Discourses About Central Europe in Hungarian and Polish Essayism

CEU eTD Collection

Second R Supervisor: eader:

i n Hungarian and Polish Essayism A In partial fulfilment requirements ofthe degreefor the of

Maciej Janowski Balázs Tr Discourses A Central European University e ncs History Department Budapest, Hungary é Andrzej Sadecki nyi Master ofArts Submitted to

bout Central

2012 By

Europe

fter 1989

CEU eTD Collection with accordance in made such instructions may made thewritten be permission not ofthe without A copies Further made. copies such any of part a form must page This librarian. the from obtained be may Details Library. European Central the in lodged Auth the by given instructions the with accordance in only made in be may part, either or full process, any by Copies Author. the with rests thesis this of text the in Copyright i

uthor

or and or CEU eTD Collection termthe Europe ofCentral contexts Hungarian and 1989, after circumstances of change the continent, the of divisions depoliticized, became discourse the hand, other the defineCentralEurope authors contemporary hand, one the On 1980s. the of discourse the with comparison in ruptures Centra the features what around Ma Robert Kiss, Gy. written analysis t discusses it Then, concept. the of in popularity its of peak the Abstract l Europe.

The post The abo discourse the in developments the traces thesis The he rsac questions: research three by .

Finally, it Finally, it

Krzysztof Czyżewski, Péter Esterházy, Aleksander Fiut, Lajos Grendel, Csaba Csaba Grendel, Lajos Fiut, Aleksander Esterházy, Péter Czyżewski, Krzysztof -

1989 essayism about Central Europe demonstrated several continuities and continuities several demonstrated Europe Central about essayism 1989 y

attribute to the region and who do they perceive as significant other significant as perceive they do who and region the to attribute examines kłowicz . Yet

and became andvaried. moreindividualized

the 1980s. the , it underwent a sort of sort a underwent it , ,

aselectionessays of Andrzej Stasiuk, Stasiuk, Andrzej

in asimilarway in it avoid o d te uhr epo te em f eta Europe, Central of term the employ authors the do how he ed First, it overviews the origins and various definitions various and origins the overviews it First, 1980s‟ 1980s‟

the the the the discourse pro discourse exclusivism ii

and discourse and L and

representative for the postthe representativefor find analogous features of analogousfeatures find “ privatization,” meaning that the uses of uses the that meaning privatization,” á szló Végel szló o longer no

which lays ground for the the for ground lays which of the concept the of ved its rootedness both in Polish in both rootedness its ved ut Central Europe following Europe Central ut . The .

political the on focused

analysis is organized is analysis . Finally, Finally, - 1989 discourse1989

the region.On the in spite of spite in further further s

CEU eTD Collection Bibliography Conclusions 1989 After Central Europe About Discourses 3. Critics its 1980s and the in Europe Central About Discourse the of Renaissance 2. CentralEurope of theof Concept and History Scope Definitions, 1. Introduction Table ofContents Secondary literature Secondary literature Primary László Végel Stasiuk Andrzej Makłowicz Robert Kiss Csaba Gy. Grendel Lajos Fiut Aleksander Péter Esterházy Czyżewski Krzysztof Europe Central about Discourse the Criticism of 2.2. Centra about The Discourse 2.1.

......

...... – –

Between Central Europe and the Balkansthe and Europe Between Central –

– – – Central Europe Versus History Versus Central Europe

......

How to Preserve the Nation and Go Beyond it at theit at Same Time Go Beyond and Nation Preserve the How to A Sceptic and aPropo and A Sceptic

“Private” CentralEurope Identity inLiterature Central European –

......

N – ostalgic CentralEuropean ostalgic

A Practitioner of the Idea of Central Europe of Idea the A of Practitioner ...... l Europe in the 1980s the in l Europe ...... nent of Central Europe in One in Central Europe of nent

......

...... iii

......

62 60 60 54 49 46 43 40 37 34 31 28 26 21 14 14

6 1

CEU eTD Collection ht s pcfc n h clue f hs ein novd any h dsiet from dissidents the mainly involved region this of culture the in specific is what is Europe Central what on debate The Union. Soviet the to Germany of Republic Federal incre became Introduction 101 (1986): 5 Currents Cross Budapest,” Cross Currents 1 (1982): 12 Attitudes,” European “Central Miłosz, 1 a constitutes it that stating Europe Central of particularity the emphasize to chose others EuropeansCentral foreign were values whose empire Eastern the of influence the under came countries their misfortune political a to due only them, to According etc. literature architecture, art, Western traditi the as such countries, their of character Western argument historical and cultural with divide political this question Konrád György or Miłosz Czesław Kundera, Milan as such authors the of goals the of continent the of halves two the of separation real domina emancipation cultural and political countries for need a and region the of fate common was what however Yugoslavia and Romania), Czecho

Eg. Milan Eg. Some of th of Some and rationale its concept, the of appeal The Europe Central of distinctiveness and identity regional of concepts the 1980s, the In tion of the Soviet Union. The The Union. Soviet the of tion as (such countries communist other sometimes and Poland Hungary, slovakia, Kundera, “The Tragedy of Central Europe,” New York Review of Books 31 (1984): 33 (1984): 31Books of Review York New Europe,” Central of Tragedy “The Kundera, mentioned

snl pplr mn te nelcul o a ein ht tece from stretched that region a of intellectuals the among popular asingly . em went as far as calling this region a “kidnapped West” (Kundera), West” “kidnapped a region this calling as far as went em

similar for practically all practically for similar

above

as well intellectuals who w

ee at f h so the of part were - 14.

frequently used frequently

the participants of the debate the of participants the 1

after the Second World War World Second the after the the - called Eastern Eastern called unders metaphor of the Iron Curtain meant a a meant Curtain Iron the of metaphor on of democracy, Latin Christianity, Latin democracy, of on ere i ere n exile n exile abroad. tanding of its meaning diverged; meaning its of tanding - 0; yry ord “etr from “Letter Konrád, György 108; s B Te epaie the emphasized They . o, oiial under politically loc,

was the sense of a of sense the was

. Therefore, one Therefore, . - 38; Czesław Czesław 38; Al the All . 1

was to was while ,

and the the to

CEU eTD Collection example treating Todorova Maria Neumann Iver as However, it. question to device useful a was identity European Central domina Soviet the to response chauvinistic or nationalist Kiš) u separate, 4 European Monitor (1995):5 5 3 (Spring 1993): 349 2 current has book seminal identity per Europe Nonetheless region. transforming and democratizing the in year. same the in Kiš Danilo of death the by symbolically marked was end Its vanished. rationale Europe Central Autobiography “Fictionalized entitled dissertation, PhD his in Snel Guido War division. agree authors exposin in

Gui Iver B. Neumann, “ Neumann, B. Iver ai N Tdrv, Heacis f atr Erp: at eta Erp Vru te akn, Suh East South Balkans,” the Versus Europe Central East Europe: Eastern of “Hierarchies Todorova, N. Maria much , which however which however , do Snel, Fictionalized Autobiography and the Idea of Central Europe (Amsterdam, 2003).

Others claimed that the postulates of the “discourse community” can be finally realized finally be can community” “discourse the of postulates the that claimed Others t a b prl explained partly be can It community” “discourse European Central the that argued Many

polarization has notits lost appealfor many

other count other Russia (Neumann) or the Balkans (Todorova). They criticized the use of the concept the of use the criticized They (Todorova). Balkans the or (Neumann) Russia deeper roots deeper g the positive qualities of one of qualities positive the g nique blend of different cultural and religious trends (eg. Miłosz, (eg. trends religious and cultural different of blend nique itd Atog i dd o bec not did it Although sisted. d

“Inventing Eastern Europe.” He Europe.” Eastern “Inventing

that ” - 369. 4 3

Russia as Central Europe‟s Constituting Other,” East European Politics and Societies 7/2 7/2 Societies and Politics European East Other,” Constituting Europe‟s Central as Russia – one ot ti rgoa dsore lo a a ecuiit character, exclusivist an had also discourse regional this out, pointed at

ries or regions or ries

of lost cannot be simply classified as E simply as classified be cannot

a given time it w it time given a

than the Cold WarCold the than Europe

- 46. t vgu i 18, hn h Cl Wr ne, hs t political its thus ended, War Cold the when 1989, in vigour its

back

as significant (constitutive) significant as taking

in the Enlightenment. the in as a as .

political split of the continent the of split political region at the expense of others. Nevertheless, both Nevertheless, others. of expense the at region

t useful tool to emancipate to tool useful o he e h mi nraie fe 18, the 1989, after narrative main the me 2 assumption

suggests astern

that

. Many used the concept to avoid a avoid toconcept used the . Many It was in this period that period this in was It rsne by presented in n te da f a of idea the and tion

the East the te icus abo discourse the , o thers for Central Europe, Central for thers

the region the - West divide in Europe in divide West . He

– ar Wolff Larry

term finds

n te da of Idea the and Konr

from the Cold the from

proposed by proposed traces ád, ut Central Central ut

regional, Western regional

Danilo Danilo in of 2

and the for his

CEU eTD Collection the prejudices of the the of prejudices the but speech Fulton famous his in Churchill War. World Second the after Europe of division Strikingly West half.” other complementary its as Europe Eastern “invented Europe Stanford University Press. 1994), 4. 5 sci political history, as such etc. disciplines, geography various by term the of uses different on Europe Central of concept trends that aroused after 1989. Europe, history. its on id the on Europe, Central of idea the on reflection the continue authors the which in 1989, after written essays of number a examine to like would I thesis this in cultura a in akin being of feeling a or history, of victim a and periphery a being of sense a like valid, old the of some traits, new acquired it though Even appealing. still remained continent 1989 thancreaterather the precede

Larry Wolff, Inventing Eastern Europe. The Map of Civilization on the Mind of the Enlightenment (Stanford: Enlightenment the of Mind the on Civilization of Map The Europe. Eastern Inventing Wolff, Larry also , when the the when , was opposed opposed was l or historicalwayor l n h first the In why partly is That identify express ti mna mp rae i te nihemn overlapped Enlightenment the in created map mental this , Cold War. The Iron Curtain Iron The War. Cold t il eosrt wa i te eelg o te urn wiig n Central on writing current the of genealogy the is what demonstrate will It The s The ed

the continuities and discontinuities with their predecessors, as well as new as well as predecessors, their with discontinuities and continuities the vanished divide geopolitical it outit of nowhere

hpe I will I chapter . For many inte many For . the to

econd chapter will address will chapter econd

w the shadowed lands of backwardness or even barbarism of the East. East. the of barbarism even or backwardness of lands shadowed the approach grounded in Western thinking Western in grounded approach ealthy

with other little nations situated in the middle of the continent the middleof the in nationssituated other little with , as well as various understandings of the concept the of understandings various as well as , t e icus o Cnrl uoe i not did Europe Central on discourse he

West against the poor East originated from the times that that times the from originated East poor the against West

briefly . llectuals of llectuals

in 1946 in

describe the origins of the term and history of the the of history and term the of origins the describe would thus would

, 3 reflected not only on a new geopolitical divid geopolitical new a on only not reflected the region, the region, the

because the main issues main the

lhuh t s rube ht Winston that arguable is it Although strengthen the deep groun deep the strengthen the deep rooted mental split of the the of split mental rooted deep the Central European European Central

since Enlightenment since

discussed in the debate debate the in discussed 5

entity of the region and region the of entity

simply T characteristics he civilization of the the of civilization he with . It will also touch also will It h geopolitical the iapa after disappear ded division ded identity ,

remain . Thus, . clearly ence, was on e,

CEU eTD Collection Czyżewski, Aleksander Fiut, Czyżewski, Aleksander L Esterházy, e Hungarian and Polish Several 1989. in continuity and changes discussthe will I pre the that criticism the present also texts Europe Central Bożena and Gosk Hanna by edited ukształtowanej przez historię.” Porównania 9 (2011): 89 wieku, XX narracjach w Karw przemilczenia i Pominięcia (Nie)obecność. Europa. “Inna Millati, Piotr by: example authors of selection this from omitted be hardly could he thatinteresting and peculiar so is approach his moreoverscholarship, Polish the outside unknown rather remains 6 constrain free Europe Central about write to employed serv from treatment its and analytical an whole. a than studies, case perspective. this from scholarship the by far so Secondly, interest. only the First, criteria two rather it Europe, Central

The only author, whos author, only The y rsn his present ly es them usually owska. Warszawa: Elipsa, 2008; Oksana Weretiuk, “Jurij Andruchowycz i Andrzej Stasiuk o tożsamości o Stasiuk Andrzej i Andruchowycz “Jurij Weretiuk, Oksana 2008; Elipsa, Warszawa: owska. from M Certainly, Moreover, these essays d essays these Moreover,

t a authors had to had authors . Most of the authors authors the of Most . st the period ( period the :

ajos Grendel, Csaba Gy. Kiss, Lá Kiss, Gy. Csaba Grendel, ajos

the recurrence of the term in their works and the originality of their approach their of originality the and works their in term the of recurrence the tool f the of in the 1980s. It will be based on secondary literature, as well as a few few a as well as literature, secondary on based be will It 1980s. the in . They rather display the emotional stance of the authors towards the concept the towards authors the of stance emotional the display rather They .

h rsac de not does research the se personal point of view view of point personal as a as a orframe postulate ofidentity a for a project.certain

survey on survey e writings on Central Europe gained some scholar interest is Andrzej Stasiuk. Yet, it Yet, Stasiuk. Andrzej is interest scholar some gained Europe Central on writings e

texts Milan a treat the issue extensively, even if it was not usually their main or the or main their usually not was it if even extensively, issue the treat re

literary or essayistic point of view of point essayistic or literary deals with deals present a particularly inte particularly a present

can be qualified qualified be can Robert Makłowicz Robert Makłowicz Kundera,

the discourse on Central Europe in Poland and Hungary as a as Hungary and Poland in Europe Central on discourse the o not argue the applicability of the term of Central Europe as Europe Central of term the of applicability the argue not o ht r dat with dealt are that Nowa mitologia Europy Środkowej w prozie Andrzeja Stasiuka,” in Stasiuka,” Andrzeja prozie w Środkowej Europy mitologia Nowa - a sample. The authors The sample. a 1989 discourse encountered. discourse 1989 ssays will be scrutinized be will ssays Czesław ,

cover both before and after 1989. after and before both

a selection ofselection a n t rfet n h tpc ih o academic no with topic the on reflect to and szló Végel on the Hungarian side and Krzysztof and side Hungarian the on Végel szló as 4 - 100.

6 and Andrzej Stasiuk, and Andrzej Stasiuk, Miłosz, l te uhr rfrig o h cnet of concept the to referring authors the all

. His writings on Central Europe w Europe Central on writings His . essays. This literary genre was most often often most was genre literary This essays. Therefore, they should be treated be should they Therefore,

resting approach, and not and approach, resting n hs hssae oeit ad essayism and novelists are thesis this in Gy texts on texts örgy . The concep The . listed listed , written by eight authors eight by written ,

Konr Central Europ Central Finally, in the third chapter third the in Finally, above on Polishthe side. á It allows the writer to writer the allows It d, were selected were t of Central Europe Europe Central of t Danilo Kiš). Kiš). Danilo

being e written e ere

nlzd for analyzed analyzed rather as rather : Péter :

It will It

using using

basic basic after .

CEU eTD Collection analyzed originalanalyzed in their Hung work of case the in and essays their for known particularly are Kiss, however Végel or Grendel novelists acclaimed internationally and renowned Esterh like them, of Some activity. side their constitutes Europeon Central orpresent anew,refined simplified, or perspective. predecessors intellectual periphery or centre of sentiment author, Thirdly, ho inquiring analyzed, be will Secondly, Europe. Central of region the Polish or empire Habsburg it does is; Europe Central what of questions the answering author, the by Europe Central of notion the of understanding the identify will it

s well. as The nwrn wo s the is who answering

t il ok closer look will it also analysis of text each superior

recognized in Hungary itself. Yet others, li others, Yet itself. Hungary in recognized lot n Almost

are of the the of are . ity ial, t will it Finally,

one of the texts are translated into English, English, into translated are texts the of one - or inferior or

to what ext what to - Lithuanian Commonwealth; does it exclude it does Commonwealth; Lithuanian at best

w he assess them and to what extent he perceive he extent what to and them assess he w

arian language.arian or Polish ohr for “other” the attitude towards towards attitude the

will beorganizedwill around

writers of the Hungarian minority in Slovakia and Serbia, Serbia, and Slovakia in minority Hungarian the of writers ity e

nt he continuehe nt also also towards East and West, does he present his region as as region his present he does West, and East towards

the main traits of the region presented by the author the by presented region the of traits main the

ok o lns ewe a ie ato ad his and author given a between links for look a

eta European, Central 5

vra wt sm ps ette sc a the as such entities past some with overlap

from their respective countries respective their from s te prs f h cniet f gi a of continent the of parts other

the well the

ke Czyżewski, Makłowicz, Fiut and Fiut Makłowicz, Czyżewski, ke ázy or Stasiuk are am are Stasiuk or ázy three mainthree

- the known directions of the of directions known does

l atter two, for the scholarly scholarly the for two, atter

research questions. First, questions. research

thus h author the any l esy wl be will essays all

territories from territories s

ong the most the ong them unique. them . Others, like Others, .

nel any unveil

debate ven ven

CEU eTD Collection and other countries of the region will admit that the term Central Europe relates to relates Europe Central term the that admit will region the of countries other and Poland Hungary, Republic, Czech of citizens a about as way same the regio the in people 1. in funded state inUniversity Krakow Eu Central courses offer universities Közép as term Agriculture European Central of Journal also E Central East of region, the of issues social or politics history, with deal that journals Technology European Central many people. identi European Central regional, a initiative of number the Definitions, Scope and History Definitions, C ScopeandHistory of the Budapest surrounding space surrounding bear Central Europe Central 1989 After n is that term a is Europe Central Central Europe in Europe Central oen studies ropean

or Közép hc am a fosteri at aims which

Európai Állatorvosi Központ Állatorvosi Európai eta Erpa Uiest. hr ae eta Erpa mgzns and magazines European Central are There University. European Central urope. urope. sc a Cen as such , , n. Although it is hard to talk about a collec a about talk to hard is it Although n.

