792(497.11):005.72

How Theaters Remember: Cultures of Memory in Institutionalized Systems Milena Dragićević Šešić, Milena Stefanović University of Arts, ,

Abstract: The aim of this study is to explore shaping a theater’s identity (semantic memory). organizational policies and strategies regarding the Research has shown that there are important institutional memory of Belgrade’s repertoire theaters. differences in active policies of preserving institutional The concept of institutional (organizational) memory memory among Belgrade’s theaters. Different has not been developed within the culture of memory organizational and programming strategies were theory. The role of theater in the culture of memory has implemented in order to safeguard institutional identity been researched mostly through studies of its and memory, particularly in theaters with a permanent repertoire, corresponding to how theaters deal with ensemble. The major difference is between theaters issues of glory, guilt, or shame. This study explores how whose culture of memory might be called “non-existent” theaters rethink their own past and organizational (Bitef), or “in storage” (BDP), and those succeeding in culture, how they use their capacity for re-imagining creating a functional memory (JDP, ). themselves, for clarifying their role and function in different historical moments. The objective of this Keywords: institutional memory, organizational culture, research is to identify the main institutional policies and memory policies, memory representations, Belgrade, types of strategies used for preserving institutional theater, identity memory through key narratives of remembering, and key methods of inter-generational transfer. The sample INTRODUCTION comprises of four Belgrade-based public repertoire theaters: the Yugoslav Dramatic Theater (JDP), the The concept of institutional (organizational) Belgrade Dramatic Theater (BDP), Atelje 212, and Bitef memory has not been developed within the culture of Theater. Specific attention is given to the means of transmission, memory theory. Social scientists such as Maurice of individual (episodic) memories into the collective Halbwachs and Jan and Alleida Assmans have dealt consciousness, influencing organizational cultures and mostly with collective memories leading towards

