI. 1984) jednako samouvjereno za usporedbu sebe sa osiem tvrdi da ta us-
poredba bila je slubena ocjena ljudi od utjecaja u Srbiji i Hrvatskoj koji se nisu podredili birokratizira-
noj vlasti. Franjo Tuman, Osobni dnevnik, III, Zagreb: Veernji list, 2011, str. 55.
64
osi, tako, ne zamagljuje da je samoga Tita uvjeravao u Krlein nacionalizam, ali mu je Tito objasnio
kako se Krlea u staroj Jugoslaviji borio protiv hrvatske malograantine, mnogi drugovi to zaboravlja-
ju, pa kritikuju Krleu za sve i svata, naroito zbogg Enciklopedije.
p j A ja j najbolje znam ta je Krlea zna-
io za na radniki pokret i klasnu borbu; tovie, poduio je osia: Krlea se potcenjuje Pa i taj
Peat. Sve su to jo neraiene stvari. Njega su najee
j napadali
p ba oni koji nisu vie s Partijom. On
je prvi shvatio ta znai socijalistiki realizam. Dobrica osi, Pievi zapisi (19511968) [ir.], Beo-
grad: Filip Vinji, 2000, str. 236, 176. osi se nije dao impresionirati, pa je za svoj problem s Krleom
nastojao pridobiti Krleina oponenta u hrvatskom partijskom vodstvu Vladimira Bakaria, koji je osi-
72 | Vlaho Bogii
informirati istaknute politike prvake, ukljuujui samoga Tita. Bez obzira na poli-
tiku nekorektnost takve misije, ona osia posve izuzima iz Krleina srpskog kul-
turnog auditorija, bez obzira na naelo ukljuenja ili iskljuenja unutar skupina ko-
je su ga inile, jer je razlikovnost Krleine srpske protubiografije ponajprije u tome
to ga njegovi oponenti, pa ni oni s desnice, institucijski povezani s kraljevskim rei-
mom, nisu kao elementarno spornog pokuali ograniiti u audijencijama toga tipa.
Za razliku od ilasa, koji je od vlasti otpao za jednu kriznu stepenicu ranije od o-
sia, i o ijem se knjievnom svojstvu kanonski dvoji, osi je svoje kanonske po-
vlastice poistovjetio s knjievnim identitetom, osjeajui se pozvanim i samim time
ravnopravnim pozvati Krleu na razgovor, i to kao drugog prema vlastitom, a moda
i dogovornom, katalogu historijskih tema.
Krlea takvom kriznom polju u svome unutarnjem srpskom monologu nee iz-
maknuti, ali ga nee voditi s osiem, nego s Daviom. I u toj e se raspravi, koja
pripada zakljunim razmatranjima naega istraivanja, fenomen vlasti isprijeiti kao
institucijski, problem nomenklature, s Krleinim otimanjem bilo kojoj historijskoj
formi koja bi ovjeka ograniavala u pravu izbora i s njime povezanim tumaenjem
povijesne zbilje. Na to je, kao Krleinu dilemu,65 u prijelomnom razdoblju uputio nje-
gov davnanji oponent Vinaver: Teoretiar Krlea nije hteo da voli Klanfara i Glem-
bajeve, emu je kao dramatiar teio. Polemiar je preoteo maha i naterao dramatia-
ra da ovaj zamukne kako ne bi uinio nita naao polemiaru. teta. Brak polemosa
i dramaturgije ovde je rastavljen presudom samog pisca, bez uea publike kojoj je
brak prijao. Ali, upravo e Vinaver upozoriti mlade pisce da iako se s Krleinim za-
kljucima uopte ne slae, jer je on podvlaio da je nae doba sve u umetnikoj kri-
zi, kako se o takvom Krlei ne moe govoriti apostrofiranjem senilnosti. Napro-
tiv, Krlea je bio u naponu, vrcao je iskrama duha i humora, a to to je poslovima
kojima se opteretio ukinuo vlastitu dokolicu, kao preduvjet svojevrsne kontemplaci-
je nikako ga ne diskvalificira.66
Sve ako je i izreena s dahom erudicijske ironije, Vinaverova je opaska dobro
locirala plutajui ductus Krleina pera, posebno s naslova itateljske kulture u ko-
joj je, poput samoga Vinavera, bio intuitivno i kondicijski predan do kraja. Krlea je
tako jo 1973. kazao Kiu da mu sredina nee oprostili talent, drei se vlastitoga
kulturnoga iskustva, ali i shvaanja knjievnosti kao totalnoga jezika, odnosno iden-
titeta. Krleino inzistriranje na vlastitoj procjeni kada je Ki doista doao u diferen-
evim ocjenama
j usmeno doista povlaivao, ali se na pisma nije oitovao, a pouen o tome na isti nain
kao i osi, u Titov se odnos s njim nije uplitao.
65
Stanislav Vinaver, Beogradsko ogledalo, Beograd: Slubeni glasnik, 2012, str. 145146.
66
Stanislav Vinaver, Beogradsko ogledalo, Beograd: Slubeni glasnik, 2012, str. 365369.
cijacijsko sredite takva kulturnog odnosa oitovano je u poruci: svojim perom Vi

draite svet oko sebe, tovie namjerno ga razdraujete ponekad se tumai kao
uzmak ili rezignacija, kao da Kia nije uzeo u javnu zatitu.67 No Krleino se dra-
nje moe razumjeti i s gotovo suprotnoga gledita: on je Kievu pobjedu u tome spo-
ru doivljavao i kao vlastitu. Pritom treba strogo razlikovati kulturnu od knjievne
identifikacije. Krlea (vie) doista nije vjerovao u kulturnu promjenu, pa ni to da bi
Ki mogao od drutva dobiti satisfakciju, ali je u Kiovu knjievnu egzistenciju kao
oevidno ne samo ouvanu nego i ojaanu gledao kao historijski pomak, rehabilita-
cijski primjenjiv i na vlastitu dramaturgiju, kako ju je nazvao Vinaver. U prilog takvu
itanju odnosa Krlee i Kia opet idu posvete i pisma koja su slijedila, ak mimo one
sjene iz odnosa s Ristiem kakvu je Krlea osjeao, ali i vaniji, na alost neostvaren
impuls. Ki je elio prirediti Krleinu beogradsku knjigu, a ona ne bi sadravala po-
lemike ni idejna oitovanja, ve pripovjetke, jer je jo (ili upravo) tada, dosljedno
potonjem oitovanju Nikole Miloevia, integralnog Krleu, kao identitet vlastitoga
pisma razumio u njegovu narativu.68
Ki je u doba Krleina odlaska svojim talentom doista dodirnuo temeljni dru-
tveni odnos do simbolike toke da se o tome sam Tito oitovao Brenjevu,69 ali to
za Krleu, kao ni za Kia nije bilo nita novo na kraju epohe koja nije zapoela Anti-
barbarusom, ve vidovdanskim mitom i pijanom novembarskom noi, u kojoj se umjet-
nik nije zatekao tek izmeu kaosa i harmonije, ve i naspram vlasti. Kada se u obzir
uzme dramatina historijska zbilja, a ne tek ograniene drutvene okolnosti, pisci
su iz toga vremena kao Krleini suvremenici izali s biografijama koje oituju vie-
struk razmjeran rast, ne samo u dijakronijskoj skali, ve i u odnosu na razvoj dru-
gih kulturnih podruja i umjetnikih praksi, a Krlein se udjel pritom, ne samo ap-
straktno, kao ouvanje slobode, ve i neposredno, kao iva ljudska dimenzija, teko
osporava, pa i u kulturi ijim se prostorom kretao s osjeajem pripadnika, ali i opre-
67
Mark Thompson, Izvod iz knjige roenih, Beograd: Clio, 2014, str. 451.
68
Ki pie Krlei (8. IV 1977): Potovani i dragi Krlea, Svojedobno sam bio napravio za BIGZ jedan
izbor iz Vaih pripovedaka. Ta je stvar sada postala ponovo aktuelnom. Naime, kao to Vam je poznato,
Nikola Bertolino, koji ureuje Depnu knjigu, eleo bi da u toj kolekciji /20000 primeraka!/ objavi ne
samo novele /ukoliko se Vi sloite s ovim mojim izborom: aljem Vam u prilogu naslove/, a Krlea mu
odmah (11. IV. 1977) odgovara da bi njihovi planovi s BIGZ-om, Dragi moj Danilo Ki, mogli ostati
na vrbi svirala. Katalog Rukopisne ostavtine Miroslava Krlee.
69
U srpskoj je knjievnoj javnosti pitanje obnovljenog izdanja Dijalektikog antibarbarusa pokretano i
za autorova ivota, o tome je s njime, prema vlastitom svjedoenju, (1972) raspravljao i Predrag Pala-
vestra, ali ni kada se to, neposredno po Krleinoj smrti dogodilo, kao da je sjena spora koja se nadvijala
nad biografije sudionika prevladala nad predmetom, opstajui i u Kievu sluaju kao svojevrsni istoni
grijeh spram vlasti. Zanimljivo je da se Krlei (22.II.1978) pismom javlja i Dragan M. Jeremi, kae da
je izgubio stan, a i mnogo ega drugoga. Memorija Bele i Miroslava Krlee / Muzej grada Zagreba.
74 | Vlaho Bogii
zom dvojstva kakvo odgovoran umjetnik stvaralac generiki podrazumijeva i kada

je nominalno zaviajan.
LITERATURA:
osi, Dobrica. Pievi zapisi 19511968 [ir.]. Beograd: Filip Vinji, 2000.
engi, Enes. S Krleom iz dana u dan. Zagreb: Globus, 1985.
Dautovi, Sava. Krlea, Albanci i Srbi. Beograd: Narodna knjiga, 2000.
Dereti, Jovan. Istorija srpske knjievnosti [ir.]. Beograd: Prosveta, 2004.
uki Perii, aneta. Pisac i pria. Novi Sad: Akademska knjiga, 2012.
Krlea, Miroslav. Dnevnik. Sarajevo: Osloboenje, 1977.
Krlea, Miroslav. Panorami pogleda, pojava i pojmova. Sarajevo: Osloboenje, 1982.
Markovi, Dragoslav. ivot i politika. Beograd: Rad, 1987.
Mihajlovi Mihiz, Borislav. Autobiografija o drugima [ir.]. Beograd: BIGZ, 1992.
Popovi, Radovan. Beskrajni plavi krug. Beograd: Slubeni glasnik, 2009.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. Nacionalizam i imaginacija. Zagreb: Fraktura, 2011.
Vinaver, Stanislav. Beogradsko ogledalo. Beograd: Slubeni glasnik, 2012.
Vlaho Bogii
MIROSLAV KRLEA AND SERBIAN WRITERS:

LITERATURE AS IDENTITY
Abstract: In this article, the attention is drawn to the inspiring mutual cooperation of
Serbian and Croatian culture in the observed period, whereby the referentiality of literature
is in the center of immediate understanding as an independent framework, before the Yugo-
slavian and the European contexts. Besides Krlezas determined position in literary and his-
torical dimension, given the receptive range of his work and literary circles he 6 contributed
to, as a member or an antagonist, we add here a reading based on which he was memorized
in general value catalogue since he came to Serbia in 1912, or since 1922 when he was rec-
ognized in Serbian public as an authentic voice of potential change, until his death in 1981.
Keywords: Miroslav Krlea, Ivo Andri, Milo Crnjanski, Dragia Vasi, Serbian and
Croatian literature
Vol. 7, No. 1 (2016):
( ) 75-88. 75
UDC 821.163.41.09 Timenko N.

UDC 821.163.41.09 Jovanovi S.

1
()

: , , -
-
.
, -

.
-
.
: , , -
,
(19342004), ,
, -
. , , ,
, , -
. -
20.
.
, -
, -
, -
.
, , -
. 1964. 1999. , -
1
dbedov@yahoo.com (Dragana Bedov, Andri Institute, Viegrad, Bosnia and Herzegovina)
76 |
, , -

, -
, -
,
.
***
, , -
,
, 1946. -

-
,2 . ,
-
.
-
1946, , ,
.3 , ,

.4
2
( (18691958);
: , , . 12,
1991, . 768772); -
1946. .
3
: . , -
, [...] , -
, . , , -
, , , ,
,
. (, 23.
1946, . 23) -

, -
:
1952. ( ), 2006.
4
: -
, . -
: . -
| 77
,5 -
(
),6 1963.
.
,
, -
, , -
,
.7 -
. -
,
,
.8 , -
. -
:
-
, , -
-

. -
, ,

. ( 36.
1983. 44 . -
: -
1946. , 15. 1983, . 15.)
5
1947, -
1948, -
: : , -
, 2010, . 399.
6
(. , . -
, . , . , . , . , . , . ) -

[...] : , . (
(18691958); : , -
, . 12, 1991, . 782).
7
, . 782.
8
. , , : , -
, 1963, . 6.
78 |
,
.9
, -
, ,
,
1964. .10 -
,
.
, -
-
, :
, -

, , -
, ,
.
-
, .11
, -

,
, -
, , , -

.12 ,
,

.
-
9
, . 782783.
10
. , : , -
, . 19, . 38, . 2, 1964, . 148149.
11
, . 148.
12
, . 148.
| 79
: -

(, -
).

.13
, , -
, -
,
, -
: , -
, , , , -
.14
, -

15 ,
, -

100 .
,
1965. ,16
1971. , .17 -
13
, . 148149.
14
, . 149.
15
, . 149.
16
24
, -
, . -
: ;
; , -
. ; -
... (. -
, :
, , -
, . 1, 1965, . 325).
17
1971.
-
1963, -

80 |
, ,
, ( ) -
.18
.
1984. 1985. -
,
. 1991. -

.19 -
. , : -
, ,
, , 1. , -
, , . ,
, -
, , :
. -
,
,
, -
. (. , . , . 786787).
18
, 1964. , , -
: ,
, - , , , -
[...] , -
, , -
, , , ,
, . -
, , -
, -
. 1964,
, , , 1971, : . 232;
, . 1, 1964, . 99102. ( , :
, :
, , 2016, . 255263). -
. , ,
,
: , B. B. C.- 11
12, . ; [...] -
1946. 20 in contumaciam,
1958. , -
. ( . , . , . 99).
19
, , -
, . -
-
, (
| 81

-
.20
1990, -
-
.21 , , -
:
-
.
-
?22 -
20. ,
,
-
(1986) -
40
).
1989. (
), -
, , -
. (. , , . 787790).
1984. 1985. ( )
: : , -
, 2010, . 404405.
20
:
. , -
- -
.
. [...] -
, , -
. [...]
, -
. ,
( ), 910,00
, 23. 1990. .
21
. , , , . 1, . 2, 1991, . 131
132. ( -
1990.)
22
, . 131.
82 |
, 20. .23
( )
,24 :
, ,
, ,
; -
,
-
, -
.25
, ,
, -
,
, , , -
... ,
:
, , -
23
, , -
-
, , , . (, .
131). , ,
, , -
.
24
-
, , -

, , -
13. 1969. : :
. .
. [...] ,
, raison d tre ! , -
, , . [...]
. , -
, : , ;
, , ,
. , , , , ;
. !
. [...] ( )
; -
, . -
! . !
25
, . 131.
| 83
; , -
!,26 -
, ,
, , -
, -
-
.

.27
, -
. 1997. -
, .28 , -
, ,
, , -
. , . -
,
, , ,
, .29 ( -
, , -
, 20.
-
.)
26
, . 132.
27
, , , ,
; ,
-
, , , -
, ! -
, , ;
,
-
. , ,
[...] -
! , , -
. (, . 132).
28
. , : , . . 2,
. 2, 1997, . 11.
29
, . 11.
84 |
.

,
-
,
, ,
,30

19. , ,
: , ,
,
. , , ,
, ,

.31
-
1929. ,
. ,

. .
-

, ,
. -
, -
,
, ,32

, , ,
. , -
, , -
, , -
30
, . 11.
31
, . 11.
32
, . 11.
| 85
.33 ,
:
.
, , ;
, ,
,
,
( -
-
-
;
, -
, -
). [...] -

: , . [...]

,
, ,
-
. [...] .
-
. [...] ,
, [...]
...34
(1997),
.35
: , , -
, , ,
33
1948.
, . ( ,
1948. -
1957. ).
34
, . 11.
35
. , : , , ,
. 54, . 12, 27. 1998, . 10.
86 |
,36
1964,
. .
-
, , -
,
-
.
, , , , --
, , -
,
, :
, -
,
.37
-
-
. , -
, ,
, -
, :
, -
. , -
,
, -
,
-

.38
-
,
, -
36
, . 10.
37
, . 10.
38
. . 10.
| 87
.39 -

,
, ,
40
. -

, , -
.41
,42
:
, : ,
, , ,
,
. , -
, ,
. [...] , , -

, .43
***
1964, -
-

. ,
, -
39
. , , (Alliance), . 2, . 2,
1999, . 8.
40
, . 8.
41
1939. -
, , ,
.
42
, , -
...
43
, . 8.
88 |

.44 , -
-
, -
,
, -
. ,
-
,45
, -
,46
, -
.
Dragana Bedov
NIKOLAJ TIMENKO AND SLOBODAN JOVANOVI:

EXAMPLE OF SPIRITUAL CONNECTION
Abstract: Forgotten literary historian and critic, essayist and philosopher, Nikolaj Timen-
ko was one of the few who were daring in the years when it was not advisable to write about
proscribed author - Slobodan Jovanovi. His articles on the importance and place of Slobodan
Jovanovi in Serbian literature present the valuable contribution to the affirmation this ne-
glected and politically incriminated intellectual and author.
Keywords: Nikolaj Timenko, Slobodan Jovanovi, Serbian literature after World War
II, freedom of writing
44
(. ) -
: ( , -
2010) .
45
. , , (Alliance), . 2, . 2,
1999, . 8.
46
. -
-
: ( ),
2009. ,
-
.
Vol. 7, No. 1 (2016):
( ) 89-107. 89
UDC 821.163.41.09-3 Pavi M.

. 1

: ,
: .
, , -
, , - ,
. (
), ,
, -
. ,
: , ,
. , -
: ( -
), ( ), ( -
), (), () .
, -
.
-
, -
, () ,
, .
: , , , , , , -
, ,
1
jelena.maricevic@ff.uns.ac.rs ( Jelena . Marievi, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Philosophy, De-
partment of Serbian Literature and Language, Serbia)
90 | .

-
, (1980: 111) : -
. -
( : , ,
). , -

: ,
/ /
,/ / -
,/ ,/ , ,/
( 2012: 194-195). -
(1980: 110), ,
. , ,
.2 3,
-
.
, -
, -
,
/ . -

,
.
: -
-
2
18. , ,
, ,
- . ( 1965: 54).
3
, :
,
, .
: (), (),
( ), (). ,
[] , . -
(2008: 15-19). , , -
: -
: , , , ( 2014: 15).
| 91
, . -
.
:
, -
.
( )
() -
, ( ). -
( 2006: 90)
. , , -
[...] ,
, , . ,
. , -
( 2006: 92).

( -
2008: 347), (
2008: 209), -
(
2008: 250), ( -
2008: 316).
, , -
, ,
, , - , -
. (-
),
,
, .
,
, -
: , , . -
,
92 | .
: ( ),
( ), ( -
), (), ()4. -
-
,
.5 , , -
() : :
, 1994.
, 1981. , 2014.
.

1.
2.
3.
-
4.

5.
6.
7.
-
8.

9.
10.
11. ?
12. ?
13.
14. ?
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
4
, ,
. :
( ), ( )
( ).
5
, -
(1902).
| 93
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
: -
1981.
:
1981. 1994.
: -
1994. 2014.
,
,
( ), -
( /
2002). 2014. -
, -

(, , , )
. -
, e ( 1999: 278). ,
, -
, , -
-
,
( ),
( 1999: 278), .
, -:
- , -
, ' . '. ,
. ,
, ' ', -
( 2015: 123). K -
, -
, , ,
, .
94 | .
6 ;
() , -
(, , , ).
, :
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
, , , , -
Junkerschnke
, : , , ,
, , Pera
Palace .
, , : -
1522. , 1652, 1654,
1683, 1699 (. 2010: 996).
, -

; :
1: 2:
6
( 1850 1940. )
1200 . -
. 1893. , ,
() , ,
(, , ), , -
, (' ', ' -
'). c () 1867. -
( 2010: 992).
| 95
3: 4:
-
, , [...] , , , , , -
, -
, (.
, , ), -
[...] ' [] , -
[...] ,
' ( 2012: 523-524).
( : ,
, , , , ...)
( : , , -
) .
7 8, -
.
-
, . ' ' -
. ,
7
' ' -
' ' ( 2011. 135-151).
8

' ', (2011: 343) -
, ' ': .
96 | .
, , -
. -
-
( 2012: 522).
,
( )
, -
. 16.
( ), -
, -
9
. -
-
,
, . -
( , )
, , , -
(. 16. ), -
(. 2013: 31-46).
, , - -
, .
, , -
, [...] -
, , . -
,
[...] -
, -
[...] [] -
/ ( 1991: 112-113).
,
.
9
, -
.
| 97
, , ? -
. -
- . :

-
, -
, , , -
(, )
,
, [...] -
'', ,
[...] -
( 2010: 225-233).
'-
', , . .
XIV -
-
[...] 1617.
'' [...] Sanctae
Mariae Majoris ( 2002:
100-101).
, -
, -
1950. ,
. , ,
, -
-
.
: -
-
- ,
. :
, ,
98 | .
, ,
: , , -
333 ? ( 2002: 101).
() -
,
,
. : -, ,
-
10. :
? , ,
(2011: 336)
, -
, , , -
: ,
.11 , , -
-
, , , ,
. -
, :
1552. -
.
, (;
2015: ).
,
,12 ,
10
, , , , -
, -
( 2013: 36). , -
,
.
11
(2013: 246) , ,
, .
, ,
, ,
, , .
12

, , -
( ): , , , , , , (
), , , , , , , , , .
| 99
-
-
. [...] -
' ,
' ' '.
( 2015:
137),
, -
-
-
, , ,
. -
'', -
: ' , ,
, ( 2015: 138).
, ,
,
. , -
. ()
, . ( 2011: 59).
:
, -
-
.13
, , (
1999: 131), ,
( 1999: 138).
, -
( , ) (-
13
-
: (), (-
), ( ).
. -
, -
. , -
, .
( ) (. 2015: 209; 219).
100 | .
2012: 522). ,
( ), .

.
.