- s s Európai Kulturális Intézet (Central European Cultural Institute) Cultural European (Central Intézet Kulturális Európai

vrl institutions everal or projects undertaken under the label of label the under undertaken projects or ) . .

also Even though there is no survey to confirm it, it, confirm to survey no is there though Even

Even o Even

national one, it would hardly be an overstatement to say that m that say to overstatement an be hardly would it one, national on

( their became

o example for Central Europe Central utside the humanities a number of journals edited in the region the in edited journals of number a humanities the utside

name, for instance Central European Journal of Chemistryof Journal European Central instance for name, rl uoen ntaie Cnrl uoen nttt of Institute European Central Initiative, European tral fication a common denominator for several cultural initiatives. cultural several for denominator common a g bte cmuiain ewe Cnrl European Central between communication „better ng n ifrn fields different in .

owadays It is possible to find even such peculiar us peculiar such even find to possible is It t hre University Charles at

became oncept of Centraloncept of Europe an ,

– Slovakia 6

history or politics or history a Central European Veterinary Centre. Veterinary European Central a

well grounded in the consciousne the in grounded well at least least at ,

Austria, Lithuania, Ukraine, Roman Ukraine, Lithuania, Austria, a part of part a ee rae udr h name the under created were

Central Europe Central tive Central European identity European Central tive

, or even entire programs entire even or , n P in among others the others among their self their it suffices to suffices it

au o Jagiellonian or rague - ,

recognition to assume that that assume to

look at the at look them and them e ss of the the of ss operates operates

s Journal Journal

of the the of Some

any any

for

or of in in ia ia A

CEU eTD Collection prominent state, Slovak the of support a awards council city Wrocław of field engaged is Centre) cultures.” 11 10 9 8 7 when 1989 after discourse 1980s the even tradition. describing publicdiscourse. the (Panorama of (Melano (East Blog Európa Közép bl the entered awards the of help the to thanks undertaken being are Europe the promoting at aims which Foundation o knowledge Recognita Terra the instance for are These

ht http://www.mck.krakow.pl/page/14 http://www.ceci.hu/cities/frame.jsp?lang=ENG&HomeID=99

http://www.pk.org.pl http://melano.hu/ tp://kelet in the early 19 early the in it oee, d However, T grants inter here here a dvlpd uig the during developed was – 7

Although it Although -

Central Europe Central

intellectuals intellectuals europa.blog.hu/ the lands between the German and Russian and German the between lands the Polish state Polish aaie f eta Europeans) Central of Magazine f Central Europe in Hungary. in Europe Central f e

is Cultures Cultures ogosphere as well. Among the most active blogs about the region are: region the about blogs active most the Among well. as ogosphere st

also is rjcs novn a lat w cutis f h region. the of countries two least at involving projects

„Cen espite espite in many project many in th . Interestingly, the Interestingly, .

appeared cent great number of numbergreat - – to main discuss the issues sponsored Międzynarodowe Centrum Kultury (Inte Kultury Centrum Międzynarodowe sponsored

rl uoes utcluaim mmr ad identity.” and memory multiculturalism, Europe‟s tral the Europelessknown). the

- ury established itself as a w a as itself established of Central European Blog) European Central , only in the Cold War period and especially and period War Cold the in only ,

every t qie oua ue oaas t nowadays, use popular quite its

sporadically yearly

er h Cnrl uoen ou big t Bratislava to brings Forum European Central the year

Central involving partners from the region and one of its main main its of one and region the from partners involving

grass root initiatives root grass “ concept started its career at a very a at career its started concept Central Eu Central

Several other projects under the label the under projects other Several before the II World War World II the before 10 uoen eae f h nineteen the of debate European 7

and Panorama Kultur Kultur Panorama and

11 of interest public idely used term used idely

Overall, the term became well grounded in well the grounded termOverall, became ropean literary prize literary ropean , 9

Melano Melano linguistic Internation

under the Central European nameEuropean Central theunder –

a közép a

, to finally enter the official the enter finally to , areas

in e em eta Europe Central term he al

, some tracing its origins its tracing some , the the region. –

, Vi

- - has a re a has uoa ne Znana Mniej Europa európaiak magazinja európaiak

s Angelus.” different

egrad Fund which which Fund egrad in its last phase in phase last its in rnational Cultural rnational eta Europe Central 8

- latively short latively

eighties S

ne 2006 ince of point

With the the With

Central

Kelet

than than and and - . , ,

CEU eTD Collection udmnal different fundamentally Oszk Hodža, Milan (eg. thinkers Slovakian various ove Germany “Mitteleurop entitled afterwards Kakanien 13 12 intellectuals Hungarian or Czech by term is the finally a be to out turned Europe T exile. in intellectuals and dissidents the among popular gradually became concept the region, the of countries the in propaganda communist the by rejected Although in however renaissance, its brought nations the for term this bury finally to seem could which War World II the during propaganda Nazi rather use was tho political Slovakian or Polish Hungarian, integrate wanted to by formulated concepts the with integrate

InEnglish: Friedrich Naumann, Central Europe (New York: Knopf, 1917). on ebur “hts n nm? itluoa Cnrl uoe Esen uoe East Europe, Eastern Europe, Central Mitteleuropa, name? a in “What‟s Neubauer, John rcoming the rcoming refer was Therefore d ht experience that Revisited(07.05.2003): 4. federal d

. 13

sometimes by Czech by sometimes . under the Austrian and German and Austrian the under aptly

In 1915 a 1915 In to the region as region the to popularized by popularized Naumann

projects capturedby conflicts ,

h tr Cnrl uoe a not was Europe Central term the exactly in

a Ge ”

d 12

postulated the integration of small small of integration the postulated

rman liberal nationalist thinker nationalist liberal rman ewe them between

advocated

h Gra occupation German the useful device to undermine the the undermine to device useful among them. In this respect this In them. among hc became which

a Eastern Europe. The idea o idea The Europe. Eastern

Wolff

group of dissident writers in the 1980s. This peculiar career of career peculiar This 1980s. the in writers dissident of group order to the avoid dominance

or Slovak or

, who , h non the then and later later and then as an “ideological antidote to the iron curtain,” given its given curtain,” iron the to antidote “ideological an as significantly a is that that is

points points

proponents of the regional cooperation regional the of proponents supremacy. Hegemony of any empi any of Hegemony supremacy. with more than 100,000 copies copies 100,000 than more with - ught emn federalists German r áz, J Jászi, ár 8

out the irony of using using of irony the out codn t Neumann to according of .

ut the Quite the interwar period interwar the y ay zc, Hungarian, Czech, many by , f Mitteleuropa was then revived by the the by revived then was Mitteleuropa f

different zf isdk) However, Piłsudski). ózef his agenda his Friedrich Na Friedrich particularly manichaeistic of

otay te period the contrary, one of their big neighbours big one oftheir

nations f h region the of otx ad understanding. and context was umann published a book a published umann the term Central Europe termCentral the popul . Although the concept the Although .

East

h rgo would region the somewhat similar to similar somewhat f h rgo and region the of r n h Czech, the in ar - West divide West he term Central Central term he bssle in bestseller a , - re re

eta Europe,” Central h actually who , t ,

was at odds at was

Polish and and Polish hey fe 1945 after what would would , and , . was

CEU eTD Collection the author and his geographical, historical, culturalinterpretations.geographical,politicalhistorical,or The authorandhis the with as complex etc. ( context national different life short relatively and origins complicated its despite territories these of conquest the promote to propaganda German by use former Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1997), 232. 16 Transactions and Papers, no. 20 (1954): 15 15 14 its until that state federal 1918 in collapse the for euphemism an as then serves Europe Central Empire. approach territorie Ukraine. and Belarus Lithuania, contemporary in lands of portion also Fe current of territory the German Another toconsider is approach the in Germany place definitely would heirs his and Neumann interpretations German other of most in and himself Sinnhuber For approach. ideological and discipline his observer, of parts other thecontine the All Peninsula. Iberian the was them of any in included never was which Europe of part Sinnhuber of use the of

Wolff, 15. Karl Sinnhuber, “Central Europe “Central Sinnhuber, Karl atn . ei ad äe E Wgn Te yh f otnns A Continents. of Myth The Wigen, E. Kären and Lewis W. Martin ) andbecame term thisregioninternationally. used tocall awidely h hsoia triois f h Polish the of territories historical the h gorpia rah f eta Europe Central of reach geographical The t term, the of scope geographical and definition the to comes it When ta d nt eog any belong not do that s es .

s to is

the He collected sixteen definitions of Central Europe and concluded that the only the that concluded and Europe Central of definitions sixteen collected He

term reflects for instance t instance for reflects term included dniyCnrl Europe Central identify its

history ,

nt were includednt were indifferentconfigurations. eta Eur Central deral Republic of German of Republic deral most of t of most Střední Evropa, Střední . Definitions of Central Europe vary Europe Central of Definitions .

–

Mitteleuropa

he nationalities of the region. the of nationalities he - oe o Poland to more 39. p cmrss ad o Asra Bhma n Moravia. and Bohemia Austria, of lands comprises ope

as Central European with Közép he article from 1954 by a by 1954 from article he - – ihain omnelh ta i a significant a is that Commonwealth, Lithuanian

Europe Centrale: An Analysis of a Geographical Term,” Geographical a of Analysis An Centrale: Europe 9

the - Európa, Europa Európa,

former territory of the Austro the of territory former

y depends r included are . 16

Poles tend to treat as Central Europe Central as treat to tend Poles - time only Bavaria andSaxony only Bavaria then rtqe f eaegah (London, Metageography of Critique ,

the the

Besides the Czech, Austrian Czech, the Besides .

significantly, depending on depending significantly,

Środkowa, Stredná Európa Stredná Środkowa,

on the origins of a given given a of origins the on One of the most popular popular most the of One er o Cnrl Europe. Central of heart

German geographer Karl geographer German

em rudd tef in itself grounded term

In this this In he situation is situation he 14 way .

Nonetheless, - complexity Hungarian ,

lo the also ,

out of

as as

CEU eTD Collection some of the authors authors some ofthe post the of Slovakia Poland, Hungary, Republic, Croatia. and Herzegovina, particularly and Bosnia Serbia, Romania, Ukraine, embraces it lands, Hungarian and zwanej środkową (Jurij Andruchowycz and Andrzej Sta 17 Estonia) and Lithuania the consolidated, soon was marketization and democratization was transition post of one communist scientists. political EuropeCentral isredeployed toundermine it. as it perceives border, over, is War Cold the Although divide. political the question to it used that 1980s the from community discursive European Central belonging Austro the Polish the Andrukhovych with links historical Yuri the emphasize as such Ukraine, Western from those mainly intellectuals, is That Europe. Central to belonging their underline

Jurij Andruchowycz, “Środkowowschodnie rewizje” [“Central Eastern Revisions”] in Dwa eseje o Europie Europie o eseje Dwa in Revisions”] Eastern [“Central rewizje” “Środkowowschodnie Andruchowycz, Jurij Euro h cnet f eta Erp bcm a ad dvc atr 99 es 1989 after device handy a became Europe Central of concept The European Central as categorised often most are that countries the As -

Atlantic o h Wsen civilization Western the to - - countries ugra Epr, o rv ter Centra their prove to Empire, Hungarian popular inHungary orAustriapopular omns tasto ad s tbe ebr o te Euro the of members stable as and transition communist - Soviet –

vn f h poes a dfeet dynamics different had process the if even Already in the beginning of the transition period transition the of beginning the in Already tutrs I cnrs, the contrast, In structures. from the countries that aspire to from thataspire thecountries

area together together

a new kind of a of kind new a suffered political political suffered . In

with the with eta Erpa countr European Central niey or entirely

– . again independent Baltic independent again

curtain hy some They are the countries to the East of the EU the of East the to countries the instability and economical crise economical and instability , twonations thatconstituted the monarchic union nowadays

10 siuk), Wołowiec: Czarne, 2000. -

part Lithuanian and

omr oit eulc (except Republics Soviet former y h triois f c of territories the ly how it happens it become for ins for Europe l widely

repeat the cultural argument of the the of argument cultural the repeat ies Commonwealth

tance

n all and member oiia, cnmc n social and economic political, perceived as su as perceived sometime an States the case the ness of – s ,

the paths of t of paths the

of ad eventually and , were different than different were hs onre joined countries these rgesn fast progressing -

ontemporary tatc community, Atlantic s the the s.

of that that , hs a This

Thus

or more often, to often, more or European Union – many Ukrainian many

ccessful stories ccessful or Schengen or the concept of concept the ,

eily for pecially pproach is is pproach i n the field field the n he former he – 17

Poland, . Latvia, Czech

, the the , They their

the the . –

CEU eTD Collection h tasto pro i te 90, tecig rm soi t Albania to Estonia from stretching 1990s, the in period transition the way widest Bul Romania, Austria, as countries such to formats plus” “V4 called configurations extended the in operates group the that way the to Similarly Slovakia. and – sciences political of 20 19 symbolic geography in Poland, Hungary andRomania,” EastCentral Europe 32,no. 1 18 termas such find onecan literature marking athird part out of locatedin continent the middle. the Europe, of mapping different a of idea the in brought works Their region. the of identity the as historians, that dimension. regional a to leading scope hist the by approached were serfdom second or movements phenomena such before, even However level. regional a on countries the of history the compare and narrative national the beyond conducted recent using research.” historical for potential analytical historians for merits neutral synonym of

Oskar Halecki,The Limits Divisions and of European History (London: Sheed and Ward, 1950). JenőSzűcs, Vázlat Európa a political alliance alliance political a osatn odci Mce Jnwk ad aás rnsni “h bte aot ein : eae over debates : regions about bother “Why Trencsényi, Balázs and Janowski Maciej Iordachi, Constantin

rgee te eta Erpa debate European Central the triggered Furthermore like Terms

employing these terms these employing the term Central Europe covers all the post the all covers Europe Central term the concepts Jen ő Szűcs ő

, Central Europe is not is Europe Central , , eta E Central such terms the“EasternBloc,” as such

. the term is used mainly to address the region of the Visegrad Group(V4) Visegrad the of region the address mainlyto used termis the created in 1991 and consisting of consisting and 1991 in created As Iordachi, Janowski and Trenc and Janowski Iordachi, As

o ee to refer to

három történeti régiójáról (Budapest 1983). 19 –

or some political scientists extend scientists political some

rp o East or urope Oskar H Oskar

. a

E “East

itn hsoy a o o cmaaie eerh a been has research comparative of lot a history, distant specially after 1989 after specially alecki And to a large extent these were the h the were these extent large a to And - Central Europe,” 18 garia, Ukraine, Mol Ukraine, garia, a -

eta Erp have Europe Central Despite Despite odce b te intellectuals the by conducted 11 uni , s akades dvlpet f national of development backwardness, as

served as an inspiration for a wide a for inspiration an as served

que

some or term to describe the region. the describe to term

the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland Poland Hungary, Republic, Czech the s - “ é communist countries that underwent that countries communist , Eastern Europe.”

nyi argue, nyi the

orians as transgressing the national national the transgressing as orians “Central scepticism in historiography about historiography in scepticism their definition of definition their

re was a growing interest to go to interest growing a was re

dova, Baltic countries. In countries. Baltic dova,

- lo ipae analytical displayed also

Eastern Europe,” Eastern “regions provid “regions - 2 (2005): 6. .

t beca It . ok o such of Works Central Eur Central istorical works istorical

e more a me r Across the the Across

debate on debate e a huge a e “South –

ope the

so -

CEU eTD Collection in order order in West the be would Germany, of East author Europe. Central to synonyms Europe “C Europe,” Eastern 22 (London: 21 East as (such labels regional various whether and use in currently are terms regional Amon Europe. Central of concepts previous the to also phenomena “ looking when between mediating They way.” “middle “środ balance. or equilibrium The view. of of and Southernparts Christianization the historians Polish some by used term a is Europe Younger is which Europe, Danubian or Carpathian Commonwealth. East

More ontheimage the of East inthe eyes ofthe Western people in: Wolff, “Inventing Central Europe.” This division was first proposed by Oskar Halecki in his book his in Halecki Oskar by proposed first was division This o “Eastern” or ” k . For instance the term East term the instance For . owy/a , This thesis is devoted to analyze the contemporary use of the term, h term, the of use contemporary the analyze to devoted is thesis This the from connotations positive brings Europe Central term the Finally,

” Sheedand Ward, 1950) o mhsz ta te ein nlds h hsoia lns f h Polish the of lands historical the includes region the that emphasize to Ohr Europe “Other , ” and “k and ” bringing rathernegativebringing adjective “central” or the noun the or “central” adjective at

the h aooit o te Habsburg the of apologists The especially if we treat the German lands as Mitteleuropa as lands German the treat we if especially - Central Europe) Central

two

(which happened around the year 1000, much later than in the in than later much 1000, year the around happened (which

özép raha Erp, “auin uoe” Yugr Europe “Younger Europe,” “Danubian Europe,” arpathian which soitos ht h adj the that associations the continent) eel a reveal

Additionally, in Polish Polish in Additionally, ifrn sds Tu, h cnet a a adtoa pstv load, positive additional an has concept the Thus, sides. different , ” ”

evokes

“in are

At - oiie enn o smtig itn fo eteiis and extremities from distant something of meaning positive

betwe soitd ahr ih backwardness with rather associated times -

Central Europe underlines that it describes it that underlines Europe Central the Aristotle the

. as a developmentas a forthe constitutive region. 21 images Europe” en Central ,

however, however, meant

to mind.

“centre” 12 - ective “central” evokes. evokes. “central” ective Eastern Europe is a term a is Europe Eastern ‟s

n Hungarian and concept o concept

to reflect the territory of Austria of territory the reflect to the etc. etc. 22 ir

E associate be can The Limits and Divisions of European History European of Divisions and Limits The

use indicate use Sometimes they are used simply as as simply used are they Sometimes mpire occasionally call this region region this call occasionally mpire g other things, it will examine will it things, other g

(such as Jerzy Kłoczowski Jerzy as (such f “ middle ,

o instance for s a certain position of the the of position certain a s mean” or the Buddhists‟ the or mean” , wilderness and other other and wilderness , d otay o the to Contrary

often often with

(which supposedly (which owever referring owever

, countries suc used in Poland, Poland, in used

semantic point semantic the the

, h ” - Lithuania notions - adjectives “Slavonic Hungary.

) that see that ) Western - Central

which which to the the to term

as n s

CEU eTD Collection employment oftheseterms. post the where chapter, third In Europe. Central term the Eastern or Europe

- Central Europe) alter the meaning, o meaning, the alter Europe) Central

the the - 99 uhr ae nlzd eaie i dti te different the detail in examines analyzed, are authors 1989 second chapter this issue is treated only cursorily, whereas the the whereas cursorily, only treated is issue this chapter second 13

r if they are used interchangeably with interchangeably used are they CEU eTD Collection eto big u te rtcl vlain f h dsore n eta Erp, n ag part w section this Overall, large scholars. Western the from coming in Europe, Central on discourse the of evaluation critical the up brings section the of standpoints the and discourse the of traits main the in concept the of renaissance the to devoted is subsection 2. 23 the that reasons the of one was which period, the of writers best famous or Miłosz Czesław poet Polish winner t as such writers, acclaimed internationally were them Among Europe. Central of label the under cooperation regional promoting as well as identity regional the discussing In sometimesin termappeared contemporary.” anything to relevance no with Joseph Francis of days nostalgic Austria of di survivors was and elderly Hungary the by exclusively “almost used was Europe Central term Sch as Before, 1980s. the in momentum 2.1. previouspartlythe debates, negation. however as its post the

George Schöpflin and Nancy Wood, In Search of Central Europe. (Rowman& LittlefieldPublishers, 1994), 1. Renaissance of the Renaissance of h ls dcd o te od War Cold the of decade last the The h pplrt of popularity The chapter This Unbearable Lightness of Being of Lightness Unbearable - 1989 literature on Central Europe which was developed partly as partly developed was which Europe Central on literature 1989 Discourse Discourse about Centra of concept the discusses smissed by most people as a remnant, a sentimental leftover from the the from leftover sentimental a remnant, a as people most by smissed D iscourse iscourse

Central Central Europe the term Central Europe (or East Central Europe) gained its its gained Europe) Central East (or Europe Central term the scholarship;

A bout ,

h ms poiet nelcul o te ein began region the of intellectuals prominent most the .

The p The öpflin Central Europe however it was only in 1980s that it became popular. becamepopular. it 1980s that in only was it however the the in the 1980s in the 14 zc nvls Mln udr, uhr f the of author Kundera, Milan novelist Czech rotagonists of the debate were thus some of the the of some thus were debate the of rotagonists puts it puts

l Europe at the peak of its car its of peak the at Europe l

most prominent adherents. The adherents. prominent most with a bit of exaggeration of bit a with

ill lay the ground for the analysis of analysis the for ground the lay ill in the 1980s in the late 1970s and 1970s late

concept became well known. well became concept

and its C and its 1980s a continuation of continuation he Nobel Prize Nobel he 23 ritics eer.

. It presents It .

though In fact the fact In The f The

second second , the , irst -

CEU eTD Collection academic exchanges were conducted between the two foreign camps, in the humanities the humanities the in camps, foreign two the between conducted were exchanges academic Wester the to unknown largely remained region the and West Department ofSlavicLanguages and University Literatures the at ofMichigan. yearly American an became debate American the as such magazines, Western prestigious by published were texts their of many Moreover, 26 (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie 1999), 13. 25 24 essay seminal his publishing after init the in only so, if or group, and Havel Vaclav Kiss, few: a nameto just Europe, Central auth other several include also can One Matvejević. Predrag and Michnik Adam Zagajewski, Adam Škvorecký, Josef were Snel, to according participants, other Among Magris. Claudio and Esterházy Péter Konrád, György Kiš, Danilo community.” discourse Europe contributed to also popularitythe ofconcept. coun these about information politic the also but Europe, Central in interest the triggered themselves They region. the of spokesmen w that countries those of writers dissident some as well as exile, in writers of community the Therefore, limited. exceptionally were contacts

Snel, 8. All the journal‟s lkadr it Bć ab ne y) Środkowoeuropejczykiem. być) nie (albo Być Fiut, Aleksander ud Se cls hs ice f nelcul wiig bu te ein h “Central the region the about writing intellectuals of circle this calls Snel Guido period that In

al developments in the Eastern B Eastern the in developments al New York Review of Books of Review York New

archivesare accessible online, at: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/crossc/.

there was not much possibility to learn about the Eastern Bloc in the in Bloc Eastern the about learn to possibility much not was there

Milan Kundera. Interestingly, Snel does not include Kundera in this this in Kundera include not does Snel Interestingly, Kundera. Milan

re, nvial fo te fiil sources. official the from unavailable tries, ial phase of the community‟s existence. The reason is that soon that is reason The existence. community‟s the of phase ial 26

He includes in its backbone its in includes He , Kundera , Josef Kroutvor, Josef rs Currents Cross

or French or

loc in the 1980s created the demand for reliable reliable for demand the created 1980s the in loc retreated from the debate, to finally even forbid even finally to debate, the from retreated 15

ere smuggling their writings abroad, became became abroad, writings their smuggling ere Le Débat Le Milan Šimečka,Mih Milan ors that contributed to the debate about debate the to contributed that ors pu , T B (r o t b) eta European]. Central be) to not (Or Be [To blished from 1982 to 1993 by the the by 1993 to 1982 from blished . Actually, the main venue of the the of venue main the Actually, .

