316.347(4)

316.723-027.511:821.163.3-2.09


Mishel Pavlovski

Sts. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia


Image of Europe in Macedonian Drama


Abstract: By voicing the question about the ways in which the over-the-national European identity can be created amidst conditions of globalization, this text starts with the thesis that such a concept is faced with problems which need to be resolved first and foremost at the national level. By problematizing multiculturalism as a “utopian theory” which does not solve any problems at the practical level, and viewing interculturalism as a potential danger to the “smaller” cultures, this text, through an analysis of the plays by Goran Stefanovski, points at the conditions that hinder the possible acceptance of the idea of a Europe without borders. Through four plays, Euralien, Hotel Europa, Ex-Yu, and Goce, Stefanovski equally criticizes Western Europe, for its construction of the problematic Other, with its visa regime, and its marginalization, as well as the Balkans, with the mythologizing of its nationally-romanticized narrative. The paper sheds light on the fact that the acceptance of a common (shared) European identity, a necessity which propagates itself amidst conditions of globalization, depends on the ways in which Europe will resolve the said problems.


Key words: image of the Other, globalization, multiculturalism, European identity, the problematic Other, marginalization, national romanticism, drama, Goran Stefanovski


No matter whether we agree or not with the opinion that globalization refers to the totality of the tightly connected cultural and economic context, or, if we are of the attitude that through the globalizing process the intensity and frequency of the global connectivity,

the fact remains that globalization conducts an exceptionally significant and vast influence on the countries of the so-called ‘First World’, or, the countries whose goal is to be included in the so-called ‘Old’ or ‘Core’ Europe. (cf. (Levy et al., 2005))

Mishel Pavlovski


Certainly, the globalizing processes are among the primary factors which unify the cultures in these countries, and which create conditions for the latter to be constructed within the frameworks of the aesthetic, ethical, political, social, etc., principles of the countries of ‘Old’ Europe. That way, the cultures of the ‘smaller’ Other are faced with a choice, to embrace the ideology of the stronger or to remain ‘without’ Europe. The right the so-called ‘Old’ Europe claims for itself so as to ‘develop’ (read: hegemonize) the cultures of the ‘smaller’ Other in the name of ‘progress’ and ‘civilization’ results in an insurmountable clash. Multiculturalism, though a controversial part of theory, in practice is (or has been) one of the greatest assets in the process of deflating (or, perhaps, better put – masking, hiding) these conflicts. As Mark Poster writes, “(…) multiculturalism is a process of subject constitution, not an affirmation of an essence. As the second media age unfolds and permeates everyday practice, one political issue will be the construction of new combinations of technology with multiple genders and ethnicities. These technocultures will hopefully be no return to essence, no new foundationalism or essentialism, but a coming to terms with the process of identity constitution and doing so in ways that struggle against restrictions of systematic inequalities, hierarchies and asymmetries.” (Poster, 1995:42) Perhaps this is why, particularly after the statement by the German Chancellor Merkel (BBC, 17 October 2010), it seems that multiculturalism is definitely proving itself to be just another “utopian theory” (Lewis, 2008).

In the global plethora of the discursive formations the current post-condition is comprised of, whence the processes of globalization intertwine with neo-colonialist urges, economic problems clash with eco-theories, new national identities combat cosmopolitanism, neoliberalism faces up to human rights questions, the status of the individual stands against the status of the grand narratives, the emerging relations of mutual co-dependence and antagonism are inevitable. Unquestioningly, the vast majority of discourses celebrate the interaction between the various cultures, of cross-inter-multi-culturalism.

On the other hand, the increase in intercultural communication, ushered in by the media and contemporary technology, and placed within the context of the globalizing processes and the unequal power shared between cultures, economies, and societies, seems to simply widen the gap between ‘Authentic Europe’ and ‘The Other Europe’, ‘The New Europe’, etc. Moreover, the inevitable hybridization of cultures, is, from time to time, felt and interpreted, as an attack on one’s own culture and identity.

