CEU eTD Collection
-
Yugoslav New Wave New Yugoslav Negotiating Self Negotiating In partial fulfillment of requirementsthe for degree offulfillment the In partial Second Reader: Professor Oksana Sarkisova Supervisor: Professor
and and -
management While Producing Films Central European Central Budapest, HungaryBudapest, Department of History Neoplanta Film Master ofMaster Arts Agnė RimkutėAgnė Submitted toSubmitted 2014
By
Balázs Trencsényi
University
Studio 1966– in
1972
-
CEU eTD Collection
full or part, page must form a part of any such copies made. Further copies made in with made copies accordance must page form ofmade. Further a part such copies any Copyright in the text of this thesis rests with the Author. Copies by any any by Author.process, either in of Copies text this in the thesis rests with Copyright lodged in Centralthe European Library. Details may be obtained from the librarian. This s uch instructions may not be made without the written permission Author withoutnot written the of made instructions may be uch the
may be made only in accordance with the instructions given by the Author the withby madebe only in accordance instructions givenand may the
CEU eTD Collection
m bureaucracies, central between cultural autonomy. relationship - self the seeing of of ways understandings different different by and informed management studio that strategies Wave New of the of variety production the in a interest their furthering explores in employed filmmakers it way this In 1971). Makavejev’s Dušan and 1969) Žilnik’s Želimir industry: film the of meanderings economic and which in manner two of process the analyze to order In production the on studyfocuses discourse, the and practice in oncarried was management functioning. of mode its through also - self socialist of project the further to supposed was which production cultural of type particular a cover to tries analysis the discourses, social and relations) administrative models, (funding practices social both on Focusing role. important an played industry film the which in policies cultural over conflict 1960s late the events, the of background - self process production of particular a kindorganizing specific a in actors studio the of players active the of one on focusing By Abstract Neoplanta Film
im. hs srtge wr nt eey self merely not were strategies These films. movies, following their development through the administrative administrative the through development their following WaveNew movies,
, this thesis provides an inquiry into the ways in which different different which in ways the into inquiry an provides thesis this , WR: MisterijeWR: organizma aaeet oils scey ee niinn and envisioning were society socialist management management not only through its film production but production film its through only not management – – i
early 1970s, was marked by an intensified intensified an by marked was 1970s, early h fl idsr. h imdae historical immediate The industry. film the Yugoslav New Wave New Yugoslav aaeet oils srcue by structured socialism management ( WR: MysteriesWR: oftheOrganism, - legitimizing tools, but were were but tools, legitimizing Rani radoRani , the film production production film the vi
socially critical socially
(Early Works, Works, (Early arkets and and arkets self -
CEU eTD Collection
m my to this thesis I dedicate feature important translating in help her for Horvat Franka disappointment) secret our for and thesis, this of drafts endless reading in patience Prof. T feedback.accurate I could not overstate my gratitude to Mihai to gratitude my overstate not could I for their suggestions. and guidance intellectual t like would I all, of First and process ofassistance the supportthinking in the owe I Acknowledgements is thesis his , Rév István i nput. existence My gratitude also goes to to goes also gratitude My also
Prof. Jacek Kochanowicz Jacek Prof.
of Yugoslav institution
ral isie by inspired greatly
of this thesis to a number of people who provided provided who people of number a to thesis this of o
thank my supervisor, Prof. supervisor, my thank o big a being for an with ended often other, other, whofinds way. another always he the Prof. n endless endless n , to mention just a few. I would like to thank to like would I few. a just mention to , names the the conversations Oksana S Oksana - ii Dan Cîrjan, Dan solipsistic .
about it agreement. I would also like to thank thank to like also would I agreement. ore of source arkisova
Balázs Trencsényi for Trencsényi Balázs
word chains that appear that chains word
for his moral support, moral his for and writing it. writing and the the had I heated discussions discussions heated
for her always her for
valuable and constructive constructive and valuable ih P with
rof.
asa Siefert, Marsha get el of deal great a
thorough and and thorough his his
which
generous to be an an be to
infinite infinite them (to (to CEU eTD Collection Bibliography Conclusions 4- Chapter radovi Rani (Early Works,1969) 3- Chapter 2- Chapter FilmSome Considerations 1–FramingYugoslav Industry: Chapter Theoretical Introduction ofContents Table
1.4 Re the filmaprocess as 1.3 Seeing statesciences social andtheananalyticalcategory as 1.2 ColdWar constructionof 1.1 An awkward case: Yugoslavia 3. 2. 1. 4.5 Self defense onthe 4.4. Neoplanta the film4.3 Tensionsindustry within power,4.2 Redefiningbalanceself of the redefining and Pro Opinion Markets Foreign 4.1 State, fessional spheres 3.3 Making thingspublic:andpublic radoviinternational Rani within the the national debating3.2 “Raniradovi”: self films: anon3.1 Documentary creating - self the 2.3 Dilemmasof centralized bureaucracy aself as 2.2 Culturalproduction powerto andSelf society”: Yugoslovenstvo 2.1 “Delegating ......
1.2 Collection of Publications Documentsand Documents1.1 Archival Secondary Filmography Primary Sources - defining sociology throughinterventions Intellectuals the of -
...... management in themanagement in plural
“WR: Misterije organizma” Misterije the “WR: End of Debate andthe Self
Neoplanta Film Film Context: Neoplanta andthe in Reforms Industry 1960s ......
...... - management in Fundingdebates:management in andPublic Literature
......
...... -
...... management model
......
......
......
......
...... - - managed industry: organizing local autonomy organizingmanaged industry: local through management withinthe andoutside courtroom
......
......
...... existent demand iii
......
...... - management
......
...... The Production Process TheProduction of - Management
......
......
......
......
......
......
...... 113 112 103 112 112 112 112 108 66 81 57 56 25 22 13 10 80 31 10 99 92 88 76 44 37 31 1
CEU eTD Collection
2 1 way” “third the Yugoslav of also ideas the but of dissemination support, financial only not included which Burma or India like countries s a had Institute Film the improvement, for need in still was cadres film domestic of education the when time a at Namely, situation. abnormal an be to considered she what regarding member anonymous an industry, film Yugoslav besetting difficulties the of overview detailed a In Introduction specific Yugoslav- to world specific contribution a as culture film specific a promote to attempt an pedagogy, global of example an called culture film context, this moral- “strong a as Yugoslavia establish to was efforts these of aim the it, put Tito Broz Josef As capitalism. Western and socialism Soviet thir both a from provide different model, to modernization attempt its from as blocks two the between maneuvering self Yugoslavia’s careful from socialist much namely, as sprang activities: endeavors these social of reach these global The organizing management. of way specific a in also the which fi applied through various in only not expertise infrastructure provide to trying was educational Federation Yugoslav larger a of part a just was school The 1965, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 48.
Slobodan Stanković, “Tito and "Non- Problemikinematografije. Materijalza diskusiju.[Problems Cinematography.of eparate school for film cadres coming from the developing countries of Africa and Asia and Africa of countriesdeveloping the fromcoming cadres film schoolfor eparate political actor in the world” the in actor political f h Fdrl oni fr dcto ad utr epesd e bafflement her expressed Culture and Education for Council Federal the of and the film industry was one of the elements of what can be be can what of elements the of one was industry film the and Alignment", 6 December, 1967, in: OSA, 133 - . 2
Such ambitions implied a complex assistance policy for for policy assistance complex a implied ambitions Such wide socialism. 1
–
self - management socialism. Within Within socialism. management
Materials for discussion], discussion], for Materials 5 - 9.
elds, but but elds, 1 d - . . CEU eTD Collection
3 local and bureaucracy state between relationship the as well as market of functions social and cultural the interpreting of manner specific a included It ion. product cultural and economic relations, social organizing of way specific a was it construct: ideological an than self country, Way Third leading a as position Yugoslavia’s Educatio for Council the Federal of School Film the as such expertise of networks international through Navigating one part ofwhat can be called a global socialist culture. of workings the into inquiry an also is analysis present the number, this of portion smaller self century: 20 the of experiments socialist important most the of one of functioning and construction socio its and culture which fo in worked underpinnings in way the of only not understanding better self socialist a within was culture film what of analysis the industry film the with of workings actual intersected they which in ways the and presuppositions these is It essential. - self to according molded and integrated be could way the and producers film of status the it, Within society. socialist a in industry film the of role the perceiving of way specific a presupposed They expertise. of notion technocratic neutral a including from far were they and education of notion neutral and abstract an from come not did attempts These ess numbered, census 1991 the that inhabitants thousand hundred two beyond went never population whose mos although
JovanMirosavljević, Novi Sad - management along with its contradictions and social tensions. Consequently, Consequently, tensions. social and contradictions its with along management t of the events in this thesis will take place in the small city of Novi Sad, Sad, Novi of city small the in place take will thesis this in events the of t 3
and although most of these events actually engaged a significantly significantly a engaged actually events these of most although and -
atlas ulica, Novi Sad, 1998. rmer Yugoslavia, but can also shed some light on the everyday the on light some shed also can but Yugoslavia, rmer n and Culture, or through the geopolitical meanderings of of meanderings geopolitical the through or Culture, and n
that will be the focus of this thesis. My claim is that an an that is claim My thesis. this of focus the be will that in which the film industry as a production process process production a as industry film the which in 2
aaeet rnils a deemed was principles management
- managed society can allow us a a us allow can society managed - management was much more more much was management - economic economic th
CEU eTD Collection
a conflict a time that at of result final the was just was backlash This cinema. Yugoslav of Wave Black the as recognized what with involvement studio’s the with had authorities Yugoslav underw it - self 1972 of by values socialism; and realities Vojvodinian of promotion the to dedicated in phase the of period short relatively the on focus will thesis this 1986, until 1966 from existed studio the Although situated. be will house production film the of analysis the that framework this within is It such realities to meanings social and “bureaucracy”, “state”, “market”. cultural specific assigning in essential self Hence, tendencies. bureaucratic against autonomies local s infrastructural complex markets: to assigned role a specific a on relied but only process, production the of not organization implied instance for schemes funding industry, connec administrative bodies. In this way, economic and administrative matters became intimately same discourse. same the through themselves legitimizing groups social various by shaped reality fluctuating different the and understandings self the the of and practice ideology the both of purity the with concerned members party line hard the een as an instrument of expressing the cultural needs of film viewers, they could bulwark bulwark could they viewers, film of needs cultural the expressing of instrument an as een ted with issues of cultural and social identities. Within my case study, the film film the study, case my Within identities. social and cultural of issues with ted - Neoplanta’s ridden period m period ridden
- development. It started out in 1966 as a film production house house production film a as 1966 in out started It development. management socialism. These conflicts showed the different different the showed conflicts These socialism. management arked by the gulf opening up between the studio and some of some and studio the between up opening gulf the by arked ent major restructuring due to the dissatisfaction that that dissatisfaction the to due restructuring major ent
first six years its existence. These years marked a specific a marked years These existence. its years six first practicesthat characterizedYugoslav self
3
- management discourse was discourse management - management,a Neoplanta Film management as as
CEU eTD Collection
wave filmmakers and ideological purists.ideologicalandfilmmakers wave New the between conflict ongoing already an of intensification an than more little marked - self a in films these of inadequacy and limitations the explain to endeavored he which in Film”, Our in Wave Black “The entitled wrapped- eventually were and a emerging started cinema Yugoslav in trends new the of “blackness” the to which in setting the on light some shed to us help may emergence its of story the contested, easily be may term this of usefulness the While 7 6 5 4 o markedof already conflict one had been various by term metaphorical the of emergence the determined which and films these of day. the of languages political experime to strived filmmakers Yugoslav of some Czechoslovakia, and Poland like countries European in Easter developments similar and Neorealism, Italian Wave, New French the by Influenced are considere tackle will thesis my that developments cinematic the cinema, of histories Within article. Only part of the discussions evolved around the question of whether the films of films the whether of question the around evolved discussions the of part Only article. Jovičić’s in out set the boundaries exceeded also but included, conflicts these of nature The European Cinema Commentary on ‘Black Wave Polemics: Rhetoric as Aesthetic’ by Greg DeCuir, Jr,” Studiesin Eastern comprehensive comment regarding these two definitions, see: Nebojša Jovanović, “Breaking the Wave: A one of the reasons why within this thesis I will rely term on thsuggestive e less developments in the 1960s, often bringing along the implicit opposition between filmmakers and regime. It is game at that “ideological” production supported by the state. However, there were more players involved in the cultural (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002): 66. the 1960s, and whose existence influenced the negotiation between the two sides.
This metaphor This Daniel J. Goulding, Liberated Cinema: The Yugoslav Experience, 1945 The approximate timeframe of these developments is the period between 1962 and 1972. This conflict too often limits the perspective to a false opposition between Black Wave a aog h ms iprat peri important most the among as d
time: the excessive amount of Western films that were invading Yugoslav cinemas throughout ic description is often picked up by cinema historians as a defining term for cinematic 2 , no. 2 (July 26, 2011): 161 – with nt the film form and its language its and form film the 5 up by Vladimir Jovičić in his eight page supplement to Borba Borba to supplement page eight his in Jovičić Vladimir by up
It was a certain pessimistic ting pessimistic certain a was It 71. 7 Most of the early years of years early the of Most
’ atce however, article, Jovičić’s society. management 4
Neoplanta Film d o post- of ods r another kind. r another - 2001 , as well as with the social and social the with as well as , , 2nd ed., rev. and expanded e
which characterized many characterized which New wave.
a Ygsa cinema. Yugoslav war functioned.
Neoplanta’s
films and the the and films
For a
6 round 1968, 1968, round Black Wave
References existence 4 .
CEU eTD Collection
8 The dissimilar. rather are have literatures two the that problems the interest, common Wave t in interest increasing an by paralleled is absences this self Wave New Yugoslav ndustry in socialist Yugoslavia remains extremely scarce, while attention on on attention while scarce, extremely Neoplanta remains Yugoslavia socialist in industry film the of workings the on research unfortunately, that, is focus a such for reasons the of Part thesis. this for background empirical the provide will that practices organizational and discursive of between conflict ongoing the in fore the to came which contradictions inner numerous by riven was framework this appear; however, could films wave New which within conditions the create indeed did industry offic cultural the by out set regulations production film the The etc. market, socialist on specific a of framework the segments within act to had chain different distribution how defined, be should industry film relationshi the how accessed, and distributed be should resources film how on perspective certain a contained infrastructure This Belgrade. to Asia and Africa from students film brought that objectives and values management were which schemes funding its especially and industry, film the of infrastructure entire the tackled that negotiation of process constant Sad: Zvezda film, 2 u administrativnom periodu [Organization of Yugoslav Cinematography in Its Administrative Period] lies on the period between 1945 –
One of the rare attempts was made by Radenko Ranković; however, as the title al - aaeet oils morale socialist management
iea hc i vsbe n oh eba ad Anglo and Serbian both in visible is which cinema
never tends to exceed the mere recognition of its existence. its recognitionof mere the exceed totends never 004).
, and and , Neoplanta’s
1951. See: Radenko Ranković, Organizacijajugoslovenske kinematografije - in - Neoplanta omto. t h sm tm, h cnlc ipid a implied conflict the time, same the At formation. lar, negated or supported the the supported or negated lar, particu in production ials responsible for the organization of the film film the of organization the for responsible ials 5
and state bureaucrats. It is this framework framework this is It bureaucrats. state and p between different institutions within the the within institutions different between p
- self same the by informed be to he development of development he - ao aaei. ept their Despite academia. Saxon ready indicates, its focus 8
Strangely enough, Strangely Yugoslav New New Yugoslav
(Novi (Novi - CEU eTD Collection
Wave the of account comprehensive a provide to attempt only the Regretfully, Wave films occupied in contemporary Yugoslavia. historical and tendencies aesthetic main the of overview general film. the over exercised regime the that actions repressive the primarily of prism the cinema through Yugoslav view to tendency a is studies these of drawback major the 12 11 10 9 an such of misconceptions and limitations the states clearly Jovanović by accurate and critique short The camps. ideological two between division simplistic the within Wave Black the analyze to tendency the against heard themselves made voices critical Some imaginary. scholarly our and culture pop our both inhabits that paradigm regime vs. dispa two of representatives the as regime Yugoslav the and filmmakers the depict to manages it Thus, post- the of problems points reference relevant and useful provide Goulding Daniel and Liehm J. Antonín and Mira by Studies simplifications. post to work on the premises of the totalitarian paradigm totalitarian the of premises the on work to DeCuir, Jr,” Jr,” DeCuir, Jovanović, “Breaking the Wave: A Comme (2008); Tirnanić (2008); Pajkić (2010). For an overview of literature on the Yugoslav New Wave Film After 1945 After Film (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002) and Mira Liehm, of Yugoslavia of
Some of the examples of such works: Škrabalo (1998); Musabegović (2008); Ognjanović and Velisavljević
See: Greg Greg See:DeCuir, See: Daniel J. Goulding, Liberated Cinema: The Yugoslav Experience, 19 45- Jovanović, “Breaking the Wave.”: 168. - 10 Yugoslav tradition of film critics and cinema historians show a symptomatic ten symptomatic a show historians cinema and critics film of tradition Yugoslav
English the for By contrast, many Anglo many contrast, By Studiesin Eastern EuropeanCinema
(Belgrade: Film Center Serbia, 2011). rate ideological traditions, and in this way it reproduces the unfortunate artist artist unfortunate the reproduces it way this in and traditions, ideological rate
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977). Yugoslav Black Wave. Polemical Polemical Wave. Black Yugoslav reader, Greg DeCuir’s Yugoslav Black Wave Black Yugoslav DeCuir’s Greg reader, uolv coasi wtot rsrig t eprcl subtleties. empirical its preserving without scholarship Yugoslav 11 - ramework of a a of framework the of out step rarely they however, ; Saxon works managed to avoid the allure of totalitarian totalitarian of allure the avoid to managed works Saxon
ntary on ‘Black Wave Polemics: Rhetoric as Aesthetic’ by Greg 2, no. 2 (July 26, 2011): 161–
Cinema from 1963 from Cinema 6
TheMost Important Art: Eastern European . 9
As Nebojša Jovanović points out, out, points Jovanović Nebojša As –
72 in the Socialist Federal Republic Federal the in Socialist 72 2001 71. 12 , manages to pick up the the up pick to manages ,
, 2nd ed., rev. and expanded situation that the New New the that situation Yugoslav New New Yugoslav
see:Nebojša
New wave wave New dency CEU eTD Collection
Trangressive Moments Kirn, Dubravka Sekulić, and Žiga Testen, eds., 13 the industry, film Yugoslav the organizing principles main the of overview an provide will It situa time same the at while large, at industry film Yugoslav of organization the of features basic the outline will chapter second The - self a of practices and discourses management society. of framework broader the reflected industry understand in helpful prove may process social a as production film of analysis an that contend will I interventions of sociology Eyal’s Gil on and history art in socio the on Drawing film. of history social a of writing the to related issues bureaucracy can - self one which in interpret way the to attention pay will I setting Yugoslav heterogeneous the conce to attempt an methodological In material. and empirical my organize theoretical will that presuppositions the outline will chapter first The chapters. four into argument my divide will I thesis, this within questions these tackling of purpose the For Black the Wave. of decline and birth the influenced social, which contemporary conditions cultural the and understanding economic at attempt any shun to seem they studies, richness the Despite films. Wave New the to related issues political or networks intellectual policies, cultural aspects, ideological on focus to tends research the of most mo of necessity Kirn Gal or Buden Boris like authors by accounts Further approach. medije_kuda.org, 2013), http://www.kuda.org/sites/kuda/files/Uvod%20u%20proslost_web.pdf from scholars and art critics alike. It nevertheless does raise topical questions to be tackled in the field.
See: Boris Buden, Želimir Žilnik, Žilnik, Želimir Buden, Boris See:
n o te akt Atrad, wl ades oe f h methodological the of some address will I Afterwards, market. the of and management debates as manners of negotiating the limits of the the of limits the negotiating of manners as debates management v mvmn. ept tee calls, these Despite movement. Wave New the of accounts nuanced re
(Maastric
ht: Jan van Eyck Akademie, 2011). The latter is the collection of the papers Uvod U Prošlost [Introduction to the Past] Surfing the Black. Yugoslav Black Wave Cinema and Its 7
ting Neoplanta within this historical setting. setting. historical this within
(Centarza nove 13 ing how Yugoslav film film Yugoslav how ing
tend to point out th out point to tend - material turn turn material
andGal
of these of ptualize ptualize
e CEU eTD Collection
w of two f The and reforms politics. Yugoslav identity market socialist of introduction the as phenomena divergent seemingly - self such between established connections a close the on of dwell will chapter this development Furthermore, the ered hind could which factors material the and framework, organizational this legitimized that underpinnings ideological similar to that of that to similar 1971, in conflict political tense of situation the in Released sphere. cultural the within power of balance the structure could which events historical on dependence their negotiations, Makavejev’s Dušan of organizma process production the following By actors. - self which in ways the of discussion a chapter, the of formation the to contributed processes these which in way the as well as produced studio the films of type the to related they empl studio the that strategies financial the on light some shed analyzing By films. short early Žilnik’s of reception and production the of nuances the to attention some devote also will I ,unit production film coherent a as studio the of workings the of picture complete more a as well as account historical comprehensive more a provide to order in however, cha Makavejev’s pter will be structured mostly around the intricacies of the production of of production the of intricacies the around mostly structured be will pter ollowing two chapters will provide a detailed account of the production process of process production the of account detailed a provide will chapters two ollowing WR: Misterije organizma WR: Neoplanta’s te orh hpe tis o mhsz te conte the emphasize to tries chapter fourth the , WR: MisterijeWR: organizma ( . However, despite However, radovi.Rani management discourse was conceptualized and negotiated by various various by negotiated and conceptualized was discourse management im: eii Žilnik’s Želimir films:
Rani radoviRani faced an immediate backl immediate an faced Rani radovi along with the complexities of its production I will will I production its of complexities the with along WR: MysteriesWR: of theOrganism Neoplanta’s Rani radovi 8
ra will trial Neoplanta’s help me to describe the divergent divergent the describe to me help
production profile. At the end of of end the At profile. production ( ash. The situation was in a sense a in was situation The ash. Early Works
attempts to employ the same same the employ to attempts aae fl industry. film managed oyed, the ways in which in ways the oyed, xtual nature of these these of nature xtual , 1969) and Dušan Dušan and 1969) , , 1971). The third third The 1971). , WR: Misterije WR: Misterije Rani radovi; Rani CEU eTD Collection
strategies of defense that had brought the the brought had that defense of strategies power. of selfsocialistdiscussionsabout WR
he polyphony of voices that characterized the the characterized that voices of polyphony the that obvious became it Suddenly, case.
- management could be interrupted through a simple gesture gesture simple a through interrupted be could management Rani radovi Rani 9
victory, they had no effect in the in effect no had they victory, CEU eTD Collection 14 experiment Rusinowthatremarked Republic TheSocialist Federal an viewedas ofYugoslavia be should Dennis War, Cold the of mark the bears itself, Yugoslavia as much very which, book a In An awkward 1.1 Considerations 1 Chapter would cut through this empirical complexity and a conceptual framework needed in in needed framework conceptual a and complexity empirical this through cut would Th socialism. managed - self of lines specific the along organized be to supposed was processes, production other like which, process production particular a industry, an also was it But production. cultural mo the Federation: the socioeconomic of the system in embedded strongly also were films superstructure, ideological an than rather hand, other the On organized. was Federation the which on bases socialist a were they media, simple than more citizens: Yugoslav among consciousness socialist a of formation the in instrument important an as regarded were films hand, one the On features. economic and social its of experi its Republic Federal the with shared it and characteristicscontradictory these for test litmus a was production Film case. hybrid a Yugoslaviaasmakes betweenYugoslavappear nationalist balancingandunity separatism in and freedom artistic socialism, and market solution best between the for search continuous A 1970s. early the and 1960s the for relevant - self the of character innovative the as well as context
International Affairs, London, by the University of California Press, 1977).
Dennison I. Rusinow, 1948 Experiment TheYugoslav . 14 –
The description, marking Yugoslavia’s specific Yugoslavia’s marking description, The Framing Yugoslav Film Industry: Some Theoretical Theoretical Some Industry: Film Yugoslav Framing case: Yugoslavia
is chapter is devised so that it may provide theoretical tools which tools theoretical provide may it that so devised is chapter is
en o epeso ad mas f uteig the furthering of means a and expression of means
vie industry was one of the most costly spheres of of spheres costly most the of one was industry vie mental, hybrid nature, as well as the complexity the as well as nature, hybrid mental, 10 - 1974
(Berkeley:P aaeet tt, s especially is state, management iet esrhp a constant a censorship, direct ublished for the Royal Institute of
position within the Cold War War Cold the within position CEU eTD Collection constructing them. constructing actively while processes these about talked actors social various how and up set were the context, Yugoslav the its within power exercised state” “the which in ways the both of account sensitive more a for allow might this thesis, this of rest the in show to try will I As practices. social everyday through state society, environment: social blurry otherwise an on distinctions these enforce that processes discursive and social of set a as perceived be should state the that argue and suggestions Mitchell’s Timothy up pick will I anthropology, colonial of field the from inspiration Taking market. and and state society, state entities: dichotomous seemingly between boundaries the of vagueness the to ignore tend they that reasonis main The state. the of definitions substantialist regarding s critical a take will I Studies, Soviet of field the from literature the with Engaging state. the of definition the socialism: of histories the on imprint their left have which issues full fa apparatus conceptual a developing While market. the and state the between balancing its on especially focusing setting, Yugoslav heterogeneous this of analysis an attempt will I follows what In positioncountry.Third Way ofcomplex the might that experiments theoretical any engender not did experiment Yugoslav the world, capitalist the or socialism state Unlike Republic. Federal the of economy mixed a debate theoretical a of lack relative the determined also blocks two the between position straddling its context: War Cold the within position Yugoslav’s of ambiguity historical the by necessary made is task this that claim might One embedded. was dustry in this which in Republic Yugoslav the extent, certain a to and, industry film Yugoslav the both analyzing
- self a in sphere cultural the of role the bout
lls beyond the scope of this thesis, I will focus on one of the central central the of one on focus will I thesis, this of scope the beyond lls manner in which objects such as the film market market film the as such objects which in manner
11 management socialist context or within the the within or context socialist management
and market are daily constructed constructed daily are market and studies and state state and studies grasp this this grasp tance CEU eTD Collection Production,” European Journal Of ouig n hi sau. aey sne ot f h pol ta wr involved were that people the of most since Namely, status. their on focusing macro underneath below, move to try will I one: previous the from spring will chapter the of part third The as such. text filmic and the film of analysis social a between gap the overcome to us enable might which process social a as production film of understanding this exactly is It consideration. political and ideological administr and economic the second field, cultural the the on constraints putting element in extraneous simple a show than more chapter, to try will I as Moreover, role. important an play considerations diverg a by defined agents, of variety of intervention the to subject being stages its of each with process social costly a is production film arts, fine or literature than more maybe complicities: social and intricacies specif the however, follow, will I thesis the Within enacted. this within which, in way the and constructed debated, were state or bureaucracy and market, as such elements production, production film of life social the thesis: present the of subject the provi de will which them accompanying processes social the and films 15 object an is product, end the result, final whose process social a as film the treat will I studies, cultural in turn socio the from inspiration my Drawing object. cultural a as film of understanding self Yugoslav understa in useful issues methodological the of some on focus will I chapter the of part second the In
Sara Malou Strandvad, “Materializing Ideas: A Socio nding how film and film industry reflected the practices and discourses of of discourses and practices the reflected industry film and film how nding - management socialism. As a first step towards this, I will reconceptualize the reconceptualize will I this, towards step first a As socialism. management - social constructs and follow up my social actors on the ground level, ground the on actors social my up follow and constructs social 15
consumed on the cultural market. It is exactly this understanding of of understanding this exactly is It market. cultural the on consumed Cultural Studies ative organization of film production was interwoven with with interwoven was production film of organization ative
ent positions and interests and within which, economic economic which, within and interests and positions ent
14, no. 3 (August 2011): 283– 12 - Material Perspective on the Organizing of Cultural icities of this process, its local local its process, this of icities 97.