Czesław Miłosz (as its leader), leader), its (as Miłosz Czesław n public ály Vajda, Csaba Gy. Csaba Vajda, ály Ee tog some though Even .

hs correlation This 24

CEU eTD Collection intellectuals. Up to today to Up intellectuals. European Central of generation whole historical a for texts of formative the of one later became and debate accused Although debate. the for exclus simplification, drive a became that 1984, in relevan was and audience Western the for made tailor was it that explaining work, his republishing 32 31 30 29 scholarship, like Maria Todorova. 28 of tragedy the or Central Europe]. West kidnapped [The central” l‟Europe de tragédie la ou kidnappé Occident “Un title: the in 27 Union. op strongly He boundaries. cultural the with overlap not does1945 after geopoliticaldivision the that idea the readership introduce and fore the to come could writers” European Central of train baggage veritable “a Judt Tony of words the in essay, popular Kundera‟s to thanks was, it as Controversial today. until up used been have they and or journalistic literary, countless for mottos as served have place,” smallest the within variety itself,” Europe of version “condensed a West,” “kidnapped the as such region, describing expressions Such sentences. clear catchy a many with and read paragraphs easy short an argument, is Europe” Central of Tragedy “The way, refined essayistic, takes

Tony Judt, “The rediscovery of Central Europe,” Deadalus vol 119, no.1 (Winter, 1990): 31. Kundera, 6. Kundera, 3. Kundera, 3. essayThe was published He was strongly criticized by the Russi the by criticized strongly was He Kundera‟s essay as a starting point. Compared to the works of Miłosz, written in a more a in written Miłosz, of works the to Compared point. starting a as essay Kundera‟s

t only in the particulart onlyinthe moment context and which in it appeared. Kundera voiced what was at a very basis of the Central European discourse, namely discourse, European Central the of basis very a at was what voiced Kundera Europe,” Central of Tragedy “The essay his was it Nevertheless Furthermore, .

posed considering his region as Eastern Europe and equating it with the Soviet Soviet the with it equating and Europe Eastern as region his considering posed

actually actually vs o ee racism even or ivism

firstthe French in periodical ,

practically every author referring to the concept of Central Europe Central of concept the to referring author every practically

contrary to contrary 30 an emigrant writers, such as Iosif Brodsky, as well as by the Western the by as well as Brodsky, Iosif as such writers, emigrant an

“Central Europe is not a state: it is a culture or a fate,” a or culture a is it state: a not is Europe “Central hi pit f iw n h rgo t te Western the to region the on view of point their the majority of other of majority the 28 16 hs sa ivgrtd h Cnrl European Central the invigorated essay his , Le Débat

(no. 27/1983),an stronger with even statement

scientific texts about the region, region, the about texts scientific

protagonists of the debate, he debate, the of protagonists 27

published in English in published

“the greatest “the the 32 31

CEU eTD Collection n Rsi are, Russia and were thatthey to discover now inthe East.” be to themselves considered always had that nations several “and continent, of a part Europe, a Western always were lands Polish or Hungarian Czech, Kundera, to According Europe. W to belongs actually region the that arguing West, the with Europe Central equated insisted ondifferentiating between the S essay, Kundera‟s to reaction in Šimečka, Milan writer, Czech Another hegemon. Eastern its and Europe Central 34 33 social or the religi cultural, different which proclaimed in middle, the in others situated is that region and the of particularity Kiš Konrád, Miłosz, Western. purely being of claim overall Ku observations these In survival. own their of sure be never can they and redrawn, constantly are borders h Cen constitute understanding his in noticed also agreement pa a lost that West whole the of tragedy a as Europe Central of tragedy the present to tried He it. to belongs actually that territory a about forget not to Western the shake aimedto was exaggerated, deliber probably claim, strong This Eastern asserted. he the them, to of foreign are domination ideas totalitarian the and democratic genuinely are nations European Central bou cultural istory of the region. He remarked He region. the of istory

Kundera, 1. He does not even use the term Soviet Union, to underline the genuine and deep rooted difference between difference rooted deep and genuine the underline to Union, Soviet term the use even not does He However, Kundera not only emphasized only not Kundera However, Europe Central different how demonstrating at aimed is essay his of part essential An limes .

ndaries ofthousand whichregionwithinndaries placesthe civilization. years Western this

regional similarities regional cross 34 ndera is closer to the core argument of the discourse community than in his in than community discourse the of argument core the to closer is ndera

n ta i i a itk t ietf te riiil epltcl iie with divide geopolitical artificial the identify to mistake a is it that and d ny fe 14 dd hy beco they did 1945 after only nd

and overlap and

among oviet Union andRussia. , a region with a specific mixture of languages, mentalities languages, of mixture specific a with region a ,

tra that Central European nations live in small states, whose states, small in live nations European Central that l Europe. He pointed He Europe. l Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians and Poles Poles and Hungarians Slovaks, Czechs, 33

17 public opinionpublic

the the Western character of character Western

me displaced to the Eastern part of the the of part Eastern the to displaced me

. It was a clear appeal to the West the to clearappeal a was . It out the turbulent and fragmented and turbulent the out rt of its possession in possession its of rt Central Europe, but but Europe, Central

Western woke up woke Western -

nations that that nations the the estern Yalta ately ous

CEU eTD Collection perceiving intermingle. Ea where place a was Europe Central East Konrád For ideologies. and religions cultures, different of blend a as Europe Central perceived They such. as Western was region the that claimed rarely they nevertheless, Easterners; as simply co they that demonstrate to and Union Soviet the of dominance the from to was community discourse the of goal the Certainly, values. of systems and 38 37 36 even or cooperation 35 of project a as also perceived was Europe Central secondly, Yet regio the emancipating Konr notion.” delineated it calls “our oftheworld.”part region the to often referred Miłosz instance, For it. address langu the by also reflected is region the adversity. historical in companions as themselves of thought and fate same community Sn As identity. regional peculiar a manifested also they culture, underline they though Even patriotism. European Central Western.”bred “pu never were Russia and Germany between countries the Miłosz to according region,

Miłosz, “Central European Attitudes,”101. Snel, 9. Miłosz, “Central European Attitudes,” 107. Konrád, “Letter from Budapest,” 12. ád oevr fr h dsore omnt Cnrl uoe a n was Europe Central community discourse the for Moreover, supranational, certain a presented community discourse the of members Furthermore, . First, as already mentioned, using the term Central Europe was aimed at at aimed was Europe Central term the using mentioned, already as First, . 38

It was rather a project, an act of faith or even a utopia or “a dream,” in the words of words the in dream,” “a or utopia a even or faith of act an project, a rather was It

the region. Some were eve were Some region. the h clua budre a ipeie ee i te et eual ifune this influenced regularly West the if even imprecise: as boundaries cultural the 35 -

they were not only fellow participants in the debate, but they also shared the shared also they but debate, the in participants fellow only not were they As for Miłosz, he was particularly careful about characterizing Central Europe, Central characterizing about careful particularly was he Miłosz, for As 36

n from the Eastern Europe personified by Russia and the Soviet Union. Union. Soviet the and Russia by personified Europe Eastern the from n

n stating that “Central Europe is hardly a geographical a hardly is Europe “Central that stating n age they employed, often using personal personal using often employed, they age 18

tr ad etr clue old and collide culture Western and stern d

hi atcmn t te Western the to attachment their

“my Europe,” whereas Konr whereas Europe,” “my el argues, they formed a true a formed they argues, el ot only the term that that term the only ot uld not be classified be not uld 37

Their attitude to attitude Their pronouns to pronouns emancipate re ád -

CEU eTD Collection a atal osre i te newr eid n during and period interwar the in observed actually had them of many that region the of nations between conflicts possible and chauvinism national of threat the of aware were They community. national the to referring avoid to them allowed appe was identity supranational the them For debate. the of protagonists the of majority by advanced was idea this Nevertheless, fiction. political complete a been have Polis the in especially tradition, long had a This concept nations. European Central of the federation 42 41 40 39 themselve identify fully not could they because kind another or one of day the if even likely, less conflicts national make can we patrimony, our of investigation comparative overdue long a practicing by akin, are pale, our within languages avoi to order in better other each know to postulate a as Europe Central term the used Miłosz grounds. cultural on least at cooperation for pushed and nations the between understanding better a advocated they them. for solution a not definitely was state or national of temptation the resist for work and chauvinism to minds” “energetic enough were there that asserted Ge as such guardian, a by check in kept be should troublemakers the Europe, Central of nations little the between conflicts and the against irrationalism,“military wrappedin rhetoric[that] outourtragedy.”patriotic brought urged and started, Wars World both that region this in was it that out pointed

Miłosz, “Central European Attitudes,”108. Miłosz, “Central European Attitudes,”102. Eg. RogerPortal, Slaves. Les Peuples et nations (Paris: Armand Colin, 1965). György Konrád, “Isthe DreamCentral Europe of Still Alive?”

h or Czechoslovak case, however in the circumstances of being Soviet satellites it must it satellites Soviet being of circumstances the in however case, Czechoslovak or h of Central Europeanof Central federation is distant.” Furthermore, some of them searched for a supranational, regional framework, simply framework, regional supranational, a for searched them of some Furthermore, be that opinion the opposed also they However,

d national conflicts. “By delineating how we all, who speak the the speak who all, we how delineating “By conflicts. national d the unification of Central Europe. Central of unification

rmany or the Soviet Empire Soviet the or rmany

19 42 s with any of the national communities. Just to Just communities. national the of any with s

In order to prevent the threat of nationalism, of threat the prevent to order In

Cross Currents 5 (1986): 117. cause of a constant risk of nationalism of risk constant a of cause

41 h Scn Wrd a. Konr War. World Second the .

40 Dominance by a foreign empire empire foreign a by Dominance

For instance, Miłosz strongly Miłosz instance, For

aling, because it because aling,

ád

CEU eTD Collection eulc f uolva Fr them For Yugoslavia. of Republic of Kingdom the of rule the gove shortly under then Yugoslavia, was youth his during which (Szabadka), Subotica in born was He Jew. Hungarian a was father his and Montenegrin Orthodox an was mother a he language Polish the of poet a becoming and family Polish a in raised Although Empire. Russian the in then (Szetejnie), present the in born was Miłosz examples: two mention 44 43 the of case the in However, West. the over superiority implies even or ideas, Western anticipating and inventions Western of ahead example, for was, one that claims to refers term The region. “protochronism of concept Stanisław or “robot,” word reminds This Orwell. before long rule the totalitarian about wrote who Witkiewicz, of inventor an as Čapek Karel recalling ones, Western Hašek, Witkiewicz. Kafka, Bartók, Mahler, Freud, as figures prominent 20 the of beginning o spite in that argued instance for Kundera partofEurope. of culturalrichness their means the was tounderline complex this toovercome concept of state.” national the thanmuch that broader ofthatkind,so needahorizon factthatmany Europeans in the Central “the it, put Konr As them.constrained unavoidably that boundaries national the transgressed it because

Kundera, 6. Konrád, “Isthe Dream”, 121. discourse community, it was rather a call to the West to acknowledge their cultural cultural their acknowledge to West the to call a rather was it community, discourse ial, eta Erp ws rmtd y h discou the by promoted was Europe Central Finally, –

an Central European idea can be considered a perverse fantasy, but its singularity lies singularity its but fantasy, perverse a considered be can idea European Central

antithesis of Eastern Europe. They felt neglected by the West and one of the the of one and West the by neglected felt They Europe. Eastern of antithesis Miłosz emphasized the the emphasized Miłosz th

century was perhaps the greatest cultural centre of Europe, with such with Europe, of centre cultural greatest the perhaps was century

” hc ws el rudd n h itleta taiin f the of tradition intellectual the in grounded well was which ,”

rned by Hungary to finally find itself in the Socialist Federal Socialist the in itself find finally to Hungary by rned lways considered Lithuania as his as Lithuania considered lways ,

eta Erp ws priual apaig concept, appealing particularly a was Europe Central precedence of some Central European authors over the over authors European Central some of precedence is oiia wans, eta Erp i the in Europe Central weakness, political its f 20

- a Ltuna tw o Šeteniai of town Lithuanian day s commu rse oboiz Shl and Schulz Gombrowicz, home land. As for Kiš, his his Kiš, for As land. iy s positive a as nity of of one of the the of one ád ád CEU eTD Collection angles. The most severe critique concerned the exclusivist character of the concept of Central of concept the of character exclusivist the concerned critique severe most The angles. 2.2. Criti by overshadowed political divide. was which existence, very their even or achievements 46 University Press, 1998), 46. Post in Design Institutional Europe,” 45 commo position a with disagrees he Therefore, project. regional and national a between the difference significant is a respect is there this that assumption in the of premise repudiation basic His discourse. in reforming and forming always is one.” political region and identity collective Iver by papers Todorova,Neuman published 1990s. andMaria inthe the by presented was discourse European Central the of traits exclusivist „barbarians.‟” the from oneself distinguish program a became the Russian, Europe the Central than Montenegrins. better the be Bulgarians, to means It state. Balcan a of citizen the nor European, East an neither be to means European Central a be “To allegations: common most the reflects Miszlivetz Ferenc sociologist Hungarian a instance by for captured problemwas This Europe. Central for other” “significant a of role a played and different, significantly as Russia such continent, the of parts other over region the of superiority of idea the and Europe

Neumann, 353. Ferencz Miszlivetz (1991): 975, quoted by quoted 975, (1991): Miszlivetz Ferencz

Iver Eur Central The and the Soviet Union (most often) or the Balkans (rarely), which were recognized as recognized were which (rarely), Balkans the or often) (most Union Soviet the and cism

Neumann treats the Central European debate as a political endeavour to create a create to endeavour political a as debate European Central the treats Neumann 46

of the D of the

He perceives identity as relation, not something we have, but s but have, we something not relation, as identity perceives He

iscourse about Central Europe pa dbt hs en prahd n ciiie fo different from criticized and approached been has debate opean -

building: “the Central European project is first and foremost a a foremost and first is project European Central “the building: - Communist Societies: Rebuilding the Ship at Sea, (Cambridge: Cambridge(Cambridge: Sea, at Ship the Rebuilding Societies: Communist

Jon Elster, Claus Offe and Ulrich Klaus Preuss, “Mapping Central “Mapping Preuss, Klaus Ulrich and Offe Claus Elster, Jon 45 21

However, the most extensive analysis of the the of analysis extensive most the However,

n to the discourse community community discourse the to n

hc alwd n to one allowed which h East the omething that that omething , whose claimwhose , - West CEU eTD Collection to the East and the regional identity was built by contrasting the region with Russia or the or Russia with region the contrasting by built was identity regional the and East the to regio supranational, a on national project reproducedthe just they Neumann to according identity, regional to appealing by chauvinism national avoid to tried community discourse the of members Although project. becomes it respect, this In other.” a “constitutive finding differentiation, a divides. needs also project process building national regional the whereas that argues unites, Neumann project European) (Central regional the that 48 47 Europe. Central of proponents the of writings the addresses mainly she region, the mapping pap East Europe: her of title the Although Europe. Central of concept the Kundera seemed overlook. to communist the that also noticed Šimečka latter. the by on brought threat political the to only referring Union, Soviet the and Russia between differentiated who Šimečka, Milan like debate, the of life.” of form other “an even Whereas West. the characterizes treated Mih of Kundera like authors, the of Some other.” “Eastern the addressed debate thanarather negative,other. positive, a as it to referred they Otherwise itself. West the of part as Europe Central perceived ob as not was it however West, the to found be could other constitutive Another Union. Soviet

MilanŠimečk After Neumann, 362. vious for many participants of the debate to treat the West as an other, because they they because other, an as West the treat to debate the of participants many for vious Maria Todorova, similarly to Neumann, focuses mainly on the exclusivist character of character exclusivist the on mainly focuses Neumann, to similarly Todorova, Maria va between however Neumanndistinguishes him

regimes in the Central European countries have a local character as well, which well, as character local a have countries European Central the in regimes s oal ifro, anti inferior, morally as - a, “A World withUtopias or without Them?” CrossCurrents 3 (1984). Central Europe versus the Balkans”) might suggest a focus on different ways of ways different on focus a suggest might Balkans”) the versus Europe Central

nal level with all its consequences. The constitutive other was found was other constitutive The consequences. its all with level nal

47 48

However, he also mentions the example of other protagonists other of example the mentions also he However, Kundera calls Russia “an other civilization,” Vajda labels it it labels Vajda civilization,” other “an Russia calls Kundera - oen n a a eain f vrtig oiie that positive everything of negation a as and modern 22

iia t, f o te ae s te national the as, same the not if to, similar rious ways in which the participantsthe ofthe which in ways rious er (“Hierarchies of Eastern Eastern of (“Hierarchies er

l Vajda ály , CEU eTD Collection usa n cnen hs ramn o te onr, s n esnilzd ali “essentialized an as country, the of treatment his condemns and Russia of vision demonizing Kundera‟s exposes Todorova East. the to attitude their and concept She other. the towards EuropeCentral committed. of idea the of supporters the that inaccuracies and inconsistencies simplifications, the all out recapit extensive very a fact in is piece Her 52 51 50 49 Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Hungarians, Romani Slovaks, Czechs, (Poles, analysis his into region the of nations small the all almost included Kiss works, literary through identity European an “remarkably was who Kiss, Csaba of example the up brings She Europe. Central about writing when criteria of the by passage a mentions Todorova claims he which in Schöpflin illustration, an As justification. any without Europe Centra of boundaries Schöpflin criticizes She terms. geographic the in Europe consistency and moral integrity.” that concludes she essay, disappoin extremely is years the ten than more wrote after Kundera “rereading he which in context historical the acknowledges civilization.”

