GRAND DELUSIONS: INTERWAR HUNGARIAN CULTURAL DIPLOMACY, 1918-1941 Zsolt Nagy A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History. Chapel Hill 2012 Approved by: Dr. Chad Bryant Dr. Konrad Jarausch Dr. Robert Jenkins Dr. Louise McReynolds Dr. Donald J. Raleigh Dr. Peter Sherwood ©2012 Zsolt Nagy ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT ZSOLT NAGY: Grand Delusions: Interwar Hungarian Cultural Diplomacy, 1918-1941 (Under the direction of Chad Bryant) This dissertation examines the development of interwar Hungarian cultural diplomacy, concentrating on efforts in three areas: academia, the tourist industry, and motion picture and radio production. In the post-Versailles era new and old European states faced the challenge of creating or revising their respective national identities. They also forged images of their respective nations for various foreign audiences. In Hungary, the significance of international public opinion became painfully apparent only after the First World War when the victorious Allies granted 71.5 percent of the country’s territory to its neighbors. In order to secure Hungary’s status as a proper European nation and to gain invaluable international support for its foreign policy aims—the revision of the Trianon Treaty and international recognition of the Hungarian state—the Hungarian political elite devised an all-encompassing cultural diplomatic campaign. In cooperation with the country’s intellectual and industrial elite, they mobilized and deployed the country’s cultural capital—real and imagined—in order to influence international public opinion. The Hungarian leadership viewed cultural diplomatic efforts as a continuation of war by other means. While the main focus of this study is Hungary, this dissertation also offers a transnational view of interwar cultural diplomacy. First, interwar Hungarian cultural diplomacy was influenced by and carried out in competition with other East and East- iii Central European nations. Second, these efforts were part of a larger, nearly universal, phenomenon whereby nations large and small sought to sway international public opinion. While domestic discussions about Hungarianness vis-à-vis Europeanness had a crucial effect on the image they tried to construct, models and information provided by other countries also played an important role in the reorganization of Hungarian cultural production. Finally, changes in international relations also influenced the ways cultural diplomacy supplemented traditional diplomacy. In the end, this dissertation offers a different perspective on the interwar period by examining a small country’s efforts to maneuver the uncertain terrain of post First World War international relations. It is a story of how Hungarian elites perceived, and misperceived, themselves, their surroundings, and their own ability to affect the country’s fate amid high hopes and deep-seated anxieties about the country’s place in a newly reconstructed Europe. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation is the product of a long and winding journey that started sixteen years ago when I arrived in the United States from my native Hungary. Along the way, I relied on the help of many people. I made the first stage of this journey at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas. There, Colin Loader not only taught me how to take college notes, but also put it in my head that one day I too might become a historian. I often jokingly remind him that he is to “blame” for all my “struggles.” Barbara Wallace taught me how to write a historical research paper and shared my obsession with Liverpool Football Club. Paul Werth’s assignments challenged me and pushed me to better myself as a student of history. Paul still helps me in times of crisis and doubt. At the University of Chicago, my preceptor Joshua Arthurs helped me to adjust to the intellectual rigor of the Master of Art Program in the Social Sciences. Michael Geyer, my MA thesis advisor, challenged me to think of European history in a different way by applying the concepts of transnational history. Here at UNC Chapel Hill my advisor Chad Bryant patiently directed my development into a professional historian. He did not hesitate for a second when I suddenly changed the direction of my research. He helped me craft my first publication and read through draft after draft of my dissertation. He wrote so many recommendation letters for me I have lost count. Most importantly, he took a chance on me and my project from the beginning thus opening a door for me to enter this strangely invigorating world of academia. Seminars I took with Christopher Browning, Terence McIntosh, Dani v Botsman (now at Yale), Konrad Jarausch, and Donald J. Raleigh opened new avenues in my approach to history. Professors Jarausch and Raleigh generously agreed to be on my dissertation committee. They too have written a myriad of recommendation letters on my behalf, read and commented on