At the same time, faced with the inevitability of a globally connected lifestyle, whence the diverging, sometimes isolated from each other, cultures come into connect, get hybridized, and unified, with the underlying desire for each of the different cultures to safe-keep a part of their own distinct authenticity, the question regarding the ways in which the slogan “Europe without Borders” could be a successfully fictional narrative is voiced. If is getting increasingly

Image of Europe in Macedonian Drama


clearer that multiculturalism cannot be the theoretical benchmark against whose background the shared European identity is forged, since it does not provide for conflict solution in practice, the need to discern new directions is ever the more present.

Such a positioned dilemma is additionally complicated in terms of national cultures which historically and geographically do belong to Europe, but are not members of the European Union. The example of Macedonia within the context of realizing the idea of a common (shared) European identity also begs the following question: How will the contradictory nature of the feeling about belonging to Europe be overcome, so that the EU is not a dividing line between Europe and the desire to have one’s own singularity be recognized, not as something ‘archaic’, ‘barbarian’ or ‘uncivilized’, but as a distinction which will add to the cultural wealth of Europe itself?

By analyzing the representation examples from the Macedonian dramaturgy, I will attempt to shed some light on a few aspects of possible answers, rather than tinkering with possible answers. In this context, Macedonian culture speaks from at least two stances: one, from the position of distancing itself from practicing the declarative multicultural concept of Western Europe, a practical failure, through an auto-imagological understanding of its own culture as the iconic cradle of (European) civilization, and, two, from the position of belonging, while the inconsistencies which cause the impossibility to realize the idea of a shared European identity are

equally examined. With that, both positions come as a result of the feeling of Otherness. Here, it’s important to emphasize that, even so, within the Macedonian cultural tradition, and certainly within the Macedonian present circumstances, the awareness of belonging to Europe is definitely present. (Cf. Pavlovski and Pavlovski, 1993, 1998)

Goran Stefanovski1, one of Macedonia’s most prolific and established playwrights, also takes on the challenge to consider the aforementioned dilemmas from an artistically conducive way, particularly with


image

1 Goran Stefanovski (Bitola, 1952), Macedonian playwright. Graduated from the Faculty of Philology in Skopje, The Department of English Language and Literature. Studied Dramaturgy at the Academy for Dramatic Arts in Belgrade, where he obtained his Masters’ Degree (thesis title: “Stage Instructions as the Basis of the Dramaturgy of Samuel Beckett”). Worked in the Drama Desk at TV Skopje, and later on, as a Teaching Assistant at the Faculty of Philology in Skopje. In 1986, he became a Professor of Dramaturgy at the Faculty of Dramatic Arts in Skopje. Currently, he works and resides in London. Member of the Macedonian PEN Centre. Member of the Macedonian Writers’ Association since 1979; member of the Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts since 2004. His works have centered round the social and political problems in the Former Yugoslavia, and their ramifications in the larger Europe. Has written scripts for a number of productions, dealing with issues of migration, social conflict, post-communist transition and multicultural identity. Notable works: Јане Задрогаз (Jane Zadrogaz, play, 1974), Диво месо (Wild Flesh, play, 1979), Лет во место (Standstill Flight, play, 1981), Hi-Fi (Hi-Fi, play, 1982), Дупло дно (False Bottom, play, 1983), Тетовирани души (Tattooed Souls, play, 1985), Чернодрински се враќа дома (Chernodrinski Returns Home, play, 1991), Гоце (Goce, one-act play, 1991), Сараево (Sarajevo, play 1993), Ex-Yu (one-act play, 1996), Euralien (1998), Hotel Europa (2000), etc.

Mishel Pavlovski


two pieces, namely Euralien (1998) and Hotel Europa (2002), two of his most famous plays in this given time period.

Let’s take a closer look. Instead of celebrating Europe’s own past or the over-emphasized Euro- phobia, Goran Steganovski, in his critical attempt to evaluate Europe’s ways, takes the road less traveled by. Ever the original creative, he criticizes Europe for its relationship with those entities that are not to be found among the Old, New, Western, Authentic Europe, i.e., that part of Europe which puts him in a position of feeling as the Other in Europe, so as to shed light on the enforced position of Otherness Macedonians (or the Balkans on the whole) have been forced into.

