Latest book My friend Jidthe author Matija Bećkovića is a kind of textbook of ethical, cultural and political significance of high practical value and usefulness.
Today, it has more healing and therapeutic properties for many of our individuals in power. But also for the ruling and opposition parties, the cultural elite and numerous other social categories and parts of society. Ultimately, the "textbook" is aimed at improving, promoting and preserving the mental health of the people in the face of the devastating impact of the ruling policies in Montenegro and the surrounding area.
So, Bećković's lengthy political-ethical essay ""My friend Gido" It talks about the normal and civilized behavior of two people where each of them is a world, consciousness and culture unto themselves, which we wrote about in the last issue of Art.
However, the book abounds in hidden paths and detours that reveal a deeper, more hidden and darker reflection of the book. This, the second part of the review, is about that side of the book.
The case of one song
It is known that Bećkovič and Djilas They had been friends for decades. They elevated their friendship to an almost mythical level, taking into account the fact that one (Đilas) held high positions in Yugoslav state and party politics until 1954, and after his fall from power, Đilas built a global liberal dissident movement and became a landmark in communist history.
The second (Bećković) had and still has a high reputation, which he built as a top (satirical) poet and critic of political and social conditions in Yugoslavia/FR Yugoslavia. And he still has a high reputation in Serbia today.
However, what makes this Bećković book special and distinctive - for our political-cultural and educational discourse in general - is that these two men had diametrically different ideological and political positions that did not lead to mutual hostility or hatred, for example, but - the opposite.
Their decades-long friendship was cordial and heartfelt.
But, as in every "textbook", so in this one (My friend Gido) there were numerous inaccuracies, superficialities, and even scratches and sins against Milovan Đilas and the Yu-revolution and its anti-fascism. Ideological and conceptual in nature, of course. They are not the subject of a deeper and broader analysis in this text. But they reveal the author of the book as an “enthusiastic professor”.
Simply put, Bećković saw and interpreted the ideological narrative of "comrade Đida" through the eyes of his art, his ideology, his view of the YU revolution, its anti-fascism, and even the world of socialism in general.
In this sense, the book "My friend Gido"There are several major "professor's forgetfulnesses", of which we will briefly mention for this occasion only the two major ones regarding Đilas and pay due attention to them.
We cite them as typical examples of Bećković's use of artistic narrative, on the one hand, and historical facts of the same events, on the other.
Why is that important?
The artistic experience of an event in our country often becomes a “valid” historical source. It often grows into a myth that exalts the false (unfactual) side of history. Especially when the event presented in this way falls into the hands of a superficial and fanatical historian. Such historians, as a rule, trust the artist’s version more than the facts. Especially if they come from a great poet like Matija Bećković, who was friends with Milovan Đilas for almost 30 years.
In this regard, let us cite the song "I asked Milovan "Dilasa" (p.55)
It is necessary to explain the background of the poem in the introductory part and state the context (circumstances) of its creation.
Namely, the song is related to the Vranić mountain (western Bosnia) where the Partisans seized a large herd of cows and oxen. The owners of this cattle traded with the Ustashas and the occupier, so the Partisans confiscated their “livestock”. This was a common way in which the Partisans punished people who collaborated with the enemy.
Bosko Djurickovic As the commissar of the Montenegrin battalion, he took for himself, i.e. for his unit, a larger piece of cheese which he believed would belong to his battalion in the final division of the confiscated goods.
The men from the second Serbian battalion immediately reacted negatively, remarking that the Montenegrins always arrive first to the confiscated goods.
For Boško's "premiership" and allegedly unethical behavior, Đilas immediately threatened his dismissal and disarmament.
The brave and eloquent Đuričković reacted in the old Montenegrin, even chivalrous manner of “whisker for moustache.” He told Đilas that he could take away his rank because he had given it to him, but he could not disarm him because Đilas had not given him the rifle, so he could not take it from him.
Đilas quietly withdrew from the "public scene", which is a sign that he highly valued Boško's response.
This ended the discussion between the two.