( 1999: 137),
, -
(1943) :
, ( 1999: 140).
- -
(1989: 12-14) -

. -
.
. -
,
, , ,
!
? , -
,
1941. 1943. , , -
: -
, 1389, 1941.
( 1999: 138) 1943. -
: 1941. 1945. , , -
( -
) 12. 1941.
, . 1943.
, -
.
16. 1943. -
1943. (. 1972: 657).
( 1999: 140),
, -
, , -
. , -
. (nomen est omen) ,
, , -
| 101
, , .
, , -
, ,
, .
(-
1999: 132), , -
. ,
, -
. ,
: -
, , (
)
( 1999: 179).
, ,
.
, -
(
),
( 1999: 186). , -
. ,
, , , , ,
( 9:0014,
1:00),
: ,
. ,
( 1999: 185). 15 ,
, .
,
. , -
, , ,
(. 1993: 32-34),
. (nomen est omen) : .
, () -
14
9:00 (. -
1993: 25).
15
( ) 1:00, . -
2:00, 3:00 4:00 ( 1993: 24).
102 | .
. -
(2. , . ) (7. ),
, , -
( 1993: 46). -
( 1993: 13) (
)
, : -
. , : ,
'' : -
( 1999: 186).
, , , -
-
.
(. 2000: 202),, -
, ,
. . -
, , 10 10.
: ( 2000: 213). -
() (-
) (. 1993: 25), 18.
. ,
.
, -
, , , , , ,
, -
. 10 10 -
, 9:50 , ,
21:50 -
,16 -
N, , . -
, ,
.
, '-
'
,
16

.
| 103
( 2000: 194). -
() , -
, -
,
, :
Nikolics von Rudna, ,
( 2000: 197) -
, , ! ! -
( 2000: 229).
: [...] -
1804 ( 2000: 194) : -

'' ( 2000: 204).
, 1804. !17
, -
( 2000: 218), -
. , .
, -
( - -
, ( 1744-1784) 1802)
( 2000: 220), -
, (1764-1805) (-
2003): , , , ,
, . -
. . . [...]
, ( 2000: 222). ,
, -
18, -
. (
), -
,
( ).
17
, -
. ,
(. 2012:
438-440; 443).
18
(2005: 89-106), -
.
104 | .
, . -
, -
: (, , , ) ,
; ,
( 2003: 19-20).
, , .
(),
(
, ), (-
, , , ), -
.
, -
, : , , -
... , , -
:
[...] ' ' , -
[...]
( 2008: 107-108).
, -
, -

:
,
, -
. -
,
, , -
( 2015: 63).
, , -
. -
,
-
. , , -
, (),
, ( ),
( ). , .
, -
| 105
,
, -
, (
).
:
1. Damjanov, Sava. Gradanski erotikon: Erotske stranice srpske knjievnosti XVIII i
poetka XIX veka. Novi Sad: Stilos, 2005.
2. Ki, Danilo. Mansarda. Beograd: Arhipelag, 2014.
3. Matavulj, Simo. Beogradske prie. Beograd: Delo, 1902.
4. Pavi, Milorad. Nove beogradske prie. Beograd: Nolit, 1981.
5. Pavi, Milorad. Zapis na konjskom ebetu. Nove beogradske prie, prir. Aleksan-
dar Jerkov. Beograd: Dragani, 1994. (i drugo izdanje iz 1999).
6. Pavi, Milorad. Aneo s naoarima: panonske legende, prir. Jovan Zivlak. Beograd:
Dragani, 2000.
7. Pavi, Milorad. Vrata sna (Gvozdena zavesa). Beograd: Dereta, 2002.
8. Pavi, Milorad. Zvezdani plat: astroloki vodi za neupuene. Beograd: Dereta,
2006.
9. Pavi, Milorad. Sve prie, pogovor napisao: Petar Pijanovi. Beograd: Zavod za
udbenike i nastavna sredstva, 2008.
10 Pavi, Milorad. Hazarski renik. Beograd: Zavod za udbenike i nastavna sred-
stva, 2012.
11. Pavi, Milorad. Beogradske prie, prir. Aleksandar Jerkov. Beograd: Vulkan, 2014.
( ):
1. Asman, Jan. Kultura pamenja, prev. Nikola B. Cvetkovi. Beograd: Prosveta,
2011.
2. Bajcar Novak, Silvija. Mape vremena: Srpska postmodernistika proza pred izazo-
vima epohe, prev. Ljubica Rosi. Beograd: Slubeni glasnik, 2015.
3. Brati, Dobrila. Gluvo doba: Predstave o noi u narodnoj religiji Srba. Beograd:
Plato, 1993.
4. Vladui, Slobodan. Crnjanski, megalopolis. Beograd: Slubeni glasnik, 2011.
5. Vojna enciklopedija, tom. 4 ( Jakac-Lafet), glavni urednik: Nikola Gaevi. Beo-
grad Zagreb: Redakcija vojne enciklopedije; Grafiki zavod Hrvatske, 1972.
6. Damjanov, Sava. Srpska knjievnost iskosa 1: Vrtovi nestvarnog. Beograd: Slube-
ni glasnik, 2011.
106 | .
7. Deli, Jovan. Hazarska prizma: tumaenje proze Milorada Pavia. Beograd; Ti-
tograd; Gornji Milanovac: Prosveta; Dosije; Oktoih; Deje novine,1991.
8. Jevti, Teodora. Motiv hrane i pia u delima Milorada Pavia, master rad odbra-
njen pod mentorstvom prof. dr Jovana Delia i prof. dr Predraga Petrovia. Beo-
grad: Filoloki fakultet, 2015.
9. Kravar, Zoran. Barokni opis. Zagreb: Liber, 1980.
10. Oliva Bonito, Akile. Ideologija izdajnika: umetnost,t manir,
r manirizam, prev. Mir-
jana Jovanovi, red. Sran Musi. Novi Sad: Bratstvo jedinstvo, 1989.
11. Skarpeta, Gi. Povratak baroka, prev. Pavle Sekeru. Novi Sad: Svetovi, 2003.
:
1. Bojovi, Zlata. Lomljenje dukata za sveu. Dubrovnik i Sveta Gora. U: Stari
Dubrovnik u srpskoj knjievnosti. Beograd:Slubeni glasnik, 2010. 225-233.
2. Bojovi, Zlata i Sonja iri. Meu Lavom i Drokunom (intervju). Vreme,
br. 1266, 9. april 2015. Dostupno na: http://www.vreme.co.rs/cms/view.ph-
p?id=1286990. Datum preuzimanja: 16. 09. 2016.
3. Vladui, Slobodan. Crnjanski: od 'Strailova' do 'Lamenta nad Beogradom'.
U: Milo Crnjanski: poezija i komentari (zbornik), ur. Dragan Hamovi. Beograd
Novi Sad: Institut za knjievnost i umetnost, Filoloki fakultet u Beogradu,
Matica srpska, 2013. 240-247.
4. Golubovi, Vidoje. O nastanku i nazivima mehana i kafana starog Beograda.
Teme, (Ni), god. 34, br. 3 (2010): 991-1010.
5. Despi, ore. Fantastika u prii 'Veera u krmi Kod znaka pitanja' Milorada
Pavia. U: Preiveti u tekstu. Beograd: Slubeni glasnik, 2011. 135-151.
6. uri, Mina. Pavievsko-uroevievska tetralogija osvojena celovitost. U:
Aspekti vremena u knjievnosti (zbornik), prir. Lidija Deli. Beograd: Institut za
knjievnost i umetnost, 2012. 515-544.
7. Zajac, Peter. Knjievna istoriografija kao sinoptika karta, prev. s slovakog
Mihal Harpanj. Letopis Matice srpske (Novi Sad), god. 191, knj. 496, sv. 3, sep-
tembar (2015): 131-147.
8. Kalajdija, Jelena. Paviev poetiki 'pomeraj': prilog za izuavanje grada-Tek-
sta na primeru Pavieve 'Veere u krmi 'Kod znaka pitanja'. U: Letee violine
Milorada Pavia (zbornik), ur. Jelena Marievi. Novi Sad: Studentska asocija-
cija Filozofskog fakulteta, 2015. 118-125.
9. Petakovi, Slavko. Motiv 'brave dubrovake' u epskim narodnim pesmama.
k istoriju i folklorr (Beograd), LXXIX, sv. 1-4
Prilozi i graa za knjievnost,t jezik,
(2013): 31-46.
| 107
10. Radulovi, Nemanja. Izmeu igre i inicijacije: Pavi i naslee evropskog ezo-
terizma. Zbornik Matice srpske za knjievnost i jezikk (Novi Sad), knj. 60, sv. 2
(2012): 437-459.
11. Stoberski, Zigmund. Kristionas Donelaitis i litavska knjievnost, prev. Vera
ivanevi. Letopis Matice srpske, god. 141, knj. 395, sv. 1 (1965): 37-56.
12. Tatarenko, Ala. Tri zumbula u prozoru: u potrazi za junakom 'Dnevnika o ar-
nojeviu'. U: U zaaranom trouglu: Crnjanski Ki Peki. Zajear: Matina bi-
blioteka Svetozar Markovi, 2008. 7-26.
Jelena . Marievi
ASPECTS OF BAROQUE DESCRIPTIONS OF TIME AND

SPACE IN THE PROSE WRITTEN BY MILORAD PAVI
Abstract: Segmenting time in prose written by Milorad Pavi, can be divided into: the
time of year and the time of day. It is noted that the seasons closely related to the transience
of time and overcoming of time, Pavi's attitude towards myth, traditional culture, decor and
music, and literary-historical categories, and with the love of women. Since for every season
characterized certain fruits (spiritual eyes) Pavi suggests that in accordance with the seasons
to be nurtured, certain aspect of spirituality, and that is the most perfect form of spirituali-
ty summarized in Hazars Ku fruit by princess Ateh, fruit that tastes regardless of the seasons .
Pavi served determinants in segmenting the day, that determine time of the meals: breakfast,
lunch and dinner, and the dinner is the most common. With such time conditions, the writ-
er has used in order to establish one of the of agreement between the collections of short sto-
ries: Iron Curtain (Dinner in Dubrovnik), Horses of St. Mark's (The secret dinner), Russian
Hound (Dinner at the inn 'When the question mark'), Inverted glove (Breakfast), Damas-
cus (Lunch). It is interesting to note that certain sublimation of all timestamps for the time
of day or the day of the week, and sometimes for the season, bring a selection of short stories
New Belgrade Stories. Milorad Pavi suggested in his literature, the answer to the question -
how to confront the eating of time and space, partly illustrated synoptic map as a performance
space in time, and underlining the role of the capital (Belgrade) in gathering, collective and
individual memory, and spirituality.
Keywords: Baroque description, time, space, seasons, breakfast, lunch, dinner, tavern,
food
Vol. 7, No. 1 (2016):
( ) 109-121. 109
UDC 821.163.41-31.09 Prodanovi M.

--:

: ,
.
, , -
, .
-
, . ,
.-
,

. -
, ( )

-
.
: , , , -
,
-
,
-
.
1
nnbilyk@ukr.nett (Nataliya Bilyk, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Institute of Philology,
Ukraine)
110 |
. -
-
apriori -
(.)

(2013:200).
-
,
, -
,
. , -

, -
.
-
.
-
, ( ) -
-
.
-
. -
( 2007: 182184).
-
-
(
2008: 272)
.

-
. -
,

, . , ,
. -
, , -
, , (
1999:221224), , -
.
--:
| 111
-
, , -
., ,
( 1992:80), .-
, ,
(-
2012: 12).
, -
,
, -
,
-
( 1993:12 15).
-
, , , -
.
.
. -
, , , -
, -
(Vujii).
,
. -

, -
. . -
-

, -
. , -

. . -
.
: , ,
, ,
, ,
( 2008: 7396).
. ,
, , ,
112 |
, -
, ,
, -
, , -
, , -
(Merenik2011:13).
-
. -
, -

,
.

-
-
( 2008:114-119).
. -
-
.
-
,
( :76). -
-
, -

. ( 2010:14).
,
-
, , ,
, -
.
,
-
, -

. -

-
.
--:
| 113
.
-

, -
.

,
, (Reckwitz2000:457).
-
-

(Reckwitz2000: 587).
-
:
, ,
,
, . .,
, -
-
,

(2008:286298). -
, , -
,
, , ,
( 2007: 426-427).
- -
-
, -
,
, -
, ,
(). , ,
, -
-
, -
,
-
114 |
. , -
-

(2007:182183), , , -
-
, -

.
, -
., -
-

. , ,
-
(Vujii).
,
-
. -

.
( ,
)
-
.
,
, -
, ,

.

, ,
( 1988) -
,
, -
-
. , ,

. ( 1988)
--:
| 115
, ,
.
. -
, -
-
, (ukalo 1990:33).
, -

,
, ,
.
. . -
-
, ,
(Vuji).
(Vuji) -
. . -
, ,
, , -
.
,
, -
. , -
,
, , --.

, , -
. , , , -
, , ,

.
-
-
. .
,
, -
,
. , ( -
116 |
2)
,
, -
, ,
-
,
..
, , , -
, -
, , ,
, -
. , ,
. ( 2008).
,
, -
,
:
, -
, , -
,

( 2009).
,
, -
, -
-
. .

. -

. : , -
, , , -
, ( 1998), ,
.
2

( : 2009).
--:
| 117

-
,
-
.
-
-
, , -
.
-
, -
-
, ,
. -

, -
. -

.
,
-

, -
( -
)
. -
-
. -

-

,

( 2009, 96).

, , -
( 2008).
, , -
, -
118 |
, -
. ( 2008).
-
, ,

, ,
.

. -
-
, -

, -
, , ,
.
-
-
,
-
. ,

.
, - -
, -- -

, -

-

.
1. , . :
. -

. . 11 (2010): 252-
--:
| 119
261 (Bilyk Nataliya L. Vichnist mifu v myttevosti prozy: teoretychnyj aspekt

mifologichnoji intertekstualnosti v literaturoznavchij semiotyci. Kompatatyvni
doslidzhennya slovjanskih mov i literatur. Pamyati akademika Leonida Bulahovskogo.
Vyp. 11 (2010): 252-261).
2. , , . :
. : - , 2008,
430. (Budnyi Volodymyr, Ilnyckyi Mykola. Porivnalne literaturoznavstvo:
Pidruchnyk. Kyiv: Vydavnychyi dim Kyevo-Mogylanska akademija, 2008).
3. , . . -
XX . ..,
., .. : , 2008,
528 c. (Voloshchuk Yevgeniya V. Charivna fleyta modernu. Duhovno-estetychni
tendenciji nimeckomovnoji modernistskoji literatury XX st. u liryci R.M.Rilke, prozi
T.Manna, dramaturgiji M.Frisha. Kyiv: Vydavnychyj dim Dmytra Burago, 2008).
4. , . correspondance des arts. : -
: . . :
, 2013: 199214. (Generaluk Lesya. Ekfrazys u
konteksti correspondance des arts. U: Ekfrazys: verbalni obrazy mystectva.
Tetyana Bovsunivska red. Kyiv: VPC Kyivskyj universytet, 2013: 199214)
5. , . . : . -
: .
.. . . : --
, 2008: 284309 (Glovinski, Mihal. Intertekstualnist. U:
Teorija literatury v Polshchi. Antologija tekstiv: Druga polovyna XX pochatok XXI
st. Volodymyr Morenets zag.red. Sergiy Jakovenko per. z polsk. Kyiv: Vydavnychyj
dim Kyevo-Mogylanska akademija, 2008: 284309).
6. , . ?? : -
, 2012, 215 . (Damjanov, Sava. ta to bee srpska postmoderna? Beograd,
Slubeni glasnik, 2012).
7. , . . . , 1998.
< http://www.rastko.rs/rastko/delo/10185> 15.05.2013 (orevi, Milo.
Tomas Man. Srbi o znamenitim Nemcima. Beograd, 1998 < http://www.rastko.
rs/rastko/delo/10185> 15.05.2013).
8. , . . .2. : , 1988.
(Zhenett, Zherar. Figury. T.2. Moskva: Izdatelstvo Sabashnikovyh, 1988).
9. , . . : , 1988, 286
. (Kuharenko, Viktor. Interpretacija teksta. Moskva: Nauka, 1988).
10. , . -
. : , , . -
120 |
. . 1 (3) (2008): 113120. (Merenik, Lidija. Mileta Prodanovich

samosvidomist postmodernogo mytca u dobu kryzy. Ukras: istorija, kultura,
mystectvo. Ukrajinsko-serbskyj zbirnyk. Vyp. 1 (3) (2008): 113120).
11. . . ..
. p. . : , 2007, 816. (Noveishyj
filosofskij slovar. Postmodernizm. Gricanov A. gl.nauch.red. i sost. Minsk:
Sovremennyj literator, 2007).
12. , . . , . . ). . 5-6
(2009): 3-105. (Prodanovych, Mileta. Sad u Veneciji. Bilyk, N. per. iz serb. Vsesvit.
5-6 (2009): 3-105).
13. . : , , .
- . . 1 (3) (2008): 7396. (Rozmova z Miletoju
Prodanovychem. Ukras: istorija, kultura, mystectvo. Ukrajinsko-serbskyj zbirnyk.
Vyp. 1 (3) (2008): 7396).
14. , . . : , 1999
(Rudnev, Vladimir P. Slovar kultury XX veka. Moskva: Amograf,f 1999).
15. , . . , 1993, 174.
(Syvachenko, Galyna M. Paradoksy slovackogo romanu. Kyiv, 1993).
16. , . (
). : , 2010, 544. (Tatarenko, Alla. Poetyka formy v
prozi postmodernizmu (dosvid serbskoji literatury). Lviv: PAIS, 2010).
17. , . : -
. . 106.
<http://www.nlobooks.ru/rus/magazines/nlo/196/2072/2092/> 18.11.2013
(Shaytanov, Igor. Triada sovremennoj komparativistiki: globalizacija-intertekst-
-dialog kultur. Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 106. <http://www.nlobooks.ru/
rus/magazines/nlo/196/2072/2092/> 18.11.2013).
18. Jerkov, Aleksandar. Nova tekstualnost: ogledi o srpskoj prozi postmodernog doba.
Podgorica: Oktoih; Niki: Unireks; Beograd: Prosveta, 1992, 232 str.
19. Merenik, Lidija. Mileta Prodanovi: biti na nekom mestu, biti, svuda biti. Beograd:
Fond Vujii kolekcija, 2011.
20. Reckwitz, Andreas. Die Transformation der Kulturtheorien. Zr Entwicklung eines
Theorieprogramms. Weilerswist, 2000.
21. ukalo, Mladen. Okviri i ogledala (pitanja teksta i konteksta). Banja Luka: GLAS,
1990, 244 str.
22. Vujii, ia. Aneo za masna i pijana usta Intervju: Mileta Prodanovi,
knjievnik
i slikar. <http://www.plastelin.com/content/view/362/89/> 15.05.2013.
--:
| 121
Nataliya Bilyk
SEMANTIC EFFICIENCY OF INTERTEXTUAL DIMENSION

IN MILETA PRODANOVIS NOVEL GARDEN IN VENICE
Abstract: Artistic practice of the Mileta Prodanovis novel Garden in Venice proves
promising potential of reminiscences. For the postmodern canon, it is of fundamental efficien-
cy in the creation of meaning. Current precedent for this form of intertextuality proves rem-
iniscence to the name of Thomas Manns novel Death in Venice. It is about the implicit per-
spectives name of the work. In the disposition of the main component of the framework it
is a strong semantic position in relation to text system. Thus, the meaning of the title is in-
cluded in filiation sense of work and enhances it in the process of interaction with the main
text. At present, the principle of semantic compensation and intertextual actualization sense
Thomas Manns poetic practice. Accordingly, notional amount of the M. Prodanovis nov-
el is symptomatic filled with meaning encoded in the title of the novel Death in Venice. There
motivational context that is important for the interpretation of the poetic situation in the nov-
el of Serbian writer and for the result of selection of semantic potential. His provide the ob-
servation researcher of work of Thomas Mann. They pay attention to the concept of an early
phase of the writer, developed in the case of his works of the artists. There there has been
a persistent desire to vary and develop and expand on the work piece to the antithesis, antin-
omies and conflicts. We are talking about a conflict between society and the talent, spirit and
art, between ethics and aesthetics. These contrasting Thomas Mann repeats several times. In
the focus of this phenomenon is the dialectic of feeling pleasure from the art and the simulta-
neous awareness of the threat of substitution of real values fanciful ideals. It makes for predic-
tion in the M. Prodanovis novel the continuity of categories of aesthetics and ethics in over-
all logic mizhtekstovyh reflexes. External intertextual correlate of header Prodanovis work
in the interpretation of the scholars of Thomas Mann, produces the semantic line in the Ser-
bian novel. It is consonant with the culmination of the work of content. Here the conscience
is devoid of a position of the highest human values, the soul is on the verge of good and evil.
Wrong choice of man is the beginning of the end. This semantic trend clearly seen in the plot
the fate of the heroine of Garden in Venice Marceline Develych. In this way reconstruction ac-
tivity allusions to highlight an important semantic fragment Serbian novel. Its content addi-
tionally updated semantic perspective of the prototekst of culture and aesthetics of art. In this
case occur the semantic transgression of the moral content. It turns out to be the main criteri-
on of their effectiveness in local creating a sense. It can be positioned as a component of gen-
eral semantic foundations of existential line of work Garden in Venice.
Keywords: Mileta Prodanovi, Garden in Venice, intertextuality, reminiscence, se-
mantics
Vol. 7, No. 1 (2016):
( ) 123-133. 123
UDC 821.163.41-31.09 Gatalica A.
Dr Vesna Cidilko1
Humboltov univerzitet u Berlinu
Institut za slavistiku
Nemaka
DOKUMENTARNO I IMAGINARNO U
U ALEKSANDRA GATALICE
VELIKOM RATU
Apstrakt: U ovom tekstu istrauje se odnos dokumentarnog i faktografskog s jedne stra-
ne, odnosno imaginarnog s druge, na pimeru romana Veliki rat Aleksandra Gatalice. Takoe,
uz ukazivanje na prevlast imaginarnog i bliskost borhesovskoj tradiciji, kritiki se predstavlja-
ju tumaenja koja favorizuju iskljuivo realistiki pristup u umetnikom oblikovanju Prvog
svetskog rata kao knjievne teme.
Kljune rei: Aleksandar Gatalica, Veliki rat, istorijska graa, ludizam, fantastika, Pr-
vi svetski rat
1. Uvodne napomene
Roman Veliki ratt Aleksandra Gatalice, objavljen 2012. u biblioteci Putevi iz-
davake kue Mono i Manjana iz Beograda predstavlja, po navodima na korica-
ma svog prvog izdanja, zavrni deo jedne vrste trilogije o XX veku ija dva druga de-
la ine zbirka tematski povezanih pria sa kraja devedesetih godina prologa stolea
Vekk (Gatalica 1999)2 i roman Nevidljivi (Gatalica 2008). Ako je verovati izdavau, nit
koja povezuje sve ove tri, kako se tvrdi, potpuno samostalne knjige3, je tematizova-
nje dvadesetog veka4 i svega ta se tokom predhodnog stolea dogodilo, onoga ta po-
vezujemo sa ovim po mnogo emu specifinim delom novije istorije ili dovodimo u
vezu sa time. Prvi svetski rat je u tom okviru svakako jedan od centralnih dogaaja i
1
vesna.cidilko@staff.hu-berlin.de (Vesna Cidilko, Humboldt University of Berlin, Institute of Slavic Stud-
ies, Germany)
2
U nemakom prevodu Gudrun Krivokapi objavljen 2013. Na do sada objavljene nemake prevode
Gataliinih dela upuuje bibliografija na kraju ovoga teksta.
3
Kako to itamo takoe na koricama prvog izdanja Velikog rata.
4
Izmeu Veka i Velikog rata postoje i formalne analogije- u oznaavanju glava romana koje se dri godi-
na na primer.
124 | Vesna Cidilko
motiva novije knjievnosti. Tematska osnova romana pokree izmeu ostalog pita-
nje mesta i uloge dokumentarnog sloja knjievnog teksta. Bavljenje ovim aspektom
knjievnog dela o kome je re (i koji predstavlja i jedan od obaveznih vidova gleda-
nja knjievne kritike na ovu knjigu5) namee se ve na samom poetku lektire Gata-
liinog romana gde pre prve glave nailazimo na napomenu autora (Gatalica, 2012:
/5/) o valjanim i pouzdanim svedocima bez ije pomoi se ne moe pisati o do-
gaajima iji svedok pisac nije bio pisac iji su oni oi i ui i pisac koji nas uve-
rava da e italac u knjizi nai stvarnu priu, hroniku i dokument u isto vreme i vernu
sliku istorijskih dogaaja. Napomena autora, kao i spisak junaka romana koji joj sle-
di (Gatalica, 2012: 7-9) nas uvruje u predstavi da je re o knjievnom delu koje se
oslanja na dokumentarnu grau6. Dokumentarni karakter romana podcrtava i vizu-
elni materijal koji je pridodat na poetku svake glave romana izraz pridodat i-
ni mi se veoma bitnim jer kroz naglaeno fiziko odvajanje od knjievnog teksta
a time i narativnog dela knjige sugerie se dokumentarna uloga i funkcija koja preva-
zilazi ilustrativnu inkorporaciju ovih inae poznatih, klasinih fotodokumenat7 u
roman. Ovu tezu potkrepljuje i injenica da nije re samo o dobro znanim fotogra-
fijama poznatih linosti, ve nalazimo i na primer dobrotvornu dopisnu kartu srp-
skih ratnika iz 1916. ili sliku nepoznatih belogardejaca na jednom od brodova koji
su 1918. isplovili iz sevastopoljske luke u pravcu Brindizija i u izgnanstvo.
Postavlja se pitanje, da li i u kojoj meri roman ispunjava time sugerisana i pobu-
ena oekivanja. Paljivi italac e ve na samom poetku biti skeptian kod na-
voenja stotina svedoka u pievoj napomeni, s obzirom da je pred nama roma-
neskno tivo, a ne opsena nauna studija, u sumnju dovode i neki navodi locirani u
takoe u istoj meri poput napomene nekonvencionalnom spisku junaka romana po-
put A fon B, pijun ili Ljubomir Vulovi, major, osuenik na smrt ili pak oi-
ti anahronizam u sluaju Sergeja estuhina, neurohirurga, da navedemo samo
neke od primera. Podela junaka romana po zaraenim stranama8 u ovom spisku
oigledno nije konsekventna, ne odgovara stvarnosti ne samo to je Adolf Hitler
5
U svakoj od do sada izalih recenzija i intervjua ulozi dokumentarnog sloja se posveuje veliki deo pa-
nje.
6
Za Vladimira Gvozdena tu se manifestuje tenja za doaravanjem pluraliteta istine o prolosti, up. Gvo-
zden, 2013: 52.
7
Fotografija hapenju Gavrila Principa neposredno posle atentata, Paul Vitgentajn pred jedan od kon-
cerata za levu ruku 1919, Mata Hari u kostimu za jedan od nastupa godine 1917 i.t.d. potpuni spisak
up. Gatalica, 2012: /4/.
8
Po ovoj logici bi eventualno Mati Hari, polazei od teze o njenoj pijunskoj delatnosti u korist Nema-
ke, mesto bilo i pod odrednicom Nemaka, s obzirom i na to da je ova istorijska figura okarakterisa-
na jednoznano a ne na primer kao plesaica i pijunka.
Dokumentarno i imaginarno u Velikom ratu Aleksandra Gatalice | 125
roen i bio graanin Austrougarske, ve i Belija Paul Vitgentajn ne potie iz Ne-