The play Euralien was commissioned by Intercult, based out of Stockholm, Sweden. Let us for a moment imagine the following: in 1998, Stockholm is the cultural capital of Eruope. Goran’s play is seen by the cultural and political elites of the city and the state, by guests from other parts of Europe, no, better, guests from the European Union, who can travel freely just with their ID cards. Such an audience is greeted by one of the author’s introductory remarks2: “The audience, as they enter, will be given passports of a generic (other) i.e. non-European-Union country, and in the course of the event will be treated as non-EU citizens, i.e. “others”


image

2 In the same play, Stefanovski also addresses the anticipated structure of the audience: “One third of the target audience will be immigrants from various countries living in Sweden, one third will be general theatre-goers and the final third will consist of young people.” (Stefanovski, 2010, 33)

or aliens. They will be stopped at “Fortress Europe” borders, asked to fill in visa forms and sample first-hand various forms of “alienation”. In this way the audience will get an insight into and experience of how sad and funny it is to be a citizen of the “other” Europe today. (…) On their way out, the audiences will be given new visas to put in their passports: towards a new, utopian, chauvinist-free Europe!” (Stefanovski, 2010: 33).

It is no accident that Stefanovski gives his audience other kind of passports, ‘other’, referring both to the countries outside the EU and to the notion of Otherness. The visa regime for the Balkan countries was discontinued merely two years ago. What is more, Macedonian citizen, for example, still need a visa to enter the UK. The process of obtaining the visa and the visa itself did not only help separate ‘real’ Europe from the countries which ‘are not Europe’, rather, individually as well as collectively, it branded the passport holder as one who lacks the EU stars. Thus, Macedonian citizens would also officially become The Other, namely, they would be stripped off the opportunity to establish their own identity within the framework of the European one.

But, to Goran Stefanovski, the process which affords, with such ease, the creation of the confrontational ‘us’/’them’ binary, is no stranger to the Balkans either. In 1996, he would open up (or more precisely – he would attempt to summarize) another grand narrative called ‘brotherhood-unity’, with which he examines the mechanisms used to construct the Other as a threat, as a danger, but this time, inside its own (Balkan) milieu.

Image of Europe in Macedonian Drama


The period when the former joint state, Yugoslavia, was breaking-up, is the impetus needed to question further his own cultural position. It is a period when the new Balkan identities are being constituted, or when the old identity matrixes are being re-structured. It is also the period when a sling of authors, theorists, and other ‘policy makers’ find themselves inside the particular kind of a void: the old Yugoslav-Marxist- Socialist aesthetical, ideological, philosophical, political fundamentals (identification pillars) are being torn down, while the new ones are either not fully accepted or are alien-like, foreign, ‘strange’.

Created within a different kind of a cultural context from the one it speaks of (the play was conceived of and completed in Canterbury, UK), Ex-Yu (1996) allows Stefanovski to part ways, once and for all, with the remnants of the confusing loss (or better, transformation) of identity, caused doubtlessly by the break-up of Yugoslavia. If for the Yugoslavs (or, if you well, ‘Yugoslavs’) the 1991 conflict was a shock of the up-until-then close/familiar (or: ‘close’) identities, in the 1996 play, Nikola (a character), calmly, even cynically, would accept violence as a necessity, and with that the ultimate need for a split into an ‘us’ versus a ‘them’.

MAJA: Did you kill anyone?

NIKOLA: I did not allow anyone to kill me. (Pause.)

Everyone killed everyone.

MAJA: My father did not kill anyone.