- material in the the in - CEU eTD Collection 16 which bias specific the despite gained, Union, Soviet the of project engineering” “social o culture of function propaganda the as such questions it, within and done was system Soviet the of production cultural the on research that context offered. they which opportunities funding the and pol with associated getting in hesitant too never was which research of type a region, the on research scholarly structure did powers”, “great the of both involved which warfare psychological/cultural and Curtain, Iron the of sides two the on societies about information accurate more gaining of difficulty the blocks, two the between tension political The War. Cold the of context specific the in coherence its gained studies i The category 1.2 Cold War social sciences and the construction of the state as an analytical interventions. of sociology recent the by offered tools conceptual the of some employ will I production, eco social, their for account to as well as contribution their to justice do to Willing endeavors. theoretical our in inefficient prove might professions of sociology the of or intellectuals of sociology the of instruments Co society. in positions and professions backgrounds, of work the in involved actors the since study present the in pertinent more even is it production cultural of sphere the in researchers traditional a being Besides industry. film the outside and within intellectuals as status their of problem the with grapple to try will I production, cultural of process specific a in engaged producers, cultural were thesis this in included debates
Nils Gilman, Gilman, Nils nstitutionalization process of what was to become the field of Russian and Soviet Soviet and Russian of field the become to was what of process nstitutionalization
Mandarins of the Future: Modernization Theory in
oi ad utrl infcne n h poes f film of process the in significance cultural and nomic 13 Neoplanta Film 16 Cold War America
t a wti ti politically this within was It nsequently, some of the classical classical the of some nsequently, r its importance within the the within importance its r
were of a broad variety of of variety broad a of were question to be asked by by asked be to question
(JHU Press, 2003). itical institutions itical
- laden laden the the CEU eTD Collection (1980): 623– to Western economic plans, economic Western to workers self its 19 18 17 “hovering something as imagined manner, independent seemingly a in power its exercises which entity distinct a is state the scholars, of generations last the within Even society. and dichotomiespervasive well. as scholars socialist state by post- and Revisionist the beyond even started, have momentous more even is This state workinghave towhen context. onsocialism reconsidered be Yugoslav the of study the for relevant be may which approaches and frameworks theoretical cu and economic framework a using call, might foremployed capitalistsystems,different“variety aofsocialism”. Szelényi Iván what represents Yugoslavia However, Stalinist decades. a socialism state centralized the on focus to tends the of most non- and Western now, both by done Even research persisted. has system cultural etatist Soviet the of workings Inter Refugee Harvard the since times several shifted questions of type this to approaches Although prominence. particular contained, they
Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History University, Budapest, March 20
See: Mark Edele, “Soviet Society, Social Structure, and Everyday Life: Major Frameworks Reconsidered,” Cyrus Ardalan, “Workers’ Self Historical Global in “Socialisms in given Talk - management sc management - managed enterprises, the salience of mixed economy, indicative planning similar similar planning indicative economy, mixed of salience the enterprises, managed 38.
trl em) n a eaiey os clua plc. Consequently, policy. cultural loose relatively a and terms) ltural in the field of Soviet studies still remains the contrast between state between contrast the remains still studies Soviet of field the in heme of socialist society, was marked by an increasing autonomy of of autonomyincreasing an by marked was society,socialist of heme th - Management and
2014. 18
decentralization, openness to Western influences (both in in (both influences Western to openness decentralization,
since some of the analytical tools used in Soviet Studies Studies Soviet in used tools analytical the of some since 19
- As Mark Edele has pointed out, one of the most most the of one out, pointed has Edele Mark As Comparative Perspective Podium Discussion” at Corvinus Corvinus at Discussion” Podium Perspective Comparative Planning: The Yugoslav Case,” Case,” Yugoslav Planning: The Western scholars (even if for different reasons) reasons) different for if (even scholars Western , no. 2 (2007). 14 Kritika generations, to be reconsidered be to generations, Kritika nd, within this period, mostly on the the on mostly period, this within nd,
iw rjc, h itrs i the in interest the Project, view 17 World Development
Especiallyinthe 1960s,
8, no. 9 CEU eTD Collection oil gns ean eemnd n s and determined remain agents social the of strategies the framework this within terms, hierarchical strictly in them envisioning than rather groups different among struggles as resources for struggles these interprets Whi resources. these to access better have way, this in and, hegemony cultural and legitimacy gain to order in strategies of variety a employ groups different which in space, social conflictual a as appears field intellectual limitations. these of discussion tentative a for ground the provide may socialism state under production comp Verdery’s Katherine Romania, Ceausescu’s on Focusing perspective. dualist a such by posed limitations the of some from free not are analyses nuanced more 22 21 20 resources allocate to capacity bureaucracy’s increase impe central the that presupposition basic the with oppressor, independence. cruel intellectual of a saviors courageous as as groups intellectual state the of image narrow a on relying dissent”, of “narratives into translate to tends it cases vulgar more In intellectuals. and production as ev defined and be basically can between which society oppositions (a “rest” Such societal the and employed. state omnipresent actors social which strategies the and a
Romania Romania Societies 76. bove the society” that provides a major framework and point of reference for the actions actions the for reference of point and framework major a provides that society” the bove
Katherine Katherine Verdery, See: Katherine Verdery, Timothy Snyder, “The Ethical Significance of Eastern Europe, Twenty Years On,” erything that state is not) has important implications for the studies focusing on cultural cultural on focusing studies the for implications important has not) is state that erything
, Societies and Culture , Societies and Culture in East 23, no. 4 (2009): 455 (2009): 4 no. 23,
21 National Ideologyunder Socialism: Identity and Cultural Politics in Ceauşescu’s
Her analysis of cultural production in centralized state socialism starts socialism state centralized in production cultural of analysis Her National Ideology under Socialism: Identity and Cultural Politics – 60.
in East in
- - Central Europe 7 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991). Central Europe 7 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), pp. urrounded by the power and the policies of the the of policies the and power the by urrounded 15 le le National Ideology Under Communism aie f hs ye f ytm a to was system of type this of rative . 22
Under this presupposition the the presupposition this Under e aayi o cultural of analysis lex East European Politics & 20
in Ceauşescu’s However, even even However, and chosen chosen and
CEU eTD Collection antagonistic relations and an atmosphere of rivalry” ofatmosphere an and relationsantagonistic producing thus another, of expense the at rule, a as out, carried are sector one of favor responsib cultural and “social life cultural of organization centralized a in that out points Majstorović Stevan socialism state bureaucratic of criticism acute his in instance, For intellectuals. replicat analysis Verdery’s position, their explaining from Far assessment.Verdery’s with more agreed have not could 24 23 (cultural) the as such spaces, social other to relate mechanisms bureaucratic their and manner the reconceptualize to useful be might it Consequently, and cultural both in West economic terms, the limitations posed by both ideological and market requirements. the to openness the funding, of viewed mode be mixed mentioned may which factors of variety a by shaped was particular, in industry film and general, in production cultural Yugoslav resources. of allocation bureaucratic the of question the in reframe to enough important element was production market the of importance the extent, certain a To discourses. public of polyphony its and funding of modes mixed its with socialism) reform of forms many as well (as setting Yugoslav the for account cannot bureaucracy, of power redistributive the on emphasis its with model, theoretical Verdery’s Consequently, apparatus. bureaucratic state’s the to respect in attitudes nuanced more by marked and criticism state
Unesco, 1972), pp. 19 and facing difficulties of taking into account such “outside” influences as tradition. “Magnetic Mountain” succumbs to the same problem, with its actor
StevanMajstorović, Verdery’s work is not a single example touched by these problems. As Edele points out, Kotkin’s brilliant . 23
The problem in applying this analytical tool to Yugoslavia is that my social actors social my that is Yugoslavia to tool analytical this applying in problem The avant ility is replaced by responsibility to higher committees” and that “corrections in in “corrections that and committees” higher to responsibility by replaced is ility - la- lettre – Cultural Policy in Yugoslavia in Policy Cultural
21.
, the Yugoslav take in the field of culture was much more flexible, flexible, more much was culture of field the in take Yugoslav the , es one of the social and discursive strategies of Yugoslav Yugoslav of strategies discursive and social the of one es , Studies and Documents on Cultural Policies (Paris: 16 24
As a result of this type of V of type this of result a As s being directed by policies of the state, s “extra as the structure of cultural cultural of structure the in which state institutions institutions state which in
- tt” te already the state”: erderyian
CEU eTD Collection 26 25 functional organization, spatial of processes mundane in found be can effect state the of appearance the to contribute which Elements power. of resources generates that calls he what (or line that maintaining and producing dismissed; be to is state the of perception prevalent the that mean not does this However, maintained. is order political certain a which through mechanisms institutional of network drawn line a is it rather, whole; coherent and real ontologically an as exist not does state that argues, Mitchell Thus, law. vs. state or market, vs. state as such dichotomies, of sets other in uncertain is it as much as uncertain, is two the between line refer” they which to world external the from apart stand to thought are ideas or intentions which in way unproblematic the in society from apart stand to appears implement to attempts persistent the notices also he however, remarks, similar Edele’s to Contrary sciences. social in issues thorniest the of one been has spaces social other and state lim the up setting of difficulties the Edele, by analyzed carefully Studies, Soviet Beyond vague. too remain entity this of boundaries the entity, distinct and stable some denote to used is state the of o Mitchell analysis, his In institutions. state and mechanisms market between differentiate to us determine which categories conceptual the of and lines these of persistence the explicate might it time, same the At blurry thelines ofkeep track might approach this since framework conceptual Mitchell’s Timothy of use make will I purpose, this To market.
Anthropologythe of State:A Reader Pub, 2006), pp. 174. (1988): 58–
Timothy Mitchell, ”Society, Economy and the State Effect”, Aradhana Sharma and Akhil Gupta, eds., The Abrams, Philip 89.
a clearly set distinction between the state and society, where “the state state “the where society, and state the between distinction set clearly a
“Notes on the Difficulty of Studying the State (1977),” Sociology of Historical Journal
its of what the state is and how one should differentiate between the the between differentiate should one how and is state the what of its ,
Blackwell Readers in Anthropology 9 (Malden, MA ; Oxford: Blackwell bserves a certain paradox: while too often the notion notion the often too while paradox: certain a bserves 17
between “state”, “society” and “market”. and “market”. “state”, “society” between
a “state effect”) is itself a mechanism a itself is effect”) “state a
internally within a a within internally . 26
Yet in fact, the the fact, in Yet
1, no. 1 no. 1, 25
CEU eTD Collection zing social relations. social organizing of model paradigmatic a as market the propose to and post- the of limits the redefine to trying are how groups social on various focused have which neoliberalism on works recent in found be can approach this of instances the of Som e are. “market” or society” “civil state, what of definitions to “civil and state between relationship order the of vision specific a in implement struggle and debate groups various which through contestation of points state or society” “civil and state between boundaries these Moreover, day within but discourse, scholarly the within only not limits these reinforcing are practices and discourses specific that is highlighting in helps Mitchell What . function boundary this Project, economy ”. “grey the of d markedbysociety a and tendencies authoritarian its by defined state Soviet a between limits the out find to trying by framework: this up setting to contributed actively also has “society” and “state” focuse has which studies socialist state 29 28 27 society and state between divided fundamentally as world the of appearance the create which representations theoretical su administration, bureaucratic specification,
(Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2003). State
Jamie Peck, Peck, Jamie StagingGrowth: Modernization,Development, and theGlobal Cold War Timothy Mitchell, “Society, Economy and the State Effect” in Sharma and Gupta, The Anthropology ofthe , pp. 185. 28
Constructions Ne of
issident attempts or between state economy and the informal markets markets informal the and economy state between or attempts issident - setting activity had not just an explicative role but also its political political its also but role explicative an just not had activity setting s e nw rm nelcul nepie sc a te Harvard the as such enterprises intellectual from know we As oliberal Reason . 27
Following Mitchell, one might claim that a tradition of traditionaof that might claim Following one Mitchell, d on state institutions and the relationship between relationship the and institutions state on d
(Oxford University Press, n.d.).
18 evso ad uvilne s el as well as surveillance and pervision , Culture, Politics, and the Cold War
World Word Two state state Two Word World - to society” or society” -
day life as well. well. as life day n mre are market and
29 various
As S. S. As CEU eTD Collection ueurce sol itrc, vr o mre atr sol bhv ad a lat as least at and, behave should actors market how over interact, should bureaucracies m were interests and attitudes political positions, social various holding actors way, this In player. market a as behave to supposed was it which in manner the sphere, economic the within defined was studio r and negotiate to film trying were the industry within working people turn, their in Similarly, actor. cultural a and economic an as perceived was unit production film the which in way the institutions, cultural state to relate should it which in manner the market, socialist the on behave should unit, economic an as studio, film a how on presuppositions contradictory) (often included it but resources, distributing of manner a only not represented schemes funding chapters, following the I as Thus, conflict. institutional of situation a in position their defended and defined actors the which in way the structures, bureaucratic its or schemes funding administra the these circumvent or schemes, change to attempts funding industry, film the film of organization bureaucratic mean I fabric institutional By possible. production film made the which fabric only institutional the not also but underpinning actors various were of discourse they process: production film the of setting social part the within also place took discussions these market, the as such spaces social with interacted it which in manner the and state the of limits the Delineating industry. Yugosl the in present also were struggles and debates these form, different a taking Although 30 various also but constructs discursive elements. and devices infrastructural technological include attempts these remarked Collier
Press, 2011).
Stephen J. Collier,J. Stephen av context and bore an important significance on my particular case study, the film film the study, case particular my on significance important an bore and context av
Pos t- Soviet Social: Neoliberalism, Social Modernity, Biopolitics Modernity, Social Neoliberalism, Social: Soviet aking specific claims over how the market and cultural cultural and market the how over claims specific aking egulate the manner in which the role of the film the of role the which in manner the egulate 19 30
(Princeton University
will try to show in in show to try will icular tive tive CEU eTD Collection 31 a society civil vs. through state of instead expect: might we what than apparatus conceptual different achieved was about talked Mitchell that sphere economic autonomous an grass local a of instruments as councils workers’ the of importance the rule, bureaucratic a of danger the avoiding of ways possible as decentralization administrative and market the autonomy, local socialist the influencing debates the followed posed was state Yugoslav the of position the which in terms the Consequently, framed. were communities local and markets state, between relationships the which through discourse - self socialist the was It reality. social Yugoslav the shaped turn, its in and, actors social the of discourse the molded that society civil vs. state or markets vs. state of problem the not was it neoliberalism, of analyses contemporary in or case Mitchell’s in the of managing the within involved were councils workers how such, as production cultural of nature the on funding state of influence the funding, state and self how over howe contentions, The polity. Yugoslav the for centrality its on and socialism self of legitimacy the on administratorsagreed local bureaucratsand cultural t of - self of regardless shared, with dealing am language I that actors the of official most which socialism management the was framed were debates these which in language The Western capitalism. a as project socialistproject” “civilizational Yugoslav the influence devices market could how importantly,
1995).
Stephen Kotkin, heir place within the film production process: studio representatives, movie directors, movie representatives, studio process: production film the within place heir
- management was to be defined: the relationship between market revenues market between relationship the defined: be to was management Magnetic Mountain: Stalinism as a Civilization
31
ried to provide a third way between the Soviet socialism and and socialism Soviet the between way third a provide to tried that - roots
socialism. As a result, the state effect and the creation of of creation the and effect state the result, a As socialism. 20 self - aaeet otie bracay vs. bureaucracy doctrine: management (Berkeley: University of California Press, Press, California of University (Berkeley:
film industry. Unlike Unlike industry. film - management management management ver, revolved revolved ver, CEU eTD Collection of 481 Sociology1985, , 33 32 - self the culturalmeanings. different convey and milieus cultural specific within embedded are determinations, cultural specific within and markets show, to tried has sociology economic As objects. cultural specific of producers as role their was what moreover, and, market on the actors should behave how imbued ofconceptualization economic were with specific more much involved to, listen to supposed were firms that requirements different the structure, economic its of and studio film the of organization film of process the within of doctrine performance pragmatic the first, obvious: become conflicts and differences these which on levels two are there analyze, I that material archival the Within position their negotiated actors social these which through reality social the shaped and ced influen that concepts emic were these terms, anthropological In autonomy. economic local vs.bureaucratization mechanism, market controlled vs. bureaucracy state of tradition critical management market, vs. state or the economic infrastructure of movie production was integrated into a specific way of of way specific a into integrated was production movie of infrastructure economic the which in manner the embeddedness, cultural this of structure the within exactly glimpse a the of analysis my In Yugoslavia.of project civilizational socialist the to related people which in manners different with as well as trans and ethnic with connected closely was it polity: Yugoslav
1976, 329–
M. Granovetter, “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness,” Marvin Harris, “History and Significance of the Emic/etic Distinction,” aaeet otie a mc mor much was doctrine management 50.
– 510. - self the to referred industry film the within actors Yugoslav
32 .
- 33 production. As I will try to show, funding schemes, the the schemes, funding show, to try will I As production.
Forinstance, secondtheas chapter make willit clear, Neoplanta’s 21 e than an economic organization of the the of organization economic an than e cnmc eair r immersed are behavior economic film production I will try to provide provide to try will I production film Annual Review of Ant than pragmatic concerns: they concerns: pragmatic than - ethnic (Yugoslav) identities, identities, (Yugoslav) ethnic self American Journal - hropology management , CEU eTD Collection Attentionfrom the Economytowards Processes Economization,”of economic process; see for instance involved in it. it. in involved actors the of position the and process social a as status its both conceptualizing in me help would that framework a provide to trying turn, now will I that process this to is this it thesis, for analysis of unit empirical basic the provides it As process. production film the - self str discursive these the and doctrine of performance pragmatic the both However, interpretations. by made films important c fourth the and third the self- called entity complex this of elements different emphasized social actors and lines various along shifted be could markets and bureaucracies, autonomy, interpre be could which concept - self process: production film the in involved actors social the Secondly,thesedebates over self and fi socialism,markets and culturalidentities. toThislightcome will through administrativethe 34 scriptwriter the manner: following the in summarized briefly be can process production film the of scenario commonplace most The 1.3 Seeing the film as a process actors economic conceiving as ofstudios film conceptualizing manner sociali production, a specific st cultural
369 The creation of film studios as economic actors very much listens to the performative character of – 98. nancial organization of the production process. nancial organization of production the
34
- self Yugoslav between relationship specific a and hapters, focusing on the production process of two of the most most the of two of process production the on focusing hapters, , I hope to describe these oftentimes clashing clashing oftentimes these describe to hope I Neoplanta, Koray Çalışkan and Michel Callon, “Economization, Part 1: Shifting ted in different ways. The relationships between cultural cultural between relationships The ways. different in ted - ategies were embedded in the specific social context of context social specific the in embedded were ategies
management were obvious in the discursive strategies of strategies discursive the in obviouswere management
writes a script and (s)he proposes it to a certain a to it proposes (s)he and script a writes 22
Economyand Society management was an open open an was management
management. In In management. 38, no. 3 (2009): management management CEU eTD Collection as a Political Dissident: The Life and Work of Aleksandar Petrović 35 aside leaving while production film surrounding contexts economic and to social the analyze out set which film, of histories constructivist) social (or social are there hand other produc a as film the view to tends as well as analysis, content inter visual and cultural film, of aspects aesthetic the on focus to tend which studies” “film of term umbrella the under conducted works of number have we hand, of studies the in present equally is problem This “themselves”. works the of analysis aesthetic the from context social the separating one the as presented is gap this discussions theoretical conventional In after. and before happens what and text) filmic (the processes of chain this of end (apparent) the between appear to seems which gap the with do to has communication and art of histories of problems persistent the of One interpreted by film audience, critics, or party officials. text visual the of meaning the hand, other the On foreseen. be could troubles formal or ideological some because or censorship, preventive of stage the in members party diligent more of request the to according altered be could film the hand, reasons of couple a for case the exactly not was this but form, final its gained have to seem may film point this At followed. process editing complex a set; the on film the of version final the shaped crew film and actors director, and stage production al fin its reached film the funded, and approved Once decision. their reaching in them on relied who institutions, funding state to submitted are films the of descriptions short Afterwards, ch council; artistic the of and council workers studio’s the of opinions the for asks and script, the receives of (and Yugoslavia of case the In studio.
One of the more recent examples in the studies of Yugoslav cinema anges can be suggested as a condition of accepting it for production. production. for it accepting of condition a as suggested be can anges Neoplanta 23 in particular) the director of the studio studio the of director the particular) in
(Bristol: Intellect Books, 2012).
: Vlastimir Sudar, A Portrait of the Artist t of a single auteur. single a of t was interpreted and re and interpreted was cinema: on the one one the on cinema: . On the one one the On .
- influences, 35
On the the On - CEU eTD Collection (London ; New York : New York: I.B. Tauris ; Distributed in the USA by Palgrave Mac millan, 2010). 1994), Jamie Miller, Insidethe Film Factory: New Approach attempts to take into consideration workings of the Soviet film industry: Richard Taylor and Ian Christie, eds., (Psychology Press, 2004), one of the few works concerned with Hollywood economics. Also, some of the few Production,” European Journal Of Cultur out with music, an “art of mediation itself” mediation of “art an music, with out mean the of understanding reconfigured on rely will I Hennion, Antoine on Drawing such. as film object material the meeting the of one actor as well as studies technology and science in developments by mostly informed production, cultural of analysis the in turn socio recent the by offered aid theoretical the through gap this bridge to try will I 41 40 39 38 37 36 These signs. of universe and things of universe the between or world, symbolic the natural the between those music: on discourse the marked have which dichotomies chapter this of scope the beyond falls study of fields two these and its economy ofindustry abandoned largely film the in studies conce studies in role auxiliary anserving only toooften “context” with detached,relatively remain studies cinema of field . perceived and produced was it which in context economic and social particular the with interacted content its which in ways the and itself film the
Communication Biltereyst, and Philippe Meers, e interesting examples here can be self (Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2011).
Idem Antoine Hennion, “The History of Art - For a brief overview of literature in this field see: Strandvard, “Materializing Ideas.” Sara Malou Strandvad, “Materializing Ideas: A Socio The exception here are studies approaching the topic from sociological perspective; one of the more For instance, Arthur S. De Vany, Hollywood Economics: How Extreme Uncertainty Shapes the Film Industry ing of a film as an object. In the course of his theoretical endeavor, Hennion starts Hennion endeavor, theoretical his of course the In object. an as film a of ing .
3, no. 2 (1995): 238. Soviet Cinema: Politics and Persuasion Under Stalin, KINO, the Russian Cinema Series . 40 points of these two apparently disparate subjects: the importance of importance the subjects: disparate apparently two these of points
Evidently, for the purposes of the present thesis, this object is the the is object this thesis, present the of purposes the for Evidently, ds., ds.,
Explorations in New Cinema History: Approaches and Case Studies - rned with the analysis of film content, and content being being content and content, film of analysis the with rned entitled “new cinema histories” strand. See: Richard Maltby, Daniël es to Russian and Soviet Cinema al Studies
Lessons in Mediation,” Mediation,” in Lessons
- network theory network
14, no. 3 (August 2011), pp. 285. 41 24 -
Material Perspective on the Organizing of Cultural as a way of explaining how a whole series of of series whole a how explaining of way a as Réseaux. The French Journal of . 38 , Soviet Cinema (London: Routledge,
While a broader comparison of of comparison broader a While 36
These two approaches in the the in approaches two These 39 , it will suffice to point out out point to suffice will it , . 37
- material
and and
CEU eTD Collection constituted this constituted process. of materialization of stages, various their in ideas cinematic process the analyze will I words, other In release. the it at of form moment cinematic final and fixed seemingly its in film the conceiving to opposed collective the be will thesis this of object basic the Hennion, paraphrase To thesis. this of concern central the as process production film the asserting by insight this follow to going am I embedded. is it which in processes social oppositions these 43 42 film that remember we once clearer becomes complexity This analysis. of unit complex it is house production film the however, time, same the At artifact. film the is which result eventual the to contribute that forces and actors social other consideration the avoid may focus drawback this because First, production. film of underpinnings economic self as appear may choice This unfold. studi film the house, production the was process this within part central the played which institution The Re1.4 everyone unless object appear”. musical it making no in participates is there obvious: the besides say to nothing has criti a “suddenly false: is dichotomy this contends, Hennion As context. social its and film the between dichotomy unbridgeable seemingly the structure also oppositions
Idem Hennion, “The History of Art .
- defining Intellectuals through the sociology of interventions of analyzing films as stable products of specific authors and since it can take into take can it since and authors specific of products stable as films analyzing of o and it is within this institutional setting that the bulk of my narrative will narrative my of bulk the that setting institutional this within is it and o
a b oecm b floig h sca traject social the following by overcome be can
-
Lessons in Mediation.” in Lessons 42
His hint, which I will follow within this thesis, is that that is thesis, this within follow will I which hint, His
and the social, economic or political mediators that that mediators political or economic social, the and - vdn fr suy ocre wt te socio the with concerned study a for evident 25 :
239.
construction of the cinematic object cinematic the of construction
ory of the object, the the object, the of ory
self a relatively a self cal discourse cal 43 , as as , - CEU eTD Collection upre b Gl yl n hs scooy f nevnin” Wie hs appr this it that is contention my expertise, of sociology the of While purposes the for primarily developed interventions”. of “sociology his and Eyal Gil by supported be will endeavor an such thesis this of framework the Within “intellectuals”. of concept the namely fields, academic or artistic with dealing studies in employed be would which categ usual the regarding discussion the in engaging by tackled be may problem This group. social this ofconceptualizing ways possible the of problem the posing “intellectual”, or “artist” “auteur”, the of definition uniform and can house production film the on focus a that reasons economic and these social for is It others. than specific production film over influence to more hold could configurations, due them, of Some fields. political and cultural the di held who and professions education, of levels backgrounds, divergent remarkably of were who people, of group changing ever and heterogeneous a embraced of setting institutional The actors. of variety great a of participation active impl process this that emphasize to important is It evaluation. artistic and public in part active took directors affiliated and workers studio’s the released, was movie the after Even partners. distribution possible for look to one the was studio the plan, production the drawing were councils artistic and workers its equipment, technical acquired progress, in works and crews film managed acquisitions, fund organizing were houses production in studios film Yugoslavia, other as well As producing. film of process the in involved were which actors of multiplicity the is attention special requires which aspects salient the of One doof(but not release film in the of here). functions result end all which multiple performing industry, film the of point nodal the extent, certain a to is, studio
Neoplanta Film
held responsibility for coordinating a variety of activities: film activities: of variety a coordinating for responsibility held 26
should lead us astray from the the from astray us lead should fferent positions in positionsin fferent Neoplanta Film ah was oach ied an an ied ory ory
CEU eTD Collection 45 particular to opposed (as 44 knowledge universal to commitment certain a sharing as and symbols, or knowledge abstract manipulate to power the holding group a as identified often very Furthermore, politicians. and experts technical laypeople, substance qua understood were intellectuals tradition this In interests. material by defined values; universal and truth to another); or own (one’s class certain a to owned allegiance?” their own they do what to or whom to and intellectuals inter public conceptualize of act the to in lies focus way main latter’s a the allegiance, their for of terms in looking intellectuals was 1980s, the and 1900 between developing c from what shift a observes Eyal to intellectuals) of world, sociology (the group social a as intellectuals of definitions substantialist contemporary the in expertise of importance increasing the and specialization of effects the to century 20th early the of intellectuals humanist on accounts from Moving science. social European by defined were intellectuals Interventions” revi his In andsetting.the text film its between socioeconomic a supports it hand, other the on gap the overcome tobecomes possible thatit way ina itselffilm the of reconceptualization while, production film of process the in involved di of account heterogeneous nuanced more a and allows it hand, fluid one the oftentimes on field: cinematic the conceptualizing for tool useful a provides
Annual Review of Sociology
E Gil Eyal and Larissa Buchholz, “From the Sociology of Intellectuals to the Sociology of Interventions,” yal and Buchholz, “From the Sociology of Intellectuals to the Sociology of Interventions.”, pp. 121. vention itself. There has been a variety of ways to answer the question “who were the were “who question the answer to ways of variety a been has There itself. vention n e ald oilg o itretos Wie h scooy f intellectuals, of sociology the While interventions. of sociology called be an – ew article “From the Sociology of Intellectuals to the Sociology of of Sociology the to Intellectuals of Sociology the “From article ew
sca tp, gop r class a or group a type, social a 44
Eyal provides a historical outline of the different ways in which which in ways different the of outline historical a provides Eyal
36, no. 1 (June 2010): 117– 27 37.
