PECOB’S PAPERS

ISSN: 2038-632X SERIES

Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West

Deniver Vukelić

Ph.D. candidate in Croatian Culture Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb

JANUARYver.1.0 | Timestamp:2012 201201271219| #19

19www.pecob.eu PECOB’s Scientific Board About PECOB’s people is an ininterdisciplinaryterdiscirdisciplinplinaryary boboardardofdd of ddirectors,irector responsible for reviewing proposals and graphic design: mdelgatto.com accepting international high quality scien- –‹Ƥ ’‹‡ ‡•‘ˆ”‡•‡ƒ” Š™‹–Š–Š‡ƒ••‹•–ƒ ‡ of the Europe and the Balkans Interna- tional Network and the Association of Ital- ian Slavists. Ž›–Š‡• ‹‡–‹Ƥ ’ƒ’‡”•ƒ ‡’–‡†ƒˆ–‡”ƒ blind review process will be published in the portal. ‡„‡”•‘ˆ–Š‡ ‹‡–‹Ƥ ‘ƒ”†‘ˆ‹”‡ - tors are: Ȉ–‡ˆƒ‘‹ƒ Š‹‹ȋ Ȍ Ȉ ”ƒ ‡• ‘”‹˜‹–‡”ƒȋ Ȍ Ȉƒ” ‡ŽŽ‘ ƒ”œƒ‹–‹ȋ Ȍ Ȉ–‡ˆƒ‘ ƒ”œ‘‹‘ȋ Ȍ

PECOB’s Editorial Staff selectssellectts andand bbrbringsiinggs ttogetheroggetthher tthehe ththinkinginkin of distinguished scholars, scholars experts, experts rre- •‡ƒ” Š‡”•ƒ†‰‡‡”‹ —•‡”•‘‡–”ƒŽǦƒ•–‡”—”‘’‡ǡ–Š‡ƒŽƒ”‡‰‹‘ƒ†–Š‡‘•–- ‘˜‹‡–•’ƒ ‡ǡ„› ‘ŽŽ‡ –‹‰• ‹‡–‹Ƥ ƒ†‹ˆ‘”ƒ–‹‘†‘ —‡–•Ǥ Ms Aurora Domeniconi ‹• ‘‘”†‹ƒ–‘”‘ˆ–Š‡†‹–‘”‹ƒŽ–ƒơǤ‘— ƒ ‘–ƒ –Š‡”ˆ‘”‰‡‡”ƒŽ”‡“—‡•–•ǡ ‘—‹- cations concerning conferences and events, courses, academic calls and contents for the ˆ‘”ƒ–‹˜‡”‡ƒǡ’”‘’‘•ƒŽ•ƒ†•—„‹••‹‘‘ˆ• ‹‡–‹Ƥ  ‘–”‹„—–‹‘•ˆ‘”–Š‡ ‹‡–‹Ƥ  Library. [email protected] Mr Michele Tempera ‹•”‡•’‘•‹„Ž‡‘ˆ–Š‡‡ –‹‘—•‹‡•• —‹†‡Ǥ‘— ƒ ‘–ƒ –Š‹ˆ‘” ‘—‹ ƒ–‹‘• concerning the economic and business section. [email protected] Mr Massimiliano Del Gatto ‹•–Š‡™‡„ƒ•–‡”ƒ†Š‡ƒ†‘ˆ‰”ƒ’Š‹ †‡•‹‰ƒ†’”‘‰”ƒ‹‰Ǥ‘— ƒ ‘–ƒ –Š‹ˆ‘” ‘—‹ ƒ–‹‘•”‡Žƒ–‡†–‘‰”ƒ’Š‹ Žƒ›‘—–ǡ„”‡ƒ†‘™•‹˜‹•—ƒŽ‹œ‹‰’ƒ‰‡•‘”‹- correct functioning, as well as for technical details and requirements of contributions. [email protected]@unibo.it PECOB’s Scientific Board is an ininterdisciplinaryterdiscirdisciplinplinaryary boboardardofdd of ddirectors,irector responsible for reviewing proposals and graphic design: mdelgatto.com accepting international high quality scien- –‹Ƥ ’‹‡ ‡•‘ˆ”‡•‡ƒ” Š™‹–Š–Š‡ƒ••‹•–ƒ ‡ of the Europe and the Balkans Interna- tional Network and the Association of Ital- ian Slavists. Ž›–Š‡• ‹‡–‹Ƥ ’ƒ’‡”•ƒ ‡’–‡†ƒˆ–‡”ƒ blind review process will be published in the portal. ‡„‡”•‘ˆ–Š‡ ‹‡–‹Ƥ ‘ƒ”†‘ˆ‹”‡ - tors are: Ȉ–‡ˆƒ‘‹ƒ Š‹‹ȋ Ȍ Censorship in Yugoslavia between Ȉ ”ƒ ‡• ‘”‹˜‹–‡”ƒȋ Ȍ Ȉƒ” ‡ŽŽ‘ ƒ”œƒ‹–‹ȋ Ȍ 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Ȉ–‡ˆƒ‘ ƒ”œ‘‹‘ȋ Ȍ Stalin and West

PECOB’s Editorial Staff selectssellectts anandd bbrbringsiinggs ttogetheroggetthher tthehe ththinkinginkin of distinguished scholars, scholars experts, experts rre- •‡ƒ” Š‡”•ƒ†‰‡‡”‹ —•‡”•‘‡–”ƒŽǦƒ•–‡”—”‘’‡ǡ–Š‡ƒŽƒ”‡‰‹‘ƒ†–Š‡‘•–- ‘˜‹‡–•’ƒ ‡ǡ„› ‘ŽŽ‡ –‹‰• ‹‡–‹Ƥ ƒ†‹ˆ‘”ƒ–‹‘†‘ —‡–•Ǥ Ms Aurora Domeniconi Deniver Vukelić ‹• ‘‘”†‹ƒ–‘”‘ˆ–Š‡†‹–‘”‹ƒŽ–ƒơǤ‘— ƒ ‘–ƒ –Š‡”ˆ‘”‰‡‡”ƒŽ”‡“—‡•–•ǡ ‘—‹- cations concerning conferences and events, courses, academic calls and contents for the Ph.D. candidate in Croatian Culture Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb ˆ‘”ƒ–‹˜‡”‡ƒǡ’”‘’‘•ƒŽ•ƒ†•—„‹••‹‘‘ˆ• ‹‡–‹Ƥ  ‘–”‹„—–‹‘•ˆ‘”–Š‡ ‹‡–‹Ƥ  Library. [email protected] Mr Michele Tempera ‹•”‡•’‘•‹„Ž‡‘ˆ–Š‡‡ –‹‘—•‹‡•• —‹†‡Ǥ‘— ƒ ‘–ƒ –Š‹ˆ‘” ‘—‹ ƒ–‹‘• concerning the economic and business section. [email protected] Mr Massimiliano Del Gatto ‹•–Š‡™‡„ƒ•–‡”ƒ†Š‡ƒ†‘ˆ‰”ƒ’Š‹ †‡•‹‰ƒ†’”‘‰”ƒ‹‰Ǥ‘— ƒ ‘–ƒ –Š‹ˆ‘” ‘—‹ ƒ–‹‘•”‡Žƒ–‡†–‘‰”ƒ’Š‹ Žƒ›‘—–ǡ„”‡ƒ†‘™•‹˜‹•—ƒŽ‹œ‹‰’ƒ‰‡•‘”‹- correct functioning, as well as for technical details and requirements of contributions. [email protected]@unibo.it

About PECOB’s people PECOB callsfor papers! About PECOB Creative CommonsLicense Deniver Vukelić 9. Appendix 8. 7. Conclusion 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. Agitprop 1. Introduction Keywords Abstract Table ofcontents 9.1. 9.1. 8.2. 8.1. 4.4. 4.3. 4.2. 4.1. 1.3. 1.2. 1.1. Sources andliterature The cultural relationship theSoviet with Unionbefore andafter 1948 The situationinSerbia The situationinCroatia very atthe endandafter theSecondWorld War Yugoslav press laws andtheinternal referrals in1945–1948 ge koje treba hitnozabraniti ionemogućiti njihovo dalje širenje”) journalist work za utvrđivanje zločina kulturnom suradnjom sneprijateljem) mittee for investigation ofthe crimeofcultural cooperation with the enemy (Anketna komisija Com Survey the and pomagača) njihovih i okupatora zločina utvrđivanje za komisija maljska List of“Booksthat we shouldimmediately prohibit andpreventtheir further circulation” (“Knji ListjournalistNDH of whowere forever tobanned practiceand otherpublishing writing, Literature Sources Examples ofcensorship ofmusicandfilm The prohibition ofbooksand/orwriters andthe condition inbookstores andlibraries Confrontation with journalists ofIndependentstate ofCroatia State Commission for establishing the crimes ofthe occupying forces andtheir supporters (Ze Sources, literature andmethodology Censorship concepts Guidelines ...... 56 55 54 53 45 43 41 39 35 18 16 13 48 45 43 43 34 24 20 19 12 10 9 7 7 2 9 - - -

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 5 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 6 workers censorship, 1948,Cominform andYugoslavia press culture, magazines, forbidden books, forbidden libraries, NDH, of paratus which inthis work was triedto berecognized andanalyzed. time that of model totalitarian and Stalinist a as identity,culturalidentified cial new,artifi a shaped be can there way that In attributes. cultural its as had and ral and complete, as damnatio memoriae of everything what previous period was lite sometimes destruction, enemy,censorship, the absolute of including ganda the way of how winner’spropaganda andwinner’sauthorities deal withpropa to insight closer a is therework this in Also, culture. low everydayof specimens destroysfromartworkartifacts,to forbidsit its or finds, it which ralinheritance side winning and expertise ofwill had lack to havethe better a insight inmethodologyofcultu because especially WWII, the in side losing the and winning Agitprop cultural periodofYugoslavia. yearresolution ofIB 1952 slowly in1948and until from comingout socalled the through aftermath, WWII Yugoslav of period the in methodologies sorship cen explaining for fields base as countries referent for Serbia and Croatia kes history,book of fields the conductedin studies archivisticsta It journalism. and shaping ofculturalof formeridentity ofpeople Yugoslavia.starts from It thepast rical andculturologicalinvestigation ofcensorshipimportantfactoras an inthe This research isbasedonthefundamentsofsomewhatnonsystematic histo Abstract Yugoslavia, Croatia, Serbia, censorship, Stalinism, Agitprop, propaganda ap propaganda Agitprop, Stalinism, censorship, Serbia, Yugoslavia,Croatia, Keywords The gap which is to be filled is one with objective approach to both sides, the ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 7 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 8 According to Oskar Danon original text was with Tito and Stalin, but the people spontaneously changed the changed spontaneously people the words to theversion only withTito. but Stalin, and Tito with was text original Danon Oskar to According LiberationNational NovemberYugoslaviaAntifascistof of the Council of session a at 1943 (AVNOJ) Jajce. the in matter,with particular worth cases in only and death, by punished be will art, especiallyliteraturewriting, in propagandaword,and and and in deed agitation the out carried and enemy the for worked “Who artists, and writers fellow his adopted property of confiscation and penalty death the on proclamation a sued is he 1944 May18th on leaders, communist the of one As Parliament. Croatian tion of Croatia (ZAVNOH), and after the war, the President of the Presidium of the the Executive CommitteeAnti-Fascist oftheNational Libera CouncilofNational shed during the NDH. Still during the Second World War, he became President of publi publications his of gaveall warhe the almost after up and songs, partisan beganand ged histhemesofwriting to write panegyricsto JosipBroz Tito and 1942, he crossed the river Kupa in a boat on the free partisan territory and chan in then And NDH. the of honor in later Yugoslavia,and and Kingdom the of nor stors in therich Croatianrealistic andmythical He also wrotepast. poems in ho most important writers of national mythic story of Croatian kings, giants and pa dom of Yugoslavia andtheIndependentState of Croatia (NDH) was oneof the wayslifeof author, their of writer Nazor,Vladimir King the of whoperiod the in period in Yugoslavia was changingandhowit adapted to currentreality. Justas how rapidly thegeneral atmosphere of the end of World War II andearly postwar ter version original version 1.1. 1. 1 «Pjesma o pesti». Popular partisan march. Text by Vladimir Nazor, music by Oskar Danon. First played in lyricsThe initial songofVladimirNazor of popularare interesting to show ( Uz maršalaTita, junačkoga sina,nasneće nipakao smest. ( Uz Tita iStaljina, dva junačka sina,nasneće nipakao smest Togetherwith Marshall Tito, the heroic son,noteven Hell shall stop us.–la Together with Tito andStalin, heroic sons,noteven two Hell shall stop us. – Guidelines ) Introduction 1 ) . ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 9 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 10 the ConstituentAssembly ofNovember 29th1945. States areFederal called Republic of Yugoslavia (FNRJ). And November 29th and 30th 1943 in Jajce, named Democratic Federal Yugoslavia (DFJ). According to declaration of from its official declaration attheSecond Session of the Antifascist Councilof LiberationNational of Yugoslavia idea, an ban to keen been had organizations religious and rulers, states, the as 1.2. tion ofinformation may berestricted only incases provided by law. thererequiredwasnot registration approval,dissemina or and publication and danger or other forms of war. In other cases, for the dissemination of information imminent of case the in only introduced be can press the of censorship mation, the Constitutionof the SFRYand provincial andthenational lawsinfor onpublic dia of Yugoslav Lexicographic Institute, published in Zagreb in 1977, according to nist-ideological State boasted. Namely, as can be read in the Universal Encyclope toformsall and of thepeople therule of freedom Yugoslaviathat commu asa ped forms of censorship, although it was publicly and constitutionally denied due thinking changed literally overnight andinwhich appeared many highly develo turbulent isa model. It political period in which and approved thepublic ways of and cultural specific a forming West, and East between halfway balancing fully a newera inwhich Yugoslavia hasmadeitaspecialtreatmentin theworld skill toand rule nist breakof 1952 thebeginning and the 1948until in and Stalin with Commu of model totalitarian Soviet the to adherence throughYugoslavia, ned war-rui the rebuilding lives, even and property culture, their with duel ciples, regimesnational satellite that like followed the same or similar ideologicalprin victoryoverthe tenegroSince Macedonia). occupyingforceand the German and Mon Herzegovina, and Bosnia Serbia, Croatia, Yugoslavia(Slovenia, comprised the understanding of thepeoplewho lived intheterritory of the republics that power,lifestyle, in and changes politics rapid and sudden many happened 1952 the states formed asaresult of the disintegration of Yugoslavia. From 1945 until in life cultural and political the controversyin much later,causing years is sixty developmentformerthe Yugoslaviaof newlytoday,a also as state.It established Communist Partyof the of Yugoslavia. This periodvery isa the in stage important Agitpropthe apparatus periodupon so called for and propaganda theagitation Yugoslavia,post WWII from theendofin19451952, WWII untilintheso-called controversial culturaland and historical wereaspects andmodelsthat in place taking interesting most the of one as censorship, with deal will which paper this of thepeopleandwithconfiscationpersonalassets.” forced labor andwithloss of civil rights andthedeclaringasoneof the enemies with thelease ofstate incomes. and gardens and buildings public of repair and construction of contracting with offenders, shame to right the from 433 BC until 85 AD, as the officer who dealt with keeping the census and supervision of public moral, with Rome in existed which function, censor Roman the from comes Westernmanylanguages, in least at Croatian), in («cenzura» «censorship» wordinternational Originally,and term.Croatian the the of definition the in limits Republic ofCroatia -NRH).Inthelastperiod,since 1963they becameSocialistRepublics -SR. People’sexample, (for of RepublicPeople’s to changed wasprefix FNRJ During FDH). - Croatia of FederalState prefixstatesFederalwhichstructurethe formedDFJ, had its of time At1952. the – period1945 the State(eg, in the disintegration inthe1991. For this study are importantfirst two namesbecausethese two nameswere used as such stays until 1963 when it became the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY), which remained to 4 Inorder to more approach more closely to thephenomenon of censorship first there shouldbesetsome is, It state. the of names the in differences the mention to needed is digression small a point this At 3 2 Topusko, May 18th1944. waysmany in out history,carried washuman censorship of yearsThrough With this literary-historical curiosity we enter within thescope and topic of Censorship concepts 2