So, the course of the entire event was described by Đilas in his memoirs and to his friend Matija. Later, this (Bećković) event was translated and elevated to the level of supreme poetry.
Bećković's poetic narration of the events is more artistic, more captivating. But also more “secret”.
Here is how the poem describes this duel between Đilas and Commissioner Boško: “I tore off his epaulettes/medals from his chest/the five-pointed star from his cap/threw everything on the ground/ and scuffed it with my clogs/...I ordered/give me the rifle... just over me dead/ And I saw/that he was ready to die/ and pretended I hadn't even asked him for it.
So, this is the poet's expression of the aforementioned event where the facts have a lower orbit, even mystery.
Therefore, let's analytically arrange the facts so that with them and simple reasoning, we can head towards the truth, without any fan-driven a priori.
First. Boško Đuričković was the battalion commissar and not the commander as the song says. It is not a formal difference, but an essential one. And the Partisans held the ethics of the commissar in high regard and were very sensitive to it. It was not natural for a man who influences and shapes the soldier's consciousness to be the first to take a piece of cheese, even for his own unit.
In addition to the alleged "unethical" behavior of B. Đuričković, the difference (commander - commissar) "touches" the organization and management hierarchy of the partisan unit that the partisans painstakingly built.
So, Djilas wouldn't be crazy to violate ethics and the party's principle of respecting hierarchy. (Djilas himself would probably have been immediately brought to his superior for a report if he hadn't reacted.)
Second. At the time of the Đuričković - Đilas dispute, there were no partisan decorations and epaulettes mentioned in the poem. The first decorations and epaulettes were brought from the USSR only at the end of 1944, by Đilas himself after his first official visit to the USSR. He brought about 200 kg of epaulettes and decorations, which were distributed mainly to military commanders.
This means that Đilas could not even step on Đuričković's epaulettes and medals with his clogs, as the song says, because he did not even have them.
Thirdly, the very act of trampling on the symbol - under which the Partisans and Đilas himself fought - would have been an unthinkable and even ideologically insane move for Đilas to allow himself such a scene - especially in front of the army.
Đilas always deeply respected Partisan decorations as a symbol of his struggle.
Fourth. After the war, Boško Đuričković was a house guest at Milovan Đilas's when he fell from power in 1954. However, it was only sometime in the late 80s as a retired general.
Fifth. In May 1990, Đuričković was one of the signatories of a petition by a group of Montenegrin colonel generals and national heroes who requested that Đilas' war decorations be returned.
It is clear that Đuričković would never have been a guest at Đilas's house, his friend, or one of the signatories of the petition if the latter had belittled and disparaged him.
All in all, the most likely hidden secret of the poem would be to present Milovan Đilas in an artistic and "poetic" way as a distracted man. Or even something worse than that.
Heroism and how to understand it
Bećković's second blunder towards Milovan Đilas is as follows.
Here is the text from the book "My friend Gido"which bears the title "Heroism":"I only act brave when there are foreign journalists in the courtroom. As soon as they are thrown out, I approach the judge and say: Come on, comrades, let's see how we can solve this problem in the best way for you and me.” (p. 77).
Therefore, the text probably points towards describing Milovan Đilas as a two-faced, loose and fickle person.
Again, we use facts from Đilas's life, because they say the complete opposite.
Perhaps the biggest and most famous haters of Milovan Đilas are Vladimir Dedijer (once) and Vojislav Seselj (today). Neither of them mentions Đilas's duplicity, which arises under pressure from outside and from which he seeks help. On the contrary. Đilas changed his convictions, ideas and beliefs, but only through "pressure" from within, personal calling and personal effort. This is acknowledged by Dedijer and Šešelj, as well as numerous other people.
In this sense, Vladimir Dedijer gives him high praise in his book "The great rebel Milovan Đilas”. In that book, he states that he admired Đilas's courage, eloquence, and resistance to pressure from Tito's the state UDB and the “judicial” branches of government. Namely, both of them (Đilas and Dedijer) were tried together in January 1955 under the famous Article 118 of the Criminal Code (freedom of speech).