–
y poiin o non- to opposition by 45
intellectuals could be be could intellectuals : allegiance could be be could allegiance : intellectuals fferent agents agents fferent or could be could or
- social –
CEU eTD Collection 46 tradition this in working scholars unifies What markets. and fields intellectual of sociology the calls Eyal what by provided is definitions substantialist such to alternatives the of One actually were scholarship, film result, as such. final film the ofuting to contrib the formation the from excluded remain often too who people, which in ways the of examples few a just are These outcome. final the creating in participating censors preventive of stage the in intervening those of position the is example telling Another Makavejev’s Dušan like films not was he director: studio the of necessarilyoper figure the by provided is example significant A people. many too to apply would Gramsci, follow to is one if contrary, the on or process; could who people the of number small a just to apply would symbols” or knowledge abstract manipulate to power “the as qualities such on focusing hand, other the On Yugoslavia. in institutions membe a time same the at was director film “independent” the which in cases schizophrenia”: “sociological of form certain a as recognize to have would definitions substantialist what by posed is problems to us as help used can characteristics qualities of defining set specific a nor allegiance of issue the neither However, qualities. stable less or more of combination a them assigning by were intellectuals who understand to attempt an as seen be can ualsintellect of sociology briefly, it put To power). or interests
(2009): 210–
Antonio Gramsci, “Hegemony, Intellectuals and the State,” hip: they would propose certain (essential) changes in the film text actively actively text film the in changes (essential) certain propose would they hip:
16.
ating a specialized symbolic language, but it was through his decisions that that decisions his through was it but language, symbolic specialized a ating culy nlec te rcs ad ucm o te im production film the of outcome and process the influence actually r of Film Review Commission, one of the few official censorship official few the of one Commission, Review Film of r WR: Misterije organizma understand film production or its actors. One of the the of One actors. its or production film understand 28 CulturalTheory andPopular Culture: ReaderA were launched into production. production. into launched were
46 2
CEU eTD Collection ol propo could actors various These managers. studio film the and directors the between worker, a and bureaucrat a between existed which hierarchies the to justice make not would producers” o the On interests. and positions divergent their to justice do cannot intellectuals of that as such category vague a production, cultural in involved all were they Although creation. film the of stages and contributions successful less or more whose workers) financiers, bureaucrats, (intellectuals, actors of variety a featured industry film the such: as production film with case the was this indeed, And, analysis. knowledge. wa this in and, “intellectual” term of the depersonalizes type this of development the in knowledge creation in the oforbecome actors important often can participate medical can conte social a within position specific a upon as qualification non- and intellectuals between boundaries the makes This claim. lay may expertise of spheres and affilia varying of actors many which to capacity a sphere, public the into interfering of intervention, public a making of capacity the to focus its shifts interventions 48 47 spheres. public specific entering of acts as understood ervention, int of modes of analysis an towards moved framework this within produced works the of Some contested. and created are values related space and attributions intellectual which a within recreating with engagement an and definitions substantialist of rejection a is
the Public,” European Journal of Social Theory Laurent Thévenot, “The Plurality of Cognitive Formats and Engagements Moving between the Familiar and understanding of “the public” as a sociological concept and of “making things
See: Eyal & Bulchoz. The concept used by Eyal has not so much to do with the intellectuals, between experts and non - and experts between intellectuals, e aiu itrrtto o wa a oils fl i, f ht h market’s the what of is, film socialist a what of interpretation various se
hr ad a itrcly oe eta tr sc a ta o “cultural of that as such term neutral more historically a hand, ther “interventions” were decisive throughout the various various the throughout decisive were “interventions”
10, no. 3 (2007): 409 (2007): 3 no. 10, 29 experts depend not so much on personal on much so not depend experts Habermasian y, multipliesy, actorsthe relevant foran 48
– Thus, sociology of interventions interventions of sociology Thus, 23.
xt: laypersons such as patients patients as such laypersons xt: understanding public“. See 47
tions, backgrounds backgrounds tions, Thus, sociology of of sociology Thus,
as with L. Thevenot’s , for instance, CEU eTD Collection this voices. capture polyphony of to attempt an also is thesis This script. movie the on bear should bureaucracy central that influence the of or market and socialism between disjuncture the of be, should function
30 CEU eTD Collection the accounts on accounts the in unnoticed remains usually which detail one is there incomplete; still is picture the But certainly was 1971 as so, Understandably screening. public from withdrawn soon was it characteristic, equally Film; Short and Documentary of Festival Belgrade the within critics, by received mo for Characteristically green prefer to seem (Croats colors representative suspiciously in colored houses their of front in taken are shots the All r which differences minute the emphasizing in insist who nationalities different of representatives film, the throughout talking persons real the from disembodied movie, the throughout unidentified however, remains, declarations passionate these gives which voice The nations. these of each for of love of declarations landscapes passionate with intercuts musical ironic monotonous somewhat by and Vojvodina, the with intercuts visual short by however, interrupted, ne different ethnically their and themselves understand etc.) different Roma, Rumanians, which Slovaks, Croats, in Hungarians, manner (Russians, nationalities the grasp to tries movie Godina’s Vojvodina, of province the on perspective Zdravi ljudi za razonodu short his through provide, to trying was Godina, Ačimović Karpo filmmakers, wave” “black studio the by released was film short a 1971 In 2.1 “Delegating power to society”: Yugoslovenstvo and Self Reforms 1960s Chapter 2
not the best year for taking an ironic look at Yugoslav interethnic relations. relations. interethnic Yugoslav at look ironic an taking for year best the not - Neoplanta Film in Context: Film Industry and the . In the midst of the film, during a routine routine a during film, the of midst the In Zdravi ljudi za razonodu. Yugoslav “unity and brotherho and “unity Yugoslav
st st ( aohr mr ciia ad sarcastic and critical more another, Healthy People for Fun) Neoplanta Film enders them unique and special compared with the others. others. the with compared special and unique them enders - elw Slovaks yellow,
productions, 31 - self their ighbors; Neoplanta od – ”
thesis. Located in the multinational multinational the in Located thesis. le Hungarians blue, Zdravi ljudi za razonodu Film - Management ; the director, one of the the of one director, the ; describing narratives are are narratives describing –
re, etc.) green,
was well was musical musical CEU eTD Collection Cultural Memory in the Present (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1998): 174. a sign of strength of the country the of strength of sign a and cultural as presented was Yugoslavmulticulturalism and embraced, be to were differences national that idea the on built was of federation politics Yugoslav prewar postwar the the assimilation, to opposition In itself. imagined polity Yugoslav which in way the in change essential an was eye cinematic ironic Godina’s of object the became What and strife. differences on debates ethnic lost amidst “ short the like just which, production close short this enlarge to try will I chapter this Within large. at industry film Yugoslav into and production, film of reality intricate the into country the of organization economic the with culture” Yugoslav “uniform a of development the - self linked Tito 1962 the May in Split at onspeech his in Thus, period. especially the of discourse management focused organization, social and economic of problems with connected intimately were culture Yugoslav overarching an and politics cultural between regional debates these Moreover, period. the of debates cultural the within element important an was discourse identity Yugoslav integrative an as story, the of part a just was a in brings suddenly company, production unknown relatively and small the for function advertising obvious an with film, the of reality the within rupture humorous 50 49 “ disruptively shouts suddenly singer a insert, eae n seta pr o Ygsa “dniy polit “identity Yugoslav of part essential - self an became emphasizing production economic of organization specific
Cambridge University Press, 2000): 283.
John R. Lampe, Country a TwiceWas There as History: Yugoslavia tel, Wach Andrew . 50
Within this perspective, it was a specific kind of Yugoslav socialism, based on a a on based socialism, Yugoslav of kind specific a was it perspective, this Within Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation: Literature and Cultural Politics in Yugoslavia .
49
Recognition of cultural national national cultural of Recognition Neoplanta 32 - up and provide an analysis of Yugoslav film Yugoslav of analysis an provide and up F Neoplanta !” shout in Godina’s movie, has been been has movie, Godina’s in shout ilm!”
c” Floig ios perspective, Tito’s Following ics”. , 2nd ed (Cambrid Film, Neoplanta differences, however, differences, aaeet which management,
ge ; New York:
short glance short !” This This Film !” , CEU eTD Collection Charter" was Constitu 1963 mentioned the Majstorović in materialized which seemingly society the to power delegating of principle The inof spheres social thesewouldwould the one which unfold.be debates po its Through federation. Yugoslav the of organization administrative the and economic the regarding debates with dynamics inter constant in were politics identity field, cultural the within debates inner to confined avije/ustav_sfrj_1963.html http://www.arhivyu.gov.rs/active/en/home/glavna_navigacija/leksikon_jugoslavije/konstitutivni_akti_jugosl 54 53 the became 52 it Region, Autonomous 51 an previously Metohija: and Kosovo of status the of alteration the was respect this in changes significant most the of One regions. and h central Party’s Communist the and government federal the of powers considerable the time, first the For life. social of s the to power government of delegation the self and centers making the decision the of expansion with the for calls conformity which society of organization full in [working] policy, policies, overall cultural and Yugoslav cultural on report non qua UNESCO sine his condition “a of is decentralization pages first very the in out points Majstorović Stevan As alike. spheres economic and cultural national, in exercised de the of catchword another with along came consciousness Yugoslav or yugoslovenstvo, of sort new a create would labor of division socialist the that out point to tried Kardelj
Unesco, “The Constitution of the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia, April 7,1963“(found online: StevanMajstorović, Wachtel, Lampe,
1972): 11. Yugoslavia as History 54 Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation : 181.
as it tried to legislate the self the legislate to tried it as
Cultural Policy in Yugoslavia in Policy Cultural
(last accessed: 8 June 2014) : 248. ierarchy were reduced to the specific advantage of republics republics of advantage specific the to reduced were ierarchy
litical import and its funding structure, the film industry film the structure, funding its and import litical - management model in all spheres and at all levels levels all at and spheres all in model management , Studies and Documents on Cultural Policies (Paris: .
33 51
- "Self the as known also tion,
hs id f spaainl Yugoslavism” “supranational of kind This cade: “decentralization”, which was to be be to was which “decentralization”, cade: n uolva, a rmnn faue of feature prominent “a Yugoslavia”, in ociety”. 53
Consequently, far from being being from far Consequently,
- Management Management management
52 -
CEU eTD Collection Contemporary Administration, 1963]: 68 for the establishment of establishment the for Cultural the case this in institution, state group initiat an as Starting Vojvodina. was in house established production film a issued, been had Constitution new the after years three 1966, In well. as level cultural the on impact its bearing itself, reproducing quickly was and decentralization of discourse overall be the questioned, might realities Vojvodinian on had legislation new the that influence the Although its much too affect not previous status. did Constitution 1963 by brought alterations the Vojvodina Court Supreme own its had it because independence juridical of level greater enjoyed Vojvodina that fact the or Nationalities, of Council the in representatives of number different a differences: consequential but minor some despite position similar a enjoyed Kosova and Vojvodina of 56 55 . leadership Republican the with agreement in done be to had this resources, own their use could they if even Republic; with tied closely remai ned and character independent an of not were however, finances, Its etc. Province, the of needs the to according institutions establish could they funds, of usage the for management, budget and planning indicative for responsibility held statute, own their had provinces level: local the on power decision of level certain a granted province autonomous of status the general, In provinces. autonomous two included now Serbia 1946, since status similar Kos of Province Autonomous
“ Srbije Republike Socijalističke Ustav The Constitution of the Socialist Federative Republ , the film studio under the same name could only be established by a a by established be only could name same the under studio film the Neoplanta, .
56
However, these changes were of greater significance for Ko for significance greater of were changes these However, Neoplanta Film ovo and Metohija. Together with Vojvodina, which enjoyed a enjoyed which Vojvodina, with Together Metohija. and ovo
[ Constitutionthe of SocialistRepublic of Serbia –
69.
was the Cultural Commission of the Province, the Province, the of Commission Cultural the was Commission 34 ic of Yugoslavia, April 7, 1963. v o te led eitn aaer film amateur existing already the of ive
of the Province. Formally responsible Formally Province. the of - self to right the 55
The two autonomous units units autonomous two The ” ], ],
(Belgrade: determination determination sovo as for for as sovo CEU eTD Collection Film ( films short that was them of One funding. state for contest the in part take to them allowing plan, production the into films these include to necessary still was it regulations, studio the of breaching Ud in reasons several were There of profile production the in set Neoplanta Film objectives official the with comply necessarily not did admitted, Udovićki as which, some were there films of list the In year. that producing ordinary the followed he repertoi studio, film the of report short the a providing of procedure for funding obtain to attempt his In Culture. of Secretariat Province’s the for letter a wrote Udovićki Svetozar studio the of director the directionsthese not of. towere subject violation be 58 57 in production film the when 1966, as early as However, . region any of specification without construction socialist of process the reflect to had films documentary the hand, other the on Vojvodina; of life cultural and economic was studi it as hand, designed one the On them. between relationship strenuous as the appear despite two essential tackle, to supposed was it which themes the to respect In films. short genre, of terms aims These policy. nationalities Yugoslav contemporary of structure studio. quaint the well rather reflected the of aims the define to right the had also which institution only
1961, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 97, p. 2. Neopl
Nacrt osnovnog zakona o proizvodnji filmova [The Draft of the Basic Law of Film Production], March 3, Svetozar Udovički, ed., Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use], vol. 1 (Novi Sad: ) “did not have market value” and thus films deviating from the official obligations of of obligations official the from deviating films thus and value” market have not “did ) anta Film, 1971) .
Neoplanta Film dcmnig h ms sgiiat vns rm h sca, political, social, the from events significant most the documenting o : 3 – the important part of the official production profile of the the of profile production official the of part important the
4. 4.
was supposed to focus its production on documentary and documentary on production its focus to supposed was
ovićki’s explanation as for why, despite the formal formal the despite why, for as explanation ovićki’s 35 58
Neoplanta Film re that that re Neoplanta Film
was just beginning, beginning, just was 57 Neoplanta
Officially, Officially, aimed at aimed
In In CEU eTD Collection ciiis of activities the of demise the on focuses which history film in Neoplanta Film circumstances economic and political cinematic, between intersection Neoplanta Film with films wave” „black the relationship the studio the into grow would politics cultural and rearrange socialism market between to attempts such years five of course the In involved. was production film which in politics cultural of type the determine could that constraint was constrain formal a than more was value” “marketthat intimated Udovićki’sexplanation relied. bureaucracies complex these which on project federal Yugoslav the and identities strategies managed legitimation of type this system, bureaucratic tough a in strategies survival mere than more However, documents. bureaucratic by set plan rigid the circumscribe an 59 - self the within tensions these management tensions economic doctrine: interwove problem inner to connected closely were functioning its and the of studio establishment the show, to try will I As possible. was films these of production studio the of budget the to up adding of way a provided studio the
p. 2.
Zahtev za obezbedjenje sredstava [Request for Provision of Funds], 22 October, rte mds atmt ht aaes of managers that attempt modest rather d
to tackle and to reconfigure the relationship between market socialism, regional socialism, market between relationship the reconfigure to and tackle to Neoplanta Film
and its production. However, rather than following the common narrative common the following than rather However, production. its and
being among them. In what follows I will attempt to outline the the outline to attempt will I follows what In them. among being Zdravi ljudi za razonodu I il ees te nl ad try and angle the reverse will I , 36 Neoplanta Film Black Wave Black and its conspicuous advertisement for for advertisement conspicuous its and
and the suspension of the the of suspension the and
to understand how the the how understand to a md i odr to order in made had
s and cultural patterns. s and cultural 1966, in: AV, F430, box 12, . 59
This was just a first first a just was This
which surrounded surrounded which ’s involvement ininvolvement ’s t, it it t,
CEU eTD Collection - self of development the at aiming t accordancetoin went 1956.law ThisissuedLawin Film BasicThe was production film Yugoslav the for value formative a had which acts legislative the of One self Yugoslav of what vision reflec a were producers film for set objectives economic the and legislation new the industry, film the of organization The studio. specific a of structure the effected exa the (as only not was it where well, as production film the of level micro the on present were concerns similar Naturally, industry. film Yugoslav the of situation institutional and broac Culture and of boundaries the exceeded Education of Ministry Federal The production 1965 By matter. particular this to dedicated institutions film of underpinning economic the with 60 economy” film our in industry them, of branches youngest For the of “one production. was industry film the of problems financial the with deal to supposed was which Cinematography, of Council the branch, separate a had Commerce of Chamber Federal the that reason this for is It activity. economic an was prod uction film it: to aspect more one was there organized, and envisioned was production film which in ways the for crucial were ideas these of all Although man”. “socialist the of type particular a of creation of dissemination the with concern limited the beyond went production film perceived leaders Yugoslav which in way The through centralized bureaucracy 2.2 Cultural production as aself
S5, p 1.
Materials of the discussion on the growth of the film industry in 1964 mple of Udovićki’s letter had shown) a matter of pragmatic bureaucratic survival, as it as survival, bureaucratic pragmatic of matter a shown) had letter Udovićki’s of mple
hed a discussion which largely focused on the financial, administrative administrative financial, the on focused largely which discussion a hed - management is management and what values it should advocate. - management structures, increased decentralization,increasedmanagementstructures,and managed industry: organizing local autonomy autonomy local organizing industry: managed
oils vle, rmto o self of promotion values, socialist 37 –
1970, July 1963, in: AJ, F405, box he ongoing reforms reforms ongoing he - management, or or management, . 60 tion of a larger a of tion
This concern This
CEU eTD Collection 61 1961 In experience. practical of dearth the as well as infrastructure material proper a of lack the was industry film Yugoslavthe oint elements market thatof introduction fluent a prevented constraints the of one factors, other Among reality. becoming from away far still were provisions its issued, was Law the after years ten even that was problem major The local communities, inc and economic their towards delegation besides power and autonomy increased implied that, also function, administrative devices complex as seen were decentralization production, cinematic affected that reforms the Within production. film rationalizing while efficiency their increase to expected were which enterprises, production film on constraint budget hard a imposed subsidies state of cut sudden this hand, other the On do. to unable be to considered was bureaucracy state centralized a that something was it consumers; cultural local of needs the and trends artistic both to flexibly more respond to able be would it re a such Officially, production. film over exercise could provider, funds main the as state, that powers the reduce to expected was box their from survive to supposed owner legal the were (who studios Film production. film 1957 (17 taxes subsi state of abolition the was Film on Law the of element key The activity. economic of spheres various into incentives market of introduction the
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002): 37.
Daniel J. Goulding, Liberated Cinema: The Yugoslav Experience, 1945 . 61 Avala Film
The adoption of such a law meant an essential change in the market structure of of structure market the in change essential an meant law a such of adoption The –
25%) on film admission tickets; these measures became effective in early early in effective became measures these tickets; admission film on 25%) ut ie n h Self the in like just , the biggest film studio in Yugoslavia, experienced a loss of 243 million million 243 of loss a experienced Yugoslavia, in studio film biggest the , luding national publics. luding national - office revenues. Officially, this take on the film industry industry film the on take this Officially, revenues. office - aaeet hre, akt ad administrative and markets Charter, management form would provide for a livelier cinematic life, as life, cinematic livelier a for provide would form
38
- 2001 o te im wr suddenly were film) the of s is n ao o a ytm of system a of favor in dies , 2nd ed., rev. and expande d CEU eTD Collection a debt reaching up to 700 million dinars million 700 to up reaching debt a enterprise an save to order in credit temporary a provide to state the for practice common a was it however, money; the returning of obligation the without done be could bailouts the of Some state. 64 63 62 as it regard did and production film of period” “administrative the regarding critical highly remained Culture and Science Education, of Council the the by issued discussions control; state increasing implied means no by however, solutions, envisioned The film its of efficiency industry. the increase and rationalize to Yugoslav ways that finding concern in had the government underestimate hardly can one case, each in play at been which and 1960s caused the throughout place taking was which television of popularity the mind in keep also should We network. distribution film inefficient an or underdevelopment fo with coproductions risky of result the be could it another: to enterprise film one from Croatian (like bankrupt situat general the reflect do nevertheless they production, film feature risky in engaging were which studios film biggest the by generated be only could losses significant such that mind in bear to has one dinars;
1965, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 37. 1965, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 37
Goulding, Problemikinematografije. Materijalza dis discussion], for Materials Cinematography. of [Problems diskusiju. za Materijal kinematografije. Problemi eg cmais o o mr sseai polm sc a pritn technical persistent as such problems systematic more of or companies, reign
Jadran Film sed dcie n h nme o fl viewers film of number the in decline steady a
Liberated Cinema . As a result of these lenient policies, by the end of 1963 of end the by policies, lenient these of result a As .
in the same period same the in Zora FilmZora : 64. ion in the film industry. While some of the studios could go go could studios the of some While industry. film the in ion
), in most of the cases enterprises were bailed out by the the by out bailed were enterprises cases the of most in ), –
kusiju. [Problems of Cinematography. Materials for discussion], 38.
lost approximately 380 million dinars million 380 approximately lost . 63
39 The reas The ons of such difficult situations difficult such of ons . 64
Whatever reasons might have have might reasons Whatever Avala Film
. 62 an obstacle an
Although Although
varied
had had CEU eTD Collection uvv b themselves. by survive limit and market, cultural the of underdevelopment the producers, film foreign with working in experience of lack the base, technical developed insufficiently an of situation the in that however, clear, was It main the of one be to continued tonomyau market and control centralized bureaucratic between conflict the sphere, public the within and actors most of discourse the Within policies. and institutions reorganizing and hold, may institution or actor each that responsibility e industry, film the plaguing were which problems the of nature enterprise the of success commercial the to according donations more state of allocation of the as development such policies, the effective hinder to continued system production film previous the of remnants some fact, in production; cinematic for structure economic rational more a of 67 66 65 simply not did markets discourse, official the despite films, documentary on discussion l at indispensable, was state the of side the from assistance Financial production. cultural of types other of most than investments higher significantly required which industry film state the for true especially direct through achieved be of rid get only only could one intervention: could organize, to were decentralization growth. for
this, see Chapter 2 in this thesis. set of incentives which corresponded to both market success and the artistic value of the film. For more on 1965, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 2. This kind of policy was soon reviewed, and the state introduce 1965
Majstorović, discussion], for Materials Cinematography. of [Problems diskusiju. za Materijal kinematografije. Problemi discussion], for Materials Cinematography. of [Problems diskusiju. za Materijal kinematografije. Problemi , in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 1. topoi 65 Cultural Policy in Yugoslavia Policy Cultural
In their view, not only did statist policies previously impede the development development the impede previously policies statist did only not view, their In .
east for a foreseeable period of time: as I will show through the the through show will I as time: of period foreseeable a for east 67 .
66
To a certain extent, the autonomy that markets and and markets that autonomy the extent, certain a To Rather, a way out was to be found by understanding the the understanding by found be to was out way a Rather, ed cultural consumption, such cultural institutions c institutions cultural such consumption, cultural ed
: 23. : central bureaucracy through bureaucracy. This was was This bureaucracy. through bureaucracy central
40 tmtn te hr of share the stimating ould not not ould d a CEU eTD Collection o rdc cmisoe dcmnais “hog dcmnais e il acquire will stability” we economic documentaries “through documentaries; commissioned produce to possibilities more for hoping was Udovićki Svetozar Council Worker‘s the of meetings the advance, in arranged was payment the providing thisin way a stable revenue. Kn and estimate, to easy was films short such for price production The factories. as such enterprises, particular by ordered were films of branch This so of production the was stable most the and first The output. its characterized which production of types three were There model. From a financial point of view, two next the chapters. in analyze will I which films both with case the be will This industry. the of debates strategic the in interference bureaucratic against arguments as used be could 68 with associated directors the of some of aspirations self economic implications: political and cultural important had production of mode mixed this issue, economic simple a being from Far market. and control state between tottering production, of mode mixed curious a to lead support state - self financial towards industry film directing of Efforts autonomy. studio’s the and support state between balance the keep to how of question s management self a into reforms market of Introduction created. be to had they cases some in existed, tdo n civn is iso a a im rdcr ersnaie f oils Vojvodina. socialist of representative producer film a as mission its achieving in studio
Minutes of the meeting of the Worker’s Council
ociety brought not only a promise of a better future, but also did pose the the pose did also but future, better a of promise a only not brought ociety Neoplanta’s . 68
Stable as it as Stable production profil production Neoplanta Film was, this type of films could neither satisfy the artistic artistic the satisfy neither could films of type this was, owing this it comes as little surprise that in one of of one in that surprise little as comes it this owing , 7 Febru - called commissioned films and documentation. and films commissioned called 41 e was the most secure: in most of the cases
is a tellin ary, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 53, p. 3. Neoplanta Film sufficiency while providing constant constant providing while sufficiency g example of the workings of such a a such of workings ofthe g example - eine n stable and reliance , nor could it help the the help it could nor ,
revenues - CEU eTD Collection Internal Use] Indicators of Regular Authors Films”], in: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For eedn o sae udn. o isac, h ms sgiiat ore o icm for of income producers of sources significant most the instance, For funding. state on dependent ofte were they and own, their of market a have not did films short out, pointed had Udovićki As predictable. less considerably was it if even necessary, filmsdeemed was feature 71 70 69 bro even and completely loss this covered films short commissioned from income However, Neoplanta’s was dinars (18%) 600 705 and state, Neoplant the of side the from support of kinds various as came (72%) dinars 000 758 2 (10%), dinars 266 385 brought sales the following: the t on account the Thus, revenue of revenue expected an Nevertheless, profitable. considerably being as production film feature its financial 1971 by that however, true, the is It anticipated. be only could outcome consequently, and, yet over not was films feature the of many of period by production of kind this of account comprehensive a provide to difficult rather is It output. of type predictable least the and last the was films feature of production The
autorski Wave. Towards the end of the 1960s
“Rekapitulacijafinansijskog pokazateljaredovnih Minutes of the meeting of the Worker‘s Council, 27 December, 1966, in: AV, F430, box 53, p. 3. The usage of the term corresponded to that of relying solely on the 1971 data. One of the reasons is that by that time the exploitation exploitation the time that by that is reasons the of One data. 1971 the on solely relying ught modest revenue for ught short the productionat large. modest section film frotn n h dsrbto poes cneunl, they consequently, process; distribution the in forgotten n
film, and a supporter of the unique personal vision of the film director. a’s : 134. production of the two other two the of production WR: MisterijeWR: organizma (
he production of short of production he own input in the overall production cost. Despite generous state support and and support state generous Despite cost. production overall the in input own own efforts, the concluding result was a generated loss of 474 957 dinars 957 474 of loss generated a was result concluding the efforts, own autorski
ouetr films documentary Neoplanta autorski WR: MysteriesWR: ofthe Organism
types of films: short films: of types was asserting itself exactly as producer which promotes auteur autorski
ee tt awards. state were films since the establishment of the studio was was studio the of establishment the since films 42
in the thought associated with the French New h filmova” [“Recapitula autorski 70 In 1971, the financial financial the 1971, In
Neoplanta tion of the Financial 69
) was also included included also was ) documentaries and and documentaries were
uh more much Neoplanta’s did present present did
. 71
CEU eTD Collection of the complex net of connections between a a between connections of net complex the of co foreign and domestic through secured funds on and abroad, and home at festivals film from awards financial acclaim, critical expected show, Neoplanta will analyze I that studies case the As limited. relatively as considered be can it but part, important an played films feature of production the into funds state the of input when Wave the of infrastructure existing already the into studio the incorporate did of image the creating in steps first the of the one was shorts critical through socially of productions early incurred The productions. losses the for compensating were films Commissioned unit. production film integral an as studio the of workings financial the in closely intertwine did production of types different these to related factors of variety The 72 Neoplanta’s co costs; overall of 26.84% covered Province the of Commission Cultural The stated. clearly be could sources funding the level, general more a on However, financing. of history unique a had them of most sense this in which in ways of variety the is production film feature the of scheme financial the in patterns the generalizing of way the in standing problem Another withdrawn point. that at consideration into taken not was was income any bring could it before film screening the that fact the estimates; preliminary these into
Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] “Finansiranje dugometražne proizvodnje” [“Financing of the Feature Film Production”], in: Svetozar Udovički,
The source of funding for the rest 8% of the overall film cost at that moment was still unclear. See:
film. The critical acclaim that these films received was of considerable importance considerable of was received films these that acclaim critical The film. Neoplanta Film often would rely on such divers factors as the r the as factors divers such on rely would often
own working owncapital working
Neoplanta ea raiig t abtos n h faue film feature the in ambitions its realizing began . 72 as a producer of socially critical, modernist mo modernist critical, socially of producer a as
- producti 43 on partners brought 29.60% and 35.70% was was 35.70% and 29.60% brought partners on variety of factors such as the type of funding, of type the as such factors of variety - productions. These are just a few features few a just are These productions. : 271.
eputation of the film director, film the of eputation feature films could be funded; be could films feature autorski production. The The production. Yugoslav New New Yugoslav
from public public from hr film short vies and vies CEU eTD Collection diitrd y h sae to state the by administered period transitive allegedly the underpinning reasoning economic The self the of Dilemmas 2.3 Neoplanta Film 1971 by that determined factors these among navigation apt an evaluation.However, peer and production film of field autonomous relatively a of development the and government the of policies cultural and financial the time, that at infrastructure film the of state the arching discourse which focused on the shortcomings of a centralized, “statist” “statist” positions. incompatible provide fora common ground otherwise centralized, a over this was of It industry. shortcomings film the of the organization on focused which discourse arching over dominant a by balanced were however, tendencies, These policy. cultural Yugoslav of managers the for dilemmas irresolvable seemingly and contradictions numerous raised which tendencies evinced below” “from culture socialist a of development the However, lines. these along organized be to supposed was culture and below”, “from socialism of - self the stat the of of away “withering of ideal distant its with socialism, ideology The also culture. cinematic was the but invigorate production, to film supposed in encountered problems economic the for solution of kind wa source funding main the as state the of role the Refusing particular - self a a in on culture relied how of also understanding but concerns, economic and administrative fil the of apparatus bureaucratic the ofrole the reduce to enthusiasm strong The film. Yugoslav the of reforms the driving were which motivations
was one of the few financial solvent Yugoslavia.studios film of in financial few was the one - management model management
self a - ein fl production film reliant aaeet oils scey hud evolve. should society socialist management 44
- arc m production was based not only on only not based was production m hing discourse which managed to to managed which discourse hing s meant not only to provide a a provide to only not meant s e” was essentially an ideology an essentially was e” , provides just a part of the the of part a just provides ,
from a film industry film a from management management
- CEU eTD Collection important means, with far reaching consequences, was to increase the accessibility of the the of accessibility the increase to was consequences, reaching far with means, important most the of One production. film of field the to applied once forms specific took approach indirect on development influence cultural an only exert could value surplus of creation the the to because contributed such, who workers as socialism of principles against went elites cultural and political same the at public the of and authorities the of interests the observe to forced are they as it), explains Мајstorović as culture” eyed - cock (“a ambiguous be to out turns producers cultural the of situation The art. of arbiters of position the in put suddenly are who bureaucrats the by imposed criteria subjective by rather but judgment, unbiased the by not directed is culture of sphere “statist” The mediocrity. of price the at come would standards these meeting if even conformity”, of cultural political, and “ideological of supervision strict the on focus to tend did asserts, Мајstorović bureaucracy, state hierarchical the of bodies controlling 74 73 ideologica the of elements key the of one was this possible; as democratic as was sphere cultural the that ensure to important was it policy cultural Yugoslav for tendencies, bureaucratic these to contrast By structures administrative higher to them assigning by responsibilities soci abandon cultural to deemed also was only but not harmful, was economically be production to cultural considered of field the over control administrative Excessive C of policy. cultural Study on report UNESCO his the in Serbia, of for Republic Socialist the of Institute Development the of director Мајstorović, Stevan by analyzed deftly are sphere cultural managed bureaucratically and centralized a of problems The
Unesco, 1972): 19.