make, pedeset verdenskih junaka se pojavljuju kako pod odrednicom Francu-
ska, tako i pod onom Nemaka, itd. Skepsa je oigledno na mestu u ovom na-
glaeno postmodernistikom i ne samo u odnosu na dokumentarno ludistiki tekst
koji je puno vie od puke hronoloke slike i faktografije jednog od traumatskih raz-
doblja prologa veka. To meutim nikako ne ini obsoletnom analizu udela i odno-
sa dokumentarnog i imaginarnog u Gataliinom romanu.
2. Od dokumentarnog ka imaginarnom ili o autonomnom

svetu rei
Sam Gatalica na jednom od predstavljanja knjige po reima novinskog izvetaa
u svom romanu polazei od dokumentarnog putem oneobiavanja stvara autonom-
ni svet rei, dakle knjievni tekst, u kome je odnos imaginarnog i realnog po pravi-
lu vieznaan i sve drugo samo ne jednostavan. Tako nastaje ovaj roman oslonjen
i na faktografiju, ali najprije na snanu matu, jer bez mate nema romana i knjiev-
nosti uopte9. U ovoj evropskoj fresci Prvog svetskog rata ( Jergovi, 2013) nala-
zimo sve centralne injenice koje su deo stvarnog, istorijskog toka prve ratne kata-
strofe svetskih razmera, sve ono poznato iz udbenika istorije, poevi od rovovske
borbe i upotrebe bojnih otrova, do pandemije kojom je obeleen zavretak ratnih
dejstava. I naglaavanje nepotrebnog, suvinog i prekomernog, masovnog umiranja
i stradanja, smrti kao imperativa istorijskog trenutka koji ostaje najupeatljivija ka-
rakteristika i centralne posledice, rezultata onoga ta se dogaalo izmeu avgu-
sta 1914. i 1918. Osim ovih poznatih i esto navoenih injenica Gatalica tematizuje
i pitanje uea u ratu Srba iz Austougarske monarhije, takoe jednu od faktograf-
skih datosti, ta ne predstavlja potpuni novum u novijoj srpskoj knjievnosti10, ali
ni u kom sluaju ne spada u kanonsku sliku Prvog svetskog rata u ovoj junoslo-
venskoj knjievnos11. Sve to, faktografsko i dokumentarno, Gatalica u svom romanu
9
Tako autor na predstavljanju romana na budvanskom festivalu Grad teatar 2013. godine, up. Lajo-
vi, 2013 i u jednom od intervjua u Novostima, up. orevi, 2013.
10
Videti u ovom kontekstu Knjigu o Milutinu Danka Popovia.
11
Po miljenju Miljenka Jergovia Gatalica meutim nije otiao dovoljno daleko: Tu je Gatalica mogao
biti subverzivan u odnosu na srpski petrificirani mit o Velikom ratu, a nije bio. Tako je izbjegao i stvarnu
identitetsku dramu austrijskoga generala, banijskog Srbina, Svetozara Borojevia von Bojne, tumaei je
kroz dilemu o istini i lai, to nije nuno pogreno, ali se nadaje komfornim, graanskim i nacionalnim
itanjima, a ne onome to takva pria, sudbinski i osobno jest., up. Jergovi, 2013. Kritike tonove na-
lazimo i kod Vladimira Gvozdena, koji smatra da je sudbina sudbina generala Borojevia opisana na
trivijalan nain, up. Gvozden, 2013: 52. Sam Gatalica u jednom intervjuu kae da mu se inilo /.../
da su dosadanji srpski romani pisani mahom o vojnikoj strani Velikog rata, a moja ambicija je bila da
126 | Vesna Cidilko
preplie sa imaginarnim i fantastinim, stvarajui neobian konglomerat12, do sada

nepoznat u srpskoj knjievnosti o Prvom svetskom ratu koja je potpuno drugaijeg
karaktera13. Ovaj ni u kom sluaju realistiki prosede14, koji neki od kritiara (koji iz
nerazumljivih razloga realistiku priu o ovom ratu smatraju jedino opravdanom)
vide kao razlog da je Gataliin roman neuspeo15, je pre svega mogunost individual-
nog vienja i obrade istorijske grae koja se u potpunosti uklapa u knjievni prose-
de autora, obeleen znatnim i centralnim udelom fantastinog u transpoziciji stvar-
nosnog i faktografskog, potpuno u duhu borhesovske tradicije16.
3. Fantastini raspleti ili o naraciji i stvarnosnom

Mada Aleksandar Gatalica tvrdi da se u Velikom ratu istorijskih injenica dri
u punoj meri do granice verovatnog i mogueg (Radisavljevi, 2012) da bi me-
utim u istom dahu svoj iskaz relativizovao reima da ono ta u svom romanu navo-
oslikam itavu epohu as kada je jedna Evropa umrla i oslobodila mesto za neku drugu., up. Radi-
savljevi, 2012.
Potpuno negativno vienje ovog po miljenju recensenta istorijskog romana, nalazimo kod Vladimira
Arsenia, up. Arseni, 2013. Kritiki tonovi preovlauju i u recenziji Zorana Jankovia Predah u sivoj
zoni, up. Jankovi, 2013.
12
Koji je meutim kako to primeuje i kritiarka Politike Jasmina Vrbovac potpuno u duhu vremena:
Sledei tezu po kojoj je svaka istorija zapravo konstrukcija, a ne rekonstrukcija, interpretacija, a ne ap-
solutna istina, odnosno tezu koja se od Niea, preko postmodernista do teoretiara novog istorizma za-
lae za to da je istorija samo jo jedan narativni diskurs, pripovedanje o onome to verujemo da se dogo-
dilo, Gatalica ukrta dokument sa mitom, istoriju sa fantastikom i injenicu sa snovidnim podjednako
afirmiui realno i faktografsko, koliko i zaumno, snovidno, fantastino , up. Vrbovac, 2013.
13
U obrazloenju irija prilikom dodele Ninove nagrade za najbolji roman na srpskom jeziku obja-
vljen 2012. godine navodi se izmeu ostalog kao razlog da je odluka prevagnula u korist Velikog rata
jer se ovaj roman izdvaja od ostalih po umetnikoj reviziji odnosa prema Prvom svetskom ratu (po-
dvukla V.C.), citirano po Saoptenju za medije nedeljnika Ninod 14. Januara 2013. godine.
14
Ne bih se sloila sa Miljenkom
j Jergoviem
g kojij tvrdi da autor /../ vrlo ppaljivo, sa darom za minija-
turu, upisuje u svoju knjigu duh epohe. ini to drei se realistinog prosedea, ali i odmiui se od nje-
ga, fantastinim, snovitim i fibrioznim epizodama i sliicama /.../, up. Jergovi, 2013.
15
Tako Haris Imamovi, blizak beogradskom Betonu, u tendencioznom tekstu More preliveno u
evir - negativnoj kritici objavljenoj u sarajevskom asopisu Dani i prenetoj na portal Betona
, up. Imamovi, 2013. Vladimir Gvozden svoju kritiku zasniva na slinoj osnovi, pri emu Gvozdena pri-
marno smeta ne meavina dokumentarnog i fantastinog, ve po njegovom miljenju nepotrebna pre-
vlast ovog drugog u konkretnom knjievnom tivu koje inae nudi utisak dobrog i modernog doku-
mentarca, vienog na nekom od kablovskih kanala i koje Gvozden pretpostavlja ve vienom jedne
vie ili manje uverljive, borhesovske fantastike, up. Gvozden, 2013: 52. Uz to je za ovog kritiara i Gata-
liin sveznajui pripoveda potpuni promaaj.
16
Na to ukazuje i sam romansijer u intervjuu Politici iz februara 2014, up. Radisavljevi, 2012-
di nisu istorijske injenice, iako je prvi korak u svakom od tih fantastinih rasple-
ta istorijski zasnovan (Radisavljevi, 2012). U izlaganju e se pokuati na nekoliko
primera pokazati mehanizam pretoavanja injeninog u literarno uz pokuaj da se
bar delom osvetli kako je ve reeno kompleksni odnos dokumentarnog i imaginar-
nog u knjievnosti.
3.1 Gijom Apoliner
Da Veliki ratt ni u kom sluaju nije pokuaj verne rekonstukcije jednoga doba,
ve svet koji je /autor/ stvorio od krhotina stvarnosti i mate (Gvozden, 2013)
pokazuje u romanu figura pesnika Gijoma Apolinera. Apoliner se pojavljuje u odelj-
ku Neko sve radi dva puta17 posveenom ratnoj godini 1915. i u zavrnom odelj-
ku o 1918. godini na prvim stranicama teksta Ja sam sada mrtav (Gatalica, 2012:
463-465). Navodi iz Apolinerove biografije poput imena i epizoda iz privatnog i-
vota meutim samo delom odgovaraju pravom injeninom stanju. Tako pesnik
koga Gatalica na vie mesta apostrofira kao Vihlelma Alberta Vloimjea Apolinari
Kostrovickog18 ve od 1898. koristi vie pseudonima, izmeu ostalog i Gijom Apo-
liner koji e od 1902 i objavljivanja njegove prve pripovetke19 stalno koristiti. Kra-
jem 1911. Apoliner dolazi na ideju da se naturalizuje u Francuskoj u kojoj ivi od svoje
petnaeste godine; odmah po izbijanju rata, dakle 191420, prijavljuje se kao dobrovo-
ljac, ali beuzpeno jer je jedan od njegovih dedova Poljak koji potie iz Ruskog carstva
i Apoliner time strani dravljanin. U decembru 1914. pesnik podnosi zahtev za fran-
cusko dravljanstvo i istovremeno zvaninu promenu imena u Gijom Apoliner, koje
e dobiti tek u martu 1916. Od ranog leta 1915. Apoliner je meutim ve na frontu.
Njegova najpoznatija zbirka Alkoholi izala je 1913, a od Marije Laranson koja je ina-
e bila slikarka i ije slikarske pokuaje je podsticao (Campa, 2009: 32-33) rastaje se
posle burne svae jo 1912. Ona ne odlazi odmah u paniju i ne udaje se neposred-
no po rastanku od Apolinera21, ve se seli kod slikara Sera Fere (Serge Frat) i baro-
nice dOettingen, kasnije kod drugih prijatelja (Campa, 2009: 53). Apoliner putuje
za Nicu, ali 3. septembra 1914, i tu zbilja upoznaje Lujzu de Kolinji-atijon, tempe-
17
Up. Gatalica, 2012: 132-135; osim Apolinera kome su posveene tri od 14 stranica ovde se poja-
vljuje i niz drugih likova.
18
Samo tri puta je re o Gijomu Apolineru ili Apolineru up. Gatalica, 2012: 132, 134, 135.
19
L hrsiarque et Cie (Jeretik i kompanija) godine 1910.
20
Tanije 5. avgusta 1914, vidi Campa, 2009: 72. Vie o pesnikovom ivotu u pievoj biografiji iste au-
torke, vidi Campa, 2009.
21
To e uiniti kasnije.
128 | Vesna Cidilko
ramentnu i vatrenu kontesu slobodnih nazora i sklonu avanturama, sa kojom e u de-

cembru iste godine u Nimu gde je na obuci za oficira i gde e zaista sa Lu proiveti
devet vatrenih noi22, iji inicijator je meutim svakako dobrim delom sama kontesa.
Poinje vatrena ljubavna prepiska (Apollinaire, 1990), u martu 1915. Lu i Apoliner
se sreu u marseljskom hotelu Terminus i rastaju, delom i zbog toga jer kontesa
nije slobodna i eli da se posveti drugom ljubavniku koji je takoe na frontu, nasta-
vljajui meutim svoju prepisku iji veliki deo predstavljaju Apolinarovi stihovi po-
sveeni Lu i koja traje do februara 1916 (Campa, 2009: 78). U vozu iz Nice za Mar-
sej 2. januara 1915. Apoliner upoznaje mladu nastavnicu knjievnosti Madlen Paes
(Madeleine Pags) sa kojom takoe poinje da se dopisuje i u koju se zaljubljuje kao
i ona u njega. Ova prepiska tee paralelno sa onom sa Lu, Apoliner e se sa Madlen
sresti vie puta u Oranu, krajem godine dobija odsustvo, boravi sa Madlen u Aliru.
Dana 17. marta 1916. biva ranjen u glavu i time osloboen ratne slube, ova srena
povreda dovodi do toga da se pesnik, u meuvremenu deziluzionirani nekadanji
zagovornik rata, 19. aprila vraa u Pariz, gde biva hospitalizovan u takozvanoj Ita-
lijanskoj bolnici na Kej dOrseju. Godine 1918. Apoliner ponovo dospeva u bolni-
cu zbog zapaljenja plua. Jedna od bolniarki je Amlia-Jacqueline Kolb, zvana Ru-
by koju je upoznao jo 1916. i sa kojom e se u maju iste godine oeniti. Poetkom
novembra oboljeva od panskog gripa kome podlee ve 9. novembra iste godine.
Uporeujui gore navedeno iz Apolinerove biografije sa romanom lako je utvrdi-
ti da Gatalica crta samo iseak iz pesnikovog ivota i da sa izuzetkom pesnikove smrti
koja zaista datira iz 1918. godine kao i u romanu, odstupa od hronoloke linije, me-
ajui pri tom ne samo vremenski okvir, ve i same dogaaje koje prevashodno sme-
ta u godinu 1915. Lepoticu dugih trepavica, nastavnicu Madlen Pages Apoliner
kod Gatalice upoznaje pre Lu, fikcija je prijava u Legiju stranaca i kupovina rat-
ne uniforme i opreme, epizoda koja se tie Romena Rolana i atmosfere u Parizu rat-
ne 1915. godine, kao i objanjenje nastanka prve Apolinerove pesnike zbirke i tvrd-
nja da je Apoliner bio enfant terible pariske umetnike scene, kineske puionica
opijuma (makar i ona quasi) u ratnom Nimu, itd. U romanu Apoliner (ili pripo-
veda u koga se lik modernistikog pesnika utapa) apostrofira Kralja Ibija bez da
se uputi na to da je re o knjievnoj figuri. Poznate injenice Gatalica menja i prila-
gouje svojoj slici i stilsko-izraajnom sloju svog romana, pa tako telesno intenzivna
veza i devetodnevna erotska epizoda u Nimu mutira u voenje ljubavi po Kamasu-
tri, a prepiska doivljava svoj vrhunac u slanju stidnih dlaica nekadanjem ljubav-
niku. Iz svega toga rezultira jedan skoro podsmeljiv, neobavezan i pre svega trivilizu-
22
Lu dolazi 7. decembra odmah sutradan po Apolinerovom (6. decembar) dolasku i ostaje do 15. de-
cembra, o kratkoj i burnoj ljubavnoj vezi vidi Campa, 2009: 72ff.
jui ton koji se pojaava kroz jezik putem preferisanja govornog segmenta23 i tonskog
stakata kratkih reenica, esto samo iz jedne rei. Na neki nain se time zaista tri-
vijalizuje cela epizoda i umesto oca nadrealizma i jednog od pionira erotskih
i pornografskih tekstova prologa veka, nalazimo sliku boema koja se pretapa u klie
(vino, opijum, ene i seks), jednog Apolinera sa kojim je italac, poznavajui sve nje-
gove slabosti i razoarenja, skoro na ti i koji time gubi znaaj i uticaj prave, istorijske
linosti, postajui iskljuivo knjievni lik koga neinformisani italac iskljuivo kao ta-
kvog i recipira. I koji je kao takav zamenljiv svakim drugim anonimusom.
Kao trei narativni zahvat kod inkorporacije dokumentarnog nalazimo svesni
anahronizam, ve na samom poetku teksta, u kljunom motivu Apolinera kao stran-
ca u Francuskoj u kojoj je nepoeljan i sumnjiv i nailazi na tekoe koje su vie ne-
go oigledno slika naeg dananjeg vremena, a ne Francuske poetkom Prvog svet-
skog rata i tokom njega.
Da autoru nije stalo do dokumentarnog slikanja epohe pokazuje i to da injenica
da je Apoliner podlegao panskom gripu ostaje izvan okvira prie. Njegova smrt se
prevraa u fantazmagoriju inkorporacijom preraene epizode sa hapenjem iz 191124.
Ouavanje istorijskih figura pisac izmeu ostalog sprovodi i putem redukcije
tako Gatalica ne navodi (naravno, moe se napomenuti) opte poznatu injenicu da
je postojalo oduevljenje za rat, ve samo itamo Vilhelm Albert Vloimje Apo-
linari Kostrovicki eli u rat (Gatalica, 2012: 132). Reenici predhodi opis Apoli-
nerovog navodnog alkoholiarskog kapaciteta i renomea koji ga kod Gatalice oi-
gledno motivie da napie svoju prvu pesniku zbirku signifikantnog naslova, ali ga
to ne zadovoljava on eli u rat25. Tako nastaje slika nekoga ko vie lii na iskuenju
nasilja i rata podlone mlade ljude naeg vremena, nego na ponete patriotskim i dru-
gim motivima dobrovoljce iz 1914. kojima je pripadao istojiski Apoliner.
3.2 Alice Ernestine Prin, Kiki sa Monparnasa
Slino kao u sluaju Gijoma Apolinera Aleksandar Gatalica u svoj roman inkor-
porira lik Kiki sa Monparnasa, dobrovoljke i modela kako je pisac oznaava
u svom spisku knjievnih likova. Na prvi pogled ini se da se radi o imaginarnom li-
23
trepke, ona je obina vrckavica, ona eli neto poizdalje(Gatalica, 2012:133), ima pro-
liv, krmaa plavog mastila (Gatalica, 2012: 134)
24
Apoliner je, zajedno sa Pikasom, bio indirektno umean u krau umetnikih predmeta iz Luvra i
proveo je izvesno vreme u zatvoru, vidi Campa, 2009: 44-49.
25
Niko nije mogao toliko da popije kod ia Libiona u Rotondu. Niko nije mogao toliko aa da obr-
ne kod ia kombesa u Klozeri de lila. Moda jedino Amadseo Modiljani. Sa takvim iskustvom pie zbir-
ku Alkoholi, ali... Vilhelm Albert Vloimje Apolinari Kostrovicki eli u rat. (Gatalica, 2012: 132).
130 | Vesna Cidilko
ku koji potpuno odgovara klieu slikarskih modela i muza. Ovakvom utisku u veli-
koj meri doprinosi izraz dobrovoljka ovde oigledno upotrebljen ironino kori-
stei dvoznanost same rei locirane u argonskom sloju govornog jezika26. Kiki
de Montparnasse, Kiki sa Monparnasa, koju su nazivali i kraljicom ovog pariskog
boemskog kvarta, roena je kao Alice Ernestine Prin 1901. u Chtillon-sur-Seine
u francuskoj provinciji27. Gatalica i ovde ignorie vremenski okvir adaptirajui ga
po svom nahoenju i narativnim potrebama, menjajui istovremeno iz istih razloga i
faktografske injenice. Tako pomera Kikino poznanstvo sa slikarem Fuitom28 u go-
dinu 1917, mada Kiki tek od 1921. poinje da pozira ovom japanskom slikaru sa ko-
jim e je vezivati doivotno prijateljstvo, slika njihovu fiktivnu ljubavnu avanturu29,
ukljuujui u sve i slikara Moise Kislinga30 koji u romanu postaje prvi Kikin ljubav-
nik-slikar31 a u stvarnosti mu Kiki samo pozira i to tek od 1918. tokom dvadesetih
godina, postavi njegov omiljeni model (Gatalica, 2012: 364-365). Istorijskoj istini
odgovara navod da je Kiki prve ratne godine radila u fabrici obue u kojoj su cokule
palih na frontu popravljane i pripremane za ponovnu upotrebu32, dok je naglaena
seksualizacija koja prelazi u grotesku u slici voenja ljubavi sa mrtvima (Gatalica,
2012: 232-234, 320, 363, 429-432, 475-476) plod autoreve fantazije i u sklopu nje-
govog koncepta predstavljanja Kiki kao raspusne mlade ene koja osim seksa kao da
nema drugih preokupacija. Istorijska Alis Prin se i sama okuala u slikarstvu i knjiev-
26
Uporedi znaenjsku razliku i vrednosne implikacije imenice mukog roda dobrovoljac i ako se ne
podlee diktatu politike korektnosti vieznaju seksualno konotirane, sa pejorativnim prizvukom
imenice enskog roda dobrovoljka.
27
Kao vanbrano dete devetnaestogodinje Marie Ernestine Prin, koja ubrzo potom odlazi u Pariz osta-
vljajui Alis kod bake. Godine 1913. Alis odlazi u Pariz kod majke, gde kratko nastavlja da ide u kolu,
ali 1914. majka je ispisuje iz kole i Alis poinje da zarauje za ivot.
28
Tsuguharu- Lonard Foujita, roen 1886. u Tokiju, preminuo 1968. u Cirihu.
29
Mada je Kiki bila ena slobodnih nazora, sa slikarem Fuitom su je sa velikom verovatnoom u to do-
ba vezivale iskljuivo profesionalne i kasnije prijateljske veze. Svih tih godina ona je bila u vrstoj emo-
tivnoj vezi - a sam Fuita upravo godine 1917 upoznaje u Rotondi slikarku i model Fernande Barrez
(1892-1960) sa kojom se venava posle dvonedeljnog poznanstva. Brak je harmonian do 1928, kada
Fuita otkriva inflagranti svoju enu u krevetu sa svojim bratom od strica Koyanagijem. Tokom sledeih
godina i Kiki je bila jedna od njegovih metresa.
30
Wolf Kisling de Brody, Moise roen 1891. u Krakovu, preminuo 1953.
31
U stvarnosti je to Chaim Soutin, roen 1893. u Belorusiji, koji 1943. umire u SAD.
32
Radu u fabrici predhodi prvo zaposlenje koje meutim nije imalo nikakve veze sa konzervama hra-
ne, a sledi mu relativno kratko vreme 1917. kada Kiki radi kao sluavka u porodici jednog od pariskih
pekara.
nosti kao i u glumi33 i bila jedna od najharizmatinijih figura u krugu avangardista iz-
meu dva rata. Takoe i jedna od prvih emancipovanih ena svog stolea, na ta de-
limino upuuje scena njenog prvog nastupa u uvenom kafeu pariskih boema:
Ta nova namigua ulazi u Rotond. Izgleda velianstveno. Meavina grke ka-

rijatide i deije igrake. Zauzima sama sto (Skaredno!), pali cigaretu (Neuve-
no! Dama!), prekrta noge, zadie haljinu tako da svi vide kako joj se butine
produuju u zadnjicu, i praena zadirkivanjem, poruuje apsint (Nemako pi-
e!). (Gatalica, 2012: 363)
Akcenat je ovde meutim ipak ne na emancipovanoj, ve na raspusnoj Alis Prin.

