Syndicate: texts from/for cfront

[Andreas Broeckmann <abroeck@transmediale.de>]

It is a collection of essays by Alexander Shurbanov, "The Dream of
Reason - Is it easy to be an intellectual?", that called our attention
to several texts we find relevant to our Syndicalist discussions. It is
a hopeful sign that a book as far-sighted as Alexander Shurbanov's is
published in Bulgaria, a book that carefully avoids Balkanizing and
treats the question of cultural conflicts broadly, drawing on a wide
variety of sources to look at a whole range of conflicts across the
world. Some of the texts chosen by Alexander Shurbanov are of lectures
presented at the at the WORLD CONFERENCE on CULTURE @ STOCKHOLM (31
March - 2 April 1998
<http://www.klys.se/worldconference/papers/index.htm>). Following his
logic of presenting different conflicts, we have picked a few of those,
>from Vietnam through Cyprus to Israel/Palestine, and add a few quotes
more closely related to the Syndicate discussions at the end. Let
Alexander Shurbanov introduce the first source himself:


"I think that Wayne Karlin's introduction to 'The other side of heaven'
has something to tell us about our world and about the mission of the
intellectual as a "third party" in every conflict. It is a narration
about the compilation of an unusual book in which one-time enemies rise
above politics, recognize each other as people and come to enjoy the
process of working for the common good." (Alexander Shurbanov, "The
Dream of Reason - Is it easy to be an intellectual?", Sofia 1999, p. 42
- in Bulgarian)


"The juxtaposition of that realization with the realization of how much
we liked each other, how much we had in common, how terrible it would
have been if we'd succeeded in killing each other, brought us to moments
of what I can only describe as a grief so intense that it changed us so
we could never again see each other--or ourselves--in the same way. For
me, that basic emotional shift became tied to a moment when in a
conversation over the breakfast table with Le Minh Khue she found I'd
been a helicopter gunner for a time and I found that she, from the time
she was fifteen to the time she was nineteen, had been in a North
Vietnamese Army Brigade that worked, often under attack from our
aircraft, clearing bombs on the Ho Chi Minh Trail. We had become friends
by then and at that moment I pictured myself flying above the jungle
canopy, transfixed with hate and fear and searching for her in order to
shoot her, while she looked up, in hatred and fear also, searching for
me--and how it would have been if I had found her then. To waste
someone, we called killing in the war, and the word had never seemed
more apt. I looked across the table then and saw her face, as if, after
twenty years, it was at last emerging from the jungle canopy. She looked
across at me and saw the same. It was that look, that sudden mutual
seeing of the humanness we held in common--which is of course what all
good stories should do--that led to this book." (Wayne Karlin, US writer
and Vietnam veteran, Introduction to "The other side of heaven"
<http://www.connix.com/~curbston/OSHINTRO.html>)


"Living in a country of ethnic conflict means that you have to obey
certain rules characterised with the side taking aspect of the conflict.
Conflict dictates you to think in terms of categories. You, yourself are
in a certain category and what is expected from you is to act within the
limits of this certain category. The conflict culture operates with
dualistic thinking. This is the either/or approach where you are forced
to make the choice. Actually as I told above, you don't even have a
choice. Your category is determined from your birth and you have to act
and take side with this relevant category that you were put in. When you
were socialised to your national identity you were thought to be proud
of the aspects of your national identity and you also learned about the
other which is less valued and which is the historical enemy. What if
you approach the enemy and try to understand the reality through their
terms? Some writers and poets in Cyprus have talked about the choice of
"both" instead of an either/or approach. But since "both" includes also
the enemy, they were named as the agents of the enemy by the supporters
of the status quo.

