29.01.2015 Views

Cultural Identity Politics in the (Post-)Transitional Societies

Cultural Identity Politics in the (Post-)Transitional Societies

Cultural Identity Politics in the (Post-)Transitional Societies

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Cultural</strong> <strong>Identity</strong> <strong>Politics</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> (<strong>Post</strong>-)<strong>Transitional</strong> <strong>Societies</strong><br />

union for this f<strong>in</strong>al purpose – if a strict selection led <strong>the</strong>ir work and <strong>the</strong>ir brushes dedicated<br />

<strong>the</strong>mselves only to national matters – <strong>in</strong> one word, if we had a national stage, we would also<br />

become a nation” (Schiller, 2005: 106; English translation <strong>in</strong> Wilmer, 2008: 15).<br />

Less<strong>in</strong>g’s lament about problems with a national <strong>the</strong>atre without a nation was<br />

<strong>the</strong>oretically grasped by Zoja Skušek <strong>in</strong> her book Theatre as a Form of Spectacular Function<br />

(1980). “How to make <strong>the</strong>atre, which would grow up from a nation and would address<br />

itself to a nation, if that very nation doesn’t exist yet,” asks Skušek (Skušek-Močnik,<br />

1980: 26). She expla<strong>in</strong>s that Less<strong>in</strong>g’s statement is trapped <strong>in</strong> a paradox: national <strong>the</strong>atre<br />

without a nation is, accord<strong>in</strong>g to Skušek, a “paradox of self-referentiality”:<br />

“The highest assignment and <strong>the</strong> mean<strong>in</strong>g of <strong>the</strong> national <strong>the</strong>atre would be<br />

[accord<strong>in</strong>g to Less<strong>in</strong>g] to make possible and to foster that which o<strong>the</strong>rwise enables<br />

a national <strong>the</strong>atre to be ‘prepared’. If that precondition is not fulfilled, <strong>the</strong>re is no<br />

<strong>the</strong>atre; on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, if <strong>the</strong>re is no <strong>the</strong>atre, that precondition could not exist<br />

as well. The paradox of <strong>the</strong> national <strong>the</strong>atre is thus a paradox of self-referentiality:<br />

if one says that <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>atre is heteronomous (i.e. it derives its existence not out of<br />

itself but out of someth<strong>in</strong>g else, <strong>in</strong> that case of ‘moral character’ of a nation), it will<br />

appear that it is autonomous (i.e. it is precisely <strong>the</strong>atre which makes possible that<br />

‘character’); <strong>in</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r words, if we say that <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>atre is autonomous, we have to<br />

say at <strong>the</strong> same time that it is heteronomous” (Skušek-Močnik, 1980: 27).<br />

An important po<strong>in</strong>t made by Zoja Skušek is that Less<strong>in</strong>g’s paradox of self-referentiality<br />

has noth<strong>in</strong>g to do with logic; it could not be elim<strong>in</strong>ated just by play<strong>in</strong>g with syllogisms – this<br />

paradox is deeply embedded <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> very practice of national and bourgeois <strong>the</strong>atre. We can<br />

add that Skušek’s conclusion also holds true for Schiller’s statement (“if we had a national<br />

stage, we would also become a nation”): a simple rotation of premises cannot solve <strong>the</strong><br />

paradox. Stricto sensu, once <strong>the</strong> nation is established, <strong>the</strong> national <strong>the</strong>atre becomes obsolete<br />

(i.e. its “historical role” is fulfilled). Never<strong>the</strong>less, social reality shows a ra<strong>the</strong>r different<br />

picture: although modern nations emerged many years ago, national <strong>the</strong>atres have persisted<br />

from <strong>the</strong> late 18th century till today.<br />

Emergence of national <strong>the</strong>atres of south-Slavic nations<br />

Some hundred years after it was formulated <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>gs of Less<strong>in</strong>g and Schiller,<br />

<strong>the</strong> above-mentioned paradox of self-referentiality has found a ra<strong>the</strong>r late echo <strong>in</strong> a<br />

pamphlet written by Slovenian writer Josip Jurčič. The elements of his “formula” were<br />

not completely <strong>the</strong> same as <strong>in</strong> Less<strong>in</strong>g’s and Schiller’s versions but <strong>the</strong> very logic of <strong>the</strong><br />

argument was quite similar. In his contribution, published <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> journal Slovenski narod<br />

<strong>in</strong> 1868, Jurčič offered a patriotic plaidoyer for Slovenian national <strong>the</strong>atre. Precisely <strong>the</strong><br />

national <strong>the</strong>atre, <strong>in</strong>sists Jurčič, is a precondition for dramatic masterpieces to emerge:<br />

“Isn’t it so that <strong>the</strong> old Greeks made <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>the</strong>atres before <strong>the</strong>y got Sophocles and<br />

Aristophanes Isn’t it so that Germany had its <strong>the</strong>atres before Less<strong>in</strong>g, even before<br />

Chronegk and Gottsched Isn’t it so that all <strong>the</strong>se dist<strong>in</strong>guished men came out of <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

50

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!