11 “national memory” that helps constructs national which rarely had an organic link with the institution’s identity and its representation. The key research enterprise and/or its daily life (List of Technical question in these studies revolves around the notion of Museums, 2013). Thus, during the post-socialist how societies remember (Connerton, 2002), or how political transition period, many of those “collections” this transfer from individual to collective memory is disappeared in different ways. When cultural realized. Thus, the politics of memory have been seen organizations are concerned, the idea of institutional as a part of a larger cultural-educational public policy museum collections resurfaced recently when the focusing on the development of national identity and National Theater of Serbia opened its own museum, in its representation. In this sense, the role of theaters 2010. within larger national or city memory politics has also Institutional memory should be an important part of been researched (Banu, Dragićević-Šešić, Lužina, knowledge management (the management of facts and Gluhović, et al.), questioning the ways in which information which are the products of activity of an theaters, through their repertories, contribute to organization), a recent addition to managerial theory national memory: what are the traumas, i.e., ethical (Megill, 2007), mostly because numerous widespread and socio-political issues that are debated on stage; international organizations (UNESCO, Open Society what are the forgotten facts that theaters makes public; Foundation, HIVOS, etc.) have been facing problems in or, how do theaters deal with issues of guilt and shame? creating a unique organizational culture – but most of However, the way in which theaters rethinks all, in exchanging and using knowledge developed in themselves, their past and culture, how they mobilize different, and sometimes distant, divisions of a single their capacities for re-imagining, i.e., clarifying their organization. It is not only that money had been own role and function in different historical moments, wasted but also that human knowledge and and ostensibly how they communicate this to society achievements were left unused and forgotten. At the at large. However, these questions have remained same time, the trans-generational and traditional tools unanswered. of recognizing achievements and values (e.g., Managerial theory, though often emphasizing the anniversaries, monographs) seemed to be insufficient importance of organizational cultures (organizational and incomplete. values, philosophy and identity), has not developed The rise of interdisciplinarity makes knowledge research linked to institutional memory. Strategic management even more important. For example, how analysis comprised questions regarding a “corporate can one analysis of “endangered heritage” completed life cycle” (Adizes, 2011), namely, representing by a UNESCO expert become known within other organizational history as a series of events worth relevant departments of UNESCO, regardless of the remembering yet neglecting the issue of institutional sector or discipline in which it was originally created? memory as part of its identity. However, if we use as Furthermore, how can we ensure that this analysis is an example, we could trace museums of factories and remembered and utilized after a number of years? In mines created during the time of Socialist the non-profit world, “knowledge management” has 12 simply become an alternate managerial discipline. As a 1992, they were re-étatized, and then with the law of result, no books and very few research studies in 2008, they were reformed once again as public cultural management have been devoted to institutions. However, this more recent law has not institutional memory and knowledge management, been fully implemented (i.e., no real competitions or while, in accordance with the predominance of autonomy for theater directors), and the theatrical neoliberal thoughts in cultural policy (Belfiore, 2008), laws that the theater community continuously topics such as the philosophy of change, demands have never reached the level of public debate. entrepreneurialism (Haghoort), strategic management The objective of the research is to identify the main (Burns, Colbert), project management (Dragićević institutional policies and types of strategies used for Šešić, Dragojević, Stojković), leadership, accountability, preserving the institutional memory of Belgrade’s city and others were, and are still, dominating the theaters through key narratives of remembering. cultural/art management discourse (Stefanović, 2012). Specific attention will be given to the means of The culture of memory in present-day Serbia focuses transferring individual (episodic) memories from on big “national narratives”, or in civil society on private to collective, by influencing organizational actions about controversial (trauma) moments cultures and shaping theater identity (semantic through the history of private lives. As a result, memory). Research questions include: do theaters important “stories” linked to the identities and have active policies regarding institutional memory; achievements of cultural institutions – stories which what are the organizational and programming are significant for understanding larger social and strategies implemented in order to safeguard cultural processes – have been put aside. institutional identity and memory; what are the defining narratives (explicit and implicit) and how RESEARCH AIMS they are used in preserving institutional memory; how do institutions remember the dark sides of their The aim of this study is to identify ways and history, or institutional trauma (censorship and self- modalities of preserving institutional memory in the censorship, rejection of creative dissident contemporary Belgrade theater system (within a personalities, etc.); and how is “dissonant heritage” larger research project titled Organizational Cultures memorialized? and Institutional Memory: The Cultural System of the This research takes into account the difference City of Belgrade). In Belgrade, numerous theaters have between episodic memory and semantic memory been created since the Second World War in different (Wickery, 2011), focusing on the ways in which socio-political contexts, which have in turn influenced individual recollections are transferred into semantic their respective missions and values. Some were memory (long-term memory based on structured and created as state theaters, others as city theaters, but systematized knowledge about an institution). both types were later transformed into self-governing Semantic knowledge overcomes meanings of institutions. During the transition period, by law in individual episodes memorialized in different 13 “institutional corners”, thus becoming a kind of institutional memory, namely, how past events and knowledge that can be transmitted to the public. We experiences are transferred as memories to will focus on the dynamics between individual and newcomers (Assman, 2011: 25), although this question collective memory, starting with the thesis that is important for theater management (each generation memory structuration is necessary within cultural might change their memory perspective in accordance institutions so as to enable the creation of their with the value [mission] changes or changes in the resilient narratives and identities. socio-political context). In creating institutional politics of memory, horizons Institutional memories are developed and endorsed of memory are usually defined within the mission and only in communication with other people, particularly vision, or implicitly expressed within the said in verbal communication (Assman, 2011: 24). organizational culture. Those horizons in the case of Collective memory develops only in proximity to Belgrade’s theaters might be extended by institutional everyday interaction