Majstorović, StevanMajstorović, Cultural Policy in Yugoslavia Policy Cultural
Cultural Policy in Yugoslavia in Policy Cultural bss f uolv self Yugoslav of basis l being deprived power being making of decision any : 22. :
, Studies and Documents on
time. In addition to that, the establishment of establishment the that, to addition In time. 45 - management. However, such an an such However, management. Cultural Policies (Paris: (Paris: Policies Cultural and aesthetic percepts aesthetic and . 74
. 73 l and al ultural ultural
The The CEU eTD Collection 77 76 75 public and experts both by delivered be to inefficient.had particular in production and cinematic and general false in production cultural morally of judgment as deemed was countries socialist state in works artistic of evaluation the in held bureaucrats state that monopoly the context, Yugoslav the Within level. high qualitatively a of culture socialist lively a for important as seen were which criteria other were there production, film grassroots of encouragement the Besides was . established studio the before time some Sad Novi in active was which name, same the under f the Beograd; Klub Kino of collaborators and Makavejev) Dušan as (such directors important the of some did only Not institutionalized. Yugoslav the of basis informal the this became and in professionalized increasingly learning becoming were started environment who amateurs 1960s the By culture. amateur technical film this of usage the Gradually cine into evolved infrastructure properly. handled be would technique the recalls Žilnik ir Želim As films. make and it use to without learn to possibility a had occupation, primary her willing, or his to regard anyone and disposal, their at filming for assets basic the had centers infrastruct technical sphere in Yugoslavia was relatively open for discussion and conflicting opinio conflicting and discussion for open relatively was Yugoslavia in sphere
kinematografije [Economic Situation of Cinematography], March 7, 1969, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 97. studio), Sarajevo (Studio film), Pristina (Kosmet film), etc. For more information see: Ekonomski položaj
Majstorović, Film Neoplanta A talk given in Central European University, Budapest, on February 28th, 2013. novi film 76 C ultural Policy in Yugoslavia Policy ultural
was not a single case; institutions of similar origin appeared . Neoplanta Film r ncsay o flmkn. bg ubr f rsros cultural grassroots of number big A filmmaking. for necessary ure Neoplanta Film 75 ilm production house as such was preceded by the amateur group group amateur the by preceded was such as house production ilm , such centers were barely supervised, the only concern being that that being concern only the supervised, barely were centers such , - clubs and contributed to the increasing importance of the the of importance increasing the to contributed and clubs
: 20. : is an important case of how such activities could be be could activities such how of case important an is
emerge from the flourishing amateur circles such as as such circles amateur flourishing the from emerge
. 77 46
As a consequence, by the 1960s the public public the 1960s the by consequence, a As in Zagreb (Filmski (Filmski Zagreb in
ns. The list of of list The ns. autorski
The The CEU eTD Collection - self of ideology the Neoplanta’s the of influence the other, the on and, production cultural of process the in involvement workers’ increasing , between tension certain a was there that true nevertheless is It and her/his production house on safer ground. Throughout the 1960s this was true true was this 1960s regardless theof whether the Throughout ground. safer on house production her/his and him both put would name his critics, professional among recognition gaining was director grounds. political on criticized acclaim being critical the Moreover, was film the once handy, especially become would this arguments; strong with director) the (and producer the provided film particular festiv various at received awards the listing involved data required the of bureaucratic some industry film Yugoslav the monitoring of process official the In films. assess and qualify would officials state which in way recognition professional the and awards official hand, one the On matter. did production cinematic of evaluations professional of importance the 1960s the throughout Moreover, policies. international its to due Yugoslavia in uncommon fes foreign in participation the with case the especially was This influence, they had secured a relative autonomy from the official line. political from exempt were spaces these all that state to feasible be not would it though even that notice to ortant imp is It eye. public the and professional the both to cinema Yugoslav opening for platform important another provided Festivals opinions. divergent for reflection of space a provided and lengthy, relatively was film to devoted journals the
productions received serves as an accurate illustration of this inner tension in in tension inner this of illustration accurate an as serves received productions aaeet A a rdcin house production a As management.
rtc’ rfsinl ois Te motn ciia acam that acclaim critical important The bodies. professional critics’ studio would be looking for state or private orfunding. private for looking studiobe state would a a atn vle s el oc te im o a particular a of films the once well: as value lasting a had als. On the other hand, the positive reception of a a of reception positive the hand, other the On als. 47 received in festivals influenced the the influenced festivals in received Neoplanta Film on the hand, the urge for for urge the hand, the on tivals, which was not not was which tivals,
a gradually was
CEU eTD Collection the working public. working the inaccessibl them made which references, philosophical and cultural with permeated film feature Furthermore, Žilnik’s acclaim. as such productions critical on much very depended movies of type 80 79 78 andthe values” “socialist of developmentthe to whichcontribute would films the between balance tricky a was here stake At socialism. state under functioning industries film other to common problem was production film essential Yugoslav the of Another managers level higher by industry. encountered - self film the in the spots underpinning sour ideology the of management one just was workers cinema of professionalization increasing the and masses the to closer life cultural bring to attempt the between Tensions development”. ofour theresults all negates and criticized (...) influences Western various under falling which, and reality, socialist our socie the above itself “places who self intelligentsia the against directed Yugoslav the 1962, as early of as criticism Tito’s Thus deviation. representatives as appeared opinion their official management some for production, film evaluate anti the within though Even professionals. film and journalists of acclaim critical the through primarily hindrances distribution by magnified was problem this audiences; broad reaching of possibility little had kind this of documentaries Short it affirming
of exploitation.of opportunity to see these films, for the reason that they were withdrawn from distribution in the early stages discussion. s for Material See: feature films instead of combining feature and short films along the lines of theme which they dealt with.
Quoted in: This problem, however, was coupled with the fact that only the limited number of people had an For example, in many cases the cinema theatre when arranging its evening program would include only Goulding, Liberated Cinema s distinct profile through the production of the so called socially critical films. films. critical socially called so the of production the through profile distinct s
- tts lgc hs clua poesoas ee entitl were professionals cultural these logic statist 79
Thus, the popularity and the significance of these films was asserted asserted was films these of significance the and popularity the Thus,
Rani radoviRani : 70. :
n Makavejev’s and 80 48
. 78
As a consequence, the success the consequence, a As WR: MisterijeWR: organizma were ty, which lives outside outside lives which ty, ed to assess and and assess to ed of this this of e to to e - CEU eTD Collection 84 83 82 81 objectives main its of one as industry film in issued Film on Law Basic the that surprise locally produced were 15% only and films foreign were 85% 1964, in Yugoslavia in screened films all of out as pressing particularly be to and out turned problem reflection adequate an provide to failed thus and society Yugoslav not socialist of understanding could films foreign popular Apparently, world” the of culture the with interaction without “ that conviction the by (covered Yugoslavia in welcome was cinema Foreign formation. in society socialist the of needs the serve to supposed was and been) have might it democratic (however function pedagogical certain a with aspiration and needs desires, his to regard with man, socialist our of formation and relations these of formation relations, social and human our of state present and historicalheritage, cultural our expressbetter could ours, “more were with engage to supposed was it industry, Yugoslav invading imports Western the to opposed as mission; own its had film Yugoslav values. socialist to according films evaluating for criteria any lacked they that mean not does This like. look should film socia a how of vision defined well and clear any propose not did industry film Yugoslav Tito the after realism socialist of rejection the Following more even di was balance this Yugoslavia of case the In consumers. film of preferences
1965, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 20. S5, p. 98. 1965, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 8.
Problemi kinematografije. Materijal za diskusiju. [Problems of Cinematography. Materials for discussion], discussion], for Materials Cinematography. of [Problems diskusiju. za Materijal kinematografije. Problemi Materials of the discussion on the growth of the film industr Idem. discussion], for Materials Cinematography. of [Problems diskusiju. za Materijal kinematografije. Problemi fficult to achieve becausetocultural production. to Western openness fficult achieve of its
84 49 . Among the possible solutions which could could which solutions possible the Among . 1962 considered the protection of domestic of protection the considered 1962 y in 1964 – s” 82 . ), but with certain reservations. reservations. certain with but ), 81
- Thus Yugoslav film was imbued imbued was film Yugoslav Thus tln pi i 14, edr of leaders 1948, in split Stalin no national culture can grow grow can culture national no
1970, July 1963, in: AJ, F405, box serve its social purposes. The The purposes. social its serve 83 ; thus it comes as no no as comes it thus ; the themes which which themes the
list CEU eTD Collection the Commission would prevent any film from public screening public from film any prevent would Commission the di personnel its composition Reviewthe asFilm Commission.of well asintensity andof itswork Thenature the as such bodies supervisory certain of existence the sustained idea this Domestically, the on and domestic the on both repercussions its had culture film of value educational the on emphasis This - self the culture within cinema functions ofpedagogical c of and, attendance cinema increasing audience, general the pleasing hand, one the on aim: double a had production Western 86 85 production film of levels various retained. Besides that, was there a set of lessstraightforward administrative regulations on still were kind this of institutions speech, of freedom proclaimed its and workers the to power delegating on focus intended its 1960swith the of context the in even that notice to sci- even and films children thrillers, musicals, e the of films enough not were there themes; human be to intimate and social deemed contemporary with engagement lacked and was “monotonous” somewhat production film Yugoslav contemporary The films. imported the fil producing substitution: import cultural re a allow Neoplanta Film
ambiguous means in which film production could be controlled. ways; involvement of the court s 1965, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 12
It also has to be kept in consideration that in majority of the cases the censorship would occur in other Problemikinematografije. Materijalza dis - anh f uolv rdcs n h dmsi mre ws qan fr of form quaint a was market domestic the on products Yugoslav of launch
d vary over time, and in the course of the 1960s it was extremely rare that that rare extremely was it 1960s the of course the in and time, over vary d by pre by - defining its focus onand its genres themes. focus certain defining on specific international sectors of film production and distribution. distribution. and production film of sectors international ystem, withdrawal of the film from distribution was just a few of the – –
kusiju. [Problems of Cinematography. Materials for discussion], 13. uh s hs stig la lmt to limits clear setting those as such ourse, revenues. On the other hand, it stressed the the stressed it hand, other the On revenues. ourse,
m genres that would correspond with those of of those with correspond would that genres m 50 fi . 85
This socialist interpretation of popular popular of interpretation socialist This
asy and entertaining genres, reviews, genres, entertaining and asy managed socialist Federation. . 86
However, it is important is it However,
the activity of of activity the
CEU eTD Collection of the Commission for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries, and receive the the receive and Countries, Foreign evaluation of the with juries at the Pula and Belgrade film festivals Relations Cultural for Commission the of the receive the of Commission Review Film the of to permission had film a institutions, four mentioned already the besides point, that at completed; was film the of production film the once applied was supervision of type decpowerto the simple:they had rather reason was The the of influence the production, film CommissionforCinematography Executivetheand Committee Culturalofthe Commission. of period early the in were, important More the and planning as matters such over decisions making Commission same the of of Council Workers Committee Executive the and Province, the of Commission Cultural the of Cinematography the studio, the of Council Artistic the approval: of steps different four through go to had project the resources, state the from funded be to was film the when Especially started. filming the before place taking 90 89 88 87 co of supervision careful the in embodied was distribution and production film in cooperation international regarding attitude cautious the Similarly, tasks technical specific for responsible only were whom of most employees, stable six to four of consisted Council Workers the insta For unequal. rather was institutions these of influence institutions of production. list film of process the oversee to entitled comprehensive a provided Udovićki Svetozar articles his of one In
[Neoplanta. For Internal Use] technical secretary, helper and accountant. See: Svetozar Udovički, ed.,
Kujundžićeve igre oko Neoplante [Kujundžić’s Games With Neoplanta], 6 June, 1971, F430, box 14/18: p. 1. Workplaces in Idem. Kujundžićeve igre oko Neoplante šKujundžić’s Games With Neoplanta ], 6 June, 1971, F430, box 14/18: p. 1.
Neoplanta Film Neoplanta , vol. 1 (Nov
. in 1971 were the following: director, archivist of filmed material, secretary, 88
What Udovićki did not mention, however, was that the the that was however, mention, not did Udovićki What i Sad: Neoplanta 89 , and consequently were not in a position of of position a in not were consequently and , 51 Film, 1971): 393.
Socialist Republic of Serbia, the film jury film the Serbia, of Republic Socialist 87
The first thres first The the studio, the Commission of of Commission the studio, the ide over funds allocation. Another Another allocation. idefunds over
evaluation of the film program. film the of evaluation Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. - productions as well as of film of as well as productions nce, in the case of case the in nce, . 90
hold of supervision was was supervision of hold Neoplanta
CEU eTD Collection en o drc ifune n o cpuig attention” capturing of and influence direct of means suppo requires world the in taking is country our that role political “The endeavor: this in role supporting a take to supposed was Cinema socialism. state of type Soviet the and capitalism Western example the movement, Non- the in role important its through time same the at providing, while West, the and East the between maneuvering skillfully War: Cold the in played Yugoslavia that regardingpossibilitiesthe re of 92 91 and extras in only cheaper are we competitors Western with comparison (“in Europe with cooperation fruitful a support to sufficient really not was base technical Yugoslav Co countries. eve create to way, this in expecting, markets, Western the on compete to able be and abroad Yugoslavia of image positive a deliver would which films produce to desire the with together went consumption domestic for films better West” the to tell to more have surely We (...) cinemas. Western in represented sufficiently not is film “our satisfactory: deemed not were they growing, Yug of representation the to way this in contributing production, film of exports the increasing of possibility the at directed was 1960s the in production film the for tasks basic the of One West. the to expansion cinematic Yugoslav of possibilities the to approach enthusiastic more a with coupled was it time same the at However, Film”. “Jugoslavija by mainly conducted exports, and imports
1965, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 12. 1965,
Problemi kinematografije. Materijal za diskusiju. [Problems of Cinematography. Materials for discussion], discussion], for Materials Cinematography. of [Problems diskusiju. za Materijal kinematografije. Problemi discussion], for Materials Cinematography. of [Problems diskusiju. za Materijal kinematografije. Problemi in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 11. - productions played an important part in this regard. Once and again, the the again, and Once regard. this in part important an played productions rt from the sphere of culture, and cinema is one of the most acknowledged acknowledged most the of one is cinema and culture, of sphere the from rt of an alternative modernization model, different from both both from different model, modernization alternative an of aching external markets was determined by the specific role role specific the by determined was markets external aching
oslavia in the West. Although rates of exports were were exports of rates Although West. the in oslavia 52 . 92 n closer ties with the Western Western the with ties closer n
The motivation of producing producing of motivation The . 91
This enthusiasm enthusiasm This Aligned CEU eTD Collection uolva a wl a a iprat noe provide income within important prestige an as of well sources as important Yugoslavia, most the of one became Oberhausen as such that ties close the Eventually, Europe. Western c the among both cooperation international seeking in part important an played audiences leftist and markets foreign towards orientation its Moreover, bureaucracy. unde in part important an played products cultural - self the of elements democratization the was important became acclaim critical this why reasons accompan which assessment critical favorable the of political- the and policy production their to thanks hand, other the On Federation. the of is tenets management identity local express to managed that, nevertheless, player market successful a as itself represent could - self it a unit: as production large managed at industry film Yugoslav for out set were that objectives the fulfilled state self Yugoslav and of practice rhetoric the of much underlie did that contradictions ideological and regulations, Neoplanta 94 93 in Europeanto markets able compete be it wouldso industry that horses”
1965, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 25. 1965, in: AJ, F319, box 73, folder 96, p. 43.
Problemi kinematografije. Materijal za diskusiju. [Problems of Cinematography. Materials for discussion], discussion], for Materials Cinematography. of [Problems diskusiju. za Materijal kinematografije. Problemi [Problems diskusiju. za Materijal kinematografije. Problemi – private mode of production, of mode private 93 management discourse: as Мајstorović pointed out professional evaluations of of evaluations professional out pointed Мајstorović as discourse: management ). All means were to be taken in order to improve the state of Yugoslav film film Yugoslav of state the improve to order in taken be to were means All ). was skillfully navigating this complex set of financial const financial of set complex this navigating skillfully was cultural context, the films produced by the studio took advantage advantage took studio the by produced films the context, cultural - management. On the one hand, thanks to a sly use of the mixed the of use sly a to thanks hand, one the On management. Neoplanta’s
Neoplanta Film rdcin ic is salsmn; hy were they establishment; its since production 53 Neoplanta
of Cinematography. Materials for discussion], did not ge not did ountries of the socialist block and in in and block socialist the of ountries r. In this way the studio carefully carefully studio the way this In r. ied new wave movies. Part of the the of Part movies. wave new ied rmining the power of the central central the of power the rmining - self the preserving while sues
developed with film festivals festivals film with developed nerate losses and in this way way this in and losses nerate . 94
raints, bureaucratic raints, CEU eTD Collection istrativeadmin These use. in output put be could cinematic of controlling ofmechanisms broad other ambiguous variety a and place, in remained Commission Review Film the like Institutions control. production ran a to due halt a to come always could market the on independence studio’s the time, same the At bureaucracy. central on dependence increasingly meant funding state turn, its In funding. state without o increasingly was it revenues, own their of out living market, the on players autonomous as acting by authorities central from independence their assert tosupposed were studios Similarly, althoughfilm category. profe and critics whether unclear was it workers, industry’s film the of control the under be to was production film although vein, same the as such torealities local of expression the were bureaucracy officially which documentaries central of role the was local it Consequently, of autonomy the exist. not did products certain for bulwark markets certain that enough clear and was it communities, express to supposed were - self decentralization Yugoslav the within imbued were that constraints contradictory to listen to had however, maneuvering, skillful This self socialist a as its image preserved it discourse both because partially Province, the of Commission Cultural the of expectations certain to conforming by partially position, its heard, be could criticisms though Even undisturbed. et Truhu te 1960s the Throughout West. third a as itself fashioned Yugoslavia which in manner specific the policy, cultural its within preserved,
- way country, bridging the ideological difference between the East and the the and East the between difference ideological the bridging country, way
decisions could easily affect easily could decisions dom administrative decision and to a complex structure of of structure complex a to and decision administrative dom bvious that this independence could never be achieved achieved be never could independence this that bvious Neoplanta ent culture. Although markets and and markets Although culture. managem ent hog is nrsrcua ognzto ad its and organization infrastructural its through 54 co l egg i tee oiis relatively policies these in engage uld - managed production unit. production unit. managed ssional bodies could be included into this this into included be could bodies ssional Neoplanta studio’s finances, requiring state requiring finances, studio’s raie h dmn for demand the organize was often able to defend to able often was
Vojvodina . In In . CEU eTD Collection contradictory traits.these I scandals, political were they as objects cultural much as were which films two on Focusing socialism. management - self of waters dangerous these in used be not could or could that strategies pragmatic it chapters, two next the In set complex of that contradictions this through is It independence. house’s production the diminished which intervention
will follow their production processes as they summarize some of of some summarize they as processes production their follow will
wil l be my task to describe the discursive moves and the the and moves discursive the describe to task my be l Neoplanta 55 had to navigate.
CEU eTD Collection Production ProcessofRani Sad Neo Sad NoviSad Neo- hetnd h saes oooy n axs discourse Marxist on monopoly state’s the threatened Kosuth, social and cultural . issues on dialogue free rather a and art modernist for space a providing 98 97 96 95 pre the of activities when time the By interest. his of sphere only the the of ideas the at place taking debates as established been had which culture alternative Yugoslav Film of establishment the before years Several art. in attitude experimental new a through and influences intellectual Western to regard in both sphere, cultural of Yugoslav up opening the of advantage full taking was Vojvodina, of city capital the Sad, Novi 3 Chapter name. In 1966, when when 1966, In name. same the under working group the within director film amateur established an already editor chief the was He Sad.
ČasUmetnosti Novosadska Neoavangarda60 the Belgrade SKC, Student’s Cultural Centre, which in the mid 1970’s became the meeting point”, in: Trajni scene, literature, t Trajni Čas Umetnosti Novosadska Neoavangarda 60
This argument was later used by Žilnik as a defense of “In the late 1960’s and 1970’s, Youth Tribune became the place of gathering of the most advanced artistic Zoran Pantelić and Kristian Lukić, “Media Ontology Mapping of Social and Art History in Novi Sad”, in: Bu Boris , Želimir Žilnik (1942 Žilnik Želimir , 97 - Avantgarde of the 1960’s and 1970’s]
den, Želimir Žilnik, ŽelimirŽilnik, den, Tribina mladih Imbued with artistic influences varying from Situationist International to Joseph Joseph to International Situationist from varying influences artistic with Imbued Avantgardeof the 1960’s and1970’s] Praxis -
heatreand performancefrom Yugoslavia, Europeand worldwide.It wasforerunnera of Self school. However, the activities the However, school. - - management in Funding and Public debates: The The debates: Public and management inFunding xset mtu fl gop led eggd n eainhp with relationships in engaged already group film amateur existent Neoplanta Film
Uvod U Prošlost [Introduction to the Past] lo xrie a non a exercised also -
) was actively participating in the alternative cultural life of Novi of life cultural alternative the in participating actively was ) 95 center that Žilnik was first introduced to the the to introduced first was Žilnik that Tribina mladih center
of the publication publication the of radovi -
Tih I I 70 Tih : 36. : was establ was
- (Novi Sad: Centar za nove medije_kuda.org, 2005): 20. Tih ITih 70 56 - (Early Works, 1969) 1969) Works, (Early Tih Godina XX XX Godina Tih - Rani radovi dogmati ished, the studio not only continued the the continued only not studio the ished, - Tribina mladih
Tih Godina Continuos Veka Godina XX [The Tih Art Class The evolving around around evolving Neoplanta Film c Marxist position which seemed seemed which position Marxist c .
Veka [The Continuos Art Class The Novi . : 159. 98
early as 1954 as early It was while organizing the the organizing while was It
[ Youth Tribune Tribina mladih
perd Žli was Žilnik appeared, 96
and had been been had and ], a hub of of hub a ], Ne was not was oplanta
CEU eTD Collection 101 100 99 self the later, years Five Vojvodina. in cinematography of development the support to means the of one as studio the of function of establishment the regarding documents legislative The 3.1 Documentary films: creating a non - ofand film aesthetics documentary objective this achieving in central be to out turned of council worker’s the of meetings first very the of one in out Neoplanta Film setting, where Žilnik already played a companies official various set n o te an oiis of policies main the of one assert of production the in engaged studio a as image public its forming was it studio; the of name the with along went oft en director the of name the attention, public growing receiving were films Žilnik’s As studio. the of policies the on influence significant a had Neoplanta Film to brought Žilnik that hand, other conditions the On working filmmaker. professional a and as career platform his facilitated a with director the provided studio film the films. These two modes of production represented two directions which the studio would studio the which directions two represented production of modes two These films. film. provocative Milošević, later on on later Milošević, direct
Neoplanta see: Svetozar Udovički, ed.,
As an amateur group, filmmakers could hardly secure any other means of financing. For more info
Minutes of the meeting of the Worker‘s Council, 27 Decem It should be emphasized, however, that Žilnik, while his input was of great significance, was not the only or contributing to the image of Neoplanta Film, 1971). Neoplanta’s
– was as important for Žilnik as Žilnik was for was Žilnik as Žilnik for important as was his innovative approach to filmmaking and subversive ideas, all of which of all ideas, subversive and filmmaking to approach innovative his
100 Karpo Aćimović Godina and others were nonetheless important in this respect.
hematic and cinematic profile was pointed pointed was profile cinematic and thematic distinct a for need the If Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] 99 production, and in this way the film production house was was house production film the way this in and production, i as apae i a eaiey iey avant lively relatively a in appeared also it ; an individual perspective on Yugoslav realities. Neoplanta’s n important n part. important - published report on the studio’s activity set out to to out set activity studio’s the on report published as an innovative studio; works by Miroslav Antić, Branko existent demand demand existent 57
oie is ou on focus its profile: production ber, 1966, in: AV, F430, box 53, p. 5. –
he provided a distinct take on the the on take distinct a provided he Neoplanta Film
. On the one hand, hand, one the On Neoplanta. Neoplanta Film autorski , vol. 1 (Novi Sad:
emphasize the emphasize - ad culture garde im quality film,
101
autorski rmation rmation , Žilnik Žilnik , CEU eTD Collection of income becomes clear once we remember that for a couple of yearsof couplea webecomesrememberthatfor clearonce income of C the hurdles, the for script clear less or more a as well a as documentation complex required it and year a once announced was funds for contest the difficult: relatively funds to access the it making inflexible, and complex relatively were funds the acquiring proced The started. had film the of production the before funding for apply could 102 chapter, previous the in mentioned I As funding state scheme. official the outside produced were latter The films. feature of production risky more the of Žilnik’s of but success, early his of reasons the on underpinnings light some social and shedding production, their of economic only not understanding deeper a the allow will documentaries of overview An films. short of category the into fall would oeuvre his of part this itself studio the by provided with films short five made Žilnik 1971 and 1967 between period the In filmmaker. documentary a as work his in sharp eco especially is and maneuvering the social despite aesthetic, them, ideological, between their moving in deftly was differences Žilnik and years next the in follow oni. h fnig hc te nttto poie rpeetd sgiiat at of part significant Neoplanta’s a represented provided institution the which funding The Council. Cultura Province’s the with connection close a keeping was studio the establishment its Since values. socialist its with along region the of heritage cultural specific the promoting and on reflecting of aim initial an with Vojvodina, of needs the for essent ially designed the period. For example, only by 1969
ng recoursedistributi funds; before that it was the Socialist Republic of Serbia who was providing resources.
This statement bears certain amount of oversimplification, though. The sources of funding shifted during
income by 1971 by income ouncil remained an important source of funding. The significance of this type type this of significance The funding. of source important an remained ouncil
. 102 –
Also, it was the main institution to which film producers producers film which to institution main the was it Also, 70 the region received powers in making categorizations and 58 Neoplanta will also help in explaining the workings the explaining in help also will was established as a film studio studio film a as established was . In the classification the In Neoplanta. nomic underpinnings. This This underpinnings. nomic ie. Despite these Despite ie. mov Neoplanta Film autorski ures for for ures
was was
l CEU eTD Collection 103 state Essentially, market. film the of side consumption the and films of distribution the to attention more devote to producers encouraging at directed was reforms these of One tendencies. market alo culture of development grassroots the encouraging time same the at while support, state grant would which incentives of system complex a introduced had they Thus, state. the of side the from input financial the without proceed cannot sphere cultural the drive, market and decentralization whole the despite that aware were production film Yugoslav of development the to directions setting for responsible Authorities production. There marketmore it cooperated tackling engagement by projects. wouldbigger demonstrate that initiative and ambition the went that productio film a cinematography, over imposed policies Yugoslav that expectations broader with relations.ofmarketbasis theaccordance itsfinancesonIn to manageable be strongerand rejected being projects of risk the posed it limited, rather was scope Its funding. of scheme secure allow not could which reasons many were there However, importance its period. throughoutthe maintained production film of aspect local the structure, funding and administrative this through way, this In achievements. artistic its and financial its for both i whom of to institution main the was Council capital Cultural Province’s working little very with studio, film new a
The report of the results of the competition for funding, 17 July, 1967, in: AV, F430, box 12, p. 1.
a aohr motn apc wih nlecd h semi the influenced which aspect important another was 103 - self greater for reach to supposed was enterprise n ad i and , n general, it was seen as expedient means before the studio could get get could studio the before means expedient as seen was it general, n
Neoplanta 59 and the creative workers with whom with workers creative the and ts own. Besides funding, the the funding, Besides own. ts Neoplanta Neoplanta utiaiiy Aog with Along sustainability. - rvt poes f film of process private o ean n this in remain to was accountable, accountable, was ngside with with ngside
CEU eTD Collection F430, box 12, p. 5. financial award. See: Communication with the Federal Fond for Development of Cinematography, in: AV, o h sreig ad vlain md drn fl festivals film during made evaluations and screenings the to a short for importance awards financial of form the took also which and works various evaluated which categorization of system a introduced had incentive of type second The was limited. income of type this of importance the thus scarce, were usually revenues production film 108 107 106 105 104 was. film what a “quality” competition of type other on accent put did nevertheless it place, second the to criteria market the put have might quality better for encouragement of system such While value. artistic and not educational high of have being as perceived were nevertheless might but tion,atten popular attracted which films support to supposed was it distribution; with concerned and short of producers While films of distribution the regarding position disadvantaged cinemas. a in were films documentary through bring to managed film each that the funding, recourse a providing at resorted often would double the actual profit made by the film. the by made profit actual the double would often important, more revenues made system recourse feature films were also suffering from the steady decline of the numbers of cinema attendees.
Sad: Neoplanta
Minutes of the meeting of the Worker’s Council, in: AV, F430, box 53, p. 3. Minutes of the meeting of the Worker’s Council, in: AV, F430, box 53, p. 3. Films in the 1 See: Svetozar Udovički, ed., This problem was not limited to the short or docum
– Film, 1971): 617. st
competition over critical acknowledgement, which alone was to determine to was alone which acknowledgement, critical over competition category would receive 40 000 dinars, 2
nd documentary films documentary nd Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
s had to deal with awards for the quality of the film. The state state The film. the of quality the for awards with deal to had s . 106
This type of funding was deemed of particular particular of deemed was funding of type This 60 entary films only. Towards the end of the 1960s amount of which correlated with the revenue revenue the with correlated which of amount . 107 nd
Distribution of these awards was related related was awards these of Distribution –
25 000, 3 000, 25 because the funding allocated by state state by allocated funding the because 105 rd
However, in the case of short of case the in However, –
10 000; 4 000; 10 . 108
Categorization was not not was Categorization th
categorywas a non , vol. 2 (Novi
- 104 , CEU eTD Collection aevr mn dvret n cnrdcoy ietos O te n hn, e was he hand, one the On directions. contradictory and divergent among maneuver to had Žilnik years, early its in studio the with associated directors film the of one as Thus, incr be to seemed Žilnik workers. film and critics film students, workers, journalists, cultural politicians, of sphere intellectual from acknowledgement and acclaim critical receive for crucial became it aside, audiences broad the appeal to opportunit y an Leaving abroad. and Yugoslavia in both circles intellectual leftist were consciously) chosen not probably (although target their Rather, market. internal the and taste popular the to appeal to intention specific a without films making were they cases, the of most In them. that films of type semi the in play at were factors these of all While and prestige cultural gaining of matter a it couldacknowledgment; a only not was Oberhausen like festivals foreign in success and participation Moreover, development. its of stages early very the that surprise little as comes 110 109 Chicago to distribution film for markets trip prospective as seen were countries foreign reveals, the of report his as occurrence; occasional or chance mere of matter di of possibility the Udovićki For film. the produced which studio the for and director film the for prestige and legitimization gaining of means favorable a was festivals foreign in success hand, one the On structure. economic complex this structure and change to enough influential was context international the Žilnik, of case the in important particularly was this and Finally,
Report of the visit to Oberhausen film festival, 1970, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. 3. Report from the business trip to the United States, 24 November, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, edibly edibly important in this endeavor. Neoplanta lso provide a considerable financial support Neoplanta Film tended to focus on required a specific attention to some of some to attention specific a required on focus to tended
stribution and exhibition abroad was more than a than more was abroad exhibition and stribution 61
started seeking for foreign connections from connections foreign for seeking started - private model of film production, the the production, film of model private
internal administrative and administrative internal
. 110
Neoplanta . 109 p. 1.