Todorova, 18. Todorova, 13. Todorova, 13. Todorova, 13.

still She displays much more understanding for the authors who do not include geographic include not do who authors the for understanding more much displays She Central defining at attempt any about sensitive particularly is Todorova addition, In at their for debate the of protagonists the of some criticizes roundly she First, ans, Bulgarian ans, - existing Yugoslavia ( 49

She even accuses him of being “at times outright racist.” outright times “at being of him accuses even She d honestly nonexclusive in terms of geography.” of terms in nonexclusive honestly d

l Europe by simply including or excluding some territories from Central Central from territories some excluding or including simply by Europe l s, Baltic Baltic s, accuses

Croatia and Slovenia are in Central Europe, whereas other parts other whereas Europe, Central in are Slovenia and Croatia peoples, Schöpflin 51 Kundera and Vajda for their exclusivist approach to the the to approach exclusivist their for Vajda and Kundera

Belarusians

wrote it in 1989)wrote itin arenot. ulation of the debate, in which she tries to point point to tries she which in debate, the of ulation 23

, Ukrainians, or even Finns and Greeks). Greeks). and Finns even or Ukrainians, , for arbitrarily marking out the the out marking arbitrarily for

52 ting in terms of logical of terms in ting

Outlining the Central the Outlining 50 Although Todorova Although n an en, titude other

CEU eTD Collection ioz o hs nelcul nert ad i aodne f obfl eeaiain and generalizations doubtful of avoidance exclusivism. his and integrity intellectual his for Miłosz Czesław praises Todorova Similarly, West. the in nor East the in neither interest main the was goals,” national of realization the to subordinated was literature obsessed their and were ideology, writers European Central that fact the “in but Russia, with values incompatible the through tradition literary their of difference the perceive not did Kiss 55 and 20 54 53 shared. they Europ Central and Russian between quarrels some caused it that was Europe Central in discourse culture. of view reductive and politicized a presenting in precisely Asia, he Russia, to approach Kundera‟s against retaliate to order In polemical. very was response His Miłosz. as such intellectuals, European essa and poet Russian Brodski, Iosif was debate this in active Particularly exile. in those mostly intellectuals, Russian by namely and ofaregion a exclusivism the treats former the that is Todorova and Neumann between difference main The Europe. exclus racist, overall the of exceptions Han or Kiss Miłosz, as (such Europeans” Central “honest The thesis. own her confirm that statements, and writers those exactly up pick to seems she Europe, Central

Snel, 17. Todorova, 18. John Neubauer, History of the Literary Cultures of East of Cultures Literary the of History Neubauer, John th ean writers, which can be surprising given the similar status of dissidents or exiles that exiles or dissidents of status similar the given surprising be can which writers, ean

Centuries, Volume (Amsterdam: 2 Benjamins,John 2004), 2. nesadby te eta Erpa dsore a as ojce b te “others,” the by objected also was discourse European Central the Understandably, m out points rightly Todorova although whole, the On

nd defining the group against group the defining nd - build

Wsen Asia.” “Western ing, Todorova whereas sharplyrejectsit.

it wo a atal a od red f ay Central many of friend good a actually was who yist, 54

vs ad itrcly as dsore bu Central about discourse false historically and ivist e rtczd h Cnrl uoen icus of discourse European Central the criticized He provocatively the 2 4

- Central Europe: Junctures and Disjunctures in the inDisjunctures and JuncturesEurope:Central ther as a natural part of the identity politics identity the of part natural a as ther 55

Overall, one of the side effects of the of effects side the of one Overall,

called Central Europe a region in in region a Europe Central called

any faults of the proponents of proponents the of faults any ák) ák) are presented as presented are

ih national with 53

which 19 th

CEU eTD Collection its vigour. its quarterly the and existence their region, the of countries the in new Although published. was Currents Cross of issue last no However, issues. regional the discuss to Euro Central many gathered Budapest and Lisbon in conferences two 1989 been transformed particularities 1989,whatareits andnew after directions. cir has Europe model their finding After Pogranicze. usacs Ti las o h floig hpe wih xmns o hs h discourse the has how examines which chapter following the to leads This cumstances. vrl, rud 99 h dbt ws lwy oig t dnms. tl i 18 and 1988 in Still dynamism. its losing slowly was debate the 1989 around Overall, The same i same The became to a certain extent anachronistic for the new political and cultural cultural and political new the for anachronistic extent certain a to became Eur ópai Utas ópai reprint

of operation of s true for the Polish magazine Polish the for true s ing

(European traveller), soon after its establishment in 1990 in establishment its after soon traveller), (European

the crucial texts from the from texts crucial the

. This was This . subsequent also also 25

a sign that the form of discourse on Central Central on discourse of form the that sign a

popularity proved to be limited. In Hungary In limited. be to proved popularity

debate of debate Krasnogruda conference was organized. In 1993 the 1993 In organized. was conference publishing publishing

1980s, both had difficulties in difficulties had both 1980s, , published by the Center Center the by published , initiatives were initiatives

pean intellectuals pean

has lost has started CEU eTD Collection cooperation between nations that had a long history of conflicts. Moreover, for many authors, many for Moreover, conflicts. of history long a had that nations between cooperation Eas homogenous the of part a as West the by treated being from emancipate to and continent the of division War Cold the question into put to exile, in those mainly region, the from intellectuals many served that framework 3 Powrotu. 57 unstable regions,such asthe Balkans or somethe of countries of 56 promoter active Europe.” enter and Europe Central leave to “How period: Po leading a instance, For concept. useless a became Europe Central integration European at aiming countries the for policies its lost it 1989 after however Union), Soviet or Russia with (associated Europe Eastern from emancipating comehypotheses mind. to th and Europe Central of idea the with then happened political andeconomical Thewas structures. region What gradually “leaving EasternEurope.” Western the with integration the on embarked quickly states these and disappeared division afterwards Soon regime. communist the rejected region the of countries Most diametrically. changed situation to category larger nation one with themselves identify hardly could who .

However, the term Central Europe was used sometimes to point out the difference with the countries from countries the with difference the out point to sometimes used was Europe Central term the However, ut atr Kzstf zżwk, Pwó Erp Śokwj [oeak f eta Erp] i Linia in Europe], Central of [Comeback Środkowej” Europy “Powrót Czyżewski, Krzysztof after: Quote Discourses h frt supin s ht h cnet f eta Erp ws ueu to in tool useful a was Europe Central of concept the that is assumption first The in chapter, previous the in demonstrated As Zapiski z pogranicza (Sejny: Pogranicze, 2008), 47. westwards A s bout main ,

of Central European cooperation put it: “belonging to Central Europe was was Europe Central to “belonging it: put cooperation European Central of hy tre dmcaiain n mre rfrs Te od a bipolar War Cold The reforms. market and democratization started they frame their identity. However, throughout the the throughout However, identity. their frame

and the (re the and

Central EuropeCentral A asn d’être raison

lish columnist Leopold Unger entitled one of his articles of the the of articles his of one entitled Unger Leopold columnist lish

- )integration with the West was set as a main goal. Therefore, goal. main a as set was West the with )integration Countries . tern Bloc. The concept was also used to promote the the promote to used also was concept The Bloc. tern fter 1989 fter 26

of the region were reorienting their foreign foreign their reorienting were region the of

the former Soviet Union.

- h 18s eta Erp bcm a became Europe Central 1980s the state, Central Europe also served as a as served also Europe Central state, e discourse that it it that discourse e 57

As Czyżewski, one of the most the of one Czyżewski, As annus mirablilis annus

triggered?

of 1989 the the 1989 of

Two 56

CEU eTD Collection unfulfilled. Indeed, s Indeed, unfulfilled. and federation, a d European “Central The c dissidents, and emigrants by mainly were desire,aspiration rush, directed the towards West.” a as perceived Ossolineum, 2004,29. Wrocław: Zenderowski, Radosław by edited zbiorowość?, czy wspólnota Środkowa: Europa in Europe], Central 58 cultureWestern andlifestyle, access to 1989. which waslimited until post the in period transition of years tha integration, Euroatlantic mean a as rather states member their by treated was CEI or CEFTA Group, Visegrad as organizations regional such Establishing target. desired long main, the achieve to order cooper regional the and goal strategic principal post the of narrative main the became integration Euroatlantic or European the of idea The foreground. the in emerged (Gy SZDSZ or Kiss) Gy. (Csaba MDF like 1990s, the in Hungary in teams ruling consecutive the r newspaper the established cooperation, regional of promoter a and dissidents Polish prominent most the of one Michnik, elected was who Czechoslovakia, fi in president, movement dissident the of leader Havel, Vaclav post the ecord in Poland. Some of the Hungarian proponents of the idea joined the parties that formed that parties the joined idea the of proponents Hungarian the of Some Poland. in ecord

ryzo Cyesi “ilg idyutrw w eine uoy Śro Europy regionie w międzykulturowy “Dialog Czyżewski, Krzysztof örgy Konrád) Nevertheless, soon after 1989, one major project for the the for project major one 1989, after soon Nevertheless, developed discourse, European Central however, assumption second the to According - 99 oiis n cud dac te einl oprto. hs a te ae of case the was This cooperation. regional the advance could and politics 1989 rst of the federation and after 1993, of the Czech Republic. In Poland, Adam Adam Poland, In Republic. Czech the of 1993, after and federation the of rst

danger of remaining provincial, on the margins of Europe, in times when the the when times in Europe, of margins the on provincial, remaining of danger .

in ome of the advocates of the idea of Central Europe became influential in influential became Europe Central of idea the of advocates the of ome common projects. However, these expectations remained rather rather remained expectations these However, projects. common ream” can be materialized in materialized be can ream” - communist countries. Joining the Western clubs was perceived as a as perceived was clubs Western the Joining countries. communist aea Wyborcza Gazeta n a value as such. Moreover, what was characteristic for the first the for characteristic was what Moreover, such. as value a n

an finally become a part of the official political agenda. political official the of part a become finally an - communist 27 hc hs on eoe h laig al of daily leading the become soon has which ation was treated at best as a pragmatic step in step pragmatic a as best at treated was ation

countries

regional integration, leading perhaps to to perhaps leading integration, regional 58

was the fascination with the the with fascination the was kwj [neclua daou in dialogue [Intercultural dkowej” onre o te region the of countries

for CEU eTD Collection eig of composed is It Poland. and Hungary in term the of use the on directions main identifying section this Hence, way. diverse more a in employed been has Europe d the to due perhaps 1989, After proponents. the all virtually for denominator emancipating same the was there polyphony, certain a by characterized was it and uniform not was 1980s the in thrived that nyc.org/printIndex.cfm?itemcategory=30817&personDetailId=177 59 responsibility. take to time is it that conclusion c 1989 in movement underground the of disappearance sudden The plays. their in materials ethnographic of use the for famous dire theatre underground an was literature, Polish of graduate a Czyżewski, that Before terms. practical in it of postulates the implement to began he many, to appeal its losing was idea calle be can that one only KrzysztofCzyżewski countries ofto their origin. sc author. particular a of position the of understanding well particularly not are them of most since biographi short a by preceded is author each of Analysis Europe. Central of idea the to subscribes author particular a how and text, each in term the of understanding

Czyżewski‟s biography on the website of the Polish Cultural Institute in New York. New in Institute Cultural Polish the of website the on biography Czyżewski‟s r utiny does not seem to determine significant determine seemto not doesutiny ht cases, demonstrating various ways of how the concept is employed, what is the specific the is what employed, is concept the how of ways various demonstrating cases, ht ctor and performer. In 1977, he co he 1977, In performer. and ctor Among all the authors analyzed in the thesis, Krzysztof Czyżewski is probably the the probably is Czyżewski Krzysztof thesis, the in analyzed authors the all Among in demonstrated as Although,

isappearance of the common threat or enemy, the concept of Central Central of concept the enemy, or threat common the of isappearance

–

A Practitioner theI of d a practitioner of the idea of Central Europe. After 1989, when this this when 1989, After Europe. Central of idea the of practitioner a d

s him ost

the previous chapter, the discourse on Central Europe Central on discourse the chapter, previous the - founded the Gardzienice Theater Company in Lublin, in Company Theater Gardzienice the founded

- a personal crisis which eventually led led eventually which crisis personal a known. Moreover, it might contribute to a better a to contribute might it Moreover, known. 28 ly their outlook, they are not divided according divided not are outlook, they their ly dea of Central Europe dea ofCentral

s rsl, n 91 e rae Ośrodek created he 1991 in result, a As Since the nationality of the authors under under authors the of nationality the Since

(read 20.05.2012).

of the thesis the of

http://www.polishculture a introduction, cal

is aimed at at aimed is him to a a to him - CEU eTD Collection reconciliation of two nations. On the other hand, it has dealt with the borderland in a broader broader a in borderland the with dealt has it hand, other the On nations. two of reconciliation engaged post the to the cooperationregional on based work.a organic Nations “Pogranicze centre” or “Middle Europe.” Josef 61 Szilágyi, István Osadczuk, firs Bohdan the for readership Polish Matvejević, the to presented are them Predgar of Majority Vilikovský. Pavel Venclova, Tomas Manea, Škvorecký, Norman Magris, Claudio Lubonja, 60 Europe, Middle or Europe Other as region the To Ukraine. and describing occasionally Europe, RussiaCentral term the often most uses he region, vast this Poland, describe Moldova, Estonia, of parts some as well as Lithuania, Belaru of territories present the comprises which Lithuania of Duchy Grand the of lands the include to also but countries, Habsburg former of consisting entity a as Europe feature constitutive the is What way. broad a in Europe Central term the treats He articles. and essays many in Europe Central of understanding his and borderlands the in working of philosophy fromstretching toAlbania. Lithuania from essayism and prose of translations many issued of Polish opening an to contributed also centre The instance. for Bosnia like region, the of parts sense

n Polish In mn te uhr pbihd y ornce r: vn Čol Ivan are: Pogranicze by published authors the Among t time. –

readership

pr fo a ev an from Apart in endeavours cultural interesting most the of one become has Pogranicze Gradually, ” Pogranicze brought its own model of intercultural andinter intercultural of model own broughtits Pogranicze f eta Erp i is utcluaim Teeoe h ugs o t tet Central treat to not urges he Therefore, multiculturalism. its is Europe Central of

) in Sejny, a little town near to the Polish the to near town little a Sejny, in ) 99 oad iiitn a ait o atvte. n h oe hand one the On activities. of variety a initiating Poland, 1989 in uoa Środka Europa neclua poet o te Polish the on projects intercultural –

zu, utr nrdw (h Cne “odrad f rs Clue and Cultures Arts, of “Borderland Center (the narodów” kultur, sztuk,

to the literature from the region. The publishing house run by Pogranicze by run house publishing The region. the from literature the to

–

rdy ciiy f aaig h Cnr, zżwk epand his explained Czyżewski Centre, the managing of activity eryday difficult to translate into English literarily, it means more less “Europe of the the of “Europe less more means it literarily, English into translate to difficult

- Lithuanian borderland, contributing to the the to contributing borderland, Lithuanian 61 -

Lithuanian border border Lithuanian

oee without however vć Dao ačr Dea Krhsn Fatos Karahasan, Dževad Jančar, Drago ović, the wider Central European region, region, European Central wider the - religiou and committed himself himself committed and leig h meaning. the altering s dialogue to other dialogueto s te etr has Center the , s, Latvia and Latvia s, CEU eTD Collection Central European is not in fact an anti an fact in not is European Central such? as anachronistic concept the isn‟t Europe: Central of concept the about doubts and concerns own his present to him allows structure dialogic This Graz. in restaurant “Comeback Miłosztraditionthe which endorses. Czyżewskiopenly ofheritage multinational the Europe Central to Including 63 62 Central [of citizen a be not would I But context. civilization and cultural wider a breath, is Europe Central me For restricted. too sometimes are configurations other because identity of levels trans which betweendialogue peoples oftheCentral European countries. grass a is Czyżewski, to the start to and other each about learn to relations, according new build to effort organic an cooperation, needed, is What level. lower a to descend we initiatives.” European similar than attractive less and economical commoncertainpolitical a to create opportunity a an as it consider if we anutopia, as Europe text his of title the Europe, Central elsewhere?” lost got which heritage, European the of values true and spirit the preserved who ones the are we “only that saying messianism, romantic the of Central embodiment another of yet Europe concept the Is unification? and integration oppose to means a Europe Central

Czyżewski, “Powrót Europy Środkowej,” 52. Czyżewski, “Powrót Europy Środkowej,” 45. oevr Cyesi ed te ocp o Cnrl uoe o ecie i identity his describe to Europe Central of concept the needs Czyżewski Moreover, essay his In granted. for Europe Central term the take not does he However, - rse tentoa faig H rjcs oee teasmto ta hs two these that assumption the however rejects He framing. national the gresses cul of Central Europe,” Czyżewski talks with a fictitious figure of an elderly man in a man ina figureofanelderly fictitious witha Czyżewskitalks Europe,” of Central ua srcue n h rgo. ee al h spaainl ntaie ae weak are initiatives supranational the all Here, region. the in structure tural he still finds still he – -

national and regional and national “Comeback of Central Europe.” Czyżewski considers the “idea of Central “ideaCentral of the considers CzyżewskiEurope.” Central “Comebackof

the term usefu term the 62 -

European stance and referring to an „intact and pure‟ pure‟ and „intact an to referring and stance European fe peetn hs eevtos o h cnet of concept the to reservations his presenting After –

exclude each other. “Central Europe is my home, my is Europe “Central other. each exclude l for his for l 30

63 undertakings

However, it is an important project if project important an is it However, Rzeczpospolita

as we hear some intellectuals intellectuals some hear we as , which is also reflected by reflected also is which , makeshim Whether being a Whetherbeing an a deeper deeper a

heir of heir - root - CEU eTD Collection instability, lackinstability, of past.” the from issues unresolved and mysteries of full world, the in remain “firmlydevastated, as region the perceives He new. something create to force positive a generate also can but inferiority, of complex the causes ethosofparticular a cultureof aborderland, dialoguewhichisclo have not did I if Europe], Pogranicze, 2008), 71. C 66 (Sejny: Pogranicze, 2008), 59. 65 64 dealing works, Esterházy‟s of part important an became it 1989 after Especially intertextuality, essayism. of use extensive an feat These irony. by and allusiveness characterized is style postmodern His the of writer. ancestry aristocratic the with as well as history, Hungarian and European the with his for prize Angelus the instance for numerousawards, received books His languages. countless into Europe. Central of conceptthe to EsterházyPéter asanasset, a rather than weakness. disputes historical of complexity the and cultures of multitude a find can we regions borderline its in state, homogenous fairly a nowadays is Poland although Yet, lands. these of multiculturalism per he world the of end the

mlx r eta Erp atr h ed f h wrd, n ii Pwou Zpsi pgaiz (Sejny: pogranicza z Zapiski Powrotu. Linia in world], the of end the after Europe Central or omplex Czyżewski, “Dialog ryzo Cyesi “zs rwnj” Tm fr h poic] i Lna ort. aik z pogranicza z Zapiski Powrotu. Linia in province], the for [Time prowincji” “Czas Czyżewski, Krzysztof ryzo Cyesi “opes tatd, cyi uoa rdoa o oc śit” Te Atlantis [The świata” końcy po Środkowa Europa czyli Atlantydy,, “Kompleks Czyżewski, Krzysztof Péter Esterházy is among the authors with the most complex and complex most the with authors the among is Esterházy Péter provincial Being territory. provincial a as Europe Central defines also Czyżewski opus magnum opus

between different nations. different between – continuity;

międzykulturowy,” 34. A Sceptic anda Sceptic A Proponent ofCentral Europe O in

published in 2000 “Harmon 2000 in published

y ainl identity.” national my

he onceeven world it calls “the end the after of world.” the evs h tai 20 tragic the ceives He is o Heis

rs r tpcl o ol fr i nvl, u as fr his for also but novels, his for only not typical are ures Therefore, he treats the provincialism of Central Europe Central of provincialism the treats he Therefore,

ne of the greatest living Hungarian writers, translated writers, Hungarian living greatest the of ne 31

ia Caelestis,” which is a great literary play literary great a is which Caelestis,” ia 64 th

zżwk fns n eta Erp a Europe Central in finds Czyżewski etr, which century, ing aside the main course of events events of mainthe course aside ing se his to worldview. 65

It is characterized by characterized is It pe te traditional the upset ne

ambivalent attitude ambivalent

As CEU eTD Collection articles are often ambiguous, very ironical and often they revea they often and ironical very ambiguous, often are articles and essays Esterházy‟s Europe. Central on views his elicit to hard extremely sometimes is it Notwithstanding, Europe. Central of idea the towards attitude his reveals and identity regional ( B essa and in articles general. publicissues His touchingand yetalso literature, mainly uponpolitics with mámora. Válogatott esszék 67 employed complexes. inferiority appease to order in region the of risks the emphasizes of uniqueness the He glorifying of approach simplistic the as well as concept, shortcomings. the of exclusivism and imperfections its mainly out pointing authors the among Europe Central of idea the about critical most the probably is He concept. the about reservation his expressing always however 1980s, the what but seems common the tobe denominator isthe period under ofliving Europe, Central/Eastern of understanding his in included are lands which clear not is It process. transition following the and experience communist the by united territory r the on reflect to rather is it entities, historical the of any to refer to not is it term, fashionable. became that Europe Eastern fact in is Europe often more is Europe in Central encountered of notion the however interchangeably, Europe Eastern thanconcreterather opinions postulates. and n a In

luestocking, Péter Esterházy, „Úgy kell rúgni, művészkém!” rúgni, kell „Úgy Esterházy, Péter H Esterh and Europe Central terms, both uses Esterházy terminology, the to comes it When ard ard ys are gathered mainly in three volumes: three in mainly gathered are ys ad nauseam ad D ázy z of aze 1994),

i essays. his participated in the debate with other intellectuals from the region the from intellectuals other with debate the in participated

Egy kék haris kék Egy F

, cikkek, 1996 in the Central European discourse:“laboratory Central European offreedom,”in the of “empire reedom He does not value one term over the other, saying that Central Central that saying other, the over term one value not does He

, 2004). – 2003 (Budapest: Magvető, 2004), 102.