and common experiences. identification with the nation, city, region, , or Theater is a space that provides both an artistic the world (contributing to local, national, and collective and audiences to share common experiences supranational identities, religious or cultural and verbalize/re-tell stories in theater foyers, salons, communities, etc.). Thus, institutional memory widens cafes, and restaurants. The research takes into account its horizons towards the past, but also towards the the existence and use of those gathering spaces in future (Assman, 2011: 21). The assumption is that theater institutions as well as the policies regarding besides the National Theater, which is defined as a them. The main focus of our research will be the “protector” and creator of national identity, Belgrade’s narratives through which memory is transferred from city theaters have been “freer” in choosing and the individual to the collective, namely from the older defining their horizons of memory.i to the younger generations. Was there any “grand The other hypothesis relates to the importance of narrative”, and is there still any need for a grand intergenerational memory communication and narrative in these organizations? transfer; in theater these “crossings between A narrative might be the accumulation of past generations, mean[s] crossings of their experiences, events or a carefully-selected set of events, yet in both narratives and destinies” (Assman, 2011: 21). How cases it has to be articulated, “to be a story”. does this intergenerational aspect function in theater Sometimes a story about “founding fathers” is not a institutions with and without ensembles (as this single narrative but rather a set of micro-stories should be one of the key aspects of institutional (Benali, 2012). Namely, a narrative has to inspire new memory policy)? Are there narratives which can artists entering the collective, to keep the loyalty of survive their initial generation and be interesting and audiences, to help endorse identity, but also to open valuable for those who have heard the narrative after new roads to the future. Although it would be the fourth or the fifth generation shift? There is no important to study “bottom-up narratives” (how research showing the extent of “multi-generational” people outside of an institution talk about it), this 14 study focuses on top-down narratives created by past might be temporarily forgotten or re-read theater institutions themselves (politics of memory). according to current institutional values. To test this Institutional memory, even more than national thesis, we will examine monographs written for memories, keeps remembrance on “triumph and not different anniversaries and repertories (where on trauma”, which are, according to Assman, the two repeated texts and authors testify about how theaters main categories of collective remembrance (2011: 12). canonize their achievements – the method of Our hypothesis is that memories of traumatic canonization starts with selection but depends more moments are not kept in institutional memory but on repetition). Cultural memory can be fostered by rather in the collective memories of other theaters, or “storage-memory” (which usually relies on books, the larger cultural sphere. images, films, archives, museums, and libraries) and The last hypothesis is related to links between functional memory, which uses more performative institutional and the wider socio-cultural memory. As practices (Connerton, 2002) like traditional customs, Assman emphasizes, social memory is based on rituals, processes of canonization, and artifacts biology; it has its time frame (80-100 years), it is inter- (Assman, 2011: 68). generational and based on conversations. In other The research sample will involve four Belgrade words, cultural memory is trans-generational and it theaters created in different historical periods: based on material artifacts, without time limits, as it Yugoslav Dramatic Theater (in continuation identified uses signs and symbols, monuments, anniversaries, as: JDP, founded in 1947), Belgrade Dramatic Theater customs, texts, and photographs. To be really (in continuation identified as: BDP, 1950), Atelje 212 functional, cultural memory has to surpass its “storage (1956), and Bitef Theater (1989). These four case for artifacts” status. Memory-storage has an interest in studies will be used to investigate all the instruments everything, and archives everything, without taking of memory communication (internal and external), into account values, norms, etc. In times of value through the following methods: interviews, changes, without certainty, many institutions have observation, content analysis, discourse analysis, and opted for this fact-based and objective approach. narrative analysis. The materials for qualitative However, real cultural memory is created today, for analysis and interpretation comprise of monographs, tomorrow, by selecting the facts to be collected, and brochures, marketing material, theater archives, and then explaining them in big narrative ways. Without photo documentation. The instruments of memory storage-memory accumulation, they run the risk of policy and memory communication that will be becoming illegible or being thrown away as analyzed include: annual celebrations, anniversaries, information of no use in/for the future. prizes and festivals, dedicated theater spaces, Functional memory is the result of memory politics memorabilia, photographs, sculptures and paintings in based on institutional values and norms, attempting to the theaters’ buildings, logos, lettering, and other forge links between past, present, and even future marketing tools and artifacts. developments. Certain things from the institutional 15 THE BELGRADE THEATRE SCENE: FIELD RESEARCH the five-year celebration, a monograph book (one or more) was published, with the history of the theater Art-centered theaters have always been very re-evaluated and revalorized, its main narratives conscious about the need to archive and memorialize. repeated. However, besides the initial institutional However, there were no official standards and strategies regarding memory preservation (archive procedures for this in Belgrade, thus each theater and publishing departments), later policies were institution had to define its own policy and ways of incoherent, i.e., defined by the “person in charge”. For collecting and archiving memories. In this chapter, example, “Žika Stojković was archiving materials for we’ll discuss the data collected from the conducted each performance, I continued that as a dramaturg, but field research in an attempt to identify types of both times I left the theater, it was thrown away and memory preservation, the existence of key narratives this policy was interrupted – there is unfortunately no (semantic memory), and the extent of functional system” (Ćirilov, interview, 2013, our translation). The memory creation. main permanent activity in this sense (besides celebrating anniversaries) is an annual celebration on Yugoslav Dramatic Theater (JDP) the 3rd of April – the moment of “remembering”, but also the process of evaluating and canonizing for the JDP was created in the turbulent postwar period future memory of the previous season (selecting best when the new federal socialist state wanted to form its performances, actors, directors, giving prizes to other own institutions as a representation of new values, theater employees). During Stupica’s last mandate, the ideas, and orientations. The ideaii to establish the second theater stage opened, in 1969, later to be theater came from “above”, and the prominent, named “Bojan Stupica” out of respect for its famous energetic young Slovenian theater director, Bojan director and founder, while in 2006 the main stage Stupica, was invited to select the best actors from received the name “Ljuba Tadić” (a company member across the whole country and bring them to