nesvrstani modernizmi

non-aligned modernisms
—
sveska #1 / volume #1

Ana Sladojević

SLIKE O AFRICI
—
IMAGES OF AFRICA
Ana Sladojević

SLIKE O AFRICI
—

1
IMAGES OF AFRICA
Ana Sladojević (born in 1976, Belgrade, Serbia)

She holds PhD in Theory of Arts and Media (2012,

Interdisciplinary Studies, University of Arts in
Belgrade, Serbia), and MFA (2003) and BFA (1999)
from the Faculty of Applied Arts and Design in
Belgrade. She worked as curator for a number of
cultural institutions in Serbia, among them the
Museum of African Art—Collection of Veda and Dr.
Zdravko Pečar (2002–2009), Museum of Yugoslav
History (2010–2012), Central Institute for Conser-
vation in Belgrade (2013–2015). She had her papers
on cultural representations and African arts pub-
lished by the Museum of African Art, the Kultura
Journal—Centre for Study of Cultural Develop-
ment, Orion Art and others.
Ana Sladojević
Images of Africa 1

“… even in those distant Asian and African

countries, there live peoples who, regard-
less of the colour of their face, have the same
yearnings as we do—to retain peace, and for
them and their countries to raise from regres-
sion and underdevelopment. We had the op-
portunity to see a lot, and we witnessed the
enormous efforts these people have made to
compensate that which has been forced upon
them by colonial rule. /… / We have also real-
ized that we must help these people as much
as possible, that there are means to do so.
And, they know that we are not a large and
rich country; they know that we have fought
for our freedom long and hard; they know
that we are making every effort to make a
better life for our people as quickly as pos-
sible. They perceive us as an example and aim
to create more, even though they started-off
from much more devastating circumstances
than we have and that is why it is necessary
to help them. Let the friendship that we are
building with those people be long-lasting,
for our yearnings are the same; long-live the
cooperation between peoples!”2

iii
iv
The map of Tito’s journeys created in the mo-
saic technique still covers the wall of the entrance
building to the Museum of Yugoslav History’s com-
plex previously known as the “25th of May” Muse-
um, opened to the public in 1962; in a way it illus-
trates the change in the contextual positioning of
Yugoslavia at the beginning of the 1960s. Unlike
previous representations which located it within
the limits of the Balkans, this new idea of its glob-
al importance carried a significant role in creat-
ing local identities. In such a context, Africa was
perceived, among other things, as proof of Yugo-
slavia’s rapid progress which permitted certain
sources to be set aside for the purpose of develop-
ing political and economic ties with countries that
had, until recently, been colonies and from which
collaboration was expected. This was in part be-
cause of Yugoslavia’s support of liberation and an-
ti-colonial movements and because of the reputa-
tion Josip Broz Tito enjoyed on a world-scale.
International relations and the ways they were
presented in Yugoslavia were, actually, to a great ex-
tent implemented into the new national discourse
and the image Yugoslavs started to build of them-
selves. They were used to strengthen domestic poli-
tics by nurturing among the Yugoslav public, through

v
the media and on the level of collective reading, col-
lective ideas and feeling (Appadurai 1996:8). As far as
cultural positioning is concerned, the impact of inter-
national relations on Yugoslav self-perception sig-
nificantly transcended the political sphere adding in
a very unique way to the development of self-im-
age from the 1960s onwards. This image was largely
based on relations between the Movement’s mem-
ber-states. Rada Iveković notes the way in which the
younger generation of writers perceived themselves
in the early 1970s. This became apparent when upon
the invitation of a prominent German feminist they
refused to be included in the Eastern Bloc edition,
rather choosing to be demarcated within the Third
World section.3 This self-perception was in tune with
ideological and cultural relations which in a relatively
short time-span enabled mobility, the flow of infor-
mation and first-hand cooperation, which were, up
until then and in such a way, not possible.
However, what will reveal itself as one of the
key problems of mutual relations between non-
aligned countries, was the structural unsustainabil-
ity of a more meaningful, encompassing and perva-
sive collaboration. Therefore, the idea of friendship,
which was discursively conspicuous and also a key
term summarising the development of the relation-
ship between NAM countries, could be interpreted
using a similar social process. Namely, that through
implicit truths of the epoch in question, without
sufficient institutional or structural incorporation,
certain images were ingrained in memory through
repetition and the idea of this friendship that we
now remember is, perhaps, “more real” than the
actual friendship that occurred in the times when
these relations took place.

vi
 “…I wanted our folk to learn about the values
of black civilization, for them to reject racial
prejudice. There was at the time among us, a
lot of prejudice; people knew hardly anything
about the poetry of black writers. In Yugo-
slavia I was the first to offer information on
black culture in general. I founded the Insti-
tute for Africa. It was at that point that I en-
couraged Ivanisević, Balen and other poets,
and we started translating and publishing Af-
rican poetry books. Africa is both a cultural
and emotional part of my life. When in 1961
I stepped on African soil for the first time,
when Senghor invited me to the celebration
of Senegal’s independence that was the most
important event in my life.”4

The prefiguration of relations with Africa were con-

ditioned to a great extent by pre-formed represen-
tations not only of Africa, in the way this was done
through many art and popular media in the pre-
vious decades, but also of new representations of
Yugoslavia and Yugoslav self-perception. The rep-
resentation of other based on a western epistemo-
logical model which pervaded numerous sources,
from novels, travel-writing, to comic-books, adver-
tisements, films and museum representations, was
brought down to a centric discourse overwhelmed
with stereotypes. Despite the nominally different
discourse in Yugoslavia, the discourse of anti-colo-
nialism and non-alignment, the existing (western)
discourse was inordinately present, rooted; it was,
so to speak, the only referential point for speech on
matters of similarity and difference.
The reason for that lies not solely in the Yugo-
slav sphere, of course, but also in the circulation of

vii
many ideologies and schools of thought on a glob-
al level, which all aimed to redefine the relations
of hegemony that was, and is today, inscribed into
existing institutions and methodologies. The pro-
cesses of territorial decolonization, namely, were
just a starting phase in the process of creating a free
space for decolonizing the mind and language. To
this day, in certain places, these processes have not
been able to gain a broader scope and true insti-
tutional support, as is the case with local environ-
ments that share the legacy of socialist Yugoslavia.
In Yugoslavia Afrocentric ideologies with a
stronghold in cultural identities were not unknown
of among intellectuals; even among the wider
reader public before the II World War. 5 These ideas
were present during the 1930s and 1940s and at an
early time exchanged among those whose inter-
ests primarily lay in questions of national and cul-
tural identities. At the time négritude was on the
rise in Paris,6 renowned Croatian and Yugoslav lin-
guist Petar Guberina wrote about sharing the com-
pany of Aimé Césaire 7 and Léopold Sédar Senghor;
while Senghor himself owed to this friendship his
short “Slavophilia” phase.
The ideologies of pan-Africanism and négri-
tude were extremely important because they were
among the first platforms created as a basis for
considering questions of African identities, cul-
ture and belonging, which echoed far and wide,
and because even today they are recognised for
the important role they carried in forming cer-
tain theories, schools of thought and art move-
ments as well. They were, all the same, ambiguous
and contradictory. This was particularly the case
with négritude, which had an enormous impact
on African thought (Kebede, 2004), while at the
same time criticized for forming its ideas on the

viii
affirmation of difference, imposed by the western
normative framework. Because of its rootedness
in race, in a historical sense négritude revealed a lot
about the identity of French citizens coming from
the colonies who encountered racism upon their
arrival to the metropolis. Unable to position them-
selves as equals in a system of inequality, which
was also the framework of their education, that
imbued them with certain epistemological models
in response they use négritude to underscore what
was a culturally imposed difference and as over-
emphasized as it was, relocate it into a positive,
instead of the previously existing negative context
(the aggrandisation of blackness, black creativity
and deriving certain, albeit generalized and wrong,
characteristically black expressive forms).
However, even though these ideas were rec-
ognised in the light of anti-colonial efforts and
were supported by Yugoslav intellectuals in the
wider, political and popular discourse, filtered
through the prism of culture that was accepted
as an unavoidable point of contact between the
countries concerned, stereotypes and generaliza-
tions were unavoidable.
After all, these ideologies were to a great ex-
tent generalizations in themselves at the expense of
local particularities and pluralities of interpretations
and representations,8 because they leaned towards
the universalisation of specific cultural traits bringing
them down to race (in a constructed social sense),
i.e. origin (Africa).
Although the discourse on friendship between
Yugoslavia and African countries aimed to incor-
porate ideas of négritude and pan-Africanism, the
problem lies in the fact that, at least on the level
of political speech, political friendship, even when
it paid attention to meeting points and cultural

ix
particularities, often halted at a very basic level of
recognizing the hardships with which, historical-
ly speaking, the peoples in questions encountered.
Comparisons between African peoples under co-
lonial rule and the peoples of Yugoslavia under the
“Habsburg Monarchy and Ottoman Empire” were
brought up countless times (Senghor mentions this
reference that occurred upon his farewell toast dur-
ing his 1975 visit to Yugoslavia, Tito used this com-
parison on numerous occasions, Živorad Kovačević,
President of the Assembly of the City of Belgrade,
used it on the occasion of the Museum of African
Art’s opening in 1977, etc.) which became a point of
intersection at which similarities between African
countries and Yugoslav peoples started and ended.
In their attempts to describe political friend-
ship, presidents of states and high-ranking offi-
cials always insist on similarities, despite how mea-
gre they are or how short the list. However, even if
the comparison between the Ottoman Empire and
Habsburg Monarchy on the Balkans with colonisers
in Africa may seem clumsy and excessive, it actu-
ally serves to underline the previously mentioned
change that took place on the geographical rela-
tional level, in which Yugoslavia transcended its
Balkan framework spreading, by means of Tito’s in-
ternational dealings, to all corners of the world.
The friendship in matter was often officially
perceived by Yugoslavia as solidarity, which placed
Yugoslavia and its peoples as discursively equal but
privileged. Yugoslavia’s relation towards countries
that, with the departure of colonial rule, had ris-
en in a politically and economically complex situa-
tions, was nevertheless patronising to a certain ex-
tent. As Sretenović notes, it was like the relation of
an “older” to “younger brother”, who “replaced the
leopard hide for the worker’s overalls”. 9

x
 Local memories and remembrance of the
“friendship” with African peoples and the non-
aligned, predominantly refer today to bidding
farewell and greeting upon arrival, either Tito or
certain leaders of the Movement, such as Haile Se-
lassie I or Gamal Abdel Nasser. It is not possible to
establish with certainty whether this is a case of
authentic memory or a reflexive response to nu-
merous media reports. Oskar Davičo noticed the
similarity between Yugoslavia and other states
outside the Bloc division (in this case Gabon in the
1960s) in terms of this orientation towards the
public presentation of political friendship, and a
series of bilateral visits, saying: “This partly hos-
pitable course or, more precisely, that open-door
politics does not seem to be a unique aspect of our
fate. It is as if all new, young states of an outside-
the-Bloc orientation are forced to, at one point in
their history, rely on this self-sustaining technique.
In order to break the conspiracy of slander, disin-
formation and deprivation of the right to own a
political voice.“ (Davičo, 1962:299–300).