Of course literature has a strong power to deal with these type of
problems. If you are a person of literature in a country of conflict the
first thing you have to deal with is the language itself. When I say
language I don't mean the different languages spoken and the problem of
translation etc. but what I mean is the language of your own society
where most of the beautiful words are borrowed by the conflict. Where
peace becomes the name of war, where victory means the denial of the
other's rights and where many innocent words become associated with some
categories of thought and where the words staying at the tip of the
iceberg are actually associated with some feelings, interests, values
and a certain history underneath. Words lose their original meanings and
become identified with some divisions in life. Many words become
associated with certain group thinking."

"In a country of conflict it is very difficult to experience democracy.
The limits of freedom of expression is the "national cause and interest"
which is mainly formulated and dictated by the ones in power. In a
country of conflict, you can not have normality. For example in Cyprus
we are still in a cease fire situation. This is an excuse for the
administrators of both sides to take measures which couldn't be taken in
a country which is not experiencing a regular threat of war. There is a
call for national unity which actually means going along with the
national cause formulated by the decision makers in power. Fighting for
a national cause usually means fighting for your own group interest
against the other. The concerns and the needs of the other is not
included in this formula. It is a situation where one party will win and
the other will lose. Here the writer's place may be the place of the
third party where concerns of both parties could be taken into
consideration.

Politicians analyse the events and fix positions which fits the needs of
their own side. The position of the other side is fixed with the same
way. But literature does not work with positions and it rather deals
with the human needs and experiences underneath these positions. This is
the place where you can reach unity. I think many writers of countries
of conflict are already playing this role by disconnecting themselves
>from the side taking and self-centred aspect of the conflict. Somebody
may say what if there is a clear victim and this is your own side. I
think there is never a definite victim in a situation of conflict. The
interaction of victim and the persecutor is a rather complicated issue."

(Neshe Yashin, Cypriot poet and journalist, "The Choice for Both"
<http://www.klys.se/worldconference/papers/Neshe_Yashin.htm>.)


"Indeed, we need to work out a kind of art which breaks down stereotypes
that existed amongst us in our region. Stereotypes need real brave
genuine people to question them and lay them bare. This does not need a
hasty flight into love and marriage because it would not be true. It
rather needs an objective and deep insight into the human need to
survive in dignity, and that this need touches all. A clear sense of
equality should prevail as a persisting tone. [?] Culture is the only
media which can dig out all the sources for such a society both in the
ancient roots and the existing reality." (Izzat Ghazzawi, Palestinian
writer and former prisoner of the Israeli authorities, "The role of
Culture in Areas of Conflict"
<http://www.klys.se/worldconference/papers/Izzat_Ghazzawi.htm>)


Alexander Shurbanov in his essays discusses in depth how history is
constructed, and how it is taught in schools on both sides of a
conflict, paying special attention to the construction of the "enemy"
and the differences in the description of one and the same event in
different "histories".


"Superiority is always relative and demands that the other side be
discredited. In order to support the claims of one nation that it is
civilized, the past, the descent and "character" of its neighbors are
declared to be Barbarian. Past events are fabricated, exaggerated or
estimated according to anachronistic current standards outside of any
historical context and understanding." (Alexander Shurbanov, p. 16)


Vladimir Trendafilov, in his newest column in the Bulgarian weekly
"Kultura", intervenes in an explosive discussion provoked by a proper
media bomb launched by a populist-nationalist commentary by Alexander
Tomov in the Bulgarian daily Demokracia, close to government positions.
Tomov's article is about "The New Barbarians" (read: the intellectuals,
and especially those not in line with the government) who want to
destroy the metaphorical City of Democracy.


"Of course, I am not here developing mythological theories about the
national individual or character. I am trying to sketch tendencies that
have constituted themselves for a long time among the fragmented
Bulgarian-language community. These tendencies or constructions, on the
basis of a long-time praxis, have sedimented into the system, and if you
are not in tune with this system you will rather feel in conflict with
it; and conversely, if you share its values, you will benefit to some
degree from the comfort of the collective resonance, and will be more
understandable and therefore more integrated. And eventually, in case
you sympathize with a more principled system of values, chances are that
you will act out your person in our social field simply as an alien from
outer space.