3 4 ------, mention, the new, victorious ideology in the liberated territory in 1945 had a role to not Croatia.And of State Independent the and occupation German of time fromthe that or Yugoslavia, first the of time the from Court Royal of that or cracy throughoutthe 20thcentury. wasWhether it oneofthe Austriancourt bureau trol thewritten word. thorities throughout history, whether they were secular or religious, tried to con arethese only words, they,but consequently, raisearmies.” armed the au the So finallywars.Yes,and riots, bias, cause that opinions wordsthe formedarethere these from but themselves, words the of consists it because special, something “Apparentlynot said: is (1613) book dell’inquisizione” essay, l’officio his “Sopra scientists and writers of Western civilization. Venetian historian Paolo Sarpiin tly filled and which contained the works of even today most recognized thinkers, constan was which Church, Catholic the by Prohibitorum”constructed brorum Li “Index called list the of centuries only remember us Let fact. or art thought, ry in Zagreb, under the condition that it will be placed in the bunker and unrea and bunker the in placed be will it that condition the under Zagreb, in ry only two to three copies, while the rest gave to the National and University Libra confiscated, that they had no room for its storing and they kept in their collection regularlybeen has which materials, emigrant of much so gathered police public re Croatian century 20th of mid-sixties in period: later somewhat the cerning storical orother. hi literary,news, whether information, any of availability of control with area ses. It is a complex mechanism of intentionalshaping of culturalidentity inan zines or suspension of shippingsuppliespaperto publishersandprint hou maga and books new the printing refusingof works,the toand wanted authors not of writers,manylists and classified regimejournalists old of liquidation and throughpersecution magazines, and books of prohibitioncurrent the toregime, from auto censorship, banning of books and magazines of the collaboratingpast, or publication article an of later,censorship suspensive,or manuscript, any of censorship tive der concept of censorship, because in this case it is not only word about a preven broa the to come wherewe is That rule. collaborating or Italian German, under old propagandaofthe mains cultureand from Croatiaother areasand were that it shouldthat establishacentralYugoslav ideologicalcontrol andremove there carried inalotof out very complexmechanisms. multiple Especially withthefact that there is no censorship, except in the cases of war. But in fact censorship was when itisdenied. features. these modelsintheearly years oftheexistence Yugoslaviathe hasassumedall Of Martials. Court and administrationadministrativecentralized orders, of duct con the and violence, to recourse to readiness voluntarism,revolutionary zeal, from the period of civil war that imbued the Soviet political culture with fighting Bolshevism radical overall the definition by is Specifically,Stalinism vernment. censorship in avery complexthe Stalin’smodels within totalitariansystem ofgo model intheform of theSovietwas Unionthat already twentyyears practicing In formerIn Yugoslavia anditsstates censorship wascommon thing a almost 6 Paraščić, I.(2007) 5 Banac,I.(1990)“Sa Staljinomprotiv Tita”. Pp.19. The of amount censored material inYugoslavia tells theinteresting factcon was 1945 since Yugoslavia, in government new the of position official The 5 And one of the main tools of any totalitarian system is censorship, even 6 ,, but a wholea but ,, range relatedphenomena of to word: published the “Cenzura uJugoslaviji: 1945.-1990 ”. Pp.3 –4 ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 11 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 12 of and“Tiskarithe book” kao cenzori u Hrvatskoj: 1945. – 1990. – Printingwor for the fight against harmful books and their authors”, “Sudbina knjige – The fate manual practical or censor perfect The – autora njihovih borbu i knjiga za štetnih protiv priručnik praktički iliti cenzoru savršenom O “” libraries, in sorship Cen – “,”Cenzuraknjižnicama information u of dissemination the in factor ting (“Cenzura kao ograničavajući faktor u Stipčevićširenju informacija -- Censorship as Aleksandar a limi libraries and books of historian and archaeologist logist, bibliographer,biblio Croatian the and “) magazines literary and Cominform – časopisi književni“Informbiro i and NDH” journalists fatetragicof neration:the ge Destroyed – NDH novinara sudbine tragične naraštaj: Uništeni victim,”“ his and censor Šegedin: Peter and MilovanDjilas of relationship the about cuments do Unknown – njegovažrtva i cenzor PetraŠegedina: i MilovanaDilasa odnosu vatskomCroatianpress,”the in Censorship novinstvu– hr dokumentio “Nepoznati u (“Cenzura Grbelja Josip journalist Croatian of research the with tributed oks andsomepublishedpapersthatindicate theoriginalsources. theme has not been well researched over the past twenty years), only a dozen bo and some oftheir fate. There was usedrelativelya of literatureamount small such, (the of lists writers, and journalists journals, works, the banning of decisions ring the NDH was more or less a whole). There shall be presented the press laws, du Bosnia and Croatia because Croatia, (with Herzegovina and Bosnia and bia tia 1941 - 1945. But the review will touch and some other republics, such as Ser Yugoslav censorship of literature and journalism of the Independent State of Cro the to related cases of portion large a because and Croatia, of angle the from be severalat levels. angleThe main of researching censorship in Yugoslaviastill will 1.3. relevant to thecurrent nationalsecurity. public, the availableto became thus and material, new with together alreadyjoined basement the from Material etc. newsletters, magazines, newspapers, of copies 8670 and authors 300 almost by Julyuse. In 1992 toUniversity National Library werecommitted also 7733 books me redundant andwere transferred to the NationalUniversity Library for public communism, all the books and records of the Secretariat of Internal Affairs beca of fall the After like. the and exclamationpoints marks,interrogation police, the of underlines seen be can there copies some In journalists. and editors authors, about informationemigrants,and on createtofiles wasAffairsused Internal for Secretariat Republic the in collected was that Material catalogues. in processed chable to users. The material was checked and located in the basement, but never tieth century with whichtieth centurywith we should be equally careful asof that winning pro siasm occasionally painted approachwith nationalist of the nineties of the twen enthu analytical non-historical their ignoring sometimes facts, the only search re paper,their fromdrawnthis are therein that notice, due with Although, via. ralbooks andpapers devoted to theissueofcensorship in Croatiaand Yugosla kers ascensorsinCroatia: 1945–1990”). 7 Stipčević, A.(2000) «Sudbinaknjige». Pp.102. werethoroughlyextensivelywhoCroatia, and in seveonlyones arein They The largestin theliterature contribution researching about thistopic iscon This reviewpaper will censorship procedures andmethodologies considered Sources, literature andmethodology

7 exceptsome inthecasethatrecords were ------turalartistic propertyand andinheritanceof Serbiaand Yugoslavia. the other On destroyedignorancecul the fromthe who cadre, ruling the of education of lack and Serbia, postwar backwardnessof cultural the about criticallyvery speaks it restingwasit because because 1988. importanceissospecial in Its published inte particularly is which Dimić, Ljubodrag historian Serbian the by “ culture) there concerned, was used one is of the best studies Serbia of that period, “Agitpropfor literature kulturathe (Agitprop As Archives. State Croatian the of funds various the in located mostly are which journalists, and writers shot or banned arrested,and magazines, and books banned of lists with documents original the on be will therefore, emphasis, greatest The appendix. the in copy a attach and them Yugoslavia,of communist some powerin analyzeand and processthem to the originaltestimony andwritten documentsoncensorship instrument of as an kslisted bibliographythe in paper,this of end the at researchthis totry will find wor cache other using and essential, the on drawing and works their from ting However,mid-forties.star the in Yugoslavauthorities the of machine paganda subordinate to the revolution, because the artists were asked to enter the core the enter to asked were artists the because revolution, the to subordinate are dogma, this to according art, of areas revolution.All for preparing and vism to the startof World War II, atthesame time when began itsaccelerated bolshe that hadtheleadersofRevolution, as were Lenin,Stalin,Mao,Castro, etc. “ legend. Tito’s legal andunlimited powerpolitical could becompared with those leadership the warand a alreadypropagandamade had whomfrom lowedTito, fol whowar, and partisan a in born was which forces political of block-motion the Party. Around this structure - the Party, government, military - has developed sports associations -nothingcouldarise and existand controlthe will without of so-cal and womenyouth, unions, trade the the Front,Popular the organizations: mass led. all and directed it and everywhere, - science in education, culture, such were the armyas and police. CPY held in its hands all Partythe power and economy,under also war,was the during created state, “The power: that about Party,directedBilandžić the byhands. Party’s powerrealwasin all that so Party.munist Frontdecisions theNational Allandactionsthat attempted were which wasand asamass publicorganization itwas anextended arm of the Com Party,Communist the by established body a - Front National the had authority the time this All clique. ruling bypersecutedthe censored and banned, been has consequence of distrust and secrecy becausesince the KingdomofYugoslavia it obvious was it secret, were meetings its all and conspiracy the in operated via PartyYugoslawhichCommunist wasfromin ty the held July1948, to 28th 21st Yugoslaviathe Cominform (CPY)and 5th Congress and oftheCommunistPar press andothercultural products. “hostile” of censorship the advocatesopenly very sometimes which ideology of hand, it is useful because it provides insight into the mental and cultural complex 8 Bilandžić, D. (1998). «Hrvatska moderna povijest», Pp.214. viewsIts cultureand onart CommunistParty has already formulated prior of Party Communist the of conflict and conflict, Tito-Stalin the until first, At 2. Agitprop 8 said ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 13 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 14 mic power, extended social networks and relationships at home and abroad, and “He” worked through “his” cultural institutions, organizations, media, had econo licy. po cultural of realization the in role major a exercised Party the Thus, ganda). and educational department), and Antifascist Front of Women (section of propa (cultural Yugoslavia of YouthAnti-Fascist of Association United the partment), de educational and (cultural Union agitation), and press the People’s of (sectors the Front in apparati similar also formed were there Party, the in paganda were asked by theDirective, from March 1945. was contrary toof theapparatus thetask for and propaganda agitation they that which issues, ideological contentious all verdictin final the out carry and issues trol) overand everything all andto owna monopoly inthestudy oftheoretical ratus for andpropagandaagitation is to exercise censorship and monitor (con appa of task the that committees, sub the and republics the of Committees tral Cen the of apparatus Agitprop the within especially concept, established been elements to subdueculturallife to theirowninterests. the timethere With has in culturalpopulation life to and preventany desire orattemptto Partyhostile directly from theParty center.guided Apparatusis supposed tothe aspirations channelall be of the to had which life, scientific and educational cultural, litical, po entire indirectly,the or directly focuses agencies advertising its and Party via andthetake-over: Yugosla of liberation victory,the absolute the after be will which Party munist directionderstanding thepolitical towardattitude and oppositions ofCom all racy and cultural life, there can be read two articles which are interesting for un lite developmentof and reconstruction of goals many the Among 1945). March propaganda,AGITPROPUU-k-1/14,and SKJ, agitation CK organizationof the On (“All- Agitpropobjectivescultural of PK Directive) the (the and on mation CK of Committee oftheLeagueCommunistsYugoslavia (CKSKJ) issuedproclaa souls.”of “engineers be to artists the asked of socialchangesandevents andto bepropagators ideas. of new the social heritage and in the dialogue often acting superior. Therefore, pursuing intellectualswho struggle inthepolitical heavily used arguments drawnfrom Party stated that concept of “enemy” in the culture was not only abstract idea. Concurrentlyof theapparatusthe establishment with for andpro agitation 13 Ibid.Pp. 266. 12 Ibid.Pp.36.–37. 11 Dimić(1988)Pp.29 –30. 10 Thephrase Ždanov A. attributed to Stalin 9 Dimić,Lj.(1988)«Agitprop kultura». Pp.191–192. The task of agitation and propagandaand of agitation The task machine was the handsof in that

13 and artisticlevel; (…)“ ideological larger the in life cultural the apoliticality,raising and dumbness against etc.), kind, even inthefieldofculture, cinema, theater, publishing, houses, controlthe centersof all servecould that thegathering oftheoppositionevery reading (libraries, activities in rights property cultural of liquidation possession, national a become and people the of - conduct a systematic struggle against the enemy influence in the cultural life, cultural the in influence enemy the against struggle systematic a conduct - (...) the materialensuring that - technicaland of culturalbase life the hands isin “ (...) 11 10 In March 1945 Agitprop of Central of Agitprop 1945 March In

12

9 The party has Theparty ------least deviatedleast from theopinionofCentralCommittee oftheCommunistPar the is that opinion other anyexterminatedifferent anyor to tried then and ters, cution andthecompromising of the enemies with different ideologies - for star perse political by achieved was which single-mindedness, ideological the and achieve aonehundred per cent acceptanceof the Communist Party inthenation xed upon their cultural heritage. After the state was created, the next goal was to fi censorship of violence and punishment, and retribution of elements the ded ty (HSS) as an enemy of ideological conflict and fear of the opposition) that inclu showdown with the enemies (with NDH, but also from the Croatian Peasant Par sented ornotpartofthetradition andcultural values ofpeopleinYugoslavia. cieties, abolished private and religious schools, regardless whether if they repre sed private libraries and reading houses, prohibited the operation of cultural so enclo privatetheaters, and cinemas of owners expropriated cinemas, okstores, culturalPartyof politics, terminatedconcept its private printers,bo publishers, but from the“people-master”, etc. “Party”,from orders accept not people”,do working writers of “power term the “Party”,used or they proletariat” “revolution”,the the of “dictatorshipabout for war”,thought “liberation and term the used was it now example, for general, in stic expression andexperimentation couldbeconsidered harmful. direct controlof Party andtheAgitprop apparatus.Free choice of topics orarti policy,culturalof part years,the as those under in is, film the So too. censorship the script, chooses the director, cast/crew. Upon completion o of filming overit controldid has the it film, new each of theme the approvedParty committees. nal ownerswhilethe beginning ofcinema(at therewere still owners) oreducatio towork that allowing not controlled, and managed wasmaterial, film of use per ting to the film, from the organizing cinema visits and advertising, and to the pro pletely under its control. Task of Agitprop Commissions wasmatters thatall rela medium ofpropagation ofcommunist ideology. re and arts in general were considered as means of revolution and, therefore, the stoy in 100,000 copies. Chekhov,of copies 111,000 copies, 348,000 in Gorki Maxim Stalin, of copies Tol 1,337,000 at copies, 1,433,000 as many as in published are works Lenin’s ters. wri Soviet other and Stalin Lenin, of works the weretranslatedthere Thus, sm. Marxi theoretical of champions and revolutionaryleaders writers, socialist red dominatedto (up the Soviet 1948with and conflict Union),andthere were favo pressionism and surrealism.the otherhandsecularizationandSovietization On ex modernism, of works “decadent” and literature dialectal then literature, val thout social content, works of priests and religious theme works, works of medie booksand printed NDH,therethe during worksdismissed the been also had wi paratus was responsible. Inadditionto prohibiting actsof ideological opponents tions andprohibitions, and intheother with propaganda for which Agitprop ap ty leadership. Given the position of war winner and the power it had, it is quite clear its clear quite is it had, it power the and winner war of position the Given 16 Dimić(1988) Pp.214. 15 Grbelja, J.(1998:1)“Cenzura uhrvatskom novinstvu: 1945. –1990.”. Pp.105. 14 Ibid.Pp.57. The departments: several Agitprop within founded Djilas Milovan 1946 In life political and texts the in and terminology, new whole a invented Party The film was considered by Party as a dangerous weapon that had to be com Ideological single-mindedness was accomplished on the one hand with rejec 15 A decadentWesternA literature wasconvicted; literatu a 16

14 ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 15 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 16 redba ozabrani ustaške ifašističke literature”) thatsays thefollowing: (“Na literature” fascist and Ustasha the prohibiting of “Order the brought was blicly available. vije ( slavia” Yugoin matter printed deliveryof obligatory on “Decision published Party nist those forces thatare fighting around it. ate works ofcontemporary reality,which deny, itself break down destroyand all the artist was not painting or describing the struggle with Cominform, but to cre “Izvor” should have a discussion paper on the theme of Cominform.” stories or jokes, unveil Cominform. [...] Each issue of “Kolo”, “Kulturni radnik” and way,literary throughthe in which humor,in version,etc., radio plays, plays, act will write Cominform.will Theyof unveilattacks tlyand and struggle, campaign throughnewspapers,magazines,etc.,and sketches, songs, reviews, etc.constan tual and artistic creativity on the other side: “The writers will, through articles in 10 we can see reflection of positions between Agitprop by one and both intellecpoint its from sector”,and educational and cultural on Cominform the against “Actionplan its publishes Agitprop So organization. state of models economic daysYugoslaviafirst of fromthe literally prescripted,Sovietlaws, programs and withdrawthe, completewasfromthere fifties the in and turning, to comes litics its duty. continued apparatus Agitprop of abolition the after who, boards editorial and councils editorial committees, working develop to strives Agitprop publishing, cipal level. muni and republic the and federal on existed, hierarchizations, and tralization Yugoslavthe cen bycommittees, of traditionthese Architecture. forAll mission Com the even was there and sectors, other and administration schools, party for Sector artwork, for Department work, educational Cultural of Department the work, mass cultural of Department agitation, and Press of Department the organizations, mass in work ideological of Department the organizations,youth and Party the in work ideological of Department Department, lecturing oretical often falsified several passages, the Ministry of Education will appoint a com a appoint will Education of Ministry the passages, several falsified often are writers international of works the in also and literature,propaganda fascist are freely soldinbookstores.and of theUstasha part big is a it Becauseamong ) withthepurposeofpreventive analysis of whatbe publishedandpu will In the official gazette “Narodne novine” dated August 10 1945, no. 3, pp. 3, it 3, pp. gazette3, official “Narodneno. novine”the 1945, datedAugust In 10 Commu The 1945 8th Februarypower, on to officially coming before Even 3. 19 Dimić(1988). Pp.194. 18 Grbelja (1998:1)Pp.174. 17 Dimić(1988)Pp.158. NDH former during published were that publications that observed was “It As already noted, after 1948 and the conflict with the Cominform in Party po in activities increasing and titles of number large the to due fifties, early In 17 Odluka o obveznom dostavljanju štampanih stvari na podru na stvari štampanih dostavljanju obveznom o Odluka referrals in1945–1948 Yugoslav press laws andtheinternal

19 18 č Theof task ju Jugoslaju ------members, sothesejobscouldnotholdby thepeople: Law was passed, which guaranteed freedom of expression and press freedom, but the Krstulović. Vicko Affairs Internal of Minister by signed order1945.” 3rd,The June 1737-45 No. Affairs. Internal of Ministry people!” the Freedomtotely. Fascism- to Death immedia effective is order This language. Italian or German Croatian, in 1941 10th, April after released was that literatureany of distribution any and sale of provisions further any do to forbidden is It command: following issued is there publications Ustasha and fascist the of preventdistribution Commission, this of decision final the until to,order works.individualIn of distribution the prohibit mission of experts who reviewwill the literature all andthereafter approve or with different occupiers(thedataobtainedfrom Paraščić (2007)p.16.) was slightly less than 200,000 people in Yugoslavia that were erased from the voter lists Yugoslavia1945 in because in elections of first before saysthat collaboratingpovijest” moderna “Hrvatska book the in Bilandzic Dusan it since internal, complete not letter,but such One denied. was existence which and exchangedhave each commissions and boards bodies, different that books information inYugoslavia were internal letters and listsofbannedauthors tions, andtheobligation ofsubmissionplanspublishingcompanies. 8th 1947 April which seeks prior permission for theissuanceofsuchpublica o izdavanju i raspačavanju omladinske i dječje književnosti i štampe u NRH ce anddistributionofyouth andchildren’s literature andthe press in PRC (Zakon val from theauthoritiesisnecessary. languages of people of Yugoslavia, and they are intended to them, such an appro of one in printed were they if but permission, special need they that require or obvious background andinstrumentofcensorship. very a as used be thus explainedvaguely and extended, quite be can provisions is forbiddenIt toor defame insult therepresentative bodiesofYugoslavia.These countries friendly of expense the at insults DFY,contain of and order tutional At the end of the summer, August 24th 1945 25 Hebrang Grgić (2000) Pp.121-122. 24 Paraščić (2007)Pp.16. 23 Like USSRatthatmoment. 22 Hebrang Grgić, I.(2000)“Zakoni otisku uHrvatskoj od 1945.dodanas”. Pp.120. while adults, of deprivedhalf were rights these without Croatia WWII post in that found Grbelja Josip 21 20 Narodne novine, August 10th1945,No.3,pp.3 However,many fordocuments important fatethe freeof expression freeand In the context of the new laws, we should mention the The Press Law The law prohibitspropagatethat publications all violentoverthrow of consti was regulating also the licensing of publishers, editors and editorial board editorial and editors publishers, of licensing the also regulating was immoral purposes.” or assisted external enemy ofYugoslavia newspapers and other printed matter that spread national, racial or religious hatred newspapers anotherprinted matter other and guards collaborated withenemiesandtheirdomestichelpers blue and white the fascist organizations and groups inthecountryandabroad aswellas persons who of organizations, organizations, Ljotić’s

20 ) h ue pes o ped ongah, rm ad xoto o similar or extortion and crime pornography, spread to press used who 5) books, of writers or staff editors, publishers, were war the during who 4) books, profascist and fascist the of co-writers editors, publishers, were who 3) or Chetniks Ustasha, the of members prominent or leaders were who 2) “1) who donotenjoy politicalandcivil rights does not prohibit importation of publications printed abroad,printed publications of importation prohibit not does 22 24 21 The

Press Law Regulations onissuan (“Zakon o štampi”)

25 ) dated 23 - - - - - .