Belgrade since 1961 and one of the star actors of the theater), a so as to constitute a repertoire theater that would year after his passing. reflect the needs of the new society. Consequently, the JDP’s horizon of memory is extended to official day of the theater’s birth is taken to be April 3rd, “Yugosphera”, as its name attests to. The key founding 1948, when its premiere performance was staged narrative was not, and is not, Yugoslav unitarism, but (Ivan Cankar’s King of Betajnova, directed by Stupica rather the idea of brotherhood and unity as a founding himself). ideological narrative that did not keep on with time Since its beginning, JDP had an active policy but was replaced with genuine regional theatrical regarding preserving its institutional memory. In the interests (expressed through the repertoire, the beginning, the theater had an archive and a museum programming policy, and its guest directors). This departmentiii (Pet godina rada, 15), which do not exist “regionalism” was linked to the narrative of as such today. Regularly, for every anniversary since importance and “grandeur” – always underlying that 16 this theater was established by regrouping the most salon and the other collective spaces within or in the creative and the most talented actors and directors proximity to the theater lost their importance, as a from all over the former Yugoslavia. The “Yugo- new generation of actors do not hang around in the orientation” should officially be abandoned after five theater beyond the rehearsal or performance times years (as the theater was downgraded from a federal (Babić, 2009 : 140). to a city theater), though the name has remained till JDP’s main narrative is a narrative of stars in a present day. This idea of its creation as a Yugoslav cohesive, firm ensemble, collective (Mata Miloševićv); a theater did not allow information about the transfer of “talented ensemble” (Gligorić), characterized by a the founding rights (to the city of Belgrade) enter collective endeavor and the constructive contribution institutional memory, as it would definitely narrow the of each individual to collective achievement (Belović), horizon of memory. as it is a “theater where big actors are playing small This horizon of memory is transferred inter- roles” (Ćirilov, 103, our own translation), where generationally by using different communicative “artistic unity” in spirit and style is achieved. In this means – from name, logo, and lettering, which still respect, the key repeated memory was the one about keep the Yugoslaviv socialist character, to texts in rehearsals and trainings “in church”, which in the first monographs, which underline this narrative. Key five years were the usual method of work, followed by agents of memory safe-keepers are three member- permanent discussions around their own founders and artistic legends of this theater: Marija achievements (self-evaluation as method). However, Crnobori, , and Branka Veselinov, who all this narrative about collective unity has changed over acted in some of the first performances, but who have time, from hot words like devotion, enthusiasm, passion, also remained quite active in contemporary Belgrade’s ambition, sacrifice, etc., in monographs up until 1973, cultural life. The commitment of this first generation of to more “cold ideas”, to use this Dahrendorfian actors was demonstrated on numerous occasions: expression, as quality and professionalism. The fact that stories about Crnobori coming every day during the this theater could bring stars to be part of a team was theater’s reconstruction (even when it was snowing, always a point of pride, even when a group of young when she’d fashioned for herself specific “snow-chains” actors came together in the same year (1969) – Bojan’s to brave the winter weather) were among the many babies, as they were called (Babić, 2009: 63) – they demonstrating this devotion. were raised individually to the levels of stars, while at The most important space where this inter- the same time accepting a collective JDP identity and generational communication took place was the still keeping their unique generational identity. theater’s salon, as well as the rehearsal rooms where JDP’s second big memory narrative is a narrative of artistic team members would remind ensembles about grandeur and quality linked with renomee (reputation the values and norms instituted through time. and renown), and the informal status of a leading However, with time – especially since its damage in the Yugoslav theater. Even the memory about the way the fire of 1997 till the spring reconstruction of 2003 – the founding decision was executed contributes to it cult 17 status: the role-model was MHAT – not aesthetically theater into a new direction, but had a very short life. but due to its importance and representativity (Ćirilov, Without those first theaters newly-created knowledge 2013); the main managerial aim was always to would not be codified and canonized. Without the regroup, to involve the best, those who could second, theater would be dead. Yugoslav Dramatic Theater always saw itself as belonging to the first introduce new qualities of “modernism” in the group. theater’s esthetics – Stupica, Milošević, Belović, Tanhofer – directors who were famous for their zeal to Theater also memorializes through programming – overcome a realistic approach (prevailing in the for JDP, re-making or regular iterations of key world National Theater in Belgrade), while Dedinac and writers, from Shakespeare and Molière, Sophocles and Gligorić were praised for the high literary value of Plautus, to Dostoyevsky and Ostrovsky. This was not their plays. They “brought absolute quality” in the only a part of repertoire policy but also of the policy of selection of the repertoire, which was immediately institutional recollection and identity reinforcing. The recognized both by the critics and the public as an publishing department not only offered dramatic texts anthology of world drama. Yugoslav classics came later, to audiences but also very significant program slowly; besides opening with a socially-engaged catalogues with literary, historical, and contextual Slovenian Cankar piece, and the huge success of the analysis. Through the repertoire, several main lines Dubrovnik Renaissance writer Držić and the Serbian have been maintained – although in the new socio- romanticist Sterija (with his Patriots, repeatedly on the political concept one line might have a completely repertoirevi). However, it took some time to allow different meaning. Programming Dobrica Ćosić’s contemporary dramatic writers to be staged. Otkriće/Discovery in 1960 as a highly-stylized This story about repertoire as “anthology” will be recitative drama was quite significant, while staging repeated from monograph to monograph, Ćosić’s The Kolubara Battle (1983) and Valjevo perpetuating the image of JDP as a theater with high Hospital (1989) in the 1980s was read as entering the literary and directorial standards, one which avoids nationalistic trend in Serbian “high culture”. However, experimentalism and innovation. One story written by in 1989, Haris Pašović directed Aristophanes’ Birds, Slobodan Selenić (in the monograph devoted to the Edward Miller Anski’s Dibuk, Nikita Milivojević 25th anniversary), and then revived by Milosav Ionesco’s Jack, or the Submission, Larry Zapia Mamet’s Mirković (in the monograph for the 50th anniversary) Life in Theater, and more, all showing this continuity as deserves to be told as one significantly contributing to a principal value in making the repertoire while the narrative of grandeur: addressing the best young Yugoslav theater directors. It seems that through these different implicit strategies Some theaters are built to last, such as Comedie of recollection, JDP succeeded in achieving a functional Française (a theater of national culture). Some theaters memory, betting on continuity as a value and trying to are