5

xi
 “The former white man.—It is pointless, but, alas,
I am ashamed. The people I belong to and the
class that brought me up have never tortured,
enslaved (or) killed. For centuries, we were liv-
ing as slaves ourselves. Yes, but I am white, that
is all the passers-by see. If only I could carry a di-
gest history of my country on my lapel.”10

Perhaps it was not crucial for someone to actu-

ally travel to any African country, but the afore-
mentioned process of self-perception developed
through imagining of a wider community and with
a sense of belonging. However, those who were
sent on an official capacity to an African country,
wanted to transfer the acquired notion of friend-
ship into the other relationship forms, such as
research (studying) and collecting (interpreta-
tion)—relationships that were in the late 19th and
early 20th century synonymous to the western ap-
proach to the other. They both contained some of
those “discoveries” that coincided with all the pre-
vious colonial relationships towards African art and
other “African” themes even though this particu-
lar kind of discovery was modified and adjusted to
correspond with the dominant discourse of social-
ism and equality. While this was nominally true—
and one could not deny a sincere interest in social
issues of the African peoples in Yugoslavia’s social
and political climate at that time—the problem,
above anything else, was in the acquired patterns
of speech and reasoning about certain issues.
The points of studying and of interpretation
were, so to say, a unique experience, since many
of those who were sent to Africa to work, felt the
need to confirm their experience through the in-
terpretation of some kind, whether in the form

xii
of travel writing or of some other genres (such as
the abridged diary notes, short stories, etc.,) and
in hunting or in collecting. The path flow of those
stories, as well as the specific objects, such as ivo-
ry from elephants that Yugoslavs, just like Euro-
peans or Americans, were hunting in Africa, to the
items of African craftsmanship and art, prove that
experience.
On the other hand, the Yugoslav society had
created a suitable social niche for students from
African countries attending Yugoslav schools and
universities. This also suited the diplomats from
African countries that had diplomatic missions in
Yugoslavia and the attendees of courses in certain
technical and military domains. The existence of
this “niche” or, various other micro-niches did not
enable the integration, but the recognition of this
temporary Yugoslav population in the acceptable
and politically confirmed frames: the confirmed
anti-colonial and non-alignment discourse and the
cooperation with the “Third World countries.”
Just as TV and film reports, literary nights,
etc., about African journeys and African arts and
culture, both the students and the employees
from African countries (that were considered elite
in some sense, either social or intellectual), also
served to somewhat confirm Yugoslavia’s new-
ly-acquired position in the international political
scene.
African students who studied in Yugoslavia
made Belgrade and other Yugoslavian university
centres demographically diverse: a dominant dis-
course promulgated the values of the cultural toler-
ance, but, again, an issue emerges: in what way that
friendship actually represented the domineering
ideological discourse and in what way did it actually
mean the accepting of the other?

xiii
 However, Yugoslavia was never supposed to
be the final destination for the majority of Africans
who stayed there. This was not the case in West-
ern Europe where, beginning in 1950s, larger popu-
lation of immigrants from once colonial countries
started to form. Of course, the shared language
and the similarity of the education systems be-
tween certain African countries and the countries
that implemented the colonial system, had con-
tributed to the easier identification, and to, condi-
tionally speaking, assimilation.
Following their studies in Yugoslavia, the ma-
jority returned to their countries; of course, some
remained, but that was insignificant in comparison
to any western country. A number of mixed mar-
riages had also, at times, suffered the consequenc-
es of the rejection of community.
There was also a difference in perception of
the African peoples in Africa and in Yugoslavia.
Many Yugoslavs had, for the first time, experienced
their whiteness when they went to Africa, which
was later interpreted in different ways.
It is interesting that one of the basic self-rec-
ognitions as being white, in the context of displaying
the newly-acquired closeness and friendship, espe-
cially in relation to subjects regarding the non-align-
ment, was translated into the asset that Yugoslavs
had over other Europeans and whites in general. It
was because Yugoslavia had no colonial experience
and thereby no colonial guilt. This was essentially
important for their exemption as being morally su-
perior compared to the countries that had owned
the colonies. However, the colonial experience, in
accordance with the post-colonial theory was not
limited only to those countries that were directly
involved in the colonisation process, whether they
were of the colonising countries, or colonised, but

xiv
its influence had global consequences; on relations,
positioning and different forms of behaviour pat-
terns and, in the wider sense, on the cognitive sys-
tems. The issues were not in the ways in which the
construction and the representation of others were
established from aside, but, according to Frantz
Fanon,11 it equally depended on the inability to step
out of the established ways of thinking that de-
rived from the balance of power, whether by those
who constructed them or, by those onto whom they
were constructed. The inability to reject the colonial
heritage and to think beyond its framework would
be an essential theme among intellectuals and also
the source of ambiguity, contention, but also the
recognition of hybrid identities. Fanon went on to
say that colonialism did not represent the phenom-
enon that was limited to certain territories, but that
it was also not limited to a certain time (duration of
colonialism as an order). Today’s experience and the
deep roots of certain stereotypes confirmed that;
namely, colonialism purported mutuality in creating
both social constructions and various cultural nar-
ratives, that no one, including Serbia and Yugoslavia,
could have been absolved from.
If the insistence on the moral foreground
could seem as a technique that was supposed to
completely exempt Yugoslavia from other Euro-
pean countries, the time narrative provides us with
different insight. Namely, Yugoslavia had never
negated its European position, and instead used
the comparison in order to represent the country
as white, as European, but without the stigma of a
coloniser. In comparison with colonial narratives,
Yugoslavia had never asserted itself as the one
who tended to civilise others, but as the one who
tended to help the others establish the position in
a role that had yet to be created and defined.

continued / xv
 A whole other issue, in considering Yugosla-
via’s, but above all Yugoslavs’ relationship with
African countries and their population, was the
question of race as a cultural construction. To il-
lustrate this, we should say that white skin was
not necessarily a guarantee of whiteness, because
it was a socially construed category, that was far
more complex, and it purported numerous other
elements that whiteness featured in some areas:
family origins, heritage, religion, status etc. (El-
Tayeb, 2011).
That is why it would be very interesting to
study an experience of a Yugoslav in a wider range
of whiteness during 1960s and 1970s. Regardless of
Oskar Davičo’s reconsideration, who did not want
to be seen as a white man, the whiteness of Yugo-
slavs in Africa singled them out far more directly,
than their whiteness in Europe. It was particular-
ly emphasised in those situations when a super-
ficial fact, such as skin colour, enabled them to fit
into a certain social category to which they appar-
ently belonged. That, to a certain extent, explained
the future identification of certain number of Yu-
goslavs with white people in Africa because, their
epidermal whiteness unlocked a whole range of so-
cially constructed and inherited relations from pre-
vious social orders, which they did not always re-
fuse when they understood them to be a privilege.
The rejection of the overtly colonial white-
ness, on the other hand, as was the case with Os-
kar Davičo, and undoubtedly with a certain num-
ber of Yugoslavs who were in Africa on official
business—above all at the very beginning of es-
tablishing relations and cooperation with some
African countries—was not only the rejection of
social privileges, but of the guilt as well. Yugosla-
via based, as we stated earlier, its public discourse

xvi / continued after the text in serbian.

2

Doček na aerodromu u Nakuruu (Kenija) / 16. 2. 1970.

welcome at the airport in Nakuru (kenya) / 16. 2. 1970
 3

Svečani doček predsednika Egipta Gamala Abdela Nasera na aerodromu „Beograd” / 1. 9. 1965.
State visit of President Nasser: official welcome at the Belgrade airport / 1. 9. 1965
Ana Sladojević (1976, Beograd, Srbija)

Doktorirala je u grupi za Teoriju umetnosti i medija (2012, Interdisciplinarne studije,

Univerzitet umetnosti u Beogradu, Srbija), i magistrirala (2003) i diplomirala/maste-
rirala (1999) na Fakultetu primenjenih umetnosti i dizajna u Beogradu. Radila je kao
kustos za više institucija kulture u Srbiji, između ostalog za Muzej afričke umetnosti
– zbirka Vede i dr Zdravka Pečara (2002–2009), Muzej istorije Jugoslavije (2010–2012),
Centralni institut za konzervaciju u Beogradu (2013–2015). Njene tekstove o kultu-
ralnim reprezentacijama i afričkim umetnostma objavili su Muzej afričke umetnosti,
Časopis Kultura – Zavod za proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, Orion Art i drugi.
Ana Sladojević 5

SLIKE O AFRICI 1

„... i u tim dalekim zemljama Azije i Afrike žive narodi koji,

bez obzira na boju lica, imaju iste težnje kao i mi ovdje, – da
se sačuva mir i da se oni i njihove zemlje što prije podignu iz
zaostalosti i nerazvijenosti. Mi smo imali prilike mnogo da
vidimo, a vidjeli smo i kolike napore čine ti narodi danas da bi
nadoknadili ono što im je u toku historije nametnulo koloni-
jalno upravljanje. /… / Vidjeli smo i to da tim narodima treba
da pomognemo što je najviše mogućno, vidjeli smo da za to
postoje mogućnosti. A oni znaju da mi nismo neka velika i bo-
gata zemlja, oni znaju da smo mi krvavo stekli svoju slobodu,
znaju da mi činimo velike napore da što prije izgradimo bolji
život našim ljudima. Oni u nas gledaju kao u primjer za sebe i
nastoje da i sami stvore što više, ali su počeli pod daleko težim
uslovima nego mi i zato je njima potrebno pomoći. Neka živi
prijateljstvo koje mi stvaramo sa tim narodima jer su naše
težnje iste, neka živi saradnja između naroda!”2

1 Ovaj tekst nastao je kao rezultat istraživanja u okviru međunarodnog projekta

„Non-Aligned Modernities”. Moj deo istraživanja, međutim, nije bio ni sasvim planski niti
sistematičan, zato što nisam odmah imala fokus u okviru ove izuzetno široke teme, već se
više svodio na akumulaciju materijala koji bi mogli da osvetle određene aspekte samog vre-
mena o kome je reč, dakle šezdesetih i sedamdesetih godina XX veka. Mene su interesovanja
i prethodna iskustva rada u Muzeju afričke umetnosti i u Muzeju istorije Jugoslavije vodila
prema domenu kulture i njenih reprezentacija, na temu čega bi, naravno, još mnogo toga
moglo da se napiše. Dogovoren format samih izdanja, kao i ideja da nijedan tekst u ovoj
ediciji nije zatvoren, već, naprotiv, da treba da posluži kao osnova za dalje grananje samih
tema i pristupa, omogućili su određenu slobodu u razmatranju odabranih fenomena koji se
tiču nesvrstanosti. Uzimajući u obzir dokumenta iz Arhiva Jugoslavije, iz knjiga, časopisa i iz
medija, elektronskog kataloga Arhive RTS kao i na osnovu uvida u zbirke i dokumentaciju dva
muzeja u Beogradu – Muzeja afričke umetnosti i Muzeja istorije Jugoslavije – skiciram jednu
moguću interpretaciju ovog, u velikoj meri još uvek nedovoljno obrađenog fenomena.

2 KPR I-2/11, Govor u Titovom Velesu, 6. 3. 1959. Arhiv Jugoslavije, Beograd.

6
 7

Mapa Titovih putovanja, koja, izvedena u tehnici mozaika i danas

pokriva glavni hol na spratu ulazne zgrade Muzeja istorije Jugosla-
vije, nekadašnjeg Muzeja „25. maj”, otvorenog za publiku 1962, na
svojevrstan način ilustruje promenu u poimanju značenjske situira-
nosti Jugoslavije početkom šezdesetih godina. U odnosu na pređaš-
nje predstave, koje Jugoslaviju u izvesnom smislu svode na područje
Balkana, ova nova ideja o njenom globalnom značaju imala je bitnog
udela u formiranju lokalnih identiteta. Afrika je u tom kontekstu
posmatrana – između ostalog – kao još jedan dokaz jugoslovenskog
naglog napretka koji je dozvoljavao da se odvoje sredstva za stvara-
nje političkih i ekonomskih veza sa zemljama koje su donedavno bile
kolonije, od kojih se očekivala saradnja: zbog podrške koju je Jugosla-
vija davala oslobodilačkim anti-kolonijalnim pokretima, kao i zbog
ličnog ugleda Josipa Broza Tita na svetskoj sceni.
Međunarodni odnosi, i način na koji su oni predstavljani u
Jugoslaviji, zapravo su bili u velikoj meri ugrađeni u novi nacionalni
diskurs, i u sliku koju su o sebi sticali Jugosloveni. Oni su korišćeni za
jačanje unutrašnje politike, time što je jugoslovenska javnost, putem
medija, u uslovima kolektivnog čitanja, počinjala da zamišlja i da ose-
ća stvari zajednički (Appadurai 1996:8). U smislu kulturnog pozicioni-
ranja, uticaj koji su međunarodni odnosi imali na jugoslovensku auto-
percepciju znatno je transcendirao sferu političkog, doprinoseći na
veoma osoben način razvoju slike o sebi od šezdesetih, koja je u prilič-
noj meri bila zasnovana upravo na odnosima među zemljama Pokreta.
Rada Iveković piše i o tome kako su autorke i autori mlađe generacije
videli sebe u vreme ranih sedamdesetih odbijajući, kako opisuje, da na
8 poziv ugledne istočnonemačke feministkinje budu svrstani u edicije
Istočnog bloka, insistirajući da njihova dela budu objavljena u sekciji
označenoj kao Treći svet.3 Ovaj doživljaj sebe bio je u skladu sa ideološ-
kim i kulturnim odnosima koji su u relativno kratkom vremenskom
roku omogućili mobilnost, protok informacija i saradnju iz prve ruke,
koji pre toga, na taj način, nisu bili mogući.
Međutim, jedan od glavnih problema koji će se pokazati u
međusobnim odnosima između zemalja Pokreta nesvrstanih bila je
strukturna neodrživost jedne svrsishodnije, potpunije i međusobno
isprepletene saradnje. U tom smislu, i ideja prijateljstva, koja je dis-
kurzivno bila veoma prisutna, i kao jedna od ključnih reči sažimala
procese razvoja odnosa između zemalja PN, mogla bi da se tumači
kroz sličan društveni proces, koji je kroz podrazumevanosti jednog
vremena, o kojem je ovde reč, bez dovoljne institucionalne ili struk-
turne inkorporiranosti, repeticijom usadio određene slike u sećanje,
te da je prijateljstvo kojeg se sećamo možda stvarnije nego što je ono
bilo u konkretnom vremenu u kojem su se ovi odnosi odigravali.