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 17 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 18 subgroups. severalinto divided be will censorship of mechanisms and occurrences that re, Therefo introduction. the in above described as censorship of definition ader bro the to belong them of Many started. were regime previous the and enemy was thebestandmostadvanced inthehistory ofmankind. consideredensured that freedom maximum press ofthe everhistory in that and served its purpose was Stalin’s Constitutionof the Soviet Union for which it was totois alsoimportant publish.It knowthe rolethat which modelconstitution what and how instructed precisely that, laws, written system vaguely and the broad within the unlike instruction informal of series whole a was there that and nationalities,herecommends thefollowing: ter patronizingly careseducation andgood abouttaste oftheYugoslav peoples Agitprop and the first censor of Yugoslavia, on October 17th 1946. Djilas in a let of head the Djilas, MilovanYugoslaviaby of Party Communist the of Committee said had thatitwasthe label addressed to EVERYONE žrtva”. Pp.120. 28 Stipčević, A.(2005) “Tiskari kao cenzori uHrvatskoj: 1945.–1990”.Pp. 4 njegovai Petracenzor Milovanai Šegedina: odnosu Dilasa o dokumenti “Nepoznati (1998:2) J. Grbelja, 27 26 Mark ofthe importancethey placedsothatthewidestrecipients gettheletter for review. the with disputes of mechanisms many war, the of end the at Croatia, In 4. Thus was theofficiallegalthe periodisclear conditionin 19451948.it - But (4) (3) (2) (1) and to someextent theRomanian literature.” Czech, Bulgarian, Albanian, Polish, to paid be should “attention that and thebestworks ofcontemporary advanced writers” shed only thebestworks of critical realism andcombatromanticism publi be to is literatureFrench and American English, the “from that oks canbepublishedbesidesofcontrol oftheParty “ ned and controlled that no topical, political and other brochures or bo plan organized, so be (should) things journalism current the “in that literature” sensational and petty pseudoscientific, on watch strictly (should) re the literature scientific popular and scientific of publishing “in that and after theSecond World War The situation inCroatia atthe end very 26

27 , was sent to the Central the to sent was , 28 ------porters. Following itsoon there was establishedlevelat thelocal State Commis te Commission forthe crimes establishingoftheoccupying forces andtheirsup mittee ofLiberation ofYugoslaviabyand thedecision of theAVNOJformed Sta is thereforelies. It wasthat logical onNovember 30Com 1943 theNational at al and supporters their all to Germans from extended Teheranand conference on confirmed was which fascists” German of responsibility the about claration 4.1. inventar, Pp.1-3. journalists, scientists, the accused they what for seen be can there files these In rious NGOs,which speaks aboutvolume ofcoverage oftheentire proceeding. va and institutes health clubs, and facilities sports resorts, health and hospitals University,of employees all to it forward the to task had Committee Survey the data oncooperation with theNationalLiberation Movement. and movement Ustasha to affiliation the about information then medals, ceived workspublic other and blished (exhibitions, performances, events, lectures), re Mayuntil occupation pu of the time their the abozt 1945, at 9th occupation and location their about details give to required data, personal to addition in were, mittee in1945theCroatian State Archives. etc. institutions, educational and scientific and cultural of management the of bers artists, musicians, radio announcers, university professors, actors, singers, mem ther they was journalists, publicists, writers, editors or editorial board members, whe NDH, the during operatedpublicly who persons all examine to had mittee gationof thecrimes for culturalcooperation the enemy.with Investigative Com porters (ZKRZ) founded in thesummer 1945 The Survey Committee for investi Commission for investigation of the crimes of the occupying forces and their sup State purpose, Forthis NDH. the during activepersons less activeand with tion state of the Democratic FederalYugoslavia newgovernment startsitsconfronta ration of Zagreb, the Croatian capital, May 8, 1945) and establishment of the new May18th 1944. sion for determining crimes by thedecision of the Presidency of ZAVNOH on 30 During the war in 1943 the Allies agreed at the Moscow conference of “De of conference Moscow the at agreed Allies the 1943 in war the During 35 HDA Fond ZKRZ-AK 5/45, box 685. 34 IbidPp.129. 33 Grbelja (2000)Pp.124. 32 Grbelja (1998:1)Pp.88 31 Fond ZKRZ-AK, box 685–691.dated 1945. 30 Grbelja, J.(2000)“Uništeni naraštaj: tragične sudbinenovinara NDH”. Pp.125. sumarni pomagača, njihovih i okupatora zločina utvrđivanje za NRH komisija Zemaljska 1.306. HDA 29 Dr.of name the with IvanKrajač.5, number Preservedthe rangefrom files However,the theyAll hadto meetthe so-called Immediately after World War II, and overthrow of the Ustasha NDH (the libe Today itis preserved in thesixboxes utvrđivanje zločinakulturnom suradnjomsneprijateljem) cultural cooperation withtheenemy (Anketna komisija za Committeeand theSurvey for investigation ofthecrime za utvrđivanjezločinaokupatora injihovih pomagača) occupying forces andtheirsupporters (Zemaljska komisija State Commissionfor establishing thecrimesof 29 Questionnaire was not just for the artists and listed above, but above,listed and artists the for just not was Questionnaire 31 of documents from the Survey Com 32 ( Upitni arakUpitni 33 ) inwhich they

34

35 ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 19 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 20 4.2.1. or posters, published theirbooks...” exhibited paintings or artifacts in the galleries or museums, painted illustrations University, Public the in or radio the on spoke who encyclopedias, or ceedings, at the time of NDH (1941 – 1945) wrote in newspapers, magazines, journals, pro who those wereall that banned conclude to“easy is it fromwhich1946) – 1945 belja in his book mentions three lists of banned authors and books (in the period 4.2. ge number. lar very a is what them of after,38 and killed warwere there the of battles last the in lists these to according journalists, Of Artuković...).(Pavelić, fled who se vernment of Independent State (18 of them) were shot or hanged except tho Go the of part large a while sentences, death 13 of total a sentenced was there process, Nuremberg the during – powers Axis the with showdown Allied with ther work. fur their for not or authorized been had who journalists emigratedand shot, of entireconstruction ofthe NDH propagandasystem resulta as and produced lists the Soviet Union,Russia confessed allcrimesinKatynandVinica. of century,collapse 21st the followingof nineties the in ironythat is USSR) (the countries allied the against defamation abot story this in all of interesting Most executed upon another verdict, that one of Military Court of Command in ago Zagreb. months two been has Jurak coincidence, the by But, Zagreb. from Jurak vit Dr.professorUniversityLjude shot be should and criminal war a as sentenced was there Ukraine, in Vinica in peasants Ukrainian executing and Katyn in mes if he not already fled into exile. Because of the same things, writing about the cri because of tellinglies alliesandfriendly about countries and would beexecuted Dr.officers. Polishexecuted000 criminal warviets 16 a declaredwas Miloslavić tional Commission examined scene in the Katyn Wood near Smolensk, where So University Professor Dr. Edvard Miloslavić enemy.So there foundbe can manyinteresting Zagrebof the that cases suchas the levelcooperationwaswhatwith their of professorsand editors,writers and rs of the SocialistRepublicof Croatian(SDS RSUP SRH) ves intheFundof the State Secretariat Securityof theNational of Internal Affai NDH conducted andcompleted between the1950and1951. i njihovih pomagača» No.2691,Zh6315/937. 40 Grbelja in his book named it the Fund of MUP (Ministry of Internal Affairs), although the archive is archive the although Affairs), Internal of (Ministry MUP of Fund the it named book his in Grbelja 40 39 Thetextaccompanying stated thelist wasit that thereconstruction workof propaganda apparatus of 38 Grbelja (1998:1)Pp.97. 37 Grbelja (2000)Pp.130–131. HDA36 FondZemaljske utvrđivanju«Odlukakomisije o and ZKRZ-AKbox 687 145/45, okupatora zločina is probablyThe list from 1952. So, following thestudiesofGrbelja we listallthree listshere. Besides the Showdownof theCommunistsUstashaisinteresting with to compare During the1950 and 1951 Udba (State SecurityDepartment)conducted are writing, publishingandotherjournalistwriting, work List ofNDHjournalist whowere forever bannedto practice Independent state ofCroatia Confrontation withjournalists of Order ofprohibitingthe Ustasha andfascist literature

39

38 It can be foundbe can It intheCroatianState Archi 36 in1943 as amemberoftheInterna 40 . This list was created in

37 , Josip Gr Josip , ------lists were condemned. in Grbelja’s book according theweight The article is here of guilt. quoted in itsentirety aswellas enemy andtheprevious regimelist was andthat detailedgiving thenameslisted members who were about to eject and condemned for the collaboration with the “Vje its of list a professionpublished whichthe has in guild 1945, October26th snik” in published was which (DNH), Association Journalists Croatian of nour and apparently madeaccording to theoriginalconclusionofCourtHo 4.2.2. interests inthenewspaper atthetimeofNDH. general had or drawphotographed,wrote, they because work further of denied the Directorate ofState Security(UDBA) services andtechniques for monitoring andinterception. departments which are concerned with internal enemies, the emigrants (Croatia, Albania...), foreign intelligence counterintelligence(KOS). UDBA civiliana as counterintelligence was consistedand SSUP in offour main (UDBA), while the Third section of OZNA was established at the Ministry of National Defense as Yugoslav Army’s the First and Second Department of OZNA were formed at the Ministry of Interior as State Security Department Republic of Yugoslavia (FNRJ), People’sJanuary Federal 31st 1946 the security-intelligence of services are Constitution restructured. the In of March 1946. adoption Upon 1944. 13th Yugoslavia»May of Liberation National the of Committee Defence National for «Commissions the in formed Service Intelligence Security the People), Socialist Republic ofCroatia). named SDSRSUP SRHFund (theFund oftheStateSecretariat SecurityoftheNational of Internal Affairs ofthe Previous list is actually UDB-a’s summasummarumalphabetically ordered 45 NOV –NationalLiberation Army, NOP–NationalLiberation Movement 44 Grbelja (1998:1)Pp.82–84. 43 Seeappendixfor pp39.ofthispaper. thecomplete list., 42 HDA, Fund SDS RSUP SRH, Act 013,1/18iAct 013/2/18,Box 48andGrbelja (1998)Pp.81-82. the of Protection the for OZNA(Department of reorganization after 1946, March in createdwas UDBA 41 (2) (1) the following conclusion gave court the occupation, the during Hrvatska Banovina of Association Journalists Home. publishes thisdecision from themeetingheldon24thofthismonthinJournalist’s journalists -theintellectual originators andtheinstigators ofwar crimes October 26th1945injournal“Vjesnik” List ofjournalists collaborators publishedon cuir ad hi srat, h Utsa wo a poaad fr planting for propaganda ran who Ustasha, the servants, their and occupiers because their workin press helped toduring theoccupation propagandaof the Hrastovec, Milivoj Korn-Mačković iLjuboWiesner Stjepan IvanIvanGrubiša, Ciprin, DraganRudolfDegrel, Balaš, Vladimir Bublić, the of members and ranks, Company are: journalistic the of time eternal the for Excluded for theircrimes answer to authorities national our to delivered be to country,are our in not if Journalists Association considers them war criminals, and as such requires that, deceived others in suchwork. For this theCourt all of Honour of Croatian hatred ethnic risen NOP enemy,and NOV war,slandered the fratricidal and served has work treacherous Danijel their i because Tortić Janko Tolj, Mijo Štahan, Uvanović Cvjetko Šenda, Antun Raić, Vlaho Radić, Vladimir Lendić, Ivo Krvarić, Milan Kamilo Kovačić, Matija Fertilio, Floss, Julijus Luka Ilinić, Bobek, Josip dr. Babić, Franjo Blažina, Josip Bogdan, Ivo the state prosecutor for thepersecutionfor theantinationalwork are: society, condemned to a permanent ban on journalistic activity, and proposed to of membership and journalists of ranks the from expelled time eternal the For After thediscussionwork about and moral integrity ofmembersCroatian Association Journalists Croatian of Honor Court 1945 25th October – ZAGREB fascist the condemned Association Journalists Croatian of Honor of “Court 44 , because it is interesting to see why exactly mentioned journa 41 ,, and includes all those who have been 45 42 , and with propaganda activities propaganda with and , Thelistcontains100names. 43 - - -