created to move and change ideas, or aesthetics, recall certain past values, by integrating them in their such as Antoine Theatre Libre, which moved world organizational policies under different management 18 and thus creating a firm link with the future. Through to the working class community. “The space where the narratives which ensure semantic memory even the theater was built was once a place where circuses put youngest members of the ensemble know not only the their tents and offered performances” (Pašić, 2007: history of the theater, and its achievements, but also its 11). The first premiere was Boris Gorbatov’s The Youth constant values, such as the use of a star ensemble and of the Fathers on the stage of the National Theatre in commitment to the team, the repertoire as an antho- 1948, and its first performance on its own stage was logy of plays, professionalism, quality, and stylization The Suspect by Branislav Nušić in 1949. In the (the modern approach) without experimentation. beginning, this theater staged Soviet writers and Finally, we wanted to see how a theater deals with Russian classics (Ostrovsky, Chekov, Dostoyevsky), as trauma, how it memorializes traumatic moments from most Belgrade theatres did. Very quickly, however, its own history, for example the removal of the BDP discovered American and English playwrights and performance of When the Pumpkins Blossomed in 1968. while it seemed that socialist society started The trauma in Serbian theatrical censorship was liberalizing, this theater experienced its first case of linked to the fact that there was no official censorship. censorship with Thieves’ Carnival by Anouilh, after the That message would be transmitted mostly by third showing, when it was taken off the repertoire. telephone to theater managers, and then through a However, this period is still considered as the golden complex procedure the collective "decided" to remove age of this theater. the performance from the stage. Therefore, it was The methods of memorializing are mostly stan- more traumatic than as it would have been in the dardized as in other theaters. For every anniversary, situation of real state censorship. This fact began to be since the 5th year celebration, a monograph is mentioned only after the period of transition, and it published where memories are presented through was widely-publicized by theater scholars (Klaić, individual views of different stakeholders. For the 60th Jovićević, Pašić), while in the monographs it appears anniversary, in 2007, the theater published an only as factual data without a narrative, especially ambitious monograph, in which its history was without valorization of what that fact meant for the recalled through different perspectives, from sets of atmosphere in the theater and for the careers of its facts through personal memories of the main participants. Trauma was disposed of. This has participants. This monograph represents a relevant partially changed in the last “memory book” through resource for small stories about the theater that can be the personal stories of different artists (Babić, 2009: transferred between generations. 71, 103, 110). The anniversary, as the main permanent event which happens every February, is an opportunity to Belgrade Dramatic Theater (BDP) memorialize achievements and reward accomplish- ments. Instruments include a prize with the name BDP was founded in 1947 as a city theater on the Tatjana Lukjanova (an actress), which in 2013 was not outskirts of Belgrade, with the idea to offer theater art given to one person but rather to the whole ensemble 19 (the idea was to boost ensemble spirit and collective controlled rehearsal Miroslav Krleža, a prominent affiliation). In order to preserve the memory of one of writer and figure in Yugoslav cultural life, commented the most prominent actors of the golden age of this to the theatre director Dinulović that Godot was a theater, the main stage was named Rade Marković. nihilist performance, which signaled a red light. Restaging as a tool for institutional memory and Dinulović linked nihilism to concepts of liberalism. identity preservation was also used, and signature Furthermore, Dinulović was afraid that playing Godot plays from the golden years, like The Glass Menagerie, would destroy the theater and organized a meeting of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, and Who’s Afraid of Virginia the artistic council, who then decided to veto the play Woolf, were put on again. (Marković, 2008: 166). The horizon of memory in the case of BDP is as it is Godot premiered in an alternative space (in the stated in the name: a Belgrade theater that in the atelier of the painter Mića Popović) and was beginning was set in a remote location of the city. immediately seen as an event to provoke many stories Today this district of Belgrade represents a dynamic in Belgrade’s cultural circles (Marković, 2008: 172). In urban community where the narrative from the 1950s 1956, Godot continued to be present on the Belgrade of a neighborhood theater has changed to the narrative theater scene, but this time at the new theater Atelje of an urban city theater. This horizon of memory 212. Besides Godot, one other case of self-censorship without specific urban narratives is not endorsed, and happened in 1952, when Thieves’ Carnival was it seemed that the theater had not developed small removed from the repertoire after three performances. urban (or neighborhood) stories to remember. These events announced the beginning of the end of BDP, contrary to JDP or Atelje 212, did not have a the modern narrative, a narrative of an “open, narrative of star actors – even less of star directors. innovative theater”, and led to confusion over the Since its beginnings, the main narrative of this theater identity of BDP, as well as its mission and repertoire. was its ensemble, as a team in which every actor could The actors and the audience demanded national play any role. The other important narrative was a authors but there were none available at that timevii theatre of new modern literature, which introduced (Pašić, 2008). American writers like Tennessee Williams and Arthur The second large trauma was when the theater’s Miller as well as American culture to Belgrade founder (the City’s Council for Culture) decided to audiences. During the presentation of Cat on a Hot Tin merge BDP with the Comedy Theater, into a hybrid Roof, most of the audience members saw a refrigerator called the Contemporary Theater in 1959. The idea for the first time on the stage. was to cut expenses and have a joint management and The institutional trauma that marked the history of ensemble. No one thought about the respective theater this theater was the censorship of in identities and specificities. This artificial fusion 1954. Although it seems that there was no official provoked perplexity and uncertainty among the staff, censorship, it was a clear case of self-censorship, and during this time many popular actors left BDP, which for an ensemble was even worse. After seeing a thus a specific collective memory was lost. This 20 attempt at integration failed, and the Contemporary organization that would place its mission in Theater existed as a single company only until 1975. concordance with the international zeitgeist, while Afterwards the renewal of BDP began, inaugurating a adhering to certain social norms and regulations” tumultuous period in the 1980s and 1990s. (Dragićević-Šešić, 2013: 4, our own translation). The In the monograph’s index of plays there is no opening play was Faust, directed by Trailović. Four information about Godot; however, many personal years later, Atelje 212 was transformed into a theater memoirs mention this event as a tragic one for the with a permanent company (on Stupica’s demand as theater. For Atelje 212, staging Godot symbolizes a its new director, and in 1962 it moved into a new heroic and epic narrative, while in the