5

3 Iveković, Rada, „The General Desemantisation: Global Language and Hegemony”,

Traduire le silence de la plebe, 2006, http://eipcp.net/transversal/1206/ivecovic/en,
20. 8. 2013.
 „ … želio sam da naš svijet upozna vrijednost crnačke civilizaci- 9
je, da odbaci rasne predrasude. U nas je u to vrijeme bilo mnogo
predrasuda, gotovo nitko ništa nije znao o poeziji crnih pisaca.
Dao sam prvu informaciju u Jugoslaviji o crnačkoj kulturi uop-
šte, osnovao sam Institut za Afriku. Tad sam animirao Ivaniše-
vića, Balena i druge pjesnike, i počeli smo prevoditi i izdavati
knjige afričke poezije. Afrika je dio moga života i s kulturnog
i s emocionalnog stanovišta. Kad sam 1961. stupio prvi put na
afričko tlo, kad me Senghor pozvao na proslavu nezavisnosti
Senegala, to je bio najveći doživljaj u mome životu.” 4

Prefiguracija odnosa sa zemljama Afrike zavisila je u velikoj meri od

prethodnih reprezentacija ne samo Afrike, na način na koji je to činjeno
kroz brojne umetničke i popularne medije decenijama pre toga, već
i od novih reprezentacija Jugoslavije i jugoslovenskog viđenja sebe.
Reprezentacija drugog u zapadnjačkom modelu saznanja, kojom su bili
protkani brojni izvori, od romana, putopisa, preko stripova, reklama,
filmova, kao i muzejskih reprezentacija, svodila se na centrični diskurs,
prepun stereotipova. Uprkos nominalno drugačijem diskursu u Jugosla-
viji, diskursu anti-kolonijalizma i nesvrstanosti, postojeći (zapadnjački)
diskurs bio je previše prisutan, previše ukorenjen, zapravo takoreći jedi-
ni referentni okvir za govor o pitanjima sličnosti i različitosti.
Razlog tome ne leži samo u jugoslovenskoj sferi, naravno, već
i u brojnim prelamanjima ideologija i škola mišljenja, na svetskom
nivou, koje su težile da redefinišu odnose hegemonije koja je bila, pa
i danas u velikoj meri ostaje upisana u postojeće institucije i metodo-
logije. Procesi dekolonizacije teritorija, naime, bili su samo početna
faza, koja je morala da oslobodi dodatan prostor za procese dekoloni-
zacije uma i jezika, koji u nekim sredinama, pa tako i u lokalnoj sre-
dini koja baštini nasleđe socijalističke Jugoslavije, ni do danas nisu
uspeli da dobiju široke obrise, i stvarnu institucionalnu potporu.
U Jugoslaviji, afrocentrične ideologije sa uporištem u kultur-
nim identitetima nisu bile nepoznate među intelektualcima, pa čak

4 Petar Guberina, Matica Hrvatska, www.matica.hr/media/pdf.../galic%20guberina.pdf,

20. 8. 2013.
10 ni među širom čitalačkom publikom još pre II svetskog rata. 5 Ove
su ideje bile prisutne tokom tridesetih i četrdesetih godina, i veoma
rano razmenjivane između onih čija su interesovanja bila upravlje-
na na pitanja identiteta, pre svega nacionalnih i kulturnih. Tako
Petar Guberina, istaknuti hrvatski i jugoslovenski lingvista, piše o
druženju u Parizu, u vreme razvoja negritude,6 sa Eme Sezerom7 i
Leopoldom Sedarom Sengorom, dok Sengor govori o kratkom perio-
du „slavenofilije” kroz koji je prošao u ovom druženju.
Ideologije panafrikanizma i negritude su bile veoma zna-
čajne, zato što su bile među prvim platformama uspostavljenim za
razmišljanje o pitanjima afričkih identiteta, kulture i pripadanja,
koje su imale veoma velikog odjeka, i zato što se i danas prepoznaju
kao bitne u formiranju određenih teorija i škola mišljenja, ali i umet-
ničkih pravaca. I one su, takođe, imale svoje sumnje i kontradikcije,
a posebno je negrituda – koja je bez obzira na to izvršila ogroman
uticaj na afričku misao (Kebede, 2004) – bila kritikovana zbog formi-
ranja svojih ideja na afirmaciji različitosti koja se smatrala nametnu-
tom iz zapadnjačkog normativnog okvira. Upravo zbog njenog upori-
šta u rasi, negrituda u istorijskom smislu govori mnogo o identitetu
građana Francuske poreklom iz kolonija, koji su, dolaskom u metro-
polu, bili suočeni sa rasizmom. U nemogućnosti da se na drugi način
uspostave kao jednaki unutar neravnopravnog sistema, u okviru
kojeg su i sami bili obrazovani, prihvativši određene epistemološ-
ke obrasce, oni kroz negritudu podcrtavaju ono što je kulturalno

5 Smatra se da su prvenstvo u konstruisanju sveobuhvatnih kulturalnih identitetskih

ideologija imali intelektualci sa Kariba, poput Markusa Garvija (Marcus Garvey) sa Jamajke,
upravo zato što je rasno pitanje na Karibima i u Americi bilo dominantno, za razliku od etnič-
kog, koje je u Africi bilo daleko više utemeljeno. Tu su naravno, i bitni zagovornici istorijskog
panafrikanizma, V.E.B. di Boa (W.E.B. du Bois) kao i Džordž Padmor (George Padmore).

6 U Parizu tokom dvadesetih i tridesetih godina razvija se negrituda, sa glavnim ek-

sponentima Eme Sezerom sa Martinika, Leopoldom Sedarom Sengorom iz Senegala i Leon-
Gontranom Damasom (Léon-Gontran Damas) iz Francuske Gvajane. Ideologija negritude, koja
„crnaštvo” posmatra kao zajedničko svojstvo svih Afrikanaca, manifestovano, između ostalog,
i kroz umetnost i kulturu, svoj veći zamah, ali i kritiku, dobiće u nešto kasnijem periodu, kada u
drugoj polovini 20. veka bude došlo do dekolonizacije velikog broja afričkih zemalja.

7 Videti: Webografija. Sezer, boraveći u Šibeniku u gostima kod Guberine 1935. godi-
ne, na plaži Martinske, priseća se rodnog Martinika, i započinje rad na svojoj čuvenoj poemi
„Cahier d’un retour au pays natale”.
nametnuta različitost, i tako prenaglašenu postavljaju je u pozitivan, 11
umesto dotadašnjeg negativnog konteksta (veličanje crnaštva, crnač-
kog stvaralaštva, i izvođenje nekih – ma koliko uopštenih ili pogreš-
nih – osobenosti crnačkog izraza).
Međutim, iako su ove ideje, u svetlu antikolonijalnih napora
bile poznate, a intelektualci sa ovih prostora su ih pratili i poznavali, u
širem, političkom i popularnom diskursu, propuštenom kroz prizmu
kulture, koja je prepoznata kao nezaobilazna tačka dodira među drža-
vama u pitanju, nisu mogli da se izbegnu stereotipovi i uopštavanja.
Uostalom, i ove ideologije su bile u velikoj meri uopštavajuće,
nauštrb lokalnih specifičnosti i pluralnosti tumačenja i reprezentacija,8
upravo zato što su težile univerzalizovanju određenih kulturnih ka-
rakteristika, svodeći ih na pripadnost određenoj rasi (u konstruisanom,
društvenom smislu), odnosno poreklu (Afrika).
Iako je diskurs prijateljstva između Jugoslavije i zemalja Afri-
ke težio da inkorporira ideje negritude i panafrikanizma, problem
je, barem na nivou političkog govora, bio u tome što se političko
prijateljstvo, čak i onda kada je obraćalo pažnju na dodirne tačke i
kulturalne specifičnosti, neretko zaustavljalo na sasvim osnovnom
nivou prepoznavanja nedaća sa kojima su se, istorijski gledano, naro-
di o kojima je reč susretali. Nebrojeno puta ponovljena su poređenja
između afričkih naroda pod kolonijalnom upravom i jugoslovenskih
naroda pod „Habzburzima i Otomanima” (što čak i Sengor pominje,
prilikom oproštajne zdravice tokom posete Jugoslaviji 1975. godine,
Tito isto poređenje koristi u brojnim prilikama, Živorad Kovačević,
predsednik Skupštine grada Beograda, koristi ga prilikom otvaranja
Muzeja afričke umetnosti 1977. godine, i sl.) što je postala tačka pre-
seka u kojoj počinju i završavaju se sličnosti između naroda zemalja
Afrike i naroda Jugoslavije.
U pokušajima opisivanja političkog prijateljstva, predsednici
država i visoki predstavnici uvek insistiraju na sličnostima, ma kako
one bile skromne, a lista brzo iscrpljena. Međutim, čak i ukoliko nam
se poređenje između Otomanskog carstva i Habsburga na Balkanu,

8 Pogledati u: Vazquez, Michael Colin, „An African Dilemma”, Transition, No. 75/76,
The Anniversary Issue: Selections from Transition, 1961–1976 (1997), 6–15, Indiana University
Press on behalf of the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute, 8.
12 i kolonizatora u Africi čini pomalo nespretnim i preteranim, ono
zapravo ide u prilog prethodno pomenutoj promeni koja je nastupila
u prostornom shvatanju odnosa, gde Jugoslavija transcendira svoje
balkanske okvire, prostirući se, kroz međunarodne odnose koje Tito
uspostavlja, do svih krajeva sveta.
Prijateljstvo o kojem je bilo reči veoma često je iz ugla zvanič-
ne Jugoslavije percipirano kao solidarnost, postavljajući Jugoslaviju i
njene narode, kao diskurzivno jednake ali u prednosti. Odnos Jugosla-
vije prema zemljama koje su, odlaskom kolonijalnih uprava, osvanu-
le, politički i ekonomski posmatrano, u složenim situacijama, ipak je
bio donekle pokroviteljski, kako to Sretenović opaža, poput odnosa
„starijeg” prema „mlađem” bratu, koji je „leopardovu kožu zamenio
radničkim kombinezonom”.9
U lokalnom sećanju i pamćenju, u pogledu „prijateljstva”
sa narodima Afrike i nesvrstanima, neka od opštih mesta danas su
ispraćanja i dočeci Tita ili nekih od lidera Pokreta, poput Hajla Sela-
sija I, ili Gamala Abdela Nasera. Da li je reč o autentičnom sećanju, ili
o refleksu brojnih medijskih izveštavanja, ne može se sa sigurnošću
zaključiti. Oskar Davičo primećuje sličnost između Jugoslavije i
drugih vanblokovskih država (u ovom slučaju Gabona šezdesetih),
u pogledu ove okrenutosti javnom predstavljanju političkog prija-
teljstva, i čitavog niza međudržavnih poseta, i kaže: „Taj delimično
ugostiteljski kurs ili, tačnije, ta politika otvorenih vrata izgleda da
nije samo specijalitet naše sudbine. Kao da su sve nove, mlade države
vanblokovskih oplata prinuđene da se, u jednom trenutku svoje isto-
rije, posluže tom samoodržajnom tehnikom. Kako bi razbile zaveru
kleveta, dezinformacija i oduzimanja prava na sopstveni glas.” (Da-
vičo, 1962:299–300).