Plod autoreve fantazije je i dramatini rasplet ljubavne veze Japanca Fuite i Ki-
ki koji Gatalica locira u 1918. godinu, ukljuujui u svoju scenu u Rotondi i (da-
kako izmenjenu) Alisinu stvarnu svau i prekid odnosa sa majkom posle naputa-
nja mesta sluavke 1917. godine (Gatalica, 2012: 429). Za razliku od uobiajenog
Gataliinog prosedea skoro faktografski deluje inkorporacija dokumentarnog u pa-
sau o emotivnoj vezi Kiki i Mana Reja, istina umotana u motiv ljubavnog lu-
dila koje je po Gatalici vladalo Parizom poslednje ratne godine (Gatalica, 2012:
431-432). Kao i kod Apolinera, i slika Kiki u romanu deluje tipski i klieizirano, sve-
dena na raspusnost i erotiku, o emu svedoi i njena replika u zavrnom odeljku
romana Nadam se da e novi svet34.
4. Umesto zakljuka
Povezivanje istorijske i imaginarne grae po nekim shvatanjima odgovara savre-
menoj poetici35. Dokumentarno i faktografsko u Gataliinom romanu nesumnjivo
posreduje iskustvo fragmentarnosti o kome u vezi sa novijim srpskim romanom
govori Vladimir Gvozden (Gvozden, 2013: 50). Sam dokumentarni pristup manife-
stuje se meutim jedino u tome da Gatalica polazi od izabranih faktografskih inje-
nica, izmenjujui ih po svojoj volji, esto do granice neprepoznavanja. Fokus nara-
tivnog postupka autora lei u borhesovskom ouavanju i naglaenom ludizmu ime
se dokidaju dokumentarnost i patetika, relativiu ratne strahote i ono za ta su ljudi
33
Igrala je u nekoliko surealistikih filmova Mana Reja, upoznala je Sergeja Ajzentajna koga je portre-
tisala decembra 1929.
34
up. Gatalica, 2012: 475-476.
35
Uz u ovom konkretnom sluaju implicirano okretanje malom oveku u mitskom prostoru i ironijski
pristup prolosti, vidi Radman, 2013.
132 | Vesna Cidilko
sposobni. Za Gatalicu poigravanje sa faktografskim predstavlja i mogunost ironiza-

cije, podsmevanja, graenja grotesknih efekata tako u verdenskoj bici na nema-
koj strani gine i izvesni Samuel (sic!) Hitler36. Odstupanje od stvarne hronoloke li-
nije pri tom je ono ta je najmanje provokativno.
U ovom kontekstu se izmeu ostalog postavlja pitanje za koga pie Gatalica: za
itaoca koji e odmah prozreti njegove izmene faktografskih injenica to jest za obra-
zovanog itaoca ili relativno obrazovanog jer autor iznosi dobro poznate, osnov-
ne injenice a ne neko specijalizovano znanje? Ili se za pisca to pitanje u sutini
ni ne postavlja, jer mu je na prvom mestu bitno borhesovsko poigravanje i ouava-
nje? I jer on rauna sa svojom publikom, koja poznaje njegovo delo i iskljuivo to i
oekuje? Ovo drugo se ini verovatnijim.
Osim toga, skoro je nemogue pisati o nekom istorijskom dogaaju, pogoto-
vo takvih razmera kao to je Prvi svetski rat bez da se u knjievnom tekstu pojavlju-
ju istorijske linosti, makar samo u komentarima i slinom. Ve i zbog same ideje
da se pokae zajednitvo stradanja malog oveka i velikih ljudi, inkorporacija
dokumentarnog u roman namee se kao neizbena. Modeliranje istorijskskih liko-
va u knjievnosti je i inae neophodno i neto potpuno legitimno, meutim posta-
vlja se pitanje naina i mere promena istorijskih injenica - i njihovog cilja. Gatali-
in cilj nam se iniborhesovsko ouavanje uz svoenje na obino i svakodnevno
istorijskog i faktografskog, nivelacija umetnosti i ivota, slavnih i obinih ljudi is-
tih u svojim slabostima, enjama, ivotu i smrti.
Za Ninov iri je umetnika revizija odnosa prema Prvom svetskom ratu ra-
zlog za dodeljivanje ove prestine knjievne nagrade upravo Velikom ratu37 revizi-
ja oigledno shvaena kao redundantnost faktografskog i dokumentarnog u literar-
noj obradi ove bez sumnje centralne teme novije istorije.
LITERATURA:
Apollinaire, Guillaume. Lhrsiarque et Cie. Paris, 1910.

Apollinaire, Guillaume. Alcools. Paris, 1913.
Apollinaire, Guillaume. Lettres Lou. Paris, 1990.
Arseni, Vladimir. Read on. Aleksandar Gatalica, Veliki rat. Pompezna panora-
ma. e-novine, 7.1.2013.
36
Gatalica, 2012: 237. Ovo nije jedino mesto gde se aluzira na budueg vou Treeg Rajha sa kojim se
u odeljku Pandemija konstatuje kraj Prvog svetskog rata, up. Gatalica, 2012: 445-446.
37
Kako to stoji u odluci irija, koju je Vasa Pavkovi proitao na konferenciji za novinare, up. NIN 2013.
Campa, Laurence. Apollinaire. La posie perptuelle. Paris 2009.

orevi, Bane. Aleksandar Gatalica o knjizi godine Veliki rat. Veernje novosti,
19.2.2013.
Gatalica, Aleksandar. Vek. Beograd: Stubovi kulture, 1999.
Gatalica, Aleksandar. Beograd za strance. Beograd: Filip Vinji, 2004.
Gatalica, Aleksandar. Nevidljivi. Beograd: Zavod za udbenike, 2008.
Gatalica, Aleksandar. Veliki rat. Beograd: Mono i manjana, 2012.
Gatalica, Aleksandar. 2013a. Jahrhundert. Klagenfurt: Wieser, 2013.
Gatalica, Aleksandar. 2013b. Belgrad fr Auslnder. Klagenfurt: Wieser, 2013..
Gvozden, Vladimir. Ovo nije kraj. Jedan pogled na srpski roman u 2012. godini.
Polja, god. 58, broj 479 (2012): 49-63.
Imamovi, Haris. More preliveno u evir. Beton, br. 141, 2013.
Jergovi, Miljenko. Aleksandar Gatalica: Veliki rat. 2013 (http://www.jergovic.
com/preporuke/aleksandar-gatalica-veliki-rat/).
Popovi, Danko. Knjiga o Milutinu. Beograd: Knjievne novine, 1985.
Vesna Cidilko
DOCUMENTARY AND IMAGINARY IN

THE GREAT WAR BY ALEXANDER GATALICA
Abstract: This paper examines the relationship between documentary and factual on
one side, and imaginary on the other, taking the example of the novel The Great Warr by Ser-
bian author Aleksandra Gatalica. In that respect, it is pointed out to the predominance of the
imaginary and closeness to the Borgesian tradition over the realistic narrative approach in the
mentioned novel.
Keywords: Aleksandar Gatalica, The Great War, historical sources, ludism, fantasy, World
War I

Vol. 7, No. 1 (2016):
( ) 135-151. 135
UDC 821.163.6-14.09 Kosma C.

Dr Zoran Boi1
Univerza v Novi Gorici
Fakulteta za humanistiko
Slovenija
DIDAKTINI MODEL UNE VERIGE ODLOMKOV: NA

PRIMERU NOVELE TANTADRUJJ CIRILA KOSMAA
Povzetek: lanek obravnava primer olske interpretacije srednje dolgega pripovedne-
ga besedila, in sicer po modelu une verige odlomkov z vpraanji za tesno branje. Ta didakti-
ni pristop se je sicer na Slovenskem uveljavljal e pred drugo svetovno vojno, bolj sistemati-
no uresniitev pa je doivel z izidom delovnih zvezkov za domae branje Zlati poljub in Poljub
zlata leta 1998. Po skoraj dveh desetletjih olske rabe je as za natannejo presojo pristopa
oz. njegove uporabnosti, tudi s pomojo primerjave dveh unih verig, nastalih po znani Kos-
maevi noveli Tantadruj. lanek zakljuuje primer une verige, ki Tantadrujevo iskanje sree
povezuje s pripovedovalevim iskanjem ustvarjalnega navdiha.
Kljune besede: Ciril Kosma, una veriga, tesno branje, domae branje, didaktika knji-
evnosti

:

: -
, .
, ,
, -
(Zlati poljub) (Poljub zlata) 1998. .
, , -
,
1
zoran.bozic@ung.si (Zoran Boi, University of Nova Gorica, Faculty of Humanities, Slovenia)
136 | Zoran Boi
.
.
: , , , -
,
Uvod
Ko se je v obdobju razsvetljenstva v Evropi zaelo pospeeno razvijati osnovno
in tudi srednje olstvo, je prilo do potrebe prilagoditi recepcijsko zahtevna klasina
verzna besedila nijim izobrazbenim ravnem, prav tako pa prilagoditi dolga pripo-
vedna besedila recepcijskim zmonostim manj motiviranih dijakov. e davnega leta
1807 sta brat in sestra Charles in Mary Lamb za mladostnike prozificirala, skrajala in
priredila dvajset Shakespearovih dramskih besedil pod naslovom Pripovedke iz Sha-
kespeara. Ta poenostavljena izdaja se tako v izvirniku kot v prevodih e vedno bere
po vsem svetu. Drugi primer je klasina antina knjievnost. Gustav Schwab je v le-
tih 183840 v treh delih na preko 400 straneh prozificiral tevilne starogrke in sta-
rorimske bajke, ohranjene v epskih ali dramatskih verznih besedilih.2 Tudi Schwa-
bove Najlepe antine pripovedke se e vedno ponatiskujejo. Obe literarni priredbi sta
se e pred leti uveljavili v slovenskem prostoru (Lamb 1967 in Schwab 2005), do-
stopni pa sta tudi na spletu (Lamb 2007 in Schwab 1975).
S pojavom osebnih raunalnikov v sedemdesetih letih 20. stoletja in kasneje e
tablic in pametnih telefonov se je zaradi isto drugane, tj. avdio-vizualne recepci-
je in druganih uitkov mono zmanjal interes mladostnikov za branje nasploh, e
posebej pa za branje zahtevneje klasine literature. Uitelji na osnovnih in srednjih
olah so se znali pred vpraanjem, kako motivirati mladino za seznanjanje s klasi-
no literaturo. Leta 1999 so tirje tudentje s Harvarda ustanovili najprej spletno stran
(in kasneje e zalobo), ki je danes po vsem svetu znana kot www.sparknotes.com.
Na spletni strani najdemo npr. Shakespearova dramska besedila, ki so na levi strani
v izvirniku, po naelu vrstica za vrstico pa na desni v celoti prozificirana v sodob-
no angleino. Uporabnik lahko bere samo poenostavitev in posodobitev, lahko pa
se seznanja tudi s bogatim Shakespearovim pesnikim jezikom.
Manj posreene so priredbe daljih klasinih pripovednih in dramskih bese-
dil za srednjeolsko rabo, ki izhajajo tudi v tiskani obliki v okviru zbirke Sparkno-
tes, npr. Orwellova ivalska farma ali Shakespearov Hamlett (Orwell 2014 in Shake-
speare 2104). Pod imenom Kresnice so se tovrstni prironiki pojavili tudi v Sloveniji
2
Na Slovenskem je za potrebe slovenskih gimnazijcev Andrej Kragelj, profesor na dravni gimnaziji,
leta 1895 prozificiral Homerjevo Odisejo, leta 1900 pa e njegovo Iliado, in to z velikim prodajnim us-
pehom.
Didaktini model une verige odlomkov: na primeru novele Tantadruj Cirila Kosmaa | 137
(ink 2010). Temeljni didaktini problem zbirke Sparknotes so namesto odlomkov

iz leposlovnih besedil obnove posameznih poglavij oz. dejanj. To pomeni, da so pri-
roniki zgolj reprodukcija znanja drugih, neke vrste metabesedila, in namenjeni di-
jakom in tudentom predvsem kot nadomestek za branje.
Tudi una veriga odlomkov,3 ki jo predstavljam v tem lanku, se lahko uporab-
lja kot nadomestek za branje leposlovnega besedila, pri emer dijaki odnesejo ve,
kot e bi obravnavali samo en dalji odlomek (to je obiajna praksa v srednjeolskih
berilih), njen temeljni namen pa je po prvem, domaem branju e drugo, pogloblje-
no branje v oli, pri katerem so dijaki ves as dejavni in ki zahteva za celovito obrav-
navo tudi po pet olskih ur. Nadaljevanje lanka opisuje sodobne spremembe v slo-
venski didaktiki knjievnosti, nastanek delovnih zvezkov Zlati poljub in Poljub zlata,
razvoj didaktinega modela une verige na Slovenskem in primerjavo dveh razli-
nih unih verig. Na koncu za ponazoritev sledi una veriga odlomkov ob Kosmae-
vi noveli Tantadruj, ki je primer slovenskega eksistencializma: dogajanje v zelo po-
sebnem svetu primorskih dolin ima izrazito univerzalno sporoilo.
Spremembe v slovenski didaktiki knjievnosti

Na prelomu 20. stoletja v 21. stoletje, kmalu po nastanku samostojne sloven-
ske drave leta 1991, so se v slovenski didaktiki knjievnosti predvsem na aplikativni
ravni zaele dogajati pomembne spremembe, predvsem v smeri dvosmerne komu-
nikacije pri delu z leposlovnimi besedili (Krakar Vogel 2013). Skoraj istoasno sta
se pojavili sodobno zasnovani gimnazijski berili Branja in Svet knjievnosti, nekaj let
kasneje pa e berilo Umetnost besede. Temu didaktinemu toku sem se po dveh dese-
tletjih pouevanja na srednji oli pridruil tudi sam z delovnima zvezkoma za doma-
e branje. Vsi ti didaktini pripomoki so v rabi e dandananji, po skoraj dveh dese-
tletjih pa je as za presojo didaktinega modela une verige odlomkov.
Nastanek Poljubov, delovnih zvezkov za domae branje

Boa Krakar Vogel, tedaj e nekaj let docentka za didaktiko knjievnosti na Od-
delku za slovenistiko Filozofske fakultete v Ljubljani, je kot recenzentka zasluna za
to, da sta bila leta 1998 pri DZS objavljena delovna zvezka za domae branje Zlati
3
Una veriga za olsko obravnavo leposlovnih besedil je didaktini model, pri katerem ob nizu skrbno
izbranih in zaokroenih krajih odlomkov dijaki po naelu tesnega branja opazujejo in razlenjujejo ne
samo zgodbo, literarne osebe in odnose med njimi, pa pa tudi slogovne prvine, snovne posameznosti
in delna sporoila.
138 | Zoran Boi
poljub in Poljub zlata, pospremljena s prironikom za uitelje (Boi 1998). Delov-

na zvezka sta zaela nastajati na zaetku devetdesetih let, ko sem kot uitelj sloven-
ine na tedanji Srednji druboslovni in ekonomski oli v Novi Gorici zautil potre-
bo, da e zlasti pri domaem branju z odlomki dopolnjujem tedanja didaktino zelo
skromna berila, nastala po usmerjenem izobraevanju in predelana po osamosvoji-
tvi (Kolek 199396).4
Bolj ali manj spontano sem se zael zavedati, da se pri olski interpretaciji do-
maega branja brez besedila lahko pogovarjamo zgolj o zgodbi, o literarnih osebah
in odnosih med njimi, obravnava odlomkov z vpraanji za tesno branje pa iri pri-
stop k leposlovnemu besedilu v smeri recepcijske estetike. Svoje poskusne didakti-
ne proizvode sem sproti predstavljal slovenistini oz. uiteljski javnosti in jih skual
tudi strokovno ovrednotiti, ob tem pa poudarjal pomen domaega branja za razvija-
nje literarne zmonosti dijakov (Boi 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996 in 1997).5
Po veletnem intenzivnem delu (izbira besedil, izbira odlomkov, postavljanje
vpraanj za tesno branje,6 tvorjenje unih verig ter dodatnih nalog) sta nastala de-
lovna zvezka s estdesetimi proznimi, dramskimi in pesnikimi besedili, ki vkljuu-
jeta kanonske izdelke slovenske in svetovne knjievnosti. Gre predvsem za besedi-
la, ki so prestala test asa v razvoju slovenske didaktike (upotevajo une narte in
berila) po drugi svetovni vojni.7
Zaloba DZS je prevzela izdajo in s prispevkom urednice Majde Degan Kapus
in ilustratorke Marjance Prelog sta avgusta leta 1998 izla delovna zvezka formata
A4 v skupnem obsegu petsto strani. Namenjena sta bila dijakom splonih in stro-
kovnih gimnazij.
Delovna zvezka sta bila med uitelji veinoma dobro sprejeta8 in se na nekate-
rih olah e vedno uporabljata, predvsem tako, da uitelji fotokopirajo posamezne
une verige in naloge za utrjevanje ali preverjanje znanja. iro uveljavitev delovnih
zvezkov sta prepreila zlasti dva dejavnika: soasna priprava sestavov novih beril Bra-
nja in Svet knjievnosti, ki sta bila po obsegu, vsebini in didaktini zasnovi velik ko-
4
Berila so bila skromna tudi po obsegu, saj so bila izpuena skoraj vsa besedila iz drugih jugoslovan-
skih knjievnosti.
5
Predvsem gre za zbornike Slavistinega drutva Slovenije in prironike Zavoda za olstvo.
6
Tesno oz. pozorno branje (v izvirniku close reading) je takno olsko branje leposlovnega besedila, pri
katerem dijaki skupaj z uiteljem berejo celotno besedilo ali zgolj odlomke, pri tem pa uitelj razlaga ali
z dialogom odkriva literarnovedne podrobnosti.
7
V Zlatem poljubu je 22 tujih in 8 domaih besedil, v Poljubu zlata pa 22 domaih in 8 tujih besedil.
8
Nekatere sta motila naslova, ki naj ne bi bila primerna za olsko rabo, zato tudi predstavitev prironi-
kov v reviji Slovenina v oli ni mogla iziti pod naslovom Poljuba v razredu.
rak naprej v primerjavi s prejnjimi berili, in zlasti pomanjkanje podpore na Zavodu

za olstvo, kjer zaradi nasprotovanja uporabi kratkih odlomkov Poljubov niso uvrsti-
li na noben seznam priporoenega gradiva.
Nasprotovanje Zavoda je temeljilo na avtoriteti Mete Grosman, ki je e v mo-
nografiji Bralec in knjievnost in tudi kasneje problematizirala uporabo odlomka iz
leposlovnega besedila v oli (Grosman 1989 in 2004). Avtorica meni, da branje od-
lomkov nima nikakrnih znailnosti literarnega branja, in trdi, da uenca prepriu-
je, da je odlomek z dodanimi podatki o avtorju in povzetkom zgolj e ena nezanimi-
va zbirka podatkov, ki je del dolgoasnega pouka in ni bolj zanimive knjievnosti
( Joef Beg 2015: 7475). Tovrstnemu, v didaktini praksi sicer ibko utemeljene-
mu staliu se je e pred izidom Poljubov argumentirano zoperstavil Silvo Fatur, ki v
lanku Didaktini problem odlomka iz leposlovnega besedila, ob primerih iz romana Pa-
vleta Zidarja Sveti Pavel navaja, da besedilo odlomka plus metabesedilo, ki nastane
ob njem in iz njega in se, kot bomo videli, obiajno pojavlja kot umestitveno bese-
dilo ali kot vezno besedilo med odlomki, vsekakor tvorita neko novo, drugano ka-
kovost, za katero ni nujno, da je a priori nekaj slabega. (Fatur 1995: 63).
Da gre za pomembno didaktino vpraanje, dokazuje kasneja empirina raz-
iskava Boe Krakar Vogel (Recepcija odlomka v primerjavi z recepcijo kratke pripove-
di pri knjievnem pouku), ki je s skupino dijakov preizkusila razlike v branju in do-
jemanju odlomka in kratke pripovedi. Krakarjeva rehabilitira olsko rabo odlomka
in ugotavlja, da dijaki razumejo odlomek kot reprezentativen del celote in da k
predstavam o njej bistveno prispeva zlasti vsebinska, pa tudi didaktina umestitev.
Ni videti, da bi jim odlomek predstavljal le e eno nezanimivo zbirko podatkov, saj
jih lahko navdui vasih celo bolj kakor manj zanimiva celota in pri veini kdaj pa
kdaj povea motivacijo za branje celotnega besedila, kar je gotovo tudi eden od po-
zitivnih uinkov teh obravnav (Krakar Vogel 2006: 663/664).
Drugi problem, povezan s Poljuboma, je dolina uporabljenega odlomka. V so-
dobnih gimnazijskih berilih Branja (20002003), Svet knjievnosti (20002003) in
Umetnost besede (20072010) gre praviloma za dalje odlomke (enega ali dva), ki
obsegajo tudi ve strani. V Poljubih so vkljueni bistveno kraji, vsebinsko sicer zao-
kroeni odlomki, predvsem zato, ker gre za veje tevilo odlomkov (od osem do dva-
najst) in prilagajanje recepcijskim zmonostim sodobnega dijaka.9 Ustreznost tovr-
stnega pristopa potrjujejo tudi sodobna didaktina spoznanja: eprav gimnazijo
praviloma obiskujejo jezikovno sposobneji dijaki, pa v vsakdanji pedagoki praksi
lahko e ugotavljamo, da imajo tudi gimnazijci teave s koncentracijo pri spremlja-
9
Kratki odlomki so e zlasti primerni za delo z manj motiviranimi dijaki, ki jim pri pouku hitro upade
pozornost, npr. z dijaki ekonomske gimnazije ali ekonomske strokovne ole.
140 | Zoran Boi
nju daljega besedila (oddaje ali celo dalje razlage oz. predavanja), z razumevanjem
prebranega besedila in izraanjem svojih misli o posluanem ali prebranem besedi-
lu ( Joef Beg 2015: 260).
Predstavitev razvoja didaktinega modela une verige odlomkov

