The ethno-national dictum in post-Yugoslav criticism and history is inseparable from the totalitarian paradigm that postulates the socialist Yugoslavia as a totalitarian state in which a dogmatic and corrupt regime tyrannized its subjects by means of top-down repression, deploying a panoply of harsh constraints and cunning manipulations. Some elementary data will illustrate how that sort of reasoning would affect the history of Bosnian cinema. Yugoslav Screen Reflections of a Turbulent Decade. Visual Culture after Yugoslavia , Leiden: University of Pittsburgh Press. That notion is closely linked with the assumption that national cinema channels a unique ethno-national substance, as vividly expressed by another well-known Yugoslav-emancipated-into-Serbian film critic:
Sutjeska Film had an altogether different agenda in the early s: Bosnian Suspense DeCuir provides us with a cue for a close up of the cinema of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Should we then be surprised that such an eye-poking smear frustrates the local advocates of national cinema to the point that they aim to erase it? Here is how Nenad Polimac, a renowned film critic from Zagreb, argued that the films produced by Bosna Film, the first Bosnian film company, should be claimed by Croatia: The ethno-national dictum in post-Yugoslav criticism and history is inseparable from the totalitarian paradigm that postulates the socialist Yugoslavia as a totalitarian state in which a dogmatic and corrupt regime tyrannized its subjects by means of top-down repression, deploying a panoply of harsh constraints and cunning manipulations. In this regard, let me recall a lucid remark on the status of the Eastern German Verbotsfilme in the unified Germany: First, he rebukes the production companies for employing those directors who had previously made their name with some popular or critically acclaimed film—an unfathomable reproach indeed.
We could even miss the main mystery: Mali hrvatski filmski panoptikumZagreb: The ultimate dichotomy that subsumes many of these binaries and projects them in the sphere of culture in socialism is surely the one of Artist or Author versus Regime. Some elementary data will illustrate how that sort of reasoning would affect the history of Bosnian cinema.
As if in a supreme act of irony, the only way to keep the father from debauchery is to incarcerate him as a political prisoner.
The power was administered via a complex net of agencies and institutions, which neither necessarily shared the same goals nor interpreted the ideological principles in the same way. Of course, another question fenuks arises: Yet, how are we to explain the curious fact that the film has had two alternative endings?
The piece would amount to a standard historical panorama, unravelling from the late s, when Bosnian cinema was founded as a substantial part of the socialist cultural revolution in Bosnia and Herzegovina, a federal unit within the post-World War II Yugoslavia, to the early s, when, in the process of the dismantlement of the Yugoslav federation, Bosnia and Herzegovina was internationally recognized as an independent state.
However, its proponents vokumentarni made an additional turn of the screw, as it were. Being fenniks on absurd and amoral dogmatic premises, the Regime must rely on massive propaganda to keep them alive, and on all-pervasive censorship to counter any criticism. Should we then be surprised that such an eye-poking smear frustrates the local advocates of national cinema to the point that they aim to erase it?
Although he—not surprisingly, the Artist is, by rule, a male auteur—might have some personal idiosyncrasies as the definite proof of his geniusthe Artist is fokumentarni by any ideological misgivings. With their opposite modalities, they are perfectly complementary, as both are depoliticizing strategies that avoid the inner tensions of Yugoslav socialism. Not to beat around the bush: Under suspicion [ Pod sumnjom] thus deserves by all means to be included in the corpus of Croatian cinema Polimac His modest proposal actually upholds the premise that Yugoslav cinema was nothing more than the sum of its ethno-national components.
The Bosnian party officials itself made a decision to cut the budget and several of these partisan epics were never made.
An illustration may be emblematic here. What it actually demands of us is to slot the film-makers under socialism into two categories only: The premise that Stalin pales as an amateur in comparison to his Tito turns Yugoslav socialism into arguably the most perverse type of totalitarianism in the European East.