5

9 Sretenović, 2004:6
 „Bivši belac – Besmisleno je, ali šta mogu, stid me. Narod kom 13
pripadam i klasa čiji sam sin nisu nikad morili, robili, ubijali.
Stolećima smo sami robovali. Da, ali ja sam beo, to je sve što
prolaznici vide. Kad bih na reveru mogao da nosim sažetu
istoriju svoje zemlje!” 10

Možda nije ni bilo ključno za neku osobu da zaista i putuje u bilo koju
od afričkih zemalja, već se proces auto-percepcije o kojem je bilo reči
odvijao kroz zamišljanje jedne šire zajednice i osećanje pripadnosti.
Oni koji su, međutim, službeno bili poslati u neku od afričkih zema-
lja, težili su da usvojeni pojam prijateljstva pretvore u druge oblike
odnosa, poput istraživanja (učenja) i kolekcioniranja (interpretacije),
odnose koji su krajem 19. i početkom 20. veka bili sinonimi za zapad-
njačke pristupe drugom. I jedan i drugi u sebi sadrže nešto od onog
„otkrića” koje prati sve prethodne kolonijalne odnose prema afrič-
kim umetnostima i drugim „afričkim” temama, iako je ovo „otkri-
će” modifikovano, i prilagođeno dominantnom diskursu socijalizma
i jednakosti. Dok je to, naime, nominalno tačno, a ne može se poreći
iskreno interesovanje za socijalna pitanja afričkih naroda u društve-
no političkoj klimi u Jugoslaviji tog vremena, problem leži pre svega
u preuzetim obrascima govora i razmišljanja o određenim pitanjima.
Momenat učenja i zatim interpretacije su takoreći jedno iskustvo,
jer mnogi od onih koje je služba odvela u Afriku, osećaju potrebu da
svoj doživljaj potvrde i svojevrsnom interpretacijom, bilo da je reč o
putopisu, drugoj vrsti šitva (sređene dnevničke beleške, priče i sl.),
lovu ili kolekcioniranju. Protok ne samo ovih priča iz prve ruke, već
i konkretnih predmeta: od kljova slona, na koje su Jugosloveni, baš
kao i Evropljani ili Amerikanci, išli u lov u Africi, do predmeta afrič-
kog zanatstva i umetnosti, doprinose potvrdi ovog iskustva.
Sa druge strane, jugoslovensko društvo stvorilo je odgovara-
juću društvenu nišu za studente iz zemalja Afrike, koji su pohađali
škole i univerzitete u Jugoslaviji, diplomate iz zemalja Afrike, čije su
zemlje imale predstavništva u Jugoslaviji, kao i polaznike na obuci u

10 Davičo, 1962:13
14 određenim tehničkim i vojnim domenima. Postojanje ove „niše”, ili
više različitih mikro-niša, omogućilo je ne integraciju, već prepozna-
vanje privremenih stanovnika Jugoslavije u prihvatljivim i politički
afirmisanim okvirima – afirmisanim diskursom anti-kolonijalizma i
nesvrstanosti, i saradnje sa zemljama „Trećeg sveta”.
Baš kao i filmovi, reportaže, književne večeri i dr., o afričkim
putovanjima i afričkim kulturama i umetnostima, i studenti i zapo-
sleni iz afričkih zemalja (u nekom – statusnom ili intelektualnom
smislu – elita) bili su ujedno svojevrsna potvrda novostečene jugoslo-
venske pozicije na međunarodnoj političkoj sceni.
Afrički studenti koji su dolazili na studije u Jugoslaviju, tako-
đe su od Beograda i drugih univerzitetskih centara u Jugoslaviji činili
demografski raznolike sredine: dominantan diskurs je propagirao
vrednosti kulturne tolerancije, ali se, opet, postavlja pitanje u kojoj
meri je prijateljstvo bilo zapravo iskazivanje dominantnog ideološ-
kog diskursa, a u kojoj meri je značilo stvarno prihvatanje drugog?
Jugoslavija, međutim, nikada nije bila predviđena kao krajnja
destinacije za većinu Afrikanaca koji su boravili u njoj, za razliku od
zemalja zapadne Evrope, u kojima se od pedesetih formiraju sve broj-
nije populacije imigranata iz zemalja koje su bile kolonije. Naravno,
zajednički jezik, kao i sličnost obrazovnih sistema nekih od zemalja
Afrike sa zemljama kolonizatorima po uzoru na koje su bili impleme-
tirani, doprinosio je lakšoj identifikaciji i, uslovno rečeno, asimilaciji.
Po završetku studija u Jugoslaviji, većina se vraćala u svoje
zemlje: određeni broj, naravno, jeste ostao, ali je on takoreći zane-
marljiv u odnosu na bilo koju zapadnoevropsku zemlju. Određen broj
mešovitih veza ili brakova, takođe, u pojedinim momentima trpeo je
posledice neprihvatanja sredine.
Takođe je postojala razlika u percepciji Afrikanaca u Africi i u
Jugoslaviji. Odlaskom u zemlje Afrike, takođe, mnogi Jugosloveni su
po prvi put doživeli svoje belaštvo, koje je zatim bilo interpretirano
na razne načine.
Zanimljivo je da je jedno od osnovnih prepoznavanja samih sebe
kao belih, u kontekstu pokazivanja novostečene bliskosti i prijateljstva,
posebno u govoru o temama povezanim sa nesvrstanošću, bivalo pre-
vedeno u preimućstvo Jugoslovena nad drugim Evropljanima i među
belcima uopšte, nepostojanjem kolonijalnog iskustva i time kolonijalne
krivice Jugoslavije. To je bilo posebno bitno za njihovo izdvajanje kao 15
moralno superiornih u odnosu na one zemlje koje su posedovale ko-
lonije. Međutim, kolonijalno iskustvo, u skladu sa postkolonijalnom
teorijom, nije ograničeno samo na one zemlje koje su direktno učestvo-
vale u procesu kolonizacije, bivanja kolonizatorom ili kolonizovanim,
već je njen uticaj imao globalne posledice na odnose, pozicioniranja i
različite obrasce ponašanja i sisteme saznanja u širem smislu. Problem
nije bio samo u načinima na koji je reprezentacija drugog uspostavljana
sa strane, već je, kako Franc Fanon11 navodi, u podjednakoj meri zavisila
od nemogućnosti da bilo onaj ko konstruiše ili onaj o kojem se predsta-
va konstruiše iskorači iz okvira prethodno uspostavljenih razmišljanja
proizašlih iz odnosa moći. Sama nemogućnost da se odbaci nasleđe ko-
lonijalizma i da se razmišlja van njegovih okvira biće bitna tema među
intelektualcima, i izvor dvoumljenja, rastrzanosti ali i prepoznavanja
hibridnih identiteta. Prema Fanonu, ne samo da kolonijalizam nije
predstavljao fenomen ograničen na određene teritorije, već nije bio
ograničen ni na određeno vreme (trajanje kolonijalizma kao poretka).
Današnje iskustvo i ukorenjenost određenih stereotipova tome svaka-
ko idu u prilog; kolonijalizam je, naime, podrazumevao obostranost u
kreiranju društvenih konstrukcija i različitih kulturnih narativa, po
strani kojih nije bio niko, pa ni Srbija ni Jugoslavija.
Ukoliko nam insistiranje na moralnom preimućstvu može
delovati kao tehnika koja je trebalo da Jugoslaviju u potpunosti iz-
dvoji od evropskih zemalja, narativ vremena nam pruža drugačije
uvide: Jugoslavija, naime, nikada nije negirala svoj evropski položaj,
već je samo poređenje težilo da je prikaže kao belačku, kao evropsku,
ali bez stigme kolonizatora. U poređenju sa kolonijalnim narativima,
Jugoslavija se nikada nije postavljala kao onaj ko teži da civilizuje
drugog, već kao onaj ko teži da pomogne drugom da se sam uspostavi
u poziciji i ulozi koja tek treba da se kreira, i da se definiše.
Posebno pitanje u razmatranju odnosa Jugoslavije, ali zapravo
pre Jugoslovena prema zemljama Afrike i njihovim stanovnicima,

11 Franc Fanon (Frantz Fanon), psihijatar i teoretičar rodom sa Martinika, koji se an-
gažovao u alžirskoj borbi za nezavisnost, objasniće u periodu pedesetih godina, identitetske
nedoumice vezane za boju kože, i kompleksne društvene odnose koji su se formirali oko
kulturalne konstrukcije rase.
16 jeste i pitanje rase kao kulturne konstrukcije. Kao ilustraciju, treba
navesti, recimo, da bela koža nije uvek bila garant belaštva (whitene-
ss), zato što je ono bilo društveno kontruisana kategorija koja je bila
daleko kompleksnija, i podrazumevala je i brojne druge elemente
kojima se belaštvo u nekoj sredini odlikovalo: porodično poreklo,
nasleđe, religiju, status i dr. (El-Tayeb, 2011)
Zato deluje veoma zanimljivo proučiti položaj Jugoslovena u
jednom širem poretku belaštva, u vreme šezdesetih, i sedamdesetih.
Bez obzira na preispitivanje, recimo, Oskara Daviča, koji ne želi da ga
u zemljama Afrike vide kao belca, belaštvo Jugoslovena u Africi da-
leko ih je direktnije označavalo, nego što je to slučaj bio sa njihovim
belaštvom u Evropi. Posebno je to dolazilo do izražaja u onim situ-
acijama u kojima im je tako površna činjenica kao što je boja kože
omogućavala uklapanje u određenu društvenu kategoriju kojoj su
samo naizgled pripadali. To donekle objašnjava kasnije poistovećiva-
nje jednog dela Jugoslovena sa belcima u Africi, zato što se njhovim
epidermalnim belaštvom otvarao čitav jedan niz ranijim poretcima
društveno konstruisanih i stoga nasleđenih odnosa, koje oni, u odre-
đenim slučajevima kada su ih razumeli kao privilegiju, nisu odbijali.
Odbijanje kolonijalnog belaštva, sa druge strane, kao kod Oska-
ra Daviča, a besumnje i kod određenog broja Jugoslovena koji su služ-
beno boravili u Africi, pre svega na početku uspostavljanja odnosa
saradnje sa nekim zemljama Afrike, bilo je ujedno odbijanje ne samo
društvenih privilegija, već i krivice. Jugoslavija je, kao što je već reče-
no, svoj javni diskurs bazirala na nepostojanju iskustva kolonizato-
ra. To, međutim, kao što je takođe već rečeno, ne znači nepostojanje
iskustva kolonijalizma. Paralelno tome, o čemu Fatima el-Tajeb piše,
jeste i rezonovanje da ukoliko određena zemlja, npr. nije bila koloni-
zator, time ima manje kapaciteta za razvoj pojava rasizma. Međutim,
ovaj argument, baš kao i u jugoslovenskom slučaju, nije validna, zato
što se kolonijalni poredak očitovao na čitav svet i na odnose u njemu.
Sa druge strane, Jugosloveni u Evropi nisu, ili barem nisu
uvek i u svim kontekstima bili belci, dakle iz ugla konstruisane ka-
tegorije belaštva koja u svakoj sredini podrazumeva određen, širi
dijapazon društvenih karakteristika, odnosno odrednica uz pomoć
kojih se konstruiše, i ovo iskustvo ne-belaštva, prevedeno u isku-
stvo ne-evropejstva ili nepotpunog evropejstva, jeste bilo prisutno
u Jugoslaviji tog vremena (baš kao što su određeni recidivi ovog 17
poretka utisnuti i u današnju auto-percepciju Srba): omogućavajući
identifikaciju sa građanima zemalja „Trećeg sveta”. Pozicija učenika
Zapada, međutim, pre svega učenika Evrope, ustanovljena kroz naci-
onalno buđenje u 19. veku i raskid sa otomanskim nasleđem, nikada
nije ni prestala, ona je samo imala manji ili veći intenzitet u određe-
nim vremenskim periodima.
Jugoslavija je bila geografski usmerena prema Evropi. Na
sasvim drugi način, brojne afričke zemlje – bez obzira na istorijsko
odvajanje od metropola koje su ih kolonizovale – imale su veoma
jake veze sa ovim zemljama, uspostavljenim pre svega kroz školstvo,
a zatim i kroz sisteme poslovanja. Iz tog razloga, često im je bilo za-
pravo jednostavnije da nastave da posluju sa onima sa kojima su se
najbolje poznavali, a evropski i uopšte zapadnjački uticaji u kulturi,
iako redefinisani dešavanjima tokom dekolonizacije i neposredno
nakon nje, nastavili su da imaju primat kako u Jugoslaviji, tako i u
zemljama Afrike.