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 21 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 22 46 DNH–Društvo novinara Hrvatske (Croatian JournalistsAssociation) and performing horribleandterrible crimesagainst ourpeople. serving directly nations, our to effort to occupiers about the exploitation of our world, destroying atrocitiesvillages and cities new to them urged but enemies, other and Ustasha the of deeds bloody and measures the all justified only not activities, publishing and journalistic their with and pamphlets, and brochurespress, Ustasha enemythe to enter helping into our country,thereby and and then, after the agents, occupation, releasing and such editing were themselves and agents enemy the of work prepared and helped and press), other and hrvatska Matica smotra”, through and magazines newspapers, garda”,“Nedelja”,“Hrvatska“Hrvatska through journals clerofascistic fascism, (especially brochures Italian and German of service in the stood II, War World before even part in who, mercenaries, fascist newspapers, propagandaagencies, Ustasha and employeesItalian variousand German, bosses of (4) (3) be extradited to ourgovernment, inthecasethatthey escapedfrom ourcountry. thousands ofpeople. It enemy. condemned the indirect the perpetrators of torture andhorrible death of thousands and for propaganda spread and forgeries made brochures, printed who Hrvatska”, “Nova narod”,“Deutsche Zeitung in Kroatien” and “Hrvatskiother daily and weekly “Spremnost”,fascist newspapers; those issued assemblies, propaganda instigatorsand ofcrimewar – condemned criminals.ItthosewhoUstasha stagedthe (a) and therefore withtheirwork harmedtheinterests ofthepeople: publicists, and and journalist a Ustasha as worked the and of organization, propaganda members enemy’s become have occupation the during who, and were not members of the Croatian Journalists’ Association of Banovine Hrvatska, Court ofHonor DNH national the harmed so and NOB interests slandered peoples, our between discord Journalists haveright thefull to require thatthese fascist war criminalsare to originatorstherefore,intellectual DNH, the of condemned Honour of Court The Court of Honour of DNH condemned, as it is seen from the above press releases, reject theirmembership inDNH. or accept action, and attitude current the to due especially and by they,general, their that Directors of Board DNH’s suggested DNH of Honor of Court the interests, national against less sinned who publicists and journalists those For (b) hatred and fratricidal war, slandered NOV and NOP, and with propaganda NOP,with and and war,NOV fratricidal slandered and hatred enemy,ethnic rosethe theyto served has worktreacherous their because Uzorinac, Stanko Vitković, Janko Žanetić,Aleksandar Žibrat Teodordr. Šuljak, Hasan Šarkanj, Božo Štedimlija, Sava Softa, Ivan Roetl, Tomica Pejnović, Grga Polonijo, Penavić, Jure Pavičić, Stanislav ing. Perše, dr. Prpić, ing Vilko Rieger, Pavičić,Franjo Jure Rubina, dr. Slavko dr.Erich Proebst, Puljiz, Herman Luka Peroš, Vilim Oršanić, Ante Oršanić, Ivan Nikolić, Novaković,Vinko Mosner,Milan Stipe Mirković, Zvonimir Magdić, Mortigjija, Ivo Marunić, Josip Mrmić, Josip Milković, Zlatko Milković, Milivoj Jagatić, Karl Kühne, NikolaZvonimir Koronički, Sepp Lenz, Radovan Latković, Tias Dujmović, Franjo dr. Mato Čović, Ilić, Andrija Hühn, dr.Foeckel,IvoFedorov, Fritz Marko Foertsch, dr. Gerda Ciliga, Ante dr. Cerovac, Buttlar- Ivo von Alfred Bzik, Cerovac,Mirko Crljen, Danijel MijoBubanić, Franjo Bonifačić, dr.Ante Moscon, Bučar, Romeo Belobrajdić, Leopold dr. requested theirextradition to ournationalauthorities: to and country,our in therefore,areworktheynot and if antinational that be will activities, journalistic all of the state prosecutor are ban proposed for theprosecution becauseofthe everlasting the on condemns and bringto thefratricidal war, andthusharmednationalinterests. the occupier and his Ustasha servants, to sow discord between our peoples for their work inthepress and propaganda duringtheoccupationhelped Đuro Teufel, Šišulj, Franjo Trbuha, StjepanTomičić, Vjekoslav Ivo Vučičević iPero Rudalić, Vukota Jure Pavrlišak, Milan Petrak, Ivan Zlatko Mrakovčić, Lovrić, Vlaho Kus-Nikolajev, M. Jerkov, Anton Juzbašić, st. Cerovac, Tom.Dujšin, Devčić,ing. Milica Boroje,Jure Balentović, Ivo Ambrozić, Ivan condemned ontheeverlasting banofalljournalisticactivities: Honor aswar criminals; of Court the to them leads which work, such to others deceived activities 46 considers necessary to issueopiniononthosewhoan shot by Ustasha streljana”).ili emigracijiu su ustaškojdanas propagandiradilau kojaa (“Popissu lica shot” or exile in now are and propaganda Ustasha the in workedwho persons of “List le 4.2.3. Ustasha –executed by Ustasha of 45 work. public their continue could them of 27 only and writing, public any tisans shot 38. Two have died instantly in exile, and 100 of them were banned for wereexecuted battles Ustasha final 13, the died in nine, ad, killed three par and abrofled them of 129 May1945, 8 - 6 Croatia,between of State Independent of about general topics. it really was talking whetherabout, it was an aggressive promotional material or whateverof regardless banned, and crushed been had work journalistic oral or printed of years four entire the this, With life. of case, worse a in or occupation workprevious of these journalists the and other publicists. With that all it deprived crime them of their war a as convicted had arguments, and force rhetorical its with one, Winning one. winning the and one losing the apparati,propaganda cause it is very accordingevident, to data, that it was about direct conflict of two 4.2.4. List of dead journalists after the war is in the document under the full tit full the under document the in is war the after journalists dead of List 49 Shot – executed by new government, dead – from other reasons, deceased – in war or fighting, shot by shot fighting, or war in – deceased reasons, other from – dead government,executed new by– Shot 49 48 HDA, Fund SDS RSUP SRH013,1/18i013,2/18,folium No.92–95,box No.48. 47 Vjesnik,October 26th1945. The final account says that of 332 journalists registered with the Government be censorship of area an as understood is journalists NDH with Showdown Data analysis 64. Židovec dr. Feliks (shot).” Tuk 58. prof. Konstantin (dead), 62. (shot), Wolf Hinko (shot by Trežić Ustaša), 63. Židovec Vladimir (shot), 57. (shot), Volinsky61. TomasseoVernić(dead), 60. Zdenko (shot), UvanovićDanijel 59. (shot), Dragutin 56. (shot), Đuro Teufel Velid 55. Tapran 54. (dead), (shot), Gino Širola 53. (shot), Aleksandar Šantić 52. (shot), prof. Šmit 51. (shot), Ivan Šestak 50. (shot), Šunjić 49. dr.(deceased), Šrepel 48. (dead), Šuster 47. (shot), Faco Srnak 46. (shot), Streha 45. (shot), Jerko Skračić 44. (dead), Ivo Skomrža 43. (dead), Schram 42. (shot), Domagoj Ružičić 40. 41. (shot), (deceased), Ivan IvanPeko Petričević 39. (deceased), Paraga 38. (shot), Ante Pajdaš 37. Paunović34. Branko Pečnik35. (deceased), Peroš36. (deceased), Alojz (shot), Vilim Pavičićemigration),32. SlavkoPaškvan emigration),33. in (died Stanko(deceased), Tijas (shot), 29. Mohaček Božo (dead), 30. Nunić Niko (shot), 31. Pavičić Jure (died Mortigjija in 28. Ustasha), by (hanged Petar Mikočević 27. (shot), Silvije Maurano 26. 23. Lavicky Ivan (deaceased), 24. Makanec dr. Julije (shot), 25. Magdić Milivoj (shot), (shot), Vjekoslav Kirin 22. (shot), Kavurić 21. (deceased), Božo Kel 20. Ustasha), by (shot Ljudevit Karamarko 19. (shot), Antun Jedvaj 18. (shot), Mijo Hans 17. (shot), Stjepan Hajdinović 16. (shot), Petris Hijacent 15. (dead), kanonik – Gjivanović 14. (dead), mato A Filippi 13. (shot), (shot), Frauen-HeimStjepan 12. Fogetić (shot), Zlatko11. Marijan Fuis 10. (shot), dr. Čačinović 9. (deceased), Bartoš 8. (shot), Vicko Berković Boris (shot), 5. Babac fra Dominik (shot), 6. Baljkas dr. Josip (shot), 7. Bjeliš List ofdeadjournalists occupier.” them of most arrivalthe the of professionafteronly but journalistic or journalistic out carry to began forces, occupying the to themselves sold they then and before, many persons who assisted in this antinational work. Some of these were journalists “1. Belošević Josip (shot), 2. Bubanić Franjo (shot), 3. Bzik Mijo (deceased), 4. (deceased), Mijo Bzik 3. (shot), Franjo Bubanić 2. (shot), Josip Belošević “1. severeless with penalty,although condemn, to had also DNH of Honor of Court 48

They are nominated in four categories: shot, dead, deceased and deceased dead, shot, categories:four in nominatedareThey 47 49 . Thelistisfollowing: - - - -

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 23 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 24 full, one in this chapter, and longer one in the appendix to this work. The first was of theDistrictCourtfor National theyear 1946. Here are welists in bringboth one (3pages)datedsmaller and a note with on thedecision onmostofthebans with the listed banned books. A more extensive (5 pages) undated and unsigned, flagged as Bundle IX: The Press, along with various documents, may find two files period since 1945 to theeighties of the twentieth century. Soagroup of records the toZagreb,” pertains in Attorneywhich Public District by press and ceedings fromdocumentation theworkof theDepartment ofCivil and administrative pro other and press the with connection in “Report is IX Bundle of title Full Zagreb. eighties of the twentieth century.bear thestampof AllDistrict Public Attorney of via, the Independent State of Croatia, early DFJ and FNRJ and Yugoslavia until the ves in Zagreb 4.3. Dragan, Trišler Težak Mirko, Turkalj Vladimir. Alojzije, Šmit Nikola, Škrgić Viktor, Sonnenfeld Nikola, Smolčić dr.MikulićEttore, Tomislav,Mazzieli Ante,Viktor, RojnićPetanjek Nikola, Pinčić Vladimir,Mayer Dragutin, Matković Vinko, Mandekić Hrvoje, Macanović Milko, Kelović Mihovil, Kara Antun, Konrad Izrael, Deme-Deže Marcel,Zvonimir, Čukli ter 8thMay 1945.Theseare: ated between the1951and1952. spaper or appeared on theradio. Itis a totalof 330 listed people. The listwas cre ked.added to Also of 79persons list whois a thislist wrote occasionallynew a in wor they whom with and sheets data biographical brief a with journalists 251 published in full in the book of Josip Grbelja “Uništeni naraštaj”. first and NDH in reported journalists of list incomplete an is which Hrvatske”), DržaveNezavisne aparatCroatia”(“Propagandni of State Independent the of ne the Ustasha’s propaganda apparatus. in NDH. which he was appointed asaChief Commissioner for thepress and propaganda bySlavkosigned document Kvaternik,a had Bogdan 1941 10th April with dyon alrea happened Uvanovićthat Daniel and journalist and Nizete Antun writer ja, Mortigji Tijas prof. Bogdan, Ivo journalist launched first investigation, Udba’s them haschangedtheprofession. Propagandni aparat Nezavisne Države Hrvatske 55 HDA –Fund Iljko Karaman 54 Ibid.Pp.215.–217. 53 Ibid.Pp.191–211. – 18 No. 52 Grbelja (2000)Pp.17–18. 013,1, Code Act 48., Box SRH, RSUP SDS Fund - HDA Orig. 65. – 64 Pp. (1998:1) Grbelja 51 50 Grbelja (1998:1)Pp.191-222. Archi State Croatian the at deposited Karaman Iljko Prosecutor Public The Slavko,Čačković Cihlar Eduard, Cerjan Ivo, Braut Ante, Bezić Ivo, Balentović af profession the in working allowed was there journalists NDH To27 only In UDBA’s fund there can be found document named “The propaganda machi Ozna’s/ to according NDH, in propaganda and press the of Organization the condition inbookstores andlibraries The prohibitionofbooks and/or writers and

52 Theywere consideredof leaders warbyand major UDBAcriminals as 55 series of bundles related to censorship in theKingdom of Yugosla 54

50 Othersare stillknown asmissing. 53 There are listed

51 ------Data Analysis the originalinspellingasitiswithoutredaction. fewa examplesfrom arethat list that interesting tois copiedfrom him).Thelist Attached to thispaper cludes authorsfrom throughoutthe former Yugoslaviathe foreignand authors. širenje”) dalje njihovo onemogućiti i zabraniti hitno treba koje (“Knjige spread” further their prevent and prohibit immediately should we that “Books 4.3.1. with few examples, so here, in the appendix to the work, it is first time published. only mentioned was another and discrepancies) odd some allowed (Grbelja nal alreadypublished Grbelja’sin book i listova”, 3folii oculistics. «Trbosek»document, (TheRipper–Thisway itissomethinglike Turbo Ripper). i onemogućitinjihovo dalješirenje», 5folii 1946 March 16th dated 18/46, št. No. decision with greb zabranjenih knjiga i listova”) banned by National District Court for the City of Za 4.3.2. tions theurgency oftheirprohibition andstopping theirspread. reading especially when itis taken intoof the titlelistwhich account men an insight into what theauthoritiesconsidered moment asnotwantedthat for etc. oculistics” hypnosis, of acts “all prohibit to PetrovićPetar of works the about Interesting ones are in the title of the novel Fels Kvida “Jack Turbosek” writtenvery ina illiteratenumerous with language and semanticerrors. spelling the marks of city of publication and year, and somewhat the publisher. The list is ganda, religion...). Most are not dated with the date of publication; only some has (propa context the from understood be can some but banned, book the is why booksand popular cult for the generalThe public. listdoesn’t contain comments cal, religious, political works, high and low literature up to the fiction and the oc by names or there is just a pseudonym. The theme is broad, from the philosophi bed as “Niče - All acts” in the note No. 90. Also many authors have not mentioned descri Nietzsche, (eg, authors these by writtenwere that works the all account specifying thout thembybe muchlongerifwill wethis list namesothat take into may be noted that, some authors are noted with prohibition of all their works wi and authors published in various genres In atimespanfrom 19171946. until It order, alphabetical its really,notes.But 162 of whichconsists booksof pile a is it First list isthedocumentwithoutsignature andthedate entitledas 61 HDA - Fund Iljko Karaman; IX. štampa – Okružno javnoHDAOkružno tužioštvo61 – Fund Zagreb,Iljko“PopisActštampa - Karaman;zabranjenih IX. knjiga the 60 Bolded by authorfor of highlighting. Itis be discussed not assumed itshouldstill occult that about author of language the with accordance in be, should It highlighting. for author by Bolded 59 58 Pp.39–43ofthiswork. 57 HDA – Fund Iljko Karaman; IX. štampa – Okružno javno tužioštvo, spis «Knjige koje treba hitno zabraniti 56 Grbelja (1998:1) (“Popismagazines” and books banned of archive,same “List the a thereIn is This isverylist interesting historically andculturally sourcegives becauseit of seeminglyonlysystematicbecause is list this that is evident is what First, List ofbannedbooks andmagazines and prevent theirfurthercirculation Books that we shouldimmediately prohibit 58 , we bring the whole list (Grbelja in his book only givesonly book his in (Grbelja list whole the bring we , 56 , but herebut , completelya is razed to origi the 61 . It also lists 24publi also It . 59 ornotes 57 . It in It . 60 ------,

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 25 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 26 List offorbidden books andmagazines of covered themesofthosebooks andmagazines. shers by whom wereis interestingIt the publications. all banned to seewideness 62 Listisleft inoriginallanguage asanoriginalsource. (22) (21) (20) (19) (18) (17) (16) (15) (14) (13) (12) (11) (10) (9) (8) (7) (6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1) (26) (25) (24) (23) Gai e oa oj Erp” šapn u r. ikrkm aou 1942. zavodu, tiskarskom Hrv. u štampano – Evropa” bolja nova se “Gradi tiskarski hrvatski Izdao Marxa. zavod, 1942. E. od rada” narodnog uredjenje “Društveno 1943. godine. knjiga”,Zagreb “Hrvatska naklada Izdala Pavičić. S. dr. od rat” svjetski “Drugi i 14/46. od 1945. i br. 5 od 26. I. 1946. godine, rješenjem Okr. Nar. suda Št. 12/45., 13/45 13 i 12 brojevi su Zabranjeni Zagrebu. u tiskara”“Narodna tiskari u Štampano Klaić. Marko urednik Odgovorni Zagrebu. u sv.Petra Župe list – pastir” “Dobri “Croatien heute” odHermanaGinzel.Tisakgrafičkog zavoda “Preporod”, 1942. Zabranjeno Zagreba. iz Vidaković riješenjem Okr. Nar. Albe sudazagrad Zagreb br. 10/46od24.I.1946. št. Urednik časopis. Glazbeni “Cecilija” za grad Zagreb br. 5/45od13.XI.1945. Št. 1946. god. u tiskari “Tipografija” Zagreb. Zabranjeno riješenjem Okružnoga narodnog za suda kalendar i “Evolucija”,Izdavačpoduzeće Vandekar-Radić.Milica glavnirednikŠtampano a zbornik politički seljačko-prosvjetni “Božićnica” “Borba zaHrvatsku” odAbdulaha Ibrahimović, tisakB.Preko, Zagreb “Boljševizam ižidovstvo”, Hrvatski tiskarski zavod, 1942. “Anatol Šidaktraži istinu”. TisakLeonove tiskare Split. Peld nilpdj paa o Afea atea Tsaa Hrvatskome u Tiskana Lajtnera. Alfreda od prava” enciklopedije “Pregled za grad Zagreb br. 3/45od 17.XI.1945. Št. a Ćelap, knjižara Izdavačštampano u tiskari “Tipografija Gide). d.d. Zagreb. Zabranjeno rješenjem (Andre Okr. Nar. Žida suda Andre od SSSR-a” iz “Povratnik u Štampano od 11.XII.1945. Ludvig. 9/45 br. Safner suda Nar.Okr. rješenjem Zabranjeno urednikZagrebu. u “Vjesnik” štampariji Odgovorni list. humoristički “Patak” izd. Kovačić, “Partizani osebi” odS.M.Štedimlije, Zagreb 1944. Matija sastavio NDH” u Hrvatskog bibliografskog zavoda Hrvatska uZagrebu, pustošenja Št. državna tiskara. i zvjerstva “Odmetnička Raspačavanje Zagreb. tiskara”zabranjeno rješenjemOkružnoga Nar. sudabr. “Narodna 2/1945. Št. tiskari u Štampano Bernardić. Ivan “Narodni glas” od 20.X.1945. Izdavač Marija ud. Radić, glavni i odgovorni urednik “Narodne pjesme”štampano utipografiji d.d.uZagrebu. “Narod injegov vodja” bezoznake mjesta ivremena štampanja. u Zagrebu, 1945.g. “Vjesnik” tiskari u štampano a Beogradu, u JovanovićD. srediolira” “Najnovija Matice hrvatskih akademičara Zagreb 1942. godine. Izdanje Crljan. Danijel obradio pokreta” ustaškog hrvatskoga “Načela “Mi oslobađamo” bezoznake mjestaivremena štampanja. od 17.XI.1945. urednik odgovorni 4/45 br. a ZagrebŠt. gradOkr. za Nar.rješenjem Posavac.Zabranjensuda strip, Zlatko Mali konzorcij Izdavač list. zabavni – strip” “Mali 1946. a I. 4. od 16/45 br.Zagreb Beogradu, Št. Okr.grad odlukom Nar.za su suda zabranjene 10 i u 9 8, brojevima narod našim pod za knjige Ove Zagrebu. Biblioteke u “Vjesnik” Izdanje tiskari u štampano K. D. pisac – pismo” “Ljubavno Zagreb. Šuflaja, Milana tisak Hrvatska,Francetića”, Novaviteza izd. Jure djela “Junačka Zagreb, štampalaHrvatska državna tiskara Zagreb 1942.godine. Putevi Izd. Magdića. Milivoja od liberalizmu” i Marksizmu prema “Intelektualci profesora uZagrebu. Štampalahrvatska državna tiskara, 1944. srednjoškolskih hrvatskih društva Izdanje Minec. dr.Julija od vidici” “Hrvatski godine. 62 new, victorious government, they were all guilty of collaborating with the enemy during thewar andtheNDH wereUnder banned. the laws also enacted by the published were that authors those of books the Furthermore, content. or name lutely prohibited publishersandbooksall had connection withtheUstasha that Data Analysis From this list there can be drawn several conclusions. thereFirst, were abso (39) (38) (37) (36) (35) (34) (33) (32) (31) (30) (29) (28) (27) grad Zagreb br. 18/46.od16.III.1946.godine.” Št. Okr.za nar.riješenjem suda su zabranjene 37 i 36 33, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 23, 22, 20, Napomena “Ženska lozaustaškog pokreta” “Velebit” “Ured zajezik” “Ustaški nakladnizavod” “Ustaška vojnica” “Ustaša” “Promidžba ustaške mladeži” “Pressimport” “Pismohrana ustaškog pokreta” “Preporod” “Poglavnikova tjelesnabojna” “Nova Hrvatska” “Muška ustaška mladež” “Minors” “Ministarstvo vanjskih poslova NDH” “Istina iživot” “Hrvatsko-japansko društvo” “Glavni ustaškistan” “Glavni savez stališkihpostrojbi” “Evropa” “Državna radna služba” “Državni izvještajniipromidžbeni ured” “Društvo Hrvata Ličana” “Bosanska poštaSarajevo” je raspačavanje svih štampanihstvari koje suizdaliniženavedeni izdavači: Rješenjem Okr. Nar. suda za grad Zagreb br. 13/46. od Št. 2. II. 1946. zabranjeno prijekog ustaškog član suda. svih Remeta” “Zvonimir raspačavanje napisao je je zabranjeno koje stvari Zagreb, štampanih grad za suda Nar. Okr. Rješenjem “Strahote zabluda” oddr. A.Pavelića. Kugli IzdaoSt. Zagreb 1941.godine. 1942. godine. Leidinger.Zagreb i Rast Tiskara Krešimirović.dr. Ive od komunizam” i “Židovi rješenjem Okr. Nar. sudaZagreb br. 6i7/45.od18.XI.1945.godine. Št. Zabranjeno ValterEmil. urednik Odgovorni dnevnik. – Ujsag” Magyar “Zagrabi u tiskari “Vjesnik”uZagrebu 1946.godine. štampano a Beogradu, u narodBiblioteke za izdanju u izašao kalendar” “Vječiti 1942. komora rad. Hrv. Izdalo godine. Guberine. Ive dr. od Marksizam” tiskarskom i “Ustaštvo Hrvatskome u god. 1946. Štampano zavodu. Zabranjeno rješenjemOkr. Nar. sudabr. Matka. 21/46od20.III.1946. Št. Janka od “Tužim” tisak MilanaŠuflaja,Zagreb 1943.godine. crvenomzvijezdom”“TriFranjepod od mjeseca Rubine.Izdala“Nova Hrvatska” drž. zavoda. Tisak“Tipografija” d.d.1944.godine “Tri godine rada hrvatskog slikopisa” od Marijana Mikac, izdanje hrv. slikopisnog “32,000.000”, štampanouZagrebu 1942.godine. “Slavenstvo boljševičke Rusije” bezoznake mjestaštampanjaiizdanja. 1943., odZvonimira Fižop. “Preporod”,zavod grafičkiZagreb štamp. hrvatskog” naroda ugodni “Razgovor Zagreb br. 15/46od2.II.1946. Št. tiskarskom zavodu u Zagrebu 1946. Zabranjeno rješenjem Okr. Nar. suda za grad Stvari navedene pod tačkom 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 19, -