official history building designed by Stupica himself. of BDP it is sent to oblivion. Still, on the website the Atelje 212 was a theater that wanted to change story about the merger with the Comedic Theater is society by having an international vanguard repertoire remembered as part of the organizational design, as that opened new and brave questions – “theater as a historical data, although Minja Dedić, Lela Kurtović, laboratory” (Dragićević-Šešić, 2013: 5, our own and Slobodan Stojanović, in interviews and memoirs, translation). The person behind this narrative was admit that this fusion was absurd and unsuccessful. In Trailović herself, the first female leader on Belgrade’s the conclusion of his interview, Slobodan Stojanović theatrical scene. Aware of the context and the political says that: “we shared good and bad, but we remember sensitivity, she knew that the subversive nature of only the good” (Pašić, 2007: 157, our own translation). Atelje 212 had to be hidden since the communist It is obvious that lacking both artistic and managerial regime could easily feel threatened by the openness leadership, and having several traumatic re- and modernity of the surrounding events. The organizations, it was difficult for the present outcome of the theater’s foundation was that this management to create a unifying explanatory narrative of experimentation produced a setting in narrative that would lend coherence to this theater. which Bitef was created in 1967. The situation in the 1990s, when several members of Although the policy on preserving institutional its ensemble left the theater while some were memory is not explicit or an official part of the degraded (Borka Pavićević), is objectively described organizational or human resources allocation of tasks, on the theater’s web page, but without a storyline Atelje 212 always had an active approach. The which would afford the younger generations’ an methods and activities in this regard were determined understanding. by each of the leaders, and the lack of continuity made evident. However, there has always been recognition Atelje 212 of the need to preserve institutional identity that has been maintained throughout history. If we talk about Atelje 212 was founded in 1956 by a group of programming and organizational activities, preserving Belgrade intellectuals led by Mira Trailović. “She institutional memory depended more on the succeeded in developing her theater space as an respective leaders’ decisions, their preferences, poetics, 21 and ambitions. For its anniversaries, Atelje 212 (Theatre Escape Cardin, 3-4 June 1977), which published monographs in which current and former was a big success for a city theater from Eastern members usually assessed and reconsidered the Europe. achievements of the company. Exhibiting photographs Although institutional identity is safeguarded from famous performances in common spaces, like the through narratives and material artifacts, some of the halls and corridors, was always present, no matter the stories are forgotten and rituals like celebrations and changes in management. customs are not developed. Functional memory is One other important instrument in preserving achieved despite sporadic rituals and festivities which memory includes the building itself, situated in a non- depend on current management decisions. Episodic theatrical street with no cultural infrastructure memory exists, as it is partially transferred via written (Dragićević-Šešić, 2013: 6). In front of the building is a documents. However, it needs to be upgraded in view statue of Zoran Radmilović, one of the most popular of coming generations that would need new narratives actors in all of Yugoslavia. In the hall, there are busts of to safeguard the spirit and collective identity of Atelje Ljubomir Muci Draškić, Bojan Stupica, and again 212 as a compact troupe, since Atelje 212’s café-bar Radmilović. The theater’s bar also had a special role to lost its central communicative function. play in internal memory politics. This bar was a place There are two grand narratives at play here: one, for inter-generational memory transfer. The narrative about a specific semi-dissident collective identity, and about the bar used to have a special meaning for the the other, about the uniqueness of the troupe and its staff, but also for the public. Stories about gatherings members. Collective, critical thinking, semi-dissident and intellectual debates in this bar were legendary Atelje 212 was a story in the wider narrative about the among the cultural and political elites. opening of culture in the city of Belgrade in the 1960s. Re-staging plays that have already been very These two narratives are interconnected, since the successful (e.g., Hair) was always part of the unofficial spirit and identity of Atelje 212 was based on the great policy that most of the leaders respected. Domestic artistic personalities who formed the semi-dissident authors like Aleksandar Popović, Bora Ćosić, Ljubomir circle marking Belgrade’s cultural scene and put the Simović, and Dušan Kovačević were always on the theater on an international map. repertoire; this continuous policy reinforced the The most famous generation of the theater’s actors theater’s image as one of satirical contemporary came between the 1950s and the 1970s. During this comedy. Horizons of memory in the case of Atelje 212 period, Atelje 212 was home to stars like Radmilović, are identified with Belgrade, with a strong Slobodan Aligrudić, Bekim Fehmiju, Danilo Bata cosmopolitan character. This character is preserved by Stojković, and many others. In the first period, it was a stories about touring all over the world (USA, Mexico, narrative of stars, in the second, a narrative of Iran), also about taking part in different festivals ensembles, which is still valid today. Previously, the (Dragićević-Šešić, 2013). For example, the play Miracle audiences came to Atelje 212 because of Radmilović in Shargan participated in the Theatre of Nations in performing Radovan III or King Ubu, not necessarily 22 because of the play itself. Together with directors and was inevitable. Still, a policy of remembrance is based writers like Stupica, Trailović, and Borislav Mihajlović on triumph and not on trauma; this is the important Mihiz, actors developed something called the Atelje legacy of Trailović. If she was not successful, like in the 212 performing style, characterized by cynicism, irony, case of Hats Down!, she would find another solution for sarcasm, and private or self-reflexive remarks with ‘keeping the team spirit up’ by suppressing the insinuations to daily events (public or private). memory of the difficult incident. In the case of Hats If we look into the memory policy of the recent Down!, that meant undertaking a successful tour in the period we find two important decisions. The theater in United States during the revolutionary 1968, ending the basement is named after , in 2012, with her selection, as one of the most critical memorializing the actor who performed the mono- contemporary performances for Bitef. (Dragićević- drama Tola Manojlović Lived his Life more than 400 Šešić, 2013: 10) times between 1967 and 2011; the other is about a The theater’s approach to censorship was to neglect festival devoted to former director Ljubomir Muci this event, and Trailović tried to present the Draškić (it took place only twice, in 2011 and in 2012). censorship as a (her) managerial decision. These attempts to preserve the memory of two important figures have been initiated under the Bitef Theater directorship of Kokan Mladenović. Muci Draškić was chosen as “he was the last one to bridge memories and The stories of the Bitef Festival and the Bitef the spirit between generations” (Novakov, interview, Theater overlap, as the Bitef Theater has been charged 2013, our own translation). He worked together with with preserving both institutional memories. However, Trailović in the 1960s and 