How to read Pamuk

On the occasion of Orhan Pamuk's message

In a really interesting and instructive New Year's interview with Orhan Pamuk which Vijesti published - congratulations for the interview also go to journalist Nina Vujacic - we could also read this message from the Turkish Nobel laureate:

"An honest writer is obliged to criticize his culture". Understandably, and not only the writer.

In our conditions, a neglected society precisely in the field of culture, in fact ethnocentric cultures and nurturing for a long period of ideological-national-clientelistic personnel in institutions, there has almost been a decomposition of culture in the state of Montenegro.

The impression is that one year of the new government led to an even more difficult situation, even though it seemed impossible before, given the depth of the decline.

Everything is partly conditioned by the mixing of heavenly and earthly cards. And that phenomenon, to be honest, is not exclusively ours. It is partly objective. Namely, it was observed that after the disappointment and unchanged miserable life in the conditions of the fraud of the earthly religions - read ideology - the population was left with some other choice, even a return to the heavenly religions.

In our edition of this phenomenon, a prime minister appeared who even publicly announced that faith can move mountains, that it has been proven, thus overcoming the most ardent supporters of heaven.

And with this statement, the prime minister threatened the building of the authority of the new government, especially in the system of culture, science, and education in a secular state. He also caused damage to much more educated circles from the church itself, which quite mundanely supported him as prime minister.

This state of mind about the decisive forces "above" favors, among other things, the colonialization of public consciousness. An introduction to some form of colonialization of the state. A phenomenon that can take modern forms and that in our conditions has several geopolitical vectors. Opposing directions again, which together produces new tensions, objectively reducing the format of seriousness and independence of the state.

Tradition, Pamuk (with the help of Todorova)

First of all, you should trust the messages of Orhan Pamuk, first of all because of his great work, and all the way to the fact that it is "our man". He writes about people and places known to us, his surname has long been our word, he was born and lived geographically and culturally in the Balkan part of Istanbul. For our (linguistically and Yugoslav) Andrić, in the mentioned interview, Pamuk says: "Ivo Andrić had a great influence on me, he portrayed the past and the present so delicately..."

Precisely by pointing to the past and the present, we would return to Pamuk's main message from the interview - that one should look at one's culture critically.

So, start from the past. Purify it where it needs to be. And it certainly should. To continue on the positive side.

But let's call for help here Maria Todorova, a Bulgarian historian, more widely established in France, who masterfully defined the terms in question in the now classic book "Imaginary Balkans". Starting from the essential distinction between the concept inheritance i traditions Todorova represents the following:

Tradition is passing on to the next generations "what should be respected and towards which there is a certain obligation".

Heritage is everything that has been passed down, positive and negative, "like it or not."

Pamuk's message should be understood in a critical relation to the parts of heritage that are negatively transmitted to the present, which are therefore uncritically adopted, reproduced and undeservedly proclaimed as cultural tradition.

A critical attitude towards heritage leads to the necessary values ​​of tradition. It is, of course, a collective job, but also the task of the entire elite that Pamuk calls writers.

The tradition should be determined jointly. And cherish. It is essentially not opposed to modern and progressive. Authentically modern one day becomes part of tradition, increasing its sum of values.

And Pamuk is such an example. He is primarily a modern writer. But his views are also based on the values ​​of tradition. First of all, those related to Ataturk's legacy. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk abolished the Sultanate a hundred years ago, proclaimed Turkey as a republic, founded a democratic state and institutions with bold political and cultural reforms, i.e. by guaranteeing political rights, emancipation of women by equalizing the rights of the sexes, introducing the Latin alphabet instead of Arabic, adopting the Gregorian calendar... All this after the defeat of the country in the First World War.

We are talking about the values ​​of tradition that bind Pamuk to a modern, critical thought that brought this Turkish Nobel laureate to the brink of dissidence, and occasionally even endangering his life.

Pamuk's messages in the barriers of present-day Montenegro

How to accept Pamuk's advice and behave critically towards culture in the conditions of dominant pluralism of national cultures in Montenegro. When only one, integrative and most important one is absent - the one at the state level.

So, in conditions when the dominant inspirations in national cultures are directed towards heroizing the heroes of their nation, while the critical attitude is mostly reserved for other national cultures. It doesn't necessarily have to be said publicly, but the message is clear - don't touch mine. In any case - “hell, those are others”.

Then the question is - in this division, whose Montenegro is the fortress of national cultures that Pamuk's advice hardly reaches?

Đukanović's attempt to mythologize the state, characteristic of authoritarian systems, which hides the value decay of the same state, failed. In other words, the mythical image of a mafia that supposedly fights for the national cause, but actually hides behind it, has been debunked.

An integral part of that project is Montenegro as a collection of special national cultures, with separate, parallel spiritual environments, without a minimum of national value cohesion.

Inherited from the previous government, it was mostly continued. The difference could only be in the degree of outrage and public indecency. The favorite national traitor has been changed, an old term in a new edition, with all the implications.

Building a value-cultural system is no less important than the functional one, i.e. the way the state functions.

The one-year balance of changes in the functional-value system is more than modest. There is not a small number of those who believe that the promised (August 30) system change has not even started.

Whether they will find the strength to turn around remains to be seen. Especially in culture. Montenegro will be able to anchor itself in its main direction only by mastering civilized norms and considering the interests of the entire nation.

And the nation is not, or not only, an ethnic-philological category.

In the end, the nation is a total set of citizens who share the same destiny in a common space. In our case, a country called Montenegro.

National policies and cultures do not have to mean nationalism. On the other hand, their synthesis is not assimilation.

The country inevitably loses its strength and historical horizon if it turns into a conglomerate of separate groups where the top of the government, in a combination of ignorance and interest manipulation, will only change the national heroes and traitors on duty.

The policy of cultural synthesis, building unity, the ability to agree on fundamental values ​​in the country - requires clear ideas about Montenegro. It requires knowledge of its history. Respect. Ability to observe lessons.

Yes, valuable lessons that can be reached by the critical method that Pamuk talks about.