( Blue

n l tee ok, sehz otn elcs n t on reflects often Esterházy books, these all In C [That‟s how we kick, my dear artist], in A szabadság nehéz szabadság A in artist], dear my kick, we how [That‟s orncrake,

Egy kékharisnya följegyzéseiből kékharisnya Egy

Esterházy ridicules the slogans that were that slogans the ridicules Esterházy 1996) and 1996) 67

When he employs the regional the employs he When l his doubts about the concept the about doubts his l A szabadság nehéz mámora nehéz szabadság A

communism.

nlzd n h thesis, the in analyzed

(

Notes of a of Notes egion as a as egion already

he in ,

CEU eTD Collection eti sproiy ipae otn y eta Erpas smaie b a hae ol a “only phrase a by summarized Europeans, Central by often displayed superiority certain feelingis a thatWest which oppressed being of prideful unobtrusivelyalways was European Central „A humiliated. beco much European Central a portrays He “second greyness,” wound, vagueness,mistake, chance and despondency] 71 70 (Budapest: Magvető Kiadó, 1994), 197. 69 Kiadó, 1994), 277. 68 Then freedom. about here dream can We talents. our on fantasies, our on us, on depends something emerge Europe Central and it on based was community national The lie.” “a was countries Central European the describing word main the period communist the in that argues he again Once them” of both or Konrád, or Kundera probably said, expert Europe‟s Central distinguished some („as dream a as Europe Central perceiving that observes He him. for connotations positive some reveals for typical perceives many European intellectuals. Central country.” pallid average, very normal, a in but history, ab Especially one. culture Western European Central the elevating and past the glorifying of 1980s the in prevailed that approach the result a as rejects Heourselves. understand not do actually we that F Europe.” Central understand can European Central

Esterházy, “A másként nőtt sejtek,” 197. ée Etráy “Közép Esterházy, Péter ée Etráy “oótéa [lw‟ jk] i Ey éhrsy fleyzsiő (uaet Magvető (Budapest: följegyezéseiből kékharisnya Egy in joke], [Clown‟s “Bohóctréfa” Esterházy, Péter ée Etráy “ msét őt etk [el go dfeety, n g kékhar Egy in differently], grow [Cells sejtek” nőtt másként “A Esterházy, Péter –

d as a good alternative to a collective “we” which was based on a lie. “Finally “Finally lie. a on based was which “we” collective a to alternative good a as d Nevertheless, in his la his in Nevertheless, a dismisses however greatly, suffered Europe Central in people that admits Esterházy and that‟s my point point my that‟s and e pr o te dniy that identity the of part a me 71 ) was not was )

- class Europe,” “deficiency that one can build on,” “Centráljuropdrím.” on,” build can one that “deficiency Europe,” class

erner indeed had of.” noidea - uóa it e, oáy hb, sl é rmntlné” Cnrl uoe s a as Europe [Central reménytelenség” és esély hiba, homály, seb, mint Európa

while only a beautiful and witty idea, but it is also a very constructive one. one. constructive very a also is it but idea, witty and beautiful a only – ter essay, Esterh essay, ter

we could regain our lost „we‟. We, Central Europeans, c Europeans, Central We, „we‟. lost our regain could we

“we don‟t leave any more in an unparalleled obscene joke of joke obscene unparalleled an in more any leave don‟t “we

as a masochist, whose sentiment of being oppressed has so has oppressed being of sentiment whose masochist, a as

, Helikon 14 (2009). ázy comes back to the concept and admits that it that admits and concept the to back comes ázy 33 e el priual go we bae and beaten when good particularly feels he

69 or Esterházy, Central Europeaness means EuropeanessCentral Esterházy, or

Thus, he rejects megalomania that he that megalomania rejects he Thus,

sy följegyzéseiből isnya v the ove an try an 68

CEU eTD Collection Aleksand neutral more and larger framework,regional national onewith burden. thenthe all its a within community the reconstruct to eager more etc.” is Serbians we he Slovenians, Hence, we Hungarians, we say: to easier be will it then and first, different borders overlap andmeander capriciously. Środkowoeuropejczykiem być) nie (albo he that region the of depiction his from deducted be can it term, the of scope the specify not does he Although Europe. Central of approach to conceptFiut ofCentralthe Europe. lit are triptych this contemporary in included essays the of most Although and European] Central be) to not (or tożsamość o Pytanie assemble are century, turbulent last the throughout change it did how and writers European Central of identity on lectures and essays His Europe. Central of question and oeuvre Miłosz‟ pri the on experts renowned most the of one is Krakow, from critic and historian literary a Fiut, Miłosz. Czesław of perspective the by influenced definitely are works refl issue, this to dimension Europe Central of identity the vately was a friend of the poet. poet. the of friend a was vately marking respectively respectively plates, transparent marking puts someone which on Europe, whole of map physical a imagine we “If uses He terminology. his in consequent quite is Fiut Fiut Aleksander er Fiut -

oty oih bt lo regional also but Polish, mostly

–

Central EuropeaninL Central Identity

[Asking about Identity],about[Asking

use s ecting on the current the on ecting –

the concept the in

fluence of Rome and Byzantium, Latin and Old Church Slavonic Slavonic Church Old and Latin Byzantium, and Rome of fluence started in the 1980s the in started

subscribes to subscribes s A ignificant part of Fiut‟s research is dedicated to the the to dedicated is research Fiut‟s of part ignificant

of Central Europe in order to continue the debate the continue to order in Europe Central of

ptai z Innym z Spotkania he describes Central Europe as a region, where where region, a as Europe Central describes he Być (albo nie być)nie Być(albo Środkowoeuropejczykiem 34

cultural and literary trends literary and cultural a wide definition of Central Europe. In Europe. Central of definition wide a

–

iterature However, However, ieaue te as reveal also they literature, almost

[Encounters with the Other]. Other]. the with [Encounters he also adds a contemporary a adds also he erary criticism about the the about criticism erary exclusively the notion of notion the exclusively d in three volumes: three in d

in the region. His region. the in

particular a

Być [Be

on on CEU eTD Collection perspective, which is a broadly understood Central Europe. The use of this wide definition of definition wide this of use The Europe. Central understood broadly a is which perspective, writers, he Polishmainlywith dealsFiut Although research. his of scope geographical the in reflected is it and area limited vaguely a therefore is about passage Kundera‟s of wh region the of diversity cultural and religious ethnic, the underlines he Hence, (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie, 2006), 247. 73 Wydawnictwo Literackie, 1999), 8. 72 in “preserved empires, multinational past the to Referring endeavour. fruitful very a be can identity one‟s of revision constant a hand one the On developments. negative very provoke phenomenonofthe problematic the whichidentity beredefined. constantly has to centuries. few last during borders changing and region this in rule colonial of outcome an is It boundaries. cultural and social States.” perceived West, the from patterns the reflection further no with copy to tend elites cultural European Central Austro Prussian, (Russian, empires a of consequence a is provincial with. cope to has European Central a that Lithuanianthe Tomas from Europe, Central of corners different from authors up bring then to him allows region the

Aleksander Fiut,Być (albo nieŚrodkowoeuropejczykiem być) Centralnot tobe) [Be(Or European], (Kraków: lkadr it “izae e rda uoy [en rm h Cnr o Erp] i Spotkani in Europe], of Centre the from [Seen Europy” środka ze “Widziane Fiut, Aleksander According to Fiut, these problems might turn into an asset or, to the the to or, asset an into turn might problems these Fiut, to According problems main three identity to him allows region the of literature the of reading His is.” Europe whereCentral itis isfound, density entanglementand thebiggest Where co of reach the mention to not clusters, religious and groups national particular of location empires, past and kingdoms fallen of borders of contours Eastern Orthodox, Catholicismand languages, 73

Second mmunism as a civilization model civilization a as , it is a sense of flexibility of borders. This painful feeling concerns state, concerns feeling painful This borders. of flexibility of sense a is it ,

– Venclova to theYugoslavianDaniloKiš.Venclova

at a certain point lines will begin to blur and muddle. It is no doubt here. doubt no is It muddle. and blur to begin will lines point certain a at the greatest var greatest the

og eid f oiain n dpnec fo foreign from dependence and domination of period long - ugra) A a eut f h prpea tikn, the thinking, peripheral the of result a As Hungarian).

– First

“from Paris, Vienna, or recently from the United United the from recently or Vienna, Paris, “from iety within the smallest place. smallest the within iety Third 35 , it is a periphery complex. A feeling of being being of feeling A complex. periphery a is it ,

, connected to the previous two problems, is is problems, two previous the to connected , usually tries to put their works into a largerworksinto a their put to tries

His Central Europe Central His contrary, they can they contrary,

ich remi ich constantly constantly 72 a z Innym Innym z a

nds CEU eTD Collection can finally “wak finally can neighbours.” closest the of culture for contempt odious with together influences, foreign yielding not vernacular, is that everything i itself transform easily can periphery Polish Austro Here today. of reality globalised the in indispensible cultures, different pat the up bring can Europeans,” Central of memory the dka Europy,” 245. 76 75 74 formanother nowless ofitis oppressive and notbasedoncoercion. evenif it, to exposed one imperialism, Europedominatedis inCentral being by culture which,after now c vernacular the and particularity the losing about concerns raises Fiut Thus, patterns.” Soviet the repeating version, rustic own, its communism the during experienced cultural the bet mainly be to but seems European Central consequences, a “Paradoxically, region. economical the in occurred the that developments only not observes he Here, points also atthreats that exampledreadful informer ofthiswe observe could Yugoslavia.

Fiut, “Widziane ze śro Aleksander Fiut,“Wstęp” [Introduction], in Spotkania z Innym (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie, 2006), 7. Fiut, “Widziane ze środka Europy,” 249. ter prepared to adopt homogenous pulp of the mass culture, than a Western European. He European. Western a than culture, mass the of pulp homogenous adopt to prepared ter - Lithuanian Commonwealth can serve as an example. On the other hand, the sense of sense the hand, other the On example. an as serve can Commonwealth Lithuanian globalization.” communist fascist its and in both totalitarianism, by created one civilization: of forms opposing region, this “Central but Europe, Central of past violent the on concentrate only not does Fiut Interestingly, -

Eastern Europe experienced in the last century an invasion of two, unknown so far in in far so unknown two, of invasion an century last the in experienced Europe Eastern e the demons of nationalism, chauvinism and racism.” According to Fiut, a a Fiut, to According racism.” and chauvinism nationalism, of demons the e

variant, another created by free market, with the early phase of of phase early the with market, free by created another variant, are commonare the fortheregion in post

Problematic identity and a need for need a and identity Problematic nto “a cultural isolationism, deceitful proud of of proud deceitful isolationism, cultural “a nto 36

terns of harmonious co harmonious of terns - 1989 period.

self

haracter of the the of haracter - identification - - existence of existence ugr or Hungary 76

CEU eTD Collection neighbouri story a fact in is Which territory. mi nations, numerous of composed region, the of history complicated Lajos Grendel (Pozsony: Kalligram Könyvkiadó, 1998), 5 77 Howev life. everyday of hardships the and experiences Europe Central of citizen a that difficulties the about writes He poverty. and invasions regular of experience the states, t perceives Grendel experience. own his and Europe Central on literature the on based is list this declares, he As deliberately be to seems it though presents exaggerated, it Grendel‟sunderstanding ofwell Central Europe: Even explicit. very is Europe Central of definition Budapestboth in promoting andBratislava,engaged in CentralEuropean literature. Kalligram at worked he years many For literature. Hun contemporary on volume excellent an wrote recently he prose, his from Apart language. Hungarian of writers best the of one as considered is he Bratislava), in then Levice,

ao G Lajos home that he has the smallest chance to achieve it.” smallest chanceto has the home he that w European Central A 9. years. eighty or seventy last the in questioned constantly was people indigenous European Central a of identity The 8. poor. are states little These 7. others. than claustrophobia states little of iscomposed Central Europe non a than paranoia is and anxiety European to Central prone a more why, is That 5. oppressed. permanently is he more, even say would I his certain a to according basis, regular a on European, Central A 4. nationality. and origins his about sensitive very is European Central A 3. territory. its on stationed are armies foreign often very but Europeans, Central by populated is Europe Central 2. world. the of part each from time any attacked be can which region a is Europe Central “1. essay the In Grendel Lajos edl “Közép rendel, ng country. Although Grendel has always lived in Slovakia (first in his home his in (first Slovakia in lived always has Grendel Although country. ng –

Central EuropeV ould also like to be successful, well successful, be to like also ould his region as a unique territory, with such particularities as the fragility of fragility the as particularities such with territory, unique a as region his

- Közép uóa s íitti [eta Erp ad t patm] i Hzm Abszurdisztán, Hazám, in phantoms], its and Europe [Central kísirtetei” és Európa ss h concept the uses - uóa s kísirtetei és Európa

about - 6. ersus History ersus

himself f eta Erp mainly Europe Central of 37 , that is why Central Europeans are more affected by by affected more are Europeans Central why is , that , being a member of Hungarian minority in a in minority Hungarian of member a being ,

- off, respected and happy, but it is especially at especially is it but happy, and respected off, Cnrl uoe n is hnos, hi phantoms], its and Europe [Central Central European. 6. For some time already, already, time some For 6. European. Central – 77

Hnain ulsig os, based house, publishing Hungarian a torical algorithm, is algorithm, torical

n re t rfr o the to refer to order in

ngled

n limited a on er, some of some er,

conquered; garian town s

CEU eTD Collection naiat, h ato recount author the inhabitants, ofhisweakness.causes the explain to tries but European, Central a of defects the justify not does Grendel identity. excessively often and anxious is region the of inhabitant typical European A Central victim. innocent a an perceive as exclusively not does writer The ironical. evidently are statements the 79 78 Or enemies. well The Hungary. to family his with flees eventually and party national Hungarian the of member a becomes Kovácspa Hungarian more a to name his changes younger the Meanwhile, partisans. Kowalski, to name his changes girl, Slovakian a marries older The brothers. two of choices future the all determines move This Hungarian. other the and Slovakian is one schools: different two to sons two their send Schmidts The easier. life their make attitude opportunistic the does Neither job. his loses ans eventually he Slovakian, or Hungarian is he whether bureau census the of representative the by questioning persistent w replies simply she gone, are Russians the that wife his tells Schmidt Mister old 1991 in When German indepen occurring events different experience that objects are they Instead, history. of actors the be to seem not do family, European Central typical a representing Schmidt, Mrs and Mr narrative,

ith aquestion:“andwhohascomeith instead?” Slovakianequivalent ofthe name Schmidt. Grendel, “Közép If they try to oppose their fate, they are punished. When Mr Schmidt gets irritated by a a by irritated gets Schmidt Mr When punished. are they fate, their oppose to try they If above the for example an As ety rm hi dcsos Vros ris oe n g (zcs Hungarian (Czechs, go and come armies Various decisions. their from dently s , and Russians and paranoiac h cmlctd itrcl icmtne ld o fml drama? family a to led circumstances historical complicated the - Európaés kísirtetei,” 6. -

netoe dcso o te aet iavrety ma inadvertently parents the of decision intentioned

and the conditions in which he lives make h make lives he which in conditions the and ) and the Schmidts get used to an uncertainty they have to live with. live to have they uncertainty an to used get Schmidts the and ) 79

n drn te eod ol Wr on te lvk communist Slovak the joins War World Second the during and wers that he is of “Košice nationality”. And as a consequence, he consequence, a as And nationality”. “Košice of is he that wers

te tr o a itv Shit aiy rm oie I his In Košice. from family Schmidt fictive a of story the s

- quoted list of features of Central Europe and its its and Europe Central of features of list quoted 38 78

im oversensitive about his about oversensitive im e w brothers two de

Anyway, the the Anyway, taky, s , CEU eTD Collection nrdcal hsoy f eta Erp. n ta i wa cnttts eta Erp in Europe Central perspective Grendel‟s constitutes what is that And Europe. Central of history unpredictable 20Europe in Central of history the characterized that circumstances tragic the shows family the of story 83 Kalligram Könyvkiadó, 1998. 82 81 80 Chinese a philosopher, European Confucius Eastern North a Kant call call I if ridiculous, be would can it but philosopher, “I Europe: of parts various between differences cultural conflicts not) (or hidden even grew West the to comparing backwardness Its minorities. national and nations states, small of the Baltic, the by restricted Union, Soviet former post of group a He as Europe. Europe Western Central defines and region this between gap wide a creating for responsible is rule o feature constitutive a as past communist the emphasizes and communism.” go They [...]. citizens Slovak as die finally to time, longer or Central core the to are shorter for Czechoslovak wife twice Hungarian, twice were they life long his their During Europeans. and Schmidt “Mister armies. foreign by invasions as

Grendel, “Közép Lajos Grendel, “Közép Grendel, “Közép Grendel, “Közép bigger In the essay the In and turbulent the shows Grendel family, Schmidt the of biography short this In oppres is not alifetime he in leastif at once European aCentral One not is frequently. more even sometimes or years, twenty or fifteen every changed why and oppressed was Who b for he rich; was because or poor was he Because reason. any for oppressed be could European Central “a

during the communist experiment. It is characterized by the multiculturalism, by by multiculturalism, the by characterized is It experiment. communist the during th

century. Itwasaperiod when - - - Európai polgár,” 48. Európaés kísirtetei,” 7. Európa 81

Közép In thishimself way,perceivesalso asaCentralEuropean. Grendel eing a Hungarian, a Slovak, a Czech or a Pole; for being a Jew or a Christian. Christian. a or Jew a being for Pole; a or Czech a Slovak, a Hungarian, a eing - Európai polgár” [Central Europeancitizen], inHazám, Abszurdisztán, 43 –

és kísirtetei,” 7

uncertain borders, changing citizenships, transit of ideol of transit citizenships, changing borders, uncertain

ad hoi iett crisis. identity chronic and , - Európai polgár Európai

- [Central European citizen] European [Central omns sae bten uoen no and Union European between states communist

Adriatic and the Black seas. It is composed composed is It seas. Black the and Adriatic 83

e, rne de nt e major see not does Grendel Yet, f Central Europe. The communist The Europe. Central f t a taste of democracy, fascism fascism democracy, of taste a t 82

Grendel particularly Grendel ogies - 52. Pozsony: , sed.”

as well as 80

CEU eTD Collection Csaba Gy.Kiss senseand the ofuncertainty probl and writing his Overall, not. did other the and experiment, communist the experienced one that is Europe of parts contrast in 84 Polish the in also works his of rooting the shows which Kiss by Polish in originally written were Central o some Actually, region. the of studies of literary and cultural his represent others Europe, concept the with directly dealing them of some texts, his of twenty than more i published volume demonstra which Europe Central on works his of collection broadest The Europe. Central in building and Slovakia Poland, with culture and literature Hungarian of connections the on extensively wrote Kiss languages. European Central the of most speaks and Croatia and Slovakia Republic, Czech Poland, in universities career academic his During liberal. leaning or differentiates oftheauthorspoliticallyindifferent, analyzed himwhoarerather from here, rest parties, conservative the for support 1993,often politics he in party theleft Although he 1987. Forum)Democratic in co a and politician conservative a also was d years

Grendel, “Kö tradition Csaba Gy. Kiss is a Hungarian scholar in literature and cultural history cultural and literature in scholar Hungarian a is Kiss Gy. Csaba ealt with the relations between different nations in Central Europe Central in nations different between relations the with ealt e hs prah o h concept the to approach his tes with Descartes with zép . -

Európai polgár,” 47. –

Howto n Poland, under a very telling title „Lesson of Central Europe.” It includes includes It Europe.” Central of „Lesson title telling very a under Poland, n s

on Central Europe are focused on the historical adversity of the re the of adversity historical the on focused are Europe Central on – P

a Western European one.” EuropeanWestern a reserve

Croatia in particular, as well as on nationalism and nation and nationalism on as well as particular, in Croatia

the Nation the Nation theand GoBeyonditat T Same recently ematic identityofaCentral Euro -

founder of Magyar Demokrata Fórum (Hungarian Fórum Demokrata Magyar of founder a be smwa srrsnl asmld n a in assembled surprisingly somewhat been has

40 for the ruling right ruling the for

he spent many years lecturing at various various at lecturing years many spent he 84

The main difference between the two the between difference main The - wing Fidesz. This actually This Fidesz. wing pean.