1970s, and in the 1980s there is a huge discrepancy in institutional memory continued as the theater’s manager. policies regarding the two. In spite of the fact that the Over time Atelje 212 modified its original mission, Bitef Festival was created in Atelje 212 by Trailović, and from theater as a laboratory space that changes the festival’s history has been memorialized society, it developed into a socio-political critical force independently from its organization-founder. that was sarcastic and farcical. After 1964, the When Bitef Theater was created to be the theater’s repertoire changed and contemporary institutional support for the Bitef Festival (as it has its Yugoslav drama was introduced with a lot of success own manager and artistic director), Jovan Ćirilov, the (Aleksandar Popović). Staging liberal or subversive festival artistic director at the time, kept the festival’s plays caused confrontations with political structures identity separate, which was even reinforced by the and censorship sometimes occurred. Although Atelje installation of Anja Suša as co-selector (at that time she 212 was the first Eastern European theater to stage was director of the Theater Duško Radović). To be Waiting for Godot in 1956 – a play banned in all certain that the festival’s identity and its institutional communist countries and previously canceled from the memory would be safeguarded, Ćirilov transferred all repertoire of BDP – in some other cases censorship of its organizational memory to the city’s archive, 23 which has since published two monographs and -1989-1990, with artistic director Arsa Jovanović registered all relevant documents. Thus, important who contributed to the idea of Bitef Theater as a recollections about the life of the festival, its guests, laboratory, also characterized by being open to performances, and role in the cultural life of Serbia and multidisciplinary programs accentuating elite Serbian Yugoslavia, are preserved as anecdotes, while national culture; narratives of a “festival of new theatrical tendencies” -1990-1995, with artistic directors Olivija and a “platform between West and East”, of “top-level Mihajlović Domić and Ivana Vujić, who attracted professionalism” (Ćirilov, our own translation) give innovative performances such as Saint Nick by Gorčin meaning to each of them. It can be said that semantic Stojanović, also characterized by numerous memory is achieved, as the festival’s leaders always "happenings"; knew that some narrative support is necessary for -1995-1997, with artistic director Branka Vuković, enabling an understanding of the festival. The repeated who oriented the theater toward popular and key words, accepted internally and externally, were commercial performances; discovery and quality. -1997-2004, with artistic director Nenad Prokić, Bitef Theater, however, does not archive an who encouraged an engagement with critical issues institutional memory. It seems that a policy of “erased and opened the stage for Belgrade’s dance troupes and memory” was there from the beginning. The previous non-verbal theaters (thus partially returning Bitef history of the building as a theatrical space (the first Theater to its earlier laboratory practices); rehearsals at JDP, later used as a storage space by the -2005-2008, with artistic director Nikita Milivojević, Boško Buha Theater) was erased from public who moved closer to the format of a repertoire theater, memories (except in 1974 by the Bitef Festival for a characterized by naming seasons according to a performance of a Eugenio Barba play). Every new certain concept; director and artistic director created their own -2009-present, with artistic director Jelena Kajgo, managerial and artistic policy that prevented any who turned the theater into a platform for dance continuity or safeguarding of memory. This was companies and the home for the Bitef Dance Ensemble. endorsed by the fact that Bitef Theater does not have Repertories and policies never crossed during those its own ensemble – thus, does not have agents of periods, therefore inter-generational and intra- memories, those who are capable to transfer this to theatrical communication had bigger ruptures than in new generations and teams. As a result, new any other theater. programming policy cannot build on the achievements Besides the annual anniversary party which was of any previous period, hence each manager has to created by Ivana Vujić, there are no other systemic start building their own repertoire and ensemble as activities to preserve institutional memory. Even the well as their own audiences. There were many memory of its founders and previous leaders is not distinctive periods in the history of Bitef Theater, kept, as the theater’s mission changed too often. This including: rupture is exacerbated by the fact that the offices and 24 the performance building are far away from each other. “creative cities” platform raised the level of festival This managerial overlapping is also one of the reasons competition. As such, small important festivals such as why Belgrade’s theaters find it difficult to initiate a Nancy (founded in 1963 as a university company precise policy of memory, as those few theaters often festival, and in 1968 as a festival of experimental memorialize the same person, which complicates the theater) closed in the 1990s. process of creating a comprehensive policy of memory (semantic memory). In spite of the fact that the COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: DOMINANT TRENDS IN horizons of memory of Bitef Theater are cosmopolitan, INSTITUTIONAL MEMORIES those horizons, even with recent European projects, are limited to Belgrade. The main identity narrative is Belgrade’s theaters remember differently. They do about the buildings, although since the beginning all not have explicit memory policies and strategies but marketing material has been created without this certain instruments are in place in all of them, such as important architectural information. In his non- anniversaries, printing monographs, dedicating stages, published book about the theater opening Arsa rehearsal rooms, even squares by the names of famous Jovanović states: members, creating memorabilia (such as photos, busts, and paintings), and more. There are no discussions The church at Bailoni Market is transforming itself in about the theater’s mission and its identity, thus there front of me into a magical theatrical space. This miracle is no consensus about a policy of memory in an of theater creation has in itself something ritual and institutional setting. mythical. (1) Through repertoire and other programming activities, theaters strive to keep the continuity lines In his manuscript Jovanović describes the difficult (by re-staging their iconic performances, returning to private circumstances under which this theater was the same writers and/or styles, etc.). This does not born. Trailović, recently diagnosed with cancer at the concern Bitef Theatre, where a policy of remembering time, learned that her husband also received the same is lacking.viii diagnosis (Jovanović: 6). Also, the difficult socio- The culture of memory of Belgrade’s theaters political situation with the rise of nationalism and the depends heavily on leadership decisions and to break-up of Yugoslavia was on the horizon. organizational culture – not on systemic procedures, Henceforth, Bitef Theater and Festival are faced with organizational solutions, and long-term strategies. In the most challenging task of preserving institutional spite of the fact that all four theaters are city theaters, memory as part of its organizational culture. It is not their horizons of memories are different, spanning only that the world theater scene has changed, “that from the cosmopolitan to the very local. Those now every festival and theater is fighting for new horizons and other explicit and implicit narratives are theatrical tendencies” (Ćirilov, our own