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 27 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 28 praised the Jasenovac Ustashas Jerolim Maričić, Branko Nemet amd lieutenant amd Nemet Branko Maričić, Jerolim Ustashas Jasenovac the praised it in and camp, concentration the in time the of memories of book ‘samizdat’ as 1946 under the No. Št. 17/46 book “Jasenovac” by Juraj (Đorđe) Miliša published too, notonly inIstria”. areasother also”makes in but struggle”difficult authorities worknational the of tive sense,directed againstgovernmentpeople’s the the achievement and of our churchof religioustaries other and fanatics,” figurathe in least “at in whatall is quently “most uses quotations from the Scriptures, the speeches of various digni magazine”,fre entire and the to givenare letters and speeches papal actionary and excerptsspeeches from the speeches anyof Comrade Tito, and made our other leaders, neverwhile re almost is sy “magazine state that our realize and censors reality and stem,”our from way afar content its “in is it because 1946, bited were magazines “Osa”, “Magnet”andpreviously mentioned“Dobripastir”. Sv.“ tomagazine SimilarlyNDH. prohiCecilija”the during waswhichpublished sical journal “Cecilia” was banned because the state estimated it was a successor blishing wartime fascist newspaper “Križaljka”. At the beginning of 1946 the mu NOB andgenderequality.” of achievements the “ridiculing to due 13 and 12 number pastir” “Dobri gazine magazine. . sitions from those announced (Ludvig Safner publisher, editor Marijan Filipović) po switched editor and publisher the because and “Kec” issue weekly the as re befo it announced they beforebecause day the from“Patak” magazine moristic year 1942. fascist publications. As an example it was specified number of “Božićnica” for the the grounds that the owner Milica Vandekar Radić published during the war pro on 1946 year the for “Božićnica” calendar and annual of 1945, 11th November from ban, of publication a find can we Thus, journalists). of exclusion the about newsof wecase to(as condemned the called in and and see justice them, can on 4.3.3. or work theirjob,norpublishanything becauseofallaforementioned reasons. associatesthe authorsand that books ofthebanned couldn’tin thefuture write priests-writers andreligious literature ingeneral. and thuscommitted a crime. Also there wereproductionall bannedalmost of rality and incitement to crime”. Although considered Miliša as suffering victim of false informationthreaten that interests national and do a grave breach of mo work and thus “not objectively described events in the camp” and “spreading the Slipčević, and described how he has managed to use the camp’s room for literary 65 Instead of fines for the change and fail, it was decided to completely ban the ban completely to decided was it fail, and change the for fines of Instead 66 Ibid.Pp. 103. 65 Grbelja (1998:1)Pp.102. 64 Grbelja (1998:1)Pp.102. 63 Pp.8ofthisstudy. The District National Court for the cityof Zagreb bannedonFebruary 14th from srca” “Gore magazine half-monthly Istrian the prohibited was it Also Also banned was weekly magazine “Rebus” as his owner was accused for pu On theDecember 20th 1945t there was news of the banZagreb parish ma Furthermore, December 13th 1945there was published news of banning hu prohibitionsinformingthese or of some published has “Vjesnik” journal The 2nd1945 August of Law Press The recall we if Also, More examples ofbannedbooks andmagazines between 1945and 1952

64 33

66 63 , then we can conclude can we then , ------nograph of Dositej Obradović by Prvoša Slankamenac, because of this “obscuran correspond to not the socialist taste. Furthermore,do to preventadventures the publishing and of a mo sensations these because that Drake Francis and remarks: denskjöld following Nor the Nansen, Amundsen, Lerman, Dragutin makes of book any public and not should they Croatia in institutes publishing for contradictory opinionsthatthey have managedto suppress andcensor. of regardless will, their of according artifacts, cultural the of some of future the weas tant see clearly can howcensorship ofonegovernment actions shape can impor is This consciousness. cultural public the in memories other or Miliša’s crimes and assuchhadto befor each sentencethe possibilityofsuchas without tion andmemory. Jasenovacof becameaplaceworship of the victims of Ustasha to create the so-called. “Jasenovac myth” that did not allow any other interpreta ge of theJasenovac concentrationfor camp future generations. Even thenbegan the Ustasha concentration camp, the book is banned not to affect the wrong ima which wereprohibited. not State bookshops andrecentsold new books publi and period, wartime prewarand the in published editions those and publishers Intheprivateds pointsought. that bookstores there were soldbooks ofprivate deman and point ideological or political by justified wasexpensive.more it But were boos thus distributors, and booksellers private,existingestablished the to distribution network. Itwas economically badbecause itmeantadditionalcost 4.3.4. Dr. Ivan Španasthepresiding judgeandElzaMujegićasarecorder. by signed was reality.decision and The spirit socialist to strangetorture, terary reflectapproachesand modern topoetry. wasIt form declaredli decadent of as greb. The poemsare recognized fromas standingout socrealistic understanding Za in “Typography” house printing the by printed and copies 333 in samizdat in book his published Stošić,errors. extremelygrammaticalmany illiterate with February 25th 1952 Number ON 136/52. The original official decision is written on dated decision the byprohibited was Stošić Josip old seventeenyearsby sed malistic anddecadent”writers. “for are Simić and Šegedin the both because Agitprop Committee CentralParty Communist the of officials high former Sarajčić, Ivo and Bunko - Sekulić Nikola to books the of reviewrecommended studencu.” He na kamen “Žedan Ujević by nici”,poems of Novakstory of collection short new a “Zakonognjevi”and Simić i “.ni letter,this In novel new byPeter“Osamlje a Šegedin on gives opinion he an godi 1848. o “Knjiga and Flaubert G. of works entire the Čapek, Karel byživot” mand of the exclusion from the annual plan of Matica Hrvatska the book “Običan prepared for printing to Agitprop.are Alsofrom the letters we can read out thecom which essays of list a send or essays Krleža of publishing the delay should Theodora Dreiser, B. Shaw’s “Essays on literature” and other books, and that bythey Trilogy” “American Gorky”, with correspondence 1948.”,“Almanah “Lenin’s ZavodHrvatskeNakladni “Anthology of plan annual the fromYugoslav of lyrics”, omission the orderedgroup”.Vujić also Vladimir He from is reactionist and tist ioa Đls n i lte dtd aur1t 14 aaye ana plans annual analyses 1947 January17th dated letter his in Đilas Milovan 68 Donat(1992) Pp.50–52 67 Grbelja (1998:2)Pp.121– 122 Party contended thestatethat andParty enterprises should develop itsown relea and 1952 in Zagreb in verses“Đerdan”self-published of the book The The situation in bookstores anddistribution

67

68 ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 29 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 30 ry books (anti-Communist, NDH books, religious books...). All books written with reactiona of libraries cleaned they when 1945 in was time first The funds. sed for internal use. tioned inthispaperareinternalbut notpublic listsof UDBA andthey were used men others and 1946 in dated newspapers” and books banned of ger.list “The lon no time later a at but lists, some werethere war the afterimmediately that it. about documents written surviving no is there and ne, ring the libraries as in the Soviet Union, but all orders came orally or by telepho to have learned a lesson from the USSR, and there was no written decree for clea books,laterbanned but they were transferred only orally. YugoslaviaIn ed seem the USSR, within the libraries, there still were occasionally, until 1948, few lists of therebecause wasaction morestoppedEducationcleaning nothing to eject. Eventually in1932 actions ended when the Russian Commissioner for National ses do not read Kant”. In the cleaning in 1927 she removed 60% of the total fund. mas “The sentence:famous wasa libraryfunds excuseof main cleaning forHer was warnedto not leave evidence she withdrew ofcensorshipthen and the list. 1923 ordered the removal of listed books fromlibraries. public After a while she Soviet libraries after the revolution. She has personally compiled a listandin 4.3.5. other state and Party enterprises, according to federal units. were “Kultura”.there and them abbr.DIZJUG Besides Bureau) Publishing (State partisans, orprinted communistliterature insecret. the helped they if even circumstances, mitigating without to) had they (which war the during Germanyfrom book orderedthey because reasons other among publishing, theParty couldnotcontrol theprivate publishersandtheirpolicies. wereconfiscated.real The reason control,wasof unlike lack because, statea the in which private publishershavesurvivingthe last canceled and been ofthem nationalization preparedenemies”.second wasthere “the 1948 publishers teIn publishers took since 1945 to 1949, and newspapers all the time called the priva privateand Party of “war” This books. of cost their lowering and paper of price stroy private publishing, disabling the delivery of their paper, paint, or raising the to that of the Communist Party. Therefore, at every step it tried to completely de of power throughwhich thebook spread can propagandaand theideaopposite shed after therevolution. njihovih autora». Pp.74-75 stic value, “which could”remove “readers from thereal life. the massaway of taking from thebooks ofsuspicious contentarti and without In Yugoslavia afew timessome categories of books moved from opento clo 75 Stipčević (2000.) Pp.207. 74 73 Stipčević (1994)Pp.107-108 72 Dimić(1988)Pp.155 –156 71 Dimić(1988)Pp.156 i knjiga štetnih protiv borbu za priručnik praktički iliti cenzoru savršenom «O (1994) A. Stipčević, 70 69 Dimić(1988)Pp.155 In the Soviet Union as V. I. Lenin and his wife Nadjezhda Krupskaja purified Krupskaja Nadjezhda wife his and V.Lenin as I. Union Soviet the In izdavačkizavod”“Državni the by occupied was place publishing central The property, state became and confiscated were bookstores private all Thus, the But problem wasthe Party that saw intheprivate publishers he centers Stipčević, A.(1992) Libraries

75 “ Cenzura uknjižnicama” 69 . Pp. 119

70

74 72 Olderlibrarians say

71 They had the task 73 In ------from politicalbrochures andpamphletsto thehigh literature. Soviets when libraries very thoroughly cleaned themselves of Russian literature, the closedfundsstartedthat to recharge againin 1948 after thebreakthe with ded books by Trotsky, Hitler, Mussolini, and all other not wanted literature. After of Nazor, that there was better equipment and paper...). Of course, same ways en biographies,theypublished collectedworks(that published be could terquality ry of theNDHsomething and thepossibilityofthatwasthinking good or of bet Parliament.tian wasthe aim The conclusionisthat to erasecollective the memo Croa the of presidentwas time the at himself Nazor that and Zagreb, Adžija”in “Božidar WorkersLibrary of Fund closed a in placed and wated” “not declared translationby VladimirNazor.is particularly It interestingwasthe book that in and 1943 in printed “Inferno” Dante’s removed was there that quote we tes Racine - just because of the date of publishing). As one of the interesting anecdo Dostoevsky,Šenoa, Homer,Hugo, - literature world from everything (including NDH’s roothad to spelling beremovedpublished inperiod 1941 andall–1945 about 3000 – 4000 books (burned or submitted to paper mills for recycling), bo county Opatija Rovinj,in of front in Island Red familyon Hütterottboxes)reeof ste from the island of Sv. Katarina in Rovinj, books (about 3000) and archives (th cal station of the Berlin aquarium in Rovinj, parts of the Biblioteca Civica di Trie hydrobiologiof libraryprofessional large destroyed:werea partially or pletely com Istria in example, for Thus, language. (“bourgeois”) French or English or (“occupying”) German or Italian in written were books the because just Mostly tian private libraries and home libraries of rich industrialists and intellectuals. cient writers, andsomerecent, suchasKantandNietzsche). ne Comedy”, Sophocles, Euripides and Aeschylus, Tacitus “Agricola” and other an ved several books surreptitiously taking them home, and that were Dante’s “Divi “fascist”literatureof destruction fromthe that sa Stipčevićalleges he truck. the be sent to the old paper. The students had to throw them from the fourth floor to should books “fascist” the all – command new a by followed was This attic. the herself. booksAll were inItalian marked asfascist andorder for resettlementin to room this wanted she because library the of eviction the ordered and school, parts of the plaster. After a job well done, Comrade Ilić came, the new director of dents who knew Italian to clean the library, which was scattered and mixed with stu those all Dunatovurgedprofessor Šime a (formerlyItalian), wasCroatian it his personal memories of thegrammar school in Zadar1945. Since became lists he wherelibraries, in censorship on book his in Stipčević givesAleksandar after April10th1941intheGerman,ItalianorCroatian language. published works all of sale the bans literature”)fašističkethat i ustaškezabrani o (“Naredba literature” fascist and Ustasha the prohibiting for Order “The sued internal catalogs. not recorded in the catalogs, and most of them have not been processed either in 79 Stipčević (1992) Pp.1 78 Hebrang Grgić (2000)Pp.119 77 Stipčević (1992)Pp.146 76 Stipčević (1992)Pp.104 In the same way there was destroyed much of Istrian, Kvarnerian and Dalma Brightexample related to the booksof theformer inthelanguage occupier In relation to books in foreignin August languages 10th 1945 there was is tois alsoimportant It knowin Yugoslaviathat books from closed funds were

77 79

76

78 ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 31 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 32 as “Novi partizan”,“Novi as kulaka”,“Kursmađarskih Tita”...“Slijedimo playswere that performed by amateur groupsand barracks inthevillages such Toshort writesuccessful. to began not she “orthodoxy” her surviveshow to and whyunderstand not does she that worksher was prohibited, werepleas her but and corruptssocialistconsciousness of citizens. She complained with theletter and threw itfrom libraries with explanationit remindsthat of feudal period work her banned censors Invisible readings. light and fiction novels, historical of author Croatian famous Zagorka, Jurić Marija was victims first the of One re. zor Đilas’headonthesephotos. ra with removeto Stipčević commanding problem this solvedMilosavljević jor Ma books. those in leaders party other and Tito with Djilas of photos found he when emerged problem new The shelf. the on book the return then diers”,and sol don’tbaffle “ideologicallythey so contributions Dilas’ all razor with crop he the ordered instances the with consultation after then, and aside, put porarily superior,Kardelj.His and Mirosavljevićmajor orderedwerefirst books the tem Djilas erup Tito, of those works issue Djilas’s the besides the contained books the of But Many ted. Djilas. Milovan of books the of library the up clean to had he library the in task first a As 1955. Belgrade Voždovacin at library company the in worked he service, military in serving While anecdote. personal another closed the holdings. Aleksandar Stipčević in his book on censorship in libraries remembers into transferred be will circles, Communist with conflict into came he when books, the of cleaner ideological and Agitprop of chief the lovanDjilas, Mi 1952, until period this of censors main the of one of books the goslavia,that oks andarchives from Pazin, Buja,Novigrad, Poreč andotherplaces. took legal actionagainst theprintinghouse. publisher the that case known no is there period, postwar throughoutthe Thus, not directly involved in thedecision andcouldnotbesued because ofcensorship. the national interest and in accordance with the ideology: the state that way was sorship in which it seemedthepressthat workers themselves decided what isin 4.3.6. were notincludedinthecultural consciousnessofthegeneral public. therecourse, Of were exceptions. aftertheypermittedthem became of most But ve one, so in many of their works they glorified NDH, falsified official history etc. ty of their efforts, as artistic and scientific started from that not point, an objecti ideology,political nationalist with indoctrinatedemigration and majori the and Ciliga andother writers and scholars. workthe Vinkoof of learned Nikolić,public Jure Petričević, Radica,AnteBogdan the createdand funds exhibitiontime closed forfirst an of the opening the 1990 In funds. library enclosed the directlyinto placed were them of Most police. the goslaviagift to asa thelibraries and mostofthemwere stopped andcensored by a high literary achievement. 83 82 Ibid.Pp.106 81 Stipčević (1992)Pp.1-2 80 Grbelja (1998:2)Pp.124 cen of sub-species interesting an was there Yugoslavia, WWII post the In Croatian emigration publishedmany books abroad andthensentthemto Yu After 1945 Agitprop’s major activity and duty was to get rid of trash literatu Yuin period next the of beginning later,the seen in to interesting be will It Ibid. Pp.145 Press workers-censors phenomenon 81 83 However, many of them were political were them of However,many

