The paper focuses on the research of virtual aspects of the narrative in the Velimir Ilišević's painting Povratak II. The transmedial narratological reading of Ilišević's artwork requires the ...application of analytical tools of cognitive narratology. Framing borders and framing, polychronic narration, and contradictory narratives represent some of the fundamental research tools for interpreting the virtual world. The aim of this research is the interpretation of the virtual narrative in the painting Povratak II, whose morphological concept is presented by the title being the framing border that frames the historiographic and psychological cognitive frame, through discourses on fascism, revisionism and painters - the tamers of their time.
This article discusses the Balkan narrative in the movies, as a model for cultural diplomacy orpropaganda, through the analysis of two Balkan movies nominated for the Best International FeatureFilm ...Oscar – Bosnian Quo Vadis Aida? and Serbian Dara from Jasenovac. The analysis is based on"film cards“, a methodological template of the author's research for the doctoral thesis, but also on thearticles of journalists, film critics, and political analysts published in the period January 4th, 2021 -March 4th, 2021. In the analysis of the movies and the published texts, the author discusses variousforms of public diplomacy (foreign and domestic), building/dismantling of the relations between nationsin the Balkans, online media impact on social networks and their users in forming public opinion, andachieving effective goals through strategic communication with the targeted public. Conclusions drewpoint to the importance and the power of online communication through the media and social networks,but also at their importance of strategic planning of the communication with targeted audiences inachieving the planned goals.
The most controversial and unresolved issue of human losses of Croatia and Yugoslavia in World War II is the number of victims of the Jasenovac camp. Lists of victims and estimates and calculations ...by historians and demographers often diverge widely on this point, ranging from minimisation to impossible megalomaniac claims, and are strongly linked to (daily) politics. Especially after the disintegration of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the issue of the number of victims of the Jasenovac camp began to be interpreted differently from the until then only permitted one-sided and ‘megalomaniac’ approach. Democratic changes, but also rising nationalist sentiment during the Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s, led to studies on the human losses of Yugoslavia in World War II, and the unavoidable issue of the number and structure of Jasenovac camp victims, having a distinct ideological-propaganda background in Croatian and Serbian historiography, opinion journalism, and public discourse. Serb nationalists vastly inflate the number of Jasenovac camp victims, most of all Serbs, while Croat nationalists strive to minimise this number. The issue of the number and structure of Jasenovac victims is heavily nationally, ideologically, and emotionally charged, which greatly hinders evaluation. Proponents of both left and right worldviews in Croatia and Serbia continue to ignore and belittle any research and facts that do not support their favoured image of the past. Furthermore, they devaluate proven facts and present typical justifications. Inflation or reduction, omission, often coupled with ignorance, stem from personal, national, or political motives. It is noticeable that both Croatian and Serbian media, for the most part, transmit such efforts. The Jasenovac camp and the number and structure of its victims continue to be popular discussion topics in Croatian and Serbian historiography and opinion journalism, which have stratified into the left and right within national frameworks since the early 1990s, and in Croatian and Serbian public discourse; very different, sometimes diametrically opposed statements and claims are made, often without basis in fact. Facts about the Jasenovac camp have been contaminated from the start, and we are still witnessing contamination from various sources, with no end in sight. Despite all the efforts of a part of Croatian and Serbian historiography, and some opinion journalism, no major progress has been made from the early 1990s until today regarding the research and aggregation of knowledge and new data on the number and structure of Jasenovac camp victims; our level of knowledge in this regard has remained more-or-less the same as in the pre-1990 period. There is no doubt that historiography, Croatian and Serbian, has yet to present substantiated answers about the number and structure of Jasenovac victims. This article presents and questions the most significant Croatian and Serbian historiographical and opinion journalism works – as well as the unavoidable echoes of the topic of Jasenovac victims in public discourse – that question the number and structure of the victims, including those that offer substantiated facts, but also some illustrative examples of indisputable ignorance and manipulation.
The article deals with the recent controversies over the interpretations of World War II. The dominant narrative of World War II, which was created after 1945 to ensure the basis of legitimacy for ...the Yugoslav Communist regime, was revised at the beginning of the 1990s. One of the consequences of this revision has been the upsurge of historical revisionism regarding the fascist Ustashe movement. After years of bitter debates that had divided and polarized the Croatian society, the government appointed in 2017 a special council to deal with the World War II past and make the recommendations on the public usage of the symbols and insignia of the 20th century “undemocratic regimes”. The final product of its work was the so-called Dialogue Document whose provisions and impact are dealt with in the second part of the text.