5
18 „Moram da kažem da smo prilično uradili na upoznavanju
kulture afričkih naroda, mada je to još uvek nedovoljno; da
smo ipak angažovali jedan broj naših naučnoistraživačkih
institucija koje su dosta sistematski pratile ono što se dešava-
lo i na afričkom tlu, naročito poslednjih godina; da imamo već
nekoliko magistara koji su proučavali afričku kulturu; da smo
imali veliki broj emisija na našim televizijskim programima.
Više naših televizijskih centara slalo je svoje ekipe da snimaju
život u Africi, da snimaju i kulturne institucije, razne festi-
vale: da je na našoj televiziji vrlo često bilo afričkih filmova,
koje smo dobijali preko afričkih ambasada ovde ili drugim
putem; da smo organizovali čitav niz razgovora o problemima
afričke kulture. /… / Kad bi se sve to sabralo, čini mi se da bi
se moglo reći da smo ulagali prilično napora u tome pravcu –
mada je to sve još uvek nedovoljno; mi se još uvek nalazimo
na početku organizovanijeg posla na tom planu.” 12

Bitno je primetiti da, čak iako nije postojala planska i dugoročna kul-
turna politika u odnosu prema zemljama Pokreta nesvrtanih, pa tako i
zemljama afričkog kontinenta, postojala je otvorenost i izvesna insti-
tucionalna potpora različitim vidovima saradnje, uključujući kulturnu
saradnju. Verovatno najveći doprinos kulturnoj saradnji jeste zapravo
bilo školovanje velikog broja studenata na školama i fakultetima u Jugo-
slaviji (prema nekim podacima preko 40.000 studenata na UB).
Pored toga, na večerima poezije u Jugoslaviji čitala su se
prevedena dela afričkih autora, poput Agoštinjoa Netoa i Leopolda
Sedara Sengora. U Jugoslaviju su dolazile umetničke grupe u okviru
manifestacija poput BELEF-a, ustanovljen je Festival afro-azijskog
filma, emitovale su se emisije koje su se fokusirale na kompleksne
društveno-političke i kulturne promene koje su se odvijale u zemlja-
ma Afrike nakon dekolonizacije.
Pre nego što je 1977. godine otvoren Muzej afričke umetnosti
u Beogradu, priređeno je nekoliko izložbi s afričkom tematikom.

12 Krsto Bulajić, „Razgovor o mogućnostima kulturne saradnje”, Kultura 1980/1, 116.

Izložba u Etnografskom muzeju 1973. ujedno je predstavila i zbirku 19
Pečarevih. Pošto je otvoren, Muzej afričke umetnosti posetili su
Kvesi Majls, direktor Nacionalnog muzeja Gane u Akri, Amadu-Mah-
tar M’Bou, generalni direktor UNESCO-a (1977), Bazil Kosu, generalni
direktor Afričkog instituta za istraživanje kulture iz Dakara, (1978),
Činua Ačebe, nigerijski pesnik, Musa Traore, predsednik Republike
Mali, (posetio Muzej i poklonio dva muzička instrumenta iz Malija),
prof. dr. Taha Husein, dekan Akademije primenjenih umetnosti u
Kairu, Rikardo Tejšeira Duarte iz Direkcije za nacionalnu kulturu
Mozambika (poklonio jednu skulpturu Makonde) (1979) Mohamed
Benahmed Abdelgani, predsednik vlade Republike Alžira, Rože Dor-
senvil, pisac i direktor izdavačke kuće iz Senegala, David Maju, pisac
i izdavač iz Kenije, Mohamed Diop, profesor univerziteta iz Sene-
gala, Žan Kuča, ministar inostranih poslova Kameruna, Fili Fabo,
ministar inostranih poslova Sijera Leonea, Adenike Ebun Ojagbola,
Savezni ministar za nacionalno planiranje iz Lagosa, Nigerija, itd.
U Muzeju je organizovana „Savremena skulptura Makonde”,
izložba u okviru kulturne saradnje između Tanzanije i Jugoslavije
(1979), „Savremena umetnost Gane”, izložba u okviru kulturne
saradnje između Gane i Jugoslavije (1980),13 predavanje: „Zašto se
Afrika smatra kolevkom čovečanstva” profesora Teofila Obengaa iz
Konga, u okviru Dana informacija o kulturi Afrike, održanih od 24.
do 29. marta 1980. u Beogradu.
Međutim, pregled dvodecenijske kulturne saradnje, tokom
pomenutog skupa koji je u martu 1980. okupio neka od najeminen-
tnijih imena, stručnjaka za pitanja prevođenja, kulturnih politika, i
kulturne saradnje, odaje generalni neuspeh u ovim domenima.
Sa velikim iskustvom iza sebe i poznavanjem međunarodnih
prilika, Zdravko Pečar postavlja pitanje o ulozi Jugoslavije u Africi
u prethodnom periodu. On, naime, kaže: „Šta smo mi, od šezdesete
naovamo, doneli novo u Afriku. Vidite, ja o tome imam loše mišlje-
nje, ja ne mislim da smo mi puno toga uradili. /…/ Ja sam proveo mno-
go godina na vašem kontinentu. Godine 1959. bio sam u Tanzaniji,
u Tanganjiki (tada je bila Tanganjika), i jedan me je omladinac sreo

13 Prilog u katalogu Savremena umetnost Gane, Jelena Aranđelović Lazić, MAU,

Beograd, 1980.
20 i razgovarali smo, i onda mi je on rekao – pa dobro, vi ste iz socija-
lističke zemlje? Jesam – rekoh. Pa znate, kaže, nema velike razlike
između vas i kapitalista. Kako, rekoh, nema, molim vas, vi nemate
pojma ni o čemu. Ja sam se stvarno zapanjio. A on kaže – znate, svi
vi trčite za materijalnim dobrima (tada potrošačko društvo još nije
postojalo kao izraz), to je glavni cilj vašeg života, i to donosite nama
ovde u Afriku. Niste ništa drugačiji od drugih. Ja sam to napisao u
svojoj knjizi o Africi koja je bila objavljena šezdesetih godina, i to je
pitanje koje mene još uvek boli i kada razgovaramo danas o kultu-
ri, mene neprekidno proganja taj elemenat – šta smo mi socijalisti,
socijalističke zemlje doneli novo na afrički kontinent i čime smo se
proslavili.” 14
U odgovor njemu, Bazil Kosu daje jednu neočekivano direktnu
i pronicljivu analizu, rekavši: „ … socijalističke zemlje su istorijski u
zakašnjenju na afričkom tlu, one ga mnogo manje poznaju nego bivše
zapadne kolonijalne metropole, na primer, Francuska, Velika Britani-
ja, Nemačka. Stručnjaci tih zemalja ga poznaju bolje nego mi, a pozna-
ju i naše rukovodioce bolje no mi sami. /… / Što se tiče pitanja šta soci-
jalističke zemlje donose – mnoge od njih se, u stvari, stavljaju u položaj
kolonizatora, ideološkog kolonizatora, jer prodaju automobilske gume
pod uslovom da se prihvataju njihova načela, po cenu prihvatanja ide-
ološke ortodoksnosti, a to je praksa, ponašanje koje ugrožava slobodu,
načelo samoopredeljenja naroda. /… / To je ideološko cenjkanje, dakle,
ponašanje ideološkog kolonizatora, kulturnog kolonizatora.”15
Iz pozicije nezavisnog intelektualca, predsednika Afričkog
instituta za istraživanje kulture iz Dakara, koji ne odgovara direktno
nijednoj vladi, Kosu sumira ne samo probleme koji nastaju u prisu-
stvu socijalističkih zemalja na afričkom tržištu, već i svih drugih
koji imaju udela u ovom bitnom delu svetske ekonomije.
Ukoliko se pogledaju pregledi kulturnih politika Jugoslavije,
kao i zemalja poput, na primer, Senegala i drugih afričkih zemalja,
vidi se da same kulturne politike ne predviđaju kao posebnu i bitnu

14 Kultura, 1980/1, 189/190.

15 Izvod iz izlaganja Bazila Kosua (Basile Kossou), časopis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina
1980/81, Zavod za proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, izlaganja povodom Dana afričke kulture u
martu 1980.g. u Beogradu, 193.
stavku saradnju u kulturi između ovih zemalja. Planska i kvalitet- 21
na kulturna saradnja, kao preduslov za međusobno upoznavanje, a
zatim i za pomenuto prijateljstvo, zapravo je u velikoj meri izosta-
jala, čak iako je država u izvesnom smislu bila facilitator. Međutim,
izuzimajući individualna profesionalna interesovanja malobrojnih
afrikanista,16 javni, prevashodno politički jezik veoma rano se zau-
stavio u svom razvoju, i nastavio da perpetuira jednu vrstu govora
uspostavljenog na binarnom diskursu.
To je za šire manifestovanje ovog kontekstualno shvaćenog
prijateljstva, predstavljalo nemogućnost da kao diskurs prevaziđe
na početku uspostavljene okvire uslovno rečeno zajedničkog jezika,
koji su, uostalom, bili veoma uopšteni. U suštinskom smislu, ova-
kva situacija nije doprinela brisanju postojećih stereotipova o rasi,
umetnostima i kulturama, uslovljenih duboko ukorenjenim evropo-
centrizmom jugoslovenskog društva; razlog iz kojeg su (iz današnje
perspektive posmatrano) određeni elementi ovog diskursa tako brzo
zaboravljeni u velikoj meri možda upravo leži u domenu saznanja
i saznajnih sistema, u kojima nije došlo do sistemske ili suštinske
promene u posmatranju, pre svega, kulturnog stvaralaštva zemalja
Afrike. Obrazovni okvir ostao je manje-više nepromenjen.
Prema podacima iznetim na pomenutom skupu o afričkoj ku-
tluri 1980, od 600 izloženih naslova u vezi sa tematikom nesvrstano-
sti, na izložbi povodom 25. Sajma knjiga u Beogradu, bilo je prisutno
samo 85 dela afričkih autora za period od 20 godina izdavanja.17
Osim pomenutih manjih ili većih privatnih kolekcija afričkih
predmeta, i izvesnog broja objavljenih memoara u formi ex-post pu-
topisa ili priča, koje su napisali Jugosloveni koji su tada radili u Africi,
danas ne postoji širi kulturalni javni okvir koji bi o ovom periodu i
o prijateljstvu govorio na drugačiji ili autentičan način, u odnosu na
prethodno uspostavljene diskurse o drugosti.

16 Afrikanista okupljenih oko Instituta za proučavanje Afrike koji je jugoslovenski i

hrvatski lingvista Petar Guberina osnovao u Zagrebu, zajedno sa profesorom Svetozarom
Petrovićem, među kojima su Nada Švob-Đokić i Biserka Cvjetičanin; direktora Slovenskog
etnografskog muzeja u Ljubljani Borisa Kuhara; prve direktorke Muzeja afričke umetnosti u
Beogradu Jelene Aranđelović Lazić i drugih.