Thus it it Thus
to to CEU eTD Collection 113 112 111 of picture montage” and expression visual of power the life, omladini o Žurnal 14 the of section informative the to only permitted was film why i grim this whether say to difficult is It drinking. heavy and head, one’s to or floor the to glasses breaking singing, pubs, in gathering of realities rural of images unadorned and rough with faced was viewer the Rather, parades. Mayday or visits o entertainment the not was it But villages. those within entertainment” and “culture about film a was it reveals, captions opening the of one As Sad. Novi of outskirts omla film, shortprofessional first his released he 1967 By general. in socialism Yugoslav it in cracks of variety a with than socialism and region the both of development d an achievements the with concerned less be to appeared Žilnik However, society. socialist a of issues the about talk indeed did he and Sad, Novi of suburbs or villages Vojvodinian of setting the in evolved fo out set plan production official the with complying as appear may works his glance, first a At about. talk it should what and like look should film documentary how of understanding own his to time same the at while o expectations the of some respect to supposed Short and DocumentaryFilm and Short Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] Smaller and Larger than Film],
Bogdan Tirnanić,”Želimir Žilnik, prvi put Slobodan Novaković, “Manje i više od života Films in this section did not participate in competition for awards. dini na zimi selu life –
” grim realities of both geographical and social margins of Vojvodina and and Vojvodina of margins social and geographical both of realities grim 113 . Being unable to participate in the competition, film did nevertheless nevertheless did film competition, the in participate to unable Being . a dee priual mvn bec moving particularly deemed was ( Newsreel on Village Youth, inWinter Filmska kultura Filmska 111 ; but such “realism” certainly did appeal some of the critics. critics. the of some appeal did certainly “realism” such but ; ” [Želimir Žilnik, The First Time], in: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. , 18 April, 1967, in: Svetozar Udovički, ed., Neoplanta. Za r the studio in the beginning: themes of his works works his of themes beginning: the in studio the r , vol. 1 (Novi Sad: Neoplanta –
manje i više od filma!” [Smaller and Larger : 40. : 62
112 Clua Cmiso o te Province, the of Commission Cultural f , because it brought “a detail from the the from detail “a brought it because , ause of its “authenticity, vigor of of vigor “authenticity, its of ause
, 1967), shot in villages at the at villages in shot 1967), ,
Film, 1971): 34. th reason the was magery festival of the Yugoslav the of festival
thanLife, museum f Žurnal o Žurnal CEU eTD Collection festivals and receiving prizes, the 2 the prizes, receiving and festivals prevent not did edge critical sharp Its activities. Pioneers appeared 115 114 were young critics had recognized foreign and Yugoslav of community independent relatively the that obvious becoming was 1 a being as evaluated wasMoreover, Germany.it t received and 1960s, the of reform economic the of result a as increased were which of rates unemployment, socialist of issue pressing Finally, them. among film care and happy addressed Milosavljević) actor popular a where show TV a was movie the of theme The realities. Yugoslav the on by take commissioned was he subversiveApparently, and ironic an providing always society, Yugoslav of segments “forgotten” the on work his continued Žilnik years following the In from state. the journal film the from award an receive Želimir Žilnik, Žilnik, Želimir out. What was presented in Oberhausen a Udovički,
remained largely unnoticed.
Film went through censorship, thus the second part of the film, which involved prostitutes, had to be cut Svetozar in: Film], of Hope New The Žilnik, [Želimir Žilnik” Želimir nada filmska “Nova Angels, Jovan Neoplanta. Za In ternu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] 16) a ogat con o scal ngetd hlrn novd n criminal in involved children neglected socially on account poignant a 1968), , Pioniri maleni, mi smo vojska prava, svakog dana nićemo ko zelena ko nićemo dana svakog prava, vojska smo mi maleni, Pioniri Uvod U Prošlost [Introduction theto Past]
Nezaposljeni ljudi ( Žilnik as an innovative and promisingfilm director. nd nd received the award is just a half of a film. See: Boris Buden,
award in Belgrade in award Neoplanta - Ek free children free ran 63 The Unemployed, The : 75. : Frhroe i rcie te 1 the received it Furthermore, . e 1 he Pioniri maleni
st lm. fi lm. children’s a for material collect to
category movie by the state. By 1969state.category theit movieBy by st
114 prize in Oberhausen film festival in in festival film Oberhausen in prize
Festival of Short and Documentary Documentary and Short of Festival . As a side product of this project project this of product side a As . : 50. from participation in several in participation from -
entertainer Gula (Dragoljub Gula entertainer 1968) Laku noć, Šnjuka 115
touched upon the the upon touched
was made and and made was trava st
category
( Little CEU eTD Collection challenge for the critics of his work: it was not just the mere critical fantasy or biased biased or fantasy critical mere the just not was it work: his of critics the for challenge documentaries Wave New o midst the in emerged Žilnik appearing. continued opinions praising these of some films, new making continued Žilnik As work. the lauded however, reactions, Other had to whoit highly renegotiated as be well. rated critics harmful for Yugoslav self as oeuvre Žilnik’s saw who those for Thus, institutions. such of one being festivals film of juries professionals, cultural the to delivered were instead, functions, These artworks. the anti byreceived widespread message festival the after right instance, denouncing of ways 118 117 116 . decision wrong the made have to deemed was which Jury Festival’s the at than film, his of aspects ideological and aesthetic publicatio same publications in appearing started oeuvre Žilnik’s to regard everyone;by thatwas by firstnotthe in Thisshared time references to opinion “blackness” directors were identified as distorting the reality: Želimir Žilnik and Lordan Zafranović. Udovički,
Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] Awarded in Oberhausen], Borba
Tomislav Ketig, “Kome je kriv Želimir Žilnik” [What is the Guilt of Želimir Žilnik], in: Svet in: Žilnik], Želimir of Guilt the is [What Žilnik” Želimir je kriv “Kome Ketig, Tomislav “Žilnik, Bourek in naša selekcija nagradjeni na Oberhauzenu” [Žilnik, Boure Milutin Čolić, “Počelo je sumorno...” [It Started Out Gloomily], Politika - etatist discourse the bureaucracy and state were denounced the power of e of power the denounced were state and bureaucracy the discourse etatist Neoplanta. 117 ; but the following day an extensive critical article occurred in the pages of the the of pages the in occurred article critical extensive an day following the but ;
. The roots of this type of criticism lied in the fact that in the official official the in that fact the in lied criticism of type this of roots The radoviRani . practice, reoccurring in other instances such as in the aftermath of the award the of aftermath the in as such instances other in reoccurring practice, cinema, but there was something unusual about him: he was making making was he him: about unusual something was there but cinema, n. Criticism, however, was directed not that much at the director, or the the or director, the at much that not directed was however, Criticism, n. rather than fiction films. Such means of expression posed a certain certain a posed expression of means Such films. fiction than rather Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] Žilnik’s achievement in Oberhausen was somewhat broader. For For broader. somewhat was Oberhausen in achievement Žilnik’s : 60. - management, criticizing the film w , 7 April 1968, in: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu.
Politika 118
Such condemnations of the Jury were a rather rather a were Jury the of condemnations Such ohrd o uls ltl mr ta a small a than more little publish to bothered 64 : 61 61 : –
62.
.
116 : 59. In this particular article two as not enough; the authority of of authority the as not enough; , 21 March 1968, in: Svetozar
However, the variety of the the of variety the However, k and Our Selection Were
ozar Udovički, f the the f valuating Yugoslav Yugoslav CEU eTD Collection no communism yet” communism no is there because films these making am (“I standpoint socialist and democratic essentially cinemagoers urban the from distant grown had which segments society, of segments problematic portray to courage his admired which praises stood side other the On it. distorted furthermore, which, and elements sporadic on relying by reality presenting was Žilnik that stated Ćolić, to similar who,journalists and critics stood side one the On depictions. his of validity the debate, public the of element important an became . heard being of possibility the groups social specific to provide so Yugoslav the of imagery public the from omitted is what about talk to attempt 122 121 120 119 official positio effect life real a with reactions for pressure intrinsic an of element an gained thus screen on showing was on hold a get to wants emphas had himself Žilnik it. to reality of dimension a was there presenting; was he that opinion i a iprat ae n h fl idsr. In industry. film the in name important an him made sparked had he discussions the and abroad and home both gaining was Žilnik that acknowledgment the work, his disapproving or approving arguments the were Whatever April 1968, in: Svetozar Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] April 1968, in: Svetozar Udovički,
Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
Bogdan Tirnanić, “Filmska umetnost me ne interesuje” [I am Not Interested in the Art of Film], Susret E. Bodanovic, “Šta da radimo?” [What Should We Do?], Pero Zubac, “Ne postoji crni film” [There is No Black Film], Bogdan Tirnanić, “Filmska umetnost me ne interesuje” [I am Not Interested in the Art of Film], Susret ized that “aesthetics” do not interest him; that it is the reality of the people that he he that people the of reality the is it that him; interest notdo “aesthetics” that ized . n of political and cultural authorities. 121
Thus it comes as no surprise that it was the the was it that surprise no as comes it Thus
Udovički, 122 ) since in many cases it was presented as perfectly in line with the the with line in perfectly as presented was it cases many in since ) 119 ; in one of his interviews he asserted that these films were an an were films these that asserted he interviews his of one in ; Neoplanta. Za Internu Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] .
Essen tially, it was difficult to argue with Žilnik’s films and his and films Žilnik’s with argue to difficult was it tially, of it, which were unrepresentative for Yugoslavia Yugoslavia for unrepresentative were which it, of : 63. : 65
Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] Mladost Index
: 75. the spring of 1968 the biggest film film biggest the 1968 of spring the
, 25 April, 1968, in: Svetozar Udovički, , 1968, in: Svetozar Udovički, realism of his films that soon soon that films his of realism 120
The harsh realities he he realities harsh The : 69. : 69. Neoplanta. ciety, to ciety,
, 5 , 5 CEU eTD Collection while “Avala Genex” remaine it Nevertheless, stable. to obligations financial their meet to failed house production the which in cases several were with Cooperation closeness. geographical production. of type this for rights had have might that studio film a with coproduction a seek to have would it hand, Neoplanta profile, production defined narrowly a with endowed Being voluntary. was cooperation 125 124 not was 123 cooperation possible a for inquiry this Moreover, activity. of sphere “Avala’s” exactly not was which films, documentary of director a as himself asserted Žilnik time that who with cooperated authors other all from distinguished (as Žilnik with cooperation of possibility the films” little “ugly his and director of director the span, time short a such in acquired had Žilnik that acclaim critical and awards of series the of Because Antić’s Miroslav between cooperation The “ 3.2 with Žilnik. cooperating of possibilities the exploring started Yugoslavia in house production
medije_kuda.org, 2013), http://www.kuda.org/sites/kuda/files/Uvod%20u%20proslost_web.pdf.
See: Boris Buden, Želimir Žilnik, Žilnik, Želimir Buden, Boris See: “Avala Genex” was a daughter distribution company of Such was the case with Antić’s Sveti pesak. Neoplanta. Rani radovi
aue im; hn uh rjcs ae at came projects such when films; feature produce to right the have not did 123
Neoplant ”: debatingself n o te esn my ae en that been have may reasons the of One Sveti pesak ( 124
was one of its most important distributors. was one mostof important its a Avala Film, Neoplanta Film
at that time). It is important to take into consideration that by by that consideration into take to important is It time). that at Avala Film Uvod U Prošlost [Introductio Holy Sand Holy d the main domestic coproduction partner for partner coproduction domestic main the d . - 125 management within and outside the courtroom
In May 1968 1968 May In
ragiša Đurić saw certain perspectives in this film this in perspectives certain saw Đurić Dragiša was an obvious choice, not the least because of of because least the not choice, obvious an was , 1968). It is difficult to say how much this this much how say to difficult is It 1968). ,
and and hwvr ws o awy fun; there fluent; always not was however, Avala, 66 Avala Avala Film Avala Avala n n to the Past] had started somewhat earlier, with with earlier, somewhat started had was already actively inquiring into into inquiring actively already was .
Avala
(Centarza nove
film was not financially financially not was film Neoplanta,
CEU eTD Collection not have our own program. Our program is the program of the most pr most the of program the is program Our program. own our have not LC of role the undermine not did strike the However, system. education higher better the a demands with along went which of all Germany, to as people young of migration the importance), particular of was managers self real the implementing of failure the Yugoslavia, of regions and classes between inequalities growing the regarding stance criti cal a expressing of way a was strike students’ the programme, political coherent a proposing not Although moment. 1968 global the of part were they events, Yugoslav local Th collected in filming student protests in Belgrade earlier that summer. had he that material the on work might he that suggested Žilnik hand, at script no was 126 gly “u his about written was lot a that and documentaries” Oberhausen, in and Belgrade in received had Žilnik awards the about heard had he that Žilnik”, that is “he that out pointed so At place. taking was festival film Pula the 1968 of summer In further. plans cooperation the accelerated have to seems which Đurić Dragiša with encounter personal a recalls Žilnik but success, market through critical acclaim and through - peer nor associated, was Žilnik which with studio the for set requirements official the with complying by not however, attained, been had success This success. growing his and Žilnik, of achievements previous the of awareness the on mostly on based
2013),
me point Đurić invited Žilnik for a conversation; in Žilnik’s memory of the situation,Đurić the of memoryŽilnik’s in conversation;a for invitedŽilnik Đurić point me e Belgrade protests he had in mind had broken out in early June: rather than simple simple than rather June: early in out broken had mind in had he protests Belgrade e Boris Buden, Želimir Žilnik, ŽelimirŽilnik, Buden, Boris http://www.kuda.org/sites/kuda/files/Uvod%20u%20proslost_web.pdf n fl srp pooe b Ž by proposed script film any . 126
Đurić invited Žilnik to produce a full feature film with film feature full a produce to Žilnik invited Đurić Uvod U Prošlost [Introduction to the Past] recognition. - aaeet oils (h dmntn rl o the of role dominating (the socialism management li. n te words, other In ilnik. 67
Y; protesters even stated that that stated even protesters Y;
(Centar za nove medije_kuda.org, Avala’s : 63.
eus ws based was request ogressive forces of forces ogressive . As there there As Avala. Gei starbeiters “We do “We
CEU eTD Collection film did notpresent any qualities required for the market success, while at the same time it pertinent especially was concern a film the of topic the of because latter The scenes”. love and “nudity and Marx” of “quotes regarding with“bureaucrats” problems possible the as well as “drama”, of lack the th Đurić For fore. the to came immediately to script the sent Žilnik September early in When September. for script the setting, heated this In actions. political legitimatin a become would cases some in which Federation, Yugoslav army the a for fear of mobilization the to The led that widespread so was public. and Yugoslavia in occurred intervention Yugoslav the for shock a was countries Pact Warsaw voiced were example Yugoslav on modeled councils and - self the for requirements the movement, reform the of demands the among been actively had protest Czech The Czechoslovakia. in countries of script the on working was Žilnik when time the at (and down quieted were protests student a had strike student the that admitted publicly Tito eventually practice.” into put 130 129 128 127 society our End Press, 1987): 61. and Scharloth,
1st ed, Palgrave Ma
Klimke and Scharloth, 1968 in Europe Katsiaficas, N. George However, this did not prevent expulsion of some of the members of the faculty from the LCY. See: Klimke Martin Klimke and Joachim Scharloth, eds., . 130 , nte sok olwd te nevnin f h Wra pact Warsaw the of intervention the followed: shock another radoviRani ), and LCY the of program —the
1968 in Europe: This fear was also used by the authorities n order to promote the unity of the the of unity the promote to order n authorities the by used also was fear This cmillan Transnational History Series (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008): 222.
127 The Imagi
Although the protest was protest the Although
223. nation of the NewLeft: Global A Analysis of 1968
nd its references to recent events. All in all, it seemed the the seemed it all, in All events. recent to references its nd : 223.
1968 in Europe: A History of Protest and Activism, 1956- the C the e film appeared interesting, but he pointed out pointed he but interesting, appeared film e 68 onstitution. We demand that it should be be should it that demand We onstitution. quenched quenched , the question of risk management management risk of question the Avala, Rani radovi with the help of police forces, forces, police of help the with . 129 good reason. good
The intervention of the the of intervention The was finished by early early by finished was supported by LCY as as LCY by supported
(Boston, Mass: South g tool for repressive for tool g 128 government government
As soon as as soon As
foreign 1977 , CEU eTD Collection 132 the of “comedy description: appeared film 131 the of title the after immediately titles: opening the to regard in appeared problem Another prelude. the just leaving agreed, Žilnik eventually and scene, making love the out taking on insisted Ćolić, Milutin commission, of members the of One alterations. certain for request the without not however, approval, its received It Commission. Review Film the through go to had film the made, once However, regulati and directions any by restrained not was film the scheme, funding state the outside Produced system. censorship cinema Yugoslav the of of case The of director the “bureaucrats”, the of expectations the with line in working or “dramatic” strikingly was films previous Žilnik’s attack ideological possible every for itself exposed to work with to work with comfortable more was it Žilnik, for companies: two the between cooperation the of base Avala Film contr the of point important Another project. this in risks financial tremendous bore Žilnik thus, failure; that guarantee a as flat his mortgaging contract, the to According which (and off risks the took which option an offered he Thus, place. first the in Žilnik with collaboratio sought he why reason the been have kind this of qualities for expectation (Maastricht: Jan van Eyck Akademie, 2011): 34. financial one.
Sekulić, and Žiga Testen, eds., productions, avoid the hustle o
The reasons were that in Such attacks, in case they resulted in withdrawal of the film, was not only an intellectual loss, but also a
–
act was that was act Rani radoviRani Neoplanta from foreign distribution. Eventually, this financial contract remained the only only the remained contract financial this Eventually, distribution. foreign from Neoplanta Neoplanta Film . a uuly eutn t rsr t) tkn a on rm h bank. the from loan a taking to): resort to reluctant usually was 132 may serve as an example of the disorganized and vague workings vague and disorganized the of example an as serve may Surfing the Black. Yugoslav Black Wave Cinema and Its Trangressive Moments Neoplanta Film f Avala
Avala , and also get “more freedom as an author”, in: Gal Kirn, Dubravka
would fund the production of the film in credit, with Žilnik with credit, in film the of production the fund would Avala
he could work with people he knew well from the previous
held rights to the income gained from local and local from gained income the to rights held Avala should not have been surprised; neither could could neither surprised; been have not should 69 will get their money back in the case of of case the in back money their get will . 131
However, considering that none of of none that considering However, ons in the process of its making. its of process the in ons Avala Film
n
CEU eTD Collection 135 134 133 the by made was Decision year. same the May late in culmination their reached hindrances small These without permission. had have could public any public” the “deceiving of trailer in appeared article anonymous an time same the at Suspiciously, film). the in present not were which shots some contained it that reason the (for movie the of trailer the distribute to permission attempt Commission by already March However, Festival. Film International Berlin the in compete to invited was a positive reviews, first the and circles intellectual in mostly screened was film the months four following the Within Countries Cooperation with Foreign ofCultural from jury Commission the for the the out cutting after pe received film scenes, Commission; undesired Review Film the by identified provocations only members the of one For ideology”. t a rcie al eesr prisos I hs oeht iegn acut, Žilnik accounts, divergent somewhat his In permissions. necessary all received had it after and completed was film the after months four decision this to led exactly what judge “comedy” just leaving with omitted, was “ideology” thus incompatible; Film] Yugoslav Zone in Twilight The
Žilnik’s letter for letter Žilnik’s Nikodijević, Milan ŽelimirŽilni Buden, Boris Neoplanta Film Rani radovi District Attorney District the Film Review Commission, 24 March, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. 1. Zabranjeni Bez Zabrane: Zona Sumraka Jugoslovenskog Filma [Banned Without a Ban: V
ečernije novosti ečernije ed to hinder the film’s promotion campaign by refusing the the refusing by campaign promotion film’s the hinder to ed .
k, Uvod U Prošlost [Introduction to the Past] 135 tre rciig eti sgs f istsato. h Fl Review Film The dissatisfaction. of signs certain receiving started was banned by the Film Review Commission because it was was it because Commission Review Film the by banned was
Obviously, the anonymous author had more information than than information more had author anonymous the Obviously, at that time, because the trailer could not have been screened been have not could trailer the because time, that at s well as condemning, started appearing started condemning, as well s (Beograd: Jugoslovenska Kinoteka, 1995): 110. of temporarily banning temporarily of rmission for public screening as well as the permission the as well as screening public for rmission
of the commission such combination seemed logically seemed combination such commission the of ( ), in which it was announced that the the that announced was it which in Evening News), 70 . It is nearly impossible to impossible nearly is It radovi.Rani : 76.
134 ; finally, ; . 133
These were the the were These
Rani radovi Rani .
CEU eTD Collection film released) film o encouragement the 139 138 137 136 that violations of list lengthy indictment the one unimpressive a highly with opened case The setting. cultural Yugoslav contemporary his in occupied Žilnik opening case, a such from authorization an received director the law, in . issued was film the of band permanent the over decision firm no fact in that and stated, be could reasons clear no that was out figure to seemed he What ban. i officials party high the to going was he decision court the receiving after immediately how recalls Žilnik interview other In want?” lunatics these do “what question the with hour an half in it stopped and film the cour that and this behind stood Tito that contends rewarding testing ground for understanding the limits of what can be expressed or or expressed configuration sociohistorical be given a can in represented what of limits the understanding for ground testing rewarding Evolvi research. historical and sociological in cases trial of usefulness the out pointed had Sapiro Gisele of vagueness aspect the ofanother case. the points just out fact Paragraph : Film] Yugoslav 111. Zone in Twilight The : 112. Film] Yugoslav Zone in Twilight The
Gisèle Sapiro, “Autonomy Revisited: The Que Nikodijević, Milan Nikodijević, Milan ŽelimirŽilnik, Buden, Boris - self not is trial of process public the in so do could he that 35, no. 1 (March 1, 2012): 41. 2012): 1, (March 1 no. 35, 138 was expressed in incredibly vague and general terms, and did also include a include also did and terms, general and vagueincredibly in expressed was , Žilnik decided to make an attempt and defend the film. Holding a degree degree a Holding film. the defend and attempt an make to decided Žilnik , Zabranjeni Bez Zabrane: Zona Sumraka Jugoslovenskog Filma [Banned Without a Ban: Zabranjeni Bez Zabrane: Zona Sumraka Jugoslovenskog Filma ng mostly around the questions of interpretation, they become a a become they interpretation, of questions the around mostly ng f Đurić (apparently, also because of the financial pressure to have the the have to pressure financial the of because also (apparently, Đurić f the possibility of understanding the complexity of the position that that position the of complexity the understanding of possibility the - Uvod U Prošlost [Introduction to the Past] page document signed by a certain prosecutor Spasoje Milošev; Milošev; Spasoje prosecutor certain a by signed document page Rani radoviRani n order to figure out, what were the actual reasons of the the of reasons actual the were what out, figure to order n
stionof MediationsandIts MethodologicalImplications,” had imposed over Yugoslav society. It seemed, seemed, It society. Yugoslav over imposed had 71 t decision was issued after he watched he after issued was decision t Neoplanta . 139
h til of trial The
: 125. to defend his own film. The film. own his defend to
explanatory; rather, it it rather, explanatory; [Banned Without a Ban: Ban: a Without [Banned Rani radoviRani 137
In any case, with with case, any In provides provides 136
CEU eTD Collection echoslovak spring: spring: echoslovak Cz the of representation the was cases such of One did. bodies political respective as way same the exactly questions problematic certain treated film the that surprise the by followed immediately was it claimed, Žilnik address, do actually film themes the identify to succeeded he when even Yet, all. at with deal not does film which with themes up picked film the of reading his in prosecutor, the that asserts he imprecise; and general too as court the of interpretation the deemed Žilnik all, of First others received, cause. ban would had consequences that the inevitably practical film the that praise critical the with do to had them of some ban; intended the to related aspects other letter defense his into included the of part only was film the of content the that Realizing expounded. the of prosecutor the that film the of interpretation the with deal to had letter the of part Only letter. defense lengthy a with responded he day following The fil ban the to intention set ofthe the reasons that grounded of part a just were film the of interpretation the regarding questions obvious that relatively Le the of the sarcasm. and irony ridicule, intrusive with of etc. society”, in Communists role the year, previous August in Czechoslovakia in events recent regarding stance the unemployment, and employment politics, agrarian Yugoslavia, in [Yugoslavs] us and general particular”. in people between relations political and ideological 141 140 morals” political and social the of violations “harsh for accused was film the Primarily, wellbeing. international or economic social, of point painful every upon touch to managed Žilnik film single a by that
Decision of the District Attorney, 19 June, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. 1. Decision of the District Attorney, 19 June, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. 1. Rani radovi Rani
did approach “political questions, international relations within within relations international questions, “political approach did 140
and for “debasing all the basic postulates of social, social, of postulates basic the all “debasing for and 72 m.
District Attorney District 141
–
For Žilnik it was was it Žilnik For rbe, Žilnik problem,
ih negative with
which the which ge of ague Rani Rani had had
CEU eTD Collection possible tor possible director- film film, in used Marx of quotes four the to reference a was accusation this that Assuming general. in 143 142 of ideology declared officially the of tenets expression: of freedom and face human a with socialism democracy, of discourse official the by set were argumentation his of limits The setting. ideological Yugoslav the in occupying was he position specific the about us tells court in arguments such present could he that fact very The status. political or social their possibility the as it framing by expression of freedom of issue the tackled he point final the In else. something did Žilnik film the of interpretation of aspects different the negotiating of course the In th to objected Žilnik Finally, the - self or revolution the of of possibility than situation rather movements student complex the addressing was film the ultimately Thus, year. previous be had that movements revolutionary the of participants the was explained, Žilnik film, the of subject actual The Yugoslavia. of League Communist the with film the of protagonists young the of identification mistaken ca film the but problems, some about talk canforumspolitical and informationofmeans other thatall or exist notdo problems these that thinks prosecutor the “whether unclear was it Žilnik for thus spheres; public as well as political in discussed widely were unemployment of problem the or Albanians of status unequal the as problems such of treatment the Similarly, did. leaders political Yugoslav radovi
Žilnik’s defense letter, 20 June, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. 3. Žilnik’s defense letter, 20 June, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. 2. condemned the intervention of Warsaw pact countries in exactly the same way as way same the exactly in countries pact Warsaw of intervention the condemned eserve classical ideas for some official forces”
for various actors of society to touch upon sensitive problems despite despite problems sensitive upon touch to society of actors various for turned- e statement that that statement e attorney framed the problem in the following way: “it is not not is “it way: following the in problem the framed attorney en shaking Europe and the world in the course of the the of course the in world the and Europe shaking en 73 Rani radovi nnot?” 142
Furthermore, he pointed out the the out pointed he Furthermore, was debasing revolutionary ideas revolutionary debasing was .
143
management as such. such. as management
CEU eTD Collection ueurtc n uraoe abtain n h shr o clue n arts” and culture of sphere the in arbitration unreasoned and “dogmatic, bureaucratic for precedent the creating mean would film the banning that out pointed his in Therefore film. the evaluating and judging in incompetent simply was prosecutor the that was defense his in arguments underlying the of One hand. at problem the on opinion expert an offer could who workers, cultural and public critics, film of list the contained letter the to attachment another further: even trial the of process the of publicity the push to willing was Žilnik Also, reviews. positive of list the until received had film the that acclaim critical the included arguments of cluster following The film. ban the todecision self the of contraposition a was making was he that 146 145 144 film” feature of medium the understand not does general “in contended, Žilnik prosecutor, self and dogmatic, anti “progressive, violate would and politics, Yugoslav of principles the with comply not could decision a Such criticism. of freedom against as well as freedom artistic the against this directed reinforce be would film the Banning letter. did defense the of remarks closing Žilnik the in argument court. the in questions suggestive and rhetorical such ask to self [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] [Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
The final defense speech of Želimir Žilnik, 1969, in: Svetozar Udovički, The final defense speech of Želimir Žilnik, 1969, in: Svetozar Udovički, The final defense speech of Želimir Žilnik, 1969, in: Svetozar Udovički, - - aaeet ti wy xoig h cnrdcin n iaeuc o te intended the of inadequacy and contradiction the exposing way this management, ropriate for him for ropriateapp was it that discourse a such within was It socialism. management . 146
n. It was not enough to simply mention this; attached to the letter was a lengthy lengthy a was letter the to attached this; mention simply to enough not was It n. - management postulates of social relationship” social of postulates management
: : :
179. 177. 179.