ele v novem tisoletju, ob pripravi in izdelavi disertacije Poezija Franceta Pre-
erna v srednjeolskih ubenikih in njena recepcija (2010), pa sem lahko bolj argumen-
tirano potrdil, da ima didaktina zasnova une verige odlomkov z vpraanji za tesno
branje tudi na Slovenskem e zelo dolgo tradicijo. Obravnava leposlovnega besedila
na nain tesnega branja se je e v 19. stoletju uveljavljala v osnovni oli, kar je v svo-
jem Posebnem ukoslovju slovenskega unega jezika v ljudski oli na zaetku 20. stoletja
natanno predstavil Janko Bezjak, ki ga je kot pomembnega didaktika e na zaetku
svoje raziskovalne poti odkrila Boa Krakar Vogel (Bezjak 190607, Krakar Vogel
1991: 10). V obdobju med dvema vojnama se je ta didaktini pristop raziril na ra-
ven nije srednje ole v znamenitih berilih petih avtorjev (Bajec 19311935), nasta-
lih pod vplivom sodobnih francoskih beril (Boi 2010: 114119).
Tudi una veriga odlomkov z umestitvami se je pojavila e po prvi svetovni voj-
ni, in sicer v berilih za vije razrede srednjih ol Janka Bezjaka, Antona Breznika in
Ivana Grafenauerja (Grafenauer 19211930, Boi 2010: 109113). Tradicijo sta
nadaljevala Vinko Belii in Martin Jevnikar v izjemno kakovostni Slovenski itanki
za vije srednje ole, ki je po drugi vojni izla v Coni A pod Zavezniko vojako upra-
vo (Belii 1947, Boi 2010: 200204). ele kasneje, v sedemdesetih letih, so se
odlomkom z umestitvami pridruila e vpraanja za tesno branje, in sicer v berilih
Vere Gregora za ekonomske srednje ole (Gregora 19731979, Boi 2010: 164
168), v osemdesetih letih pa so une verige odlomkov z vpraanji za tesno branje
vkljuevala berila za srednje usmerjeno izobraevanje Silva Faturja (za prva dva le-
tnika) ter Franka Bohanca, Petra Kolka, Rajka Koroca in Tineta Logarja (za zad-
nja dva letnika) (Fatur 19811982, Bohanec 19831984, Boi 2010: 174178).
Sedanja didaktina teorija in praksa veinoma potrjujeta uporabnost une verige
odlomkov z vpraanji za tesno branje. Tesno branje se je e zlasti uveljavilo v etrtem
letniku gimnazije pri obravnavi besedil iz tematskega sklopa za pisanje maturitetne-
ga eseja (Krakar Vogel 2004: 234247), v najnovejem asu pa celo kot uinkovita
metoda za pomo uencem z bralnimi teavami (Krakar Vogel 2014). Boa Krakar
Vogel v Poglavjih iz didaktike knjievnosti delovna zvezka za domae branje Zlati po-
ljub in Poljub zlata opredeljuje kot uveljavljeno dopolnilo k ubeniku, z namenom
spodbujati uence predvsem k eni zahtevneji in samostojneji dejavnosti, npr. k
poglabljanju znanja, k bralni in ustvarjalni sposobnosti ob domaem branju ali ob
ustvarjalnem pisanju (Krakar Vogel 2004: 144).
Alenka bogar pri kritini predstavitvi delne in celostne olske interpretaci-

je ocenjuje, da je uinkovita npr. una veriga, ki kombinira domae branje celot-
nega besedila z obravnavo vejega tevila kratkih odlomkov v oli (na nain tesnega
branja) (bogar 2013: 87). Joica Joef Beg pa v svoji disertaciji pri predlogu slo-
venskega prispevka k evropskemu literarnemu okviru ugotavlja, da je za obravnavo
domaega branja bolj kot obravnava odlomka v berilu primerna metoda tesnega
branja z uno verigo, ki jo je v prironikih Zlati poljub (1998) in Poljub zlata (1998)
uveljavil Zoran Boi, saj z njo razvijamo natannost pri opazovanju besedila, dijaki
v dvojicah ali skupinah dani odlomek natanno preberejo (med poroanjem prebere-
jo tudi interpretativno), ga umeajo v sobesedilo, razlenjujejo, se opredeljujejo do
ravnanja oseb, povezujejo s prvinami iz e znanih besedil ipd. Po konanem poroa-
nju imajo dijaki pregled nad literarnointerpretativnimi prvinami in so pripravljeni na
razline aktualizacije, ki niso bile vkljuene v uno verigo ( Joef Beg 2015: 284).
Primerjava dveh unih verig in didaktinih predstavitev v sodobnih

berilih: na primeru Kosmaevega Tantadruja
Boa Krakar Vogel v prvi izdaji prironika Teme iz knjievne didaktike navaja tri
praktine primere obravnave leposlovja po metodinem sistemu olske interpreta-
cije (Krakar Vogel 1995: 2032). Na prvem mestu je predstavljena una veriga Ale-
ksandre Belak za obravnavo Tantadruja v tretjem letniku srednje ole (UV110). Ta
objava omogoa primerjavo z uno verigo v Poljubu zlata (UV2) (Boi 1998: 145
149). Na prvi pogled je razvidna razlika v didaktinem instrumentariju: UV1 ima
sedem odlomkov z vpraanji za tesno branje, odlomki pa nimajo nobene umestitve.
UV2 ima zaetni odlomek z motivacijsko ilustracijo, za tem uvodne naloge, poveza-
ne s pisateljem in njegovim delom, tem pa sledi deset odlomkov z vpraanji za tes-
no branje, vendar tudi z vpraanji in nalogami, ki se nanaajo na zgodbo in umea-
jo odlomke v celotno besedilo.
Vsebinska primerjava pokae, da ima UV1 dva odlomka iz okvirne pripovedi in
pet odlomkov iz materine pripovedi o Tantadruju. Noben odlomek ni besedilna ce-
lota, ampak so lepljenke posameznih motivov, poleg tega pa ne sledijo zgodbi, pa
pa so razvreni po nejasnem, neloginem zaporedju. S Tantadrujem se natanne-
je ukvarja samo en odlomek. V UV2 so trije odlomki iz okvirne pripovedi in sedem
odlomkov iz zgodbe o Tantadruju: razvreni so linearno, tako da sledijo zaporedju
v noveli. Vkljuena sta zaetek in konec celotnega besedila ter zaetek in konec ma-
terine pripovedi. Odlomki so vsebinsko zaokroene celote. V vseh odlomkih iz ma-
10
UV1 = una veriga 1, UV2 = una veriga 2.
142 | Zoran Boi
terine pripovedi se pojavlja Tantadruj, bodisi kot osrednja oseba bodisi kot eden od
norkov. Sklenemo lahko, da izdelava uinkovite une verige nikakor ni preprosta
zadeva, saj zahteva natanno poznavanje literarne zgodovine in didaktike knjievno-
sti, vkljuuje pa tudi interpretativne zmonosti.
V berilih Svet knjievnosti in Umetnost besede je Kosmaeva novela predstavlje-
na le z enim daljim odlomkom, v berilu Branja pa z dvema, in sicer z zaetka okvir-
ne pripovedi in z zaetka zgodbe o Tantadruju.11 Svet knjievnosti in Umetnost bese-
de imata isti odlomek, ki vsebuje dogajanje na sejmu in natanneje predstavlja druge
tri norke (Luko, Furlana in Matica), s tem da je v prvem berilu odlomek malo dalj-
i in je vkljuen e Najdeni Peregrin. Izbrani odlomek sicer vkljuuje tudi Tantadru-
jevo iskanje sree, vendar je predstavitev osrednjega lika izrazito statina in ne omo-
goa sledenja zgodbi, ki ele z zapletom in razpletom prinaa zakljuno sporoilo.
Didaktino ustrezneja je reitev v Branjih, ki v drugem odlomku prinaa predvsem
Tantadrujev bivanjski problem, povezava z okvirno pripovedjo v prvem odlomku pa
omogoa tudi problemski pristop.
Vsa tri berila imajo umestitev odlomka/-ov, pri emer je umestitev v Branjih
skromna, v Umetnosti besede pa zelo izrpna. Ker dijaki pred sabo nimajo zakljuka
besedila, ne morejo kritino presojati navedb, da S sklepnim prividom zaledenele-
ga sveta se novela tudi kona. (Branja, str. 151) in Novela se kona z zakljunim
delom pripovednega okvira, ki je veliko mraneji kot uvodni del, saj privid ledene-
ga sveta zbudi alost, tesnobo, misel na smrt. (Umetnost besede, str. 114). V skla-
du s koncem novele je samo razlaga v Svetu knjievnosti, ko pripovedovalec ugoto-
vi, da pripoved o Tantadruju ni ve tako svetla kot pred tiridesetimi leti in da se je
zgrenila, toda kljub vsemu sta se vanj vrnila plodovito hrepenenje in rodovitna tes-
nobnost, ki sta mu vrnila ivljenjsko radost (str. 88).
Interpretativna spodbuda za olsko uporabo une verige

Kosmaev Tantadruj je bil prvi objavljen v Nai sodobnosti leta 1959 in besedi-
lo je v celoti dostopno tudi na spletu. Prvo knjino izdajo prinaa ele leto pisateljeve
smrti (1980).12 Skoraj dve desetletji uporabe une verige v razredu je test asa, ki e
pokae morebitne pomanjkljivosti. Danes bi zamenjal kaken odlomek, bistvo pa bi
ostalo nespremenjeno. Poudariti je treba, da so temelj une verige odlomki: vpraanja
11
Odlomka imata naslova Resurrecturis ter Tantadruj in njegova smrt.
12
Prva objava nosi naslov Tantantadruj in ta dalja razliica imena se pojavlja tudi v besedilu kot ime li-
terarnega lika in na zaetku njegovih povedi. Zakaj je v knjini izdaji prilo do redukcije, ostaja zaenkrat
neznano. Tedanji urednik Miha Mate in avtorica spremne besede Helga Glui sta al pokojna, pa tudi
poizvedovanje na spletnem forumu slovlit ni dalo rezultata.
in naloge so uitelju in dijaku le v oporo. Uitelj jih lahko tudi nadgradi in postavlja
svoja, lahko jih izpua ali dodaja, spreminja njihov vrstni red ali daje razline pou-
darke. Skoraj vsaka obravnava v razredu prinaa nepriakovana odkritja in spozna-
nja: dokaz, da je vrhunska umetnina odprto besedilo. Pomembno je, da to zautijo
tudi dijaki, zato moramo z odprtimi rokami sprejemati posebnosti njihovega branja.
Ciril Kosma: Tantadruj (posodobljena una veriga odlomkov)

a) Kosma je po vojni ivel v a) Piranu, b) Slapu ob Idrijci, c) Mostu na Soi.
b) Kosma je bil komaj osemnajstleten ve mesecev zaprt. DA NE
c) Po Kosmaevem romanu Tistega lepega dne so posneli barvni film. DA NE
) Tantadruj je novela, zato ker traja dogajanje samo en dan. DA NE
d) Dogajanje Tantadruja poteka v Jugoslaviji in v Avstro-Ogrski. DA NE
V pozni, jasni in rahlo vetrovni noi sem se vraal iz Pirana. Poasi sem se vzpenjal
navkreber po ozki in strmi ulici, mrmraje ponavljal pripev tuje popevke, ki mi je bila os-
tala v uesih, in se pogosto ustavljal ter zavzeto gledal in poslual,l kako se je jesenski ve-
ter igral z meseno nojo. Igral se je z njo kakor s tanico: svileno je vistelo okrog mene in
nad mano, bledo zlata lu pa se je mehko prelivala po polonih strehah in igrivo popleso-
vala po razvalovanem morju.
Tudi v mojem srcu je bilo prijetno vetrovno in v moji dui nenavadno svetlo. Spet so
me obiskale tiste zlate ure, ki me vsega presvetijo in prezvonijo, da zapoje v meni tako ra-
dostno, kakor zapoje visoki poletni dan, ki obstane sredi zelene doline. Bilo je preve le-
po, zato sem vedel,l da se bo vse kmalu stemnilo v tisto neznano in nepojmljivo hrepene-
nje, pomeano z grenkosladko tesnobo, ki me zane potiskati k pisanju. (1. ODLOMEK)
1. Kaj je vsebina prvega odstavka in kaj drugega? Katera poved ju povezuje?

2. S katerimi uti dojema pripovedovalec okolico? Kako je trenutno razpoloen?
3. V odlomku poii in podrtaj vse poosebitve. Kaken je Kosmaev jezik?
4. V drugem odstavku poii vsa antitetina mesta. Kaj sporoa zadnja poved o bi-
stvenih znailnostih Kosmaevega umetnikega ustvarjanja?
a) Napis Resurrecturis nad pokopalikimi vrati spomni pripovedovalca na sestro in
na njeno pripoved o oetovi smrti. DA NE
Zmrzla zemlja jim je zvenela pod okovanimi evlji in mrzli mesec jim je svetil z neba,
zakaj zimsko nebo je bilo jasno in jutro e dale. Od dale so korakali tudi ljudje: kmetje
in bajtarji, trgovci in obrtniki, kramarji in kronjarji, prekupevalci in meetarji, hlapci
in dekle, fantje in dekleta, potepuhi in skromni tatii, izgubljene due, berai, norki od
144 | Zoran Boi
rojstva, ki so jim takrat rekli otroci boji, in taki, ki se jim je zmealo kasneje, pa niso bi-
li tako nevarni, da bi jih morali drati za zapahi. Posamez in v gruah so hiteli po vseh
tirih dolinah, ki so se odpirale pred njimi. li so na Most,t in li so na semenj, zato so ho-
dili mole, da so lae raunali in premiljevali o svojih potrebah in sanjali o svojih eljah.
(2. ODLOMEK)
1. Zakaj spada Tantadruj med klasine novele? Primerjaj tridelnost (pot na sejem
osrednje dogajanje povratek) Tantadruja z zgradbo Pregljeve novele Matkova Ti-
na ter Hemingwayeve novele Starec in morje.
2. V prvi povedi odlomka poii aliteracijo. Kaj je v tej povedi realistinega in kaj izra-
zito ekspresivnega? Katera znana slovenska pisatelja sta s svojim znailnim umetno-
stnim jezikom (ritmizirano prozo!) Kosmaeva predhodnika?
3. Katere razline skupine ljudi omenja odlomek? Kaj je tem ljudem skupnega?
4. Na kaken nain je v odlomku izraena avtorjeva naklonjenost do norcev?
a) Zaradi stekanja ve dolin je bil Most neko pomembno prometno kriie.
DA NE
Na, pa vzemi e krajcarek, k da bo lahko dobro izbral,l so rekli kmetje in mu sti-

snili nekaj drobia.
Tantantadruj, izbral bom, dobro izbral. Potem pa hitro k upniku!
Seveda. Potem pa k upniku!
Tantantadruj, in potem bom umrl! je veselo poskoil. Tako bi rad umrl!
Saj bo! Saj bo! so pritrdili kmetje in zdaj prav odlono zdaljali korak, k da bi si
lahko obrisali solze, ki so se jim zaradi mraza nabrale v oeh.
Tantantadruj ni mogel z njimi vtric, c ker je bil majhen in zelo kratkih nog. Zaostal
je, a ni bil alosten, zakaj verjel je, da bo zdaj res umrl. Veselo se je pognal po cesti, vese-
lo so zacingljali zvonci in veselo je mrzli rdei zarji naproti odplavala njegova pesem, ki
jo je zapel s toplim glasom:
Na-a nebu je-e sonce, na zemljici mraz.
Na-abiram ja-az zvonce in vsi so za vas... (3. ODLOMEK)
1. Zakaj je najprej predstavljen Tantadruj? Po kateri dolini prihaja ta norek?

2. Kako je Tantadruj dobil svoje ime? Kaj je njegova najveja elja? Ali so kmetje res
solzni zaradi mraza ali pa z omembo solz avtor sporoa nekaj drugega?
3. Katero dekle je Tantadrujeva izvoljenka? Kako si on predstavlja sreno ivljenje z
njo? Zakaj lahko njegova predstava o tem spominja na Krst pri Savici?
4. V em je zakljuek poglavja (zapel je s toplim glasom) antiteza zaetka?
5. Kaj lahko simbolizirata sonce oziroma mraz v Tantadrujevi pesmi?
6. Kaj ve o drugih treh norkih? Kako so posamezna imena vseh norkov povezana
z materialno, duhovno, asovno in drubeno razsenostjo bivanja?
a) V nadaljevanju Tantadruj na sejmu izbira zvonce, odgovarja otrokom, poslua le-
po petje in aka na domaega upnika, ki je v cerkvi pri mai. DA NE
Naposled so le prili do cerkve in otroaji so jo hitro pobrisali skozi zakristijo, zakaj

slovesna maa se je pravkar zaela. Tantantadruj bi rad el v cerkev, ker je bilo notri ta-
ko lepo, toda vedel je, da ne sme. Stopil je k debeli murvi pri cerkvenem obzidju in se za-
maknil v tri svetlosive golobe, ki so stopicali ne dale od njega. Orgle so donele in lepo pet-
je je plavalo od vsepovsod. Tantadruj je zavzeto poslual in se hudoval na vrabce, ki so se
vneto prepirali v vejah nad njim. Ozrl se je kviku in se stresel od jeze. Zvonci so zacin-
gljali in vrabci so odleteli, odleteli pa so tudi tisti trije lepi golobi; vignili so v sonce, ki jih
je oblilo z lesketajoim se srebrom, in nato so vsi srebrni po poevni poti odjadrali v nebo.
(4. ODLOMEK)
1. Zakaj se Tantadruj ni smel udeleiti mae? Kaj pa drugi trije norki? Kaj s takim
odnosom do izobencev sporoa avtor?
2. Kaken je njegov odnos do treh golobov in kaken do vrabcev? Katere znailnos-
ti teh dveh vrst ptiev poudarja pisatelj?
3. Kaj simbolino sporoa konec odlomka o sprejemanju dobrega in slabega na tem
svetu?
Tantantadruj, zdaj je zima in ni modrasov! Vzdignil je prst in strogo nadaljeval,l

kakor bi mu zabijal besedo za besedo v glavo: Pa tudi kadar bodo in e bo ti kakega
nael in e te bo piil,l ne bo umrl,l temve se bo zastrupil!
Tantantadruj, zastrupil! je zastokal norek in ista, neskonna alost se je razli-
la po njegovem drobnem, nagubanem obrazku.
Zastrupil,l so v zboru ponovili tuji upniki in mu pougali z ronatimi zalitimi
kazalci.
Zastrupil! je pribil domai in tudi sam e enkrat pougal. Poakaj, da odbije
tvoja ura. Vsi moramo trpeti, preden pridemo do jame! Tako je rekel in se obrnil pro-
ti upniu.
Vsi moramo trpeti, preden pridemo do jame! so slovesno vzdihnili tuji upniki,
nato so spet privzdignili talarje in se prijeli za birete ter se odzibali za svojim gostiteljem.
Tantantadruj se je brez moi naslonil na murvo in strmel za velikanskimi rnimi pos-
tavami, ki so izginile skozi svetla vrata upnia. Potem so se vrata zaprla, in stresel se je,
kakor bi se zaprla za njegovo sreo. (5. ODLOMEK)
146 | Zoran Boi
1. Kaj vse poskua Tantadruj, da bi im prej priel do svojega cilja? Na kaken nain
upnik vsakokrat iznii njegovo trenutno reitev? Pojasni, zakaj upnik ne more pri-
trditi Tantadruju, tudi e bi to hotel.
2. Zakaj je s stalia normalnega loveka Tantadrujev poloaj brezizhoden? Kaj pa
avtor sporoa o odnosu dananjega sveta do posmrtnega ivljenja?
3. V katerem Cankarjevem romanu se bolehna dekleta tolaijo z vero v posmrtno
ivljenje? Zakaj? S katerim prizorom se ta roman kona?
4. S katerimi slogovno-jezikovnimi sredstvi je avtor ustvaril ironino perspektivo?
5. Kakna je simbolika zadnjega odstavka? Kako se zdaj pouti Tantadruj?
a) Za tem so norki v gostilni deleni obilne in slastne veerje. DA NE
V imenu postave, e enkrat! je zarjovel stramojsterr, udaril po mizi in tako belo

pogledal,l da se mu je Peregrin nasmehnil in prikimal. Zaigral je e enkrat in e enkrat,t in
potem je igral in pel do same noi. Ljudje pa so pili, se smejali in jokali.
Ko se je znoilo, so stopili v sobo Luka, Furlan Rusepatacis in Matic Enaka Palica.
Prili so po Tantadruja, da bi se skupaj odpravili k Hotejcu spat. Toda obstali so in zav-
zeto posluali igranje na kravje zvonce. Bilo je tako lepo, da e Furlan Rusepatacis ni ni-
ti enkrat zaniljivo prhnil.
Naposled pa se je le bilo treba posloviti. Tantadruj je stopil k Peregrinu in ga prosil,l
naj mu vrne zvonce.
Tantadruj, pusti nam zvonce! so prav iz dna razneenega in razburkanega srca
zaprosili ljudje. Druge ti kupimo! e lepe! isto nove!
, ne! je s smehom odkimal Peregrin. Zanj so samo ti zvonci pravi. To boste e
Ne
razumeli, saj ste e dovolj pametni! (6. ODLOMEK)
1. Pojasni, kdo je Peregrin. Zakaj so ga ljudje obudovali in se ga tudi bali?

2. Kaj je Peregrin napravil s Tantadrujevimi zvonci? Kako so njegov ustvarjalni po-
skus sprejeli gostje? Zakaj zdaj drugae dojemajo Tantadrujevo pesmico?
3. Primerjaj Peregrina in njegov vpliv z mitolokim Orfejem in s Cankarjevim Kuren-
tom.
4. Kako avtor v odlomku problematizira odnos normalnih ljudi do norkov? Kaj s
tem sporoa bralcu? Kaj pomeni, da so zanj samo ti zvonci pravi?
a) V nadaljevanju norki na pokopaliu odkrijejo svee izkopano jamo. DA NE
Obrnili so se, li s pokopalia in se spustili nazaj s police. Po prstih so se pribliali

upniu, po prstih so stopili do okna in pogledali skozi ree priprtih temnic in ostrme-
li so, da jim je zaprlo sapo, zakaj soba je bila vsa zlata. Zlat je bil Kristus na steni, tem-
no zlata je bila knjina omara in zlati so bili napisi na hrbtih knjig. Na mizi je stal zlat
svenik s estimi roglji, v njih so bile bledo zlate debele voenke, ki so gorele z ivimi zla-
timi plameni. Temno zlate so bile peene goske na podolgovatem kroniku z zlato obre-
zo, bledo zlata je bila sredica maslene pogae in temno zlata njena skorja. Zlate roice so
bile na steklenici in na kozarcih in sonno zlato je bilo vino, ki se je svetilo v njih. Okrog
mize so sedeli upniki in njih okrogli obrazi so bili krlatno zlati; s temeni so se naslanja-
li na steno, zapirali oi in odpirali usta, da so se jim svetlikali zlati zobje, ter prepevali s
polnimi temno zlatimi baritoni:
Oo-ooo...Oo-ooo...
Tantantadruj, ali so sreni? je vpraal norek. (7. ODLOMEK)
1. Kako se v odlomku kaeta barvna izrazitost in posebno zvono slikanje?

2. Podrtaj vsa tista mesta v odlomku, kjer zlata barva ne deluje realistino.
3. Zakaj je glede na soasno poetje norkov odlomek izrazito kontrasten?
4. Razmisli in povej, kaj ti sporoa norkovo vpraanje na koncu odlomka.
a) Za tem norki Tantadruja ivega zakopljejo in on je sreen. DA NE
In zapomni si e nekaj! je z globokim glasom rekel upnik.