82 but thiswas but not 80 ------“decided” notto printthenewspaper anymore. workers press copies 100,000 of circulation reached year same the of vember ti-party system because it was a list of Grol’s Democratic Party mul the show to 1945. September in published first “Demokratija”wasZagreb. pravice”in i slobode čovječnosti, – glas “Narodni and Belgrade “Demokratija”in to proceed. Only then would the secretary called a meeting of Party people, and people, Party of meeting a called secretary the would then Onlyproceed. to organization of SK in printing houses, which has received clear instructions how of thehigher Partycommittee was sentbysecretary a who informed thebasic decision The manuscript. the of rejection the order committees the that so list), enough that the writer or publisher of manuscript was on the (thatis, blacklist a was it experts, of suggestions or advice any need not did committees the times other Partycommittee broughtthe decision onthefate Some ofthemanuscript. any or city municipal, opinion expert the receiving after Only committee. Party the to opinion their submit to and manuscript, analyze to committee the of side ople who were not too educated, so they employed trusted and loyal experts out tentParty committees Regularlyor city). (municipal in thesecommittees pe sat house tookof theLeagueCommunistsinprinting toapplied and it thecompe nuscript and offered it to printing press, Party secretary of the basic organization press inYugoslavia, soinfact itwas illegal. sorship in Europe, especially considering that it was not official by the laws of the se publication. refu to “decided” workersand of convenedmeetings then who houses printing of Partycommittees the totelephone by or person in sent then and committees, organs ofParty. Decisions have beentakenclosed meetingsofsenior atParty decision ofpress workers onitsnonprinting. censors In 1945 is the way of censorship extinguished theopposition newspapers 90 Ibid.Pp. 2 89 88 Stipčević (2005)Pp.1 87 Grbelja (1998:1)Pp.100– 101. 86 Stipčević, A.(2005)«Tiskari kao cenzori uHrvatskoj: 1945.–1990.” Pp.4. 85 84 Banac(1990)Pp.33 ma “questionable” some brought himself author the or publisher the When workers’Such censorship wasverya interestinghistorycase inthe ofcen by allowed be they would nor anything, workershavedecided never fact, In This was the first known case of the so-called phenomenon of press workers- Ibid. Pp.1 Stipčević (1994)Pp.31-33 Bernardić from “preventative reasons” got10years inprison. necessarynot togovernment thenew released informationthe workers that read themagazineit was andconcludedthat issue wasthat supposedto gofourth November 1945 never was printed. There was then already a HRSS, illegally represents party in the new government. So the second Among other things, because it it was published in it that the former When leadership of number.HSS, printing. prevented and first intervened prosecutor public the the more, out printed be sold should edition entire the after only banned actually representedhad not side besaidthat can anywasIt specialanti-communism. political the On out. sold and 1945, 2th October on printed was issue postwar first “Dom”.The name the under HSS of magazine as published was it 1941 until 1906 Since Bernardić. Ivan was chief in Editor Radić. Stjepan of widow Radić, Marija by 87 . These publications were not officially banned by court, but only as a as only but court, by banned officially not were publications These . “Narodni glas” was a magazine of HSS (Croatian Peasant Party). It was published 89 85 and that is antinational. Editoris antinational. that and Chief inIvan

90

88

86 84 , but when to No ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 33 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 34 to themorally orby telephone fromhigher a authority. of printinghouses zations inSKfollowed theorder and instructionswere given organi main the of secretarieslaw, the the by not was works.”it such Although propaganda literature. The most effective measureworkers isthat donotprint most ofbooks ispublishedby theCatholicChurch. Here we shouldprevent this editions church of terms “In sessions: the of one in editions Church of printing ting socialism inYugoslavia. spapers would have brought news ofthelaudatory role ofworkers in construc new the then and printing, its refusing about letter a written simply as was re the revolution, socialist the of achievement the towardsdestructive or nalities sessed as ahereticalpublication or destructive to the Yugoslav nationsandnatio pers we have anexamplebecause intheevent the press that workers-censors as of newsbecause innewspapers orfrom personal experiences. Fromthe newspa magazine or a newspaper. book, a print toworkers refused”“press the that learned public the cases, some on and rose, dust public in censorship of kind that about or manuscripts, their weknow, well-knownwasa it writersbecause anout who were rejected toprint houses printing the in censorship of cases some However,about manuscripts. rectly identify thenamesof those who were really deciding the fate of offered this dayuntil so that retained verywritten little traces onwhich we couldcor phone, the over dictated or oral, were organs Party higher of directives the All es, to reject themanuscriptandnotto printitby theprintinghouse. relevantcommitte the in made alreadybeen had earlier which decisions, make would they then and house, printing the in bodies self-governingnecessary, if Branko Marjanović and written by Joža Horvat. Problems with the film started film the with Problems Horvat. Joža by written and Marjanović Branko ogie, etc.), because“itsmusicalityadversely affected theeducationofyouth.” 1947.” which contained translations of foreign compositions (such as Boogie-wo “Albumof za edition melodija of plesnih dissemination further prohibit to cided 4.4. blication ofawork. factis very from clear which highlevels ordercame regarding therefusalof pu editorial board from thebuildingNZH. the of eviction the ordered it Also, magazine. “Magjarujsag” the of printing the prohibiting Agitprop, to sent was report The NZH). – Hrvatskezavod (Nakladni of CroatianWriters directorAssociation and oftheCroatianPress Institute Štambuk, politician a and diplomat, a failed poet who was a member of the court been found. 95 94 Ibid.Pp.4-6 93 92 Paraščić (2007)Pp.19 91 Stipčević (2005)Pp.3 by directed Miguli” “Ciguli movie the banning was example interesting An Evenmusic hasnotbeenpreserved popular by thecensorship. wasSo it de the regarding conclusion had 1947 in Agitprop, of head the Đilas, Milovan Also there issavedreport a dated December 10th 1945 and signedby Zdenko Aboutthe whole of this process usually there wasn’t any written evidence. Ibid. Pp.13 Stipčević (2005)Pp.15 Examples ofcensorship of musicandfilm

93

91 The role of press workers-censors is known mostly 92 No records from themeetingsof committees have

94

95 From thisconclusionin ------proval for viewingcamein1977. choirs and anniversary of the“known”urban conductor Ciguli Miguli. in some place alongtheriver Drava andthetroubles connected with themore Ivanović Ivan referent cultural of problems about comical naive and humorous is movie The 2nd. July on VnukŽivko and Baltić, Milutin Barbijeri, Frane mica, whichwasfollowed1952 20th byand negative 16th June Mi on byMiloš critics Zagreb in JNA of House the in preview a just held wasThere banned. vertheless premiere,tothe come should whenwasit stedand forfilm year half, ne a a and who gave his blessing for the filming and Arts Council passed the idea. Filming la like. However, Joža Horvat directly contacted the head of Agitprop, Milovan Đilas, some socialist principles, manifested a tendency to return to the mocks old author waysthe that and the concept, confusing a is scenario the that stated was it re whe 1950 14th March on held Film, Jadran of Council Arts the of meeting from per class. But with the change of political system,political of change therethe pervadedwith But generalclass. the per in up former the was audience cultural Narrowarchives. and galleries museums, schools, of distribution poor and number small the and Serbia in literatepeople ple, loyal to theparty. the Serbian literary cooperative and others in which they distributed new peo grade, Matica srpska, National Library, the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences, Bel Library,of UniversityUniversityuniverzitet, narodni Kolarčev Theatre, nal Natio the were That work. however,their continued important, most and dest ol the institutions, the of part elsewhere.One and Ethnographic Museum seum, Library,Mu National Art Serbia,the Archivesof to further deployedit purpose, therings, went to the state, ie the Ministry of Education, which, depending on the ties and institutionscanceledaspotentially possible centers of opposition ga socie those of values cultural and Assets glasnik”etc.). književni (“Srpski sues is cultural treated were that magazines and papers disputed the Club, Cultural Serbian of organization an others), Pavleand Prince of (Museum vatemuseums pri others), and Sava”“Sveti Company (the associations educational and tural and groups of other political parties, singing and cultural societies, religious, cul ves andsoon. archi artifacts, cultural old of especially too, censorship of lot a to exposed was war,the after Serbiaperiod first this in but procedures,censorship many to sed far,so expo see could we as propaganda his and enemy the with link its to due was, Croatia see. shall we as case the not was that and censored was Croatia in only that belief general Croatian conventional because primarilystudy, this in researched and presented.it is Butinteresting to take Serbia asacomparison sorship in the former Yugoslavia, the situation in Croatia in this paper is the most 97 96 Donat(1992)Pp.40 –43 Great burden was carried with big cultural backwardness, huge number of il societies cultural for place no was there Serbia of life cultural the in Thus, Because of the availabilityof materials andthegreatest exposure to cen 5. Dimić (1988) Pp.57–58 The situation inSerbia 97 96 Finalap ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 35 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 36 cepted only ingeneral Soviet ideologicalworks. sciousness.” con their of shaping negativelythe can literature,affectrottenwhich decadent, bibliographies published after the war because “young readers may not meet the the in mentioned longer no were writers Some others). and Crnjanski Miloš as tion of writers, poets and artists in general who created from 1918 to 1945 (such WorldSecond rethe War. entiregenera an Likeand Expressionism,Surrealism, is publishedonly oral folk literature, especially theepics. Dubrovnik.of Morehistory the about something and Duklanina), popa (Ljetopis Miroslavpriest (Miroslavljevoof Duklja Gospel onlyof Chronicle evanđelje) and published were monuments medieval from and Methodius, and Cyril about ten writ was little a Just genealogies. and chronicles, kings, the of biographies acts, as historical documents and codes (Code of Emperor Dušan) and themajorityof well as mentioned, not also were novels knight Medieval Danilo. archbishop or TodosijeDomentijan,, Prvovjenčani, Stefan Sava, Saint of those as such culture, Serbian for important corpus, literary and historical Serbian of works portant im published longer no werethere and bypassed, literaturewasmedieval bian Aristophanes, Schiller and Shakespeare’s plays are also not put into theaters. Ser fashioned themes there were pushed away great world masterpieces. Sophocles, lor –itwouldand religious notpass.National themes were fully banned.Asold- havedid not opponents. Ifit strict form a ofrealismactivitypolitical and co and lues, orexpert’s opinion. governing structures and ideologicalenthusiasm simply ignored the cultural va for a detailed examination of all cultural artifacts, but at lower levels ignorance of shoes for the first sports parade. The official position of Party was indeed looking an underground caves, was sent to Borovo to and melted and turned into glue for tury. Or the case when the complete archive of film material previously stored in in Vojvodina, where in some cities disappeared the rich archives of the 16th cen emblems...) Sowerenational destroyed and scattered archives and their holdings crowns,systemssymbols,earlierdestroy crosses,toas the zeal(such of ty parts werements destroyed. “culturecide”this wasfromAll out excessivecarried Par numents of national leaders, medieval mosaics and the remains of ancient monu facts and churches themselves) because their cultural value was not noticed. Mo arti art manuscripts, (inventory,books, property church of destruction the on to massive destruction of Serbiancultural heritage. Sothere isavariety ofdata led people the of governingstructure the of knowledge Modest courses. of riety va a and schools evening the finished they and educated, well too not wereves difference ofthewidermassesfor books, plays orconcerts. grade 36employees violatedhonor of teachingand duty the profession, five tea of intellectualsenemy.the with wasIt Universitythe in concluded that ofBel in Croatia.There werecreated also courtsofhonor for crimescooperationof the 102 101 Quote ofRadovan Zogović, oneof majorcommunistcritics. 100 Ibid.Pp.66–67 99 Dimić(1988)Pp.64 –65 98 Ibid.Pp.63 Press Law from autumn 1945 also defined Serbian cultural life as it was case SerbianliteratureIn everything was rejected facedarts whatsocial befo the In literature and artare generally was denied workall created by ideological The Party has tried to start education, but most of the first teachers themsel Dimić (1988) Pp.68–71

101 In the first period of the postwar era, until 1948, there were ac were there 1948, until era, postwar the of period first the In 99 102 100 98 ------de, the Serbian Writers’ Association, Association of Visual Artists of Serbia and Serbia of Artists Visual of Association Association, Writers’ Serbian the de, Belgra Writersof of Association the as such societies, and associations cultural educational levels ofstaffinthecommittees. and that does not understand people, which directly influenced on the decline in does haveligence not revolutionary the strangeit that spiritand to nation the requiredjob knowledge wasit because This is education. and thought intelthat trust in the “good Party members” than in the “smart intellectual”, even when the to work inherfield. right her lost artists, drama Serbian best of one Stokić, Žanka rights,civil others re was mass cleaning of personnel with regard to their Forpast. example, among the institutions Serbian other all Germany.in to And fled them of 16 and fired, was them of 12 crimes, war a for convicted be to proposed was Commission te Sta the at professor honor,one national Serbian the against sinned have chers son andhostileact. trea considered structure governing the that and art, own their for space vate And again here we can see self-censorship, which cleverly resisted creating a pri completelyworkslike.differentof forprivatethe set groupsand discussion use, other,and exhibitions, and createda wheretheyprint public, the to them giving rewas leveldual a whichin first createdthe artists - art of workstheir wereand the that said be can reality.fromIt diverts which road, wrong a as thought ply currentsthe main as of resistance. Inspirationof thedefaultout theme was sim sted. Bohemian young writers were called “Ujević like” and also were considered Party were declared hostile, the writers had withdrawn into themselves and resi articles had to be written by editors. Given that the different opinions of those of terswere simplythe of saturatedaccordingmost dictates,so writing tothe with and scientists have notresponded andparticipated in thediscussions. The wri artists writers, the because mission their in succeeded neverhave like, the and of evaluationof works quality ofartthrough theperspectiveneeds ofnational cuted. duality andbecameonly theexecution of the taskthatmustbesuccessfully exe set ofself-censorship ble mechanism. Creativein thisway act hadlostitsindivi tely and faithfully, but not neutrally, but eagerly and engaged. So that is veryaccura visi described be to supposed is reality the socrealism, of principles the on than from professional critics. position ideological an from more criticized, was work current their Also work. attend inthese societies classesinorderpolitical to know theguidelines for their ship inmany societies hadseveralrevisions overArtists sometimeshadto time. member the Therefore, ranks. their from rejected were opponents ideological already are or be might who those war,all whilethe during conduct their mise thereit in others. But members onlybe could thoseartistswhocompro didnot Immediatelyafter thereWWII end ofthe the are created manyartistic and The mainproblem ofthepostwar period is thefactthe statethat hadmore 107 106 Ibid.Pp.199 105 Ibid.Pp.195–198 104 Dimić(1988)Pp. 119 103 Ibid.Pp.102 Septem Forin example,case. the not was it when situations werethere But However, it is interesting that the magazines, which had, by the Party, the task Writing inaliterary works amounted to therealistic description of events 106 Ibid. Pp.217 –220 107 103 105