NIKOLA: That’s right. Your father did not kill anyone. (Pause.) Or, any other.3


image

  1. The emphasis is Stefanovski’s.

    MAJA: And them, the enemies we killed? Didn’t we

    once live side-by-side? How did that cute phrase go

    – ‘Brotherhood-Unity’. Then, we were all one and the same. They were like us. They were us. (Stefanovski, 2010: 21)

    Here, we can see a reflection of the processes which were (all) present not only in the culture of Macedonia, but generally speaking, throughout the former Yugoslavia. On the one hand, he directs his criticism towards favoring one’s own culture and nation, towards the uncritical insistence on the relevance of the national narrative which only compels the creation of xenophobia for the Other, or to paraphrase Stefanovski, xenophobia for ‘those who were once us’, that follows the same principle and logic as the visa regime found in Hotel Europa.


    Ex-Yu


    NIKOLA: Do you know that their toes are webbed?

    Like ducks. Have you heard about that?

    MAJA: No.

    NIKOLA: They are not fully developed like we are. They are a primitive bunch. I am glad that we got rid of them. (Stefanovski, 2010: 21)


    Hotel Europa


    ANGEL: Passport!

    The Drifter gives him her documents. The Angel

    closes the door of the cupboard like a counter window.

    Mishel Pavlovski


    Pause. The Angel opens up the window again.

    ANGEL: Is this your photograph? Is this your hair? Your nose? Are these your eyes? Is this your signature? Your visa is invalid. Your passport is out of date. Who are you? Where are you going? What do you want? Anything to declare? Open suitcase! (Stefanovski, 2010: 121)

    On the other hand, what can be read in Stefanovski’s Hotel Europa, is an examination of conditions which are closely connected to globalization.

    SOCIAL WORKER: (An energetic, intelligent,

    young woman.)

    My name is Eurydice. Nomen est omen. I was destined to be married to Europe since birth. I am a social worker. I’m only a supply worker here. Otherwise I’m a student of sociology. I love my work. Although I can see lots of injustice. I can see greed and exploitation. I can’t start to tell you what goes on in here. Undercover, you know. I believe in Europe as a common home for all. A Europe in which the lamps of hope will be lit again, in our lifetime. I’d love to go to Brussels and see the European politicians in the flesh. And tell them a few horror stories.

    In the nightmare of the dark All the dogs of Europe bark, And the living nations wait Each sequestered in its hate.

    We mustn’t let hell happen again. We’ve seen it all before. We have no excuses. What shall we tell our children if we let it happen again? That we didn’t

    know? Well, we do know. Je regrette l’Europe aux anciens parapets! (I pine for Europe of the ancient parapets!), as the poet said: We must bring back the age of chivalry! We must put an end to the sophisters, economists, and calculators. Oui, c’est l’Europe, depuis l’Atlantique jusqu’a l’Oural, c’est l’Europe, c’est toute l’Europe, qui decidera du destin du monde. (Yes, it is Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, it is Europe, it is the whole of Europe, that will decide the fate of the world.) Do you understand what I’m talking about? (Stefanovski, 2010: 94-95)

    In the monologue of the Social Worker4, the two positions/attitudes/manners Goran Stefanovski takes, both towards the globalizing processes and the relations forged within Europe itself, namely the relations between the so-called ‘Old’ and ‘New’ Europe, are portrayed/reflected.

    Here, on the one hand, the author celebrates the European globalization, understood as an idea that Europe is a home to each and all. The apparent quotations of Arthur Rimbaud5 and Charles de Gaulle6 have a clear tendency not only to portray the image of a true/real Europe, but also to inscribe the author and


    image

  2. It needs to be pointed out, once again, that the author’s note which characterizes the Social Worker as “an energetic, intelligent, young woman” are not given/stated in vain.

5 The former quote comes from Arthur Rimbaud’s poem “The Drunken Boat”. It was first translated into Macedonian (from the original French) by Dushan Tomovski (Kulturen Zhivot, 1-2, 1976).

  1. A famous saying attributed to Charles de Gaulle, pronouced on November 25th, 1959, in Strasbourg.

    Image of Europe in Macedonian Drama


    his own culture within the European cultural context. Goran Stefanovski celebrates this kind of a Europe, a global home to all of its citizens, here and ‘now’.