17 Opservacija Miloša Nemanjića, u tekstu razgovora objavljenog u časopisu „Kultura”

1980/1.
22 Iz šire istorijske perspektive, Jugoslavija i zemlje Afrike sa
kojima je imala kontakta, tek su se ovlaš susrele tokom nekoliko de-
cenija manje ili više uspešne saradnje. Međutim, ovaj susret je u tom
vremenu uticao na značajne promene u razumevanju prostornih
odnosa i mesta Jugoslavije u svetskoj politici, a time i jugoslovenske
auto-percepcije u odnosu na svet.
U decenijama nakon osamdesetih ovo prijateljstvo je skoro
u potpunosti i svakako ne bez razloga povezano sa jugoslovenskim
identitetima koji su, posebno devedesetih godina bili u brisanju. Sva-
kako nije slučajnost da ponovnim buđenjem interesovanja za jugo-
slovensko kulturno nasleđe, za kojim se ukazala potreba iz različitih
razloga, u jednom smislu iz razloga postizanja određenog kontinui-
teta ili celovitosti, i ponovnog uspostavljanja relacija prema tom delu
zajedničke istorije, i pitanja iz vremena nesvrstavanja dobijaju svoju
reafirmaciju.
Međutim, promišljanjem jugoslovenskog nasleđa, pa tako i
nasleđa inicijalne nesvrstanosti, koja danas može da osvetli neke
osobenosti vremena, i predstavlja svojevrsni kulturni kapital za nas,
kroz brojne simultane projekte koji se trenutno odvijaju oko tema
nesvrstavanja, konačno može da se kritički ispita i potencijalnost
ovog vremena i njegovih diskursa.
 23

Bibliografija

— Abrahamsen, Rita • „African Studies and the Postcolonial

Challenge”, African Affairs, Royal African Society, 2003, 102,
189–210.
— Ahluwalia, Pal • Politics and Post-Colonial Theory, African Inflec-
tions, Routledge, London and New York, 2001
— Amin, Samir • Eurocentrism. Modernity, Religion, and Democra-
cy. A Critique of Eurocentrism (2nd edition), Pambazuka Press,
Oxford, 2010
— Appadurai, Arjun • Modernity at Large, Cultural Dimensions of
Globalisation, Univeristy of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis/
London, 1996
— Aranđelović Lazić, Jelena • Savremena umetnost Gane, katalog
MAU, Beograd, 1980
— Ashcroft, Bill and Gareth Griffiths, Helen Tiffin • Post-colonial
Studies Reader, Routledge, London/New York, 1995
— Bal, Mieke and Bryan Gonzales, eds • The Practice of Cultural
Analysis: Exposing Interdisciplinary Interpretation, Stanford
University Press, Stanford, California, 1999
— Balibar, Étienne and Immanuel Wallerstein • Race, Nation,
Class: Ambiguous Identities, Verso, London/New York, 1991
— Barber, Karin • The Anthropology of Texts, Persons and Publics,
Oral and written culture in Africa and beyond, Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, Cambridge, 2007
24 — Bhabha, Homi K, ed • Nation and Narration, Routledge, Lon-
don/New York, 1990
— Bogetić, Daragan • „Jugoslovensko bekstvo iz Evrope” – novi
ekonomski prioriteti nesvrstane Jugoslavije sredinom 50-ih
godina, Istorija 20. veka 30, (1), Beograd, 2012, 163–178.
— Botwe-Asamoah, Kwame • Kwame Nkrumah’s Politico-Cultural
Thought and Policies, An African-centered Paradigm for the Second
Phase of the African Revolution, Routledge, London/New York,
2005
— Biščević, Hidajet • Predgovor, „Jugoslavija u doba Hladnog rata:
u zaklonu nesvrstanosti”, u: Jakovina, Tvrtko • Treća strana
Hladnog rata, Fraktura, Zagreb, 2011, 10–16.
— Davičo, Oskar • Crno na belo, Prosveta, Beograd, 1962
— Dorsenvil, Rože • „Knjiga i izdavačka delatnost u Africi”, časo-
pis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81, Zavod za proučavanje
kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 43–59.
— El-Tayeb, Fatima • European others: queering ethnicity in post-
national Europe, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis/
London, 2011
— Eškroft, Bil i Garet Grifits, Helen Tifin • „Ponovno promišljanje
postkolonijalnog”, Postkolonijalna teorija u: Treći program, br.
125–126, I–II, 2005, 107–129.
— Falola, Toyin, and Christian Jennings, eds • Africanizing Knowl-
edge, African Studies across the Disciplines, Transaction Publish-
ers, New Brunswick/London, 2002
— Fanon, Frantz • Black Skin, White Masks, Foreword: „Remem-
bering Fanon; Self, Psyche and the Colonial Condition” by
Homi K. Bhabha, Pluto Press, London, 1986 (first published
Editions de Seuil, 1952)
— Grupa autora (Veda i dr Zdravko Pečar, Kwasi A. Myles, Jelena
Aranđelović-Lazić) • Muzej afričke umetnosti – Kolekcija Vede i
dr Zdravka Pečara, katalog povodom otvaranja MAU, Beograd,
1977
— Gupa autora • Razgovor o mogućnostima kulturne saradnje,
časopis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81, Zavod za prouča-
vanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 115–130.
— Grupa autora • „Prevođenje i izdavanje književnosti zemalja u 25
razvoju”, časopis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81, Zavod za
proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 133–167.
— Grupa autora • „Benin, Gabon, Obala Slonovače”, časopis Kul-
tura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81, Zavod za proučavanje kultur-
nog razvitka, Beograd, 171–198.
— Guberina, Petar • „Pogovor izdanju”, u: Davidson, Basil • Genij
Afrike, Stvarnost, Zagreb, 1977, 297–320.
— Hall, Stuart • Representation: Cultural Representations and Signify-
ing Practices, Sage Publications and Open University, London, 1997
— Heyking, John von, and Richard Avramenko, eds • Friendship
and Politics, Essays in Political Thought, University of Notre
Dame Press, Notre Dame, Indiana, 2008
— Jakovina, Tvrtko • Treća strana Hladnog rata, Fraktura, Zagreb, 2011
— Jinadu, Adele L • „Some African Theorists of Culture and Mod-
ernization: Fanon, Cabral and Some Others”, African Studies
Review, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Apr., 1978), 121–138, African Studies As-
sociation Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/523767
— Kamrava, Mehran • Cultural Politics in the Third World, Rout-
ledge, London, 1999
— Kebede, Messay • Africa’s Quest for a Philosophy of Decoloniza-
tion, Rodopi, Amsterdam/New York, 2004
— Klasić, Hrvoje • Jugoslavija i svijet 1968., Ljevak, Zagreb, 2012
— Kosu, Bazil • „Perspektive i svrha kulturne saradnje nesvr-
stanih”, časopis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81, Zavod za
proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 99-114.
— Kovačević, Ivan, ur. • Okviri konstruisanja jugoslovenskog kul-
turnog nasleđa, Ogledi o jugoslovenskom kulturnom nasleđu,
Etnološka biblioteka, knjiga 61, zbornik, SGC i Odeljenje za et-
nologiju i antropologiju Filozofskog fakulteta, Beograd, 2011
— Krstić, Marija • „Nesvrstanost na strukturalistički način”, Et-
nološko-antropološke sveske, 14, (n.s.) 3, Beograd, 2009, 17–41.
— Krstić, Marija • „Pokret nesvrstanih kao jugoslovensko nasleđe”,
u: Kovačević, Ivan, ur • Okviri konstruisanja jugoslovenskog kultur-
nog nasleđa, Ogledi o jugoslovenskom kulturnom nasleđu, Etno-
loška biblioteka, knjiga 61, zbornik, SGC i Odeljenje za etnologi-
ju i antropologiju Filozofskog fakulteta, Beograd, 2011, 57–82.
26 — Loomba, Ania and Suvir Kaul, Matti Bunzl, Antoinette Burton,
Jed Esty, ed • Postcolonial Studies and Beyond, Duke University
Press, Durham and London, 2005
— Majstorović, Stevan • Cultural Policy in Yugoslavia, Studies and
Documents on Cultural Policies, UNESCO, Paris, 1972
— Mates, Leo • Nonalignment, Theory and Current Policy, The Insti-
tute of International Politics and Economics, Belgrade, and Oceana
Publications, Inc., Dobbs Ferry, New York, Belgrade, 1972
— Mek Klintok, En • „Genealogija imperijalizma”, Postkolonijal-
na teorija u: Treći program, br. 125–126, I–II, 2005, 130–160.
— Meusburger, Peter and Michael Heffernan, Edgar Wunder, ed •
Cultural Memories, The Geographical Point of View, Springer, Hei-
delberg, 2011
— Norbu, Dawa • Culture and the Politics of Third World national-
ism, Routledge, London and New York, 1992
— Njegovanović-Ristić Nataša, dr Zdravko Pečar • Monografija
MAU, MAU, Beograd, 1989
— Obenga, Teofil • „Afrika – kolevka čovečanstva” (Théophile
Obenga, „Comment l’Afrique est-elle le berceau de l’huma-
nité?”), časopis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81, Zavod za
proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 11–25.
— Olaniyan, Tejumola • Scars of Conquest, Masks of Resistance, The
Invention of Cultural Identities in African, African-American and
Caribbean Drama, Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York,
1995
— Pečar, Zdravko • Afrička kretanja, Naprijed, Zagreb, 1965
— Petković, Ranko • Teorijski pojmovi nesvrstanosti, Rad, Beograd, 1974
— Prakash, Gyan, ed • After Colonialism, Imperial Histories and
Postcolonial Displacements, Princeton University Press, New
Jersey, 1995
— Radovanović, Ljubomir • Afrika u savremenom svetu, Dokumen-
ti današnjice 47, Nova serija, God. III, br. 47, Sedma sila, Beo-
grad, 1963. (II–3017)
— Rubinstein, Alvin Z • Yugoslavia and the Nonaligned World, Prin-
ceton University Press, New Jersey, 1970
— Said, Edward W • „Kultura i imperijalizam” (1993.), u Zdenko
Lešić • Poststrukturalistička čitanka, Buybook, Sarajevo, 2002
— Said, Edvard • Orijentalizam, XX vek, Beograd, 2008 27
— Sladojević, Ana • „Muzej afričke umetnosti i njegov anti-kolo-
nijalni diskurs”, časopis Kultura, No 134, 2012, Zavod za prou-
čavanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 92–103.
— Smole, Jože i Rudi Štajduhar • Pretsednik Tito u zemljama Azije i
Afrike, Kultura, Beograd, 1959
— Sretenović, Dejan • Crno telo, bele maske, Muzej afričke umet-
nosti, Beograd, 2004
— Ugrešić, Dubravka • „Homelands and Exiles: Nostalgia”, Sal-
magundi, Nos 174–175, Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs,
Spring/Summer 2012
— Vazquez, Michael Colin • „An African Dilemma”, Transition,
No. 75/76, The Anniversary Issue: Selections from Transition,
1961–1976 (1997), 6–15, Indiana University Press on behalf of
the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute, 8.
— Vučković, Čedomir • Nesvrstanost u misli i delu Tita, Rad, Beo-
grad, 1977
— wa Thiong’o, Ngugi • Decolonising the Mind, The Politics of Lan-
guage in African Literature, Zimbabwe Publishing House, Ha-
rare, 1981
— Wegner, Phillip E • Imaginary communities: utopia, the nation,
and the spatial histories of modernity, University of California
Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles/London, 2002
— Wittrock, Björn • „Modernity: One, None, or Many, European
Origins and Modernity as a Global Condition”, Daedalus; Win-
ter 2000; 129, 1; Research Library, 31.
28 Webografija
(Datum pristupa: 20. 8. 2013.)

— Cvjetičanin, Biserka • „Hvala, Profesore!”, Zarez (10. 2. 2005.)

http://www.zarez.hr/148/zariste3.htm
— Guberina, Petar • Matica Hrvatska, 201-212,
www.matica.hr/media/pdf.../galic%20guberina.pdf
— Iveković, Rada • „The General Desemantisation:
Global Language and Hegemony”, Traduire le silence de la plebe,
2006, http://eipcp.net/transversal/1206/ivecovic/en
30

Beograđani pozdravljaju učesnike Beogradske konferencije / 5. 9. 1961.

citizens welcome belgrade Conference participants / 5. 9. 1961
 31

Svečani doček u Tunisu, na putu od pristaništa do rezidencije / 9. 4. 1961.

State visit to Tunisia: on the way from the docks to the residence / 9. 4. 1961
on the lack of the experience as a coloniser. How-
ever, that did not mean that the experience of co-
lonialism did not exist. Correspondingly, as Fati-
ma el-Tayeb wrote, there was a reasoning, that if
a certain country was not a coloniser, it, therefore
lacked the capacity for racism to emerge. Howev-
er, this argument, just like in the case of Yugosla-
via, did not apply, since the colonial order, as men-
tioned earlier, reflected to the entire world and to
the world’s affairs.
On the other hand, Yugoslavs in Europe were
not always necessarily seen as white, from the
point of view of the construed category of white-
ness which preordained certain, wider range of
social characteristics, i.e. the guidelines that help
construe it; the experience of non-whiteness trans-
lated into the non-European, or the insufficiently
European experience, was indeed present in Yugo-
slavia at the time (just like some relapses of this
order remain imprinted into self-perceptions of
the Serbs to this day), enabling somewhat easier
identification with the citizens of the “Third World”
countries. However, the position of the one who
learns from the West, especially from Europe, es-
tablished through the national awakening that
happened in 19th century and the break up with the
Ottoman heritage, had never ceased to exist. At
certain times, its intensity only shifted.
Yugoslavia was geographically part of Eu-
rope. In a completely different way, numerous Af-
rican countries—regardless of the historical divi-
sion from the capital cities and metropolises that
colonised them—had firm ties with those coun-
tries, established above all, through educational
and later business systems. Because of this, it was
often easier for them to continue businesses with
the ones they knew the best, while the European

continued / xvii
and, generally, western influences in culture, even
though they were redefined during decolonisation
and in its immediate aftermath, continued to have
the primary influence, both in Yugoslavia and in Af-
rican countries.