104 ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 37 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 38 harms the overall work and national progress” national and overallwork the harms that “everything destroyed and removed was There appearance. and character Librariesreceivedthem. collect librariesshould uniformand a “good” be should creasingly losing. in more is works Soviet of dominance German, fifties the In ignored drama. ancient and French and eliminated completely almost and literature, theatrical the policyofsettingplaysthat the emphasis putondomestic and realistSoviet for agitationandpropaganda ofCKSKSerbia ceasedto exist. ones havenew yet not been created. 1952 InafterCongress theSixth Directorate and abolished were commissions old the because difficulties werethere Serbia, In apparatus.bureaucracy reduce to tried they and individuals, just not groups, larger of hands to went work cultural with and changes been have there fifties early The so. do to competent not were themselves they policy,and cultural of definition the with deal to supposed were who personnel, of education of level as they were not concerned with other questions. Also big influence was the low tors led to the factindividuals that wanted to dealonly withtheir assignments Apparatuswas notfully completedthe personnel.Alsodivision with into sec responsiblefor workthis Partythe commissions, not in organization whole.a as individuals the by dealt were propaganda and agitation of Issues firm. set also in thefiftiesoftwentieth century. ghs andthey were oneofthefoundations andsignsofchangeinculturalpolitics the Partythe inspirationall couldnotquell creative andauthentic breakthrou Since 1949 critics opposed the influence of the Soviet Union. But alert. no matter the what, on constantly be must art that more, even for look to began It layers. new added just but criticism, the to changes made not has Cominform the with with the dogma and thus exercised a real literary censorship of the time. Conflict and others. They attacked everything wasthat notsocialistrealism inaccordance critics were Milovan Djilas, Radovan Zogović, Jovan Popović, Čedomir Minderović derstood theforeign policyofYugoslavia. se of the text entitled “Krylov or Aesop,” with the explanation that author misun becau novine” “Književne magazine of number 36th forbidden was it 1949 ber Yugoslavia, until 1952. Although with a small difference between the two time two the between difference small a with Although 1952. until Yugoslavia, This waycation. retainedbe will ofpublishing the endofAgitprop until phasein publi toapproved reviewedprior and be to had text all propaganda, and tation Publishers weretask. ty closely related toof agi commissionsdepartments and tice. Editors were mostly Partywhopeople worked inthepressof Par aspart to write. Theofeditorstask was howto these guidelinesinto implement prac managed the printing press in a way of giving guidelines for what, when and how be intheservice blished mustoforganizing power forthe country. building It situation was thesameas inCroatia. 112 Ibid.Pp. 143 111 Ibid.Pp.213 110 Ibid.Pp.267–268 109 108 Ristović. Pp.338 The press was entirely controlled by Party.what Itdemandedall that was pu Library hadadutyto popularizebooks. Party was concernedbooksthat The analysis of theater plays inSerbiain forties can beconcludedwithfact organizationIn Agitpropplans, firmdesigned in apparatus Serbiain was not Criticism was, in contrast, completely under the control of Agitprop. The main Dimić (1988)Pp.222 –225 111 109 108 112 from thelibrary funds. So the 110 ------1948 when slowly, the situation in Yugoslavia began to turn to the Western cultu bypassed 1948 and untiltheadvantagehad theSoviet writers. It was only after What it was seen fit - passes, what does not – it was censored. World literature is media wereall republics inboth under thecontrol of theParty and itsAgitprop. cinemas... theaters, bookstores, libraries, Magazines,Party. the of eye watchful the under authorities local and common the by controlled was which field, ral ces between Serbiaand Croatia as thepostwar Yugoslav republicsin thecultu plans theCentral Committee ofCommunistParty was kept informed. sent there wasof thepress.out nothing Aboutany changesinthepublishing and propagandaagitation of the CommunistParty of Serbiaits con andwithout ganize Party spiritandlineofeachmagazine andeditorial policy. aling with the censorship business completely, and after 1948 it was trying to or sub periods: until 1948 Agitprop censorship studied and edited every article de controlled andcensored. In thebeginningthatcontrol was made by aspecial weapon and asked they must be used carefully and skillfully. Movies were strictly Russian books deemedas“harmfulwaste ofpaper.” criticism of Soviettextbooks. Thisledto also anotherextreme where translating Sovietthe Westernand moreand abandon, is book increasingly was made being ideological differences. slated and published in the Soviet Union, and then in Yugoslavia, in order to avoid quence ofuncriticaltranslation ofmatter. Sovietthe leader.a as Stalin and the homeland Unionas This was greata conse pancies inwhich students were taught inYugoslavia from historical books about censoredaccepted but So itcameto aseligible. theinteresting culturaldiscre or corrected checked, not were works Soviet the that fact the in emerging was ters wereand politicians translated andprinted in hugecirculation.The problem fromuncritical andall USSR was unconditionally accepted. Books of Soviet wri the Soviet Union. And it was since 1945 1948 until in Yugoslavia almosttotally aforementioned reasons inthispaper. wasatia considerably still higher constraintcensorship regardand with tothe all republicsralquiteboth similar,is in trends. anysituation In the case, Croin but From this brief overview there canbeseen the similarities and differen ofpublisherswereplans All considered andapproved by theDepartmentof 117 116 Ibid.Pp.176. 115 Ibid.Pp.175. 114 Dimić(1988)Pp. 157 113 The same thingwasthe cinematography. with Party considered movies as a on Differing changing. was field cultural the in relationship this 1948 After There was also the custom to for a work from World literature to be first tran Thus we come to thelastimportantitem in this paper -therelationship with 6. Ibid. Pp.176. Ibid. Pp.148–149 Soviet Unionbefore andafter 1948 The cultural relationship withthe 116 115 117 113

114 ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 39 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 40 organize discussions about the line of our Party in the sector of literature and art, sector.revealingthis and forin fighttruth Cominform wested,policy must of To manife others and Union Soviet of nationalism where countries, Cominform of revealwill Cominform Throughplans. criticism and reviews of individual works dio drama, humor, etc. in which in the literary way, through stories or jokes, they ra plays, plays, act will write will They Cominform. of attacks campaign unveil magazines etc, and through poems, sketches, reviews, etc. constant struggle, and newspapers, in articles through will, writers “The said: was paragraph 10th in ry journalsandcultural sectionsofnewspapers. of cultural life in town and village, control of movies and theater, and other litera the work of universities, drama groups, choirs, and their repertoire, organization everything: control to had Agitprop apparatus. Agitprop of work the in lization tralizationof cultural policy. Tighterwas planning followed by increased centra policy. Conflict with the Cominform in the first time influenced the increased cen wereculturalrelatedwhichto of many issues, practical-political and theoretical cultural consciousnessofthepeople. the Stalinist cultural influences in Yugoslavia and start removing them r from the Sovietthe dramaturgy theater.the at This isvery beganshift that big to change import of Soviet movies is stopped, and in early fifties is reduced the influence of operationmagazinesand similar themesare with extinguished. Duringthe 1949 list policy. The Soviet-Yugoslav friendship societies and societies for cultural co- suggestedideas newandways ofunderstandingtheculturaland general socia num of the Central Committee Communist Party inDecember 1949 where they Ple Third at broughtwas shift Radical influences. cultural Soviet towardthe de in an offensive against Stalinism in the field of cultural policy and changed attitu with Western influences. But the Communist Party will soon pass from defensive raged andpropagated Soviet thoughtculturaland requiredand impact combat encou Party Communist the beginning, the Party.In the of politics cultural the in era new a heralds Cominform the with Conflict messages. propaganda Soviet reducing theimportofmoviescensorship and removedthose who all wear the length documentarymovies and145journals.Intotal 557movies. feature- 31 movies, short 189 movies, art 192 Union Soviet the from imported Yugoslavia1949 to 1945 Since life. new a for fight and everything of middle the movie wasdaily propagatednewspaperthe in in carrier man a ofideasthe as thereforeand harmful wereand idea censored.Sovietsideredwithout tasteless, viet cinema as good and classed. American, English and French movies were con and censors. Because of lack of own production, from 1945 to 1949 prevailed So and Education, Informationbecause there was not an educated staff Defense,in the form of film critics of Ministry of representatives of composed commission article orsimilardiscussionabout Cominform.” Cominform. every issue of “Kolo”, “Kulturni radnik”, “Izvor” and so should have an area. To organize literary evenings wherebe given will presentationsthe about and through suchdiscussions revealpolicy oftheSoviet Unionandothers in the 121 Grbelja, J.(2002) «Informbiro iknjiževni časopisi“.Pp. 173. 120 Ibid.Pp.231.–232. 119 118 Dimić(1988)Pp. 177–179. So in Agitprop’s “Plan against Cominform on cultural and educational sector,” and ideological complex of series a opened has Cominform the with Conflict decreased, viewers of Number changed. suddenly situation the 1948 Since Ibid. Pp.184.–188. 119 121 120 118 ------from October 5 - 7 1952 in Ljubljana. Major theme was analyses of the cultural the of analyses was theme Major Ljubljana. in 1952 7 - 5 October from turewasart and the Third Congress ofWriters ofYugoslaviawhich washeld longer thesoleauthorityfor alltheideologicalandconceptualissues. free culturaldevelopment and decentralized culturallife. State andParty are no his duties Soviet modelofsocialdevelopmentis abandoned.Opensuptheideaof apparatusand theFifth Congress oftheCommunist Party precisely formulated it 1949 came to partialcentralization inthefinancingofcultural policy.the After Committees. republican of level the at same the was it Thus, CultureFNRJ.and of Science of Ministry the theybecome 1948 of end the at and the Committee for Schools and Science and theCommittee for Culture andArt are Connected control. Party of issue exacerbated was and forums, bases, daily January 28th – 30th 1949 it was decided each that culturalwork takes place on enemies or the church, which was not tested in Yugoslavia or in the Soviet Union. ty.Rejected was everything whatwas created political byopponents, ideological The attitudes. positivewas acceptation only what itdeemed to notbother Par these of interpretation Stalinist the or Marxism, of classics the of attitudes the to which Yugoslavia was pushedwithitsbreak withEast. was actually an attempt to present regime in a better light to the West, according deterioration This deviations. ideological and resistance dogmatic strong tions, oscilla the with out carried are still matters these all But Camus...). Sartre, ka, recently(Fromm,until criticized strictlywhohad and been authors banned Kaf viet andWestern literature. There are publishedWestern philosophers and other Schiller andothers) in thetheater.stoppedthe publishing In division on the So WesternreturnedShakespeare, It Sophocles, Ibsen, influences. (worksdramaof dogma ofsocialistrealism. the of rejection the and art and Yugoslavliterature in course new a announces approaches to replacethe ideologicalprinciplesofvaluation. scientific and criticism expert which in present, and past the fromvalues the all of revision and review critical a Thirdly,seeked it. he to keeps blindly be to not but heritage, cultural with rich get further artist the that seeked he life, cultural gress. Herequired focus onthree things-thefreedom to createand art inpublic Krleža, one of the Miroslavgreatest Croatianart. writers, and was one science of of the leading fields figures in the Con in dictates the and Stalinism of criticism people which often disagreed of with thatartiststhemselves. Congress was huge and literary lifewasin it concluded that andthat imposedwaya to ofthinking The key event thatwas criticalfor thespread of new ideas and views on cul Agitprop of weaknesses all of removal sought Cominform the with Conflict Party,in Communist the of Committee Central the of Plenum Second the At 125 Ristović. Pp.347. 124 123 Ibid.Pp.254. 122 Dimić(1988)Pp. 240–242. Its views onculturalheritage andtradition Communist Party founded upon 7. Basically, at the end of this period Yugoslav culture begins to open to Western Ibid. Pp.256–257. Conclusion 125

124 Krleža so openly 122 123 ------

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 41 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 42 and removed. banned was heritage cultural the of part good a where and them, with peration coo profascist and powers Axis the by occupation its to due Croatia, in mostly Yugoslavia,former of territory the in peoples all of heritage the and heritage ral cause onseveralcultu dealings with occasions ofunskilled mentionednumber censorship had inresearched Agitprop period since 1945 1952. until Largely be the design anddevelopment of cultural identityinYugoslavia amechanism for sciplines for theirown research. ming decades, while they are slowly pulled in the light by scientists of various di se works andarticlesare missingfrom thearchives weknow will only intheco not use until thefallof Yugoslavia andopening of the archives. How many of the from theNDH ended in recycledeither orclosedinfundsthatthescientistscould material printed other and magazines the all like 1945 after and extinguished, pages, and various declarations to the Croatian people. “Revija Zagreb” was soon PavelićAnte of picturesover published several1941 in dated number The ason. re Why?Forsimple articles. a of series this see not did fifties, the in subject the on work major Bayer,the Vladimir wrote as who such area, this in authors tant with. But this knowledge was missing for about fifty years and even most impor mense knowledge about the subject that the author of this paper then concerned shed an article in the sequels named “Czoperniczki Czeh” which has gathered im forties of the20thcentury. Andasapartof it in1940 and 1941 there was publi Zagrebmagazineof Society,a whichearlywas monthlyand thirties published in tion of his mentor in the Archives of the City of Zagreb he ran into “Revija Zagreb”, in Zagreb in the Middle and Early Modern Times, by chance on the recommenda this paper worked on his graduate thesis on thesecularpersecution of witches is unwittingly onefrom theauthor’spersonalexperience. While theauthorof le society, itsmaterial andspiritualdevelopment. Culturalstile. policy intheperiod 1945 – 1952sensitiveis a indicator ofthewho with Party dogma and ideas, was censored and dismissed as reactionary and ho culturallife.Everythinggenerallyof movies, line and aspects in wasall whatnot tic for this period is that the Party has control of artistic creativity, media, theater, Symptoma declining. is influence Soviet Cominform, the with conflict the After socialism. to road “proven”approach the copy to tried and learned from they whomUnion, Soviet the by left was 1949 until influence Great understood. not was that everything of censorship the and heritage, cultural of destruction the mistakes,and serious toentirely wereled almost uneducated,policy cultural on through them. Also, the fact that many Party personnel who have made decisions because they were consideredclosed hostile or theenemythat worked from themand were influences cultural rich and histories long with institutions Many tive consciousness according toneeds of thepolicyshiftingaway thepolitical mechanisms of censorship shaped the culturalidentity of peopleand the collec the Cominform,slowly thesituation beganto againon the inside,but change the with conflict and 1948 After state. the to approaches Soviet all tivelyimporting modeled upon the Stalinist approach learnt from the USSR in the early years, ac was observed from perspective thesamepolitical of a young Yugoslav socialism 126 Dimić (1988) Pp.269–273. At all levels of culture and art, such as publishing, film and theater everything on influence significant a how show to managed has paper this case, any In interestingAn example of how such policiesaffect thefuture science largely 126 ------cultural identityofeachnation. developingthe in important political) (qualitativecontextor its regardlessof is, the collective consciousness of identity, not an official one, but one censored, that sary to be preserved, processed, and examined because it shows the other side of countries in the former Yugoslavia, mean much. It means a legacy, which is neces other in referenceresearch,also weretakenthis as forbut that Serbia countries nipulation andpolicyofdetermining ofsystem eligibility. from the Soviet Union. In fact, this whole period dramatically was filled with ma 8.2. » » » » » » » 8.1. » » » » » » » » » » Hrvatske novinara Društva časti suda Odluka – 1945 25th October – journal “Vjesnik” njihovih i okupatora zločina pomagača, 1.306,sumarniinventar utvrđivanje za NRH komisija Zemaljska HDA, “Popis – tužioštvo javno Okružno štampa, zabranjenih knjiga ilistova” IX. Karaman; Iljko Fond HDA, treba hitnozabraniti ionemogućitinjihovo dalješirenje” koje “Knjige – tužioštvo javno Okružno štampa, IX. Karaman; IljkoFond HDA, ili streljana” emigraciji u su danas a propagandi, ustaškoj u radila su koja lica “Popis - br.48. kutiji u 95, – 92 broj list 013,2/18, i 013,1/18 SRH RSUP SDS Fond HDA, novinara kojima jezauvijek oduzeto pravo pisanjauštampi” “Spisak – 48. kutija 013/2/18, spis i 013,1/18 Spis SRH, HDA,RSUPFond SDS spis i 013,1/18 Spis SRH, RSUP 013/2/18 –“Propagandni aparat Nezavisne Države SDS Hrvatske” Fond arhiv), državni (Hrvatski HDA » » » 8. These lists of banned books, magazines, human labor, etc., both in Croatia and BOBAN, Ljubo Marketing Dušan BILANDŽIĆ, jugoslavenskom komunističkom pokretu. Zagreb: Globus BANAC, Ivo Literature Sources Sources andliterature 19) S Sajnm rtv ia Ifrbrvk rsjp u rascjepi Informbirovski – Tita protiv Staljinom Sa (1990): (1990): Kontroverze izpovijesti Jugoslavije, 3.Zagreb (1998). Hrvatska modernapovijest. arb Golden Zagreb: - -

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 43 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 44 » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » zavod Matice hrvatske Nakladni Zagreb: autora, njihovih i knjiga štetnih protiv borbu za priručnik Aleksandar STIPČEVIĆ, za Odsjeka studije informacijske znanosti informacijske za Zavod Zagrebu, u sveučilišta fakultet Aleksandar STIPČEVIĆ, informacija Zagreb: Zavod zainformacijske studije STIPČEVIĆ, Aleksandar 337. –352. 1964. godine Centar za politološka istraživanja, politike kulturne Milan RISTOVIĆ, obzorja, Vol. 2,Str. 397-398. Ivan PEDERIN, rad diplomski znanosti, informacijske za Odsjek Zagrebu, u Sveučilišta fakultet PARAŠČIĆ, Ivan Politics ofCroatia W. Gary SELNOW, i Stjepan MALOVIĆ, Beograd: Fokus. Marko LOPUŠINA, danas Ivana GRGIĆ, HEBRANG 168–176. 56, 7/9,str. GRBELJA, Josip Zagreb: Regoč Josip GRBELJA, str. 120–130 i Petram Josip GRBELJA, Zagreb: Jurčić Josip GRBELJA, Zagreb: Nakladnizavod Maticehrvatske; Globus. DONAT, Branimir Biblioteka Dijalog. “Rad”.organizacija radnaIzdavačka Beograd: 1952. – 1945 Srbiji; u politike Ljubodrag DIMIĆ, . Zagreb: u“Vjesnikbibliotekara Hrvatske” 42,3,str. 117–134. Šegedina: cenzor i njegova žrtva njegova i cenzor Šegedina: , Oznaka. 1.3.3.D., downloaded in PDF format June 7th 2010. Pp. (2002): (2007): . Westport: Praeger Publishers. (1994): (2000): Uništeni naraštaj: tragične sudbine novinara NDH, novinara sudbine tragične naraštaj: Uništeni (2000): (1998:2) Nepoznati dokumenti o odnosu Milovana Dilasa Milovana odnosu o dokumenti Nepoznati (1998:2) (1998:1): Cenzura u hrvatskom novinstvu: 1945. – 1990. – 1945. novinstvu: hrvatskom u Cenzura (1998:1): : Jedno viđenje prelomne godine jugoslavenske posleratne jugoslavenske godine prelomne viđenje Jedno : (1992): (1988): (1952). (1991): (1990): Cenzura kao ograničavajući faktor u širenju Informbiro i književni časopisi CenzuraJugoslaviji: u 1945.-1990. (1992): rtv ouitče cenzure. komunističke Protiv Crni dossier: o zabranama u hrvatskoj književnosti 19) O areo cnou lt praktički iliti cenzoru savršenom O (1994): (2000): Agitprop kultura http://www.cpi.hr/download/links/hr/7248.pdf Crna knjiga: cenzura uJugoslaviji 1945-91. 1.3.3. Socijalistička Jugoslavija Cenzura u knjižnicama u Cenzura Zakoni otisku uHrvatskojdo od1945. , Zagreb: u “Republika” 54, 11/12, 54, “Republika” u Zagreb: , (2001): : gtrpvk fz kulturne faza agitpropovska .: The People, Press and , Zagreb: u “Republika arb u Hrvatska u Zagreb: , Zagreb: Filozofski Zagreb: , Zagreb: Filozofski od 1945. do . .