    The monologue of the Social Worker leads us to the second aspect of the globalizing processes at play in Europe; in other words, Stefanovski criticizes the globalization which produces marginalized groups. In Hotel Europa, ‘Old’ Europe is dealt with viciously, exposing its pomposity and elitism, its rejection of the Other and its acceptance only of the ‘high’ values which are deemed ‘natural’ for the ‘refinement’ of such a Europe. Namely, this is the Europe the play commences with:

    BELLHOP: (Very old man, finicky in his manners, well dressed, naturally elegant.) I apologize for this mess. Such idiotic overbooking. Mind you, it’s not that it hasn’t happened before. They get it painfully wrong at Reception sometimes. We’ll try to straighten things out. But there is only so much a man can do. I shouldn’t take things so personally. But I take pride in my work. I am the only one here with any qualifications. I come from a family with a long tradition in fine hotels. (Stefanovski, 2010: 89)

    The play, therefore, begins with an image of a Europe bound by tradition, one which views the immigrants as chaos-mongers; a Europe which looks into tradition to claim the right to call its truth the only viable truth. Henceforth, ‘the right’ to claim its own auto-imagological depiction of the ‘true’ and ‘doubtless’ and ‘real’ marginalization of the Other.

    Even if we think that such logic has already been surpassed, as it belongs to the old-fashioned bellhop, in the further unfolding of the play’s plot, this logic proves itself quite present and living, particularly in the case of the Caretaker’s discourse, and Stefanovski’s description of his demeanor as “young, cocky, very short hair, well built up”.

    CARETAKER: Dead beat fuck-ups. Gimps. Gonners. Jerks. Bums. Flim-flams Fallen off the back of a lorry. One of these days they’ll wake up dead. How many unemployed in this country? Millions! And the government gives accommodation and cash to whoever comes under a truck. We work our guts off to make a living; they want everything for free overnight. Bloody mongrels. They multiply like rabbits. They stink. (Stefanovski, 2010: 124)

    And the elitism of this ‘high’ culture projected through the character of the old Bellhop, and the globally mediated mass culture, represented through the character of the Bellhop, in fact carry out one and the same vision of Europe – a vision which divides the continent into two different, inconsolable parts: the ‘civilized’ one and the ‘barbaric’ other. What has changed is the style; the process remains the same. The old European colonial culture, which re-packages hegemony as kindness, transforms elitism and refine into a xenophobic, neo-colonialist culture with media- produced values. The elitist Euro-centrism and global media culture constructs the East and the Balkans as an European problematic Other, hence an unwanted/

    Mishel Pavlovski


    undesirable part of Europe (See Georgievska-

    Jakovleva and Pavlovski, 2009).

    It, in its own right, results in the already known impulse, to glorify and mythologize its own heroic past, perhaps one of the greatest obstacles when accepting the idea of a European over-the-national identity. The nationalist romanticist idea, taken as compensation for the processes of marginalization and Otherness, will clash with the globalizing processes which impose the need of constructing an European identity. In Hotel Europa, this clash is represented as a direct physical encounter:

    HUSBAND: (SINGS A DRINKING SONG. THIS IS JUST A SUGGESTION. HE WOULD MOST LIKELY BI SINGING A LATVIAN7 TUNE.)

    So we’ll drink-a-drink-a-drink/ To Lily the Pink- a-pink-a-pink/ The savior of the human race/ She invented medicinal compound/ Most efficacious in every way!

    WIFE: Where have you been? HUSBAND: Fighting for Latvia! WIFE: Again?

    HUSBAND: These bastards asked me where I was from. Latvia, I said! Where the fuck is that, they said? I’ll show you where it is, I said! (HE SHOWS HIS HEART) Here! I said. This is where “the fuck” it is I said! And fuck you too! Next thing I know - I’m fighting these six big motherfuckers.


    image

  2. In Macedonian version here and bellow is used term Macedonian, Macedonia. In English copy I have, the term is Latvian, Latvia. (M.P.)

WIFE: That’s what happened last time.

HUSBAND: Exactly.

WIFE: Every time you come home drunk, you’ve

been fighting for Latvia.

HUSBAND: Our enemies are many.