The traits and constructions sketched above form a colorful tradition
that I prefer to call the syndrome of unsuccessful barbarism. I
understand "tradition" to be the disorderly system of Bulgarian ethnic
self-reflection that has been preserved to this day some relevance in
writings and mentality. Even before the Ottoman invasion, that favorite
historical period of our historians-nationalists, Bulgaria has always
had only a foreign policy and no home-affairs policy. I'm not
criticizing, just trying to outline. The main - if not the only - topic
of our history is our borders - the movement in that and the other
direction across the borders with Byzantium, the loss of borders in the
times of the briefer Byzantian and the longer Ottoman slavery, the
reestablishment of the borders after the Russo-Turkish war 1878, the
movements for enlarging the borders in the direction of Southern
Rumelia, Macedonia, Aegaean Thrace and the unhappy contractions of those
borders after a few grim wars. All the rest that is known and emphasized
- the Czars, culture, religion, battles, the people, the alphabet,
literature, etc. - are variations on that same theme.

It seems that at the roots of this centrifugal deviation stands the
long-standing inertia of mentality originating unsurprisingly in the
high tiers of our strongly hierarchical social field. Our collective
identity, which constituted itself around a lasting inferiority complex,
stands out in history from afar and as yet from above - from the complex
of the government that has not succeeded in conquer or decisively defeat
its more brilliant geopolitical neighbor and has therefore come to
imitate him, envying him about everything he has and is. The fate of
Bulgarians is thus to some extent analogous to that of the Barbarian
tribes that destroyed Rome and in the early Middle Ages regrouped
themselves in its already decentralized territories. With two
differences. The first is less important, and the second perhaps
decisive. Our conflictual contact is, first of all, with Rome Minor,
secondary, isolated and lurking, that has regressed to its pre-Roman
(i.e., Greek) language-cultural identity. The second difference is that
the tribes of new settlers in this case do not end up conquering their
Rome, but stay in its periphery. It is the Ottoman invaders that in the
end play the role of successful Barbarians. In this line of reasoning
the latter turn out to be more local - or more inside - than we are,
because they are the activating element of the emotional ferment on the
land of the Balkan peninsula. We remain outsiders and even construct
ourselves on the sub-state level, in terms of the group, towns and
villages or larger family."

(Vladimir Trendafilov, "The Unsuccessful Barbarism", Kultura, Vol. 17, 4
May 2001 <http://www.online.bg/my_html/2178/varvar.htm> - in Bulgarian)


Here's a glimpse of a commentary in the Bulgarian daily press about
what's happening in our neighbor country.


"Macedonia is on the brink of a civil war. The killings and violence
give rise to vendetta. The streams of refugees go to regions with ethnic
dominance among the inhabitants - the Bitolian Albanians seek refuge
with their relatives in Western Macedonia, the Macedonians from Tetovo
move to Bitol and Strumitsa. Ethnically cleansed zones are appearing,
which have been the portents of armed conflicts and civil wars in
throughout the history of Yugoslavia's falling apart." (From Krassimir
Uzunov, "Macedonia Is Civilian", in: Trud, 5 May 2001, see also
<http://www.focusbg.com>.)


Let's now continue on in more cozy waters with a few excerpts from
Syndicate discussions and interventions.


"i can understand what Misko started in the syndicate list as reporting
on the situation, and i don't have a big problem with it. i think that
it's neccesary to be involved when such situations occur. what i
disagree with is the simple reporting, or the cut and paste from local
and international media reports, which we can get in any case, and i
tell you that i am simply deleting them from my mail box now. - what i
suggest is to see what can we do, Misko, Michael, Eleni, Andreas,
everybody that is participating in this posting, to find some common
ground where to develop common initiatives that can help towards a
longer term goals, of peaceful coexistence, such as the latest posting
>from Misko was on the pannel being organized in the Harward school of
Law."