5

xviii
 “I must say that we have moved quite a bit
forward in our efforts to learn about the cul-
ture of African peoples, however these are as
yet insufficient. We have appointed a number
of our scientific and research institutes that
have systematically observed what has been
happening on the African soil, especially in
the past few years. We have several magisters
who have studied African culture. We have
had numerous television programmes. Sev-
eral local television centres sent their crews
to film life in Africa, to film cultural institu-
tions as well as different festivals. There were
many African films broadcast on our televi-
sion, which we had received through African
embassies here, or by other means. We have
organized a whole series of talks on Afri-
can culture issues. /… / If we were to asses all
this, I would be inclined to say that we have
made quite an effort—however, it is not yet
enough. We are still at the beginnings of a
more organized effort in that field.” 12

It is worth noting that even though there was not

a planned long-term cultural politics towards Non-
Aligned Movement countries, thus countries of
the African continent, there was an openness and
certain institutional support for different forms
of cooperation, therefore cultural cooperation as
well. Probably the biggest contribution to cultur-
al cooperation was the education of a great num-
ber of students in Yugoslav schools and universi-
ties (according to certain records there were over
40,000 students at the University of Belgrade).
Besides, different forms of cultural exchange were
encouraged. For instance, poetry night events in

xix
Yugoslavia included readings of translated works
by African writers such as Agostinho Neto and
Léopold Sédar Senghor.
Yugoslavia hosted art groups at big events
such as BELEF (The Belgrade Summer Festival), the
Festival of Afro-Asian film was initiated, there
were television programmes dedicated to the
complex socio-political and cultural changes that
were taking place in African countries following
decolonisation.
Before the Museum of African Art in Belgrade
was opened in 1977, several African-themed exhibi-
tions were organised; among others an exhibition
at the Ethnographic Museum in 1973 that presented
this collection. The Museum of African Art was vis-
ited by Kwasy Myles, director of the National Mu-
seum of Ghana in Accra, Amadou-Mahtar M’Bow,
general director of UNESCO (1977), Basil Kossou, the
general director of the African Institute for Cultur-
al Research in Dakar (1978), Chinua Achebe (Nige-
rian poet), Moussa Traoré, president of the Repub-
lic of Mali (he visited the Museum and gave as a gift
two musical instruments from Mali), professor Taha
Hussein, Dean of the Academy of Applied Arts in
Cairo, Ricardo Texeira Duarte from the Directive for
National Culture of Mozambique (he gave one Ma-
konda sculpture, 1979), Mohamed Benahmed Abdel-
ghani, President of the government of the Republic
of Algeria, Roger Dorsinville, writer and director of a
Senegal-based publishing house, Jean Keutcha, Min-
ister of Foreign Affairs of Sierra Leone, Adenike Ebun
Oyagbola, Federal Minister for National Planning
from Lagos, Nigeria, and others.
The Museum organised the “Contemporary
Makonda Sculpture” exhibition resulting from the
cultural cooperation between Tanzania and Yugo-
slavia (1979), the “Contemporary Art from Ghana”

xx
exhibition resulting the Ghana—Yugoslavia coop-
eration (1980),13 the lecture: Why Africa is the Cra-
dle of Humanity with professor Théophile Obenga
from the Congo, as part of the Days of Information
on the Culture of Africa, held from March 24–29th
1980 in Belgrade.
Nevertheless, the overview of the two-de-
cade long cultural cooperation which was being
considered on the March 1980 conference that
gathered some of the leading names and experts
in the fields of translation, cultural politics and cul-
tural cooperation, leaves the impression of overall
failure in these spheres. Namely, if we are to com-
pare the cultural politics of certain countries in
questions, Yugoslavia as well, non-alignment and
cooperation with African countries do not appear
as distinctive issues.
With his great experience supporting him
and as an erudite in international politics, Zdravko
Pečar questions the role of Yugoslavia in Africa.
Namely, he claims: “What novelty have we, from
the sixties to this day, brought to Africa. You see, I
have a poor opinion on this matter; I do not think
that we have done all that much. /… / I have spent
many years on your continent. In 1959 I was in Tan-
zania, Tanganyika (at the time it was Tanganyika)
where I met-up with a youth and engaged in con-
versation with him. He said to me: Very well then,
you are from a socialist country? Yes, I replied.
Well, you know—he said, there is no great differ-
ence between you and capitalists. How’s that?—
I retorted, Please, you do not know what you are
talking about, (I was quite aghast). Whereupon
he responded: You know, all of you are after ma-
terial goods (the term consumer society was not
yet coined at the time), that is the sole aim of your
life and this is what you bring here to Africa. You

xxi
are no different from the others. I wrote this in
my book on Africa which was published in the six-
ties, and that question still pains me even when
we speak of culture today; I am forever tortured
by the thought—what is it that we socialists, from
socialist countries, have brought that is new to the
African continent and what have we got to show
for it.”14
As a reply, Basil Kossou offered an unexpect-
edly forthright and insightful analysis, saying: “…
socialist countries are historically belated on the
African continent; they know much less about
them then former colonial metropolises, for in-
stance France, Great Britain, and Germany. Ex-
perts from these countries know it better than
we do, and they know our leaders better then we
ourselves do. /… / As far as the question, what is
it that socialist countries bring, is concerned—
many of them, actually, position themselves in the
role of the coloniser, the ideological coloniser, be-
cause they sell car-tires only under their own rules,
for the price of accepting their ideological ortho-
doxy, and that is the practice, therefore, it is the
behaviour of the ideological colonizer, cultural
colonizer.”15
From the position of an independent intellec-
tual, president of an Institute that does not answer
directly to any government, Kossou summarizes
not only the problems that occur in the presence
of socialist countries on African soil, but the prob-
lems of all others who have a stake in this impor-
tant aspect of world economy.
If we are to observe the cultural politics of
Yugoslavia and other countries such as Senegal,
for instance, it becomes apparent that the cultur-
al politics do not project any cultural cooperation
between the non-aligned countries as a separate

xxii
and important endeavour. A planned and produc-
tive cultural cooperation as a prerequisite for get-
ting to know each other, and then the afore-men-
tioned friendship between countries, was in fact
largely lacking even though the state itself was in
a certain sense the facilitator. However, excluding
individual professional interests of a handful of Af-
ricanists,16 the public, primarily political language,
stopped at the very beginning of its development
and continued to perpetuate a certain speech
rooted in binary discourse.
For the wider manifestation of the contex-
tually understood friendship, this made it impos-
sible for the established mutual discourse to over-
come the framework of a language halted in its
formative stage, which was very generalized, at
that. Essentially, such circumstances did not aid
the obliteration of existing racial, art and cultural
stereotypes resulting from the deeply rooted Eu-
rocentrism of Yugoslav society. One of the rea-
sons why (from the present perspective) certain
elements of this discourse were so easily forgot-
ten may very well lie in the spheres of knowledge
and systems of learning which did not undergo
systematic and fundamental changes in their per-
ception of, above all, the cultural creativity of Afri-
can countries. The educational framework has re-
mained more or less unchanged.
According to the data presented at the 1980
gathering on African culture, among the 600 titles
dealing with non-alignment that were presented
on the exhibition accompanying the 25 Book Fair
in Belgrade, in the course of 20 years of publishing
there were only 85 works by African authors.17
Besides the mentioned, smaller or larger col-
lections of African objects, and several published
memoires in the ex-post travel and story writing

xxiii
form by Yugoslavs working in Africa at the time,
there is no wider cultural framework today that
would refer to this period and ideas of friendship in
a way which would be different or authentic to the
previously set discourse of otherness.
From a wider historical perspective, Yugo-
slavia and the African countries it was in contact
with, had only met briefly in the course of several
decades of a more or less successful cooperation.
However, at the time this encounter had an impact
on significant changes in the understanding of
spatial relationships and the position of Yugosla-
via in world politics, thus Yugoslav self-perception
with respect to the world.
In the decades following 1980 this friendship
was entirely and certainly for good reason, linked
to Yugoslav identities that were dissolving, es-
pecially during the 1990s. It is by no means a co-
incidence, therefore, that with a renewed inter-
est for Yugoslav cultural heritage which has been
stirred for different reasons—from the need for
establishing a certain continuity and roundness,
or rebuilding the path to this aspect of a shared
history—that questions from the times of the
Non-Alignment are experiencing reaffirmation.
Nevertheless, deliberations on Yugoslav heri-
tage and the heritage of the initial non-alignment
that can cast certain light on particular times and
which may represent a unique cultural capital
for us, through numerous simultaneous projects
which are currently revolving around questions of
non-alignment, can also contribute to the critical
examination of the potentials of that time and its
discourses.

xxiv
notes

1 This text is the result of research that was part of the in-
ternational project “Non-Aligned Modernities”. My re-
search, however, was not entirely planned or systematic
because of a lack of focus within this extremely vast topic.
It was reduced primarily to gathering materials which
could shed some light on certain aspects of the times in
question, the 1960s and 1970s. My interests and profes-
sional experiences at the Museum of African Art and the
Museum of Yugoslav History inclined me towards the cul-
tural domain and its representations (of which much is yet
to be written). The agreed format of the publications and
the idea that not a single text in this edition is closed, cre-
ated a space for certain freedoms in the process of con-
sidering selected non-alignment phenomena. Taking into
consideration the documents from the Archives of Yugo-
slavia, books, magazines and media sources, the electron-
ic archive of the Serbian Radio Television Network, and
based on insights into collections and documentations of
the two museums in Belgrade—the Museum of African
Art and the Museum of Yugoslav History—I was able to
outline a possible interpretation of this, to a great extent,
still inadequately researched phenomenon.

2 KPR I-2/11, Speech in Titov Veles, March 6, 1959, Archives of

Yugoslavia, Belgrade

3 Iveković, Rada, “The General Desemantisation: Global Lan-

guage and Hegemony”, Traduire le silence de la plebe, 2006,
http://eipcp.net/transversal/1206/ivecovic/en, 20. 8.
2013.

4 Petar Guberina, Matica Hrvatska,

www.matica.hr/media/pdf.../galic%20guberina.pdf, 20.
8. 2013.

5 It is accepted that the pioneers in the construction of

comprehensive cultural identity ideologies were Caribbe-
an intellectuals like Marcus Garvey from Jamaica, mainly
because the racial question was dominant in the Caribbe-
an and America, unlike the ethnic issues which were more
deeply rooted in Africa. Also important are the advocates
of historical Pan-Africanism—W.E.B. du Bois and George
Padmore.

6 Négritude developed during the 1920s and 1930s in Par-

is. Its most renowned exponents were Aimé Césaire from
Martinique, Léopold Sédar Senghor from Senegal and
Léon-Gontran Damas from French Guiana. The ideology

xxv
 of négritude which perceived “blackness” as the shared
trait of all Africans and which was manifested through art
and culture, achieved its full potential and received criti-
cism as well, at a later period when the decolonisation of
numerous African countries was to take place in the mid-
20th century.

7 Reference: Webography. Césaire, whilst visiting Guberina

in Šibenik in 1935, reminisces his home Martinique on the
Martinska beach, and starts working on one of his famous
poems “Cahier d’un retour au pays natale.”

8 In: Vazquez. Michael Colin, “An African Dilemma”, Transi-

tion, No. 75/76, The Anniversary Issue: Selections from
Transition, 1961–1976 (1997), 6–15, Indiana University Press
on behalf of the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute, 8.

9 Sretenović, 2004:6

10 Davičo, 1962:13

11 During the 1950s, Frantz Fanon, psychiatrist and theoreti-

cian from Martinique who took part in the Algerian free-
dom fight, was to explain the identity concerns with re-
gard to skin colour and the complex social relations that
formed around the cultural construction of race.

12 “Razgovor o mogućnostima kulturne saradnje”, Kultura

1980/1. Krsto Bulajić, 116.