Ti sploh ne bo umrl!
Tantantadruj, sploh ne bom umrl? je tako vztrepetal norek, k da so zacingljali vsi
njegovi zvonci.
Ne! je pribil upnik. e bo e hotel umreti, sploh ne bo umrl!
Tantantadruj, saj ne bom hotel ve umreti! je zajokal norek in se s sklenjenimi
rokami pognal proti njemu. Saj ne bom hotel ve umreti!
Ali res ne? je vpraal upnik.
Tantantadruj, ne, ne ve! je odkimal norek in takoj nato z novim upanjem v gla-
su vpraal: Ali bom potem umrl?
No, potem bomo videli! je milostno rekel upnik. Zdaj pa se razidite in mir z
vami! In razidite se tudi vi, se je obrnil k svojim faranom, in hvalite boga, da ni bi-
lo kaj hujega! Nato je pokimal svojim sobratom in vsi so slovesno odli v upnie. (8.
ODLOMEK)
1. Na kaken nain spravi domai upnik Tantadruja iz jame? Zakaj je upnikova iz-
java, da Tantadruj, e bo hotel umreti, sploh ne bo umrl, ironina?
2. Kaj se po tej upnikovi izjavi dogaja s Tantadrujevim hrepenenjem?
a) Za tem Hotejec, ki je poosebljena dobrota, predlaga, da bi norki prenoili pri
njem, upnik pa ne preklie svojega ukaza o vrnitvi domov. DA NE
In medtem ko so upniki peli v zlati sobi in so v zakajenih gostilnah pili in hrumeli

kmetje in bajtarji, trgovci in obrtniki, hlapci in dekle, prekupevalci in meetarji, mladi
in stari, so e dale tam zunaj, vsak po svoji prazni dolini, li tirje norci. Zmrzla zemlja
148 | Zoran Boi
jim je zvenela pod nogami in mrzel mesec jim je svetil z neba, zakaj zimsko nebo je bilo
jasno in jutro e dale... (9. ODLOMEK)
1. Opredeli razliko med uvodnim in zakljunim odstavkom zgodbe o Tantadruju.

2. Zakaj so zdaj norki predstavljeni kot izobenci iz drubene skupnosti? Pojasni,
kako se je v skladu s tem spremenilo njihovo poimenovanje.
3. Navedi nekaj literarnih likov, ki so bili izobeni iz svoje okolice.
In nisem videl samo pokrajine okrog sebe, videl sem vso zemeljsko kroglo, in vsa je bi-
la zledenela in mrtva. Ledene in prazne so bile tudi tiste tiri moje doline, ki so po njih ne-
ko odli moji tirje blagi norci. Vse je bilo mrtvo. Tudi veter je e zdavnaj umrl,l popolno-
ma umrl,l umrl do zadnjega diha. Na mrtvem nebu je poevno leal samo en oblak, k dolg
in tenak kakor ledena svea. In vedel sem, da to ni oblak, k temve zadnji zategli loveki
krik,
k ki je zledenel. Nizko pod njim je visel mesec. Visel je za ostro konico ledenega stolpa
stare katedrale in bil je preklan na dva kosa. In taken je zdaj svetil nad zemeljsko krog-
lo, nad izumrlim sejmiem lovetva. (10. ODLOMEK)
1. Katera beseda v zadnji povedi predstavlja povezavo s prejnjim dogajanjem?

2. Podrtaj vse izraze, ki izraajo odsotnost gibanja ali toplote. Kaj simbolizira ta apo-
kaliptini prizor in kako ga sam doivlja?
3. Pojasni, ali je prizor naturalistien, impresionistien ali grotesken.
Na cesti sem se ozrl proti pokopaliu. Napis nad vrati se je srebrno zasvetlikal,l ka-
kor bi se mi hotel bodrilno nasmehniti.
Resurrecturis! sem mu hvaleno pokimal.
Resurrecturis! se je zasrebrikal v odgovor.
Pomahal sem mu in se obrnil proti domu. In spet sem bil ves poln plodovitega hrepe-
nenja in rodovitne tesnobe. el sem po cesti in se nekoliko majal,l zakaj bil sem vse: mate-
rin sin in bridki gusar brez enega uhlja in s rno zaplato ez oko, ostareli orel in osirote-
li vrtiljak,
k preklani mesec in pokopalika cipresa, odmev svojega glasu in zategli zledeneli
krik,
k ki zveni v mrtvem brezvetrju; bil sem Luka in Rusepatacis, Enaka palica in Tantan-
tadruj. Ni bilo lahko, a vendar sem vse nosil z nepojmljivo radostjo, zakaj bil sem tudi jata
svetlo sivih golobov, ki so v nenehnem srebrnem traku leteli skozi mojo duo. Vse je vralo
okrog mene in nad mano in zato priznam, eprav bi to utegnilo kodovati resnosti litera-
ture, da sem vasih poskoil kakor Tantantadruj. In zakaj ne bi poskoil? Saj sem vendar
tiho prepeval tudi njegovo pesmico: Na-a nebu je-e sonce // (11. ODLOMEK)
1. Beseda resurrecturis se nanaa na vstajenje. Na kaken nain je poskrbel za Tan-

tadrujevo vstajenje pisatelj Ciril Kosma?
2. Podrtaj poved, ki dokazuje, da je umetnik v svoji domiljiji lahko kdorkoli in kar-

koli. Katero vrednoto predstavlja umetniku njegova domiljija?
3. V kateri pesmi Preeren poudarja podobno spoznanje o ustvarjanju? Kateri pris-
podobi te spominjata na pesem Jadro in Pesem o albatrosu?
4. Na katero pomembno razsenost besedne umetnosti (tudi posebna besedilna oz.
jezikovna vloga!) opozarja prispodoba z jato svetlo sivih golobov?
5. Zakaj je zakljuek zgodbe o Tantadruju vendarle optimistien? V em je umetnik
enak Bogu kot stvarniku? Kaj pravzaprav pomeni glagol u-stvar-iti?
Zakljuek
Konec une verige se spontano navezuje na pomembno, morda kljuno didak-
tino vpraanje, ali je olska obravnava knjievnosti za dijake muka ali radost. Kadar
so dijaki samo nedejavni opazovalci oz. poslualci, je zanje razlaga pesmi, proze ali
dramskega besedila pogosto muka. Kadar pa uitelj ne samo dopusti dijakom, da ob
njegovi razlagi povedo svoje mnenje, pa pa jih spodbuja k razmiljanju in povezova-
nju in jih z nenehnimi, tudi problemskimi vpraanji izziva, bodo tudi tisti dijaki, ki bi
se sicer dolgoasili, lahko obutili ustvarjalno radost. Eden od ustreznih didaktinih
modelov za tako olsko delo je prav uporaba une verige odlomkov.
LITERATURA:
Bajec, Anton, in drugi. Slovenska itanka za prvietrti razred srednjih in sorodnih ol.
Ljubljana: Banovinska zaloga olskih knjig in uil, 19311935.
Barbari, Nada, in Zoran Boi. Priprava na razpravljalni esej v drugem letniku srednje
ole. Ljubljana: ZRS, 1994.
Belii, Vinko in Martin Jevnikar. Slovenska itanka za vije srednje ole III. Gorica:
Zaveznika vojaka uprava v Julijski Beneiji, 1947.
Bezjak, Janko. Posebno ukoslovje slovenskega unega jezika v ljudski oli. Ljubljana: Slo-
venska olska matica, 19061907.
Bohanec, Franek in drugi. Knjievnost IIIIV: ubenik za srednje izobraevanje. Ma-
ribor: Zaloba Obzorja, 19831984.
Boi, Zoran. Problemske obdelave slovenskih klasikov. U: Vpraanje slovarja in
zdomske knjievnosti. Eds. Martina Oroen in Mateja Hoevar. Ljubljana: ZRS,
1993. 237256.
Boi, Zoran. Sveti Pavel: olska interpretacija z metodo une verige. U: olska ura
s Pavletom Zidarjem. Ed. Silvo Fatur. Ljubljana: ZRS, 1994. 4862.
150 | Zoran Boi
Boi, Zoran. Preeren, Sonetni venec. U: Knjievnost v etrtem letniku srednje o-

le: prironik za uitelja. Eds. Matkova Tina Pregelj, Tujec Camus, Vinko Cuder-
man. Ljubljana: ZRS, 1996. 268272, 289299, 311323.
Boi, Zoran. Obravnava domaega branja z uno verigo: ponazoritev s Cankarjevi-
mi Hlapci. U: Stodvajsetletnica Ivana Cankarja in Dragotina Ketteja. Ed. Zoltan
Jan. Zbornik Slavistinega drutva Slovenije, no. 7. Ljubljana: ZRS, 1997. 7185.
Boi, Zoran. Zlati poljub. Delovni zvezek za domae branje. Ljubljana: DZS, 1998.
Boi, Zoran. Poljub zlata. Delovni zvezek za domae branje. Ljubljana: DZS, 1998.
Boi, Zoran. Slovenska literatura v oli in Preeren. Ljubljana: Tangram, 2010.
Fatur, Silvo. Knjievnost III: ubenik za srednje izobraevanje. Maribor: Zaloba Ob-
zorja, 19811982.
Fatur, Silvo. Didaktini problem odlomka iz leposlovnega besedila, ob primerih iz
romana Pavleta Zidarja Sveti Pavel. U: olska ura s Pavletom Zidarjem. Ljublja-
na: ZRS, 1995. 6378.
Grafenauer, Ivan, in drugi. Slovenska itanka za vije razrede srednjih in njim sorodnih
ol IIV. Ljubljana: Kraljeva zaloga olskih knjig in uil, 19211930.
Gregora, Vera. Slovenina IIV: Knjievnost z berilom za ekonomske srednje ole. Lju-
bljana: Dopisna delavska univerza, 19731979.
Grosman, Meta. Bralec in knjievnost. Ljubljana: Dravna zaloba Slovenije, 1989.
Grosman, Meta. Zagovor branja: bralec in knjievnost v 21. stoletju. Ljubljana: Zalo-
ba Sophia, 2004.
Joef Beg, Joica. Razvijanje kljunih zmonosti pri knjievnem pouku v gimnaziji. Dok-
torska disertacija. Ljubljana: Oddelek za slovenistiko Filozofske fakultete, 2015.
Kolek, Peter in drugi. Berilo 14. Maribor: Zaloba Obzorja, 19931996.
Krakar Vogel, Boa. Skice za knjievno didaktiko. Ljubljana: ZRS, 1991.
Krakar Vogel, Boa. Teme iz knjievne didaktike. Ljubljana: ZRS, 1995.
Krakar Vogel, Boa. Poglavja iz didaktike knjievnosti. Ljubljana: DZS, 2004.
Krakar Vogel, Boa. Recepcija odlomka v primerjavi z recepcijo kratke pripovedi
pri knjievnem pouku. U: Slovenska kratka pripovedna proza. Ed. Irena Novak
Popov. Ljubljana: Oddelek za slovenistiko, Filozofska fakulteta, 2006. 655665.
Krakar Vogel, Boa. Razvoj slovenistine didaktike knjievnosti. Slavistina revi-
ja 61/1 (2013): 157167.
Krakar Vogel, Boa. Tesno branje kot dodatna podpora uencem z bralnimi teava-
mi. Slovenina v oli 17/34 (2014): 117121.
Orwell, George. Animal Farm. New York: Spark Publishing, 2014.
Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. New York: Spark Publishing, 2014.
Schwab, Gustav. Najlepe antine pripovedke. Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga, 2005.
ink, Jurij. Loil bom peno od valov, Feri Lainek: prironik za spoznavanje knjiev-
nih del. Ljubljana: Rokus Klett, 2010.
bogar, Alenka. Iz didaktike slovenine. Ljubljana: Zveza drutev SdS, 2013.
Zoran Boi
DIDACTIC MODEL OF A LEARNING CHAIN

OF FRAGMENTS: A CASE STUDY OF SHORT
STORY TANTADRUJJ BY CIRIL KOSMA
Abstract: The paper presents a case study of the school interpretation of a medium-length
narrative text based on the model of a learning chain of fragments equipped with questions for
close reading. This didactic approach already became widespread in Slovenia prior to the Sec-
ond World War, reaching more systematic realization with the publication of two workbooks
for home reading: Zlati poljub (Golden kiss) and Poljub zlata (Kiss of gold) in 1998. After al-
most two decades of its application in schools, it is time for a more detailed assessment of the
approach and its usefulness, which has been carried out also through the comparison of two
learning chains that were created after the well-known short story Tantadruj by Kosma. The
paper is concluded with a learning chain that connects Tantadrujs search for happiness with
the narrators search for creative inspiration.
Keywords: Ciril Kosma, learning chains, close reading, home reading, didactics of lit-
erature

Vol. 7, No. 1 (2016):
( ) 153-165. 153
UDC 94(474.5)13/14

. 1
()

: -
1387. . -
-
.
1387.
., -
-
.
.
: , , , , ,
,

XIV ,
1377. .,

. -
-
,
-
.

1
vladislav@sotirovic.eu (Vladislav B. Sotirovi, Mykolas Romeris University Vilnius, Faculty of Politics
and Management, Political Science Department, Lithuania)
154 | .
.
-
.
1385. . 14.
(Krve)
-
,
. , -
-
[Krvos aktas, 2122]. 1401. .,
1434. . 1386. .
2
.3 (
), . -
( )
. -
[ Jokimaitis R., Pasaulio ir Lietuvos istorija, 119].

:
. , -
( ) . -
-

. -
.
-
. () -
-
. ,

. , () -
2
(), () ().
3
-
[Gudaviius E., Lietuvos istorija,
166].
| 155
-
XI XII
[Zinkeviius Z., Lietuviai: Praeities didyb ir sunykimas, 149]. -
XI ;
.
- -
, -
. ,
,
-
. , -
X XV [Bakonis
E., Lietuvos istorija, 4475].
-
:
, . -
-
-
.

. XIV

-
1382. . ,
. -
21. 1383. . . -
, 1384. . -

-
.
-
-
, . .
( ) -
, , -
. ,
-
. -

156 | .

. -
. -
, -

. -
. ,
(. ) --
. , -
1385. .
,
1371. . (26. ) -
[ ., , 184],
1237. . -
. , XIV (-
) -
()
[Zinkeviius Z., Lietuviai: Praeities didyb ir sunykimas, 155].
1385. . 1387. . -
-
.
-
[ : Engel J., Groer
Historischer Weltatlas, 40; Magocsi R. P., Historical Atlas of Central Europe, 21].

-
1387. . ,
, , -
, .

(). , -
, ,
( Jan Dugosz 1415. .1480. .)
XV . ,
-
( ) . -
| 157
,
,
. , , -
.
. -
-

. , , -
, . ( , ), -
.
(, , ...) [Dlugoa J., Lenkijos istorija].

. , ,
.
.
-
.
() ,
() , . -

() -
. XIV -
.
( )

.
-
[Baliulis ., Lietuvos Didiosios Kunigaiktysts kasdieninis gyvenimas,
3639].
, .
-
( XIII ) -
(1251. .) [Mindaugo kriktas],
, . .
1419. . -
.
1387. .
17.
1387. .
158 | .
.4
, .
50 60
-
[Kiaupa Z., The History of Lithuania, 130].

, .
. -
, , -
-

XIV XV . -

-
. -
.
-
. , ,
, -
, () -
() 1413. . /
() 1410. . -
(.,
, , , .) -
[Gudaviius E, Lietuvos istorija, 166].

-
. , ,
,
-
4

. -
VI 1388. . [Karolio VI laikas]. -
12. 1388. .
.
. -
1388. . 1392. . -
.
| 159
.
-
. , -
, . ,
. 10. 1389. .
-
.

- .5

,
, -
. , -

17. 1387. . -
, 22. 1387. . -
.
-
. , -
ad hoc
. -
1387. . - -
.
1387.
.
. ,
-
(. )
-
( ) . ,
, , -
-

. , , -
.
5
-
[Samalaviius S., An Outline of Lithuanian History, 36].
160 | .

1388. . , . -
1385. . -
.
, -
, .
(). , -
20. 1387. .,
,

. , ,
, -
. , -

[Kiaupa Z., The History of Lithuania, 130131].
22. 1387. .
-
XII XIII
() .

. -
(.
, ),
. 1387. . -
- -
. -
.

-
,
.
22. 1387. . ,
,
[Bumblauskas A., Senosios Lietuvos
istorija, 134].
-
1795. . -
. -
1387. .
| 161
-
, .
.6

() 1385. . -
, -
()
. -
,
, -
, , , .
-
-
-
.
1403. . IX
[Popieiaus Bonifaco IX bul] -

/ () 1410. . -
- (Drang nach Osten). -

. -
VI 1389. . -
. 1410. .
, .
-
. , 1403.
. (
) , -
-
.
, -
, . ,
6
: [Witte J., Bourdeaux M., Proselytism
and Orthodoxy in Russia].
162 | .
, . -
,
. -
-
. -
, .
-
XV .
,
( )
( ). -
,

. - -
- (tripartitio
christiana) - : , .7

,
. ,
-
-
. -
,
. -
. -

-
15. 1569. .
XX .

XVI , . ,

7
: [Le Goff J., La Civilisation de LOccident
Medieval].
| 163
.

. ,
-
:
, , , ,
, . --
-
X (966. .)
,
.
-
, 30-
,
.
-
. -
, .
, , -
: . -

- .

. ,
. -
-

--
.8 -
- .
-
-
, .
-
-
8
: [ ., ].
164 | .
. -

1569. .
XVII
-
1697.
. --

.
1387. . -
-
, - .
-

.
-
, -
.
-
-
-

- -
.
(, , ):
Bakonis E., i dr. Lietuvos istorija. Iliustrota enciklopedija. Vilnius: Leidykla viesa,
2012.
Baliulis A., Meilus E. (eds.). Lietuvos Didiosios Kunigaiktysts kasdieninis
gyvenimas. In Lietuvos istorijos skaitini chrestomatija. Vilnius, 2001.
Bumblauskas A. Senosios Lietuvos istorija, 10091795. Vilnius: R. Paknio leidykla,
2007.
Dlugoa J. Lenkijos istorija: Balt religijos ir mitologijos altiniai. T. 1: Nuo seniausi
laik iki XV amiaus pabaigos. Vilnius, 1996,
| 165
Engel J. (Hrsg.). Groer Historischer Weltatlas. Zweiter Teil. Mittelalter. Mnchen:

Bayerischer Schulbuch-Verlag, 1979.
Gudaviius E. Lietuvos istorija. I tomas. Nuo seniausi laik iki 1569 met. Vilnius:
Akademinio skaut sjdio Vydno fondas ikagojeLietuvos raytoj
sjungos leidykla, 1999.
Jokimaitis R., Kasperaviius A., Manelis E., Stukien B. Pasaulio ir Lietuvos istorija.
VIXVIII amiai. Vadovlis 8 klasei. Vilnius: Kronta, 2006.
Le Goff J. La Civilisation de LOccident Medieval. Paris: Arthaud, 1977.
Kiaupa Z., Kiaupien, Kunceviius A. The History of Lithuania Before 1795. Vilnius:
Lithuanian Institute of History, 2000.
Krvos aktas. Vilnius, 2002.
Magocsi R. P. Historical Atlas of Central Europe. Revised and Expanded Edition. Seattle:
University of Washington Press, 2002.
. . : , 1989 (Mihalji, R. Kraj
srpskog carstva. Beograd: BIGZ, 1989).
Popieiaus Bonifaco IX bul 1403: Danilowicz J. Skarbiec diplomatw papieskich,
cesarskich, krlewskich, ksicych. T. 1. Wilno, 1860, 338, no. 774.
Samalaviius S. An Outline of Lithuanian History. Vilnius: Diemedis leidykla, 1995.
Witte J., Bourdeaux M. Proselytism and Orthodoxy in Russia: The New War for Souls.
New York: Orbis Books, 1999.
Zinkeviius Z. Lietuviai: Praeities didyb ir sunykimas. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedij
leidybos centrasLietuvi kalbos institutas, 2013.
. . : , 1996 (Obolenski D.
Vizantijski komonvelt. Beograd: Prosveta, 1996).
Vladislav B. Sotirovi
CHRISTIANIZATION OF GRAND DUTCHY OF LITHUANIA
Abstract: The research topic of this article is the christianization of Grand Duchy of
Lithuania in 1387. In that sence, Research analysis is focused to the importance of this histor-
ical event in terms of geopolitical and cultural regions of the Baltic States and Eastern Europe.
Keywords: Christianity, Lithuania, feudalism, Middle Ages, Catholicism, Orthodoxy,
Paganism
Vol. 7, No. 1 (2016):
( ) 167-185. 167
UDC 94(540)1757