WIFE: Must you fight them all? (Stefanovski, 2010: 92)

In order to further elucidate the matter, let us return to 1991, the year when Stefanovski writes the play Goce, defined as “A Theatrical Impression of the Last Minutes in the Life of Goce Delchev” based on its extended title. In it, and not just because of the main character8, Stefanovski recalls the Macedonian


image

8 DELCHEV, Goce, birth-name Georgi (Kukush, Aegean Macedonia, 1872-Banica, Sersko, 1903), Macedonian nationalist leader and revolutionary, ideologist and organizer of the Macedonian national and revolutionary movement from the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century; teacher, vojvoda [militia leader]. Completed his elementary education in his native town, and continued with his secondary school education in Thessaloniki. As a young cadet of the Military Academy in Sofia, he secretly attended the socialist group meetings and disseminated socialist literature, for which he was expelled from school. In 1894, began his work as a teacher in Shtip, where he befriended Dame Gruev, who at the time was a member of the Central Committee of TMORO [The Secret Macedonian Revolutionary Organization]. During the time of his frequent sojourns throughout Macedonia, he worked hard on establishing an organizational network of healthy and strong bases, committees, and militia troops for the Organization; took part in the Thessaloniki Congress of TMORO (1896). Together with Gjorche Petrov, wrote the Draft version of the Constitution and the Draft version of the Rule Book of TMORO. Since then up until 1901, was the representative of the Organization in Sofia. He fought a long and hard battle with the Vrhovists [Pro-Bulgarian Supremacists]. Advocated for an

Image of Europe in Macedonian Drama


national narrative. A parallel with Kole Chashule’s9 play Darkness (1960) is evident, expressed through the character of the Young Man (in the case of Chashule), i.e., of the Boy (in the case of Stefanovski). With one ‘minor’ change – Goran’s Boy is no killer. In Goce, the killer/traitor is the character of Komitata, one who symbolizes the experience, virtue and


image

independent development of the Movement, one that would revolutionarize the Macedonian masses, no matter their creed or ethnicity. Systematically prepared the same to win over a political autonomy for Macedonia.

  1. CHASHULE, Kole (1921-2009), Macedonian revolutionary, dramatist, storyteller, novelist, journalist, diplomat, academician. Participant in the armed uprising of the Macedonian people, on the 11th of October 1941; sentenced to death by the Bulgarian occupation forces. After the libration, editor of several magazines (‘Nov Den’, ‘Sovremenost’, ‘Razgledi’); director of several institutions in the realm of culture; civil servant. Yugoslav Council to Canada, Ambassador to Bolivia, Peru and Brazil. One of the founders of the Macedonian Association of Writers, its later on President; member of the Macedonian PEN Centre; Honorary Member of the Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts since 2003. His dramatic output marks a turning point in the Macedonian dramatic production, marking a shift towards modernity. A Twig in the Wind (1957) is the first Macedonian play to treat the issue of contemporary migration from a psychological perspective; his play Darkness (1960) introduces the so-called political theatre. At the center of his interest lay the motif of national dark spots and political intrigues inside the Macedonian national-liberation movement. In his prose production his interest was engaged by patriotic themes, wherewith a special emphasis is placed on the document. For Chashule, writing was a revolutionary act, a social engagement in the name of “battles which last forever”. Other more notable plays: Game or Socialist Eva (1961), City Clock (1965), Whirlpool (1966), Musical Score for a Miron (1978), Judgment (1978), Zhitolub (1981), Divertissement for

    a Strez (1967, 1990).

    struggle of the Macedonian people in their pursuit of freedom. Only through this laconic characterization of the protagonists can we see not just the difference between the two plays, Darkness and Goce, but also in the latter, Stefanovski’s relationship to history and the heroic magnification of the past.

    Linked by a national narrative, Stefanovski, however, constructs history in such a way so that it speaks about the present, namely, to share its message with the contemporary generations. For Stefanovski, treason is not a problem which follows the Macedonian man as evil fate throughout history:

    KOMITATA: They threatened my children’s lives. They swore to burn down my house. I told them where we would be spending the night. (The Boy throws himself on the Komitata)

    GOCE: Leave him be. He’s but a vessel. Strike the hand that is chasing us.