(Edi Muka, message to Syndicate on 30 March 2001
<http://www.v2.nl/mail/v2east/2001/Mar/0350.html>)


"Let's create peace. Let's rebuild our own region. It coincides with the
boundaries of the Balkans. This time on safe ground. Openly face and
overpass all hardships. Get acquainted to each other. Maybe for the
first time properly. A creative explosion will come from this. Let us
conduct a thoughtful reorganization of the Balkans where cultures
interact one with another constructing thus a new socio-economic system
that will make good use of the existing cultures on our peninsula.
Expand the conscience for spiritually and materially prosperous Balkans.
Have us use in a good direction the historical conscience of our people.
Let us reject the untruth and hatred. Praise the joy of people, praise
their peace. Allow for reconciliation of the Balkanian people and
settling of their disagreements. Negotiate how to demilitarize,
transform. Preserve the cultural heritage of the Balkans. The Balkans
are flexible enough to adjust to sociological, economical, and political
changes accepting all religious beliefs. Holy places are holy for all.
It only makes them more holy if more people regard them as such. Let us
surpass the destroyed economy, the end of millennium catasBalkantrophy.
In accomplishing this let us try not to harm anyone. Do not work on
splitting the region but work on its unity. It's so easy to split and so
difficult to unite. But so much worthier. We need wisdom more than
courage. We need a constant revolution of the heart. We need a concept
of togetherness. We need creative minds with love for the people. We do
not need leaders with hunger for power. Nor do we need stubbornness but
rather adaptable, power sharing people. Nobody is alien on the Balkans
so nobody should be discriminated on issues of nation or faith. Religion
is a private affair of the individual. Fear no one and nothing. Let the
people of the Balkans determine the faith of the Balkans. If we don't
someone else will."

(Melentie Pandilovski, "The Balkans to the Balkanians", posted to
Syndicate on 3 April 1999
<http://www.savanne.ch/balkania/papers/balkania.html>)


"On the constantly morphing political map of the Balkans, it is easier
than in most other places to visualize how arbitrary the writing and
teaching of "history" is, and to draw the conclusion that there are
"histories" rather than "history", each written in a time and place and
context for a purpose rather than following logically from a sequence of
events that intrinsically relate to each other. Each an attempt at
designing and molding the past to fit the interests of a ruling class.
In a broader context, feminist theorists and historians have shown how
official history-writing in the countries of the imperialist center
ignore the active role played by women and otherwise works to perpetuate
gender stereotypes and impose gendered social roles. Writers and
historians from antagonist movements have shown that this same
history-writing extensively deals with the interaction between people
(men) from the ruling classes while ignoring the struggles of other
people against the control mechanisms installed by the former.
Similarly, critical historians and activists from countries of the
periphery have shown how official history-writing takes on an
imperialist perspective, legitimizing colonialist and imperialist
control and access to people and resources."

"One of the moments in which the richness of contradictory and
subversive potential of Balkan "histories" became apparent was a series
of night-long discussions between Luchezar Boyadjiev (from Sofia) and
Melentie Pandelovski (from Skopje), with the involvement of Amos Taylor
(from the UK, living in Finland) some of the time, at the ISEA 98
(Inter-Society for Electronic Arts) meeting in Manchester/UK in the
first week of September 1998, in the context of the temporary media lab
Revolting. The two started discussing the respective histories on which
the notion of the Bulgarian and the Macedonian nation are constructed.
What they found is that the same events were often described with
completely different connotation in one or the other historical
construct, that the same people were sometimes claimed as part of the
respective "nation" by both official histories, and that the histories
varied in which stories, events and relations they left unreflected and
untold. Each official history builds a narrative in order to create a
necessary, a "logical" order between single events. This narrative
including its omissions is one of the important building blocks of the
concept of "nation"."