Vladimir Dedijer never again opposed Tito's rule, while Milovan Đilas remained adamant. He embarked on a whirlwind of new "criminal" acts that led to a series of new trials and 9 and a half years of imprisonment in Sremska Mitrovica.
In this regard, let us quote a lengthy quote from Dedijer's aforementioned book that is very much in conflict with the quoted text of the book's author:My friend Gido”. Evo quoted: “"Đilas went through all kinds of humiliations, but the result was completely opposite to what Tito, Kardelj and Ranković expected. They overlooked the fact that he was a very brave Montenegrin who would not accept these primitive Balkan methods. His self-respect sustained him and helped him cope with such adversity."
There are countless examples of this and similar examples of Đilas' indomitability under external pressures.
The cruel and draconian punishments against Milovan Đilas were aimed at breaking his will to rebel against Tito's rule and Titoism as a single-minded, anti-liberal and even anti-people system.
Let us recall a few facts from Đilas's prison "life" that show that Đilas was not a loose and fickle person: his prison cell was not heated; he maintained the hygiene of his night prayer room himself; he wrote novels, translations and stories on toilet paper; a prison guard used to fire a machine gun over his head during his prison walk; he received 5 kg of food per month from his family; his letters were censored; there is every chance that he was subjected to some opiates for a while in order to "come to his senses"; he only received his passport briefly in 1968 and it was soon taken away; the apartment in which he lived was monitored and bugged; he was threatened with the murder of his son if he did not comply, etc.
In other words, the government sought to bury Đilas alive.
Let us briefly conclude here based on the facts that Đilas was a big, significant, stubborn "crazy Montenegrin one-armed man" who did not know and did not want to surrender to the authorities. In any case, the above facts clearly show that Đilas was by no means a two-faced person who said one thing in the courtroom in front of foreigners, and when they left, he would approach the judge and negotiate with him in some other way.
So, throughout his life, Đilas was resistant to pressure, and what is this Bećković's text "Jconversion” brings into question.
Numerous arbitrariness
Almost the entire book "My friend Gido" is dotted with words, thoughts, quotes, and associations that sting the eyes and brain of the reader of the book.
Let us quote just a part, without comment: "war under the occupier, bloodshed in fake battlesor” (22); “Savle from Podbišće” (25-26) that “My friend Đido reported himself in advance and suspected him of being a possible traitor.” (43); “The Comintern is evaluating whether it should have given him (thinking of Tito - VP) higher or lower salary (44); "It wasn't me who said that, it was the chair I was sitting on.” (54); “"Behold, I and my brothers rebelled and destroyed ourselves and that people, and all in vain" (65); "in that manger my mother gave birth to me," he pointed with his finger to the manger in the left corner of the spacious room” (66); “I stayed there briefly.” (73); “rare are those who (referring to MĐ - VP) give up their time and give everything for what is to come" (74); “I don’t remember, but it looks like it” (156); “We will make these reeds here on the coast like chaff. What a Trieste, what coppersmiths"; "Traitor and collaborator of the occupiers” (p.163/4); “communists should not complain about the beatings they receive because they asked for and provoked the fight” (177); “When asked by an interlocutor whether the Chetniks were traitors, my friend Đido replied: That's too strong a word.” (186); “Perfect prison” (194) etc.
So, we have listed in the form of a series of lines numerous lightly given and arbitrary interpretations of the character and works of Milovan Đilas, for whose factual explanations not even an entire issue of Art would be sufficient.
It is normal for books to have numerous sublime intellectual sparks of a neutral type. Here is an example: “And after decades of friendly love, neither one has moved from their place. Only this persistence and staying is a form of doubt in one side, in one truth. The best proof that love and friendship are more important than sides and more sacred than single-mindedness.
Let's conclude.
Just as every medal has two sides, so does Matija Bećkovič's book "My friend Gido"It has a bright side, but also a darker side."
Bonus video:
