|
|
||||||
The intangibility of multiculturalismLidija Nikocevic Paper presented for ICME at Museums and Intangible Heritage The multiculturality of Istria is both a living reality, which has been present for centuries on the Croatian far north-western peninsula and also something that has been occasionally used in political rhetoric during the last hundred and fifty years. Austrian rulers were perhaps the first ones to admire the number of "folk tribes" (as they used to name various peoples and ethnic groups within their state) that they saw in Istria. Many of their travel writers and ethnographers were writing about Istria as one of the most colorful regions of the then Austro-Hungarian Monarchy in that regard. Some of them even named Istria as a certain "laboratory" of peoples - and even races. Actually, as Austro-Hungary had many nationalities and ethnic group within their state, and, of course, many problems tied to their claims for political freedom, they liked to emphasize the Istrian example, where, as they were pointing out, such "mixture" had existed successfully and "naturally" for centuries, even since Roman times. After Croatia gained its independence as a state in the year 1991, a local, regional party won the elections in Istria and has since endeavored to oppose the central government in Zagreb, the Croatian capital. The regional party predominantly stressed Istrian uniqueness and diversity. On which values have they based their assertions? Precisely on the multuculturality and the harmonious way of life(as they like to stress) in the multi-ethnic and multi-national setting that is simply named "convivenza" or "living together". The leader of the above-mentioned regionalist party said that in Istria, multiculturality has been transferred in the "authentic culture of everyday life". Another politician from the same circle wrote that "The Istrian man has hold out himself on the historic windward side precisely thanks to multiculturality, acquiring many characteristics of other European civilizations, not forgetting at the same time his cultural identity." (Janko 135). However, all this political rhetoric has mostly remained on the level of promotional speeches. Little has been done in investing into the research, presentation and preservation of cultural characteristics of "convivenza", meaning the living experience of multiculturality: the state doesn't have special interest in such projects and regional authorities usually don't have the instruments, sufficient money, institutions and abilities. And yet, multiculturalism in Istria embraces three national groups - Croatian, Slovenian and Italian, and several ethnic groups: Istro Rumenian, Montenegrin, etc., and among the newest ones - Roma, Serbian and Macedonian. Many of these have states which embrace the related majority, some don't. The space they occupy does not always shape uniform, separate territories: Italians have lived mostly in towns, in the hinterland and along the coast. Croatians have lived mostly in rural areas, while Slovenians live in the bigger towns and along the Slovenian-Croatian border in Istria. The quality of interrelations and exchange (meaning also mutual marriages, friendships and adopting each others language and other cultural expressions) must always be defined by time and space. In some parts of Istria - in some periods or even for centuries - a high degree of cultural exchange has been present. In some other parts and/or periods groups were merely living one next to another, accepting differences, but not adopting other groups' culture in a larger scale. However, nowadays when the multiculturalism of Istria is mentioned in the context of political or general discussions, it has a uniform, all Istrian quality, even among people who work in the field of culture.
One of the most remarkable and most expressive cultural elements through which Istria has presented itself in other neighboring regions is music. In the contemporary context remakes and modern interpretations of characteristic Istrian music are often among the most popular and beloved ones by young generations in Croatia. Both on the textual and musical level it contains components derived from various cultures of Istria. In the traditional context, Istrian music is defined by the so-called Istrian scale, descant two-part singing and tonal music, of which we can only partly determine territorial boundaries. Some music styles of certain traditions are part of the heritage of different ethnic groups and this could be regarded as certain bi- or multilingualism in music, because individuals often inherit and embrace a number of traditions. Because of the strong symbolic meaning of this kind of music, it is no wonder that a free-lance ethnomusicologist and musician from Istria, Dario Marušic (of both Slovenian and Croatian background, but whose mother tongue is Italian) submitted a candidature for the UNESCO's Second proclamation of Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity in 2003. I was, as the head of the Ethnographic Museum of Istria, named in the action plan expert group, and therefore am familiar with the process of submitting this candidature. In the text itself, it was written: "The pluriethnic and multicultural microcosm of the Istrian County is a melting pot and a point of constant contact, exchange, permeation and transformation, but also the maintenance of continuity of the music cultures of the Croats, Italians, Istro-Romanians and Peroj-Montenegrins as autochthonous ethnic groups. The Istrian modus… can be defined as an articulate and unique system of historical, ethnic, cultural and linguistic shades that marks and determines the specific quality of Istria in relation to most of Croatian, but also many other European areas. It is not a mere sum of different cultural substances, which, by historical circumstances, exist one next to each other, but it is more a centuries-long, spiritually -cultural sedimentation and intertwinement in which, what is special productively comes up from the specific unity of cultural differences. Because of true intercultural communication, multicultural facts are not made distinctive but are only recognized." Nevertheless, the UNESCO Intangible Heritage Section from Paris wrote back asking if that candidature should be constructed multinational, because the described cultural expression was presented as being part of Italian, Montenegrin and Slovenian culture. If that would have been the case, the candidature could have been endorsed also by other relevant countries. Otherwise, the file should have been, according to their rules, representing only the Croatian character of the cultural expression. The reply from Istria tried to explain that it was a national candidature because the cultural expression concerned is identified exclusively within the state of Croatia. This means that original Italians, Slovenians or Montenegrins within their own countries have never developed similar musical expressions and it is a result of those cultures in contact in Istria that doesn't exist elsewhere. At the same time, it is not a result of Croatian culture in Istria only. So, in a way the administration of UNESCO have showed a formalized, narrow view on minority cultures that Thomas Hylland.Eriksen criticized in his text "A critique of the UNESCO concept of culture" considering it as: "A Romantic way of thinking about differences and similarity"… which results with a notion of cultures as bounded and unique entities. Even more, according to UNESCO evaluations of culture, this distinctiveness should be encouraged. This "archipelago vision of culture" again reffering to Hylland Eriksen's text, "was evident in the Apartheid system in South Africa, providing groups with cultural autonomy and thereby preventing them from becoming integrated in the greater society; bluntly put, it had a high score on the right to be different and a low score on the right to equality". This reminds me on the policy of ex-Yugoslavia to which Croatia and, of course, Istria belonged until 1991, in which context so called "national minorities" were allowed to have their colorful folklore groups so long it stayed under the control of harmless and ideologically neutral activity, if possible, on a certain distance towards other groups or so-called majority. That was especially the case with Italian minority that was for a long time regarded with suspicion, because of the Italian annexation of Istria between the two wars, the Fascist reputation and the treatment of Italians as possible outside enemies. Kept in their controlled reservation, Italian folklore groups haven't been invited up to nowadays on the yearly official Festival of Istrian folklore, and the same happens to almost all minority groups. In that way, it is obvious that the UNESCO attitude toward minority cultures is very similar to both the Croatian, Slovenian and Italian national attitudes. Their administration in the ministries of culture and researchers have had towards cultural phenomena that incorporated multiethnic and multicultural influences an attitude that is described in the text of the Candidature of Istrian traditional music: "Almost all the approaches to Istrian traditional music have until recently avoided focusing their interest on its diversity or, on the other hand, the cultural exchanges were as a rule accepted as an anomaly. In the understanding of the diversity of the Istrian music heritage different standards were used up until now. Prevailing division in the Italian cultural circle is