translation), transferred inter-generationally through all but that the world scene is now global and the previously-mentioned instruments, but most 25 specifically through stories which are codified and While the former has its narrative of grandeur, the shared in monographs devoted to theater latter trades on its small but experimental grandeur anniversaries. and world relevance, keeping its cosmopolitan spirit The challenges in transferring institutional both by its repertoire and touring. The other memories are biggest in theaters without a permanent narratives are more specifically linked to each ensemble, where a core group is lacking, and also individual theater. Bitef keeps its narrative of where frequent changes of management are bringing specificity and exclusivity, devoting itself to different programming policies (changing the previous contemporary dance but not practicing the art of theater identity). It is not possible to achieve complex memorializing its own achievements. The reasons why semantic memory from the sporadic episodic BDP and Bitef do not have clear narratives of memories of different persons and periods by creating remembrance (and even of identities) is due to the a story, a narrative to give a sense to the theater organizational transformations and managerial identity. However, all four theaters have a sentimental changes these two theaters have passed through. founding narrative, so that facts and stories from the Every new managerial period brought new aims and first period of their existence have become the stuff of repertoire policies, neglecting everything that romantic legends. happened previously. This also relates to the question JDP speaks about the devotion and commitment of of how theaters deal with traumatic moments in their the “founders from the church”, Atelje 212 speaks history, and with a heritage which in today’s context about its underground beginnings and “dissident might be considered dissonant. The traumatic events atmosphere”, BDP about introducing Western culture are not represented and discussed as such. through American dramaturgy, or Bitef Theater about This policy of oblivion is absolutely coherent when the triumphant legend of Trailović as a pioneering it comes to non-honorable behavior and acts – like woman. These sentimental narratives about the those prior to the forced retirement of Trailović in founding fathers (and mothers) are endorsed if Atelje 212 (when several other staff members also left, combined with the narratives about the collective like Beka Vučo and Borka Pavićević), or Bojan and spirit of their respective ensembles. BDP’s story Mira Stupica leaving JDP, or a group of artists leaving emphasizes the enthusiasm of the young generation BDP at the beginning of the 1990s. These non- devoted to renewal after the Second World War and discussed and non-recorded events, and the during the construction of a socialist society, while diminishing of the importance of theater salons and JDP’s story emphasizes a devotion to art and the coffee bars in contemporary theater life (as well as the artistic experience, i.e., to permanent learning and method of working which brings actors directly to training. rehearsals and performances without socializing) The other key theater narrative is the narrative of prevents the creation of institutional memory. This representation, importance, and social respect, which would also enhance the capacities of ensembles in JDP and Atelje 212 nurture in very different ways. dealing with controversial situations (such as the 26 actors’ strike against the director in Atelje 212), but policies might be decisive in this process. As our also the respective leaders’ capacities to understand research has shown, those policies are integrated in the needs of their ensembles and their sense of both artistic (repertoire) and managerial strategies collective identity, which they should nourish through and decisions. Memory policies depend, to a smaller adequate memory policies. If leaders create their own extent, on social trends and cultural context (audience memory policies and strategies which are not shared expectations), or the demands/needs of the socio- and are different from the organizational culture, it political settings. Theater management seems not would be probable that those activities will not survive aware of the potential of institutional memory in the next leadership change.ix preserving the good motivation of the ensemble, of keeping its spirit and ambition, but also of maintaining CONCLUSION: INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY AS A CHALLENGE TO the interest of audiences and public opinion, as well as NEW LEADERSHIP? using nostalgia and past qualities as part of marketing and public relations strategies. Although the last 20 years in Serbia were In order to preserve a theater’s identity new characterized by “the reconstruction of memories leadership should focus great attention on the issue of through official and populist monument projects” institutional memory, developing policies and strategy (Dragićević-Šešić, 2011), theater institutions did not of memory as integral parts of organizational culture. experiment much in this sense, maintaining their It can then be consistent in internal and external conservative policies of preserving the social respect communications, facilitating the marketing of the new and status of the theater as an elite cultural expression. repertoire and enhancing audience loyalty – but most Keeping in mind the transitional nationalistic hysteria of all, enhancing the collective consciousness of the and market adoration, these conservative policies ensemble, motivating them for new endeavors and helped theaters avoid joining those trends.x Memory achievements in the spirit of the poetics of the artifacts were used in order to safeguard the main concrete theater. At the same time, horizons of theater narratives, such as the narratives of excellence, memory of Belgrade’s city theaters and their quality and devotion. Only in cases of politically respective narratives might be important for general inadequate nominations or contradictory visions of cultural ambience in society, opening perspectives and ensembles and nominated directors were there crises preserving unique identities. and ruptures in memory policies. In cases when the mission of the theater has However, even in cases of consensus it was visible changed or become unclear (sometimes due to social that organizational culture and its memory politics and historical changes, but more often due to depended on leadership values and styles. Although it unsuccessful leadership changes in a bureaucratic is confirmed that collective memory relies on political system) it is self-evident that it would affect “agreement” (Sontag, 2003), it would be important in policies of memory, as there would be no clear the future to verify this hypothesis if leadership indicators about how to select narratives and episodic 27 individual memories for further integration into a aiding a profiling of the theater system in Belgrade as semantic comprehensive memory. Going back to the well as the reconsideration of the cultural and theater initial mission statements and values on which the history of the city, which still has its blind spots with theaters were founded would help in a necessary regards to Belgrade’s cultural life and cultural policies reconceptualization of the contemporary mission and as a whole. vision of development. A real institutional memory as semantic cultural memory would be created, also

[6]. vi 2003. ENDNOTES [7]. vii

[1]. i

[8]. viii

ix [2]. ii [9]. 212. [10]. x

(

- -

[3]. iii REFERENCES

[1].

[2]. [3]. [4].

- A. 2,000 [5]. [4]. iv

[6]. [5]. v

28

[7]. [17].

– [18]. – [8]. –

- [19]. [9]. [20]. -

[10]. - - [21].

[11]. [22]. - – – [12]. [23].

[13]. [24]. – - A. - [25]. – [26]. –

[27]. – - [14]. [28]. - [15]. [29].

[16]. [30]. –

- -

29