. Interestingly, he Interestingly, . , who for many for who ,

expresseshis ime

f them them f gion gion - CEU eTD Collection typical approach in Hungary, where Central Europe was most often identified with the former the less with identified often most was Europe Central where Hungary, in approach a typical was It Balkans. the in possessions Ottoman former the and Commonwealth Polish Hung Greater only not including yet nations, of mixture dense a with territory a as Europe Central perceived he that is Kiss, for particular then already was What countries. neighbouring the in minorities Hungarian fram European Central the using began he period this (Budapest: RációKiadó, 2 86 85 Bosnia Albania, the instance for examined He Europe. Central passagesnostalgic constitute definitely minor a ofhisworks. part these Nonetheless, Trieste. or Zagreb Prague, Vienna, Budapest, in encounter still can one na the under pastry,” of realm the in found be to symbols] essay the In K.u.K. the for longing Austro the of peculiarities some is Central thathistoriography, Polish the in termespecially popular more a submitto to tends he readers, E and Europe Central terms the alternatively uses also He Black. and Adriatic Baltic, seas: three between area an as alternatively areas, linguistic Russian and German between territories Throu lands. Habsburg

ast His inrole the CentralEuropean debate is mentioned in thesecond subsection of the secondchapter. sb G. is “Közép Kiss, Gy. Csaba - eta Erp. neetnl, atclry n i cnrbtos nedd o Polish for intended contributions his in particularly Interestingly, Europe. Central n is es Kiss‟ In the employs he occasionally Nevertheless, ofCentral Europe. of oftheconcept agroup admirers Kiss already joined in1980s , he facetiously points out that “it is possible that the symbols of Central Europe are Europe Central of symbols the that possible is “it that out points facetiously he , - Eastern Europe. me of meof - ezgvn, ugra Cota Ceh eulc Hnay Macedonia, Hungary, Republic, Czech Croatia, Bulgaria, Herzegovina, štrudla as n shlry ulctos e rcs aiu cmo faue of features common various traces he publications scholarly and says

009), 51. ghout Kiss‟ works Central Europe has been usually loosely defined as as defined loosely usually been has Europe Central works Kiss‟ ghout - uóa s z jlée, [eta Erp ad t smos i A ov himnusz morva A in symbols] its and Europe [Central jelképei,” ő az és Európa

strudel

- Hungarian legacy, in a way more typical for the Hungarian the for typical more way a in legacy, Hungarian ary or Austro or ary 86 . Or in the particular atmosphere of the coffee houses, that that houses, coffeetheofatmosphere particular the in .Or Közép

recalling for instance Hungarian Hungarian instance for recalling - Európa és az ő jelképei jelképei ő az és Európa 41 image -

Hungarian Empire, but also the lands of the the of lands the also but Empire, Hungarian em eta Erp i odr o describe to order in Europe Central term

of the nation in the national anthems of anthems national the in nation the of ework, primarily in order to refer to the to refer to order in primarily ework,

[ Central Europe and its its and Europe Central rétes , found elsewhere found ,

In CEU eTD Collection positive me positive nationalism West inthe andinEast nation indepen the regaining of desire a to as well as powers, foreign of dominance or defeats tragedies, past the to refer persistently Montenegro, (Kraków: Międzynarodowe Centrum Kultury, 2009), 195. 88 [Homeland, whereyou? are East 87 the promote and for search to calls he Furthermore, relativized. be could mythologies national the way this In once. at perspectives their present and camps opposing in freedom for fought 1848 of revolutions of leaders Croatian and Hungarian Czech, together put instance neglected be not should tha argues He Europe.” of integration “spiritual a to contribute could pantheon European Central common The Europe. Central for symbols common and memory collective a of creation the postulates coex peaceful the with projects of serve region whichcan as the an example toothers. beaninter could thispassageFollowing in1993,written Kisssuggeststhat experiencethis unique ofthe region great asset.

Csaba Gy. Kiss, Lekcja Europy Środkowej Europy Lekcja Kiss, Gy. Csaba sb G. is Hl ay hzm Kelet hazám? vagy, Hol Kiss, Gy. Csaba - building process building What is a recurring theme in the the in theme recurring a is What a constitutes Europe] [Central it religions special value.” and languages cultures, people, of multicolour Wes and East but West, nor East, neither is It borderline. a also is sea, Black and Adriatic Baltic, the between stretching belt European the sense, wider a “In East of Central called is it Whether

aning. For instance, he perceives the borderline character of Central Europe as a as Europe Central of character borderline the perceives he instance, For aning.

Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Slovenia. and Slovakia Serbia, Romania, Poland, t Central European myths, especially those that set one nation against another, another, against nation one set that those especially myths, European Central t esting lesson for the rest of the continent. He emphasizes the positive features positive the ofthecontinent. Heemphasizes esting lessonfortherest

in the region. Here, he emphasizes the different paths of developing developing of paths different the emphasizes he Here, region. the in

n forgotten and - Central European anthems.History of the national symbol] Kiadó, (Nap 2011).

istence of the nations in the mixed area of Central Europe. He Europe. Central of area mixed the in nations the of istence dence. One of his main concerns main his of One dence. - Central Europe.Central . , but presented together. Such “panorama” could for for could “panorama” Such together. presented but , Eseje i szkice [Lesson of Central Europe. Central of [Lesson szkice i Eseje - Kiss Közép - Central Europe, these terms have an unequivocal an have terms these Europe, Central ‟ essays ‟ 42 - uóa insa. g nmei ekp történetéhez jelkép nemzeti Egy himnuszai. Európa

is his attempts his is 87

t at the same time. With its rich rich its With time. same the at t

What he found, is that they that is found, he What is to is to reconcile the national the reconcile to describe t describe Essays and skethes] and Essays he particular he who

CEU eTD Collection Slovaks, Poles, Czechs and others, ar andothers, Czechs Poles, Slovaks, Hungarians, “We, region: the for task overdue long a Kiss, to according is, memory historical common a constructing of endeavour the all, in All continent. whole the in as well as Europe the opinion Kiss‟ in and contexts national their outside Oszká Radić, Stjepan Hodža, Milan Masaryk, Garrigue Tomáš as such integration, regional the advocated that example, thinkers political an As nations. European Central unite that ideas and events 91 90 89 Cze a be can I Swabian, Saxonor Transylvanian Jew,a Galician a Croatian, a Hungarian, a Pole, a be can I “Actually, nationality. single one with identify it,Varga put Krzysztof As Europe. Central of culture and history on reflect to departure of point a fact in is book his In writer. travel absorbing an as himself presented he 2010 gra a also is Makłowicz However, show. Travels) Culinary popular very his for especially Poland in known recently until critic, culinary personality, television a thesis: this in analyzed Robert Makłowicz for ourheritage, especially forits and interpretation, weareresponsible.”

From thecover of Robert Makłowicz, Café Museum (Wołowiec: Czarne, 2010). Kiss, Lekcja Europy Środkowej, 156. ned Mkoiz ecie hmef s Cnrl uoen sne e a hardly can he since European, Central a as himself describes Makłowicz Indeed, Like no are there fact in Because Austrians more the all Hungarians, and Slovaks Poles, originate. Europeans, Central we, which from And ever. lands invented other any than extraordinary, and complicated more Mitteleuropa, mysterious i Museum “Cafe among choice unusual most the be to seem Makłowicz glance, first a At

Robert Makłowicz.” Robert

Café Museum. –

N s indeed a book about craving and thirst, yet above all it is an excursion to the to excursion an is it all above yet thirst, and craving about book a indeed s ostalgic CentralEuropean ostalgic

91 Podróże Kulinarne Roberta Makłowicza Roberta Kulinarne Podróże

e representatives of a our common past, and for this past, past, this for and commonpast, our a of representatives e Jászi and Józef Piłsudski. Their ideas are hardly known hardly are ideas Their Piłsudski. Józef and Jászi 43

–

duate of history, a journalist and in and journalist a history, of duate sol b pooe i Central in promoted be should y there are only true Central Europeans. CentralEuropeans. true only are there ch or a Ruthenian, a Boyko, a a aBoyko, Ruthenian, a or ch Café Museum Café

(Robert Makłowicz‟s Makłowicz‟s (Robert 89

e rns p the up brings he the authors the 90 , cuisine ,

real real CEU eTD Collection Hungary until 1918 and where after 1989 a kind of Habsburg nostalgia became widespread in widespread became nostalgia Habsburg of kind a 1989 after where and 1918 until Hungary monarchy the of citizens were ancestors his of most because only Not monarchy. K.u.K. the to nostalgia particular a reveals Makłowicz Poland. contemporary homogenous religiously and ethnically the than identity t background, Austrian and Ruthenian Armenian, Monarchy.” Habsburg the and old the of legacy multinational the bear genes My [...]. too Lemko a Hutsul, http://wyborcza.pl/1,76842,8543285,O_dobry_Panie_Mitteleuropa_.html?as=1&s 94 93 92 a remained Romania of su part last the of one as this it perceives Makłowicz territory. multiethnic fortunately rule, Ceauşescu of madness the despite 20 the during extent large Europeanto it. “I‟m aCentral of nationality,” Polish Althou multi and multilingual is addition in which family, bigger a to belonging of sense a “gains he but tribe, his of member a is he only Hungary Mitteleuropa and today of context signifie rather It association. negative Franciszek,inFerdynand honourofthe “gracious established the was during school secondary his that underlines proudly Makłowicz circles. certain

Makłowicz, 37. Makłowic gh he is aware that the ver the that aware is he gh epass npriua h utcluaimo Cnrl uoe which Europe Central of multiculturalism the particular in praises He any up bring not does Mitteleuropa term German the Makłowicz for Therefore, O or Pne itluoa” aea yoca 4.10.2010, Wyborcza, Gazeta Mitteleuropa,” Panie dobry „O . For Makłow For . z, 11.

‟ s

– nation

necagal, n bt rfr any o h territories the to mainly refer both and interchangeably, icz, when one when icz, eg” f rn Jsp I Te uhr vn ae hs one son younger his named even author The I. Joseph Franz of reign” - states of the region. He actually uses two terms two uses actually He region. the of states th

etr. hn rvlig rud rnyvna h ntcs that notices he Transylvania, around travelling When century.

92 . He comes from Kraków, which itself was a part of Austro of part a was itself which Kraków, from comes He .

Although a Pole by birth, Makłowicz has a mixed Hungarian,mixed a has Makłowicz birth, by Pole a Although y existence of this family is a is family this of existence y becomes aware of aware becomes s the idealized multiculturalism which he m he which multiculturalism idealized the s Habsburg - religious 44

hat is why he seeks he why is hat Archduke Franz Ferdinand.Archduke Franz –

94 o Cnrl uoen community.” European Central a to

as he declaresas he inoneof interviews. the

the old bonds, he can realize that not that realize can he bonds, old the

utopia, he eagerly subscribes eagerly he utopia, ch parts of Central Europe, Central of parts ch tartsz=x for a wider wider

[read 17.05.2012]. –

Central Europe Central Rzeczpospolita

vanished to a to vanished frame for his for frame

f Austria of isses in the in isses

- -

CEU eTD Collection all open.”all even I‟m religions, different of temples are there place one in when enjoy I me. around languages different hear to best the like I tongue, mother my is Polish “although Gyulafehérv Iulia, Alba (eg. languages different roller.” national century‟s twentieth in names multiple their enumerating cities Transylvanian the to the refers he pleasure undisguised with “crushed were parts other since 96 95 the are these territories hefinds where oldmixture ofcultures the thatisunknownWest. in the secondly for, yearns he that states former the of memories the him to bring Swiss journeyin the to Alps Dinaric the through railroad Paris, to Sarajevo prefers He continent. the of part Western theand Chernivtsi, stations ofwhichVienna remind in andBudapest ofthose (Ivano Stanisławów Split, Przemyśl, to refers accordingly Makłowicz So stations. Austro typical these find can you where is Europe Central that of Hrabal words the to refers he monarchy, old the for pining authors many to Similarly cuisine. books, previous gemišt are: writer the by along brought examples other The as Czechs and Museum

Makłowicz, 12. Makłowicz, 68. . However, Makłowicz enumerates many more Central European dishes in one of his of one in dishes European Central more many enumerates Makłowicz However, . ial, ałwc fns eta Erp sml mc mr itrsig hn the than interesting more much simply Europe Central finds Makłowicz Finally, also He

he mentions, for instance, pickled cabbage stewed with pork, known by Austrians by known pork, with stewed cabbage pickled instance, for mentions, he 96

segediner Goulash segediner refers of course to cuisine as a particular feature of Central Europe. In Europe. Central of feature particular a as cuisine to course of refers K kuchnia CK

Alps , Dalmatian seaside to Spanish or Italian cost.First Italian or Spanish to seaside Dalmatian ,

(K.u.K , whereas in Hungary as Hungary in whereas ,

cuisine), unlike unlike cuisine), 45

r Wiebr, albr) A h claims, he As Karlsburg). Weißenburg, ár, aé Museum Café knödel székelygulyás or

nde srdl spritzer strudel, knedle,

eoe ecuiey to exclusively devoted

- or happ ugra railway Hungarian . székelykaposzta

ly, these places places these ly, ier

, if they are are they if , - Frankivsk) 95

With Café

or . CEU eTD Collection otnn wih s o yt rnfre b te lbl as utr ad see and culture mass global the by transformed yet not is which continent the in Travels Babadag: Babadag book essayistic the for particular in travelogues, his for especially famous is author Andrzej Stasiuk Andruchowycz and Andrzej Stasiuk (Wołowiec: Czarne,2000), 134. 97 the of part another puts He stay. to intends he where and lives currently he where place the p He compasses. of pair a with Europe “his” delimitates he Instead, region. the of definition objective an give to pretend even not does He Europe”). “my simply or Europe” Central (“my “my” pronoun personal the by seconds.” few a lasted that events trifles, details, of composed is Europe] “[my region: the about generalizing term ( Europe Middle Europe, Other as synonyms, such use to tends he Europe, Central of concept this about debate the of ballast Polish major the of p one is it nowadays and Poland neighbouring the cultures in and interest countries the triggered and region the from literature contemporary of works many series leading Literature its with reportage, and essayism prose, European Central in specializing house, publishing Czarne 1996 in established Sznajderman Monika wife his with together Stasiuk region, the in writing travel his from Apart modernization. ublishing houses.ublishing

nre Saik “zenk kęoy [obo] i Da sj o uoi zae śokw, Jurij środkową, zwanej Europie o eseje Dwa in [Logbook], okrętowy” “Dziennik Stasiuk, Andrzej “a Stasiuk rarely uses the term Central Europe itself. Probably in order to avoid all the all avoid to order in Probably itself. Europe Central term the uses rarely Stasiuk de Stasiuk Andrzej

eta European Central . Along the Pogranicze publishing house of Krzysztof Czyżewski, Czarne published published Czarne Czyżewski, Krzysztof of house publishing Pogranicze the Along . hc apae i Egih w English in appeared which 97

– He presents a completely “priv completely a presents He

“Private”

O voted to the region a large part of his writing. This prolific Polish Polish prolific This writing. his of part large a region the to voted hr Europe. ther ”

Central Europe laces the spike in Wołowiec (a town in South in town (a Wołowiec in spike the laces o ecie h ihbtn o ti rgo. tsu avoids Stasiuk region. this of inhabitant the describe to “ Europa Środka Europa

t te vn oe eln title telling more even the ith tsu i fsiae b te rvnil at f the of part provincial the by fascinated is Stasiuk 46

”

) or “my Europ “my or ) ate” view of Central Europe, characterized Europe, Central of view ate”

e.” More eagerly he uses the uses he eagerly More e.” te Erp, Other Europe, Other

- n h Ra to Road the On Eastern Poland), Poland), Eastern s mue to immune ms Jadąc do do Jadąc CEU eTD Collection 1980s, he does not underline the cultural refinement of the region which would legitimize the the legitimize would which region the of refinement cultural the underline not does he 1980s, he marks“his”CentralEurope. out Homeland.” the of third one as well As Republic. Czech of strip a and Slovakia of surface entire the almost Hungary, and Romania of parts comparable and decent constitut inside is which everything and circle a makes he Then born. was he where Warsaw, in compass 99 98 region whichhistory constantly oppresses the population ofthisregion. fl a signifies it also but choice, esthetical his only not blow which history, of wind metaphorical a about writes Stasiuk wind. regular a by opinion, his in caused, only not is Europe Central in drought the However, safer. feels he where place a to Poland, Southern Mazow the of drought constant a stand not could he case, own his in Nevertheless, it. to listen necessarily will it has that everyone nor instinct, this has plain European Central the of inhabitant every not that though reservation t to flee to him pushed instinct whose plain, European Central the of inhabitant an as himself portrays Stasiuk region. the of history turbulent the namely and region its immu Eur Central of imperfection and chaos the about writes He ones. previous the opposes that mythology “ European

Stasiuk, “Dziennik okrętowy,” 89. Stasiuk, “Dziennik okrętowy,” 8 ,

Stasiuk, similarl Stasiuk, writings his in resonate also debate European Central the of traits some However, well already Europe Central on discourse the to contrast in Secondly, a different understanding of the notions of history and time between a Central Central a between time and history of notions the of understanding different a ” ope which paradoxically appeals a lot a appeals paradoxically which ope

character of it. He presen He it. of character es “his Central Europe”, including: “a piece of Belarus, quite a lot of Ukraine, Ukraine, of lot a quite Belarus, of piece “a including: Europe”, Central “his es nity to nity change.

s “in this or that direction, but is always here.” always is but direction, that or this “in s y to Miłosz, for instance, perceives as one of one as perceives instance, for Miłosz, to y 6.

ts a sort of anti of sort a ts sze plain, and had to escape to the mountains in mountains the to escape to had and plain, sze 47

to him. He praises the provinciality of the the of provinciality the praises He him. to - mythology of Central Europe, or a new new a or Europe, Central of mythology ight from the Central European brutal European Central the from ight

e onan. e ae a makes He mountains. he 99 the main features of the of features main the

98 His escape is thereforeis escape His

In this arbitr this In - known from from known ary way ary -

CEU eTD Collection i cnestos ih nihor h i a ek. i fml was family His Lemko. a is who neighbour a with conversations his h will what of uncertain therefore are Europeans Central wher area appropriate an are is sentences” “conditional It history. by experienced particularly was Stasiuk, says region, ago.” years hundred five not fifty, happened what about story the telling I‟m that ex to try area [deserted] this to West the from man a take I “When Westerner. a and European the 102 by Poland to ceded were that 101 West the in territories decision of Yalta Conference in 1945. the to Boykos) (Lemkos, groups ethnic Ukrainian 1947 the In remain. settlement 100 and intriguing. surprising is region this that, of because precisely and incoherent, and disintegrated chaotic, is o experiencing and oil of bottle large a with travelling woman slim a fighting, boys young some seeing trip, second the of details the all recalls he however wagon, German quiet clean, a in trip first the remember to one journeys: Burku train to two another Germany, his in compares Bremerhaven he when visible particularly and clean is is It everything glass, organized. of out made are cities where West, the to opposed somethi as Europe Central perceives Stasiuk it), of This ofplundered. micro kind land. exchang the in them to owns given and taken who was land sure the if Especially completely never soil, German on houses, German In suitcase. formerly a of out live still there people that says He Poland. western in places various