74 actions of the court and the basic values of values basic the and court the of actions Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. Neoplanta. Za Internu Upot final speech in court Žilnik Žilnik court in speech final . 144
The underlying point point underlying The
authors and and authors . rebu. rebu. 145
The The - CEU eTD Collection 150 149 148 147 - self the to appealing by film the defend could Žilnik 1969, in place taking criticism”.artistic and“objectivescientific the over take to administration state the Czechoslovakia” of task the in not was it situation that admitted court the the Furthermore, to attitude our politics, agrarian relationships, like film such one thus and strong sufficiently is society socialist “our that stated court the problematic, as seen was film s for permission the and received a groupby specialists of was seen film that the who confirmed Relations, Cultural Foreign the for Commission the of president the of assistant Deneš, Oto necessarilythea case, not was this that explained Žilnik decided. already is everything when fiercely so film his defending is director the that surprised be to appeared who judge, the with conversation decis the recalled court the Eventually, perceivedbe and be mistakenly an act] may situation, interpreted [such as provocative” in developments international current recent the of “complications the the regarding that asserted he Czechoslovakia to Alluding another. by made decisions recall to trying is institution state one when situation baffling the of because least the in not Yugoslavia, of image the compromise would point this at film the Banning internationally. issued already festival in mentioned was and Festival, Film Berlin the to invited was film that stated explicitly Žilnik practicalities. of list a included arguments Further [Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
: 112 Film] Yugoslav Zone in Twilight The
The decision of County Court in Belgrade 30 June, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. 4. The decision of County Court in Belgrade , 30 June, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. 4. Nikodijević, Milan The final defense speech of Želimir Žilnik, 1969, in: Svetozar Udovički, creening abroad. Eventually, a somewhat vague decision was made: even though the the though even made: was decision vague somewhat a Eventually, abroad. creening Zabranjeni Bez nd thus the judge decided to lead the court normally court the lead to decided judge the thus nd :
175.
Zabrane: Zona Sumraka Jugoslovenskog Filma [Banned Without a Ban: –
113.
Rani radovi ion to ban the film. Žilnik remembers that he had a a had he that remembers Žilnik film. the ban to ion 75 ant usin u inter our question cannot 150 Importantly enough, Importantly Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. ulctos ht were that publications
. 148 management
They invited invited They - republican in the trial the in . . 147 149
CEU eTD Collection 153 152 151 life” cinema contemporary from six withdrawn following the for and 1969 autumn “the by that “c and festivals Western of original) in marks “experts” (quotation the for created itself film the and “conventional”, be to deemed was public extensivewascriticism Negative pressure public huge the recalls Žilnik Berlin in festival the After festivals. journals. film specialized the Film 16 the In FIPRESCI. and Generation Young of Award an received was it festival same the in extensive: more way was with honored was film the that acclaim critical and awards it: worth been have to proved Festival Film International Berlin the to film the sending for fight The public spheres radovi Rani public: things Making 3.3 film was absolved and could enter the film festival in n. Berli the successfully, ended trial the As authorities. official the criticizing while even doctrine, March 1970). However, Žilnik did observe that the crowd [of cinema goers] was lessening was goers] cinema [of crowd the that observe did Žilnik However, 1970). March radovi : 113 Film] Yugoslav Zone in Twilight The
his “anarcho May 18, 1969. Svetozar Udo
Milan Nikodijević, Nikodijević, Milan “ Maksimović, M. ŽelimirŽilnik, Buden, Boris Festival it was awarded the special Jury Prize, and it also received several awards severalfrom received also it Prize,and Jury special the awarded was Festivalit a nt hw ayhr; t ol priiae n festi in participate could it anywhere; shown not was
Rani radovi - liberalism”and forcedwithdrawto from the LeagueCommunistsof Yugoslavia.of
Rani radovi Rani Zabranjeni Bez Zabrane: Zona Sumraka Jugoslovenskog Filma [Banned Without a Ban: received the highest evaluation, the Golden Bear. However, the list of list the However, Bear. Golden the evaluation, highest the received vički, vički, Uvod U Prošlost [Introduction to the Past]
mladog reditelja Žilnika” [Early Works of Young Film Director Žilnik], Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] Rani radovi Rani . 151 –
114. There were more consequen
In some of the cases, the positive reception among the the among reception positive the cases, the of some In within the national and the international 76 a as wdl dsrbtd n oeg film foreign in distributed widely also was . 153
hs i nt eesrl ma that mean necessarily not did This - ee yas te im a fully was film the years, seven om
: 67. - as eg, ef n arb in Zagreb in Geff (e.g., vals
ces, like Žilnik being blamed for parlors”
for banning the film. film. the banning for 152 . Žilnik contends contends Žilnik .
: 226 Politika – th
227.
Rani Rani Pula
, CEU eTD Collection “the specific taste” of one cultural one of taste” specific “the and fruit” “forbidden the of expectation of atmosphere peculiar “a way this in creating the on publications that was process discussion of center the became Žilnik sphere. public the in discussion extensive an generated Festival” PulaFilm inaward and Bear Golden inga winn and again approved banned, “approved, film the of situation whole the that fact the than important less even was film the regarding debate harsh continuing reception.The publicthe in aspect oneimportantmore was There was he which reality Yugoslav the was such as ideas Marxist and notthe resorting to criticize, continuously it that 1968; the of revolutionaries young - self Yugoslav the not was it that idea Žilnik’s accept to seemed reviewers the of Many heard. also were voices positive 159 158 157 156 155 1969 August late In conflict. the 154 of story the public more make to was intention the contrary, the On courtroom. the to Žilnik led had which of decisions powers, ambiguous the with terms better in get to ed help have might which happened just had what forget and conceal to trying not were Udovićki Svetozar and Žilnik Želimir both Bear, Golden the winning be encouraged somewhat maybe and trial, the of end successful the After the trial became at least . law the of release the after For Internal Use] SvetozarUdovički, Neoplanta. Z from cinemas; but it’s just a guess. See: Žilnik’s letter to Udovićki, 3 March 1970, in: VA, F430, box 14/18.
Nikola Lorencin (unidentified article), in: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. Bogdan Tirnanić, “Kucanje na otvorena vrata” [Knocking at the Open Door], He was an actor in “In last months, everybody is talking aboutlist him”, književni Hrvatski Studentski list, Zagreb, 21 October, 1969. It is not clear what “the law” refers to here. Might be the case that the order to withdraw a Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] . 156 : 190. Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
As Bogdan Tirnanić Bogdan As Rani radovi
as important as the film itself. , as well as a friend of Žilnik. management socialism that fell under Žilnik’s scrutiny, but the but scrutiny, Žilnik’s under fell that socialism management 154
But domestic reception was not solely negative, though; though; negative, solely not was reception domestic But - politicalscandal” 157
contended in Zagreb’s Zagreb’s in contended inks su wud per n rs dy y day, by day press in appear would issue Žilnik’s 77
: 199. . 158 159
In many publications the process of of process the publications many In
, April 1969, in: Svetozar Udovički, Telegram Telegram : 192. . 155
, the result of this this of result the , , 22 August, 1969, in: Rani radovi
CEU eTD Collection eventually it turned out to be a successful project. The production cost of the film reached film the of cost production The project. successful a be to out turned it eventually of situation financial co of contract the of nature the of Because shoul copies remaining that insisting was Žilnik and Zagreb, in received well very was magazine the the to solely idea an such for support financial provided Province the of Commission Cultural the indirectly, . moment that at through going was cinema Yugoslav that values the of also but radovi, of only not fate the demonstrating of way a as seen was book The reactions. negative and positive both including film, the surrounded which conflict the with deal would which 163 162 161 160 - self under declarations cultural production actions and their regarding their between differences the attitude, authorities central the of nature contradictory t of exposed it argument: defense important provided 1960s, the of context the in publications, to related debate public whole the with deal to had book intended The costs. publication book a of 50% cover could they that so cinematography of development the for devoted funds from money some allocate to Neoplanta Film 1.
Žilnik’s letter to Udovićki, 3 March 1970, in: VA, F430, box 14/18, p. 2. Minutes of the meeting of the Worker’s Council, 6 November,1969, in: AV, F430, box 53, p. 2. Letter to the Cultural Commission of the Province, 19 November, 1970, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. 1. Udovićki’s Letter to the Cultural Commission of the Province, he studio’s production through administrative means. In this way, it highlighted the the highlighted it way, this In means. administrative through production studio’s he . 161
n Nove In b sl i GF a well as GEFF in sold be d Rani radoviRani
ural Council. They were asking the Council Council the asking were They Council. ural Cult Province the to letter a sent br 99 h peaain f h 3 the of preparation the 1969 mber Rani radovi Rani new was finished and distributed. and finished was
Yugoslav film s o aalbe n h acie of archive the in available not is Rani Rani . the attempts of the authorities to limit the scope scope the limit to authorities the of attempts the 163 , and to open the discussion about the crisis of of crisis the about discussion the open to and , - radovi. production with with production
78 The reason why it mattered was that such such that was mattered it why reason The
t a Žli’ ie: o ees a book, a release to idea: Žilnik’s was It Neoplanta 25 August, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. rd 162
su o magazine of issue
Sometime later it appeared that that appeared it later Sometime
Avala film and its directors with an with directors its and film 160 the exact account of the the of account exact the
It appears that, even if if even that, appears It . However, However, Neoplanta. management. ROK
devoted ,
Rani Rani CEU eTD Collection . had invested exploitation film the of cinemas, years two within from film the withdraw to pressu re quick the despite revenues, distribution to claims further any have not did costs ofpart covered, production intervened. never Having their Yugoslav authorities 166 165 164 with work to going you are plan, the down making. decision of moment of story the of end the outcome, positive relatively its Despite covered with dinars, 000 711 regard doubts little had latter the that appeared, It Udovićki. Svetozar to letter his in Žilnik asked
[Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
Žilnik’s letter to Udovićki, 3 March 1970, in: VA, F430, box 14/18, p. 2. The estimated return reached 384 000 dinars. See: Svetozar Udovički, ŽelimirŽilnik, Buden, Boris ing all of these questions. ofthese all ing 164
because they were responsible for international distr international for responsible were they because 165
Neoplanta’s : 242. Uvod U Prošlost [Introduction to the Past]:
“The law taken into consideration consideration into taken law “The
investing only 41 000. “Avala’s” part of costs was fully was costs of part “Avala’s” 000. 41 only investing lt ln Žli’ fa. rm h domestic the From flat. Žilnik’s alone let Neoplanta, Neoplanta Avala 79 again, what is their situation,etc.” theiretc. is what again, gained around ten times more than it it than more times ten around gained
67. Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu.
ibution, a right with which which with right a ibution, -
are you going to narrow to going you are Rani radovi Rani was also a a also was Avala
166 ,
CEU eTD Collection cultural production, cinema included. It was exactly at this point that that point this at exactly was It included. on cinema control production, their cultural increase to bodies political led tensions international and Domestic the inner to the connected and 1968 federation, of the aftershocks throughout sentiments nationalist growing the to due destabilized was situation political Yugoslav the production film the of course the In and both Makavejev that skills institutional and reputation the of result a was support such of possibility The Neoplanta o sector private Yugoslavthe of inefficiency the circumscribe to efforts its In film. the of production the enabled which factors the of part one just was this However, of appearance the possible making in part crucial a played this though Even acclaim). Žilnik’s of foreign case the in seen have we as unchallenged, go and not did recognition juries festival critics, workers, film fellow the and society) socialist of interest the represent to intended tools discursive and (institutional sphere “official” the between collusion relative a facilitated recognition professional This the that background rela and reputation the production film of beginning the At Yugoslavia. within supervision film and production film both regulating policies the in shift gradual a caused which country the in climate political the within change rapid of period a in evolved Makavejev’s Dušan of stages postproduction and production The 4 Chapter
“alternative” artistic milieu (which relied mostly on peer recognition from the the from recognition peer on mostly relied (which milieu artistic “alternative” was also relying on foreign markets which provided important financial support. support. financial important provided which markets foreign on relying also was -
“WR: Misterije organizma” and the End of the Debate Endofthe andthe organizma” Misterije “WR: Neoplanta new wave
as such in the had gained films had gained since the early 1960s was still influential. still was 1960s early the since gained had films - - self the of contradictions 80
previous years. previous WR: MisterijeWR: organizma. WR: MisterijeWR: organizma manag
mn discourse. ement f film production, production, film f ted institutional institutional ted WR: Misterije Rani radovi,Rani
it it CEU eTD Collection had resorted to before the controversy of controversy the before to resorted had he policies risky the continuing about doubts many have to seem not did Udovićki Svetozar 4.1State, Professional Opinion andForeign Markets self the of contradictions general the within place taking although which, alliances relational and contextual on depended results the sphere: cultural Yugoslav the within management t struggles power the within card winning no was There actions. social similar radically seem might what of outcomes different radically for allowed period the of context cultural Yugoslav the methodological for plea a be partly will chapter this sense, this In come. to years the in studio the of life the affecting self radovi, with comparison in had, moves discursive and pragmatic same the how analyze to film. theof process production the that framed setting in developments these of analysis and account detailed a provide will I follows what In contradictions. insoluble seemingly these of test litmus a radovi of case the in circumscribe to managed have to seemed Žilnik Želimir and Udovićki - self the of and organization economic the of contradictions diverse increasing, was production film over control bureaucratic organizma
- - manage unsuccessful, 1968, in unlike were, production cultural of role the and management became acute. Developments evolving around around evolving Developments acute. became radically different effects in 1971: si 1971: in effects different radically a cmltd n rlae, ny o et fec politic fierce a meet to only released, and completed was ment discourse that I tried to describe, could bear various that Itodiscourse could bear results. ment tried describe, - self and markets bureaucracy, between relationship the defined hat and theoretical modesty from the historian’s side, showing how how showing side, historian’s the from modesty theoretical and management discourse that that discourse management R . In fact, the idea that that idea the fact, In ani radovi. milar manners of framing and conceptualizing and framing of manners milar 81 appears as as MisterijeWR: organizma appears WR WR
and its production will allowme will production its and h isiuinl n discursive and institutional the Neoplanta’s al backlash. As the the As backlash. al Neoplanta Film
director Rani Rani Rani
CEU eTD Collection scripts: one of them was Puriša Đorđević’s Puriša was them of one scripts: haste, In competition. funding proposed he when time orga the around Exactly Pula. or Berlin Chicago, with films 171 170 169 168 167 he producer, film a As audience. the of needs the for cater to had he which in competition of types other to similar competition a was funding state for applying that aware much very was Udovićki decision. this determined which considerations other we there But public. international the and professional the towards orientation success“ Đorđević’s 100% and Makavejev’s a for rely could we whom on authors scripts other Among Đorđević. P. about said be can same The director. film renown internationally an is Makavejev that deny could “Nobody consideration. into taken be to had also themselves director scripts; in presented ideas the of quality the by only not determined was choice his that Council Worker’s the to explained He films. two these proposed personally who WR: 1969 December as early as conceived was Reich Wilhelm on film Makavejev’s produce should
Innocence Unprotected depiction of the partisans. For more on Đorđević’s oeuvre, see: Goulding, Pula and Venice film festivals in 1967, but at the same time received criticisms regarding the inappropriate By that time Makavejev was already an established film director. He had produced three produced had He director. film established an already was Makavejev time that By
Zapisnik [Minutes], 11 December, Puriša Đorđević was one of the Yugoslav New Wave Manis Nota Bird ŽelimirŽilnik, Buden, Boris Izvod iz zapisnika [Excerpt from the Minutes], 8 December, 1969, in: AV, F430, box 53, p. 1. nizma 167 Misterije organizma ( , in a time when Žilnik’s film was being withdrawn from . distribution Žilnik’swaswithdrawn when being film , in a time Avala Film to to –
Neoplanta Film and this is according to the opinion of other professionals other of opinion the to according is this and (1965), Love Affair, or the Case of the Missing Switchboard Operator
(1968). 169 , which earned him awards at important film festivals such as as such festivals film important at awards him earned which , Uvod U Prošlost Uvod
1971). Udovićki was the one one the was Udovićki MysteriesWR: of the Organism, 1971). scripts scripts te utrl omsin f h Poic anucd its announced Province the of Commission Cultural the , 1969, in: AV, F430, box 53, p. 1. Neoplanta evinced film studio’s determination to continue its its continue to determination studio’s film evinced
[Introduction to the Past]
decided to participate in the contest with two with contest the in participate to decided 82 Nešto
filmmakers. His His filmmakers.
( Something)
Morning . : 67. 171 Liberated CinemaLiberated
170 The choice of submitting submitting of choice The , another another , ( Jutro
had to predict what what predict to had , 1967) was
(1967), and 168 : 91 91 : – – WR: Misterije Misterije WR:
there are no no are there Makavejev’s –
97.
awarded in
re also also re s CEU eTD Collection 173 172 the in coopted four year this that important very is “It enterprise: which through forms expected less projects other Yugoslavia” in of cinematography the engaged of development “the were supporting and Vojvodina in program had film they special that a Moreover, organized exchange. film international and production film amateur could they which in ways for looking was studio the functions basic its besides that mentions Udovićki Svetozar 1968 of report yearly the in example, and Neoplanta Province, the in mission” “social studio’s of part as declared be to continued This Neoplanta and films Žilnik early the to nature in similar that productions in engaging by studio the to assigned function social initial the from 1969 since fact, In film within Makavejev’s produce to possibility the about enthusiastic as be will Province the have might Makavejev proposed what from differently rather defined been had themes) local (namel needs These needs. educational its further - self of representative the be to assuming institution, state was client the case particular this In client. its of demands and interests the be would Makavejevas filmdirector. to presented However, even if we refuse to speculate about the extent to which the original idea of the film was
53,
Izveštajraduo ustanove za 1968godinu Regretfully, it is not possible to access the original documents with which the film applied for funding.
p. 5. 5. p. Vojvodina as . 172 did not miss the opportunity to emphasize their achievements in this field. For For field. this in achievements their emphasize to opportunity the miss not did the Commission, it is clear that by that time its members knew aesthetic and thematic profile of a t cnrbt t fl euain f on ad nxeine filmmakers. inexperienced and young of education film to contribute to was
Despite this risk, however, Udovićki expected that the Cultural Commission of of Commission Cultural the that expected Udovićki however, risk, this Despite Neoplanta Neoplanta Neoplanta
ciiis n wo .. i a oeeal ftr wl become will future foreseeable a in (...) who and activities itself itself was. was more and more often taking directions that deviated deviated that directions taking often more and more was
[ Report on the work of the Institution], 1968, in: AV, F430, box Neoplanta
83 . For instance, one of the tasks of of tasks the of one instance, For Rani radovi. could contribute to this common socialist socialist common this to contribute could - five young people ( people young five y, short documentaries, socialist and and socialist documentaries, short y, management socialist society and to to and society socialist management support the promotion of of promotion the support . 173 ) were unemployed)
T here were even were here were CEU eTD Collection for debutants” for [ “we that m the at the participants other the for of unexpectedly rather declared, Udovićki midst meeting the In contradictions. these of illustration straightforward very but one, The studio. the of workings actual the within attitude different a hide did façade this However, cadres” for school a “as served also studio the that stated was it achievements and 1971 in evident were house production the of function social the and value educational the on emphasis 177 176 175 174 the for program the in included be to films of list The plan. production film of plan another when year, following the asserted further were production relying of policy The suggestionsinto consideration. these take to refused Udovićki authors”. raising from than rather “authors from living at aim not should studio the that and people, accomplished already of number certain a for policies such employing by that argument the with Udovićki contradict to tried them of Some rule. a such of existence the about known not have to appeared not them of did Some meeting. studio, the of to in participants other convince coming scripts of number growing the of consequence logical a added) (emphasis etc.” organizers,assistants, camera assistants, director’s authors, the Workers Council, 6 January, 1970, in: AV, F430, box 19/67. 53,
Minutes of the meeting of the Workers Council, 25 April, 1970, in: AV, F430, box 19/67, p. 3. An advisory body established for the evaluation of submitted SvetozarUdovički, Izveštajo
p. 7. 7. p. negotiations with the Artistic Council Artistic the with negotiations Neoplanta Film radu ustanove za 1968 godinu 177 , when in the introductory pages of the mimeo report about studio‘s work studio‘s about report mimeo the of pages introductory the in when ,
in the production program. The justification that he provided, that this is is this that provided, he that justification The program. production the in Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] n h ciial acclaimed critically the on ] are relying on outstanding authors, and will leave only one place place one only leave will and authors, outstanding on relying are ]
[ Report on the work of the Institution], 1968, in: AV, F430, box 176 Neoplanta
84 over the production plan of 1970 provide just just provide 1970 of plan production the over
film projects; see: Minutes of the meeting of auteur risked to secu to risked ad pooaie tp of type “provocative” and s Neoplanta re a creative monopoly creative a re : 5.
was developing developing was
. 175 . eeting, eeting, 174
The The CEU eTD Collection and pay for . and pay it film, the within advertise to company the of wish the ensure to expected was that abroad and home both recognition critical and awards through Žilnik’s)expressed achievements and name case, this (in directors the was it films; to in advertisings inserting of intention in orientation Market sector. private the in funds for hunt the in used also were they sector; state the in only not sell of names surprisingly, less somewhat Probably 181 180 179 178 of part bigger Miloš Branko Godina, Žilnik, Šajtinac, Borislav by films short as well as Žilnik, Antić, Miroslav by films feature 1970 the of end the by projects: such supported Province the of Commission Cultural the level, regional a On sector. cultural the supported in space some gaining were films aware socially its and cinema, Yugoslav of wave new that seemed 1960s it the of end the Towards right. to be appeared projects such Udović home for Christmas returning workers emigrant of melancholy the and modernization, of effects negative society by scripts Šajtinac Bronislav (both suicides authority, of power pertaining the of criticism topics: critical of range broad included film documentary short of field the in funding for competition See: Udovićki’s letter to the general director of “Interkomerc”, 19 Udovički,
Report on the status of production, 19 November, 19 Such was t Proposed program, 3 March, 1971, in: F430, box 14/18. Who was a rather acknowledged director of animation films. For the list of films and awards see: Svetozar ki’s intuition that the Cultural Commission of the Province will be willing to support support to willing be will Province the of Commission Cultural the that intuition ki’s “os hs en two mean this (“does Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] he case of Žilnik’s 180 ’s state Neoplanta ’s
178 179 ), the divergence between “principles and deeds” of self of deeds” and “principles between divergence the ),
(both by Želimir Žilnik). Sloboda ili strip (Freedom strip ili Sloboda or Cartoons), the film which was never completed. - aens ad rss f oas” akdBak Milošević), Branko asked morals?”, of crisis and facedness ’s production sometimes went as far as to the the to as far as went sometimes production Neoplanta’s - . plan production supported 85
70, in: AV, F430, box 14/18.
accomplished directors were supposed to to supposed were directors accomplished
April, 1971, in: AV, F430, box 14/18. : 8 181 –
However, these tendencies these However, 21.
vć opie the comprised ević - management management
state state -
CEU eTD Collection from Munich “Telepool” and Bavarian Television Bavarian and “Telepool” Munich from sector: private for funding of source important Another to forprovide support Province decided of context the in is It self- the of needs the represent to supposed were which institutions official the and penetrating started acclaim production critical of cinema importance the standards, of evaluation professionalization The institutions. and circles political Makavejev’s factthe that time that by filmcompromiseddespite certain was within heavily having on keen very be would Ćolić, Milutin and of profile production the to corresponded fully directions both Confrontations”; Social on “Film as entitled was programs specialized the of one interestingly, more Even Yugoslavia. of setting cinematic and festivals foreign that way significance this the acclaim, international emphasizing received had that films the to devoted was program Tito” Broz Josip 183 182 [ festival film international the 1972 By level.federal a on present also were remained a problematic partner, while did provide an opportunity for opportunity an provide did while partner, problematic a remained co the Neoplanta’s of sign the a of also situation was but problematic markets, film international with engagement growing
], organized “under the auspices o auspices the “under organized The Brave New World],
Report of the business trip to Munich, 25 March, 1970, in: AV, F430, box 14/18, p. 1. Letterfrom the organizers of festival the to - Neoplanta production partners was partners production 182
included, among other, two important sections. The main part of the the of part main The sections. important two other, among included, Neoplanta Film these tendencies that in 1970 the Cultural Commission of the the of Commission Cultural the 1970 in that tendencies these entered into a co a into entered
Yugoslav film industry. Until then, one of the main main the of one then, Until industry. film Yugoslav . Later o Later . Neoplanta, 5 January, 1972, in: AV, F430, 19/67. WR: MisterijeWR: organizma. Avala WR: MisterijeWR: organizma - 86 production with the West German companies companies German West the with production n, the organizers of the festival, Petar Volk Volk Petar festival, the of organizers the n, Film . 183 in the program, the MisterijeWR: organizma in
, which, from a financial point of view view of point financial a from which, , This reflected not only on only not reflected This f the President of the Republic the of President the f critics had for the domestic domestic the for had critics
came from the foreign the from came management society. management
Neoplanta Film Hrabri novisvet
Neoplanta ’s
to to
CEU eTD Collection there is no proof that such endeavors were successful were endeavors such that proof no is there attr to attempted though even limited; was sector state the of outside from funding doubtful remains side its from input financial any appeared, regarding trouble ideological and bureaucratic of signs first co the among 188 187 186 185 184 Misterije WR: passed, organizmawas . to production was launched overitself film the of cost rest The “Telepool”. from came 000 500 another dinars, 000 Province 400 provided the of Commission Cultural the following: the was scheme ding fun final The one. productive and obvious an as appears partner German Western a of choice the mind, prod film feature in engage
was considered to be “ funding was needed fo
811. Politika, June, 1971, in: Svetozar Udovički,
See: Svetozar Udovički, The composition of these resources is not entirely clear. However, the fact that investment of this kind Cooperation with enterprises worked well in the case of commissioned films, but not necessarily so when Jovan Kesar, “Pucanj u revoluciju!?” [The Shot Into the Revolution] R. Popović, “Ko stvara misteriju oko mis
4 June, 1971, in: Svetozar Udovički, . However, as the funding was secured and the primary stage of state supervision supervision stage state of primary the and secured was funding asthe However, . Avala - producers of producers – immedia
was covered by by covered was act some investment from the enterprises to some of their projects, projects, their of some to enterprises the from investment some act r “ r Neoplanta Neoplanta’s” own projects. Neo planta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] . project the from withdrew tely ’s” own working capital of sorts is of no less importance. uction. As mentioned in the last chapter, chapter, last the in mentioned As uction. Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] for some time; however, when the the when however, time; some organizma Misterije WR: for Neoplanta. terije?” [Who is Creating the Mystery Around the Mystery?], Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
87 187
In this way the studio imposed huge risks risks huge imposed studio the way this In . 185
The number of other ways of securing securing of ways other of number The . 186 184 Večernije n
All these circumstances kept in in kept circumstances these All
Furthermore, the existence of of existence the Furthermore, WR: MisterijeWR: organizma 188 ovosti Neoplanta
Avala Film [ Evening : 257.