13 Appendix in the catalogue Savremena umetnost Gane,

Jelena Aranđelović Lazić, MAU, Beograd, 1980

14 Kultura, 1980/1, 189/190.

15 Excerpt from Basil Kossou’s presentation, journal Kultura,

broj 51/52, 1980/81, Zavod za proučavanje kulturnog raz-
vitka; presentation on the occasion of the Days of African
Culture in March 1980 in Belgrade, 193.

16 Africanists gathered around the Institute for African

Research founded by Yugoslav and Croat linguist Pe-
tar Guberina in Zagreb, together with Professor Sve-
tozar Petrović, including Nada Švob-Đokić and Biserka
Cvjetičanin; the director of the Slovene Ethnographical
Museum in Ljubljana Boris Kuhar; the first director of the
Museum of African Art in Belgrade, Jelena Aranđelović
Lazić and others.

17 Observation by Miloš Nemanjić published in an article for

Kultura journal, 1980/1.

xxvi
Bibliography
— Abrahamsen, Rita • “African Studies and the Postcolonial
Challenge”, African Affairs, Royal African Society, 2003, 102,
189–210.
— Ahluwalia, Pal • Politics and Post-Colonial Theory, African
Inflections, Routledge, London and New York, 2001
— Amin, Samir • Eurocentrism. Modernity, Religion, and De-
mocracy. A Critique of Eurocentrism (2nd edition), Pamba-
zuka Press, Oxford, 2010
— Appadurai, Arjun • Modernity at Large, Cultural Dimen-
sions of Globalisation, Univeristy of Minnesota Press, Min-
neapolis/London, 1996
— Aranđelović Lazić, Jelena • Savremena umetnost Gane,
katalog MAU,
Beograd, 1980
— Ashcroft, Bill and Gareth Griffiths, Helen Tiffin • Post-co-
lonial Studies Reader, Routledge, London/New York, 1995
— Bal, Mieke and Bryan Gonzales, Eds • The Practice of Cul-
tural Analysis: Exposing Interdisciplinary Interpretation,
Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, 1999
— Balibar, Étienne and Immanuel Wallerstein • Race, Na-
tion, Class: Ambiguous Identities, Verso, London/New York,
1991
— Barber, Karin • The Anthropology of Texts, Persons and
Publics, Oral and written culture in Africa and beyond, Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007
— Bhabha, Homi K, Ed • Nation and Narration, Routledge, Lon-
don/New York, 1990
— Bogetić, Daragan • “Jugoslovensko bekstvo iz Evrope” –
novi ekonomski prioriteti nesvrstane Jugoslavije sredi-
nom 50-tih godina, Istorija 20. veka 30, (1), Beograd, 2012,
163–178.
— Botwe-Asamoah, Kwame • Kwame Nkrumah’s Politico-
Cultural Thought and Policies, An African-centered Para-
digm for the Second Phase of the African Revolution, Rout-
ledge, London/New York, 2005
— Biščević, Hidajet • Predgovor, “Jugoslavija u doba Hladnog
rata: u zaklonu nesvrstanosti”, u: Jakovina, Tvrtko • Treća
strana Hladnog rata, Fraktura, Zagreb, 2011, 10–16.
— Davičo, Oskar • Crno na belo, Prosveta, Beograd, 1962
— Dorsenvil, Rože • “Knjiga i izdavačka delatnost u Afri-
ci”, časopis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81, Zavod za
proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 43–59.
— El-Tayeb, Fatima • European others: queering ethnicity in
postnational Europe, University of Minnesota Press, Min-
neapolis/London, 2011

xxvii
— Eškroft, Bil i Garet Grifits, Helen Tifin • “Ponovno
promišljanje postkolonijalnog”, Postkolonijalna teorija u:
Treći program, br. 125–126, I–II, 2005, 107–129.
— Falola, Toyin, and Christian Jennings, Eds • Africanizing
Knowledge, African Studies across the Disciplines, Transac-
tion Publishers, New Brunswick/London, 2002
— Fanon, Frantz • Black Skin, White Masks, Foreword: “Re-
membering Fanon; Self, Psyche and the Colonial Condi-
tion” by Homi K. Bhabha, Pluto Press, London, 1986 (first
published Editions de Seuil, 1952)
— Grupa autora (Veda i dr Zdravko Pečar, Kwasi A. Myl-
es, Jelena Aranđelović-Lazić) • Muzej afričke umetnosti –
Kolekcija Vede i dr Zdravka Pečara, katalog povodom ot-
varanja MAU, Beograd, 1977
— Gupa autora • Razgovor o mogućnostima kulturne sarad-
nje, časopis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81, Zavod za
proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 115–130.
— Grupa autora • Prevođenje i izdavanje književnosti zemal-
ja u razvoju, časopis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81,
Zavod za proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd,
133–167.
— Grupa autora • “Benin, Gabon, Obala Slonovače”, časopis
Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81, Zavod za proučavanje
kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 171–198.
— Guberina, Petar • “Pogovor izdanju”, u: Davidson, Basil •
Genij Afrike, Stvarnost, Zagreb, 1977, 297–320.
— Hall, Stuart • Representation: Cultural Representations and
Signifying Practices, Sage Publications and Open Universi-
ty, London, 1997
— Heyking, John von, and Richard Avramenko, Eds • Friend-
ship and Politics, Essays in Political Thought, University of
Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, Indiana, 2008
— Jakovina, Tvrtko • Treća strana Hladnog rata, Fraktura, Za-
greb, 2011
— Jinadu, Adele L • “Some African Theorists of Culture and
Modernization: Fanon, Cabral and Some Others”, African
Studies Review, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Apr., 1978), 121–138, African
Studies Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/
stable/523767
— Kamrava, Mehran • Cultural Politics in the Third World,
Routledge, London, 1999
— Kebede, Messay • Africa’s Quest for a Philosophy of Decol-
onization, Rodopi, Amsterdam/New York, 2004
— Klasić, Hrvoje • Jugoslavija i svijet 1968., Ljevak, Zagreb,
2012
— Kosu, Bazil • “Perspektive i svrha kulturne saradnje nes-
vrstanih” Časopis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81, Za-
vod za proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 99–114.

xxviii
— Kovačević, Ivan, ur. • Okviri konstruisanja jugosloven-
skog kulturnog nasleđa, Ogledi o jugoslovenskom kul-
turnom nasleđu, Etnološka biblioteka, knjiga 61, zbornik,
SGC i Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju Filozofskog
fakulteta, Beograd, 2011
— Krstić, Marija • “Nesvrstanost na strukturalistički način”,
Etnološko-antropološke sveske, 14, (n.s.) 3, Beograd, 2009,
17–41.
— Krstić, Marija • “Pokret nesvrstanih kao jugoslovensko
nasleđe”,
u: Kovačević, Ivan, ur • Okviri konstruisanja jugosloven-
skog kulturnog nasleđa, Ogledi o jugoslovenskom kul-
turnom nasleđu, Etnološka biblioteka, knjiga 61, zbornik,
SGC i Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju Filozofskog
fakulteta, Beograd, 2011, 57–82.
— Loomba, Ania and Suvir Kaul, Matti Bunzl, Antoinette
Burton, Jed Esty ed • Postcolonial Studies and Beyond,
Duke University Press, Durham and London, 2005
— Majstorović, Stevan • Cultural Policy in Yugoslavia, Studies
and Documents on Cultural Policies, UNESCO, Paris, 1972
— Mates, Leo • Nonalignment, Theory and Current Policy, The
Institute of International Politics and Economics, Belgrade,
and Oceana Publications, Inc., Dobbs Ferry, New York, Bel-
grade, 1972
— Mek Klintok, En • “Genealogija imperijalizma”, Postkoloni-
jalna teorija
u: Treći program, br. 125–126, I–II, 2005, 130–160.
— Meusburger, Peter and Michael Heffernan, Edgar Wun-
der, ed •
Cultural Memories, The Geographical Point of View, Spring-
er, Heidelberg, 2011
— Norbu, Dawa • Culture and the Politics of Third World na-
tionalism, Routledge, London and New York, 1992
— Njegovanović-Ristić Nataša, dr Zdravko Pečar • Mono-
grafija MAU, MAU, Beograd, 1989
— Obenga, Teofil • “Afrika – kolevka čovečanstva” (Théo-
phile Obenga, “Comment l’Afrique est-elle le berceau de
l’humanité?”), časopis Kultura, broj 51/52, godina 1980/81,
Zavod za proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 11–25.
— Olaniyan, Tejumola • Scars of Conquest, Masks of Resis-
tance, The Invention of Cultural Identities in African, Afri-
can-American and Caribbean Drama, Oxford University
Press, Oxford, New York, 1995
— Pečar, Zdravko • Afrička kretanja, Naprijed, Zagreb, 1965
— Petković, Ranko • Teorijski pojmovi nesvrstanosti, Rad,
Beograd, 1974
— Prakash, Gyan, ed • After Colonialism, Imperial Histo-
ries and Postcolonial Displacements, Princeton University

xxix
 Press, New Jersey, 1995
— Radovanović, Ljubomir • Afrika u savremenom svetu, Do-
kumenti današnjice 47, Nova serija, God. III, br. 47, Sedma
sila, Beograd, 1963. (II-3017)
— Rubinstein, Alvin Z • Yugoslavia and the Nonaligned World,
Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1970
— Said, Edward W • “Kultura i imperijalizam” (1993.), u Zden-
ko Lešić • Poststrukturalistička čitanka, Buybook, Sarajevo,
2002
— Said, Edvard • Orijentalizam, XX vek, Beograd, 2008
— Sladojević, Ana • “Muzej afričke umetnosti i njegov anti-
kolonijalni diskurs”, Časopis Kultura, No 134, 2012, Zavod za
proučavanje kulturnog razvitka, Beograd, 92–103.
— Smole, Jože i Rudi Štajduhar • Pretsednik Tito u zemljama
Azije i Afrike,
Kultura, Beograd, 1959
— Sretenović, Dejan • Crno telo, bele maske, Muzej afričke
umetnosti, Beograd, 2004
— Ugrešić, Dubravka • “Homelands and Exiles: Nostalgia”,
Salmagundi,
Nos 174–175, Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, Spring/
Summer 2012
— Vazquez, Michael Colin • “An African Dilemma”, Transition,
No. 75/76,
The Anniversary Issue: Selections from Transition, 1961–
1976 (1997), 6–15, Indiana University Press on behalf of the
W.E.B. Du Bois Institute, 8.
— Vučković, Čedomir • Nesvrstanost u misli i delu Tita, Rad,
Beograd, 1977
— wa Thiong’o, Ngugi • Decolonising the Mind, The Politics
of Language in African Literature, Zimbabwe Publishing
House, Harare, 1981
— Wegner, Phillip E • Imaginary communities: utopia, the na-
tion, and the spatial histories of modernity, University of
California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles/London, 2002
— Wittrock, Björn • “Modernity: One, None, or Many, Euro-
pean Origins and Modernity as a Global Condition”, Dae-
dalus; Winter 2000; 129, 1; Research Library, 31.

xxx
Webography:
(20. 8. 2013.)

— Cvjetičanin, Biserka, “Hvala, Profesore!”,

Zarez (10. 2. 2005.)
http://www.zarez.hr/148/zariste3.htm
— Guberina, Petar, Matica Hrvatska, 201–212
www.matica.hr/media/pdf.../galic%20guberina.pdf
— Iveković, Rada, “The General Desemantisation:
Global Language and Hegemony”, Traduire le silence
de la plebe, 2006
http://eipcp.net/transversal/1206/ivecovic/en

xxxi
nesvrstani modernizmi
non-aligned modernisms
—
sveska #1 / volume #1

Ana Sladojević
SLIKE O AFRICI — IMAGES OF AFRICA

izdavač / publisher: Muzej savremene umetnosti, Beograd /

Museum of Contemporary Art, Belgrade • www.msub.org.rs •
za izdavača / on behalf of the publisher: Slobodan Nakarada,
v.d. direktora / acting director • urednik / editor: Zoran Erić •
tekst / text: Ana Sladojević • lektura / proofreading: Dušan
Đorđević Mileusnić • prevod na engleski / translation into
english: Ivan Epštajn • fotografije / photographs: ljubaznošću
Muzeja istorije Jugoslavije [izbor: Radovan Cukić, kustos] /
courtesy of the Museum of Yugoslav History [selection: Radovan
Cukić, curator] • grafičko oblikovanje / design: Andrej Dolinka •
štampa / printed by: Publikum, Beograd / Belgrade •
tiraž / print run: 500 • isbn 978–86–7101–311–6

podrška / supported by:

1