Stasiuk, “Dziennik okrętowy,” 96. Stasiuk, “Dziennik okrętowy,” 96. Stasiuk refers here to the ruined villages in Beskid Niski in southern Poland, where almost no signs of human of signs almostno where Poland,southern in Niski Beskid in villages ruinedthe to here refers Stasiuk Despite all the tragic history of the region (or perhaps the other way around: because around: way other the perhaps (or region the of history tragic the all Despite plain to him that he is walking through a crowded and loud village, he cannot believe cannot he village, loud and crowded a through walking is he that him to plain

ther peculiar things that kept happening. For Stasiuk, Central Europe Central Stasiuk, For happening. kept that things peculiar ther - 1950 Polish communist authorities resettled about 200,000 people mainly fr mainly people 200,000 about resettled authorities communist Polish 1950 -

histories form histories

–

ohn i gvn n ntig s forever. is nothing and given is nothing s

48 a picture ofthepicture a region in Stasiuk‟s essay t in Ukraine, through Hungary. He does not not does He Hungary. through Ukraine, in t

ng more exciting, appealing to emotions, as emotions, to appealing moreexciting, ng appen. For instance, the writer the instance, For appen. e of another land which was which land another of e

deported in 1947 to to 1947 in deported 101 s 102

100 only e . recalls recalls

well

This

The and om - CEU eTD Collection the fears the that aWesterner possess towardsother,less known the ofcontinent. part Europe. Other 103 literary magazine avant the around concentrated writers Vojvodina Hungarian of generation the among readership Hungarian the by only Hungarian not the among writer renowned a is he Hungary, outside living although Grendel, to Similarly the and Europe Central between border Balk the “at lives he since different, is experience from time this László West, whereastheWesternersneglect peripherydriven the ofEuropeandare bystereotypes. the about everything know Europe Central of inhabitants the because virtue, a as Stasiuk by is Europe Central of provincialism The Europe. divides that gap the stresses he Here,

Stasiuk, Fado, 82 ans,” and he experienced the dissolution Yugoslavia, which ended the multicultural state. multicultural the ended which Yugoslavia, dissolution the experienced he and ans,” László László computer EU the all make will is above human comprehension.” will do Albanians what mad. [...]And go systems which Slavonia of inhabitants as pose over will and Slovakians and over Slovenians changing criteria. transparent to craftily used opinion will public [Western] Latvia the misleading and and identity Lithuania of Citizens [...]. Britain Great sheep sheep of millions their with [...]. do alcohol will pure Romanians what of say full to fruits Hard give that shrubs plant and Moselle, and Rhine drunk by Milan, vineyards of gates the at Valley Po the in semi Ku'damm, Berlin‟s Champs on camps their up put decades following the for plan the less or more how “That‟s displays West the that stereotypes the with plays also Stasiuk Finally, Végel - breeding, but above but breeding,

– Végel, along Lajos Grendel, is yet another writer from the the from writer another yet is Grendel, Lajos along Végel,

Writing shortly after the so the after shortly Writing

eba wo ilnl epos h tr Cnrl uoe Hwvr Végel‟s However, Europe. Central term the employs willingly who Serbia, B - 83. etween Europe Central andtheBalkans Új Symposion

- speaking minority. His plays, novels and essays have been have essays and novels plays, His minority. speaking

and critique and

- wild Ukrainians will establish their misogynist Cossack settlements settlements Cossack misogynist their establish will Ukrainians wild

, established in 1965, established in inNoviSad. all, unpredictability. Serbs, Croats and Bosnians [...] will balkanize will [...] Bosnians and Croats Serbs, unpredictability. all, - É lysées, Bulgarian bear tamers will show their tricks in in tricks their show will tamers bear Bulgarian lysées, . Végel is one of the most prominent representatives prominent most the of one is Végel . - called Eastern enlargement of the EU, he ridicul he EU, the of enlargement Eastern called 49

and fervently praying Poles will ravage the the ravage will Poles praying fervently and

looks like: Gypsies will come and and come will Gypsies like: looks

–

their national feature is is feature national their Hungarian minority, Hungarian

oad the towards 103 acclaimed

treated - garde ed

CEU eTD Collection ok oe a ecutr ifrn rgoa lbl: eta Erp, atr Erp, East Europe, Eastern Europe, Central labels: regional different encounter can one works history. or literature politics, about writings his in occasionally, rather concept the with deals He Europe. Central to entirely devoted is them of East none Yet, commentaries. or Central to refers he Nonetheless, Regénybe Pikareszk title: the in even term the bears prose the considers He Balkans. the as labelled is n Yet region. wide the of countries the treats the perceived he how to contrary however terms, the defines he post entire the describe to assumingly sense, East pointofthe reference. I conflicts. into fell which Balkans, the in developments negative the to contrary 1989, after countries European the describe to order nation successive with it and Empire Habsburg the Central hand, one the On way. positive most the in treats Végel that one is Europe Central terms, regional various among that seems also Austro landsof historical the of equivalent an as usually Europe Central them Central or Europe Central - Central Europe or Eastern Europe when he wants to refer to the region in a broader broader a in region the to refer to wants he when Europe Eastern or Europe Central quite O in texts his of One writings. Végel‟s in often very appears Europe Central term The hr einl label regional ther e te lbl nurly as neutrally, labels other se

nossety Hwvr one However, inconsistently. n any case, Central Europe is a is Europe Central case, any n

[The Great Central Great [The successful path of democratization and economic reforms in the Central the in reforms economic and democratization of path successful -

states. On the other hand, in some of his essays, he applies this term in in term this applies he essays, his of some in hand, other the On states. - Eastern Europe. The author does not define these terms and uses uses and terms these define not does author The Europe. Eastern s mc mr isiig n itrsig iest, n comparison in diversity, interesting and inspiring more much s

o not do ot all of them, because a big part of the former Yugoslavia former the of part big a because them, of all ot posses - egahcl r oiia trs ecmasn the encompassing terms, political or geographical Eastern ng Közép nagy A recurrence uh pos a such -

lands of the the of lands 50 communis Europe symbolizes the lost multiculturalism of multiculturalism lost the symbolizes Europe - eta Erp mil i hs sas and essays his in mainly Europe Central

- European Feast Enters a Picaresque Novel] Picaresque a Enters Feast European

definitely positive term, no matter what matter no term, positive definitely

a b noti be can i t area t ie enn. ée ue trs like terms uses Végel meaning. tive - old federation old Kelet

in Europe in - uóa Lkm bvnl a bevonul Lakoma Európai notion of notion ced. He employs the term term the employs He ced. - Hungarian Empire. It It Empire. Hungarian

. Neither in this case this in Neither . as belonging to two two to belonging as Central Europe, he Europe, Central

Across Végel‟s Across

is - . CEU eTD Collection e bevs ih orw h dsperne f h multilin the of disappearance the sorrow with observes He Yugoslavia. of demise the after years, past the in especially endangered became but region, Centralconsider Europeanatthe or betweenCentralborder theEurope and Balkans. Austria to belonged previously it into Balkans the in Partly regions. different 106 vegel 105 honor ofMr Tišma], in in shop pastry Dornstädter the renovate to wished Schmitz Rudolf Mr Sad, Novi through [Passing cukrászdát,” 104 that Thecity Sad. Novi of tragedy the about writes Hence,Végel state. homogenous relatively a in time this but minority, a of member again now is he was), Yugoslavia (as country diverse himself. for place V for experience everyday an became statelessness of sense the conflict, the during Later, patriot.” “stateless a himself call to used he autonomy, larger a granted “anexciting cultural Hungary, being Babylon.” Yugoslav him For lived in. actually he which in period, Yugoslavian the or epoch, Habsburg the recollects nostalgically culture.” European Central a called is that something with rupture radical “a is which

Végel, “East European Savages,” 4. László Végel László L sl Vgl “at uoen aae, Erzn, 7.10.2008, Eurozine, Savages,” European “East Végel, ászló - en.pdf égel V . As a member of Hungarian minority in Vojvodina, a province which in 1974 was was 1974 in which province a Vojvodina, in minority Hungarian of member a As venture.” aEuropean intellectual wasanexciting challenge, diversity wonderful their with cultures Balkan and European Central Mediterranean, of conjuncture the Yugoslavia “[he] Cen As hemaintains,1980s inthe

égel and local patriotism became absurd. The “stateless local patriot” could not find the the find not could patriot” local “stateless The absurd. became patriotism local and , 3. rl uoe o Vgl yblzs h mliutrl utr ta peald n the in prevailed that culture multicultural the symbolizes Végel for Europe tral

tl hrord cer harboured still , “Rudolf Schmitz úr Újvidéken átutazva Tišma úr tiszteletére renoválni kívánja a Dornstädter a kívánja renoválni tiszteletére úr Tišma átutazva Újvidéken úr Schmitz “Rudolf , ak fr ntne bu sm o te iis f h fre Ygsai which Yugoslavia former the of cities the of some about instance for talks

From being part of a of part being From Élet ésIrodalom a rsre sm o te utcluaim hrceitc f Austria of characteristic multiculturalism the of some preserved ia

tain illusions, not surprisingly, as for very many of us across across us of many very for as surprisingly, not illusions, tain -

ugr, uh a such Hungary,

19 (2001). ,

partly minority in a multinational, culturally and religiously and culturally multinational, a in minority

influenced by Central Europe, or even included even or Europe, Central by influenced 106

s Ljubljana http://www.eurozine.com/pdf/2008 ul n mliutrl Nov multicultural and gual Zge ad oi Sad Novi and Zagreb ,

hmls) oi a local Sad Novi (homeless) 105

ht he that 104 - 10 Sad i

- He 07 - -

CEU eTD Collection “As a matter of fact, it is only since its disintegration that I really started to understand the understand to started really I that disintegration its since only is it fact, of matter a “As Austria the of citizens former many that feeling the to similar homelessn and statelessness of sense his describes He difference.” nameof the in Balkans the Europe and Central of point meeting the at born was which paradigm Sad Novi special the question into the broke eventually Zagreb and Ljubljana inevitable was Sad Novi of balkanization “the However,regions. the in 1990s situated is 109 108 (Spring 2001). 107 more and more ethnically becomes West The continent. the of be world to gone forgood. he Dornstädter, visits he dreams his in and past the about nostalgic is Végel Although times. old the to back narrator the shop pastry cukrászdát the renovate to plan a presents Dornstädter a kívánja renoválni tiszteletére úr Tišma átutazva story short his In “Athens”. as 1990s the in renamed eventually first was shop coffee The country. the stroke that waves ideological different to according times, few a renamed was and 1945, after it lost eventually spirit.” 20 the of part big a throughout which Sad, Empire.”Austro−Hungarian sens Roth's Joseph writer

Végel, “Egy hontalan lokálpatrióta.” Végel, “East European Savages,” 4. ázó ée, Ey otln lokálp Hontalan “Egy Végel, László 109 Finally, Végel reflects on the relation between the West and the Central or Eastern part Easternor Central theWest relation theand between reflects onthe Végel Finally, his In

h peie eand t caatr n h itra Kndm f uolva but Yugoslavia, of Kingdom interwar the in character its retained premise The “on the edge of Central Europe and the Balkans,” combined the traits of both both of traits the combined Balkans,” the and Europe Central of edge the “on

–

various Végel himself Végel

is also aware of the current circumstances and considers the Central European Central the considers and circumstances current the of aware also is

essays there is a recurring example of a Dornstädter pastry shop in Novi Novi in shop pastry Dornstädter a of example recurring a is there essays e of homelessness and statelessness following the dissolution of the the of dissolution the following statelessness and homelessness of e

108 –

dissuades him from doing that, explaining that there is no way no is there that explaining that, doing from him dissuades

atrióta,” [Homeless local patriot], in Magyar Lettre Internationale 40 40 Internationale Lettre Magyar in patriot], local [Homeless atrióta,”

107 Danubian balance. The disintegration of Yugoslavia called called Yugoslavia of disintegration The balance. Danubian

– and restore luster of the old Dornstädter. However, Dornstädter. old the of luster restore and

the fact that it no longer belonged to the same state as as state same the to belonged longer no it that fact the th 52

century “evoked a pleasant pleasant a “evoked century

ess after the demise of Yugoslavia as Yugoslavia of demise the after ess

called Moscow, than Zagreb, to be be to Zagreb, than Moscow, called - Hungary had, after its demise. its after had, Hungary diverse, whereas in the other other the in whereas diverse, Rudolf Schmitz úr Újvidéken úr Schmitz Rudolf eta European Central M Schmitz Mr , CEU eTD Collection emerging West the withthe in starting p been only has into born were we what West: the of ahead was Yugoslavia multiculturalism, are formerly Paris the diverse, more and ever ethnically become Berlin London, of megalopolises western the „While disappearing. of process continent the of parts 111 110 partoft last community. a make not do They describe ofCentralEurope bysome authors idea was also Europe. Central of concept the of understanding and uses of polyphony the is authors C transition. to

Végel, “East European Savages,” 3 Végel, “East European Savages,” 4.

elc aot h drcin ta te icus dvlpd n h 18s ok fe the after took 1980s the in developed discourse the that directions the about reflect unn ehial homogeneous.” ethnically turning These various standpoints, presented in the selection of es of selection the in presented standpoints, various These

their private, particular private, their he thesis ertainly, they do not form a coherent narrativ coherent a form not do they ertainly, Further findings and comparison of the essays analyzed above are included in the in included are above analyzed essays the of comparison and findings Further

ny political claim, political ny -

that is –

East in the in the conclusions.

- eta Erp ad h Balkans the and Europe Central -

4. experiences and their emotional attitude towards the region. region. the towards attitude emotional their and experiences

110 ast ast two decades.” nor do nor

eoe oee, we i cm t implementing to came it „when however, Before 53 they

in a way in a nationally motley small cities of the East the of cities small motley nationally promote 111

„privatized.” „privatized.” e. What is characteristic for these for characteristic is What e.

any idea of a Central European Central a of idea any – says of eight authors, allow authors, eight of says

multiculturalism is in the the in is multiculturalism The concept is used to usedto The conceptis

The The CEU eTD Collection canonic the of most to Contrary region. the in politics and history identity, on debate the animated Europe Central on discourse of domain a remained Neither 1989. after disappeared Conclusions different was Europe Central term the of East texts: Hungarian the in be rather would it appeared, Europe Central than other terms if essays these Czechs Polish the of lands the evokes Central term the use to tended has scholarship Polish essays. these observe distinction the Interestingly, discourse. Polish and Hungarian the in term the of rootedness the proves mind their to first comes intuitively that notion a be to seems Europe Central term. the scholars not are them of Most Europe. Central the of discourse. aspect “othering” the concerning especially them, between differences significant trai main its and Europe Central term the pre of use the the as (such in discourse similarity the demonstrated also They approach. Hungarian other the against region pos the and region the of features the Europe, Central term the of meaning the questions research main the to Answers readership. local the for intended languages, ) prefer the shorter form of Central Europe, reflecting the Habsburg lands. However, in However, lands. Habsburg the Europe, reflecting Central formof shorter preferthe ) As for the term itself, authors writing after 1989 have usually stuck to the notion of notion the to stuck usually have 1989 after writing authors itself, term the for As and relevance its lost not has Europe Central of concept foremost,the and First al texts of the pre the of texts al -

Central Europe (Végel) or Central or (Végel) Europe Central

d in many academic works of the two countries has not been reflected in reflected been not has countries two the of works academic many in d

nelcul, e n lne i eie r negon. oevr the Moreover, underground. or exile in longer no yet intellectuals, - 99dsore tesbeun esy wr rte n h native the in written were essays subsequent the discourse, 1989 –

eeld sgiiat eebac bten h Pls and Polish the between resemblance significant a revealed - had Lithuanian Commonwealth, whereas Hungarians (similarly to (similarly Hungarians whereas Commonwealth, Lithuanian did

not anymore aimed at the Western public, it has rather rather has it public, Western the at aimed anymore not it ma it ke

n aiu txs O te n hn, Czyżewski, hand, one the On texts. various in a great career, though. Similarly to the 1980s, it 1980s, the to Similarly though. career, great a 54 -

Eastern Europe (Kiss). (Kiss). Europe Eastern and do not systematically reflect on the use of use the on reflect systematically not do and

- Howev Eastern Europe which which Europe Eastern ts), yet it identified it yet ts), -

er n post and itioning of the the of itioning , the meaning the , – , has not has

which - about about 1989 1989 CEU eTD Collection vn huh e lis ht eta Erp i ol a oe ahoal nto t describe to notion fashionable more a only is Europe Central that claims he though Even po whole the probably describing Europe, Eastern and Europe Central landsofthe former the Austro the used Végel and Makłowicz including post the all practically Europe, Central of definition wide a employed Grendel and Kiss Fiut, Stasiuk, (Esterh discourse 1980s‟ the of critical strongly Esterh experienced personally has them of each why is that 1963, and 1941 between born were authors analyzed All experience. fresh regio the of trait common a as recalled often particularly totalitarianisms two w region the 20 the in continent, especially history, by the experienced of parts other to compared Europe: Central constitutes This region. the of history turbulent the instance, for out, point them of all Hence, thes theessays.in all prevails Europe Central term the general, In case. isolated an quite a is this however empire, occur instance for Makłowicz of works the in 1980s, the in unpopular quite was that term the Mitteleuropa, (Stasiuk). Europe My use they instance, actually is which terminology over debate a Esterh term. former the to rather sticks eventually he Europe, Eastern is follow to a large extent their predecessors from the 1980s‟ Central European debate. European Central 1980s‟ the from predecessors their extent large a to follow is ázy, n em o faue caatrsi fr eta Erp, h atos nlzd n the in analyzed authors the Europe, Central for characteristic features of terms In terms the uses interchangeably who Esterházy, by taken is approach separate A

h ae ihr significan either are who

alternative notions, such as Other Europe (Czyżewski, Stasiuk) or simply simply or Stasiuk) (Czyżewski, Europe Other as such notions, alternative –

- fascism and communism. As a matter of fact, the communist system is is system communist the fact, of matter a As communism. and fascism communist countries between Germany and Russia. On the other hand, other the On Russia. and Germany between countries communist - Hungarian Empire. term ie ne te system the under life

Central Europe Central l dtce fo te rvos eae (tsu) or (Stasiuk) debates previous the from detached tly s in a positive sense, as a synonym for the Habsburg Habsburg the for synonym a as sense, positive a in s th 55

century when Central Europe was affected by affected was Europe Central when century ht m what

ázy), the view of an intense and somewhat somewhat and intense an of view the ázy),

in a narrower sense, basically to denote denote to basically sense, narrower a in n ohr uhr tne t d. For do. to tended authors other any Ee i te sas f tsu and Stasiuk of essays the in Even . n, since it is a more recent and still still and recent more a is it since n, ázy tries in fact to avoid avoid to fact in tries ázy st - communist region. region. communist s particularly as CEU eTD Collection variety of cultures, religions and languages appears in the works of practically all the authors. the all practically of works the in appears languages and religions cultures, of variety the to reference The peculiarity. region‟s the as considered multiculturalism, of perception resemblance. subject a than rather history, of object an countri these of persists region the of history accelerated Inaddi more andless byculture. global flattened the authentic findstheperiphery Stasiuk instance, For asset. an as Europe Central of provincialism the perceive authors some hand, respons a such identify They country. a of superiority and uniqueness claiming to leads and megalomania national Esterh and Fiut hand, one the On “forgotten” the restoring of agenda traditions and cultureof the dialogue. the with diversity European Central bygone the to uniformity. and homogeneity the than cre and interesting more as traditions and religions languages, groups, ethnic nations, value a actually is multiculturalism authors these of char is region nation of uniformity with Austro of religions and nations different of coexistence multicult past the of nostalgia valid remains which region, the of feature past a as mainly it consider They diversity. cultural of vanishing the sorrow with out multic European Central on perspectives their However, Most of the authors also mentio also authors the of Most 19 the in debate the from “inherited” authors these that trait Another

acteristic also to the works of Czyżewski, Fiut, Makłowicz and Kiss. and Makłowicz Fiut, Czyżewski, of works the to also acteristic es –

a lability of borders, oppression by foreign powers and the sense of being being of sense the and powers foreign by oppression borders, of lability a e to e - tt ta floe. otli t te utntoa sae o the of states multinational the to Nostalgia followed. that state the the inferiority complex as distinctive for the region. On the other the On region. the for distinctive as complex inferiority rls i dslyd y ée, h dsrbs h peaceful the describes who Végel, by displayed is uralism ázy nowadays only to a certain a to only nowadays