–
: 829. sometimes sometimes half of the the of half
News], 11 was listed listed was
: CEU eTD Collection self move, contradictory a In felt. acutely themselves made chapter second the in identified self- the by claimed decentralization socialis Yugoslav of principles basic also but polity, Yugoslav the in place its and “tribe” Croatian the affecting only not were apparatus control, centralized that claimed over s Communist bureaucratic of League Croatian the discourse, re a In centralism. and unitarism but nationalism, not was Yugoslavia of problem the that 1970 January in Communists of League Croatian th by marked was and Croatia, from came sharpest The levels. international - self and of ideology unifying the with discontent rising of expression domestic on both rapidly, change to began While 4.2 Redefining the balance of power, redefining self comparison to Croatian. However, national conflicts were not confined to Croatia only; by only; Croatia to confined not were conflicts national However, Croatian. to comparison in wasoverrepresented Serbian grounds that the on languages separate two of recognition refus again, once question be to language the raised Hrvatska Matica congress, the Following Spring. Croatian the as known came which years in Yugoslavia in discontent national of outburst harshest the of point starting a just was This clash. often would that claims competing in elites national and Belgrade both by used be could it Consequently, councils. workers’ local and markets through identities regional or ethnic local expressing of means the and identity Yugoslav
- management was to provide both the social social the both provide to was management WR: Misterije organizma - grow and the Serbian hegemony over this expanding bureaucratic bureaucratic expanding this over hegemony Serbian the and grow ed to accept the notion of Serbo of notion the accept to ed was being being was management doctrine. The contradictions which we we which contradictions The doctrine. management 88 e stance taken in the Tenth Congress of the the of Congress Tenth the in taken stance e rdcd te oiia ciae n Yugoslavia in climate political the produced, : ae o lcl uooy n the and autonomy local on based m: and economic underpinning of a common common a of underpinning economic and - prpito o self of appropriation - management - Croatian and demanded the demanded and Croatian management Yugoslavism management - management CEU eTD Collection ebr f C hd opand bu te ea i stig p n mrvmn for improvement Institute an up Studies setting Hungarian in delay the about complained had LCY of member pre equilibrium of Serbian to led disbalance which cases of trigger from the exempt them. One entirely not however, uprisings; national of context the in peaceful most the remained 192 191 190 189 hold. on reforms the putting considering tense so got republics within and among relationship the 1971 spring By Serbian backlash as Rózsa lost hisscholarship. Yugoslavia. of “niggers” as Hungarians depicting language, their and Rózsa Sándor student a which in Symposion, periodical Hungarian in article an by followed was conflict This Republic. Serbian the of Committee Executive the of president vice the of post the to t advancemen his prevented b they 1971 summer precondition for Soviets of increasing their control over Yugoslavia. Tito was increasingly was Tito Yugoslavia. over control their increasing of Soviets for precondition a as seen was country the within instability Political maintained. was “friend” socialist achie was spring Czechoslovak the after USSR and Yugoslavia between reconciliation formal the if Even response. Soviet aggressive of trigger possible a as seen was Yugoslavia within instability political the hand, other the On wa situation political the and federation the within equilibrium apparent the destroying were aspirations nationalist rising hand, one the On concern. The Three Yugoslavias: State Yugoslavias: Three The
http://www.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/publications/workingPapers/batovic.pdf: 14. Blocs 1965 -
Batović, Ante, “The Balkans in Turmoil - Ramet, Yugoslavias TheThree Ramet, Yugoslavias TheThree For more on national conflicts in different republics and provinces of federation see: Sabrina P. Ramet, 1971” (presented at the LSE Cold War Studies Programme, LSE Ideas, 2009), sent in the region was the so the was region the in sent . federation Yugoslav the throughout widespread ecame - Building and Legitimation, 1918 : 241. : 241. . 190
The Serbian press accused him of nationalism and and nationalism of him accused press Serbian The
Croatian Spring and the Yugoslav Position Between the Cold War 192
89 There were two interrelated reasons of Tito’s Tito’s of reasons interrelated two were There
described the inferior position of Hungarians Hungarians of position inferior the described -
called Rehák affair. László Rehák, an active active an Rehák, László affair. Rehák called e rte qiky te er f h greater the of fear the quickly, rather ved - 2005 , c2006: 240 240 c2006: ,
s getting increasingly tense. tense. increasingly getting s –
243. 191
This again caused caused again This that Tito started Tito that 189 –
Hungarian Vojvodina Vojvodina Új Új CEU eTD Collection as he called it, “orgone energy”), can cause a neurosis will erupt. Makavejev used this this used Makavejev erupt. will neurosis a cause can energy”), “orgone it, called he as i author this encountered first he since Reich of figure eccentric the to attention Makavejev’s attracted What Reich. Wilhelm psychologist socialist the about film a making Yugoslavia to USA from countries taking were developments these As focus chapter. of this - self around practices institutional and discursive of reshuffling this of victims collateral the of One well. self the of structure the and of authorities bureaucratic reshuffling autonomy, local a between to relationship the lead regard positions fore, the to again once contradiction this brought situation The Yugoslavism. of importance the stressing by or identities and autonomy local emphasizing by either manners, opposite totally in used be could practices institutional self the time same the At communities. local (national) o will the expressing of capable autonomy, local of harbingers as councils workers’ and - self the with interwoven se the in show to tried I As sphere. cultural the over control growing into resulted priority this and priority, a becoming was country the within stability political Regaining 1960s. of re certain required situation political gener the of negotiation tense field, political the within negotiation 193 dimensionsexaggeratedrather despiteits sphere, political a the and this, about cautious
od hpe, rbes f ainl dniy n rgoa atnm wr intimately were autonomy regional and identity national of problems chapter, cond Ibid, 14.
management was management
- al official discourse and policies as they were applied in the course course the in applied were they as policies and discourse official al management discourse which greatly affected the fil the affected greatly which discourse management nthe 1950s was Reich’s theory that unreleased sexual energy (or, management discourse, as well as with the function of markets of function the with as well as discourse, management Neoplanta rgument of Soviet danger started gaining weight in the the in weight gaining started danger Soviet of rgument
lc, aaee ws rvlig hog different through travelling was Makavejev place, itself and itself 90 , the empirical the MisterijeWR: organizma, - . management discourse and its its and discourse management 193
Outside of the boundaries of of boundaries the of Outside m industry as industry m
1971 f - CEU eTD Collection pnaet, oee, a te at hn Ygsa atoiis edd i and increasing, was Union Soviet the to respect needed in stance Yugoslavia’s regarding confusion authorities Yugoslav thing last the was however, Spontaneity, for local initiatives and spontaneoussocialist organization. fertile grounda andas country the over structurespanning bureaucratic a as both councils, autonomy local of enabler an as and identity Yugoslav trans of discourse unifying a both as role double its through facing was discourse 194 top in lies reason the and achieve, to difficult very be can revolution the and orgasm an both that idea underlying an by connected intermingle, revolution the and sexuality of powers Sovi - self the of (representative Milena liberated politically and sexually between story love a of plot fictional the with intertwines which Reich, Wilhelm of work and life the on elaborates part documentary the parts; two of consists film The matters. political of commentary satirical a as liberation sexual of theory spontaneity? ho and organization, destroying without spontaneity allow to how organization: and spontaneity of dilemma the question to liberation, own their in engage to people enabling of to possibility on reflect to intention an with autocratic, socialism of types different two represent to figures these on relied Makavejev film. the of part fictional the in role central a occupied Vladimir and Milena love the movie, the for unfortunately probably and However, Reic Wilhelm of framework overarching the within Yugoslavia and Union Soviet right Nazism, incorporated Makavejev
Dušan Makavejev. Interview by Christian Braad Thomsen. Video recording. Denmark, 1972. et ice skater appropriately named Vladimir Illych. The plot lines of the liberating liberating the of lines plot The Illych. Vladimir named appropriately skater ice et - on osrit ipsd y aiu rgms In regimes. various by imposed constraints down 194
o cran xet hs wr te iems ht h self- the that dilemmas the were these extent certain a To - wing tendencies in the McCarthy era, Stalinism, Stalinism, era, McCarthy the in tendencies wing 91 aaeet uolv oils) n the and socialism) Yugoslav management
through markets and workers’ workers’ and markets through w to organize without killing killing without organize to w - hate relationship between between relationship hate WR: MisterijeWR: organizma, , self , - management and and management n 1971. The The 1971. n management
h’s theory. theory. h’s for this this for - ethnic CEU eTD Collection self inner the off cut and country the within stability political regain to means only the is control that appeared it when moment the at so doing was he And control. authoritative or ideology overarching of kind any of usefulness the denounced also but right, is what and good is what for as statements clear refuse not did only not which way - self for solution better a for looking was 196 195 permiss received film the applied: Yugoslav still that speech of seemed freedom and field it cultural the beginning of professionalization the the to commitment In spring. 1971 the of period unfavorable Thus industry thefilm within Tensions 4.3 self and War, Liberation People's revolution, the discrediting be to appeared it for harmful politically anti and anti ideological and communism set criticizing clearly be to any appeared it provide guidelines; not did film the Furthermore, Union. Soviet the film. the against voiced organizma criticisms the of some in well reflected was violate public morals and be harmful for the youth. the for harmful be and morals public violate to deemed was film the dangerous, politically being besides unnoticed; pass not did film and revolutions socialist and sexual between comparison
SvetozarUdovički, This feature of the film was often defined as “ideological confusion”. - management as such. as management
entered the second stage of state control in the very very the in control state of stage second the MisterijeWR: organizma entered - oit tiue aog h sm lines same the along attitudes Soviet appeared as possibly offensive for countries like People's like countries for offensive possibly as appeared - management socialism, the basic tenets of Yugoslav socialism. Naturally, the Naturally, socialism. Yugoslav of tenets basic the socialism, management Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
ion for public screening from the Film Review Review Film the from screening public for ion
man 92 agement socialism, but he was doing this in a a in this doing was he but socialism, agement . 195 196
utemr, th Furthermore,
Makavejev may have stated that he he that stated have may Makavejev the strong sexual content in the the in content sexual strong the
- omns, anti- communism, : 726 Republic of China or China of Republic e film was seen as as seen was film e - contradictions of of contradictions –
727. WR: MisterijeWR:
Stalinist CEU eTD Collection Isaković, film critic Milutin Ćolić, scriptwriter Arsen Diklić Arsen scriptwriter Ćolić, Milutin critic film Isaković, 201 200 199 198 197 correct bureaucratically This voting. from abstained film, the of director the being Commission the in presence the before importance and o scope production in growing was that scene cultural “alternative” Neoplanta membe four only because valid not is permission previous the that emphasized letter the of Authors Serbia. of Republic Socialist the of Culture and Science Education, for Ministry the from validate that document official the obtained film the after week A contested. soon was decision this However, “without screening doubts” public for film the permission provided Commission Review Film perceived the regarding reservations certain had of case the in seen have we as filmmakers; wave new the by asserted avant- and stance critical the of supporters overt be to considered be o Most himself. Makavejev suggested, Serbia. SR of Commission SvetozarUdovički, SvetozarUdovički, May, 1971, in: Svetoz 811. Politika,
“ Letter form the Republican Secretary for Education, Science and Culture of SR Serbia, 18 May, 1971, in: Idem. Dragan Gajer, “’Luis Bunjuel’ na popravom ispitu” [‘Luis Buñuel’ on a Retake Exam], Express R. Popović, “Ko stvara misteriju oko misterije?” [Who is Creating the Mystery Around th Neoplanta
4 June, 1971, in: Svetozar Udovički,
. 199 attempted to rely on the intersection between the official decision making and and making decision official the between intersection the on rely to attempted
’s” response to Republican Secretary for Education, Science and Culture of SR Serbia, in: s f h rqie fv wr peet t h screening the at present were five required the of rs f Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] started: the studio appealed to Makavejev’s Makavejev’s to appealed studio the MisterijeWR: organizma started: ar Udovički, d its rights for public exhibition exhibition public for rights its d 197 Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] .
201 Members present at the screening were writer Antonije Antonije writer were screening the at present Members
He was considered to be the fifth lacking member who, who, member lacking fifth the be to considered was He Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] f the present members of the Commission could not not could Commission the of members present the f 93 blackness Neoplanta Film 198 , and, as and, , f i our. oee, the However, oeuvre. his of : 587. : 586. . 200 Neoplanta Film
In their response response their In , Ćolić Ćolić radoviRani , ad tendencies garde eevd letter a received e Mystery?], Mystery?], e , Express : 796.
, 30 30 ,
later later : CEU eTD Collection omnt” declare community” people’s contemporary of motive and power basic the “as revolution sexual the on put socialism general.in Furthermore, the emphasis that ideologi and systems reactionary and progressive the between differentiation of “lack the demonstrated film - self the of and revolution cle a with diversion”, political calculated and over “thought a be to film the proclaimed They impact. extensive an had organization Liberation) National for Struggle (the NOB of Tradition the of Development and Cultivation for Associations) Veterans War Civil of Union (the SUBNOR of Commission Province Vojvodina SAP the of side the from came film the 204 203 202 the what for as suggestion had film the of production the in invested were that a funds state the be: should retribution had even SUBNOR project. this for funding provided the by taken be for responsibility The expanded. was ones guilty of list the element: important more one contained SUBNOR of declaration the film, the of criticisms against action which through means the of one only was screenings public from film the Suspending permission for public screening remained remained argument socialist revolution. socialist the SAP Vojvodina Province Commission of SUBNOR. Tradition of NOB (the Struggle for National Liberation), 10 June, 1971, in: AV, F430, box 19/67. Henceforth:
This was not something specific to Yugoslavia; the film was censored for this reason in Britain as well. The task of which was protection of t Declaration of SAP Vojvodina Province C 203 WR
generally had in the Province, but in this particular case it seemed to have have to seemed it case particular this in but Province, the in had generally
author of the film, the production house, and the institutions which which institutions the and house, production the film, the of author
t and critical opinions regarding opinions critical and t consisten most the of One taken. was without response, and for a period of time the decision to recall the the recall to decision the time of period a for and response, without a atc aant h scea norms societal the against attack an d es” and in this way it attacked the ideology of communism and and communism of ideology the attacked it way this in and es” management society. Moreover, the indictment continued, the the continued, indictment the Moreover, society. management ar intention to undermine the basic achievements of socialist socialist of achievements basic the undermine to intention ar he memory of the liberation of Yugoslavia, as well as memory of the ommission of SUBNOR for Cultivation and Development of the active
94 . 202 .
It is difficult to judge what influence this this influence what judge to difficult is It WR: MisterijeWR: organizma did allegedly was to MisterijeWR: organizma was . 204
eie te common the Besides
CEU eTD Collection would be obliged to return the allocated funds.tothe return would obliged be consequence, a as film; the of production the of stages early the in Commission self understood badly a not did products, cultural certain of appropriateness the assessing of non- this of making the in invested had they which funds public the of and institutions public of status the regarding questions with complemented was film the of contents harmful ideologically the about discussion of trial the in present not something was which had, film the impact negative the of responsibility take to Province the of Commission Cultural the asked it time same the at But corner. tight very a in film the put it obviously, hand, one the 207 206 205 refuses Province the of Commission Cultural the that meant have would registering film’s the Rejecting Yugoslavia. of register film official the into included be MisterijeWR: organizma should follow a and screening public Yugoslaviafurther,a situationin complicatingnationalistaspirationsthe the were as June, in Early funder. public a as position its and Province the of Commission Cultural the press the in times several appeared Vojvodina of SAP SUBNOR the by made declaration the to References toberetrieved Sad For Internal Use] and 19/67.
400 people supposedly participated. See: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. Articles referring to the SAP Vojvodina Province Commission of SUBNOR declaration appeared in Declaration of the SAP Vojvodina Province Commission of SUBNOR, 10 June, 1971, in: AV, F430, box - Borba 207 management scheme support- management non
. The immediate objective of the of objective immediate The . . See: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] : 687. . banned be to had film the and , Neoplanta Film .
206
Even more importantly, though, it seemed to have directly affected affected directly have to seemed it though, importantly, more Even - up discussion on discussion up
socialist production. Were this local institutions capable institutions local this Were production. socialist the right to the funds that it had received from the the from received had it that funds the to right the socialistdeclaratio
meeting was to make a relevant decision whether whether decision relevant a make to was meeting was organized in Novi Novi in organized MisterijeWR: organizma was 95 205
This letter had several consequences. On On consequences. several had letter This ns and non- . Suddenly, the Suddenly, radovi.Rani socialist practices?socialist Neoplanta : 826, 83 826, : Dnevnik that that 0. 0.
CEU eTD Collection 211 210 209 208 meant also funding public society: management - self the of defenders and cause social the of representatives as themselves fashion could they as argument strong a with critics film’s the provided it inaccurate: was it as crucial Province. the of Commission Cultural the by provided was project the for funding the of fifth one only that fact the ignore to tended speech officia the from film the excluding for reason sufficient a was this and contract the of breach a meant have might screen whi result final the with common in much have not did argued, Kovaček project, initial the However, project. the approve to decided eventually they later, sometime Makavejev from script developed fully a received matters cultural over of monopoly public a in holding accused been had they that mentioned It form. primary its in application the reject did Council) this of chair the as him (and Council Executive the how sufficient, not were 1969 of December late in ed submitt scripts the how about narrative a delivering was Kovaček film. this for resources” “social provided Commission the that happened it how of explanation an rather but film, the of values ideological or aesthetical the not excuse. intricate an of form a took talk Kovaček’s whole the speech: his of background the in lurking was film the of supporter financial the regarding Commission the of Committee the , Kovaček Božidar of speech the with opened discussion The in: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] [Neoplanta.
400 000 out of 2 000 000 Bogdan Tirnanić, “Polemićni novosadski vikend” [The Polemical Weekend of Novi Sa Transcript of the sound recording of the meeting, in: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. Transcript of the sound recording of the meeting, in: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. 209 . This was of essential importance as deviation from the initial form of the film film the of form initial the from deviation as importance essential of was This .
For Use] Internal dinars dinars l register. l : 618 : 615. –
required for the production of the film.
619. . 208 210
ch the participants of the meeting had just seen on on seen just had meeting the of participants the ch
The accusation that members of SUBNOR expressed expressed SUBNOR of members that accusation The However, both the SUBNOR declaration and Kovaček’s Kovaček’s and declaration SUBNOR the both However, 96 n h Poic ad a a eut oc they once result, a as and, Province the in public responsibilities and, consequently, consequently, and, responsibilities public 211
This ignorance was as much much as was ignorance This
The main concern of his was was his of concern main The president of the Executive Executive the of president : 838. d],
NIN , 13 June, 1971, CEU eTD Collection 214 213 212 Go film of list long a 1972 early In stern. particularly be to proved attitudes Their established. was Province the of Commission increasing studio. the within felt be to started making the in still were that films other of production the over wa only the not was film this However, suspended. were revenues) possible any with (along film the of screening the time same the at while allocated, had Commission the that dinars 000 400 the return film. the for registration the denied Council same the of Committee Executive the after days inscribe to decided was it discussion the re did and pressured felt Commission The from picture. the function of market ofthe conscious the exclusion a and situation whole the of reframing discursive a as arguments Kovaček’s backed which only the was which society socialist a of product sole a as film the fashioned it picture, the from connections informal of problem the which in terms the case, particular an responsibilities set also production, film organizing by which, schemes funding of set complex the background the into put to managed inaccuracy apparent this time, same the At legitimation. public for need the Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] Enlisted into the Register of Produced Films], Politika
Udovićk’s letter for Province’s Film Review Commission, 29 February, 1972, in: AV, F430, box 19/67. Request from the Province’s Council for Culture, 10 June, 1971, in: AV, F430, box 19/67. filmov snimljenih registar u upisane nisu organizma’ “’Misterije dina’s 212 213
The financial consequences financial The
Nedostaje mi Sonja Heni ( Furthermore,the Cultural CommissionProvinceofthe was not of onlythe means
control over over control Neoplanta Film i wih oni’ pesr ws xrie. nrae control Increased exercised. was pressure Council’s which in y eore rvdr i ws o s mc te miia reality empirical the much so not was it provider: resource
for for I miss Sonia Henie Neoplanta - : 870. . In the course of 1971 the separate Film Review Review Film separate the 1971 of course the In . bans over the right to public screening occurred: occurred: screening public to right the over bans d liberties, hierarchies and autonomies. In this this In autonomies. and hierarchies liberties, d into the register, a few a register, the WR: Misterije organizma into spond as such. Even though immediately after immediately though Even such. as spond , 16 June, 1971, in: Svetozar Udovički,
97 were dire, as this meant that they had to to had they that meant this as dire, were WR WR a” [‘Mysteries of the Organism’ Were Not was put excluded the market and and market the excluded put was 1971) , 214
Včk Karolj’s Viček ,
Neoplanta. Za Krst sa
CEU eTD Collection dependent on the state funding. Moreover, it provided the reason for a more active active more a for reason house the production provided it a Moreover, funding. into state it the on ing turn dependent and situation financial studios crushing of tool a became and received, film the that funding the all for stood that fifth one that exactly self to capacity the mechanisms, bureaucratic commonYugoslavpreservinga while autonomy local encourage central to contrast in cultures socialist local encourage and express to capacity the mechanisms: market to assigned function Neoplanta state. the from directly coming budget this of fifth one only with efficiency, of example of scheme funding the Culture, and Council Federal the in out set logic the to According profile. thematic and self aesthetic greater distinct its affirming by and production of modes different between maneuvering towards moving confidently was which Yugoslavia, Socialist 217 216 215 1971 Before industry. film Yugoslav the of organization the in contradictions essential the of one on well reflected situation The it paradoxically movies. these for made they investments Eventually, the recover not could they that meant sta political 1972) zvezdom
.
217 Letter from the Cultural Commission of the Province, 30 December, 1971, in: AV, F430, box 19/67. Decision over the public screening, 29 February, 1972,in: AV, F430, box 19/67 Decision over the public screening, 29 February, 1972, in: AV, F430, box 19/67. - management framework. Now, as the need for political pressure was growing, it was it growing, was pressure political for need the as Now, framework. management
. 216
( The reasons were as varied as vague: pornographic content, unacceptable unacceptable content, pornographic vague: as varied as were reasons The Cross With a Star a scesul asrig tef s aal o fulfil of capable as itself asserting successfully was nces, negative depiction of Yugoslav realities, etc. For etc. realities, Yugoslav of depictionnegative nces, Neoplanta , it was the Cultural Commission of the Province that was supposed to provide supposedprovide Province tothat was the Commissionof Cultural the itwas , a ld o h bre wee h nee t rqet bailout; a request to needed she where border the to led was 1972) , might have served as a good a as served have MisterijeWR: organizma might 215 Žilnik’s , Neoplanta 98 ee dolaze Žene was a rare case of a solvent stu solvent a of case rare a was ig h sca ad cultural and social the ling ( The Women are Coming framework based on a the a on based framework Neoplanta
such decisions decisions such for Education Education for - eine by reliance
dio in in dio , CEU eTD Collection artist and his creation. 220 219 218 c dire in achieve to able still was film the that success the to and acclaim critical of advocacy the to appealing publicity, for reaching film: the defended and position their asserted have might 1971 of and summer ofperiod forspring discussion. the In provided just ofitself a part material the evenentered pages ofthe film the about News abundant. disproportionally was it about publications of number workers cultural and intellectuals of public selected for mostly times, five the 1971 July By escalating. was issue the over discussion public the institution), same the within made (often decisions their withdrawing and receiving were institutions bureaucratic While films. of register the from recalled and included was while. a for open left and recalled issued, was screening public for permission The indecision. of full also was it although one, prolonged a was whole a as studio the on restrictions bureaucratic of imposition the of period The 4.4.Neoplanta on the defense the by market. provided curbingand by autonomy the - self the the for responsible definit Province, the institutions of production film the of the organization within League Communist the of participation in: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For I Udovič
in: Svetozar Udovički, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
“’WR’ ili povod diferencijacije” [‘WR’ or the Cause of Differentiation], Milutin Ćolić, “Balada o patnji i zabludi” [Ballad About Suffering and Misconception], Politika Informacijasa Savetovanja komunista [Information forthe Assembly of Communists], 1971,in: Svetozar ki, ki, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] - self a that rights the to and onditions, management discourse was supposed to maintain in favor of central authorities central of favor in maintain to supposed was discourse management Neoplanta Film
and Makavejev were employing all the possible methods that that methods possible the all employing were Makavejev and Ekonomska politika
99 ( management society had to provide for the the for provide to had society management Economic Policy) Economic 218
: 355. nternal Use]nternal ely toppling the balance which which balance the toppling ely Ekonomska politka, 14 June, 1971, WR: MisterijeWR: organizma and .
220
film was screened only screened was film Bureaucratic indecision : 899. : 847.
219 , 5 July 1971,
, but the the but , The gfilm The CEU eTD Collection
have provided a specialist opinion specialist a provided have ju festival for important was Pula in Participation festival. film Pula the in participating from film the preventing by raised were controversies greatest Howev film. the towards attitude favorable a cultivating way this press, the in represented widely was venues film foreign other many and Cannes in received film the that feedback positive The Yugoslavia. ca took and film the over rights held still “Telepool” company German the suspended, fully were film the of distribution for when Even festival. film Cannes the to crew film the and film the send 223 222 221 considerati a without - self left was of importance, laws had have the should management under which public, and professional both opinion, their However, program. festival the from film the of withdrawal the of condemnation clear a expressed court. the to appeal letter public a issued critics” film and authors “young of group a Yugoslavia; of Workers Film of Conference Serbia, of Workers Film of Association of side the from protests of series a to led situation This permission. of screening public the regarding situation ambiguous the in stop full the put to decided Serbia of Attorney Public the approaching, 19 on disappointment, their For studio. the for withcase wasalso the it as and Makavejev festivalsand foreign to apply didnot restriction the Firstly, Letter to the District Attorney, 12 See: Svetozar Udovički, See: Svetozar Udovički, y a a semi- a as ry, Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] 223 needn bd o eauto o te ieai our, would oeuvre, cinematic the of evaluation of body independent
er, screening in Yugoslavia was close to impossible. Some of the of Some impossible. to close was Yugoslavia in screening er, tic’s community community critic’s and workers film federal the Essentially, Rani radovi Rani July, 1971, in: AV, F430, box 19/67. 221 re of distributing the movie outside the borders of of borders the outside movie the distributing of re
(expectedly, a favorable one), and thus an argument argument an thus and one), favorable a (expectedly, , 222 to make ful make to , the Festival of Yugoslav Feature Film sent the the sent Film Feature Yugoslav of Festival the , 100 and cancelled the the cancelled MisterijeWR: organizma and th
July, as the beginning of the festival was festival the of beginning the as July, l use of this: of use l Neoplanta
Neoplanta because they thought that that thought they because ’s rights Neoplanta’s : 720. : 715. Neoplanta still managed to to managed still on. The critics critics The on.
tried,
CEU eTD Collection
226 225 224 withdra was film the that fact the by hindered was project research this However, future the in exhibited be should for directions provide to supposed were research of means other could and time, this through gained insights the Officially, of film. the of understanding the alter information passage the by affected were they how held, opinio what as: such questions asking film, the of perception and opinion public Preparative and Marketing of aspects for of variety a on focus to intended exploration planned The UNIMAR. Propaganda Institute “Borba” Company Publishing Newspaper film” the to react structures social different how find out research was supposedtopsychological which a “sociologicalto order and decided fears the counter would which argument strong a gain to Hoping opinion. “objective” of resources effect, its achieve to seem not posi numerous As central authorities’ position and their final decisions. the affect not did this but to, wanted have might one as interpreted be could process, - self what production the in workers over (film) the of position the negotiations over be, could and was discursive management the that criticism seemed their It nevertheless, unanswered. management: remained the in role important an having as seen were they consequently, and, workers as recognized were employees industry film the and omsin f h Poic are wt ti plan this with agreed Province the of Commission possiblereorganization theof studio production profile. Commission regarding the participation of the film in Pula film festival; and also seemed to be open to the demonstrates a level of leniency from the side of
Letterto the District tothe Letter “ Neoplanta
of public and political disorder that the film was often accused accused of Udovićki was raising, often film that the disorder and political public of ’s” letter for for ’s”letter Cultural Commission of the Province the of Commission Cultural tive reviews in the press and protests from the side of film workers did did workers film of side the from protests and press the in reviews tive Attorney Cultural Commission of the Province the of Commission Cultural , 12 July, 1971, in: AV, F430, bo Neoplanta . 225
Apparently, the Executive Council of the Cultural Cultural the of Council Executive the Apparently, Neoplanta Film Neoplanta
, 14 June, 1971, F430, box 19/67. This letter also 101 was looking for other means of publicity and and publicity of means other for looking was
. 224
, 14 June, 1971, in: AV, F430, box 19/67. x 19/67. x The research had to be co be to had research The Neoplanta Film ; they were a 226 , and the inquiry was launched. launched. was inquiry the and ,
sking for advice of the
s o hw t how for as nducted by by nducted wn from wn ns were ns e film he
CEU eTD Collection
film criticism was also under attack. Dušan Popović, the President of the County County the of President the Yugoslavia of Popović, Communists of League the of Committee Dušan attack. under also was criticism film ac have thatmight party possiblethird other the ally, an assciences social could screening there no be without screening. experimental the the objectivity: of form and this of needs studioinfrastructural the by hindered the itself in was authorities, between negotiated have could discourse, scientific of prestige 229 228 227 of power. exercise into ofa monologue the turned now dialogue (angry) an of part was previously What industry. film the of workings the affecting offensive bureaucratic extensive of context the in happening was it ideas: or occurred had directors festivals film certain at aimed toolrhetorical a simply not was it 1971 by However, before. of seriously”. juries professional questions the and critics these film the take of denunciations should We understanding. ideological profes of terms in both needs, our of level the below far is criticism objectivity of form a up build to attempts The for. strived have may they credibility conclusive any losing way this partial, only were achieved they results the that admit to had they however, research; their halt not did Institute The audiences”. “test for even screenings organize not could UNIMAR that meant This showing. public the Udovički, “Objectivity and the Escape from Perspective.” t h sm tm when time same the At
Informacijasa Savetovanja komunista [Information fot theAssembly of Communists], 1971,in: Svetozar for the Cult Letter I am using here the term objectivity in the sense in which Lorraine Daston employs it in her article Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] ural Assembly of the Province, 17 May, 1971, in: AV, F430, box 19/67, p. 1. Neoplanta a tyn t rfae h ngtain y employing by negotiation the reframe to trying was
102 228 , had declared in 1971 that “film “film that 1971 in declared had , : 349 : .
227 sionalism and political- and sionalism
which, based on the the on based which, ted as an arbiter, an as ted
229
Daston, Such CEU eTD Collection
231 230 2 The film workers. - self the in trust of lack of expression an and was controvers publication of documentation the for of devoted volume second whole The authors. and films its of reception public and studio the of production the of aspects various a on of documents consisted of book collection this of part biggest The Udovićki. Svetozar studio the of director 1971 in around evolving conflict the expose to designed was which ROK, magazine the Makavejev’s around Misterije organizma evolving. conflict the publicize to attempts their to related the in like Just Self 4.5 k was seen as propagating “politically inimical attitudes and statements, contradictory statements, and attitudes inimical “politically propagating as seen was k boo for, the it wasdevoted that filmthe to Similarly film. the bookand theboth by undermined systematically prosecutor, were the of opinion authorityin the preserving which, and order Publi the of initiative - self of premises essential the contradict such,did being pressure”,and political “hidden the on werebased producer and use methods the view, of point Neoplanta’s From 1971. of studio spring the the since it which on in imposed continuously way constraints the the interpreted to connected closely was publicity for aspiration This in cultural and intellectual circles when the trial was
After all, it was not that internal; “ Neoplanta nd
- volume of of volume management in the plural Neoplanta ’s” letter for Province’s Council of Culture, 17 May, 1971, F430, box 19/67.