    KOMITATA: Condemn me, teacher.

    GOCE: I forgive you. A great misfortune seems to have come upon you, has it not? Do you know how to cook an eel in ashes? (Stefanovski, 2010: 13-14)

    The play finishes with a short monologue by Goce,

    where “the future generations” are being summoned, whom we can easily recognize as the author’s contemporaries, and who are asked to respect tradition and abandon empty rhetoric. The monologue finishes on ultimate note-cry: “Keep abreast your name and roots, so that you may know who you are, no matter where life may take you. Love thy country. So that it may love you in return.” (Stefanovski, 2010: 14)

    Mishel Pavlovski


    What the ‘minor’ change in Stefanovski’s text accomplishes is in fact a serious critique of the nationally-romanticist ideas conducted during contemporary conditions. In today’s global world they can only cause clashes and result in violence. If the authenticity of a national culture cannot establish its identification through the glorification of the heroic past, which in turn causes violent acts, then the question remains – how are we to love our motherland, i.e., how are we to safe-keep authenticity? What follows is the dialogue between the Boy and Goce, where Goce takes on the role of General Danail Nikolaev.10

    BOY: (…) You desire rivers of blood and mountains made of corpses. While we wish to live and grow. You know nothing about us; do not interfere. We do not need beneficiaries; we do not need masters.

    GOCE (as the General): You talk nonsense! You are not aware of the international situation. (…) We will decide when the time is ripe for action. Understand? Ours is the final world. Otherwise…

    BOY: Otherwise?

    GOCE (as the General): We will annihilate you! BOY: Either you us, or we you.

    GOCE (kisses him on the forehead): All your answers are correct. You’ve learnt all of your lessons! (Stefanovski, 2010: 11)

    If the false patriotism which produces violence


    image

  2. Bulgarian general. Took part in the Serbian-Turkish War, the Russian-Turkish War and the Serbian-Bulgarian War. Emissary of Ferdinand I of Austria. Bulgaria’s War Minister during the Balkan Wars.

has been inherited from the Enlightenment-spawn nationally-romanticist idea, the need for new ideas would strike us as one of utmost certainty. And it is chiefly contained inside the idea of forgiveness, clemency, and the establishment of the principle of love (to each other or to one’s country, either way), which instead of marginalization produces equality.

The plays are mostly populated by sad-looking, grotesque, and by far, marginalized characters. Smugglers and corrupt customs officers, common prostitutes and frightened boys, angels playing the role of crossing guards and homeless women without visas. The ‘elite’ Europe is gone, as is the ‘ancient’ Balkans. The glitter and glory of the European metropolises is gone, as well as the stern wisdom of the saints on the Macedonian icons. All – products of the current logic of succession and fortification. Nonetheless, in these plays by Goran Stefanovski, if you’d allow me to be a bit paradoxical, Europe is the one who is celebrated, and not the European Union; certainly not the bureaucrats in Brussels. Not one of her parts, no matter whether it is ‘the most civilized’, ‘the richest’ one, or ‘the cradle of civilization’ for that matter. What is celebrated is Europe’s diversity.

And the question remains: Does globalization connect/link cultures, namely, do the globalizing processes, at least in Europe, enable, assist, help, act, by constituting a shared European identity?

It seems that Goran Stefanovski does not offer a one-sided answer. Through the processes of globalization, which are a staple of today’s life, it

Image of Europe in Macedonian Drama


becomes apparent that the contemporary world is in need of re-positioning. Henceforth, neither Western European marginalization (the visa regimes, the constituting of the problematic Other), nor the Balkan national-romanticism cannot create the new values which will ensure the fulfillment of an integrated Europe. On the road to imagining these new values, we chance upon the following question too: How will Europe protect itself from the imported baseness and poverty when it already has plenty of it amidst its own ranks, and, how will Macedonian defend itself from the unequal treatment? The way in which Europe (and this refers to the entirety of Europe, not just the EU) will respond to the set challenge will determine the success of the narrative called Europe without Borders.