(Alain Kessi, "Unstable identities and multiplied histories - a step
towards Balkania" <http://www.savanne.ch/balkania/texts/broken1.html>)


"From my experience of many artists that I have met, including many
cyber ones also, is that they are much more concerned on how kool they
look externally rather than daring to declare open direct, creative
action against institutional control. There are a few exceptions. A lot
of artists have gone through the process of being pruned and directed,
given ideas by institutions on how they should behave in an idealized,
art world. A lot of artists are quite happily, isolated in their
studios, trapped by their computers & ignore dealing with fundamental
issues of the world. The usual problem is that loads of these supposed
artists hide behind the medium & have no message to say at all. The way
round this for many strategical, denial orientated artists is to say
that there is nothing worth while saying anymore, which is part of the
decadent & facile american x generation sheen that issued 'irony beyond
intention'. Art has never saved lives, people have."

"So all you artists who hide behind the institutional, lazy agendas of
cultural complicity. I dare you to become real for once and re-invent
who you have been informed you are & become part of the world actively.
Any little creative gesture helps towards the liberation of our mediated
souls. All oppression should be challenged-----now!"

(Marc Garrett of furtherfield.org, message to Syndicate on 29 March 2001
<http://www.v2.nl/mail/v2east/2001/Jan/0685.html>)


"In 1942, during his American exile, the German writer Carl Zuckmayer
writes the theatre play Des Teufels General, The Devil's General. The
central figure, Harras, is a German airforce general who comes to resist
the Nazi order and eventually kills himself at the end of the play. In
one scene, Harras is talking to a young SS officer from the Rhineland,
who is very proud of his pure Arian family tree. Harras laughs at him
and says:

'Imagine all the things that can happen in an old family. And especially
in one from the Rhine, of all places. From the Rhine. From the big
grinder of populations. From the winepress of Europe! And now imagine
your ancestral line - since the birth of Christ. There was a Roman field
captain, a black fellow, brown as a ripe olive, he taught Latin to a
blond girl. And then a Jewish spice merchant came into the family, he
was a serious man and became a Christian before the wedding and he was
the founder of the Catholic tradition in the line. And then followed a
Greek physician, a Celtic legionary, a landsquenet [French for German
mercenary soldier, from German Landsknecht; ed.] from the Grisons in
Switzerland, a Swedish cavalryman, a soldier from Napoleon's army, a
deserting Cossack, a mine worker from the Black Forest, a miller from
the Alsace on his travels, a fat boatman from Holland, a Magyar, a
Pandur, an officer from Vienna, a French actor, a Bohemian musician - on
the Rhine, all these people have lived, fought, drunk and sung and made
children.'

Harras tells the young SS officer not to be proud of some purity, but to
be proud 'because everything has been mixed in the Rhineland'. To come
>from the Rhine, he says, means to be from the occident, from the
Abendland, from Europe. [?]

On the morning of 26 May 1999, the day of a European football cup final
between Manchester United and Bayern Munchen, the Berlin yellow press
newspaper BZ included a subtitle on its front page, reading: Heute abend
sind alle Berliner Bayern. Tonight, all Berliners are Bavarians.

This vignette encapsulates the degree to which identities are constructs
that can be changed, acquired, rejected, manipulated. The flexibility
suggested here - turning Berliners into Bavarians when that seems to be
opportune - is a good start. Let us look out for the stories with
headlines such as:

Tonight, all Brits are French.
Tonight, all Serbs are Albanians.
Tonight, all Belgradskis are Croatians.
And, a challenging one:

Heute abend sind alle Europaer Zigeuner. Tonight, all Europeans are
gypsies."

(Andreas Broeckmann, "Small Channels for Deep Europe (almost a sermon)",
presented at the finissage of OSTranenie in October 1999, to be
published in the Communication Front 2000 Book
<http://www.cfront.org/cf00book/en/broeckmann-channels-en.html>)


-----Syndicate mailinglist--------------------
Syndicate network for media culture and media art
information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate
to post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate@eg-r.isp-eg.de>
to unsubscribe, write to <majordomo@eg-r.isp-eg.de>, in
the body of the msg: unsubscribe syndicate your@email.adress