Rani radovi Neoplanta. For Internal Use sud two a issued Unlike in in Unlike c District Court. The stated reasons of banning implied the need of of need the implied banning of reasons stated The Court. District c case, one of the important moves in in moves important the of one case, Neoplanta management. Ž ilnik’s movie, h movie, ilnik’s - oue 10 pg ln mmo eot eie b the by edited report, mimeo long page 1000 volume,
had printed several hundred copies and began distributing it
e eovn around evolving ies launched. 103 d against against d 230 management body of the film studio and the the and studio film the of body management
owever, the strategy would fail. Similarly to Similarly fail. would strategy the owever, It was a form of bureaucratic intervention, bureaucratic of form a was It
a bne i te al 1972 early the in banned was
, its director its MisterijeWR: organizma, ’s affair was also was affair Neoplanta’s WR: Misterije organizma
Rani radoviRani , 231 , by the the by , WR: . CEU eTD Collection
233 232 conse the as which, in ways contradictory the into light some shed to us allows interpreted was publicity of question the way The of- what self arbiters as end, official and, in the people Yugoslav the of representatives authoritative as status as their well on (as relied SUBNOR) court the Yugoslavia; of workers intellectual the to delegated point some self of name centra the of advocacy an mean creation. of freedom no is there that level, highest the of pressure political the with permeated environment with had prosecutor that problems the self of values the manner, ambiguous somewhat a in if Even socialism. of version autocratic o become not did court the of prosecutors The that language same the again, was, using were they that language The NOB. or SKJ like institutions of authority the defend The story. the of part one just were accusations Such “causing was book the that was disturbance of citizens”. the decision court the in remark conclusive The LCY. t to of influence primarily and role the of interpretation negative organizations, tendentious the with along SUBNOR”, social to labels malevolent assigned and “offensive social- and SKJ of policy the to Neoplanta Film
Idem. Court decision over the temporary ban of distribution of the second book of “Documentation of - management, such as democracy or publicity, were sustained. Actually, it was one of one was it Actually, sustained. were publicity, or democracy as such management,
, 23 February, 1972, in: AV, F430, box 19/67. - management. However, management. 233
Thus, defending the conservative communist institutions did not not did institutions communist conservative the defending Thus,
lized rule or censorship. Both sides were speaking in the the in speaking were sides Both censorship. or rule lized oiia stain n u country” our in situation political Neoplanta Neoplanta the book: that in its pages “Novi Sad is shown as as shown is Sad “Novi pages its in that book: the rvative communists of Yugoslavia imagined, the imagined, Yugoslavia of communists rvative 104 management was. was. management utspoken advocates of the bureaucratic and and bureaucratic the of advocates utspoken employed: the self the employed:
was relying on the powers that were at were that powers the on relying was Public District Court did set out to to out set did Court District Public -
management discourse. management 232 ; moreover, it was was it moreover, ; he he CEU eTD Collection
activity was called into questi into called was activity of whole the when 1971, In 1972. of report Unesco his in Majstorović Stevan by and 1965 in Culture and Education of Ministry Federal of meeting the of participants se whole of the in development crack the a as Thus, appeared one. by one dismissed were unit production that level discursive was inaccuracies, and flaws empirical of interpretation an provided meeting The principles. socialist frame to necessary - self what over struggle discursive problem, the within The explained. and defined well that not was however, understanding, This with a well self socialist a decent of development The themselves. by all life cultural the invigorate and decide not simply could they enough; not were workers industry film time, same the At production. 235 234 self a of values central transparency, and publicity Suddenly, discussion. the enter to obliged and an was art. public exclusively it because exactly was important so was film the why reasons the of one that of meeting regarding questions the pertinent the discuss to intended communists for prepared materials The organized. be should production cultural communist tradition, or simply more conservative Party members. membership card; it referred to the members of inst Udovički,
In the document under consideration the term “communist” does not simply refer to the holder of Party Informacijasa Savetovanja komunista [Information forthe Assembly of Communists], 1971, in: Svetozar - aae scey deprive society, managed Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] - defined understanding of what socialist culture is. of understanding culture what socialist defined - managemen Neoplanta’s 234 s lis o rpeettvt a a self a as representativity for claims Neoplanta’s
And exactly because it was public, communists public, was it because exactly And on, one of the criticisms was that it failed to fulfill its social its fulfill to failed it that was criticisms the of one on, t culture required an intervention of loyal party members members party loyal of intervention an required culture t d industry workers of their rights for the control of of control the for rights their of workers industry d activity so that it would fall outside the boundaries of of boundaries the outside fall would it that so activity lf a powerful interpretative contender: it was at this this at was it contender: interpretative powerful a - aaeet dooy s t a li ot y the by out laid was it as ideology management itutions created for the purpose of cherishing 105 manag ement is and what it is not, made it made not, is it what and is ement
: 346.
Neoplanta
, pointed out out pointed Neoplanta, - 235 aae socialist managed which, despite its despite which,
were supposed supposed were Neoplanta ’s Neoplanta
CEU eTD Collection
rapid growth and acknowledgment growthrapid and acknowledgment of studio. the reverbercircumstancesthatated political and social cultural, economic, of set the question to not Popović allowed it but not, or conscious been have may negligence This studio. the of policy the of part important an was that programing 237 236 accidental was thatasserted He achieved. was success this how for as understanding mistaken a have to seemed he However, respects. many in successful of critical Being of circumstances the to attention much pay to willing be to seem not did meeting) the for materials the arranged had (who Popović Dušan Furthermore, and toParty ethi socialist - self representing of instead - self of principles the with accordance in workers Grassroots meeting. the Neoplanta in unmentioned left were Sad Novi and Belgrade of culture film amateur the from came directors important most its of two that fact the or studio people ordinary for ucation ed cinematic providing and amateurs young with working of obligation social the from departed had acknowledged, that mission; Udovički, Udovički,
Informacijasa Savetovanja komunista [Information forthe Assembly of Communists], 1971,in: Svetozar Informacijasa Savetovanja komunista [Information forthe Assembly of Communists], 1971,in: Svetozar Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. [Neoplanta. For Internal Use] Neoplanta. Za Internu Upotrebu. cncl ae n fl euain o ieprecd film inexperienced for education film and base technical a provided had 237 , even though the achievements of the studio had to be be to had studio the of achievements the though even Neoplanta, , which did not take into consideration relatively c relatively consideration into take not did which , , he nevertheless had to admit that that admit to had nevertheless he Neoplanta, cs in general. general. in cs management principles was seen as running contrary to the the to contrary running as seen was principles management
[Neoplanta. For Internal Use]
106 ’s choice of authors and themes themes and authors ofNeoplanta ’schoice
management; their autonomy, however autonomy, their management; . 236
The amateur back- amateur The : 347. : 348. ’s efforts and led to to led and efforts Neoplanta’s
areful and considerate considerate and areful Neoplanta Film ’s growth. growth. Neoplanta’s ground of the the of ground
was was CEU eTD Collection
239 238 “socio among discussions following and law Sve of dismissal suggested, previously had he as which, on amateurs inexperienced whether question the ask he did Neither home. at actors political and social certain by criticized were they why reasons the with coincide partially did abroad appreciated were Makavejev and festivals foreign both determined that circumstances of set whole of achievements main the of one was repr be should films Yugoslav that idea the supported He needed. was communists by supervision closer why reasons Neoplanta’s . reputation Neoplanta’s to most the contributed that films critical socially the was it that however, admit, did He be much more of“communist” more much a diligent be to appeared He appointed. was profession, by scholar literary Ređep, Draško director, new Province the of Committee Excutive 1972 the March late In focus. to supposed ( Freedom or Cartoons
Žilnik recalls that that recalls Žilnik Idem: 349. nbd i te et ol b wlig o ac ad rie h wrs of works the praise and watch to willing be would West the in anybody
films tozar Udovićki from his position as the director of the studio. Abiding the the Abiding studio. the of director the as position his from Udovićki tozar Ređep immediately began pushing him to cut out certain scenes from strip ili Sloboda
) . were distorting reality and this type of production was one of the the of one was production of type this and reality distorting were
See: Boris Buden, Želimir Žilnik, ŽelimirŽilnik, Buden, See: Boris rdcr, r h fc ta te esn fr hc fls y ink or Žilnik by films which for reasons the that fact the or producers, 238
This social involvement became, however, a disadvantage: disadvantage: a however, became, involvement social This esented in foreign countries; but did not mention that this this that mention not did but countries; foreign in esented , nor did he take into consideration the the consideration into take he did nor Neoplanta, 239
107 than a skillful manager. - political, social and cultural organizations” a organizations” cultural and social political, Uvod U Prošlost [Introduction to the Past] Neoplanta ’s strive for cooperation with with cooperation for strive ’s
Neoplanta
initiated the the initiated : 95.
was was
CEU eTD Collection
self of form specific a functions: its and structure its organized which principles the of lenses the through it see to attempt an in latter the historicize to also was attempt my sphere, sp particular a as industry film the conceptualize to trying Although film. of study historical the on take versatile more a enable to was thesis this of aims the of one process, production film the around material empirical my structuring theoretically By Conclusions also supposed to bulwark this aim: film producers were to become self become to were producers film aim: this bulwark to supposed also was incentives market of introduction The Federation. the within republics and regions self based identity Yugoslav of notion a cultural building move, over contradictory a power in Thus, making matters. decision them assigning in resulted people working the organized. consequently, and, imagined E were life economic and cultural social, of spheres different which in ways the framed below” from “socialism of idea the sentiments, co inner the out point to forinterpretations that various sense it allowed in which way and the vision this of contradictions this in tried I life. cultural Yugoslav of lines general the self which in ways the describing by analysis this continue to me allowed chapter second The and social relations. production (cultural) organizing of mode this of specificities the on but such, as industry mphasizing the need for a cultural sphere which would enable the active participation of of participation active the enable would which sphere cultural a for need the mphasizing l esl sev fo te fiil C dcrn. upre b srn anti strong by Supported doctrine. LCY official the from swerve easily uld - - - aaeet oils. n hs a, tid o sh to tried I way, this In socialism. management aaeet oils tigrd nrae clua self cultural increased triggered socialism management so management
cialism was envisioned by the authorities responsible for setting up up setting for responsible authorities the by envisioned was cialism 108 ed some light not only on the film film the on only not light some ed - determination in different different in determination - ace of the cultural cultural the of ace le market le sustainab - etatist etatist on on CEU eTD Collection
and market revenues or other non- other or revenues market and subsidies state both of advantage take could which policy financial cautious a preserve to etc. collaborations, international awards, festival reviews, film form of professionalspositive in the supportgaining the cultural making: of innovative film Neoplanta effects the and - self funded were films two of the which in lines way particular the the on focused I along Thus, management. organized industry an within employed directors) affiliated (both producers film that strategies pragmatic the to follow intended I hand, one the On twofold. was studies these of focus The chapters. two last the in analyzed I which studies case two the in contradictions these up follow to tried I nature the ofproduction. for film would the responsible be aaoial, ept tee successes, these despite Paradoxically, avoid to waters. turbulent financially able being while prominence, artistic and function educational its preserved perfectly to producers and consumers that implied incentives sensemarket this In autonomy. local enable to order in also but efficiency, for concern a of out only not players - self of postulates the with o content the only self of principles self a of outcomes Seemingly, a houses production tried to define its production profile by focusing on critical recognition and and recognition critical on focusing by profile production its define to tried fulfill these -
management socialism for some of the conservative communists. Not Not communists. conservative the of some for socialism management the requirements asked from a a from asked requirements the f the the f - self socialist of principles the by abiding not for ccused
ow how how show to tried I debates. subsequent in had funding of types Neoplanta
management; it was feared that the sheer presence and and presence sheer the that feared was it management; - managed industry could appear as a violation of the the of violation a as appear could industry managed state incomes. To a certain extent, extent, certain a To incomes. state im wr ocsoal itrrtd s o complying not as interpreted occasionally were films Neoplanta 109 self - managed film production house: it it house: production film managed would
Neoplanta
eoe n o te first the of one become This strategy allowed them allowed strategy This –
and not the state state the not and Neoplanta as such such as management. seemed and its its and -- CEU eTD Collection
time recognizing, that markets do not simply exist and market actors have to be actively be to have actors market and exist simply not do markets that recognizing, time same the at while freedom market for pushed it function; pedagogical certain a enforcing grassro numerous revealed analyze I - self that which contradictions films two the to related conflicts the Secondly, society. self of version their emphasized particular a on relied that categories “market” report Wave the of attempts The etc. autonomy, economic local vs. bureaucratization mechanism, market controlled vs. bureaucracy state using: were themselves actors the that concepts an Mitchell’s on relied I purpose this For project. pedagogical socialist the and freedom artistic between limits the self- a how or be should bureaucracy state and markets film between relationship the the what of visions within specific h wit connected position intimately was industry one’s which in setting a provided situation conflict the that case the usually was It film. particular a regarding position one’s of affirmation simple the in the exceeded film specific a over conflicts Firstly, tochapters. in my tried describe I space that conflictual this itis clash often interpretationswould these As practices. its and diversity the was obvious made accusations these What effects. negative have may film these of publicity
filmmakers Neoplanta Film. Za internu upotrebuwere ) alsoforms ofimposingspecific “state”or ots freedom of creation and public engagement in cultural production while while production cultural in engagement public and creation of freedom ots
- self on discourse the both marked that interpretations of o ulcz tee eae (hog te aaie O, r h mimeo the or ROK, magazine the (through debates these publicize to oe s rsros utrl rdcr wti a eortc socialist democratic a within producers cultural grassroots as role lss f h sae fet wie rig o rsre oee the however preserve to trying while effect, state the of alysis management ideologues appeared to have left aside. It asserted It aside. left have to appeared ideologues management
110 terpretation of the cinematic text or text cinematic the of terpretation managed society should negotiate should society managed - management which which management management management New New CEU eTD Collection
heated debates was a book, the 2 the book, a was debates heated of case the In decision. administrative simple a through interrupted be also could sph ere, public same self socialist about discussions the characterized that voices of polyphony the that obvious became despite different: more be not could results the the films, two the of producing in employed similarity strategies the Despite respect. this in useful very be Misterije organizma can compariso A limits. their and - self what pragmatic over negotiations these that of and strategies nature discursive contextual the emphasize to important is it Thirdly, o type every not etc. country, tothe allowed be leave production should that suggesting while markets, Western enter to certain eagerness a promoted it control; bureaucratic of form complex a through activities their cre lo nger change anything and which itself was banned in the spring in the ofwas banned itself 1972. and which anything change nger - self the for strived it state; the by ated Rani rado there was no court trial and the only result of these of result only the and trial court no was MisterijeWR: organizma there - aaeet n te ifrn prpcie ht ol co could that perspective different the and management vi s ucs, hy oe o fet i Mkvjvs ae Sdel, it Suddenly, case. Makavejev’s in effects no bore they success, ’s n between the production process of process production the between n nd
volume of of volume reliance of film enterprises while trying to direct to trying while enterprises film of reliance 111 Neoplanta.Internal For Use,
management was could have have could was management Rani radoviRani -
exist within the the within exist and that of that and that could no no could that f film film f WR: WR: CEU eTD Collection
jbvi lčj l Taeia lžeie PPT službenice Tragedija ili slučaj Ljubavni Stevan. Majstorović, Arhiv Vojvodine [Archive of Vojvodina] (Novi Sad). Fond 430: Radna organizacija organizacija Radna „ filmova 430: Fond Sad). (Novi Vojvodina] of of [Archive Chamber Vojvodine Arhiv Yugoslav the of Council Industry [Film PKJ S5. Box: Industry]. and Commerce kinematografiju za Savet 405: Fond kulturu [Archives Jugoslavije Arhiv
Krs Jutro tica nije Čovek ed. Udovički, Svetozar and Publications of1.2 Documents Collection 1.1 ArchivalDocuments Bibliography (1966-1988)]. Boxes: 12, 18, 14, 19, 53, 67. t sa zvezdom [ zvezdom t sa 1. 2.
[
]. Dunav film, Beograd. Director: Puriša Đorđević. Screenplay: Puriša Đorđević. 95 95 Đorđević. Puriša Screenplay: Đorđević. Puriša Director: Beograd. film, Dunav ]. Morning
[Federal Council for Education and Culture]. Box 73. Box Culture]. and Education for Council [Federal Primary Sources Filmography
Neoplanta Film Neoplanta Operator Jozef mins.,1972. 13 Podolski. Color, Paris: Unesco, 1972. Sad: Novi mins., B/W, 1967. 1965. B/W, 80mins., Petković. Aleksandar Photography: Makavejev. Dušan
[ ]. Avala Film, Belgrade. Director: Dušan Makavejev. Screenplay: Screenplay: Makavejev. Dušan Director: Belgrade. Film, Avala ]. aBird Not Man is Cross With aStar With Cross . Studies and Documents on Cultural Policies. Policies. Cultural on Documents and Studies . Yugoslavia in Policy Cultural
. Za internu internu Za . Neoplanta ]. Avala Film, Belgrade. Director: Dušan Makavejev. Screenplay: Dušan Dušan Screenplay: Makavejev. Dušan Director: Belgrade. Film, Avala ]. -1988)(1966 ” [Work Organization for Production of Film FilmsNeoplanta “ Neoplanta Film Neoplanta
of
Yugoslavia] (Belgrade). Fond 319: Savezni savet za obrazovanje i i obrazovanje za savet Savezni 319: Fond (Belgrade). Yugoslavia]
]. Neoplanta Film, Novi Sad. Director: Viček Karolj. Screenplay: Screenplay: Karolj. Viček Director: Sad. Novi Film, Neoplanta ]. , 1971. ,
[ Love Affair, or the Case of the Missing Switchboard Affair, theLove or Case Switchboard Missing the of
. For Internal Use]. Vol. 1 1 Vol. Use]. Internal For . [Neoplanta upotrebu. 112
za proizvodnju proizvodnju za - 2. 2. ” CEU eTD Collection Works]. [Early Rani radovi m maleni, Pioniri [ ljudi Nezaposljeni zaštite bez Nevinost [ Heni Sonja Nedostaje mi Abrams, Philip. “Notes on the Difficulty of Studying the State (1977).” (1977).” State the Studying of Difficulty the on “Notes Philip. Abrams, Sveti pesak[ Ardalan,Cyrus.“Workers’ Self [Healthy People for Fun]. Neoplanta Film, Novi Sad. Director: Karpo Karpo Director: Sad. Novi Film, Neoplanta Fun]. for People [Healthy za ljudi razonodu Zdravi [ organizma Misterije WR:
zimi selu na omladini o Žurnal dolaze Žene 3.
Secondary Literature av Mirosl Screenplay: Antić. Miroslav Director: Sad. Novi Film, Neoplanta ]. Sand Holy [ 87 mins., 1969. B/W, Godina. Aćimović Karpo Photography: Vučićević. Branko Žilnik, Želimir Screenplay: Žilnik. Želimir Screenplay: Žilnik. Želimir Director: 1968. B/W, mins., 18 Fanđo. Jakšić Miodrag Photography: Sad. Novi Film, Neoplanta 1968. B/W, mins., 13 Latinović. Petar Photography: Žilnik. Želimir 1968. Dušan Screenplay: 1971. Color, mins., 20 Godina. Ačimović Karpo Photography: Godina. Ačimović Karpo Makavejev, Photography: Žilnik. Aleksandar Petković. 70mins., B/W, 1967. Želimir and Vučićević Branko direction: Assistant Makavejev. Sociology Antić. mins., 83 B/W, 1968. Ačimović Godina. mins., 1971. 14 Color, mins., 86 Popović. Pega Petković, Aleksandar Photography: Makavejev. Dušan Screenplay: Makavejev. Dušan Director: Munich. 8, Ciga. 15 mins., B/W, 19 Jovanović Mihajlo Photography: Žilnik. Želimir Screenplay: Žilnik. Želimir Director: Želimir Screenplay: ]. areThe Coming Women no. (September 9 1980): 623 – trava zelena ko nićemo dana svakog prava, vojska smo i The Unemployed The
[ Innocence Unprotected Innocence 1, no. 1 no. (March 1, 1988): 58.
WR: Mysteries of theOrganism of WR: Mysteries Avala Film Avala I miss Sonia Henie I missSonia Management and Planning: The Yugoslav Case.” Case.” Yugoslav The Planning: and -Management [
Newsreel on Village Youth, in Winter Youth, in Newsreel Village on
Makavejev. Photography: Branko Perak. 78 mins., Color and B/W, B/W, and Color mins., 78 Perak. Branko Photography: Makavejev. 1972. B/W, Ninkov. Dušan Photography: Žilnik.
]. Neoplanta Film, Novi Sad. Director: Želimir Žilnik. Screenplay: Screenplay: Žilnik. Želimir Director: Sad. Novi Film, Neoplanta ]. 67. , Beogr ,
Neoplanta film, Novi Sad. Director: Želimir Žilnik. Žilnik. Želimir Director: Sad. Novi film, Neoplanta ad, Neoplanta Film, Novi Sad. Director: Želimir Žilnik. Žilnik. Želimir Director: Sad. Novi Film, Neoplanta ad, ]. Avala Film, Belgrade. Director: Dušan Makavejev. Makavejev. Dušan Director: Belgrade. Film, Avala ]. 38. 113 ]. Neoplanta Film, Novi Sad. Directors: Dušan Dušan Directors: Sad. Novi Film, Neoplanta ].
Color, 1971. Color, ]. Neoplanta Film, Novi Sad, Telepool, Telepool, Sad, Novi Film, Neoplanta ]. ]. Neoplanta Film, Novi Sad. Sad. Novi Film, Neoplanta ].
Journal of Historical Historical of Journal World Development World [ Little Pioneers Little ]. ]. –
CEU eTD Collection
Buden Turmoil in Balkans “The Ante. Batović, DeCuir Çalışkan, Larissa and Gil, Eyal, C. David Life: Engerman, Everyday and Structure, Social Society, “Soviet Mark. Edele, Collier, Stephen J. J. Stephen Collier, J. Daniel Goulding, Embeddedness.” of Problem The Structure: Social and Action “Economic M. Granovetter, Harris, Marvin. “History and Significance of the Emic/Etic Distinction.” Distinction.” Emic/Etic the of Significance and “History Marvin. Harris, State.” the and Intellectuals “Hegemony, Antonio. Gramsci, oaoi, eoš. Bekn te ae A omnay n Bak ae oeis Reoi as Rhetoric Polemics: Wave ‘Black on Commentary A Wave: the “Breaking Nebojša. Jovanović, Art of History “The Antoine. Hennion, Ian. Hacking,
, ,
Greg. Greg. lmr Žilnik. Želimir Boris, Koray, and Michel Callon. “Economization, Part 1: Shifting Attention from the Economy Economy the from Attention Shifting 1: Part “Economization, Callon. Michel and Koray, Historical Ontology Historical medije_kuda.org, medije_kuda.org, 91” S Ies 2009. Ideas, LSE 1965-1971.” http://www.kuda.org/sites/kuda/files/Uvod%20u%20proslost_web.pdf Blocs War http://www.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/publications/workingPapers/batovic.pdf. Cold Republic of Yugoslavia of Republic University Press, 2011. 98. Economization.” of Processes Towards Interventions.” Interventions.” of Massachusetts Press, 2003. 349. Reconsidered.” expanded. Journal of Sociology of Journal Anthropology Reader Aesthetic’ by by Aesthetic’ Communication 2011): 161– Yugoslav Black Wave. Polemical Cinema from 1963 – 1963 from Cinema Polemical Wave. Black Yugoslav
Staging Growth: Modernization, Development, and War and the Global Development, Cold Modernization, Growth: Staging Liberated Cinema: The Yugoslav Experience, 1945 Experience, Yugoslav The Cinema: Liberated Post
2 (2009): 2 210– Buchholz. “From the Sociology of Intellectuals to the Sociology of of Sociology the to Intellectuals of Sociology the “From Buchholz.
2002. Press, University Indiana Bloomington: - Soviet Social: Neoliberalism, Social Modernity, Biopolitics Modernity, Social Neoliberalism, Soviet Social: 71. 71.
5 (October 1976): 329. Greg DeCuir, Jr DeCuir, Greg
Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History Eurasian and Russian in Explorations Kritika: 3, no. (1995):3, 2 no. 233– Annual Review of Sociology Review of Annual Uvod u prošlost [Introduction to the Past] the to [Introduction prošlost u Uvod . Harvard . University Press, Harvard 2004. , 1985, , 481– 1985, 16. . Belgrade: Film Center Serbia, 2011. Serbia, Center Film . Belgrade:
- - Croatian Spring and the Yugoslav Position Between the the Between Position Yugoslav the and Spring Croatian Lessons in Mediation.” Mediation.” in Lessons
.” .”
Cinema European Eastern in Studies 510. 114
62. 62. Economy and SocietyEconomy and
and Theory Cultural
6 n. (ue 00: 117– 2010): (June 1 no. 36,
Réseaux. The French Journal of of Journal Réseaux. French The
72 in the Socialist Federal Federal Socialist the in 72
. 2nd ed., rev. and and rev. ed., 2nd -2001. 38, no. 3 (2009): 369– (2009): 3 no. 38, Major Frameworks Frameworks Major Annual Review of Review of Annual . Centar za nove nove za Centar . Popular Culture: A Culture: Popular 2, no. 2 (July 26, (July 2 no. 2,
, no. 2 (2007): (2007): 2 no. , .
. Princeton Princeton . American American . Univ Univ . 2013. 2013. 37. CEU eTD Collection eds. Testen, Žiga and Sekulić, Dubravka Gal, Kirn, N. George Katsiaficas, Lampe, John R. John Lampe, Stephen. Kotkin, Klimke, Martin, and Joachim Scharloth, eds. eds. Scharloth, Joachim and Martin, Klimke, Mira. Liehm, eds. Meers, Philippe and Biltereyst, Daniël Richard, Maltby, Jamie. Miller,
On.” Years Twenty Europe, Eastern of Significance Ethical “The T. Snyder, Methodological Its and Mediations of Question The Revisited: “Autonomy Gisèle. Sapiro, I. Dennison Rusinow, P. Sabrina Ramet, Ranković. Radenko Nikodijević hra Aahn, n Ahl Gu Akhil and Aradhana, Sharma, Peck, Jamie. Jamie. Peck,
, Constructions of Neoliberal Reason Neoliberal of Constructions Milan. Milan. The Most Important Art: Eastern European Film After 1945 After Film Eastern European Art: MostThe Important . KINO, the Russian Cinema Series. Series. Cinema Russian the KINO, . Under Stalin Persuasion and Politics Soviet Cinema: and Its Trangressive Moments Trangressive and Its 1987. Press, End South 1997. Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. 1t d Plrv Mciln Transnational Macmillan Palgrave ed. 1st 1956-1977. California Press, 1977. Cambridge University Press, 2000. ches and Case Studies Case and ches Approa London ; New York : New York: I.B. Tauris ; Distributed in the USA by Palgrave Palgrave by USA the in Distributed Tauris ; Macmillan, I.B. York: New York : New London ; Institute o Institute Societies 2006. Pub, Blackwell Oxford: MA ; Malden, 9. Anthropology in Readers Implications.” Press, University Indiana 2006. Press ; Center Wilson Woodrow IN: Bloomington, D.C. : Zvezda2004. film, [Organization Film] Yugoslav in Zone Twilight The Ban: Yugoslavia as History: Twice There Was aCountry There as History:Twice Yugoslavia Uiest o Clfri Press, California of University . aCivilization as Stalinism Mountain: Magnetic The Three Yug Three The Zabranjeni bez zabrane: Zona sumraka jugoslovenskog filma [Banned Without a Without [Banned filma jugoslovenskog sumraka Zona zabrane: bez Zabranjeni
Organizacija Jugoslovenske kinematografije u administrativnom periodu periodu uadministrativnom kinematografije Jugoslovenske Organizacija The Imagination of the New Left: A Global Analysis of 1968 Analysis of the of NewAGlobal Left: Imagination The
The Yugoslav Experiment 1948 Experiment Yugoslav The 23,no. 4 (Nove f International London, f the byAffairs, University of California Press, 1977.
2010.
Paragraph of Yugoslav Cinematography in Its Administrative Period] Administrative Its in Cinematography Yugoslav of
oslavias: State oslavias: pta, eds. eds. pta,
mber 1, 455– 2009): 35, no. (March 35, 1 1, 2012): 30–
. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2011. Ltd, Sons & Wiley John MA: Malden, . . Maastricht: Jan van Eyck Akademie, 2011. Akademie, Eyck van Jan Maastricht: . The Anthropology of the State: AReader the of State: The Anthropology 1968 in Europe:A HistoryProtest Activism, of and Building and Legitimation, 1918 Legitimation, and -Building
115 (Oxford University Press, n.d.) Press, University (Oxford
Surfing t Surfing . Beograd . Berkeley: Published for the Royal Royal the for Published Berkeley: -1974. 60. he Black. Yugoslav Black Wave Cinema Cinema Wave Black Yugoslav Black. he Explorations in New Cinema History: History: Cinema New in Explorations
: Jugoslovenska Kinoteka, 1995. Jugoslovenska : . 2nd ed. Cambridge; New York: York: New Cambridge; ed. 2nd . 48.
History Series. New York: York: New Series. History
Bree: nvriy of University Berkeley: . East European Politics & Politics & European East
. Washington, Washington, -2005. . Boston, Mass: Boston, .
. Novi Sad: Sad: Novi . . Blackwell Blackwell .
CEU eTD Collection Socio A Ideas: “Materializing Malou. Sara Strandvad,
eds. Christie, Ian and Richard, Taylor, Vlastimir. Sudar, Wachtel, Andrew. Andrew. Wachtel, Katherine. Verdery, De. S. Arthur Vany, 60 neoavangarda Novosadska umetnosti čas Trajni the between Moving Engagements and Formats Cognitive of Plurality “The Laurent. Thévenot, . Cultural Memory in the Present. Stanford Present. the in Memory Cultural . Yugoslavia
Cultural Production.” Production.” Cultural 283– Soviet Cinema Soviet Petrović California 1991. Press, Romania Psychology P 2005. medije_kuda.org, nove Neo Sad Novi The Class Public.” the and Familiar A Portrait of the Artist as a Political Dissident: The Life and Work of Aleksandar Aleksandar of Work and Life The Dissident: Political a as Artist the of A Portrait 97. National Ideology under Socialism: Identity and Cultural Politics in Ceauşescu’s Ceauşescu’s in Politics Cultural and Identity Socialism: under Ideology National , Breaking a Nation: Literature and Cultural Politics in in Politics Cultural and Nation: Literature Breaking, a aNation Making Hollywood Economics: How Extreme Uncertainty Shapes the Film Industry Film the Shapes Uncertainty Extreme How Economics: Hollywood . Bristol: Intellect Books, 2012. Books, Intellect Bristol: .
Sceis n Clue n East in Culture and Societies . ress, 2004. . Soviet Cinema. . Soviet European Journal Of Cultural Studies Cultural Of Journal European
Avantgarde of the 1960’s1970’s]-Avantgarde of and European Journal of Social Theory Social of Journal European Inside the Film Factory: New Approaches to Russian and and Russian to New Approaches Factory: theFilm Inside
1994. Routledge, London: 116 tih godina XX veka [The Continuos Art Art [TheContinuos veka XX godina I 70-tih -tih
Material Perspective on the Organizing of of Organizing the on Perspective -Material eta Erp 7 Bree: nvriy of University Berkeley: 7. Europe -Central , CA: Stanford University Press, 1998.
10, no. 10, (2007):3 no. – 409
14, no. 3 (August 2011): 2011): (August 3 no. 14, . Novi Sad: Centar za za Centar Sad: Novi . 23
. .