my chapters, and most vitally, always supported me. Louise McReynolds also agreed to be on my committee, commented on my colloquium presentation, and offered critical advice—underlined with a great sense of humor. Being an RA for Melissa Bullard not only introduced me to the world of nineteenth-century Brooklyn, but also made it financially possible for me to conduct my oversees research. I must mention the sustained help I received from the administrative staff of the department: Violet Anderson, Joy Jones, Joyce Loftin, and Wanda Wallace. Outside of the History Department, I received a great deal of help from UNC’s Center for Slavic, Eurasian, and East European Studies. Its director Robert Jenkins became one of my committee members and read early drafts of my chapters, as did the associate director of the center, Jacqueline Olich. I was also lucky enough that Peter Sherwood of the Department of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures agreed to join my committee. He read and reread the entire manuscript and with seemingly endless patience corrected my English and allowed me to utilize his expertise as a renowned translator of Hungarian literature. Davis Library and its Interlibrary Loan staff helped me to locate obscure sources; without the service they provide, dissertations such as this would not be possible. The department’s Mowry Fellowship, UNC Center for Global Initiatives’ Pre- Dissertation Travel Award, and the UNC Graduate School’s Travel Grant made my research possible. The generous support of the Quinn Fellowship Program allowed me vi the luxury of a year of uninterrupted writing. I also must thank my brother-in-law, Michael McCormack, and his wife Cindy for helping me out in a time of dire need. And lastly, I owe great deal of debt to my dear friend Zoltán Baranyai and his wife Judit for insisting that I stay with them while doing research in Hungary. While I did not have a typical cohort of East and East-Central European graduate students I benefitted greatly from the support of my UNC colleagues cross the board regardless of focus and specialization. During the early stages of the program Marko Dumančić, Michael Meng and Gleb Tsipursky took a great deal of time helping me with administrative issues and navigating the challenges of devising a viable research agenda. In Friederike Brühöfener I gained a friend. We shared countless hours studying together in Davis Library, discussing history and politics afterhours off campus, and she too offered helpful comments at various stages of this project. She and the other “Ladies of Pemberley”—Nora Doyle, Kimbely Kutz, and Rachel Hynson—and their open-door policy helped me through some difficult times. In addition to those already mentioned, a number of historians, friends, and colleagues read and commented on my work or helped me in other invaluable ways on both sides of the Atlantic. Robert Nemes, Holly Case, Alice Freifeld, and David S. Frey read early versions of different chapters. Andrea Orzoff and Gábor Ujváry not only offered helpful advice, but also allowed me to read their book manuscripts before publication. Márta Jusztin, Balázs Ablonczy, and Paul E. Michelson also generously shared their work with me. Attila Pók of the Hungarian Historical Institute followed and supported my work since my years as an MA student in Chicago—beyond his duty as the deputy director of the Historical Institute at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Pál vii Pritz, Michael Miller, and Miklós Zeidler met with me on numerous occasions in Budapest and helped me conceptualize my research. Miklós continues to answer my unremitting barrage of email questions with patience and diligence. No historian work would be possible without the aid of archivists and librarians. The staff at the Hungarian National Library, the Budapest Metropolitan Library, and the Hungarian Parliamentary Library was invaluable. In the Hungarian National Archive János Kalmár and Szilveszter Dékány were professional and more than generous with their time. Kenneth E. Nyirady (at the Library of Congress) answered email after email. Andrea Bakonyi at the Tourism Library of the Budapest Business School made numerous trips to the “dungeon” to satisfy my curiosity. Tamás Sávoly, István Salamon, and Hajnalka Sütheő welcomed me at the private archive of the Hungarian radio. Márton Kurutz and Lilla Ignéczi helped me navigate the collection and library of the Hungarian Film Archive, while Vera Gyürey and Szilágyi Blanka made it possible for me to have a copy of the film “Hungaria.” My unusually long acknowledgement reflects the fact that writing this dissertation was far from solitary work. However, there is certainly one more person that needs to be mentioned here for, without her selfless love and unremitting faith in me and my goals, this dissertation would have never been possible: my wife, Karla. She read and improved every single page I typed in the past sixteen years.