tied tostrictly Italian and strictly Slavic music, in a type of contradicting in-group that is "us" and "other" in this case the Slavs in general. Similarly, among the Croatian cultural circle the prevailing division is Istrian music (which implies Croatian music) contra the music of the Italian ethnic community. This division is also quite generalized because it can lead us to believe that the music of the Italian ethnic community is not Istrian." (Istrian Ethnomusicological microcosm", p. 14.). In short: that unique mixture and overtaking of musical expressions among the groups involved is specific Istrian that is not known in the neighboring states or regions. This is something that is not recognized by authorities of the states involved because they mainly recognize "pure" expressions of separate Croatian, Slovene or Italian culture. But neither UNESCO authorities recognize them because they are state oriented and state-centred. To whom should such projects apply? |
||||||
The problem is even bigger when a large number of people who are direct bearers of more cultures are in question. For example, plenty of people in Istria have Italian mother, Croatian father. They, in many cases worked in Slovenia and maybe even married a Slovenian wife. They have been receiving culture impulses from more groups, not even being aware of the margins of those cultures. Very often different situations or contexts of their everyday life have accentuated one of the cultural components: in the local pub they were speaking and singing Italian with their old pals, at school they would be Croats only, at work they were speaking and communicating with Slovenians. Throughout their life they experienced Italian, Yugoslav and Croatian state, and if some border regions are in question, their place of living was sometimes in Slovenian or Croatian state. This kind of culture has a long continuity which could be shown from the example of the manuscript called "Croatian Istrian folk songs" from the end of the 19th century. What could be found there, among other songs, are a few songs in which one line is written in Croatian and the other one in Italian. These songs are very well known in Istria. In some cases there are entire strophes each in different languages.
Then again, there are some groups in northern Istria, micro-cultures, who built their identity on a neither-nor concept. They say for themselves (in Croatian): "Niti Cici ni Brkini, mi smo jušto na kunfini" - meaning "We are not Cicians nor Brkinians, we are right on the border". The question is who is going to recognize their culture for representative one, distinct and valuable? Of course that the state capitals of Slovenia, Croatia and Italy don't particularly appreciate unclear, mixed cultures, especially in recent times when, for example, Slovenia is already a member of EU and Croatia is not and there are constant political discords between these two states which are since May 1st divided by the Schengen border that cuts former parishes and endogamous units, dividing relatives and families into Slovenians and Croatians. Who is going to support their claims and projects for protecting that kind of heritage? Who, actually, would recognize their culture as heritage? This is probably the point when the application of another UNESCO's declaration - the one about the Human Rights meets "the protection of minorities" The first one says: "Respecting and safeguarding culture is a matter of Human Rights. Cultural Diversity presupposes respect of fundamental freedoms, namely freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of opinion and expression, and freedom to participate in the cultural life of one's choice." Conflict between collective minority rights and individual rights are obviously inevitable, in general and, of course, in the Istrian case as well. Furthermore, the Declaration of Human rights state that "All human beings are born free (,,,) and should act toward one another in a spirit of brotherhood" (article 1) and "Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community" (article 27). The question is: what is community and who defines it, especially in the Istrian cases that just have been mentioned. It is not likely that the authorities in the centralized states of Croatia and Slovenia will understand and support projects that don't reflect "real Croatian or Slovenian spirit and identity" and if they don't, also UNESCO won't even take that in the consideration, because every candidature has to be approved by the state. By the way, the candidature named "Istrian ethnomusicological microcosm" is not rejected by UNESCO, but there are some open issues to clarify (which should be done by the author of the text of the candidature) and some visual material has to be completed. But, it seems that the new administration in the Croatian Ministry of Culture (that has changed due to another party winning the elections a year ago) is no longer interested in supporting that candidature. Before leaving for Seoul, I was not given a precise answer whether this project still an official Croatian candidature or not. It seems that for cases as illustrated by the Istrian example, neither the state frame of evaluation nor UNESCO "isolated islands' archipelago" concept of culture is appropriate. So, with this paper I would like to stimulate a discussion and get possible answers on a question that I can't really answer myself: could UNESCO's framework be adapted to such cultures that have been exchanging among themselves and, if not, who can evaluate and promote such traditions and values? Notes
http://icme.icom.museum Source:
|
||||||
|
This page compliments of Marisa Ciceran
Created:
Monday,
January 10, 2005; Last updated:
Friday, November 23, 2007 |