Summary:


This text rests on the premise that the globalizing processes impose a need to create a so-called ‘Europe without Borders’. By voicing the question about the ways used to create an over-the-national European identity as a prerequisite for a united Europe, the text problematizes the concept of multiculturalism and the

concept of interculturalism. Both concepts in practice cause conflicting situations which hinder the realization of the aforementioned idea. While searching for ways to outgrow and overcome problems, the text analyzes four of the plays by Goran Stefanovski, namely, Euralien, Hotel Europa, Ex-Yu and Goce. The former two point out the processes which Western Europe uses to construct the Balkans/Macedonia as the problematic Other. By creating a ‘barbaric’, ‘uncivilized’, Other Europe, through the constructs of us/them groups, Western Europe entices conflicts. However, this process is no stranger to the Balkans, so Ex-Yu elucidates these kinds of processes which take place in the Balkans. If Western Europe, with its visa regime, and the marginalization of the ‘smaller’ Other, hinders the realization of the idea of a Europe without borders, then the Other, Balkans/Macedonia, does the very same thing, by mythologizing its own national narrative and heroic past. If Western Europe locates the problem its desire to impose its own values as universal and all-encompassing, then for the ‘rest’ of Europe, the problem can be located in the evocation of the no-longer effective, 19th century nationally-romanticist narrative. And both tendencies produce conflicting outcomes, which make the idea of an over-the-national European identity impossible.

Mishel Pavlovski


Literature:


BBC. (2001), “Merkel says German multicultural society has failed”. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11559451> [Accessed on 21. 10. 2011].

GEORGIEVSKA-JAKOVLEVA, L. & PAVLOVSKI, M. (2009). “Europe as Europe’s Otherness”. In: ARSLAN, S., AYTAR,

V., KARAOSMANOGLU, D. & SCHROEDER, S. K. (Eds.) Media, Culture and Identity in Europe. Istanbul: Bahcesehir

University Press.


LEVY, D., PENSKY, M. & TORPEY, J. (2005). Old Europe, New Europe, Core Europe : Transatlantic Relations after the Iraq War, London/New York, Verso.

LEWIS, J. (2008). Cultural Studies : the basics, Los Angeles, Sage Publications. PAVLOVSKI, J. & PAVLOVSKI, M. (1998). Macedonia Yesterday and Today, Skopje, MI-AN. POSTER, M. (1995). The Second Media Age. Cambridge, Polity Press.

СТЕФАНОВСКИ, Г. 2010. Собрани драми. Книга трета, Скопје, Табернакул.

Image of Europe in Macedonian Drama


Мишел Павловски


Сликата на Европа во македонската драма


Резиме: Поставувајќи го прашањето за начините на создавање на наднационален европски идентитет во услови на глобализација, текстот поаѓа од тезата дека овој концепт се соочува со проблеми кои треба да се решат на национално ниво. Проблематизирајќи го мултикултурализмот како „утописка теорија“ кои не ги решава проблемите во практиката, а во интеркултурализмот гледа опасност од атак на „помалите“ култури, текстот, преку анализа на драмите на Горан Стефановски, посочува на состојбите кои го оневозможуваат прифаќањето на идејата за Европа без граници. Преку драмите

„Еуроалиен“, „Хотел Европа“, „Екс-Ју“ и „Гоце“, Стефановски подеднакво ја критикува и Западна Европа со нејзиното конструирање на проблематичниот Друг, со нејзиниот визен режим и со маргинализацијата, како и Балканот со митологизацијата на неговата национал-романтичарска приказна. Текстот укажува на фактот дека прифаќањето на заедничкиот европски идентитет, неопходност која се наметнува во услови на глобализација, зависи од начините на кои Европа ќе се справи со посочените проблеми.


Клучни зборови: глобализација, мултикултурализам, европски идентитет, проблематичен друг, маргинализација, национал-романтизам, драма, Горан Стефановски


70


image