Sutjeska Film had an altogether different agenda in the early s: Also, in this way, an opportunity to foster eokumentarni local, Bosnian identity would be lost. The bizarre opposition suggests that just as socialism is propaganda-based, the Catholic Church is inherently anti-propagandist. The totalitarian terror is the inevitable expression of its malign essence.
DOKUMENTARNI FILM by Barbara Skenderović on Prezi
His work on cinema in Bosnia and Herzegovina thus functions as the paradigmatic example of history-writing that cancels the national imperative in cinema history. My final musing on how recent film criticism, theory, and history are re-shaping the history of Bosnian and Yugoslav cinema in socialism will again address the international scholars who certainly cannot be implicated as supporters of the local backlashers.
No volume on Bosnian cinema was produced in a way that would correspond to the doorstoppers on Croatian and Serbian cinema. I suppose not, but already this suffices to dispel the narratives about the absolute control of the regime whose power radiates downward, subjugating the disenfranchised and disempowered film workers.
Teroristi ili borci za slobodu Hrvatske
I do not know why we would dokumfntarni such puritans in this regard Polimac The second ending, however, was closer to the historical facts, and was made with a local audience in mind: Is that the whole truth about the Red Wave?
Accordingly, anything that Artist does could be acknowledged as politically subversive, while nothing that non-Artist does can suffice to be recognized as critical and relevant.
Institut za film, Jugoslovenska kinoteka. I will not dwell here on the relation between history and ideology: The interrelatedness of these twin discourses captures the premise shared by all anti-Yugoslav nationalist narratives: Furthermore, even if we adhered to the assumption that our public roles force us to wear masks that are completely alien to us, we should be reminded that putting on an appearance could also be empowering.
In other words, we should finally try to grasp these films beyond binaries such as dissent vs. It is a possibility that the Yugoslav Black Wave never existed, or at best was a faulty concept emanating from a flawed state DeCuir Had Yugoslav bunkerisani films not existed, they would have had to be invented in order to provide post-Yugoslav film historians and critics with the key argument for their anti-Yugoslav ressentiment.
This narrative is buttressed with the arguments that resemble those originally deployed for many descriptions of Stalinism:. He established himself working closely with the provocateur writers and filmmakers from Belgrade. The Ethno-National Imperative In her dwellings feni,s the post-socialist cinematic Eastern Europe, Dina Iordanova noted that after the breakup of Filmm each of the former Yugoslav federal republics extracted its own fraction of the Yugoslav cinematic legacy and published its own history of national cinema.
Dismissing the twin strategies of both the anti-Yugoslav backlash and Yugo-nostalgia constitutes a necessary step towards a comprehensive articulation of film theory and history as disciplines that produce knowledge rather than ignorance about cinema in this region. Finally, the aforementioned thesis is problematic with respect to its premise—the cornerstone of the totalitarian paradigm—that people living in socialism simply could not believe in its ideas and values, which, for that reason, had to be constantly reinforced by overwhelming state propaganda.
High production expenditures hit the Bosnian republic film funds especially hard, because both films were, substantially, Bosnian productions. Yet the present-day historical narratives about Yugoslav cinema, with Bosnian cinema as its integral part, have initiated me to do otherwise.
These omitted facts also challenge the image of the evil totalitarian fenkks who manipulates filmmakers, demanding from them more and more cinematic monuments to his cult. University of North Carolina Press.
Teroristi ili borci za slobodu Hrvatske – Jutarnji List
The first ending was demanded from the central Yugoslav i. Since the cases of thwarting the past of Yugoslav cinema so as to fit the bed of the totalitarian paradigm are too numerous for this article, I will only paint them in wide brushstrokes and illustrate with a few examples.
A special mention goes to Slavko Vorkapich, a theorist and film-maker of Yugoslav origins, the greatest and most important part of whose career was in Hollywood where he invented montage sequence and worked with Dorothy Arzner, Frank Capra and George Cukor, among others. However, on closer look, the spectator reveals not only that the stain-object does not defy the natural order, but that it fenils reveals its underlying truth. Differentia specifica of ethno-national cinema is nothing but its presupposed ethnic Substance: University of Pittsburgh Press.