9.1. » » » » » » » » 9. WESTERMAN, Frank rad Zagreb. Filozofski fakultet Sveučilišta vijeka. novogu ranogZagrebu, tijekom Odsjek okoliciza povijest, i diplomski Zagrebu u vještica progoni te hereze i Deniver VUKELIĆ, 1990. Aleksandar STIPČEVIĆ, STIPČEVIĆ, Aleksandar (23) (22) (21) (20) (19) (18) (17) (16) (15) (14) (13) (12) (11) (10) (9) (8) (7) (6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1) practice writing,publishingandotherjournalist work List ofNDHjournalist whowereforever bannedto Zagreb: u“Vjesnikbibliotekara Hrvatske” 48,3/4,str. 1–15. Degrel Ivan Čović Marko Cerovac Tomislav Ciliga dr. Ante Cerovac Ivo Cerovac Mirko Crljen Danijel Ciprin Vladimir Boroje Jure Balentović Ivo Bubanić Franjo Bonifačić dr. Ante Buttlar-Moscon von Alfred Bzik Mijo Bučar Romeo Belobrajdić dr. Leopold Balaš Rudolf Bublić Dragan Bobek dr. Josip Babić Franjo Blažina Josip Bogdan Ivo Ambrozić Ivan Appendix (2009): Svjetovna suđenja i progoni zbog čarobnjaštva zbog progoni i suđenja Svjetovna (2009): (2007): (2000): (2005): Inženjeri duša Sudbina knjige Tiskari kao cenzori uHrvatskoj:– 1945. , Zagreb: Durieux , Lokve: NakladaBenja

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 45 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 46 (62) (61) (60) (59) (58) (57) (56) (55) (54) (53) (52) (51) (50) (49) (48) (47) (46) (45) (44) (43) (42) (41) (40) (39) (38) (37) (36) (35) (34) (33) (32) (31) (30) (29) (28) (27) (26) (25) (24) Oršanić Ante Oršanić Ivan Nikolić Vinko Novaković Milan Miakovčić Ivan Mosner Stipe Mirković Zvonimir Magdić Milivoj Milković Zlatko Milković Josip Mrmić Josip Marunić Ivo Mortigjija Tijas Lovrić Vrah Latković Radovan Lenz Sepp Lendić Ivo Kus-Nikolajev Mirko Korenički Zvonimir Kühne Karl Kern-Mačković Milivoj Krvarić Kamilo Kovačić Matija Jerkov Anton Juzbašić St. Jagatić Mato Ilić Andrija Ilinić Milan Hühn dr. Ivo Hrastovec Stjepan Grubiša Ivan Foeckel Fritz Foertsch dr. Gerda Fedorov Nikolaj Floss Julius Fertilio Luka Dujšin ing.? Devčić Milica Dujmović dr. Franjo (74) (73) (72) (71) (70) (69) (68) (67) (66) (65) (64) (63) (100) (99) (98) (97) (96) (95) (94) (93) (92) (91) (90) (89) (88) (87) (86) (85) (84) (83) (82) (81) (80) (79) (78) (77) (76) (75) Žibrat Aleksandar Žanetić Janko Wiesner Ljubo Vukota Pero Vučičević Ivo Vitković Stanko Uvanović Danijel Tortić Janko Tolj Mijo Tomičić Stjepan Trbuha Franjo Teufel Gjuro Šišulj Vjekoslav Šuljak Hasan Šarkanj Božo Štedimlija Sava Štahan Cvjetko Šenda Antun Softa Ivan Rudalić Jure Roetl dr. Erih Rubina Franjo Rieger dr. ing.Vilko Raić Vlaho Radić Vladimir Pavrlišak Milan Petrak Zlatko Perše ing.Franjo Pavičić Jure Penavić Tomica Pejnović Grga Polonio Stanislav Prpić Jure Proebst Herman Pavičić dr. Slavko Puljiz Luka Peroš Vilim Uzorinac dr. Teodor

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 47 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 48 9.1. 127 HDA –Fund Iljko Karaman; IX. štampa;analysis atpp.18ofthis paper • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ERDELJI: -Sva djela EMIL LUDVIG: -Vodji Evrope. Beograd “Kosmos” EMIL LUDVIG: -Musolini,Beograd “Narodno delo” EKONOMIKUS: –Teorija društvenog gospodarstva, Zagreb 1944. DJUKANOVIĆ ILIJA: -Kralj Petar I.Beograd 1922. DJOLOVIĆ JOVAN: -Sva djela DRLJEVIĆ SEKULA: -Sva djela DRAŠKOVIĆ SLOBODAN: -Sve što jenapisao DE GAB: -Bacanje karata g. DAUMING: - Dojče Landvirdšaft im Banat und im der Bačka Minhen 1931. DANUNCIJO: -Oganj. Beograd 1942. CETKOVIĆ D:-Svatovi kneginjeZorke BURCEV: -Carivunješnjajapolitika BUDAK MILE–Ognjište isva ostaladjela BONIFAČIĆ: Antun–Sva djela BORSAMAJO: -Lalibertadistampa.Milano1925. BOROVNJAK: -Spomenica Milorada Draškovića BOGUNOVIĆ DUŠAN -Sokolstvo iškola. Zagreb, 1931. BJELAVEC H:-Muhamed BINDING: -Žrtva BINDING: -Legendenašegvremena BEVENSON: -Lavije apre etavanturence deMusolini,insmise.1938.g. BERDINO -Horoskop BEUMELBURG: -Pflihtundsicksav. Štutgart BERLE: -Šiksal undErdraum BASTIN: -Kradljivica –Dobrotvor BASTIN: -Zadesethiljadamiliona ATANASIJEVIĆ KSENIJA –Sva djela APUHTIN: -Meždusmertjuižizni.Moskva 1917. hitno zabraniti ionemogućitinjihovo dalješirenje”) prevent theirfurthercirculation”(“Knjige koje treba List of“Books thatweshouldimmediately prohibitand FUKS” - AlsSekadet nahFornost. Štutgart 1946. FROJND: -Veltgešihte derGegenvart inDokumenten FELS KVIDO:-DžekTurbosek FAJROV: -Hiromantija ilinauka osudbininadlanu ERNST: -Otmica 127 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • KOSTIĆ prof. LAZA:-Sve što jenapisao KOLHERAHAJER: -Božićnepriče KOHLER: -StudienderJudenfrage KNEŽEVIĆ RADOJE:-Sve što jenapisao KNEŽEVIĆ ŽIVAN: -Što mora znatisuvremeni borac. 1940. KERMENDI-KERENC: -Lageneracione felice. Torino 1941. KAROSA: -Slučajevi doktor Bilgera KALERTI: -Kudenhove isva ostaladjela JOST: -Konzuela JONIĆ VELIBOR:-Sve što jenapisao Jevdjević Dobrosav: -Sve što jenapisao JELAČIĆ –Istorija Rusije JASINSKAJA: -MolodajaRusija -časopis JASINSKAJA: -Sva djela JANZEN: -JAPANS ZEMAHT. Berlin 1938 JANZEN: -Erkunde fuerhohere Šulen,VI.iVII.klase JAKŠIĆ: DUŠAN: -Putboljojbudućnostinašemnarodu. 1944. JANKOVIĆ VELIMIR:-Sva djela JAKOVZEN: -NileLine.Beograd 1943. IVANIĆ STEVAN: -Sva djela IN OFOCIR: -LahjutimeKronsade. Berlin 1940. ILEŠIĆ: -MaršalPilsudski.Zagreb 1926. IL GREPUSKALO: -DelSocijalizmo.Milano1925. IGNAČEVIĆ: -Kako sepišuljubavna pisma.Bgd.1941. HUSANGAR: -Rešenje svetske krize HJUN-KALMAR: -Abessinien, Afrikas, Unruherer. Salcburg 1935. HESEL: -Crvena stepa. Beograd 1927. HAUPTMAN: -Kolega Kramptol GULJ: -Sva djela GERSTNER: -Veliki Put GOSPOĐA LENORMAN-Proricanje sudbinepariske proročice GERHARET -ŠtacionarajnerIde GENERAL KRASNOV: -Sva djela KUJUNDŽIĆ IVAN: -Vratimo seGospodu,Subotica1946. KUEHEN: -Sendlict KSJUNJIN ALEKSEJ: -Raspućin. Beograd 1924. KSJUNJIN ALEKSEJ: -OdNikole II.do Lenjine.Beograd 1923. mani (naruskom) KRIŽANOVSKAJA V.N. – KRAKOV STANISLAV: -Sve što jenapisao Proricanja sudbine pariske proročice Svi njeni ro -

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 49 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 50 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • PRIBIČEVIĆ ADAM: -Sve što jenapisao POPOVIĆ NIKOLA –publicist -Tucović Dimitrijeisve ostaleknjige POPOVIĆ prof. NIKOLA: -Sva djela PONTON: -Umjetnik PITIGIRIJ: -Sva djela PILE ERAZEN:-Poljska, Jugoslavija iRusija. Bgd. PENHANOVIĆ: -Prodavačica svog tela PETRUŠEVSKI: -Frina PETROVIĆ PETAR: -Sva djelaohipnozi,okulistici, itd. PETROVIĆ PETAR: -Kako seosvajaju žene PATROTIKUS: -Ko potkopava čovečanstvo PAJO F: -Sveže meso OSENDOVSKI: -Lenjin.“Narodno delo” NAJMAN: -SeingRusija. Njujork 1926. NIKOLAJEVIĆ DUŠAN: -Navidovdan, Beograd 1939. NIKČEVIĆ RADOJICA:-Nacionalnihram NIČE: -Sva djela NELSON: -Strenios Italu NAUL: -Ličnimagnetizam MATURAL: -Veština dopastise.Beograd 1943. MORIS DEKOBRA: -Madonaspavaćih kola idruga djela“Narodno delo” MIRA: -Raspućin ikrvava zora MILJTUKOV SENJOVOS-AZEMAN: -Historija Rusije. Zagreb 1926. MILIČEVIĆ ŽIVKO: -Putopis izMakedonije. Beograd 1918.g. MIHJEV: -Osnovnaja podgotovka gosudarstva. “Nar. delo”. Beograd 1939. MEREŠKOVSKI: -Antihrist MEREŠKOVSKI: -Napoleon MATHAR: -DerRajh šterlmaršal MASIS A:-Losideas resteit. Paris 1941. MALEŠ BRANIMIR:-Sve što jenapisao LJUBAČEVSKI: -JosipPilsudski.Varšava 1930. LORENCIN A:-Sedam LAŽNOVSKI: -Čehrazgovara saistorijom. Prag 1940. RAŠIĆ DAMJAN: -Jugoslavenski velikani. Beograd 1937. RAKIĆ LJUBOMIR: -Tumač snova RADOSAVLJEVIĆ: -Vojnički deklamator. Beograd 1937. RADICA BOGDAN: -Sumrak Ev rope isva ostaladjela RABRENOVIĆ MILAN:-Historijski albumi.I,II.Beograd 1926. PSUNJSKI: -Vrhati usvetlosti istoriske istine. Beograd 1934. država crkava. Subotica,1946.g. 1939. 1919. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • VASIĆ DRAGIŠA: -Sva djela(osim “Pripovjedaka”) VAJT: -Velika borba izmedjuvidelaitame.Subotica 1936. VAJT: -Vaspitanje. Subotica1936. VAJT: -PUTHRISTU VAJT: -Po stopama velikog ljekara. Bdg.1936. VAGERL: -Kalendarske priče VAGERL: -Hleb UDET: -Majnfligerleben. Berlin 1935. TRIFKOVIĆ: -Principivodjenja. Pančevo 1937. TRETČIKOV: -Sovremenaja Mandžurija TOPALOVIĆ ŽIVKO: -Sve što jenapisao TOMSON: -Rokambolo TASINARI: -,Iekonomije fasbiste. Roma 1937. ŠTEDIMLIJA S.M.–Sva djela BerlinŠPER: -NojedojčeBackunst. 1940. ŠNAJDER: -NahtundGmade.Lajpcig1941. ŠIMRAK JANKO: –Sva djela ŠERI-BIBI: -Najopasnijiapaš ŠEGVIĆ KERUBIN: –Sva djela ŠARIĆ IVAN (biskup) –Prevod sv. pismaisve ostalo STEFANOVIĆ P. –Nacionalni testament kr. Aleksandra STEFANOVIĆ SVETISLAV: -Sve što jenapisao STARČEVIĆ MILE:–Ante Starčević iSrbi SPALAJKOVIĆ MIROSLAV: -Sve što jenapisao SLIJEPČEVIĆ DJOKO: -Sve što jenapisao SLANKAMENAC: -Usjencivelikih dogodjaja SIBURD: -Čeličnicvijet SFORCA: -Neimarisavremene Evrope SERGIJEVSKI: -Perežitoje. Beograd SENSINGER: -Anali SAMOJLOVIĆ: -Vsernoščno jebdenije RIVET ŠARLES: -LedernijerRomanof. Paris 1918. RENSI: -Teorija pratika delaracione politika. Milano1922. VUKOJEVIĆ S:-Zakralja iJugoslaviju. Beograd 1933. VUJIĆ VLADIMIR: -Sva djela VERDJALEV: -Savremena krizakulture VERDJALEV: -Hrišćanstvo iklasnaborba. Beograd 1936. VELJKOVIĆ MOMIR:-Kritike VELIMIROVIĆ NIKOLA: -Sva djela

PECOB’s Papers Series | JANUARY 2012 | #19 | Censorship in Yugoslavia between 1945 and 1952. Halfway between Stalin and West | by Deniver Vukelić 51 | (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 52 • • • • • • • • • • • • “Sreća jeoznačenasvakome nadlanu” “Pjesmarica zavojnike” “Porijeklo grijeha” “Kralj” –Beograd –Nar. Delo “Kako sedobijajurogovi” “Hrvatsko-srpski sport” “Ćudesa spiritizma” “Čovek injegova budućnost” “ Čitanjekaraktera pocrtamalica” “ Crkva naOplencu”–Beograd 1936 DJELA NEPOZNATIH AUTORA ZEMZINOV: -Sva djela Deniver Vukelić

Deniver Vukelić is Ph. D. student of Croatian Culture, (with M. A. in History and Croa- tian Language and Literature) at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb. Among his recent publications are “Influence of Roman Catholic Church on civil witchcraft trials in Zagreb during the Early Modern Period “, “Witch hunts in Zagreb”, “At the strike of maul”. He is currently writing his Ph. D. thesis “Influence of magical conceptions and patterns on shaping of Croatian cultural identity”. He works at the Ministry of Justice of- Re public of Croatia in Zagreb, as Croatian language expert and media analyst. [email protected] Creative Commons License About PECOB Portal on Central Eastern and Balkan Europe University of Bologna - 1, San Giovanni Bosco - Faenza - Italy PECOB disseminatesddiss up-to-date materials, provides contentscontents ooff hihighgh sscienticientic valuevalue andand raises the visibility of research works with theh aim of f ffacilitating l national/internationall/ collaboration on the institutional level and promoting scientic research in the disciplinary elds concerning East- Central Europe, the Balkans, and the Post-Soviet space.

PECOB’s Scientific Library collectsccolle original scientic contributions selected throughthhrough pepeerer rrevieweview prprocessocess anaandd pupublished online as PECOB’s volumes (with an ISBN code)d) or under d the h PECOB’s ’ papers series (with the ISSN code: 2038-632X). It provides an opportunity for scholars, researchers and specialists to contribute a comprehensive collection of scientic materials on various topics (politics, eco- nomics, history, society, language, literature, culture and the media). Texts can be submitted in English as well as any language of the countries considered on PECOB.PECOB.

PECOB’s Informative Area offerse continuously updated news regarding ac- ademicademic aandnd cculturalultural eveventsents aandndn pprovidesr with information about, as well as access to, a llarge collection ll of f publications bl and online news resources, academic centres and institutions.

PECOB’s Business Guide isis ana innovative instrument to monitor the reregiongiion ffromrom an eeconomicconomiic peperspective,rssppective offering a selection of quality information, analysesl and d reports on bibusiness topics related to the region.

Supported by the University of Bologna, the portal is developed by the Institute for East-Central Europe and the Balkans (IECOB) with the collaboration of the Italian Association of Slavists (AIS) and the ‘Europe and the Balkans’ International Network. PECOB calls for papers! graphic design: mdelgatto.com graphic

Call for papers!

The Scientific Board of PECOB announces an openInterested call for contributorspapers to bemay published deal with with any ISSN topic 2038-632X focusing on the political, economic, historical, social or cultural aspects of a specific country or region covered by PECOB. Potential contributors must submit a short abstract (200-300 words) and the full text, which can be in English as well as any language from the countries covered by PECOB. Upcoming deadlines for submitting proposals are: January 31st June 30th November 30th All texts must comply with PECOB Submission Guidelines (www.pecob.eu). All proposals, texts and questions should be submitted to Ms Aurora Domeniconi, PECOB Coordinator, at: [email protected]

Supported by the University of Bologna, the portal is developed by the Institute for East-Central Europe and the Balkans (IECOB) with the collaboration of the Italian Association of Slavists (AIS) and the ‘Europe and the Balkans’ International Network.

Portal on Central Eastern and Balkan Europe University of Bologna - 1, San Giovanni Bosco - Faenza - Italy