El presente artículo realizará un recorrido a través de la historia del campo de concentración y exterminio de Jasenovac, el más grande por tamaño y en el que fueron ejecutadas una mayor cantidad de ...personas de toda la red concentracionaria ustaška, existente entre 1941 y 1945. El Estado Independiente de Croacia se dotó de todo un sistema de campos de diversa naturaleza que le permitieron controlar mediante el encarcelamiento, el trabajo forzoso y el asesinato a los tres grupos que fueron víctimas de sus políticas eliminacionistas por motivos étnicos, serbios ortodoxos, judíos y gitanos, todo ello en su intento por crear un Estado puro y étnicamente croata. A su vez, los campos de la Ustaša se utilizaron para encerrar y matar en ellos a elementos que se consideraba que perturbaban el orden y la moral católica, como los homosexuales, las prostitutas, los indigentes o los alcohólicos. Y, además, se convirtieron en una pieza fundamental dentro de las dinámicas persecutorias contra los opositores políticos, como los federalistas yugoslavos, los comunistas o los socialistas, y pasaron a ser un recurso fundamental de los ustaše en el marco de la guerra antipartisana. Por lo que respecta a esta investigación, trataré de dar una visión del campo desde la experiencia humana, a través de las vivencias y los sufrimientos que los internos de Jasenovac experimentaron desde el momento en que eran detenidos hasta que ingresaban, aunque muchos fueron ejecutados antes de atravesar siquiera las puertas del campo. Con todo ello, este trabajo buscará respuestas a algunas preguntas clave: ¿Cómo se creó y organizó el campo de concentración de Jasenovac? ¿Cómo evolucionó y qué hace que podamos hablar de él como campo de exterminio? ¿Tuvieron los diferentes gobiernos de la Ustaša un control efectivo sobre su red concentracionaria? ¿Cómo fue la vida en su interior? ¿Quiénes eran y qué métodos de ejecución utilizaron los guardias para matar a los internos? ¿Qué se encontraron los primeros liberadores e investigadores del campo tras su entrada? ¿Por qué es importante integrar la experiencia de Jasenovac en las grandes narrativas sobre los estudios del fascismo, la violencia de masas o las políticas eliminacionistas en la Segunda Guerra Mundial? A partir de estas cuestiones y mediante fuentes primarias que incorporan relatos de supervivientes de Jasenovac e informaciones de organismos oficiales, se tratará de analizar y mostrar las experiencias de los prisioneros y las estrategias utilizadas por sus custodios para controlarlos, torturarlos y ejecutarlos.
New Memory of the Old Trauma? Lozica, Ana Kršinić
Politička misao,
12/2022, Letnik:
59, Številka:
4
Journal Article, Paper
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Recently, there has been a significant rise in the production of films on the Jasenovac camp and related Ustasha crimes, taking their share in the mnemonic politics. The paper focuses on the two ...most recent films, The Diary of Diana B., a docufiction filmed in Croatia, and Dara of Jasenovac, a feature film which was Serbia’s candidate for an Oscar. The memory of traumatic events is remediated in each film differently and used for representing diverse group identities through temporal relation with the difficult past. Comparison between the two films focuses on subject positions and regimes of historicity as categories that make the production of meaning mechanism visible. The main questions that guide the analysis are: how are victims and perpetrators portrayed, who is witnessing traumatic events, and to whom is the trauma attributed? Do they bring something new to the cultural memory of the Holocaust and genocide in the Independent State of Croatia?
Jasenovac Byard, Roger W
Medicine, science, and the law
61, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Jasenovac was a camp run by the Ustaše Supervisory Service (UNS) of the Independent State of Croatia during World War II. It was located approximately 100 km south-east of Zagreb on the banks of the ...Sava River. Although the purpose of, and number of deaths in, the camp have been debated, it appears that a significant number of Serbs, Roma and Jews died and/or were executed at this site between 1941 and 1945. The site demonstrates that not all detention camps at this time were controlled by the German government and that cultural/religious groups other than the Jews were detainees. Balkan mass graves may therefore derive from different conflicts at different times, and so establishing accurate conclusions from excavations often requires a verifiable and plausible context and an understanding of burial processes.
This article analyses the revisionist currents in Croatian contemporary historiography – and implicitly also in politics – which in its focus has interpretation of the Independent State of Croatia ...(NDH, 1941-1945). Three main elements of the revisionist narative are: a) NDH was just a normal state concerned with rebellion in its own territory, rather than the state which used state terror to exterminate religious and ethnic communities marked as its “natural and organic enemies”. In other words, it only applied limited and legitimate instruments to protect itself from its political opponents. b) There were no massive crimes, and especially no genocide, neither against the Serbs, nor Jewish or Roma population. On the contrary, the main victims in 1941-1945 had been Croats, and thus the crimes of NDH should be de-Serbianized and de-Jewisized. c) Jasenovac was only a labour camp and prison, not a concentration death camp. The NDH used it for gathering and arresting its political opponents in order to prevent them from pursuing their destructive actions against the state. The real death camp in Jasenovac was formed only in 1945 by post-NDH communist authorities. By deconstructing what they call the “Jasenovac myth”, the revisionists are in fact trying to deconstruct “the myth of genocide by NDH”, and thus to rehabilitate the NDH either completely or partially.
U tekstu se razmatra revizionistička struja u suvremenoj hrvatskoj historiografiji, a posredno i u politici, koja se bavi Nezavisnom Državom Hrvatskom (1941-1945). Revizionistički narativ čine tri ...glavne postavke: (a) NDH je bila normalna onodobna protupobunjenička država koja nije koristila državni teror kako bi uništila vjerske i etničke zajednice koje su u ustaškoj ideologiji i politici bile odreðene kao prirodni ili organski neprijatelji te tvorevine, nego je primjenjivala ograničena legitimna sredstva borbe da bi se zaštitila od političkih pobunjenika; (b) u NDH nisu izvršeni masovni zločini, a kamoli genocid, ni nad Srbima, ni nad Židovima, ni nad Romima; štoviše, glavne žrtve bili su Hrvati te zločine NDH treba desrbizirati i dejudeizirati; (c) logor Jasenovac bio je samo radni i sabirni logor, a ne koncentracijski logor smrti, u koji je NDH privodila političke protivnike kako bi se zaštitila od njihova razornog djelovanja, a ne kako bi ih ubijala; pravi smrtonosni logor u Jasenovcu osnovala je tek jugoslavenska komunistička vlast poslije svršetka Drugoga svjetskog rata. Pokušavajući dekonstruirati "jasenovački mit", revizionisti zapravo nastoje dekonstruirati "mit o genocidu" u NDH, a time potpuno ili djelomice rehabilitirati NDH.
PDF