Dr Abdul Azim Akhtar1

Glocal University (Saharanpur)
School of Media and Cultural Studies
India

MONEYBAGS, FRENCH FRIENDSHIP & NAWABS
Abstract: The eighteenth century world was an open field for the European naval pow-
ers to test the waters across the globe. The attraction for India lay in its fame in the world as
land of unending opportunities, spice trade and seamless wealth, thanks to the splendid rule
and fame of the Moghuls, who by this time were on their last legs. The English seized the op-
portunity with both hands to not only get concessions from the fading Moghuls but also to
use force and coercion to plan the gradual elimination and extinction of Indian political en-
tities. Plassey in 1757 is perfect example of such type, which has been presented as a Battle
in textbooks. The paper attempts to narrate that the so-called battle was actually a plot con-
spired by the super rich Marwaris and Jains and executed by a Thug of the British East India
CompanyRobert Clive.
Keywords: Battle of Plassey, Seven Years War, British East India Company, colonial-
ism, Marwari, Bengal Nawabs
Introduction
Bengal in Eastern India was among the most peaceful and prosperous areas of
Asia, and paid an annual tribute of ten million rupees to the Moghal Court in Delhi
around 18th century. After the death of Moghal Emperor in 1707 C.E., no successor
could enforce the sovereignty of the Empire in the far-flung areas of the Indian Sub-
continent, as a result many states declared independence, or were had only symbol-
ic and ceremonial connection with the Moghal Emperors for some legitimacy. Ben-
gal, Oudh in Northern India, and Hyderabad in South India were prominent states
which asserted independence.
1
azimakhtar@gmail.com
168 | Abdul Azim Akhtar
Alivardi Khan was the powerful and popular ruler of Bengal, who enjoyed sup-
port base among all sections of the region. He was against the grant of any conces-
sion to the European powers in his state, and vehemently turned down the farman of
the Moghal Emperor to grant land to the English East India Company around Hug-
li river in Bengal for trade and construction of the Fort. The state was though not so
opposed to the French and Dutch companies, which had trading centres within the
state and obeyed the terms and conditions. European mercantile companies arrived
at Bengals shores and changed its history for all time to come.2 The English abused
the rights, privileges and concessions given by the state and the Moghal Court.
Genesis
The origin of the strained ties between the English and the Bengal Nawab com-
menced from the anchoring of the British ships in Bay of Bengal. The English mis-
used dastaks granted to the British in 1717 by Moghal Emperor Farrukh Siyar. This
caused huge loss of revenue to the Bengal Nawab. British supported Ghaseti Begum,
and gave shelter to the son of Ghasetis treasurer in the Fort William. English forti-
fied Fort William with mounted guns, without taking the approval from the Nawab.
This alarmed the Nawab, as it amounted to challenging the authority of the Nawab.
The Fort was attacked by Bengal Nawab to reinforce his power and stamp his author-
ity over the province. This attack has been blown out of proportion and termed by
the English Historians as Black-Hole, which never was. Most of the local tradition
and native historians have not given any account of any such incident3. It is worthy
of note that the incident of the Black Hole finds no mention in the Seir-ul-Mutakher-
in . And Holwell, whose account is taken as the proof , was released by Sirajuddau-
la. The young Siraj-ud-Daulah was also constantly threatened with invasion on its
western border by the Afghans and the Marathas.
The English were aware of this opposition from the state rulers and were plan-
ning to cement their position since getting a foothold in the state. As early as 1752,
The East India Company planned to remove Sirajs grandfather, Alivardi Khan, in
order to prosper. Before his death in April 1756, Bengal Nawab Alivardi Khan, nom-
inated his grandson Siraj-ud-Daulah, as his successor. The decision led to intrigues
in the extended family of Alivardi Khan. On ascending the throne, he (Sirajuddau-
la) expelled Ghasiti Begum from her palace and kept her in confinement. The En-
2
Rila Mukherjee, The Northern Bay of Bengal, 800-1500 CE: A History apart?, Nehru Memorial Mu-
seum and Library, New Delhi, 2013, p. 45.
3
The Musnud of Murshidabad, Purna Chandra Das, Calcutta , 1905, p. 89.
Plassey Plot in 1757: English Enimity, Marwari Moneybags,
French Friendship & Nawabs | 169
glish historians also expected the young 20-years-old Nawab to practice celibacy. The
British Historians have deliberately fabricated facts to present the young Nawab in
poor light, so that the change of guard could be justified.
Alivardi Khans eldest daughter, Ghaseti Begum, brother Mir Jafer, and army
general Yar Latif Khan challenged the decision to appoint Nawab Siraj Ud daula as
Nawab and formed a discontent group against. Alivardis commander-in-chief,f Mir
Jafar, to whom his half-sister was married, started plotting against Siraj-ud-daula, and
for a short time was removed from the command4. Another reason for weakness was
the existence of the East India Company, which had established at Calcutta not on-
ly a commercial, but a political center. A third was the attitude of the Hindu zamin-
dars, bankers, and officials who, always influential in Bengal, had grown very power-
ful since the days of Murshid Quli Khan5. English also developed intimate relations
with the Hindu Marwari merchants, who were bankers of the day. The policy of fa-
voring Marwari merchants such as Jagat Seth did not go down well with the Bengal
Nawab. While the Nawab was not happy with the English for various reasons, the
growing French presence in the Eastern India accelerated the tension during the Sev-
en Years War period. The proximity of the French to the Bengal Nawabs made the
English jealous and wary.
French friendship
The French influence at the court of the Nawab grew during the reign of ambi-
tious French Governor-General Joseph Franois Dupleix. This was resulting in in-
creasing French trade in Bengal. The power of the English also frightened the young
Nawab. Frightened by the growing power of the British in Bengal, Siraj Ud Daulah be-
gan contacting the French. As the nawab sought aid, Clive dispatched forces against
the French colony at Chandernagore which fell on March 23.6
The French authorities at Chandernagore were alarmed with the growing influ-
ence and the crony ties of the British with the neo-capitalists of India. Before the
French could act and send the reinforcement from the Deccan or Europe, the En-
glish led by Clive and Watson attacked French outpost Chandernagore in Bengal,
and struck heavy blow for any revival of the French fortune in India. The naval at-
tack was led by Watson, while Clive marched by land. French Fort, the barracks, the
4
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/ikram/part2_19.html
5
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/ikram/part2_19.html
6
http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/frenchindianwar/p/Seven-Years-War-Battle-Of-Plassey.htm
armaments, and logistics fell into the hands of the English. The defeat of the French
further alarmed Siraj about the rise of the English company in his province.7
The East India Company responded with an army led by Robert Clive, which
recaptured Calcutta, took Chandernagore off the French. The British were able to
overwhelm the French artillery. Clive marched on Chandranagore and, after brib-
ing the Nawabs general sent to intervene, took and destroyed the settlement on
23rd March 1757.8
Clive then marched to attack the French station of Chandernagore, and received
its surrender on 23 March. Mosher Lass (Monsieur Law) who was a Command-
er of character amongst them, assembled the few remains of his nation, and some
musketeers, which had had disciplined soldiers marched to Murshidabad, where he
took service with Sirajud Daula. The Nawab, fearing the growing threat of the Brit-
ish presence in Bengal, began corresponding with the French East India Company
in Pondicherry and Arcot.9 English, through their agent informed the Nawab about
their displeasure and breach of treaty and that they would be treated as enemy.10
The agents were supported by the coteries, who were against the Nawab. The
French General warned that most of his servants, ministers, Generals either were dis-
affected to his person or had already entered into correspondence with the English;
but that so long as he with his handful of French would be in his service, no one would
serve him so well in a day of battle. The General departed for Azimabad(Patna)11.
During the Plassey clash, the French provided assistance to the Nawab. Super-
vising the Indian gunners and working a few smaller calibre field guns themselves
were 40 or 50 Frenchmen, retained from Monsieur Laws force, all deeply resent-
ful at the destruction of the French settlement at Chandranagar, and commanded
by Monsieur St. Frais.12 While the declining French power in India was being over-
shadowed by the rising English power, a new business caste came into prominence
in the 18th century. These were Jain Marwari banias who had established themselves
as leading bankers for the Moghals, the Nawabs and were also lending loans to the
European trading companies.
7
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Seven_Years_War /
8
http://www.britishbattles.com/anglo-french-wars-in-india/battle-of-plassey/
9
Daniel Marston, The Seven Years' War, Routledge, 2013, p. 46.
10
Syed Gholam Hussein Khan, The Seir-Mutakherin or Review of Modern Times. Vol. II, Inter-India
Publications, New Delhi. 1986, p. 226-227.
11
Publications, New Delhi. 1986, p. 226-227.
12
Marwari moneybags
For centuries the Marwaris had dominated much of the long-range trade and
high finance in north India, especially that of Bihar, Bengal and Eastern UP. Tod, the
classical historian of Rajasthan, noted in 1832: nine-tenths of the bankers and com-
mercial men of India are natives of Maroo Desh (Marwar) and these chiefly of Jain
faith13. They are also known as Oswals and Saherwals.
In the 18th century, the Jagat Seth House (Marwari Oswals) were bankers to the
Nawab-Nazim of Bengal and made and unmade Mughal emperors. Their role in the
economy was very important.14 Activist Aakar Patel writes, Jagat Seth ran the econ-
omy for Siraj-ud- Daulah, Mir Jafar, and later for Mir Qasim. It is recorded that Rs 3
out of Rs 4 collected as revenue in the state went straight to Jagat Seth, against loans
he had already advanced to the nawabs.15
Before the conquest of Bengal by the British, there was a large merchant class en-
gaged in inland trade, banking, and shipping. The house of Jagat Seth, banker to the
Nawabs, was a Marwari family settled near Murshidabad. There were other bankers
who engaged in the transfer of funds across India, with Benares serving as a clearing
node. Shipping was largely in the hands of Gujarati merchants.16
The Oswals were considered by colonial ethnographers to be the Rothschilds
of India, having earned prominence as bankers and financiers to the Mughals. Said
to have originated in and emigrated mainly from Bikaner (now in Indian state of Ra-
jasthan), the Oswal merchants set up a colony in the town of Azimganj in Murshi-
dabad, north of Calcutta.17 The head of this community of merchants was given the
hereditary Mughal title Jagat Seth while serving the Mughal Nawabs of Bengal up
until the end of the reign of Siraj-ud-Daula.
A community of fellow Oswals soon gathered in Murshidabad( capital of Mu-
ghal Bengal, and its suburb Azimgunj) and to this day forms one of the elements of
13
Thomas A Timberg, The Origin of Marwari Industrialists, in Robert Paul Beech & Mary Jane Beech,
Change and Continuity, Asian Studies Centre, Michigan, 1969, p.159.
14
Change and Continuity, Asian Studies Centre, Michigan, 1969, p. 159.
15
Aakar Patel / Blame the British Raj on bankers/ /http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/zgaDxyMuIrH-
3QWHElwkX3M/Blame-the-British-Raj-on-bankers.html / published on April 06, 2012
16
Amiya Kumar Bagchi / On Colonialism and the Indian Economy / http://ras.org.in/on_colonial-
ism_and_the_indian_economy/ 16/04/2016)
17
http://www.gutenberg-e.org/haa01/frames/fhaa01.html
the Marwari community in Bengal. Many bought large landholdings and assimilat-
ed their life style to landed gentry of Bengal.18 What transpired between the Nawab
and the house of the Jagat Seth around this time is mentioned in legends and con-
temporary records.
Nawab Serajuddaula required Jagat Seth to raise three Crore rupees from the
European merchants trading and on his refusal to comply with the requisition the
latter came for blows in open Durbar.19 This incident of the banker being beaten up
in the court is also mentioned by some other accounts. It is not clear if this was the
reason for the parting of the ways for the Jagat Seth Housewhich enjoyed cordial
relation with the Bengal Nawab since the time of Murshid Quli Khan.
Secret Conferences were held at Jagat Seths House and the deposition of Sera-
juddaula was decided. Mir Jafar was replaced with Khaja Hadi, after former recalled
his troops from Plassey, against the will of Nawab20. The bankers promised three
crore rupees to the people engaged in overthrowing Sirajuddaula. English held a great
Council, and the proposal of the two rebel commanders to attack Siraj, and made
preparation for declaring war21. The then Jagat Seth (Seth Manik Chand) played a
pivotal and treacherous role together with Sirajs maternal uncle Mir Jafar, Umichand
and Rai Durlabh in the determining the outcome of the battle of Plassey in 1757.22
Speaking of Jagat Seth, Clive said, he is a person of the greatest property and in-
fluence in the three subas (Bengal, Bihar & Orissa) and of no inconsiderable weight
at the Mughal Court, it was natural to determine him, as the proper person to settle
the affairs of this government23. The banker received support from the disgruntled
elements of the Bengal Nawab family. The two principal Generals of Serajuddaula
conspired with Jagat Seth, Bibi Ghasiti Begum an enemy of the Prince joined them.
She was planning to overthrow Siraj with the help of Mir Jafar & Raja Dulrabh24.
Patel says, I am convinced that this communitys individuals wanted the British
to take over the administration of the country. The community is the Jain baniyas,
18
Change and Continuity, Asian Studies Centre, Michigan, 1969, p. 159.
19
20
21
Publications, New Delhi. 1986, pp. 230.
22
http://business.illinois.edu/doogar/www/Other/Jain/murshid.html/11 7 2015
23
Naheen Jabbar, Historiography and writing past colonial India, Routledge, London, p. 101.
24
Publications, New Delhi. 1986 .
who financed the Mughals in Bengal, and the Jain and Hindu baniyas who financed
the two (the Mughals and the British) in Surat. He continues, These influential
bankers were Oswal Jains, led by a man whose title was Jagat Seth. His name is not
known for certain, but it might have been Madhav Rai. Penderel writes: It seems to
have been Jagat Seth who took the lead in approaching the English for help in over-
throwing him.25. The other was Punjabi Khatri baniya Omichand, who was the key
to the negotiations. Jagat Seth played from the shadows.
The most famous of all Marwari families was Jagat Seth of Murshidabad, who,
along with Omichund and Mir Jafar, conspired against Serajuddaula, the Nawab of
Bengal, in the Battle of Plassey in 1757.26 Though the Jagat Seths supported the Brit-
ish in the politics around the Battle of Plassey in 1757 which firmed British control
of Bengal, their position began to decline rapidly as the British took over many of
the functions from which the Jagat Seth firm had made money.27 A Soviet Histori-
an V I Pavlov points out that the spread of Marwaris throughout the country consid-
erably accelerated after the extension of direct British rule.28 The plot to dethrone
revolved around the several state and non-state actors and it tested the nerves of all
the men involved as they did not trust each other blindly.
The Hidden Plot

After defeating the French, the English formed a clandestine confederacy against
Serajuddaula. This comprised of troika Raja Dulrabh, finance secretary Bengal, Mir
Jafer, military chief Bengal, and Jagat Seth. The plot was confided to the English
agents, and a communication was opened between the discontented elements at
Murshidabad and the committee at Calcutta. During the negotiations stage, the con-
spiracy to topple Serajuddaula ran with many trouble, before it was finally execut-
ed with lot of apprehension and doubts. Clive came to know that Omichandthe
key broker was ready to reveal the plan to enemy for any price. This revelation made
Clive develop cold feet over the plan to topple the Bengal Nawab.
25
3QWHElwkX3M/Blame-the-British-Raj-on-bankers.html / (published on April 06, 2012)
26
htt p://w w w.business - standard.com/ar ticle/beyond-business/it- star ted-w ith-
plassey-114061201347_1.html / Bhupesh Bhandari /
27
Thomas A Timberg, The Marwaris : From Jagat Seth to the Birlas, Penguin,UK, 2015, p. 64.
28
Quoted in Thomas A Timberg, The Origin of Marwari Industrialists, in Robert Paul Beech & Mary
Jane Beech, Change and Continuity, Asian Studies Centre, Michigan, 1969, p. 159.
The lives of Watts, Mir Jafer, of all the conspirators, were at the mercy of Omi-
chand. He was keen to take advantage of the circumstances and dictate his own terms.
He demanded three hundred thousand British Pounds Sterling, or Rs. 30 Lakh as
the price of his secrecy and assistance. Patel writes, History records the broker of
Plasseys treachery as another trader in Bengal, a Punjabi Khatri called Amin Chand.
He is said to have cemented the deal between Clive and Mir Jafar, but then black-
mailed the British saying he would tell Siraj ud Daulah unless he was paid Rs 30 Lakh.29
Omichand also demanded that his clause should be inserted in the proposed
treaty between Mir Jafer and Clive. His advice was taken. He had demanded that an
article touching his claims should be inserted in the treaty between Mir Jafer and the
English, and he would not be satisfied unless he saw it with his own eyes! Clive be-
ing the clever man of the century wanted to beat Omichand in his own game, and ac-
cordingly he planned. Two treaties were drawn up, one on white paper (Omichunds
name not mentioned), the other on red (it was shown to Omichand and contained
his name), the former real, and the latter fictitious! This was only known to Clive,
and no other person from either side.
The East India Company since their arrival on the Indian shores banked heav-
ily on the espionage as a policy and ploy to further their interests and business. In
the early 18th century the business of Bengal authorities was divided between a se-
cret department, which dealt with military plans, and a public department, which
dealt with all other matters, including military appointments and fortifications.30
The secret pact between the English and the prospective Nawab were carried
on by Watts, a Company official and Bengali merchant Omichund, who was one of
the wealthiest native merchants in Bengal. His business was affected as a result of
English and Nawab rivalry and he decided to throw his lot with the English to get
huge reward in cash and also consolidate his position as fixer / tout. He was influ-
ential among his Marwari caste, and had the requisite amount of vices, greediness,
and treachery to amass wealth through unknown and unfamiliar sources.
All was now ready for action. Mr. Watts fled secretly from Murshidabad. In the
committee there was much hesitation for the next move; but Clives voice was giv-
en in favour of the conspirators, and his vigour and firmness bore down all the op-
position. Clive wrote to Watts a letter in the following terms: Tell Mir Jafer to fear
nothing. I will join him with five thousand men who never turned their backs. As-
29
3QWHElwkX3M/Blame-the-British-Raj-on-bankers.html / published on April 06, 2012
30
T. A. Heathcote, The Military in British India: The Development of British Land Forces in South Asia,
Manchester University Press, 1995, p.70.
sure him I will march night and day to his assistance, and stand by him as long as I
have a man left.
Some English historians have claimed that Seraj was aware of the plot. But this
sounds ridiculous and is not proved by any contemporary narrative, or evidence. No
native historian, not even Ghulam Hussain Khan, whose family were also acting as
spies for the East India Company mention about this. Serajuddaula continued to pose
faith in Mir Jafer till the very end. During the skirmish at Plassey, Siraj put his turban
at the feet of Mir Jaffer and said, The honour of this turban is with you honour it.
Clive was negotiating through William Watts, chief of the Kasimbazar facto-
ry of the Company with potential contenders and dissatisfied members of the royal
family of Bengal. Mir Jafar was negotiating through an Armenian merchant, Khwa-
ja Petruse. Yar Latif Khan, army chief Mir Jafar Ali Khan and Ghaseti Begum were
key discontent members of the royal family. Ghaseti Begum wanted Shaukat Jang,
installed as the Nawab, while Mir Jafer was nursing the ambition of becoming the
Nawab himself. The government of Madras, apprised that war had commenced in
Europe, and apprehensive of an attack from the French, became impatient for the re-
turn of the armament. Clive decided that the best way to secure the Companys in-
terests in Bengal was to replace Siraj with a new and more pliant nawab. He found a
candidate in a discontented elderly general named Mir Jafar.31
The East India Company approved the plot to overthrow Siraj Ud Dawla. The
Board of Directors of the Company approved the plot on April 23, 1757. An agree-
ment was signed between Clive and Mir Jafar on June 5, 1757. However, in an age of
espionage, slow communication and chain of intermediaries, there were apprehen-
sion and suspicion galore. When the correspondence with Mir Jafar Khan became
less than satisfactory, the English were in fix and expected worse. Clive held a Coun-
cil of War with all his officers to take stock of the situation. The question discussed
and put to the council for a vote was whether the army should continue to advance
or stay at Katwah, The majority of the officers were for staying put.32 Coote urged
that a delay would enable Monsieur Law to join Seraj-ud-Daulah from Bhagalpur with
his French troops, known to have been urgently summoned by Siraj-ud-Daulah. The
presence of Monsieur Laws force in the opposing army, in addition to strengthen-
ing it significantly, was likely to cause the many Frenchmen serving in the East In-
dia Company army to desert to their own side33.
31
http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/battle-plassey ( by Richard Cavendish / accessed
on 31/07/2014)
32
33
He seems to have had a crisis of confidence and summoned his officers to a coun-
cil of war on June 21st. The majority, including Clive, voted against action. At that
point, according to his friend Robert Orme, Clive retired into a grove of trees where
he stayed for an hour in meditation.34 On his return he gave orders for the army to
move on to Plassey. After the Council of War, a further letter reached Clive from Mir
Jafar Khan, confirming that in the event of battle he would join the English against
Siraj-ud-Daulah. Clive decided to back Mir Jafar and, as the Nawab withdrew his ar-
my north to Plassey, the conspirators signed a treaty granting Mir Jafar the throne
of Bengal, Orissa and Bihar in exchange for the transfer of all the French stations in
the area to British control.
Ground zero / Battle