Moreover, some of them, like Czyżewski or Kiss, refer refer Kiss, or Czyżewski like them, ofsome Moreover, n the status of periphery as typical of Central Europe. Central of typical as periphery of status the n stress that the complex of being a periphery causes causes periphery a being of complex the that stress . The awareness of the difficult historical experience historical difficult the of awareness The . – 56

togy nlecs hi feig f regional of feeling their influences strongly

- e se per ulturalism differ. Many of them point them of Many differ. ulturalism Hungary and Yugoslavia, contrasted Yugoslavia, and Hungary te prev te ait of variety the perceive they ,

extent. A particularly strong strong particularly A extent. 0 i the is 80s For many many For ative tion, CEU eTD Collection community V Grendel, thesis the witha potentialland particular yettobediscovered. cent the while is periphery in leaving those of advantage the different.degree large a to however is authors analyzed the of response The “Easterners the and “Westerners” the between encounters of intensification the and borders diminished probably although valid, still is Wollf, by discussed aptly so East, the of construct The region. their towards West the of disrespect even or neglect, level. a supranational as region the define would Sovietopposed to Russia or Unionwhich cancausearecreation ofthe chauvinismnational on Europe Central of proponents the of many when discourse, recreat not does it more, is What character. anti significant a has Europe Central on discourse the Overall, boundaries. national limited the be to forinstanceabout hardly Hewrites whichcan Carpathianculture context. the t that territories many of composed as region the original perceives his perspective, from Stasiuk, minorities. national and ethnic the of coexistence peaceful the framework, regional use they approachpromote to cooperation thenations, between aswell as of legitimacy the assert Kiss and Czyżewski dialogue Although the nations. advocate the to between order in framework supranational the apply Others particular. all they wi Makłowicz, Sim on Finally, og o te utntoa ette ta eitd n h rgo, Austro region, the in existed that entities multinational the for long

is lry o h dsore bu 18s cneprr authors contemporary 1980s, about discourse the to ilarly whereas Hungary, in live not do they but origin, by Hungarians are two first The . égel the re is unaware of the periphery. Czyżewski in turn perceives the periphery as a as periphery the perceives turn in Czyżewski periphery. the of unaware is re th his mixed ancestry, feels that that feels ancestry, mixed his th

and attempt to go beyond the national narrative. For different reasons, though. reasons, different For narrative. national the beyond go to attempt e of e

Makłowicz can hardy perceive themselves as members of one national one of members as themselves perceive hardy can Makłowicz

the main common denominator common main the e the identity politics as in the case of the 1980s‟ 1980s‟ the of case the in as politics identity the e 57

one national context restricts him. Therefore, Therefore, him. restricts context national one that

hy nw vrtig bu te centre, the about everything know they s

for the post the for - 198 due to due 9 essays analyzed in analyzed essays 9 also asrs national ransgress They rarely prove rarely They

the openi the point out the the out point - the the ugr in Hungary - nationalist national ng of ng . ”

CEU eTD Collection ifrnit ter onre fo te orr r ntbe ein (uh s h Blas an Balkans the as (such regions unstable or poorer the from countries their differentiate post the from politicians U Soviet and Europe Eastern from emancipating of effort The other. the to approach the is 1989, after and globalization anduniformity oppose. whichthey that a by understood even Westerner. be hardly can which groups ethnic and nations little of multitude such by characterized is Europe Central that adds Stasiuk West. the from Europe Central precis sometimes or region, the of particularity the underline this fact in that or culture Western the of posses region this that prove longer no do authors Analyzed 1980s. the from homogenous perhaps ofits or onthe entity, basis richest metropolies. perspective this in striking is Sta (Makłowicz, boring eventually but rational, and organized perfectly as portray often they which West, the than inspiring and interesting more simply is region this authors uniq a possesses Europe Central Hence, decades. few a since only it experienced has which West the them For West. be more Balkans, attributing meaningto positive the former. hardly can approach the and Europe Central such between difference the emphasizes essays Végel László Only analyzedencountered. the in states), successor Union Soviet

the e nweg ta cud e ple eswee Cyesi Ks, V Kiss, (Czyżewski, elsewhere applied be could that knowledge ue In this sense, the contemporary Central European discourse is the inversion of the the of inversion the is discourse European Central contemporary the sense, this In other the mentioning If before from discourses the between difference significant most the probably is What are y

in s tpcl o te icus o te 90, em t b oe. Although over. be to seems 1980s, the of discourse the for typical so nion,

at n h Wsen utr. h Ws bcms fo becomes West The culture. Western the in part ,

Central Europe is a region that knew multiculturalism for ages, contrary to contrary ages, for multiculturalism knew that region a is Europe Central - communist states sometimes used the concept of Central Europe to Europe Central of concept the used sometimes states communist at all, the es the all, at

s smlsi ve o te et prevd s sr of sort a as perceived West, the of view simplistic a is is a part of the West that was “stolen.” was that West the of part a is sayists examined in this thesis this in examined sayists 58

ely these traits that distinguish that traits these ely

te a ybl of symbol a them r

usually mention the the mention usually ses égel

many features features many

). For other other For ). They rather They siuk). What siuk). one one d CEU eTD Collection lo A works. literary and essayism the in only not observed be can Europe Central on discourse the Moreover, occasionally. employed is concept the where European, Central considered from as well discourse Slovak and Czech essays, other of variety a include could research in HungarianandPolishgrounded the discourse. i translated were texts the of some country, particular the of readership the by acclaimed often were They houses. publishing appeared essays these phenomenon large mentioned firstchapter. inthe t of material to analyze this analyze to material of Nevertheless, th Certainly, uti, ugra Cota Rmna Urie n ohr onre ls often less countries other and Ukraine Romania, Croatia, Bulgaria, Austria, . As already As . e

this does not mean that the discourse on Central Europe i Europe Central on discourse the that mean not does this set of authors anal authors of set usually

hc is which

discourse could be found in newspapers and blogs, as already already as blogs, and newspapers in found be could discourse argued

n h mjr aaie o wr ise b the by issued were or magazines major the in nto other languages of the region. the of languages other nto , it it ,

also yzed in the thesis the in yzed rath

bnat n h ltrtr o Cnrl uoe as Europe, Central on literature the in abundant er 59 remained

also

from

a domain of intellectuals. However, intellectuals. of domain a different national contexts, like the like contexts, national different w as

selected subjectively. selected This proves that the that proves This s a particularly a s popular Further y are y

CEU eTD Collection Czyżewski, Krzysztof. Czyżewski, Krzysztof. pogranicza, “CzasCzyżewski, Krzysztof. [Time prowincji” province]. the for In zp Powrotu.Zapiski “PowrótCzyżewski, Krzysztof. [Comeback EuropyŚrodkowej” ofCentral Europe].In Primary literature Bibliography Abszurdisztán Lajos.Grendel, “Közép z Spotkania Innym. Aleksander. Fiut, 2006. Literackie, Aleksander. Fiut, European]. Aleksander. Fiut, 2004. Magvető, nehézszabadság mámora. cikkek, Válogatottesszék, 1996 Péter. művészkém!”Esterházy, “Úgy kell rúgni, [That‟showwe myartist], kick, dear In följegyezés Péter. Esterházy, “A másként [Cells growdifferently]. nőttsejtek” In 1994. Budapest: Magvető, [Clown‟s Péter. In Esterházy, “Bohóctréfa” joke]. awound, Europe as mistake, vagueness, chance Péter. Esterházy, “Közép byRadosław Wrocław:Ossolineum,edited Zenderowski, 2004. [Intercultural dialogue in Cent “DialogCzyżewski, Krzysztof. międzykulturowy wregionie Europy Środkowej” zpogranicza, Zapiski [ The Atlantis ComplexThe Atlantis orCentralEurope after the endoftheworld] In eiből Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie, Wydawnictwo Literackie, 1999. Kraków:

55 , 4

- 64. Sejny:Pogranicze, 2008. , 195

11. Pozsony: Kalligram11. Pozsony: Könyv “ “ B Widziane z Wstęp” In [Introduction],

245

ć ab ne y) Środkowoeuropejczykiem być) nie (albo yć ogranicza, -

197. Kiadó,1994. Budapest: Magvető 65 - - “Kompleks Atlantydy,, “Kompleks Europa Atlantydy,, czyli Środkowapokońcy 252. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie,2006. 252. Kraków: Európa és kísirtetei”[Central phantoms].Európa és Europeandits In - - 73. Sejny: 73. Sejny: Pogranicze, 2008. Európa mint seb,homály, esély hiba, ésreménytelenség” [Central

ral Europe].ral In e środka Europy” of[Seen Centre from Europe],In the

43 - 54. Pogranicze, Sejny: 2008.

Spotkania z Innym. Europa Środkowa: wspólnota czy zbiorowość? czy Europa Środkowa:wspólnota 60

kiadó, 1998. kiadó, and despondency]. Egy kékharisnya följegyezéseiből Egy kékharisnya

– 2003,

- 102 B (r o t b) Central be) to not (Or [Be 8. Kraków: Wydawnictwo 8. Kraków: Helikon Linia Powrotu. Zapiski z Linia Powrotu.Zapiski Egy kékharisnya - 106. Budapest: 106. Budapest:

Linia Powrotu.Linia

14 (2009).

świata” świata” , 276 Hazám, Hazám,

Linia Linia - A 278. , CEU eTD Collection Centrum 20 Kultury, 2002). pamięci”Kiss, CsabaGy. wspólnej “Miejsca ofcollective [Places memory] published (first in a Kiss, CsabaGy. morva himnusz, Kiss, CsabaGy. “Közép Abszurdisztán Lajos.Grendel, “Közép http://www.eurozine.com/pdf/2008 EuropeanVégel, László.“East Savages.” 40 Internationale [HomelessVégel, László.“EgyHontalan lokálpatrióta” patriot].In local http://mozgovilag.com/?p=4338 Serbia Végel, László.“Levelek Szerbiából shop Dornstädterpastry the inhonorof Tišma]. Mr a Dornstädter cukrászdá átutazvaVégel, László.“RudolfSchmitz Újvidéken Tišma úr tiszteletére úr renoválni kívánja Andrzej. Stasiuk, Andrzej. Stasiuk, Andruchowycz(Jurij andStasiuk), 85 Andrzej Andrzej. Stasiuk, “Dziennik okrętowy” [Logbook]. In Robert.Makłowicz, http://www. prejudices]. nation, Kiss, CsabaGy. “Közép nd skethes]. Kraków:Międzynarodowe Centrum2009. Kultury, – In

Balkan and Lekcja Europy Środkowej. Esejei szkice deol.hu/disputa/2009/Disputa_09 , 43

51 Lekcja Europy Środkowej. Eseje iszkice EuropyŚrodkowej. Lekcja - Jadąc doBabadag Fado (Spring 2001). 52. Pozsony: Kalligram52. Pozsony: 1998. Könyvkiadó, - 53. RációBudapest: Kiadó, 2009. Debreceni Disputa:Debreceni kulturális Café Museum Central Europeanparadigms]. 09. . Wołowiec: 2006.Czarne, - t” [Passing Rudolf throughNovi to Schmitz Sad,Mr wished renovate - - Európai polgár” [“Central European Európai In citizen”].

Európa és azőjelképei” Európa és [Central Europeanditssymbols]. In Európa, nemzetképek, Európa, nemzetképek, előítéletek.” [CentralEurope, images ofthe

(read 25.03.2012) . Wołowiec:Czarne, 2010. - 10 – [Travelling Wołowiec:[Travelling to Babadag]. 2004.Czarne,

balkáni ésközépbalkáni - 07 - Eurozine vegel - 61 07.pdf - 157.Wołowiec: Czarne, 2 -

en.pdf, (retrieved6.05.2012). -

, 151 . közéleti folyóirat , 7.10.2008,

Mozgó Világ Mozgó Élet ésIrodalomÉlet .

Dwa eseje oEuropie zwanejśrodkową Dwaeseje - - európai paradigmák.”from [Lettres 157. Kraków: Międzynarodowe . [Lesson Europe. ofCentral Essays

(Március 2011),

7 (2009): 4

19 (2001). Magyar LettreMagyar 000. Hazám,

8. A

CEU eTD Collection Delanty, Gerard Kse Delanty, and TheorySocial Arnason, JohannP.“Introduction.Demarcating CentralEast Europe.” Wołowiec: 2000.Czarne, oEuropie zwanej eseje “Środkowowschodnierewizje”Andruchowycz, Jurij. [Central Eastern Revisions]. Secondary literature 2007. Literackie, Maria. Janion, 1815 Catherine. Horel, 1950. Oskar. Halecki, 1991. (ed.) R. Stephen Graubard, Europe], andMonarchy Central Gang Europe.” 18(1999).March Central of Puzzle “The Timothy. Ash, Garton Octob exists?” Europe Central “Does Timothy. Ash, Garton 2008. wieku XX narracjach S Andrzej of Andruchowycza.” Jurija i Stasiuka Aleksander. Fiut, 1998. Press, Cambridge University PostDesign in Elster, Jon, KlausClaus OffeUlrich Central Preuss. “Mapping and Europe.” in ofSocialTheory European Journal 11 - , Gábor. ó,

2004. er 9(1986).er

Paris: Beauchesne,Paris: 2009. tasiuk and Yurij Andrukhovych] In Andrukhovych] Yurij and tasiuk

8 (2005): 387 - Communist Societies: Rebuilding ismwt Słowiańszczyzna Niesamowita h Lmt ad iiin o Erpa History European of Divisions and Limits The

“

Cette Europe qu’on dit centrale. dit qu’on Europe Cette sehz Ptr oacij é Közép és Monarchiája Péter Esterházy “ ort o uoy Środkowej? Europy do Powrót

eie b Hna ok n Bżn Karwowska. Bożena and Gosk Hanna by edited , środkową nija Vidmarnija

- 400. atr Erp.. eta Erp.. Europe Europe... Central Europe... Eastern

Magyar Lettre Internationale Lettre Magyar

(Jurij Andruchowycz and Andrzej Stasiuk), (Jurij Andruchowycz andAndrzej

[Comeback of Central Europe? Variations on the writings writings the on Variations Europe? Central of [Comeback -

Horvat. “MitteleuropaHorvat. and European the Heritage.”

(2008): 203(2008): 62

Srne lvo] Kaó: Wydawnictwo Kraków: Slavdom]. [Strange (Nie)obecność the ShipatSeathe

- Des Habsbourg à l’intégration européenne l’intégration à Habsbourg Des 218.

aice a ea psrta Andrzeja pisarstwa temat na Wariacje

h Nw ok eiw f ok 35 Books of Review York New The h Nw ok eiw f Books of Review York New The - 56 Európája.” . , 35 Pominięcia i przemilczenia w przemilczenia i Pominięcia Lno: he ad Ward, and Sheed London: . (2005): (2005): 39 - 62, Cambridge: European Journal of [ asaa Elipsa, Warszawa: , Westview Press, Press, Westview , ée Esterházy‟s Péter - 42. 7 - Institutional

82.

I n Dwa , , CEU eTD Collection i, aio “aitos n h tee f eta Europe.” Central of theme the on “Variations Danilo. Kiš, Great “The płaskostopiem, Aleksander. Kaczorowski, 54. Europe,” Central of rediscovery “The Tony. Judt, no. 1 Romania.”and Hungary in Poland, over geography symbolic debates B and Janowski Maciej Constantin, Iordachi, Europe.”Central Neuba European Culture Attitudes.” European “Central Czesław. Miłosz, and BożenaKarwowska. In Stasiuk”] Andrzej of prose the in (Ni Europe Central of mythology New Europe. [“Other Piotr. Millati, Wigen. E. Kären and Metageogr W. Martin Lewis, 38. Europe.” Central of Tragedy “The Milan. Kundera, History L Kontler, European5 of Central Culture György. Konrád, 1 Culture György. Konrád, Central and http://www.tygielkultury.eu/4_6_2006/aneks/01.pdf Europe Środkow Europą Central “Między F. Adam Kola, EuropeanCentral Culture 6

e )obecność - 2 (2005):5 e, on “hts n nm? itluoa Cnrl uoe Esen uoe East Europe, Eastern Europe, Central Mitteleuropa, name? a in “What‟s John. uer,

6 (1999):9

(1982): 12 á aphy. zó “nrdcin R “Introduction. szló. “ . Inna Europa Inna 209 oiica pzmlzna nrajc X wieku XX narracjach w przemilczenia i Pominięcia

- London, Berkeley, London, Berkeley, Los Angeles:University 1997. of Press, California Kakanien Revisited 58. “Is the Dream of Central Europe Still Alive?” Still Europe Central of Dream the “Is “Letter fro “Letter

5 - -

14. 223 (1986): 101 -

14.

Wołowiec: 2006.Czarne, Warszawa: 2008.Elipsa, .

(1987): 1 m Budapest.” Budapest.” m Nowa mitologia Europy Środkowej w prozie Andrzeja Stasiuka.” prozie w EuropyŚrodkowej mitologia Nowa

(1986): 109 - 108. fetos n yblc Geography.” Symbolic on eflections -

atr Europe]. Eastern (07.05.2003): 1 (07.05.2003):

- 14.

Cross Currents. A Yearbook of Central European Central of Yearbook A Currents. Cross 121. eta Erpa Side” In Swindle.” European Central a uoą Środkowo Europą a ą 63 alázs

h Mt o Cniet. Ciiu of Critique A Continents. of Myth The

Deadalus

Cross Currents. Currents. Cross . New York Review of Books 31 Books of Review York New Trencsényi. “Why bother abo bother “Why Trencsényi.

- 11.

yil utr 4 Kultury Tygiel vol 119, no.1 (Winter, 1990): 23 1990): (Winter, no.1 119, vol rs Cret. Yabo of Yearbook A Currents. Cross Cross Currents. A Yearbook A Currents. Cross , edited by Hanna Gosk Gosk Hanna by edited , Yabo o Central of Yearbook A East Central Europe Central East - Wschodnią” [Between [Between Wschodnią” uoen eiw of Review European

- ut regions : regions ut (1984): 33 (1984): 6 uoa z Europa 2006. ,

32, - - -

CEU eTD Collection Napvilág Kiadó,Budapest: 2007. Europe [Central Mária. Ormos, and Societies Other.” Constituting Europe‟s Central as “Russia B. Iver Neumann, Naumann, Friedrich. Disjunctures inthe19th and 2 John. Neubauer, Enlightenment Larry. Wolff, Balkans.” “Hierarchi N. Maria Todorova, EuropeanCentral Culture Them?” without or Utopias with World “A Milan. Šimečka, inSymbolic Boundaries NewEurope.” the Piotr. Sztompka, Szűcs, Jenő. Snel, Guido. Term.”Geographical Europe “Central Karl. Sinnhuber, Publishers, 1994. Schöpflin, Rupnik, Jean.“Central MitteleuropaEurope or Turda, 268 East in History Cultural Disseminating Workshop: the C and Patterns Cultural Europe: “Central Cristina. Petrescu, South European East Monitor - ere n Nny Wood. Nancy and George 280. Budapest: Central European Central 280. Budapest: University and Budapest,Europa Institute 1999. Vázlat Európa régiójárólVázlat háromtörténeti Fictionalized Autobiography andtheEurope ofCentral Idea , 7/2(Spring 1993). . Stanford:Stanford Press, University 1994.

Közép Inventing Eastern Europe. The Map of Civilization on the Mind of the the of Mind the on Civilization of Map The Europe. Eastern Inventing

– itr o te ieay utrs f East of Cultures Literary the of History

“ Was? Is? Will be? Changes of the conept in the 19th and 20th century] 20th and 19th the in conept the of Changes be? Will Is? Was? rm at uoen t Erpas Sitn Colle Shifting Europeans: to Europeans East From Central Europe - Transactions andTransactions Paper Európa

(1984): 21 0th Centuries, Volume0th Centuries, 2 –

Volt? Van? Lesz? A fogalom változásai a 19 a változásai fogalom A Lesz? Van? Volt?

s f atr Erp: at eta Erp Vru the Versus Europe Central East Europe: Eastern of es – . NewYork: Knopf, 1917. -

28. Mitteleuropa n erh f eta Europe Central of Search In

5 (1995).

European Review s 64 ?” , no. 20 (1954): , no.20(1954): 15

Daedalus

–

. Amsterdam: Benjamins, John 2004. (Budapest, 1983).

uoe etae A Aayi o a of Analysis An Centrale: Europe -

eta Europe Central

119/1 (1990). - ivil Society.” In Society.” ivil

Cross Currents 3. Currents Cross eta Erp: ucue and Junctures Europe: Central 12 (2004): 12 (2004): 481

- 39.

Rwa & Littlefield & Rowman . East European Politics European East

. Amsterdam, 2003. ctive Identities and and Identities ctive , edited by Marius Marius by edited , - 496. The Garden and Garden The - 20. Században. Században. 20. A Yearbook of Yearbook A