The Battle of Plassey was fought on June 23, 1757, during the Seven Years War
(1756-1763). Clive was against immediate advance. The decision of the majority
was not to fight. In this predicament, Clive returned to mediate. Through exhaus-
tion, he fell asleep, but after an hour rose, determined to fight. Immediate orders were
given to cross the river. His force consisted of nine hundred European artillery, fifty
English sailors, and little over two thousand native troops.35 Eight six-pounders and
two small howitzers composed the artillery terrain.
The East India Company troops were under the overall command of Robert
Clive, who had led the companys troops against the French during the Carnatic war
in Southern India. The English troops consisted of 900 Europeans, 200 Topasses,
and 2,100 sepoys and 9 cannons. British East India Company Regiments consisted of
39th (Dorsetshire) Regiment of Foot, 1st Battalion; 103rd Regiment of Foot(Bom-
bay), 102nd Regiment of Foot (Madras), 101st Regiment of Foot (Bengal), 1st Ben-
gal Native Infantry (BNI) / Lal Paltan, 9th Battery, 12th Regiment, Royal Artillery,
50 naval ratings from HMS Tyger. The British deployed in linear formation, placing
European troops in the centre and sepoys and Topasses on the flanks.
The Nawabs force consisted of thirty five thousand infantry, fifteen thousand
cavalry and fifty three field pieces, with fifty Frenchmen under M. Sr. Frais, occupy-
ing a strong position covered by intrenched works.36 The infantry was armed with
firelocks, pikes, swords, bows and arrows, covered the plain. They were accompanied
by fifty pieces of ordnance of the largest size, each tugged by a long team of white ox-
34
http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/battle-plassey
35
The Musnud of Murshidabad, Purna Chandra Das, Calcutta , 1905, p.242.
36
The Musnud of Murshidabad, Purna Chandra Das, Calcutta , 1905, p.243.
en, and each pushed on from behind by an elephant. Some smaller guns, under the
direction of a few French auxiliaries, were perhaps more formidable.
Apart from the nawab, the Bengal side consisted of La Compagnie des Indes Ori-
entales of France. The heavy artillery (53 cannon) was operated by about 40 French
soldiers sent by the French East India Company under French artillery officer Mon-
sieur Sinfray. The small contingent of French artillery came from their lost station at
Chandernagore. Siraj-ud-Daulahs artillery comprised 53 cannon, all of heavy cali-
bre; 32, 24 and 18 pounders. Guns of this size, more usually deployed in fixed po-
sition siege work, were not ideal for use on the battlefield, being cumbrous, slow to
load and difficult to move.37
Mir Jafar Ali Khan was commanding the 16,000 cavalry but had already fixed
a deal with the English, as mentioned above. It may be mentioned that in the 18th
century, the power and strength of the most of the Indian contingents lost its battle
advantage due to the adoption of European mode of war, where the canons played
the major role. Most of the emerging powers in the 18th century employed the Euro-
peans to manage the artillery, and no edge or element of surprise was left in the bat-
tlefield. Siraj-ud-Daulahs army comprised 35,000 foot soldiers, most poorly armed
and lacking formal discipline.38
The Nawabs army left at day break to take up their position under the com-
mand of Mir Madan, Mohan Lal, Dullavram(Rai Durlabh), Yar Lutf Khan ad Mir
Jafer. They assembled their troops near the battlefield but made no move to actually
join the battle.39 At Plassey, the army of Serajuddaula lay encamped under Dullara-
ma and Mir Jaffer. Clive and the Calcutta Council took this as a sign of hostility. 40
The Campaign
The Nawab opened the battle with an ineffective cannonade. The French opened
the action around 8:00 am with artillary fire, beginning an artillary duel that con-
tinued until noon.41 Both armies were in place by 8am. The French, under St Frais,
fired the first gun, which acted as a signal for the opening of a heavy bombardment
all along the line of Siraj-ud-Daulahs army. The Indian line was enveloped in a cloud
37
38
39
http://kuldeepsinghchouhan.blogspot.in/2011/06/mir-jaffar-and-historic-importance-of.html
40
41
http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/frenchindianwar/p/Seven-Years-War-Battle-Of-Plassey.htm /
Kennedy Hickman Updated February 22, 2016.
of powder smoke. The English guns returned the fire and inflicted considerable dam-
age on Siraj-ud-Daulahs troops.42
A rainstorm drenched the Nawabs powder supply, and the French made no ar-
rangement to cover the canons, muskets and guns. The heavy guns, which were loaded
on oxen-driven carts, and pushed by elephants, could not move on slippery ground.
And the animals were anxiously looking for shelter, which was not in sight. All this
created confusion and chaos in the Nawabs camp. The heavy rainstorm turned the
tables. The British were well prepared, came with plan of action, and made arrange-
ments to resume the fight after the rain. The Company troops covered their cannon
and muskets. When the storm cleared, Clive intensified the attack. The British guns
had greater range than those of the French.
The French troops with 4 cannon occupied the mound around the larger tank,
about half a mile from the English army. Between the larger tank and the river were
2 heavy guns manned by Indian gunners. Behind these guns stood Mir Madan Khan,
described as Siraj-ud-Daulahs sole faithful commander, with 5,000 cavalry and 7,000
foot soldiers, all described as the pick of Siraj-ud-Daulahs army.43
The 18th century historian, Ghulam Husain Salim, describes what happened:
Mir Muhammad Jafar Khan, with his detachment, stood at a distance towards the
left from the main army; and although Siraju-d-daulah summoned him to his side,
Mir Jafar did not move from his position. In the thick of the fighting, and in the heat
of the work of carnage, whilst victory and triumph were visible on the side of the ar-
my of Siraju-d-daulah, all of a sudden Mir Madan, commander of the Artillery, fell
on being hit with a cannon-ball.44
After an opening cannonade, a crash of thunder at noon heralded a torrential
downpour of rain that lasted half an hour. The British artillerymen quickly covered
their cannon and ammunition with tarpaulins, but the enemy failed to do the same
and their artillery was put out of action, so that when the Nawabs army moved for-
ward, assuming that Clives cannon were also out of action, it was met with a with-
ering storm of fire. The enemy withdrew and Seraj, lost his nerve when Mir Jafar ad-
vised retreat.45
42
http://www.britishbattles.com/anglo-french-wars-in-india/battle-of-plassey/ 31/10/2014)
43
http://www.britishbattles.com/anglo-french-wars-in-india/battle-of-plassey/ 31/10/2014)
44
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1757plassey.asp (From: Oliver J. Thatcher, ed., The Library
of Original Sources, (Milwaukee: University Research Extension Co., 1907), Vol. VII: The Age of Rev-
olution, pp. 59-64.)
45
http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/battle-plassey/ ( by Richard Cavendish / accessed
on 31/07/2014)
Around noon, Clive grabbed the opportunity to pound the enemy with the best
known canons and most effective gun powder of the time. It may be mentioned that
the English did not respond to the initial shelling with full force and retained their
powder and guns for the next phase of the war. Perhaps, they were waiting for the
time when the Nawabs poor French friends would exhaust their powder. And the
luck as the saying goes, favoured the brave when the unexpected heavy rains neu-
tralised the heavy guns of the Bengal Nawab.
Mir Madan, the most trusted and loyal officer of the Nawab, who had launched
an attack against the the East Indian Company, was hit by a British cannonball.46 But
soon after twelveoClock a cannon-ball struck Mir Madan, who was truly a brave
man and faithful servant.
After the martyrdom of Mir Madan, the field was taken by Mohan Lallthe loy-
al soldier of the Nawab. Mohan Lall was fighting bravely and needed support from
swiftly moving cavalry, which has not taken to the field during the action. Colonel
Clive reportedly said to his agent, That his master had promised and pledged him-
self,f that the troops, as well as commanders, were totally alienated from Sirajuddau-
lah; and that as soon as some engagement should take place, they would do his busi-
ness effectively. As much as I can see they very reverse of all that is taking place.47
Mohan Lal was fighting bravely with the canon. Mohan Lal was closely engaged
with the enemyhis canon was served with effect (the canon was served by a num-
ber of Frenchmen, commanded by Sinfray, as the report goes, who was a member of
the Council of Chandernagore; and his infantry having availed themselves of some
covers and other grounds, were pouring a quantity of bullets in the enemys ranks.48
Around this time, Serajuddaula make desperate appeal to Mir Jafer to honour
the promise and take the field for the honour of the Bengal state. The English were
angry that the battle actually took place and wanted Mir Jafer to take to the field to
save further injury and loss of life in their camp.
Seraj requested Mir Jafer to fight, I recommend myself to you; take care of the
conservation of my honour and life.49 Jafer replied that all advancing troops should
46
Charles Stewart, The History of Bengal, Bangabasi Press, Calcutta, 1903, p.600.
47
Publications, New Delhi. 1986, p. 231.
48
49
be called and said, recall those engaged and tomorrow with the blessing of God; I
will join all the troops together, and provide for the engagement.50
Mir Jafer, who is discredited and infamous in India for his treason, asked the
Nawab to order the retreat of the army from the battlefield...God-willing I will do
the best. The enemy withdrew and Seraj, lost his nerve when Mir Jafar advised re-
treat.51 The Nawab argued that the time was to fight and finish the war and not re-
treat, as it would demoralise the entire rank and file of the forces. Mir Jafer with a
smile said, I have given advise ...now it is for you to decide...you know better. Mir
Jafer however insisted on retreat, and Mohan Lall, reluctantly returned to the camp,
about two`o clock in the day.52
At this time, Seraj on the advice of Jafer called for retreatment of army. He (Mo-
han Lall) answered, This was not a time for retreat of army. that the action was so
far advanced ; should he turn, he head, to march back to camp, his people would
disperse, and perhaps abandon themselves to an open fight.53 His fears were true.
The Mir Jafer camp spread all kinds of rumours to suit the interest of the British
East India Company. The Nawabs troops as Raja Mohan Lall had predicted on see-
ing their military (artillery) returning to the camp, concluded that a general retreat
was ordered. Many other distinguished officers from the Nawabs side fell during the
day.54 Seraj again asked for retreat after Jafer gave a cold reply, the advice he had pro-
posed was the best in his power; and that as for the rest his Highness was the master
of taking his own decision and resolution. Seraj submitted to Jaffers pleasure, and re-
quested for retreat repeatedly.55 Thus retreat of Mohan Lals made a tall impression
on his troops. The soldiers did not bother to confirm the rumour and check with
Nawab Sirajud-daulah, who was busy fighting and slaughtering. Around this time,
the soldiers started to flee from the field amidst heavy shelling from the English side
and open hostility of the fellow soldiers of the Mir Jafer-camp. With their cannons
and muskets completely useless, and Mir Jafar refusing to attack the Clives camp,
50
51
http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/battle-plassey / ( by Richard Cavendish / accessed
on 31/07/2014)
52
Charles Stewart, The History of Bengal, Bangabasi Press, Calcutta, 1903, p.601,
53
54
Charles Stewart, The History of Bengal, Bangabasi Press, Calcutta, 1903, p. 602,
55
revealing his treachery, the Nawab was compelled to make a hasty retreat to save his
own life amidst general and an open treachery.
The native army suffered big loss and more than 1,000 were killed and thousands
were injured. Worse, loyal and most gallant native Generals and soldiers were not al-
lowed to fight in the battlefield due to the persuasion of Mir Jafer to return. This de-
cision to leave the battlefield sealed the fate of the Nawab. Before the sun-set, a gen-
eral flight occurred in Nawab Sirajuddaulahs army, and actually it was the eclipse of
the independent state of Bengal. The fight now had lost all its shame, whole bodies
fled although no one pursued; and in a little time the camp remained totally emp-
ty. Serajuddaula was amazed and confounded by general abandonment, joined the
runaways himself. He reached his palace next morning.56
By evening, the skirmish was over and the plot was a grand success. It did not
save his infant kingdom, his honour and not even his life. Seraj fled to Murshidabad
and from there he was on way to Patna, when a mendicant informed about his pres-
ence to the British agents. Some historians have noted that the beggar has had some
personal grudge against Serajuddaula and took revenge. He has sent for help from
Musuur Lass, but was seized by Mir Jafars men before Lass reached Rajmahal and
retreated, was followed by Major Coote.57
He was brought back, his wives were forcibly taken before the English. The roy-
al ladies were stripped of all the gold and silver jewellery, precious stones, diamonds,
and this was handed over to Robert Clive as gift. When Seraj was brought back to
Murshidabad around noon, Mir Jafer was unconscious after taking heavy dose of
opium, to which he was addicted. Miran, the son of Mir Jafer ordered the execution
of the fallen Nawab. Miran ( Mahmoody Beg) assigned the task of beheading Ser-
aj to Lal Mahmed.58
The battle cost the British East India Company nothing, as it recovered the cost
of the campaign, indemnity, award for the British men, and the entire exchequer of
Bengal, the rulers, and the elite was at the feet of Clive. The English just lost 22 men,
who were native sepoys.59 Though it was more of a skirmish than a battle, the British
56
57
58
59
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1757plassey.asp (From: Oliver J. Thatcher, ed., The Library
of Original Sources, (Milwaukee: University Research Extension Co., 1907), Vol. VII: The Age of Rev-
olution, pp. 59-64).
victory at Plassey was a crucial event in the history of India.60 Historian Malleson as-
serts that the Battle of Plassey set the course for the establishment of the British Em-
pire in India and the Far East.61
The Battle of Plassey has been called by a modern British writer the most miser-
able skirmish ever to be called a decisive battle. The victory of Plassey was complete.
Judged purely from a military standpoint the action was little more than a skirmish.62
Napoleons triumph over the Turks in Egypt was only a symptom of the technolog-
ical superiority achieved by Europe over Asia. The real historic hinge was the Battle
of Plassey, fought on the sweaty swamps of Bengal in 1757. Richard Cavendish says,
The skirmish at Plassey was critical to the East India Companys triumph over its
French rivals and, in the longer term, to the establishment of British rule in India.63
Following the battle, Clive saw that Mir Jafar was installed as Nawab on June 29.
Mir Jafer sent congratulations to his ally and future master. After the battle of Plassey
there continued a conference for three days at the residence of the Jagat Seth to select
a new Nawab of Bengal.64 On June 28, 1757, Clive installed Mir Jafar on the masnad
of Murshidabad and four days later Serajuddaula was executed.65 It was Jagat Seth
who went to Delhi to convince the Moghal emperor to accept the English victory
and install Mir Jafar as nawab.66 The white treaty was produced and read. Clive then
turned to Mr. Scrafton, one of the servants of the Company, and said in English, It
is now time to undeceive Omichund. Omichund, said Mr. Scrafton in Hindos-
tanee, the red treaty is a trick, you are to have nothing.
The victory at Plassey effectively eliminated French influence in Bengal and
weakened their position in India.67 The Alinagar treaty was confirmed and the French
factories were not permitted to resettle in Bengal, Bihar or Orissa. The victory at
60
Richard Cavendish, History Today Volume 57 Issue 6 June 2007, http://www.historytoday.com/rich-
ard-cavendish/battle-plassey)
61
Kennedy Hickman Updated February 22, 2016.
62
Nazeer Ahmed , The Battle of Plassey, https://historyofislam.com/contents/onset-of-the-colonial-
age/the-battle-of-plassey/ )
63
http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/battle-plassey / ( by Richard Cavendish / accessed
on 31/07/2014)
64
http://en.encyclopediaofjainism.com/index.php?title=JAGAT_SETHS_OF_MURSHIDABAD
65
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/ikram/part2_19.html 15 10 14
66
3QWHElwkX3M/Blame-the-British-Raj-on-bankers.html / published on April 06, 2012)
67
Daniel Marston, The Seven Years' War, Routledge, 2013, p.45
Plassey effectively eliminated French influence in Bengal and saw the British gain
control of the region through favorable treaties with Mir Jafar. After 1757, the Sev-
en Years war began to turn in favour of Great Britain. British forces defeated French
forces in India, and in 1759 British armies invaded and conquered Canada.68 The
Seven Years War was fought in North America, Europe, the Caribbean and the Trea-
ty of Paris in 1763 ended the Seven Years War.
The shower of wealth now fell abundantly on the Company and its servants. A
sum of eight hundred thousand pounds sterling, in coined silver, was sent down the
river from Murshidabad to Fort William in more than a hundred boats. The trea-
sury of Bengal was thrown open to Clive. In addition, Watts collected 114,000 for
his efforts. The annual rent of 30,000 payable by the Company for use of the land
around Fort William was also transferred to Clive for life.69 The English people were
divided over the actions and acts of omission and commission in India, still Clive
was charged of corrupt prices and his impeachment trial was held in 1773. Appear-
ing before it, Clive said, A great prince was dependent on my pleasure, an opulent
city lay at my mercy; its richest bankers bid against each other for my smiles!
Clive did whatever one could think of in wild imagination for amassing wealth,
without bothering about rights, ethics, and morality. He deceitfully employed cor-
ruption, perjury, forgery, to plan the toppling of the Bengal Nawab, engineered coup
with the help of the native elite and emerging tycoons of the 18th century. This her-
alded the beginning of the crony capitalism on Indian soil. He bypassed even Chris-
tian morality, subverted the British laws and stooped to falsehood, hypocrisy, and
even substituted documentsan act which could be punished with death penalty
under British Act of 1729. Clivewho is credited with laying the foundation of the
British Empire became addicted to opium and committed suicide.
Concluding remarks
It may be concluded from the narrative that the clash between the East India
Company and the Bengal Nawab was not a war, as the result was fixed before the first
cannon was put into action. Just as today, many of the sports events are fixed by the
players, the so called battle was fixed by the top general of the Nawabs army, who
despite being present at the Zero Ground did not fight. The French were reluctant
68
Kennedy Hickman Updated February 22, 2016
69
The Life of Robert Lord Clive; collected from the Family Papers, communicated by the Earl of Pow-
is. By Major-General Sir John Malcolm, K.C.B. 3 vols. London: J. Murray, 1836.
friends, who were struggling with the English over the globe, and on a very weak
wicket. It is a sham on part of the British Historians to call this a Battle. At best, it
can be termed a mere skirmish, where a young Nawab with thousands of disloyal and
untrained soldiers was up against the worlds top military power of the day. It was
Plot which shaped the history of the world and changed the course of Indian history.
The plot was a huge success for the British colonialism and its masters in England.
The victory of the East India Company destroyed the French imperial dreams in In-
dia. The unaccounted wealth gathered by the Company, its servants helped Britain
in the Seven Years War. Bengal provided the British with a source of revenue in the
conflict with the French which followed The Battle of Wandiwash. The Marwari
Banias, who had enjoyed the status of Banker of the World during the reign of the
Bengal Nawabs and puppet Moghal emperors, lost their position to the East India
Company. The British sun was shining in the Indian Subcontinent.
Glossary: Jagat Seth=Banker of the World; Topasses = native Portuguese sol-

diers; masnad = throne; Bania = A trading sub-caste coming from the Vaishya main
caste; farman = Moghal official order / Nawab official order; dastaks = Mughal Impe-
rial export trade permits; Nawab = Viceroy of the Moghal Emperor in province /
Head of Province
LITERATURE:
Chaudhury, Sushil. The Prelude to Empire: Palashi Revolution of 1757. New Delhi:
Manohar Publishers & Distributors, 2000.
Marston, Daniel. The Seven Years War. London: Routledge, 2013.
Gupta, B.K. Sirajuddaulah and the East India Company, 1756-1757. Leiden: E. J
Brill, 1962.
7 Clive of Indias Finest Hour. London: Osprey Pub-
Harrington, Peter. Plassey 1757,
lishing, 1994.
Heathcote, T. A. The Military in British India: The Development of British Land Forc-
es in South Asia. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1995.
Landes, David S. The Wealth and Poverty of Nations. New York: Norton and Com-
pany, 1999.
Marshall, P.J. Bengalthe British Bridgehead. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1987.
Naheen, Jabbar. Historiography and writing past colonial India. London: Routledge,
2011.
Rila, Mukherjee. The Northern Bay of Bengal,l 800-1500 CE: A History apart?. New
Delhi: Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, 2013.
Sarkar, J. N. The History of Bengal. Dhaka: University of Dhakha, 1968.
Spear, Percival. Master of Bengal. Clive and His India. London: Thames & Hudson,
1975.
Stewart, Charles. The History of Bengal. Calcutta: Bangabasi Press, 1903.
Syed, Gholam, and Hussein Khan. The Seir-Mutakherin or Review of Modern Times.
Vol. II. New Delhi: Inter-India Publications, 1986.
Timberg, Thomas A. The Origin of Marwari Industrialists. In Change and Conti-
nuity, eds. Robert Paul Beech and Mary Jane Beech. Michigan: Asian Studies
Centre, 1969.
1757. :
, ,

:
. -
,
.
-
,
. 1757. ,
, . -
-
, -
.
: , ,
, , ,

| 187

1. , -
(Word), Serbian Studies Research:
serbian_studies@hotmail.com
2. : 25 (48.000 ).
3. : : Times New Roman; : 12; -

: Before: 0; After: 0; Line spacing: Single.
4. : : Normal; : (Col 1).
5. : () , ()
().
( ), -
.
6. (): -
() -
, .
. ,
, , ,
. -
.
7. : -
. , -
, .
8. : , , , -
, , , -
. a
,
.
188 |
9. : ; -
.
10. : , , -
. 100 250 (-
, .) , . -
,
. [ :
: Times New Roman, Normal; : 10;
Before: 0; After: 0; Line spacing: Single; (Col 1).]
11. : 10. -
.
. [ : : Times New Roman,
Normal; : 10; (Col 1).]
12. :
( ),
, .
:
.
13. () :
.
, :
... ( 2001: 56-63)..., / (. 2001: 56-63)..., / (. 2001: 56-63)...
/ . (2001: 56-63) ...[
: / ]
14. (): -
. , -
, ., -
. [ : Footnote Text;
(Col 1); 10; -
.]
15. : -
,
.
| 189
16. ():
(, .) -
, .
, , ( -
-).
, . -
, .
. (
, , .) :
[ ]
Jeli, Vojislav. Antika i srpska retorika, Beograd: igoja tampa, 2001.
[ ]
Milutinovi, Dejan. anr pojam, istorija, teorija, Philologia Mediana (Ni),
god. 1, br. 1 (2009): 11-37.
[ ]
Radulovi, Milan. Filosofski izvori Pekieve knjievnosti. U: Poetika Borislava
Pekia, ur. Petar Pijanovi i Aleksandar Jerkov. Beograd: Slubeni glasnik Institut
za knjievnosti i umetnost, 2009. 57-72.
a, b, c
, , , .: 2007a, 2007b 2009a, 2009.
, , .: , ;
: ( ) et al .
[ : : Times New Roman,
Normal; : 11; Before: 0; After: 0; Line spacing:
Single; : , (Col 1:
Hanging, Format)]
:
[ on-line]
, . . . -
.
.: Veltman, K. H. Augmented Books, knowledge and culture. http: //www.
isoc.org/inet2000/cdproceedings/6d.. 02.02.2002.
[ on-line]
, . . ,
. . .
.: Du Toit, A. Teaching Info-preneurship: students perspective. ASLIB
Proceedings, February 2000. Proquest. 21.02.2000.
[ on-line]
. . . .
190 |
.: Tesla, Nikola. Encyclopedia Britannica. http: //www.britannica.com/

EBchecked/topic/588597/Nikola-Tesla. 29. 3. 2010.
17. :
. , .
, .
. [ : -
: Times New Roman, Normal; : 11; -
Before: 0; After: 0; Line spacing: Single; (Col 1).]

| 191
GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTORS

Manuscripts to be considered for publication should be submitted in MS Word
format by e-mail to: serbian_studies@hotmail.com. Papers are received on the un-
derstanding that they are not under consideration for publication elsewhere and have
not already been published.
There is no standard length for articles, but 48,000 characters is a useful target
(excluding footnotes and references). The cover page should provide full affiliation,
the mail and e-mail addresses, and telephone number(s) of the corresponding au-
thor. The title page should include the paper title and the names and affiliations of
all authors. The article should begin with an abstract of 100-250 words describing
the main arguments and conclusion of the article.
The Chicago Manual of Style is to be followed.
Ordinarily, we are able to report back to authors about their submissions with-
in three months.
The opinions expressed in the articles published in Serbian Studies Research are
those of the authors and not necessarily of the editors of the journal.
Serbian Studies Research accepts advertising that is of the interest to the mem-
bership of the scholarly Association for the Development of Serbian Studies.
CIP
,
811.163.41
821.163.41
SERBIAN Studies Research /

. - . 1, . 1 (2010)- . - :
, 2011-. - 25 cm
. - . - .
. .
ISSN 2217-5210
COBISS.SR-ID 262351623

"Покрштавање Велике Кнежевине Литваније" ("Christianization of Great Duchy of Lithuania")

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

"Покрштавање Велике Кнежевине Литваније" ("Christianization of Great Duchy of Lithuania")

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

,

(Association for the Development of Serbian Studies, Novi Sad)

SERBIAN STUDIES RESEARCH

Vol. 7, No. 1, 2016

Peer Review Policy and Frequency

Indexing and Abstracting Information

Serbian Studies Research .

Nataa Kovaevi, PhD

UDC 1:327.2 iek S.

ENJOY YOUR BOMBING: SLAVOJ IEKS

This essay analyzes the post-communist criminalization of Eastern Europe,

modification when accounting for Romanian orphanages, Bulgarian poverty, Alba-

ler in Precarious Life as an establishment of grievable casualties through detailed

of being or not-being European (civilized, modern, democratic, capitalist) preced-

This militaristic humanism, by assuming a purely ethical or moral legitimation,

vo siege disaster points to a libidinal economy of Sarajevos victimization, Western-

Why this insistence on differentiation between entire nationalisms, already as-

The effectiveness of the NATO bombing as a humanitarian method and a dem-

Mousavizadeh, N. (1996) The Black Book of Bosnia: the consequences of appeasement

Received 30.09.2016 / Accepted 10.12.2016.

UDC 821.163.41-13.09 Petrovi Njego P. II

MECHANISMS OF TRANSFORMING THE PROTAGONIST

Received 20.10.2016 / Accepted 22.12.2016.

MIROSLAV KRLEA I SRPSKI PISCI:

Pod naslovom Da ne bi bilo zabune urednitvo Nina (1935) donosi biljeku za

Problemi kulturnog rasporeda to proizlaze iz identifikacijskih gesti, kakve u na-

Podsjeajui da su Andri,6 Krlea, Ujevi i Crnjanski7 pripadnici generacije

a da ono to pritom tumae te vidljivosti zbunjuje ostaje upravo sama ta injenica

poloaja dopratio u Beograd a raspolagali su s dovoljnim zbirom injenica to su

zbiljnih frustracija i fatalne psiholoke posljedice, Andri tijekom 1945. objavljuje

razumije najbolje, no umjesto da se rasprava, ije je teite dobro pogoeno, razvi-

lo kako je strane knjige toliko da je ona domaa ve time zaguena, da bi se 1950-ih,

se u Beogradu, poslije 1922. zbliio s nekima od presudnih glasnika promjena u srp-

U vrlo osobnom angamanu Krlea u Zagrebu (d)oekuje i Marka Ristia42: ja

des monuments Franais poziva Association Franaise daction artistique, posebno

ciji ne bi bio upuen, rauna upravo s pretpostavkom da je ilasova kooperacija, pa

cijacijsko sredite takva kulturnog odnosa oitovano je u poruci: svojim perom Vi

zom dvojstva kakvo odgovoran umjetnik stvaralac generiki podrazumijeva i kada

MIROSLAV KRLEA AND SERBIAN WRITERS:

UDC 821.163.41.09 Timenko N.

NIKOLAJ TIMENKO AND SLOBODAN JOVANOVI:

UDC 821.163.41.09-3 Pavi M.

ASPECTS OF BAROQUE DESCRIPTIONS OF TIME AND

UDC 821.163.41-31.09 Prodanovi M.

261 (Bilyk Nataliya L. Vichnist mifu v myttevosti prozy: teoretychnyj aspekt

. . 1 (3) (2008): 113120. (Merenik, Lidija. Mileta Prodanovich

SEMANTIC EFFICIENCY OF INTERTEXTUAL DIMENSION

UDC 821.163.41-31.09 Gatalica A.

roen i bio graanin Austrougarske, ve i Belija Paul Vitgentajn ne potie iz Ne-

2. Od dokumentarnog ka imaginarnom ili o autonomnom

preplie sa imaginarnim i fantastinim, stvarajui neobian konglomerat12, do sada

3. Fantastini raspleti ili o naraciji i stvarnosnom

3.1 Gijom Apoliner

ramentnu i vatrenu kontesu slobodnih nazora i sklonu avanturama, sa kojom e u de-

3.2 Alice Ernestine Prin, Kiki sa Monparnasa

Ta nova namigua ulazi u Rotond. Izgleda velianstveno. Meavina grke ka-

Akcenat je ovde meutim ipak ne na emancipovanoj, ve na raspusnoj Alis Prin.

sposobni. Za Gatalicu poigravanje sa faktografskim predstavlja i mogunost ironiza-

Apollinaire, Guillaume. Lhrsiarque et Cie. Paris, 1910.

Campa, Laurence. Apollinaire. La posie perptuelle. Paris 2009.

DOCUMENTARY AND IMAGINARY IN

Received 10.06.2016 / Accepted 23.08.2016.

UDC 821.163.6-14.09 Kosma C.